Two On The Go, Pics To Follow

[kitbasher]

One will be the result of Mr Carter's trip to Hatfield and Huttlecote, the other one the result of Mr Smith wanting to improve Mr Mitchell's masterpiece.  

[kitbasher]

...and the first of these is - the Supermarine Sweptfire FR.1.
Joseph Smith assumed responsibility for Spitfire design and development after the death of Reginald Mitchell and in the quest for better performance sought to improve the Spitfire's wing.  The more conservative change was the F.21/22/24 (and Seafire 45/46/47) wing, the more radical approach was the laminar flow wing that was fitted to the Spiteful/Seafang and Attacker.  But what if Smith had been revolutionary and designed a swept wing Spit?
Here's the raw material (Italeri F.IXc fuselage, Ventura Spitfire FR.XVIII Griffon engine cowling, Aeroclub contra-prop, Matchbox Alpha Jet wings, fin and tailplane - all from the spares box).  The plan is to finish it in the same colours as the Spits which formed the RAF fighter component of the Commonwealth occupation forces in post-war Japan.
 

[kitbasher]

The second asks - what if Frank Whittle had never been born?  Would Glosters have produced a twin piston equivalent of the Meteor (the Gloster Mercury)?  Would this have done away with the need for the de Havilland Hornet, both in Europe and the Far East?
My Mercury is a simple cross-kitting of an Airfix Meteor III and a Frog Hornet F.3, both bought for next to nothing at SMW 2007.  Props come courtesy of two long departed Frog Spit 14s.
It'll be a tail dragger, of course.
 

PS George Carter designed the 'Meatbox', meanwhile the Hornet was developed at Hatfield.

[Brian da Basher]

Wow you've got my attention, kitbasher! These are gonna be fun to watch!

Brian da Basher

[kitbasher]

Progress with the Sweptfire fuselage, with the wings and prop placed next to it to give an idea of the finished item (assuming it is finished!)
I quickly came to the conclusion that the rudder looks a bit inadequate, so a dorsal fillet (for example, as per the P-51) will be added soon.
   

[kitnut617]

Out if interest, when Bell did that to a P-63 they ended up having to add a four foot extention to the rear fuselage because the cg had shifted so much.  The extention was a parallel section which looks really like an afterthought although your model looks really smart like you have it.



I've wondered if that was the problem the swept wing Mustang had before it crashed.

http://www.hiplanes.dragnet.com.au/new/1_7...s/race_7204.htm

[kitbasher]

Wow - didn't know about the swept wing P-63, and had forgotten about the 'Learstang'.  Interesing comparisons - why was the swept wing P-63 built?  research?    

[elmayerle]

Wow - didn't know about the swept wing P-63, and had forgotten about the 'Learstang'.  Interesing comparisons - why was the swept wing P-63 built?  research?    

Yep, I forget the designation, but it was commissioned by the USN as a means of exploring the behavior of swept wings at low speed.  ISTR that it had fixed gear for that reason (and to simplify wing design, no doubt).

[jcf]

Two L-39s were built, the photo is of the second aircraft, L-39-2, when fitted with a wing similar to that of the Bell X-2. The Navy tests ceased on on 26 August, 1946.
The L-39-2 was transferred to NACA Langley on 11 December, 1946. Both aircraft were later transferred to NACA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH on 12 December, 1949. The aircraft were scrapped in 1955.

Jon

[kitbasher]

With the Gloster deelie, I'd suggest a cut and shut with the wings.  The Hornet wings are obviously a DH design.  The Meteor carries a fair few Gloster design elements from other types - the wing shape looks like it's scaled up from the F5/34 design (now there's a thought...).  Failing that, just take the engine nacelles out of the Hornet and replace the Meteor nacelles.  Might be a bit more work but would look more like a Gloster design.

The original plan was to simply use the Hornet wings, plus the Hornet main undercarriage.  I can see what Wooksta means, though, and looking again at the two sets of wings I think it's in the wingtips - the Hornet wing needs the Meteor wing tips - but I will think about that one a bit more before going much further.  

[kitbasher]

Here's the Sweptfire so far - all stuck together and filled, loads of sanding to do next, strip the paint off the prop, fit the u/c etc.  Having second thoughts about the colour scheme, though, as it'll strip me out of that style/size of roundel, so it looks like the same airframe BEFORE it went to Japan courtesy of an Aeromater decal sheet.    

[kitbasher]

....and here's the 'Mercury'.  Fuselage all done, wings placed next to it but yet to be fitted, u/c to be done, filling etc.  Thought about Wooksta's comments about the wing and concluded that adding the Meteor wing tips was the right thing to do.  Looking at various profiles (eg on Flitzerart) I came to the conclusion that the wing profiles of the various wartime designs were similar but not identical.  The Meteor was a fairly conservative design (only the powerplants were radical) so round tips seemed appropriate.
And just before anyone asks, it'll be a taildragger like the Hornet, and yes, although I hadn't intended it, there is a resemblance to the Trent Meteor courtesy of the props (might fit Hornet 4-bladers yet).  

[ysi_maniac]

That Mercury looks just right          

[Brian da Basher]

Wow both of those are just killer!

I'm particularly fond of the Sweptfire!

Great stuff!!

Brian da Basher

[kitbasher]

Afternoon, Mr Wooksta!  Funny you should mention colour schemes, 'cos I've been thinking about them this weekend and you're right about a colour rethink.  As the Mercury is intended to be a Meatbox if Frank Whittle had never been born (or had done needlework at school instead of metalwork) I'd decided that the classic MSG/PRU Blue or later Hornet intruder schemes weren't quite 'it', hence the original Ocean Grey/DG/MSG as worn by Meteor 3s.  But looking at coloured illustrations has led me to think that the 1947/48 RAF Day Fighter Scheme of Aluminium would better suit, whilst keeping the wartime roudels, serials and walkway lines on the kit decal sheet, plus black Squadron codes and underwing serials from Modeldecal stock.  Underwing roundels would be Meteor size, but the serials, in keeping with the Hornet wing, will probably be the same size as 'real world' Hornet serials rather than the much smaller characters used by Meteors.
That way the 'ultimate' piston transition to early jets would be doubly represented as the colour scheme (in true keeping with the period) would also represent a transition from the immediate WW2 era to the more stable late 40s.
Anyway, glad you like the model and thanks for the tips - might not always entirely agree with them but they do get the grey matter going!