John Aero Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 This Trop mod gets more confusing as we go on. TT.20 photos I have show no trop mods. One thing there was plenty of space to install this kit as they obviously used the un-used fifth and sixth cannon bays. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 This Trop mod gets more confusing as we go on. TT.20 photos I have show no trop mods. One thing there was plenty of space to install this kit as they obviously used the un-used fifth and sixth cannon bays. John To me it seems reasonably clear. If you were operating a RAF two seat NF variant aircraft "east of Suez" such as a NF 13 in Egypt or NF 14 or a TT20 in Tengah the aircraft were modified prior to deployment to have the heat exchanger equipment fitted. When returned to UK afterwards it probably would not be economic to remove this equipment, so you could see the odd TT20 with the intakes. The exception would be the T7 which might not have the space for the heat exchanger equipment, But interestingly has anybody seen a Far east based T7 with the intakes as well? Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dambuster Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Selwyn, Not sure there would be any need for heat exchanger units on a T7 as I don't expect there would be any equipment that needed cooling. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Selwyn, Not sure there would be any need for heat exchanger units on a T7 as I don't expect there would be any equipment that needed cooling. Peter how about two grumpy sweaty pilots? Selwyn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dambuster Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) how about two grumpy sweaty pilots? Selwyn No worse than any other aircraft of the period, surely? Do we know for certain that one of the purposes of these heat exchangers was cabin conditioning. Peter Edited October 26, 2015 by dambuster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
huvut76g7gbbui7 Posted October 26, 2015 Author Share Posted October 26, 2015 Regarding Dennis' post ,#50, on the TT20s and the flaps. Did they use ex.NF13 outer wings,modify the NF11 wings (doubtful?) or were they spares ? The extra flap area must have been of benefit, otherwise why bother? I started this topic as I suspected a mistake in a magazine and now it has grown into a very interesting discussion and mine of information. As usual you've added to my knowledge.thank you all. Richard. (resisting digging out the Matchbox kit as I really must finish one model this year.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Dennis, Thanks for posting the pictures, interestingly, the NF.13's don't appear to have an ADF Sense Aerial (towel rail) on the underside, which I'd been led to believe was the case. Wez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 You can cool equipment with a cold air blast but not aircrew hence the heat exchangers. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Ekedahl Posted October 28, 2015 Share Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) --- --- Dennis These, and previous, NF.13 photos, have finally solved the mystery of the shape of those two intakes/heat exchangers for me too. Wish I had known this (and the correct nose length) when I built my 60 Sqn NF.14 many years ago. But these photos also made me raise my eyebrows. In a list of the errors on the Matchbox kit, it states that there should be holes under the wings for the spent shell chutes, and not the protrusions molded on the kit wings. But these two photos, and a few others seem to indicate that Matchbox was right after all! Another interesting detail is the antenna sticking out from under the port engine nacelle. Haven't noticed that one previously. And BTW, Wikipedia gives the incorrect nose length for the NF.14. Edited October 28, 2015 by Sten Ekedahl 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Leader Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Looks like Roger Lindsay's superb 'Cold War Shield' also quotes the fuselage lengths of the 12 & 14 being the same with additional reference to the windscreen angle differences. So there's another publication that ticks this box correctly. Now can I ask, does the small bore intakes only apply to early build NF.11's and were these ever seen on any of the later marks? Cheers.. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kallisti Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Does anyone have any photos of the side panels of the navigators cockpit of an NF 11? I've got a problem with my Classic Airframes kit in that they've supplied two sets of the side panels for the pilot's cockpit instead of a set for the navigator's cockpit. I'm struggling to find any pics apart from some in the walkarounds section here from 2011 but these are not terribly clear. If I can find some pics I can probably scratch build something that looks appropriate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 Again the info regarding the engine/intake fit on NF.11's is very poor unless you have access to the AP's and mod states.Yes some early 11's had the small intakes. Another snippet of info is that the NF.11/12/14 were built from essentially T.7 cockpits, but with sealed pressurised cockpits the T.7 did not have a sealed cockpit. I'm so busy with getting Telford together that I can't spend the time at the moment to search out any more stuff. Cheers John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccm Posted October 30, 2015 Share Posted October 30, 2015 G-LOSM with NF13 cooling vents and plated over radio compass window? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Leader Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 All this talk of NF Meteors has caused me to crack open one of my Matchbox kits. Anyone know if any nose weight is required if building either an 11 or 12? (Haven't quite decided which mark yet). Cheers.. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousAA72 Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 All this talk of NF Meteors has caused me to crack open one of my Matchbox kits. Anyone know if any nose weight is required if building either an 11 or 12? (Haven't quite decided which mark yet). Cheers.. Dave Yes, nose weight is a must. I'm building an NF14 in the Group Build. Luckily there is no lack of space to cram it into.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Womby Posted October 31, 2015 Share Posted October 31, 2015 Interesting, that NF13 doesn't seem to have the outboard flaps fitted. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Leader Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) These, and previous, NF.13 photos, have finally solved the mystery of the shape of those two intakes/heat exchangers for me too. Wish I had known this (and the correct nose length) when I built my 60 Sqn NF.14 many years ago. But these photos also made me raise my eyebrows. In a list of the errors on the Matchbox kit, it states that there should be holes under the wings for the spent shell chutes, and not the protrusions molded on the kit wings. But these two photos, and a few others seem to indicate that Matchbox was right after all! Another interesting detail is the antenna sticking out from under the port engine nacelle. Haven't noticed that one previously. And BTW, Wikipedia gives the incorrect nose length for the NF.14. Reviving this thread... can anyone clarify these underwing cannon shell spent chutes as shown in the previous photos? Most photos tend to hide these behind the underwing drop tanks so cannot really be seen, however the photos in this thread are very clear and do confirm that (on occasions and with certain airframes) that Matchbox's details are pretty good. I'm building an NF.11 early serialed airframe (WDxxx) with small bore intakes and it would be nice to know if I should leave these or hack them off!! Cheers.. Dave. Edited November 16, 2015 by Rabbit Leader Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Interesting, that NF13 doesn't seem to have the outboard flaps fitted. David If you mean WM167, it's an ex-TT20, so was originally an NF11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloegin57 Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Reviving this thread... can anyone clarify these underwing cannon shell spent chutes as shown in the previous photos? Most photos tend to hide these behind the underwing drop tanks so cannot really be seen, however the photos in this thread are very clear and do confirm that (on occasions and with certain airframes) that Matchbox's details are pretty good. I'm building an NF.11 early airframe with small bore intakes and it would be nice to know if I should leave these or hack them off!! Cheers.. Dave. Good point and one I looked at some time ago. As far as I could tell, the fitment of the shell chutes was entirely dependant of whether or not the guns were fitted as they appear to have been part of the gun installation. Now. With the guns removed, I am nor certain as to whether or not, the "slots" in the wing were covered by a quick release panel or left open. When I am fully awake and had breakfast, I will rescan some of my NF.11 images that have no tanks fitted and try and see what is what. HTH Dennis PS - just had a look at my Matchbox Meteor and it appears that the guns have the fairing fitted over the nose so of the top of my head, that will need chopping off and a bit of wire slipped in to represent the gun. I'll be back DR Edited November 16, 2015 by sloegin57 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sloegin57 Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 OK Dave. had a look through and am a bit thin on the ground ref NF.11's without tanks - NF.12's yes, 11's no. The two I have used are both from non-standard Units, regret that I have no Squadron aircraft without them. However, what I said in the above post appears to be correct. With regards to the Shell chute "slots' being covered wit the guns removed, if you look at that wonderfull photo put up by ccm in Post 63 there do appear to be closing panels fitted but with the caveat that I am still not sure if they were applicable to the NF.11. As an aside, the Matchbox kit does appear to be incorrect in a "nit-picking" way in that it has the fairing over the gun port but still has the chutes fitted. No doubt there are a few well closeted but vociferous individuals out there who will complain that the kit is totally unbuildable !!!. (Sorry - woke up with my Mk.2 Cynical head on this morning ! ) Attached may help :- HTH Dennis 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Leader Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Thanks very much Dennis. As I'm considering an early WD serialed NF.11 from probably 29 Sqd, I think I'll leave my kit chutes in place as per the first photo in your latest post. It adds a little to the overall character of this kit, which at this stage is being sanded and filled, sanded and filled .. and did I mention sanded and filled to death. Cheers .. and very much appreciate the feedback... Dave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theplasticsurgeon Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 (edited) Interesting, that NF13 doesn't seem to have the outboard flaps fitted. David Neither does this NF13 at Jet Age. Edited November 16, 2015 by theplasticsurgeon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 OK Dave. had a look through and am a bit thin on the ground ref NF.11's without tanks - NF.12's yes, 11's no. The two I have used are both from non-standard Units, regret that I have no Squadron aircraft without them. However, what I said in the above post appears to be correct. With regards to the Shell chute "slots' being covered wit the guns removed, if you look at that wonderfull photo put up by ccm in Post 63 there do appear to be closing panels fitted but with the caveat that I am still not sure if they were applicable to the NF.11. As an aside, the Matchbox kit does appear to be incorrect in a "nit-picking" way in that it has the fairing over the gun port but still has the chutes fitted. No doubt there are a few well closeted but vociferous individuals out there who will complain that the kit is totally unbuildable !!!. (Sorry - woke up with my Mk.2 Cynical head on this morning ! ) Attached may help :- HTH Dennis The outer wing panels with 20mm guns were basically common to all NF meteors and would have the same chutes fitted. They would have the same blanks fitted if the guns were removed. Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Fleming Posted November 16, 2015 Share Posted November 16, 2015 Neither does this NF13 at Jet Age. It's a hybrid - can't recall what the wings were from Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabbit Leader Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Does anyone know if a 1/72 canopy mask exists for the Matchbox / Xtrakit series of NF Meteors? Sure would be handy!! Or has any other resourceful modeller made a homemade template that their will to share? Cheers.. Dave. 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