The Me 262 had speed and firepower, but I thought it was not much of a dog fighter.
Despite its high wing loading it was surprisingly agile. Once you got it up to speed (450mph) it could turn pretty well and use that energy for zoom climbs, etc.
You had to had careful not exceed its mach limits of course. And it had poor acceleration as did all the early jets.
The important thing was to get it up to speed and keep it there, once you did that you were untouchable.
It was a good airframe the 262, its weaknesses were with the engines not the performance of the actual plane.
Basically you can compare it to the UK's Meteor: the 262 was a great airframe with crappy engines, the Meteor was great engines within a crappy airframe.
Though you have to think the wicked thought: If Willy Messerschmitt had spent a bit more time on a successor to the 109 (a real 209), or even make those disasters the 210 and 410 actually work, then his time might have been spent more effectively for Germany's defence. Bit of a Prima Donna I suspect.
One of the reasons I respect Kurt Tank a lot more. Just imagine what he could have achieved if Daimler Benz and Jumo had actually delivered on some of their promises on engines. The Allied air forces would have had a bit more trouble than they did.
It is a total condemnation of the whole system and people involved (Govt, airframe manufacturers, engines manufacturers, etc) that they were still producing and using the Me-110 in 1945, a plane that was obsolete in 1940*.
Note: I always prefer to use the term agile to sum together all the elements needed, roll, zoom/contineous climb, dive, instantaneous/contineous turn, acceleration, etc, etc.
* Then again are we any better with that mega (giga, more accurately tera) disaster the F-35?
).
