Gloster Meteor

[GTX]

Hi folks,

I can't seem to find a thread dedicated to the Gloster Meteor, so here goes.

I was recently thinking of doing a bomber version of the Gloster Meteor, probably with a perspex nose of some sort - a bit like a British equivalent to the Me-262A-2a/U2.  Maybe if the Canberra was delayed or something similar.

What other ideas do you have?

Regards,

Greg

[r16]

although probably done already but me-262's swept wings and maybe tail could probably be mated to the  Meteor and Hawker Stormbird would signify the products of the company would henceforth be birds ; not winds and storms.

[Mossie]

Mount one of those 4.5in recoiless rifles that the RAF was fascinated with, I'm pretty sure the Meteor was one of the aircraft it was slated for.

Unicraft do a 1/72 Trent conversion, you could maybe build an advanced trainer?

A two seater FB variant would be good, put a T.7 or NF.14 canopy on a F.8 airframe.  Maybe in conjunction with that 4.5in gun?

The 'missing' Mk.6 is open for debate, was it a pre-cursor to the F.8 or a swept wing variant?  Who knows, this one could be whiffed however you want.

[ysi_maniac]

The 'missing' Mk.6 is open for debate, was it a pre-cursor to the F.8 or a swept wing variant?  Who knows, this one could be whiffed however you want.

More info? is this in any Butler's book? I need something (going out of control)

[Daryl J.]

F.3 with F.4 engines painted in something other than grey or green.
Some type of additional gun pack underneath and done up in SEA/USAF as a trail strafer used across the pond.
PR.9 in Hemp/Ex. Light Hemp for use in the sandbox.   Why not even have whiff colors too yes?

Some years back I found a Tamiya F.3 for a heavily discounted price and got it specifically for whiffing.  But can I ever remember what the plan was......?? No...
The Meteor begs for whiffery doesn't it.
,
Daryl J.

[dy031101]

The 'missing' Mk.6 is open for debate, was it a pre-cursor to the F.8 or a swept wing variant?  Who knows, this one could be whiffed however you want.

I remember seeing a line drawing claimed to be that of the abortive F.6, basically one with a new set of wings...... a tailed delta, to put it roughly.

Abandoned because, as the likes of MiG-15 and F-86 were down the pipeline, the British figured that a re-winged Meteor might still not be competitive enough......

[jcf]

The 'missing' Mk.6 is open for debate, was it a pre-cursor to the F.8 or a swept wing variant?  Who knows, this one could be whiffed however you want.

I remember seeing a line drawing claimed to be that of the abortive F.6, basically one with a new set of wings...... a tailed delta, to put it roughly.

Abandoned because, as the likes of MiG-15 and F-86 were down the pipeline, the British figured that a re-winged Meteor might still not be competitive enough......

Yer must mean the P.262.

More Glostery goodness on this old thread:
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,16717.0/highlight,gloster.html

Jon

[Mossie]

Suppose the experiments with the prone piloted Meteor led to a dedicatd version?  Slimmer fuse, pointy nose.  Anyone know if there's a conversion set for the prone Meteor?

[kitnut617]

F.3 with F.4 engines painted in something other than grey or green.

Daryl, it was done but not with the F.3.  One of the Rampage prototypes was used to investigate engine nacelle shapes, this is a model I started after reading, and seeing some photos of it, an article in an Air-Britan magazine.  Of course there's always the Metro-Vick powered version which was an axial flow engine and pre-dates any information got from German technology

[kitnut617]

A couple of the Metro-Vick model I've started too.

[kitnut617]

There was one Meteor that had Saphfires installed but even though it had twice as much power (more than that IIRC) it only managed to fly 30 or 40 mph faster than the Mk.8.  The limiting factor being that the airframe wasn't aerodynamic enough to make it go any faster.

[GTX]

Suppose the experiments with the prone piloted Meteor led to a dedicatd version?

Like this maybe?



Crude I know.

Regards,

Greg

[Mossie]

Yeah, something like that Greg, I think the cockpit would be closer to the original position, maybe like this?



This opens up a whole new what-if line, how would fighter design have changed had the prone position been adopted?

[jcf]

This opens up a whole new what-if line, how would fighter design have changed had the prone position been adopted?

Adoption was doubtful as the cons outweighed the pros, the theories didn't prove out on test.

However, here is a bit of Meatbox trivia for ya, the original Air Staff requirements for what became F.9/40 included "a seat to provide a deck chair attitude for the pilot". In other words a semi-reclined seating position.

Classic wooden deck chair

Jon

[kitbasher]

I've got the Unicraft Trent Meteor.  The word you're looking for rhymes with bite.   
Gloster did design a specialised ground attack version of the F8.

Well I've got a Merlin F8 - and Wooksta rhyming slang applies to that just as much!
The plan was to turn it into a D.16 but it's just not worth the effort.  So....the long term plan is to turn it into a ground attack development of the Meatbox and call it te 'Reaper'..
Now the real Reaper was the F8 development Wooksta refers to (the Gloster G44, not to be confused with the Gloster F.9/37 (see http://www.jaapteeuwen.com/ww2aircraft/html%20pages/GLOSTER%20F9%2037.htm) or the http://www.aeroscale.co.uk/modules.php?op=modload&name=Sections&file=index&req=viewarticle&artid=1239).  So big - very long term!! - plan is to keep the fuselage as is, slap the engine nacelles on to the fuselage sides, add the wings (suitably modified) at shoulder height so as to be able to sling loads of stores on pylons.  Nosewheel would remain the same, but the main gear would have to fit into fuselage fairings under the engine nacelles.  I imagine the final product looking not unlike an Su-25 Frogfoot or even a Northrop A-9.
Hard work, but someone's gotta do it!