Meteor shower

[bazzar]

Delighted to announce that Just Flight will publish the Meteor. We've also added the FR Mk9.:engel016:

[YoYo]

Delighted to announce that Just Flight will publish the Meteor. We've also added the FR Mk9.:engel016:

Yep. We know it ;) http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?101366-Gloster-Meteor-F-Mk-8&highlight=Meteor .

[delta_lima]

Yep. We know it ;) http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?101366-Gloster-Meteor-F-Mk-8&highlight=Meteor .


Read the models referenced. The FR9 is indeed a new announcement.

Great news Baz!!!

[YoYo]

Read the models referenced. The FR9 is indeed a new announcement.

Great news Baz!!!

Ahh, ok but I think its a the same package with Gloster Meteor F. Mk.8. btw. Id like to see this NF verions with radar functions, always I like this awful nose ; ) :

https://defenceoftherealm.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/nf14.jpg

[Ian Warren]

This will be a fun one, nice thing is the type being so early adds to the fun, the Mk F8 and FR-Mk9 will make for some very interesting paints :untroubled:

[bazzar]

Just to clarify, the release was to be Aeroplane Heaven when we originally announced. However, since then, Just Flight have acquired the project for publishing and the FRMk.9 has been added. Hence this new announcement.:engel016:

[spatialpro]

TacPack integration???

[YoYo]

TacPack integration???

+1. Will be nice but I'm affraid not. Never see any AH model with TP.

[bazzar]

Not officially my call anymore but no I do not think so.:engel016:

[spatialpro]

FWIW TacPack integration would make me open my wallet for this one (a superb model though it looks, don't get me wrong)

[hschuit]

Barry, thanks for adding the FR.9, nice to have a model with the early production metal rear section canopy and one with the later full glass canopy.

[Cees Donker]

Bazz,

That guitar in your avatar, is that yours?

:wavey:

Cees

[bazzar]

Yes it is Cees. I made it. It's a bit of a hobby, along with restoring old guitars. I call it the FrankenHofner. I used an old "new"stock Hofner factory neck grafted onto a new florentine cut hollow-body I've had kicking about for years. Anyway, lace-painted which was an idea I had from painting my old classic car, and loaded with Gibson goodness in pickups, controls, hardware etc. I made double sure of the set neck and with plenty of wood in the body, she just sings all-day.

[b52bob]

[QUOTE=bazzar;1035724]Yes it is Cees. I made it. It's a bit of a hobby, along with restoring old guitars. I call it the FrankenHofner. I used an old "new"stock Hofner factory neck grafted onto a new florentine cut hollow-body I've had kicking about for years. Anyway, lace-painted which was an idea I had from painting my old classic car, and loaded with Gibson goodness in pickups, controls, hardware etc. I made double sure of the set neck and with plenty of wood in the body, she just sings all-day.[/QUOTE

I know this is a little off subject but I used to live in San Diego and frequented the Carvin factory there. About a hundred guitars in their showroom to try out. The neck on some was like butter. Great guitars.
They also had a guitar kit that you could finish anyway you wanted. Gigged with that thing for years. Great memories. Play nothing now but contemporary Christian music.

[awstub]

+1. Will be nice but I'm affraid not. Never see any AH model with TP.

Hmmm, that's too bad. I'd buy it in a heartbeat if it was.

[Mach3DS]

FWIW TacPack integration would make me open my wallet for this one (a superb model though it looks, don't get me wrong)

Same here....as well as selectable drop tanks via wieght or a stores management panel. Would be fairly easy to implement the guns...just need to get the code into the sighting system for accurate aiming. Looks fantastic though!

[bazzar]

Sorry but personally I am not a great TacPac fan. My personal opinion is that this simulator is a peaceful place to be where you can practice your aviation skills. It's not a combat sim. If people want combat, fly DCS where you can do it so much better. We make warbirds, yes, but because a) they are interesting subjects and b) it allows people to fly iconic and historic aircraft just as you would at a modern day airshow. :engel016:

[Stickshaker]

I respect your opinion, Bazz, but including TacPac gives people a choice.<o:p></o:p>

[hairyspin]

I like the warbirds JF and Baz have been building lately because that period in aviation is fascinating. So many developments in such a short time and they still didn't have all the answers so the aircraft are varied and have such different characters. Much more interesting to me than contemporary commercial aviation. All the best with the Meteor!

[awstub]

Sorry but personally I am not a great TacPac fan. My personal opinion is that this simulator is a peaceful place to be where you can practice your aviation skills. It's not a combat sim. If people want combat, fly DCS where you can do it so much better. We make warbirds, yes, but because a) they are interesting subjects and b) it allows people to fly iconic and historic aircraft just as you would at a modern day airshow. :engel016:


DCS is not really better. It has a very limited plane set and the few theaters it has are too small in size.

FSX has no limitation on theater size...you can literally fly around the world in almost any aircraft you want to fly.

Tacpack integration, especially on jet age aircraft, adds a new level of complexity within the cockpit.

Everything about these older jet fighters was difficult, including the weapons systems and some of us would like to experience these difficulties so we can see what the pilots were faced with.

If someone thinks that warfare and/or the military is so abhorrent that they cannot bring themselves to fly a weaponized aircraft within a virtual world, they don't have to. That's their choice as a free person and it should be respected....as should any other persons choice.

[hairyspin]

...Tacpack integration, especially on jet age aircraft, adds a new level of complexity within the cockpit...

... and to the model development.

[bazzar]

There are many other considerations that need to be taken into account. Such as budget and timing. Licencing has to be paid for, SDKs studied and then approvals processed. It is not as simple as putting it into a freeware aircraft. Aside from my personal opinions, these other issues decide the final outcome. Besides, this is not strictly our baby anymore. It will be Just Flight's call. You could try lobbying them if you wish of course.

By the way, I meant "better" as in more appropriately.:engel016:

[YoYo]

I respect your opinion, Bazz, but including TacPac gives people a choice.<o:p></o>


...or like Milviz , two version, tackpacked and without TP. :wavey:

[awstub]

...or like Milviz , two version, tackpacked and without TP. :wavey:

Developers don't have to offer two versions, since even if an aircraft is made Tacpack capable (which is apparently license and royalty free to developers), the features wont work unless the end user has purchased & installed Tacpack on their system.

It would really be a challenge to use a Tacpacked Meteor to attempt an intercept of a V-1 as it races toward London.

[hairyspin]

Weapons offered by TacPack currently do not include the Hispano Mk.V cannon used by the Meteor. TacPack afaik don't want you to roll your own but use only what they supply with the pack

[spatialpro]

Weapons offered by TacPack currently do not include the Hispano Mk.V cannon used by the Meteor. TacPack afaik don't want you to roll your own but use only what they supply with the pack

From what I'm given to understand this is a "chicken and egg" situation. It seems aircraft developers might stay away from TacPack if the weapons for their era of aircraft aren't modelled, but VRS will only model the weapons if there is the demand for them. IMO if enough users (and therefore in turn developers) create the demand then the development will probably be taken on by VRS. The aircraft developer gets more sales, VRS becomes more widely used (and therefore more sales) and the users gets what they want. Surely everyone is a winner?!

The other caveat is there must be good documentation for the weapons, in order to model their behaviour accurately. Without such VRS are reluctant to take on the development of said weapons. It seems they may be willing to use mesh and textures for weapons developed by others, so long as a) they can then be released as part of the commercial TacPack package; and b) VRS does the modelling of the weapon behavior (as this is coded into TacPack itself, which is their product).

These are just my opinions and observations, nothing official and I'm not the voice of VRS by any means!

I imagine for the most part commercial developers are unwilling to provide mesh and textures which will end up in a package (TacPack) which could also be used by rival's products (e.g. the mesh are then provided to other developers free of charge, such that the static weapons can then appear on the airframe before release). Therefore IMO the community of users and freeware developers is best placed to create mesh and textures for weapons (esp. the more niche and obscure weapons) for VRS to use (This doesn't apply to many guns/cannon however, as mesh and textures are rarely needed for these). This community may also be best placed to have a large number of "eyes peeled" and "ears to the ground" for finding original, legitimate documentation for these weapons, such that VRS can accurately model their behavior. This may help to ease the "chicken and egg" situation.

Getting back to the Meteor, I'd like the choice. If there is no choice of TacPack for the Meteor then my cash will stay in my wallet, simply because I want to have the ability to fire weapons from this aircraft in this sim. That may not bother the developer, publisher or other stakeholders, which is also fine. No worries. It is what it is. Others will happily buy it. The world will keep on turning and the sky won't fall. I'm merely expressing myself.

[Pips]

Tacpack, no Tacpack...... don't care. It's flyable, and will no doubt be a beaut.

Can't wait for the Meteor's release!! :jump:

[thefrog]

I always groan when people come up with extra ideas for a developer to put into their planes because it inevitably delays the release.

[hairyspin]

There is also a case for developers being a little bloody-minded sometimes, although this is best kept to freeware. "This is what has been built, hope you like it."

[WarHorse47]

Whatever happened to this one?

It looked pretty complete to me when it was being developed by Aeroplane Heaven, but since it went to JustFlight there has been no update on its release. :mixed-smiley-027:

And please don't use that "S___" word. :biggrin-new:

[bazzar]

When a project is "complete" as it can be, it still has to be beta tested to iron out any bugs and faults and give the developers chance to upgrade the original ideas. All of this takes some weeks as testers are not available 24/7 and the process takes a long time. It is not unusual for a a product like Meteor to take 6 months or more to reach the market place. There are developments out there in their fourth and fifth years. It does not mean that they will not appear. 1 - 2,000 hours of work time to make these things - remember. :engel016:

[WarHorse47]

When a project is "complete" as it can be, it still has to be beta tested to iron out any bugs and faults and give the developers chance to upgrade the original ideas. All of this takes some weeks as testers are not available 24/7 and the process takes a long time. It is not unusual for a a product like Meteor to take 6 months or more to reach the market place. There are developments out there in their fourth and fifth years. It does not mean that they will not appear. 1 - 2,000 hours of work time to make these things - remember. :engel016:Hmm.. Interesting.

Thanks for the explanation, Baz.

In my defense when I see images like the ones you posted, I can only assume it was getting close. And I had assumed you already did the beta testing before it went to JF. How the production system works for addons is still a mystery to me - totally different than the manufacturing processes or software implementation that I'm familiar with.

Cheers. :very_drunk:

[Bjoern]

To drive Baz' point home: Systems modeling and flight dynamics development is one of the more time intensive and ungrateful jobs as there is little to show for it to the common folk. Visuals can easily be presented and drooled over, but systems and flight dynamics have to be experienced to be appreciated. Not to mention the dreaded manuals...

[WarHorse47]

"common folk?" Are you referring to us paying customers? Us loyal and true enthusiasts? Well, shucks. I guess that's me... :biggrin-new:

So much for "Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right!"

[Henry]

JUST AS ILOST ME PILOTS LICENCE:a1089:oh dear
H

[WarHorse47]

Thank you, Henry.

I feel better now.

Beers on me. :very_drunk:

[Bjoern]

"common folk?" Are you referring to us paying customers? Us loyal and true enthusiasts? Well, shucks. I guess that's me... :biggrin-new:

So much for "Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right!"

I just wanted to make a case for the less visible aspects of add-on development and make sure that it hit home, nothing more.

AH and JF will (hopefully) very much reward your monetary investment and loyalty with a top notch product, once the beta testers are done finding the tiniest speck on textures, the slightest inefficient bit of code, inadvertent, ever so slight wind noise in the soundset, that 0.0000001% deviation from published performance figures and the hardest to find typo in the manual.

[b52bob]

We all see what happens with an early release - this is wrong, flys like a pig, how can they release it with all those bugs, frame rate hog, I'll never by another thing from that company, I want my money back, etc. Instead of asking how soon, let them finish. I would love to have this on my flight line but can wait until most, if not all bugs are found and exterminated.

Looking forward to this release when finished. Just my two pence worth.

[WarHorse47]

Seems we're all trying to make different points in this discussion.

I recognize the complexity of what goes on behind the scenes, so there is no bashing of the less visible aspects of development. Nor am I asking for any early release of the product or questioning the quality of the product when its released.

My inquiry was with regards to status. Like I said I had the impression it was nearing release, in fact I thought I had read somewhere there was a possible August release. Again, it was my perception and I was just wondering what happened. The core issue to me is communication, not knowing what the proposed timeline is for product release.

Speaking only for myself, when I see great screenshots of a new product I get excited and continually check on the various websites to see if and when its released. When there is no date set, no discussions in the forums, and no release after a couple weeks, then I get curious. I've always felt it never hurts to ask. That's all. No more, no less.

[bazzar]

Settle petals, it's not far away, the rocket packs and starter trolley arrived at the hangar this week.:engel016:

[YoYo]

Few new shots from JF website;

http://dxhb0it26is40.cloudfront.net/productimages/meteor-f8-fr9_12_ss_l_160825140308.jpg

http://dxhb0it26is40.cloudfront.net/productimages/meteor-f8-fr9_13_ss_l_160825140309.jpg


btw.
this gunsight will be collimated in the final version? It looks like from FS2004 model and period :( ...

http://www.aeroplaneheaven.com/img/products/meteor/Cock1.jpg

[WarHorse47]

Whatever happened to this??

Last post was over a month ago, yet there has been no word or additional information on its release.

[Martyn]

Work has been progressing well. Not long to wait now!

[WarHorse47]

Work has been progressing well. Not long to wait now!It's always hard (near impossible) to tell what additional work is needed from looking at the initial screenshots. I can only guess at the number of times I keep checking different resources to see if there is any update on the product release. :untroubled:

[bazzar]

Just one of the risks with publishing previews. 80% of a product can take a small amount of time, 20%, a lifetime. The "extras" like programming accurate flight dynamics, sound production and flight manual are three areas that are unseen as such but take a lot of hard work and time. For example, if I asked you to produce a flight manual for say, a Boeing 737, how long would you need do you think? That's do the research, learn the facts and systems, digest and reproduce in a form the average game-player can understand. Less time than it takes to become a real-world pilot but almost as much knowledge and certainly the same data to absorb.

Flight dynamics require a complete understanding of the type, its systems, aerodynamic profile, engineering and flight characteristics taken from real-world pilot reports.

Previewing a product is natural for any developer and provides some insight as to what is happening in the hobby, some fun and in some cases heated debate! All things great for this hobby in my opinion.

Rush the above and we'd have far worse than the odd comment on when something's going to be ready!

As Martyn says, not long now.:engel016:

[hairyspin]

Someone's Law reckoned the first 90% of the work takes 90% of the time, the remainder takes the other 90%...

[Martyn]

We've posted some new screenshots of the Meteor:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43219&stc=1 http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43220&stc=1 http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43221&stc=1 http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43222&stc=1

[YoYo]

Nice, this textures looks better than before.
But I see no collimated gunsight (like in FS9), pitty.

http://dxhb0it26is40.cloudfront.net/productimages/meteor-f8-fr9_12_ss_l_160921115930.jpg

http://dxhb0it26is40.cloudfront.net/productimages/meteor-f8-fr9_23_ss_l_160921120145.jpg

[Pips]

A really sweet looking bird. :)

[Flyboy208]

Gorgeous Glosters here ! Mike :applause:

[DaveB]

The more I look at these shots, the more I'm bothered by the pilots bone dome. Granted.. the aircraft pictured are fitted with bang seats so the leather flying helmet would be retired but I'd expect to see him wearing a Mk1 either with clip-on visor or with a rail on top of the lid to accommodate a sliding visor. Mk1's were issued in silver though some pilots painted them (had them painted) white.

The one the models pilot is wearing makes it look very 'Warbird'. At least I think it does:wavey:
ATB
DaveB:)

[Martyn]

Hi Dave. I have zero knowledge with regards to flying helmets but I'll pass on your feedback.

[DaveB]

Thanks Martyn:encouragement:

I got in touch with a friend yesterday to confirm (or otherwise) my thoughts. I know he has 25hrs in the Meatbox and it transpires.. all of these were flown with the old leather flying helmet.. pre-bang seat. He didn't wear a bone dome until the advent of the Venom FB4 in mid '55 and this was a Mk1 with blue airtex inner.

This pic shows a Mk1a with rail added and 3-position visor. The Mk1 visor was attached by 3 press-studs on a piece of elastic! Mk1's were modded to Mk1a standard
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=RAF+Flying+helmets&view=detailv2&&id=38F2917554F8274FD3AB936C5F44513ED506FE23&selectedIndex=71&ccid=RA5d4mfj&simid=608033294286391562&thid=OIP.M440e5de267e320d95532c106715bb479o0&ajaxhist=0

This shows a Mk2.. 1970 vintage..
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=RAF+Mk2+flying+helmet&view=detailv2&&id=79E383B6A9FF6137F799CEDE22A0EB7BF989664F&selectedIndex=11&ccid=6wMjQsSA&simid=608035347282529583&thid=OIP.Meb032342c480387ada91314c9793a4ebo0&ajaxhist=0

It's only a small point I know but it does kinda throw the model out of era a wee bit.
ATB
DaveB:)

[Dimus]

Also make sure you perform gunsight collimation correctly for P3D. It was not done so for the Hawk. I understand the procedure is different from FSX.

Looking great so far.

[YoYo]

Also make sure you perform gunsight collimation correctly for P3D. It was not done so for the Hawk. I understand the procedure is different from FSX.

Looking great so far.

Agree. I'd like to buy this model but this gunsight drive me crazy ; ) and looks in present time very unnatural, like from FS2004 :dejection: .
Pretty please do this AH ! :-)

http://s10.ifotos.pl/img/31624710j_ahqsehn.jpg

Example (from wip) :

http://s2.ifotos.pl/img/Nowy-2JPG_ahqsexs.jpg

[Dimus]

YoYo, in these WIP pictures, I'm sure this is just a placeholder. I do not expect JF will have an uncollimated gunsight in this day and age. I just point out that they should particularly take care of the the procedure in P3D so that the issue in the Hawk is not repeated. P3D treats this differently than FSX.

[Martyn]

This aircraft is developed for us by AH and therefore has no connection with our Hawk project. I'll be sure to pass along your request though.

[YoYo]

It looks like soon, addon received the Cover:
http://www.justflight.com/product/meteor-f8-fr9 .

[Martyn]

The flying helmet and collimated gunsight requests have been incorporated:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43373&stc=1 http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43374&stc=1

[Dimus]

These are looking good! Great to see constructive comments being incorporated.

Now, I don't wish to be a pest but is the collimation working well in P3D (i.e. without the pipper being projected outside the glass area?)

[Martyn]

Yes, and it's been fixed on the Hawk too :encouragement:

[Dimus]

Yes, and it's been fixed on the Hawk too :encouragement:

Excellent news Martyn! Thanks!

[DaveB]

Now.. the gun sight doesn't bother me but that bone dome seals the deal. Love it, love it, LOVE IT.

Excellent stuff Martyn and thank you:encouragement:
ATB
DaveB:)

[YoYo]

The flying helmet and collimated gunsight requests have been incorporated:

http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/attachment.php?attachmentid=43373&stc=1

Excellent news ! BiG Thank YOU!!!
Im a customer now :applause: .

:wavey:

[bazzar]

P3DV3.4 has a lot of changes but a lot of nightmares for devs. Finally got the gunsight sorted but there's a lot more to learn about that sim to get the best out of these projects. I hope they stabilise for a while and give us a chance to catch up.:engel016:

[YoYo]

P3DV3.4 has a lot of changes but a lot of nightmares for devs. Finally got the gunsight sorted but there's a lot more to learn about that sim to get the best out of these projects. I hope they stabilise for a while and give us a chance to catch up.:engel016:

:D . The last patch (3.3) was in Jun so 4-5 months of freedom ;).
Thx bazz for this update. :wavey:

[wombat666]

:D . The last patch (3.3) was in Jun so 4-5 months of freedom ;).
Thx bazz for this update. :wavey:

Currently at P3D4.9 .............:173go1:

[YoYo]

Currently at P3D4.9 .............:173go1:

P3D4 ? Where ?
You are wrong, now its a P3Dv3 still (exactly P3D3.4.9.18400).

[bazzar]

Current version is P3DV3.4. The Meteor looks terrific in the sim. They certainly have done a lot with it since 3.3 I'm not complaining, I just would like some time to get to know it all before something new is added again.

[YoYo]

Current version is P3DV3.4. The Meteor looks terrific in the sim. They certainly have done a lot with it since 3.3 I'm not complaining, I just would like some time to get to know it all before something new is added again.

Any preview as video is planned? :wavey:

[bazzar]

Not my call YoYo but there usually is, yes.:engel016:

[YoYo]

Ah, ok,
btw I'm ready, me and Meteor (not very fresh), picture from this year. :biggrin-new:

http://s2.ifotos.pl/img/Nowy-3JPG_arrprsp.jpg

This nose was so nice ; ))) https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/ZCTEEtLCRVbFrNtRfT7S-Us2sN7ozbAw_QeaFqlAee87g6f70PG6h9BkTKMgcgslsh2mIu9 KsuAAvlM=w2560-h1440-rw-no .

[Ian Warren]

:untroubled: I guess we are going to see a Museum photo paint on the Meteor then YOYO :encouragement:

[wombat666]

Current version is P3DV3.4. The Meteor looks terrific in the sim. They certainly have done a lot with it since 3.3 I'm not complaining, I just would like some time to get to know it all before something new is added again.


Prepar3Dv3 Professional 3.4.9.18400 ............. Duh!!!!
It's been a long week.
:banghead:

[pilto von pilto]

Ah, ok,
btw I'm ready, me and Meteor (not very fresh), picture from this year. :biggrin-new:

..snip...


I'm pretty sure that you're standing in front of one of the meteors from the "barnfind" squadron which was made famous for having an innovative ground radar that pinpoints old bugatti's and ferrari's hidden in barns. The livery you see there was specially formulated to make sure that the owners of the barn find didnt clue on to the actual price of their bugatti and let it go for the price of a ford mondeo.

The squadron was active until very recently when the airforce formed a new squadron called the "ebay snipers" and the requirement for overflights was greatly diminished.

[YoYo]

I'm pretty sure that you're standing in front of one of the meteors from the "barnfind" squadron which was made famous for having an innovative ground radar that pinpoints old bugatti's and ferrari's hidden in barns. The livery you see there was specially formulated to make sure that the owners of the barn find didnt clue on to the actual price of their bugatti and let it go for the price of a ford mondeo.

The squadron was active until very recently when the airforce formed a new squadron called the "ebay snipers" and the requirement for overflights was greatly diminished.

Interesting :biggrin-new: .

Few more pictures, good idea for repaiters:

http://s2.ifotos.pl/img/Nowy-3JPG_arrxnxe.jpg

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/3Mp58GfmUDr1TNc98333Tc91MpBMK3AVZxjrMELlkIRqLqOwiC x0vpADg7CNEDCnHvNWWPI7kFMpt7o=w2560-h1440-rw-no

https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112462806459097563978/album/AF1QipNRZacZ6WYRmBaVVdiOPOovLZ9vtldyelDLBMh6/AF1QipNoXAAAzMj-GovyTqsVze1ij3dtp2VJrFJm0cnW

https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112462806459097563978/album/AF1QipNRZacZ6WYRmBaVVdiOPOovLZ9vtldyelDLBMh6/AF1QipPAJz0oJTaz8M4JC9XuxhqPFGWy1OAMpCwtmicR

https://get.google.com/albumarchive/112462806459097563978/album/AF1QipNRZacZ6WYRmBaVVdiOPOovLZ9vtldyelDLBMh6/AF1QipNd8Z0e5nk81Dw8u5eMDKVLihjasQ9zfwmoL5cH

[hairyspin]

I'm pretty sure that you're standing in front of one of the meteors from the "barnfind" squadron which was made famous for having an innovative ground radar...

Chuckle, chuckle; nice one pilto! :-)

[hschuit]

2 more paints, just uploaded.

Meteor F.8 WH397, No. 54 Sqn, RAF Odiham, 1954

https://s5.postimg.org/63hah2qtz/JF_METR_WH397.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/tugnz6r0z/)


and Meteor F.8 WL135, No. 245 Sqn, RAF Horsham St Faith, 1955

https://s5.postimg.org/cfwfqwtw7/JF_METR_WL135.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/tt6q5rp77/)

[Timmy74]

2 more paints, just uploaded.

Meteor F.8 WH397, No. 54 Sqn, RAF Odiham, 1954

https://s5.postimg.org/63hah2qtz/JF_METR_WH397.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/tugnz6r0z/)


and Meteor F.8 WL135, No. 245 Sqn, RAF Horsham St Faith, 1955

https://s5.postimg.org/cfwfqwtw7/JF_METR_WL135.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/tt6q5rp77/)


Thank you every much for some more repaints for this aircraft.

Could I please ask for a favour? I was hoping that you maybe able to "fix" the paint "Bowl em Over!" A77-17 that was released with the JF package?

"Bowl em Over!" was actually A77-207 and not A77-17 as released. A77-207 was flown by Pilot Officer Geoff Collins.

http://radschool.org.au/magazines/Vol34/Page10.htm

I hope you could help me in rectifying this...but if not I fully understand? I am surprised that Aussieman -whom was a beta tester on this- did not pick up on the historical error!

Regards,
Tim.

[hschuit]

Tim, I just uploaded A77-207 to the Warbirds Library. I can imagine how AH got the serial wrong, there are drawings on the web with A77-17. Photos are a much better source, they clearly show the serial as A77-207, not A77-17.

BTW, in the book "All in a Day's Work: Some Experiences of 45 RAAF Pilots 1939-1945" there is an interview with Wg Cdr Ken Godfrey about his flight with A77-207 on Nov 29, 1952. He got hit by AA gun fire, the left engine died but he managed to land safely at Kimpo AB. Apparently the aircraft was repaired, there are photos of it from the 1960's, it was converted to an U21A target drone.

https://s5.postimg.org/cste14bx3/JF_METR_A77_207_1024.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/j6ih4dgsz/)

[Timmy74]

Tim, I just uploaded A77-207 to the Warbirds Library. I can imagine how AH got the serial wrong, there are drawings on the web with A77-17. Photos are a much better source, they clearly show the serial as A77-207, not A77-17.

BTW, in the book "All in a Day's Work: Some Experiences of 45 RAAF Pilots 1939-1945" there is an interview with Wg Cdr Ken Godfrey about his flight with A77-207 on Nov 29, 1952. He got hit by AA gun fire, the left engine died but he managed to land safely at Kimpo AB. Apparently the aircraft was repaired, there are photos of it from the 1960's, it was converted to an U21A target drone.

https://s5.postimg.org/cste14bx3/JF_METR_A77_207_1024.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/j6ih4dgsz/)

Thank you very much for your time in fixing this for me hschuit! A77-207 certainly had a very colourful career in the RAAF, just be "blown up" as a drone!!! Such sacrilege!!

I am going to have to do some more digging on the History of 207 and find the dates and times of the change over of the pilots that flew her. The nose art "Bowl em Over" was certainly when Pilot Officer Geoff Collins flew her.

"All in a Days Work" is a great book and a wonderful read!

Thank you again for your help.

Regards,
Tim.

[jeansy]

Tim, I just uploaded A77-207 to the Warbirds Library. I can imagine how AH got the serial wrong, there are drawings on the web with A77-17. Photos are a much better source, they clearly show the serial as A77-207, not A77-17.

BTW, in the book "All in a Day's Work: Some Experiences of 45 RAAF Pilots 1939-1945" there is an interview with Wg Cdr Ken Godfrey about his flight with A77-207 on Nov 29, 1952. He got hit by AA gun fire, the left engine died but he managed to land safely at Kimpo AB. Apparently the aircraft was repaired, there are photos of it from the 1960's, it was converted to an U21A target drone.

https://s5.postimg.org/cste14bx3/JF_METR_A77_207_1024.jpg (https://postimg.org/image/j6ih4dgsz/)

Thank you for fixing that up, and giving the correct credits to the correct serial, its greatly appreciated

I only recently found out about this mistake on the Australian serials site as it was a topic of conversation

im not sure how an australian team can mix that up

[bazzar]

Perhaps I had other things on my mind. Seriously, 2 years to reply to a post?

[jeansy]

Perhaps I had other things on my mind. Seriously, 2 years to reply to a post?

I was paying hschuit credit, so what if it was two yrs later it was news to me until today, I will pay someone credit 10yrs later if need be

the fact that this particular paint was discussed in the past 24hrs by ex-servicemen in the ADF serials circle pays exceptional credit to the justice he has done.

again thank you hschuit :ernaehrung004:

[Moses03]

We get it Matt. You have a long running grudge against AH.

I would suggest a PM to Bazz or any of the AH team to air out the things that bother you, otherwise please keep it out of the forums. Constantly pointing fingers at them publicly only makes you look petty.

Thanks,
Kevin

[jeansy]

We get it Matt. You have a long running grudge against AH.

I would suggest a PM to Bazz or any of the AH team to air out the things that bother you, otherwise please keep it out of the forums. Constantly pointing fingers at them publicly only makes you look petty.

Thanks,
Kevin

Thanks for the advice kevin :encouragement: