Antoine Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Hello, I know nearly nothing about the aircraft, and I'd like to know if it would be possible to convert tamiya's F.3 into an F.4, as there are more interesting camo and colour options. Wiki says it's only a matter of strengthened fuselage, but I'm a bit suspicious. So, any comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triumphfan Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Different engines for starters, others will be more specific I'm sure. Here is a good place to start....... http://www.kitsforcash.com/meteor-f4-conversion-wing-set--now-back-in-stock-9425-p.asp ATB, Steve. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homebee Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Conversion set by Heritage Aviation: "Meteor f4 conversion wing set" http://www.kitsforcash.com/meteor-f4-conversion-wing-set--now-back-in-stock-9425-p.asp V.P. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Hello, I know nearly nothing about the aircraft, and I'd like to know if it would be possible to convert tamiya's F.3 into an F.4, as there are more interesting camo and colour options. Wiki says it's only a matter of strengthened fuselage, but I'm a bit suspicious. So, any comments? Wiki says eh? You are right to have your suspicions!! As you will have hopefully seen looking at the more interesting camo and colour options the only thing common between the two marks is the fuselage, the wings and engine nacelle shapes are totally different. The F3 had extended rounded wing tips, the F4 didn't. Now that said SOME late Mk.III's had the larger nacelles associated with the late marks.... As you will also see above Heritage do an excellent F4 type wing for the Tamiya kit. Watch out for the wing root fairings at the rear of the wing though, as some F4's had a shortened version ..check your references. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted January 1, 2014 Share Posted January 1, 2014 Wing root fairings? Never noticed that change- I'll have to go look for suitable photos! I've frankly never been quite clear on the transition from III to IV- didn't some early IVs have long wings, while as you say, some late IIIs had the "big engines" (or nacelles)? So when is it a III vs a IV- does the engine mark/type define it? And I'd quibble a tiny bit with your comment that the wings were "totally different"- essentially they were just cut back, and (neglecting the nacelles) what was left was pretty much the same, wasn't it? bob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antoine Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 Thanks gents, most interesting informations. So what about the said strengthened fuselage? Maybe something hidden from view, but that sounds strange to me, as usually strengthening. Is made of métal strips outside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Metal strips outside are usually band-aid efforts. "Proper" strengthening is generally internal, with stronger alloys or heavier gauges being used, or simply "more structure". bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antoine Posted January 2, 2014 Author Share Posted January 2, 2014 I agree, Bob, but I was thinking about a "transition" strenghtening for F.3, before going on to something more definitive with subsequent marks. So I'm wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 Wing root fairings? Never noticed that change- I'll have to go look for suitable photos! bob Hi Bob, the wing root fairings on the F3 (and F1) had a continuous curve from the wing itself to the fuselage. This is quite apparent in V.P's pics above. This is included in the conversion set, and Is I think correct for some early Mk III's. The later wing root shape was the same on all subsequent Marks, including the T7 and F8......This was a straight angled line, from wing to fuselage without the curve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viscount806x Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 The F3 had extended rounded wing tips, the F4 didn't. Now that said SOME late Mk.III's had the larger nacelles associated with the late marks.... Not wishing really to pick at the expert input by Bill (as always) but early F4's (the first 9 hulls apparently) had the extended wings, F3 style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted January 2, 2014 Share Posted January 2, 2014 I just had a quick look at some photos (good excuse!) and the 4s seemed to have the same wing root fairing as the 3. The "straight" fairing of the later types is quite obvious now that someone told me what to look for. I admit I'm only at the early stages of Meteor fine points. (Bill did say "some 4s" had the later style, which appears to imply that it is the exception.) bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Am I right in thinking that if you then add the PR nose cone from say CA's FR9, you then have a PR10? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antoine Posted January 3, 2014 Author Share Posted January 3, 2014 Not so sure, as it seems to me that PR and FR have a different camera set up, as the mission is different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisrope Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Am I right in thinking that if you then add the PR nose cone from say CA's FR9, you then have a PR10? Pretty sure the PR.10 would have the longer F.8 fuselage but the early tail Edited January 3, 2014 by chrisrope Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Silly question no doubt but wouldn't it be better just to get the CA Mark 4? It seems to be generally available (Not like the thrice damned Mark 8) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Am I right in thinking that if you then add the PR nose cone from say CA's FR9, you then have a PR10? No 'fraid not Gary, the PR10 was based on the longer F8 fuselage, it also had extended wing tips, with a different camera layout rear fuselage. There WAS IIRC a proposal for a FR5, which was based on the shorter F4 but I'm not sure if that ever flew though.... Edited January 3, 2014 by Bill Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Silly question no doubt but wouldn't it be better just to get the CA Mark 4? It seems to be generally available (Not like the thrice damned Mark 8) Generally available? Where from Danni - I've not seen one for ages (though I do have one in the stash!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venomvixen Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Generally available? Where from Danni - I've not seen one for ages (though I do have one in the stash!) E bay, they pop up heaps when I do my standard Meteor search. Theres one on there now for 30 bucks. Edited January 4, 2014 by venomvixen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
viscount806x Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Am I right in thinking that if you then add the PR nose cone from say CA's FR9, you then have a PR10? The PR10 had the F8 length fuselage, forward of the tail end transport joint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Do you get the impression that Gloster had a lot of left over sections and just mated them all together!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Learstang Posted January 4, 2014 Share Posted January 4, 2014 Do you get the impression that Gloster had a lot of left over sections and just mated them all together!! That definitely seems to be the case with the PR.10. "Let's see, we have some F.8 fuselages, some F.3 tails and wingtips, now if we added them to a modified FR.9 nose we just might have something we could sell to the RAF!" Regards, Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted January 8, 2014 Share Posted January 8, 2014 E bay, they pop up heaps when I do my standard Meteor search. Theres one on there now for 30 bucks. Not on Ebay this side of the globe they don't! There is a T7 and an F8 on EBay UK though.....they normally go for around £80.00.. I don't really need another F4 but I reckon that they will be very scarce soon anyway, especially as Jules hasn't issued any for what 5 or 6 years? AND WON'T be issuing them again........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilfish Posted March 10, 2014 Share Posted March 10, 2014 Read Bill Waterton's book, "The quick and the dead" and it explains about the Meteors design changes. In a nutshell.... F4 originally designed with normal F3 wings, but the more powerful engines (double the power) caused buckling in the rear spar. Gloster's choices were to redesign the spar (costly and delayed production) or clip the wings, thereby reducing stress..... The PR10 had the original tail (as did the first 100 F.8s, which I believe were rejected by the RAF) because Gloster had ordered them, so decided to ust them, despite them being totally unsuited to the aircraft due to the new extended front end altering the CG. The PR, it was reasoned, didn't need to manouver as much as a fighter, or fly as low in the dense air, making the old tail "acceptable" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now