FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I could agree with that!
Dogfight: Me 262 vs. Meteor (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Friendly Fire
- Start date
The Meteor mk IIIs that were delivered in December 44 were supposedly only a few mph faster due to the more aerodynamic canopy, remember, the first 15 were still equipped with two wellend jets, Meteor mk Is could do about 410 mph, from memory, the operational mkIIIs could do 420 mph.
some have suggested that they were able to get derwent engines of a reduced thrust(1800 pounds)into service before the war ended, I have no independent knowledge of this.
The MkIII as tested in 1946,with 2000 pnd thrust Derwents... was 90 mph slower than the 262 at 20000ft(its best altitude) and between 120 and 150 mph at 30000ft,
some have suggested that they were able to get derwent engines of a reduced thrust(1800 pounds)into service before the war ended, I have no independent knowledge of this.
The MkIII as tested in 1946,with 2000 pnd thrust Derwents... was 90 mph slower than the 262 at 20000ft(its best altitude) and between 120 and 150 mph at 30000ft,
I believe the DO 335 had reverse thrust, a highly sophisticated production aircraft that might have seen limited action at the end of the war.
Hello Awack
Yes, the first 15 had Wellands but in mid March 45 616 had 4 of them but also 15 Mk IIIs with Derwents, see http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/meteor/meteor-squadrons-16march45.pdf
and with 1,800lb Derwents Mk III seems to have been 44mph slower than Me 262 at 30,000ft, not 120 to 150mph and some 85mph slower at sea level. Mk III with 1,800lb Derwents 435 mph at s.l. and 465 mph at 30,000 ft.
Last edited:
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
British Jet aircraft development does seem to have been very slack. Gloster with its admittedly small team spent 4 years and came up with the Meteor III that snaked, had gun troubles and after several versions still needed a new tail and engine nacselles. DeHavilland seem to have developed the Spider Crab/Vampire almost as an after work hobby project at one point just 2 men were working on it in the drawing office.
I wonder what other companies could have come up with if given plenty of resources to design and build a fighter. My favourite would be Miles aviation though as they were known for some pretty wacky designs its possible they would have turned out a Bat wing Canard or have the Pilot sat underneath the engines.
I wonder what other companies could have come up with if given plenty of resources to design and build a fighter. My favourite would be Miles aviation though as they were known for some pretty wacky designs its possible they would have turned out a Bat wing Canard or have the Pilot sat underneath the engines.
The cannon troubles were solved fast but otherwise I agree the Meteor points.
One explanation might be that British knew at least after July 44 that war will be won with the planes in production or in pipeline, so no need to put too much scare resources on jet development, jets would not change anything and probably would not be ready in significant numbers before VE-day. Japan was a different matter and that's why they put effort in DH 103 Hornet and Arvo Lincoln. Meteor and Vampire might well have seen as intermin a/c and more effort were put to more refined Supermarine and Hawker projects. And after the war GB was broke and Labour gov wanted to put resources available to built up a welfare state, not military equipment.
Last edited:
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
I think your spot on there Juha. The money and men that went into Britains Jet aviation programme was small compared to Germany and miniscule compared to the US particulary post war. Rolls Royces jet division was tiny compared to GE there were more men working on superchargers at Derby than there were on Gas Turbines at Barnoldswick till well into 45. Without being too harsh on Glosters they were small compared to Hawkers, Supermarine and others and probably got the design job as they had no other orders.
Yes that was the main reason, the other was that Whittle and the Gloster's chief designer, Carter?, got along well.
The Meteor airbrakes were evidently more effective than the MiG... see JetAgeRMC_Korea
"The long nacelled F8 was the ultimate day fighter version of the Gloster Meteor and was only replaced in front line RAF Fighter Command squadrons by the Hawker Hunter in 1955. Between 1951 and 1953 the Meteor F8 also became the only British built jet aircraft to serve with the United Nations forces in Korea: equipping 77 Squadron Royal Australian Air Force based at Kimpo, South Korea.
On 27 March 1953 Flight Sergeant George Hale and Flight Sergeant David Irlam were part of a flight of four Meteor F8s - led by Squadron Leader John Hubble - attacking ground traffic between Pyongyang, capital of Communist North Korea, and Sinmak with under-wing rockets.
Upon reaching Pyongyang the formation split with Hale and Irlam heading south in line astern at low level. Hale sighted three transonic swept-wing MiG 15 fighters preparing to attack two USAF RF-80 Shooting Stars. As he jettisoned the ventral tank on his Meteor - A77-851- and turned to intercept the MiGs, Hale fired off the last two of his underwing rockets in an attempt to distract the enemy pilots. This forced the two MiGs to turn away from each other.
As he turned to follow the enemy, Irlam reported that he was under fire and Hale turned into the new threat, which turned out to be two MiGs on Irlam's tail. While Irlam headed for cloud cover in his damaged Meteor, Hale's opponent extended his air brakes and turned in behind Irlam, but overshot. Hale extended his air brakes and slotted in behind the MiG. He opened fire and hit the enemy fighter squarely behind the cockpit. The MiG rolled on its back and fell away, spewing smoke. Just as Hale was about to follow his victim, two more MiGs dived on him. However, he managed to pull into them and fired but their speed carried them away. A third pair of Communist jets turned in on his tail but Hale turned back on them and opened fire on the second MiG, which left a trail of white smoke. Out of ammunition, Hale had to let the MiGs get away. Back at Kimpo, Hale and his wingman counted no fewer than 112 shrapnel holes in Irlam's Meteor. However, the two MiG silhouettes painted on Hale's cockpit by his crew chief lasted only a few days before Squadron Leader John Hubble ordered them to be painted out as they broke RAAF regulations. By the end of hostilities four months later though, 77 squadron had lost 32 Meteor pilots in 18,872 sorties but had deprived the Communists of 3,700 buildings. 1,500 vehicles and six MiG 15s."
On 27 March 1953 Flight Sergeant George Hale and Flight Sergeant David Irlam were part of a flight of four Meteor F8s - led by Squadron Leader John Hubble - attacking ground traffic between Pyongyang, capital of Communist North Korea, and Sinmak with under-wing rockets.
Upon reaching Pyongyang the formation split with Hale and Irlam heading south in line astern at low level. Hale sighted three transonic swept-wing MiG 15 fighters preparing to attack two USAF RF-80 Shooting Stars. As he jettisoned the ventral tank on his Meteor - A77-851- and turned to intercept the MiGs, Hale fired off the last two of his underwing rockets in an attempt to distract the enemy pilots. This forced the two MiGs to turn away from each other.
As he turned to follow the enemy, Irlam reported that he was under fire and Hale turned into the new threat, which turned out to be two MiGs on Irlam's tail. While Irlam headed for cloud cover in his damaged Meteor, Hale's opponent extended his air brakes and turned in behind Irlam, but overshot. Hale extended his air brakes and slotted in behind the MiG. He opened fire and hit the enemy fighter squarely behind the cockpit. The MiG rolled on its back and fell away, spewing smoke. Just as Hale was about to follow his victim, two more MiGs dived on him. However, he managed to pull into them and fired but their speed carried them away. A third pair of Communist jets turned in on his tail but Hale turned back on them and opened fire on the second MiG, which left a trail of white smoke. Out of ammunition, Hale had to let the MiGs get away. Back at Kimpo, Hale and his wingman counted no fewer than 112 shrapnel holes in Irlam's Meteor. However, the two MiG silhouettes painted on Hale's cockpit by his crew chief lasted only a few days before Squadron Leader John Hubble ordered them to be painted out as they broke RAAF regulations. By the end of hostilities four months later though, 77 squadron had lost 32 Meteor pilots in 18,872 sorties but had deprived the Communists of 3,700 buildings. 1,500 vehicles and six MiG 15s."
The Me 262 didn't have airbrakes...
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
We don't know what the MiG's airspeed was, if he had built up too much speed for the attack as the Meteor was decelerating, then an overshoot was inevitable...regardless of the airbrake configuration. And I have read elsewhere that the MiG-15's airbrakes were actually quite effective, so it certainly appears that the attacking MiG had built up too much speed in the attack.
And yes, the Me262 did not have airbrakes and due to the slow spool-up time of the Jumo engines, would have been more of a liability than an asset had they been installed.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
WRONG - they claimed 6 MiGs, actually got 4 while loosing 6 - see the earlier post.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
In what way? You keep posting little tid bits that are meaningless. That site was put together by a modeler. There is no flight test data to prove your point (deceleration tests at all flight parameters)
No matter what you believe the Meteor was no match for the MiG-15 and the RAF eventually realized this.
In service with 349 squadron
The Mk. 4 version of the Hawker Hunter served within the squadron. It's presence however was short-lived, only 11 months to be exact. The Hunter served as a stop-gap measure to replace the rapidly aging Gloster Meteor F. Mk. 8. The staff of the Belgian Air Force hadn't decided on a replacement yet when the Meteor needed an urgent replacement. Therefore it was decided to equip 349 squadron with the Mk. 4 version of the Hunter.
Hmmmm......why was that????
Hawker Hunter
Korean War MiG Claims
During the time that the "Honchos" (the nickname given by the Sabre pilots to excellent MiG pilots) were in Korea, between April 1951 and January 1952, they shot down or damaged beyond repair 158 UN aircraft against 68 losses, an overall 2:1 kill ratio. Their most successful month was October 1951, when the Soviet MiG-15s bagged 8 F-86s, 6 F-84Es, 2 RF-80As and one F-80C, one Meteor and 10 B-29As -25 victories- and suffered only 8 MiGs lost, achieving a 3:1 kill-to-losses ratio. During that period over 30 Soviet MiG-15 pilots became aces, among them Nikolai Sutyagin (21 kills); and also Yevgeni Pepelyayev (19), Lev Shchukin (17), the already mentioned Sergei Kramarenko (13), Mikhail Ponomaryev (11), Dmitri Samoylov (10), etc.
Korean War Aces - Axis History Forum
…However, most of the claims of the four top scoring aces -Sutyagin, Pepelyayev, Shchukin and Kramarenko- proved to be very reliable, as did the claims of several other aces, e.g. Aleksandr Smorchkov, Stepan Bahayev and Dmitri Samoylov. Further, the overall 2:1 kill ratio of the "Honcho Period" clearly shows that the Russian Aces at that time gained at least a slight edge against their skillful American counterparts.
So, why did the Russian pilots in Korea score so high? It is an interesting question, and it has more than a possible answer. One of them is because - at least in 1951- they were using better tactics:
• The Soviet fighters were guided to the air battlefield by good ground control, which directed them to the most advantageous position.
• The MiG-15s always operated in pairs, as part of a team called "the sword and the shield," with an attacking leader ("the sword") covered by a wingman ("the shield").
• The squadrons operated in 6-plane groups, divided in 3 pairs, each composed of a leader and a wingman:
1. The first pair ("the sword pair") of MiG-15s attacked the enemy Sabres.
2. The second pair ("the shield pair") protected the first pair.
3. The third pair remained above, with a panoramic view of how the battle evolved, supporting the "sword pair" or the "shield pair" depending the situation. This pair had more freedom than the others, because it could also attack targets of opportunity, such as lone Sabres that had lost their wingmen.
Experience was also a key factor, and the Russian pilots had a great deal of it. Most of the regimental and squadron commanders in 1951 were WW2 aces, e.g. Georgii Lobov (19 victories), Aleksandr Vasko (15 kills), Aleksandr Kumanichkin (30), Grigorii Ohay (6). So, the Russian pilots were as experienced as the best American WW2 Aces of the 4th and 51st Wings, like Francis Gabreski, Glenn Eagleston, Walker Mahurin, Robert Thyng, George Davis and many others...
Russian Aces of the Korean War - MiG-15 Pilots versus USAF F-86s
That would seem to be in line with the description in Caygill, Peter. Meteor from the Cockpit: Britain's First Jet Fighter. Casemate Publishers, and JetAgeRMC_Korea quoted.
KILL RATIO CLAIMED
…Soviet forces claimed 1309 American aircraft kills of all types, while admitting to losing some 350 aircraft and 200 pilots. American records generally agree that U.S. losses were around 1300, but only 139 were lost in air-to-air combat. The rest were lost to anti-aircraft fire or for other reasons. The U.S. claims 823 MiG-15 kills (792 by Sabre pilots). Some of the downed MiGs may have been piloted by Chinese or North Koreans…
Who Were Those Men
During the time that the "Honchos" (the nickname given by the Sabre pilots to excellent MiG pilots) were in Korea, between April 1951 and January 1952, they shot down or damaged beyond repair 158 UN aircraft against 68 losses, an overall 2:1 kill ratio. Their most successful month was October 1951, when the Soviet MiG-15s bagged 8 F-86s, 6 F-84Es, 2 RF-80As and one F-80C, one Meteor and 10 B-29As -25 victories- and suffered only 8 MiGs lost, achieving a 3:1 kill-to-losses ratio. During that period over 30 Soviet MiG-15 pilots became aces, among them Nikolai Sutyagin (21 kills); and also Yevgeni Pepelyayev (19), Lev Shchukin (17), the already mentioned Sergei Kramarenko (13), Mikhail Ponomaryev (11), Dmitri Samoylov (10), etc.
Korean War Aces - Axis History Forum
…However, most of the claims of the four top scoring aces -Sutyagin, Pepelyayev, Shchukin and Kramarenko- proved to be very reliable, as did the claims of several other aces, e.g. Aleksandr Smorchkov, Stepan Bahayev and Dmitri Samoylov. Further, the overall 2:1 kill ratio of the "Honcho Period" clearly shows that the Russian Aces at that time gained at least a slight edge against their skillful American counterparts.
So, why did the Russian pilots in Korea score so high? It is an interesting question, and it has more than a possible answer. One of them is because - at least in 1951- they were using better tactics:
• The Soviet fighters were guided to the air battlefield by good ground control, which directed them to the most advantageous position.
• The MiG-15s always operated in pairs, as part of a team called "the sword and the shield," with an attacking leader ("the sword") covered by a wingman ("the shield").
• The squadrons operated in 6-plane groups, divided in 3 pairs, each composed of a leader and a wingman:
1. The first pair ("the sword pair") of MiG-15s attacked the enemy Sabres.
2. The second pair ("the shield pair") protected the first pair.
3. The third pair remained above, with a panoramic view of how the battle evolved, supporting the "sword pair" or the "shield pair" depending the situation. This pair had more freedom than the others, because it could also attack targets of opportunity, such as lone Sabres that had lost their wingmen.
Experience was also a key factor, and the Russian pilots had a great deal of it. Most of the regimental and squadron commanders in 1951 were WW2 aces, e.g. Georgii Lobov (19 victories), Aleksandr Vasko (15 kills), Aleksandr Kumanichkin (30), Grigorii Ohay (6). So, the Russian pilots were as experienced as the best American WW2 Aces of the 4th and 51st Wings, like Francis Gabreski, Glenn Eagleston, Walker Mahurin, Robert Thyng, George Davis and many others...
Russian Aces of the Korean War - MiG-15 Pilots versus USAF F-86s
That would seem to be in line with the description in Caygill, Peter. Meteor from the Cockpit: Britain's First Jet Fighter. Casemate Publishers, and JetAgeRMC_Korea quoted.
KILL RATIO CLAIMED
…Soviet forces claimed 1309 American aircraft kills of all types, while admitting to losing some 350 aircraft and 200 pilots. American records generally agree that U.S. losses were around 1300, but only 139 were lost in air-to-air combat. The rest were lost to anti-aircraft fire or for other reasons. The U.S. claims 823 MiG-15 kills (792 by Sabre pilots). Some of the downed MiGs may have been piloted by Chinese or North Koreans…
Who Were Those Men
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
There's been several post about this subject through out this forum. These authors fail to mention that many of the Soviet pilots were withdrawn later in the war and at least one squadron received heavy losses, this was mentioned by No Kum-sok after his 1953 defection. Although there were overclaims on both sides it is more likely the Soviets did more of it because not only was failure not on option (remember Joe Stalin was still in charge and lack of results could result in a midnight visit by the KGB) but the Soviet pilots were compensated well for their time in Korea. The rand Corporation did a study about this subject in 2008 and came up with a ratio of slightly below 2 to 1 for USAF F-86s vs MiG-15s or all types and about a 1 to 1 ratio against the Soviets. As you point out the Soviets probably did have a 3 to 1 ratio during the beginning of the war and that was probably accurate against all types.
Based on the more credible data available IMO the F-86 "probably" had an actual kill ratio between 4-6 to 1 against the MiG-15 and between 1 to 2 to 1 against the Soviets by the time the crease fire was put in place. I seen at least one Soviet claim of something like 500 to 700 F-80s shot down when at any given time there were never more than 175 F-80 in country at one time!
Yeah, the British seemed to have played it safe like the US with the P59, at the same time ive read more than once that in one year alone some where around 130 to 140 pilots were killed in accidents while flying the Meteor, that seems crazy to me, don't know which mark it was, remember though there was a speed limit at low altitude placed on the Meteor, infact, the 262 could fly faster in level flight than the Meteor could dive at low altitude, post war testing in the states show a sea level speed of 522 mph, 2 different aircraft and multiple engines, these are the Me 262s that achieved 568 mph at 20 000 ft and 546/548 mph at 32500 ft, that sea level speed is similar to the average 1944 262 powered by b2/3 engines, what a lot of people might not know is that some 262s were capable of over 540 mph at sea level as shown in testing, supposedly after the war, Messerschmitt said that a good 262 with a good pair of engines could do close to 560 mph at sea level, that's hard for even me to believe, im very biased when it comes to the 262, 544 or so mph at sea level is the best I could find for a standard 1944 production aircraft.
I have been reading about the me 262 for 20 years now, some people might be interested in some of the things ive learned over the years, lets start with the me 262 he 280 comparison, there is at least one test pilot that flew both, he doesn't state what engines were powering the 280, but his conclusion was that the me 262 was faster, better in the dive, better acceleration and especially pointed out the superior roll rate of the 262(the 262 surprisingly had an absolutely fantastic roll rate that ill talk about)he said that the he 280 felt more like a bomber when compared to the 262 due to its inferior rollrate..he went on to say that the me 262 was a air superiority/interceptor while the 280 would make a great ground attack air craft, from what I know of the 280 hes absolutely right axcept that the 280 like most early jets(p59,meteor I, etc} had very short ranges, in fact only 240 miles for the 280, but on the other hand there is a place for short range tactical air craft like the hs 129.
Now to expand on the roll rate of the 262...most reports/testing are extremely positive with the exception of the test done in the US as many people know, Eric brown got 3.8 seconds at 400 mph at 5000 ft, supposedly there are test that show even better performance, something like 3.4/3.6 seconds at 400 mph at 10000 ft where most roll test are performed, makes sense, most air craft I know of WW2 roll better at 10000 ft than at 5000 at high speed due to thinner air, what we don't know is the peak roll rate which suppose to be between 310 and 360 mph. Its handling, control harmony, and responsiveness is the main thing people complement the 262 on along with its speed and rate of climb of course, im sure I don't need to go through all the quotes, most people on here seem to be very knowledgeable many, more so than me no doubt, there is a book written some time ago, one of the more popular books about the 262, which sent out a questionnaire, most agreed on this point one ex Luftwaffe pilot stating that "when we pilots say that the 262 is the most beautiful aircraft in the world, we are not talking about its looks or performance, we are talking about its handing characteristics) this is the one thing im not 100% sure about do to how long its been, the combat report of the 30 p51s vs 15 me 262s, im sure many people know about this one, the 262 would dash in and then use their superior rate of climb to gain separation, one 262 would stay behind doing no more than a 90 degree or quarter turn before rolling out of the turn then leave the p51s standing while it climbed away, the p51 pilots had to engage this 262 of course as to not allow it to get on their tales, the after report states the obvious, the jets have a greater and much better climb, but it also states that the 262 had superb roll rate...able to make sharp turns at high speed then using its excellent roll rate to roll out of the turn then using its superior climb to to gain altitude.
another well known encounter is the one where 5 RAF spitfires don't know if they were IXS or XIVS, of 401 sqdn, all shared in a shoot down of a me 262 fighter bomber on a mission to bomb the Nijmejen bridge his name was Hans christopf, probably an ex bomber pilot, not sure, this is how it was described (Despite the odds, it was a hard-fought action. Smith described the jet as doing better high-speed rolls than a Spitfire and capable of very high-speed turns. MacKay reported that "the pilot was hot and put the aircraft through everything in the book) im only using the more well known encounters one UK and one US, but this is in general how encounters are described, climb, speed, high speed maneuverability, especially roll rate, acceleration above 190 mph and maybe some times dive, it seems that a lot of German pilots were hesitant to dive there air craft, and we all know why, its acceleration in the dive is to great, despite its having according to post war US and British test, the Mach capability of any current fighter.
To put its handling into perspective, the Meteor III is said to have a roll of 9 seconds or more at 300 to 400 mph at 10000 ft, I don't know if any one knows exactly roll numbers are, but its roll with out question was horrible due to restrictions imposed upon it, rightfully so by the way, the other British jet, the Vampire MK I, even though its controls are described light has a roll of 6.2 seconds at 270 to 320 mph at 10000 ft, at 400 mph, it would of course be worse, the Spitfire which is, lets face it, freaking awesome air superiority/ interceptor, pilots at the end of the war were ask to name the worst things about the spitfire, late war spit fires, one was its poor diving ability, when compared to contemporary fighters, this has to do with dive acceleration which is the most important aspect of diving while in combat along with how the air craft behaves at high mach numbers, another was the stiffening of the ailerons as speed increased, if you look at test that have been done while the spit fire handles beautifully at more moderate speeds it can take 9 seconds or more to complete a 360 degree roll, according to the parameters of the test, remember though, most air craft are in this category, only a handful such as the p 51, the fw 190, and I think the Tempest V(by the way, the tempest is an amazing aircraft in my opinion) and any thing with boosted ailerons...which are the p38, 190d13 and possibly the d0 335, which might not of even seen combat, I believe it did though.
I have been reading about the me 262 for 20 years now, some people might be interested in some of the things ive learned over the years, lets start with the me 262 he 280 comparison, there is at least one test pilot that flew both, he doesn't state what engines were powering the 280, but his conclusion was that the me 262 was faster, better in the dive, better acceleration and especially pointed out the superior roll rate of the 262(the 262 surprisingly had an absolutely fantastic roll rate that ill talk about)he said that the he 280 felt more like a bomber when compared to the 262 due to its inferior rollrate..he went on to say that the me 262 was a air superiority/interceptor while the 280 would make a great ground attack air craft, from what I know of the 280 hes absolutely right axcept that the 280 like most early jets(p59,meteor I, etc} had very short ranges, in fact only 240 miles for the 280, but on the other hand there is a place for short range tactical air craft like the hs 129.
Now to expand on the roll rate of the 262...most reports/testing are extremely positive with the exception of the test done in the US as many people know, Eric brown got 3.8 seconds at 400 mph at 5000 ft, supposedly there are test that show even better performance, something like 3.4/3.6 seconds at 400 mph at 10000 ft where most roll test are performed, makes sense, most air craft I know of WW2 roll better at 10000 ft than at 5000 at high speed due to thinner air, what we don't know is the peak roll rate which suppose to be between 310 and 360 mph. Its handling, control harmony, and responsiveness is the main thing people complement the 262 on along with its speed and rate of climb of course, im sure I don't need to go through all the quotes, most people on here seem to be very knowledgeable many, more so than me no doubt, there is a book written some time ago, one of the more popular books about the 262, which sent out a questionnaire, most agreed on this point one ex Luftwaffe pilot stating that "when we pilots say that the 262 is the most beautiful aircraft in the world, we are not talking about its looks or performance, we are talking about its handing characteristics) this is the one thing im not 100% sure about do to how long its been, the combat report of the 30 p51s vs 15 me 262s, im sure many people know about this one, the 262 would dash in and then use their superior rate of climb to gain separation, one 262 would stay behind doing no more than a 90 degree or quarter turn before rolling out of the turn then leave the p51s standing while it climbed away, the p51 pilots had to engage this 262 of course as to not allow it to get on their tales, the after report states the obvious, the jets have a greater and much better climb, but it also states that the 262 had superb roll rate...able to make sharp turns at high speed then using its excellent roll rate to roll out of the turn then using its superior climb to to gain altitude.
another well known encounter is the one where 5 RAF spitfires don't know if they were IXS or XIVS, of 401 sqdn, all shared in a shoot down of a me 262 fighter bomber on a mission to bomb the Nijmejen bridge his name was Hans christopf, probably an ex bomber pilot, not sure, this is how it was described (Despite the odds, it was a hard-fought action. Smith described the jet as doing better high-speed rolls than a Spitfire and capable of very high-speed turns. MacKay reported that "the pilot was hot and put the aircraft through everything in the book) im only using the more well known encounters one UK and one US, but this is in general how encounters are described, climb, speed, high speed maneuverability, especially roll rate, acceleration above 190 mph and maybe some times dive, it seems that a lot of German pilots were hesitant to dive there air craft, and we all know why, its acceleration in the dive is to great, despite its having according to post war US and British test, the Mach capability of any current fighter.
To put its handling into perspective, the Meteor III is said to have a roll of 9 seconds or more at 300 to 400 mph at 10000 ft, I don't know if any one knows exactly roll numbers are, but its roll with out question was horrible due to restrictions imposed upon it, rightfully so by the way, the other British jet, the Vampire MK I, even though its controls are described light has a roll of 6.2 seconds at 270 to 320 mph at 10000 ft, at 400 mph, it would of course be worse, the Spitfire which is, lets face it, freaking awesome air superiority/ interceptor, pilots at the end of the war were ask to name the worst things about the spitfire, late war spit fires, one was its poor diving ability, when compared to contemporary fighters, this has to do with dive acceleration which is the most important aspect of diving while in combat along with how the air craft behaves at high mach numbers, another was the stiffening of the ailerons as speed increased, if you look at test that have been done while the spit fire handles beautifully at more moderate speeds it can take 9 seconds or more to complete a 360 degree roll, according to the parameters of the test, remember though, most air craft are in this category, only a handful such as the p 51, the fw 190, and I think the Tempest V(by the way, the tempest is an amazing aircraft in my opinion) and any thing with boosted ailerons...which are the p38, 190d13 and possibly the d0 335, which might not of even seen combat, I believe it did though.
Last edited:
I should point out there are reasons for the 262 superb handling, one is the introduction of the multi gear control stick, one gives greater leverage and id is very sensitive, another are the superb double hinge servo tabs, these were so effective that other german aircraft started using them like the ta 152 h, double hinge supposedly gives smooth action, I should point out that some people believe that the servo tabs were fixed for some reason, though were not designed to work like that, im not sure, info is scarce on this, I can state with some degree of certainty that some prototypes and early production 262s did have functioning servo tabs, plus I find it weird because these things came with a price due to drag, dang, part of the modernizing of the 262 was a redesign of the servo tabs so they would be eternal. During development, a huge amount of time and effort WAS devoted to making the controls lighter and more responsive, especially the ailerons, I had a book that described day by day development of the 262 it was great, you wouldn't believe how, writing was on the ailerons and there effectiveness, of course wing design contributes a lot in this regard along with aileron design. One last thing I can add to this point is that one of the last features to introduced to production air craft(I don't know if this actually became standard or not and that was a junction box for the control rods and such, this thing was filled with several types of lubricant along with some type of anti freeze agent for high altitude flight, I have the names of this stuff written down somewhere. well that's it for this part of your introduction to what I know about the me 262.
Just to finish up on this aspect of the 262, one of the p47 pilots who became one of whatsons whizzers, went into some detail about this, I forget which one, I don't think it was Strobell, he said, the me 262 had the most responsive handling of any air craft he had flown up to that time, including the p47 of course as well as the p40, he mentions the p40, because from the little I know about this fighter, it had superb handling role rate, he said that time from which input was made through control column to the 262 reacting was instant , no delay or mush.
I realize this is going to go on fore ever, im going to break this up into multiple post. The part im going to talk about next is pretty much universally known amongst people who does a lot of reading about the 262, and that is its greatest virtue, its most useful in many ways combat capability, the aspect that was used by most fighter pilots, in defense and attack, im talking about its climbing ability, this acpect of the 262 flight envelope is many times described in super natural terms, as ive said in other post, more than one pilot thought the me 262 could accelerate while climbing, this is simply due to there aspect, from there view, behind the me 262, the jet seems to be accelerating, the auther Walter boyne think that's his name, described allied as saying that the 262 could defy gravity, could stand on its tail for an unbelievable amount of time, I could fill a 100 page book on the reactions, statements, etc, from allied pilots, another resent, interview ive seen about a famous german ace, stated the 262 highest rate of climb of any fighter of that time, including the 190 d9 and 109 k4, or any allied fighter, when they got allied pilots to described the me 262 who had faced it in combat, it was unanimous, the 262 could easily out climb any prop fighter. There isn't a lot of writings about the Russian view on the me 262, but one of course states that the me 262 is much faster with far better rate of climb than any of our fighters, meaning Russian. Ive also written about combat between me 262 and spit fires, im pretty sure these were Spitfire IXs, one allied pilot described a 262 pulling into a climb leaving the chasing spitfires stalling thousands of below, never had he seen any thing do this, shouldn't be possible, by the time it had reached his altitude, it had slowed down some, but still traveling at a high velocity, he was able to position himself behind the jet an strike the engine before it climbed away, A similar encounter between a 262 and I believe spitfire XIVs this time there was one waiting thousands of feet above him,in his words the Spitfire stalled 6000 ft below him at which time he leveled his fighter and accelerated away, the 262 apparently not close to stalling, the not close to stalling is my opinion. There is also the.... I forget, its the recon variant of the MK XIV, anyway, it made the mistake of trying to out climb the 262, knowing he could out climb any German prop plane at that altitude, the 109 k4 might have been better than the spit XIV 18 boost at lower altitudes I believe, the pilot actually survived and was captured. The German pilot said he should have turned, especially at that altitude in the thin air the couldn't hope to follow.
Damn. I could go on for ever with this stuff, ill just add one more thing, on a intercept of a Mosquito at a much higher altitude, the pilots of the Mosquito and escorting p51s, saw the 262 climbing at an unbelievable rate, remember most fighters had little chance in intercepting the wooden wonder even when at same altitude, this is true for all nations, hell even when the interceptor had an altitude advantage it was difficult, but the 262 had no trouble quickly over taking the Mosquito while in the climb, the escorts not being able to do anything but tell the Mosquito how to maneuver to avoid interception...Two test were done in Germany, in both test the me 262s weight was 15700 pounds, or as the Germans wrote 7100 kg which I think is actually 15652 pounds, one test got a result of the now famous 3937 fpm, the other result was 3790 fpm, this is at max weight, with both auxiliary tanks filled. you will see people giving climb rates of 5000+ or 5500+ fpm at normal take off weight, no idea where the over 5500 fpm stat comes from, but we can compare it with post war testing, the Russians, got 4240 fpm, its not known what weight the 262 was, but the rates of climb seem to be very close with the max TOW( 15 660 pounds) at 20000 ft and 30000 ft, so this might have been a above average 262 or a below average 262 weighing 14100, which is its normal take off weight, the way we figure out its rate of climb at 14100 ibs, is to look at the allied testing, I think there is more info on the 262s flight performance than any air craft in history, we know that the P 80A, climeb at between 4750 fpm and 5000 fpm, at 11700 and 12000 pounds, we also know that the 262 T2-711 unpainted had approximately the same climb as the P80(superior zoom climb though) the t2 4012, with fighter nose and gloss paint job to simulate battlefield conditions(later hughes would give it a more extensive make over, this is the condition that it is most well known for) where is the t2-711 was flown and compared to the average P89 and the XP 84, in which it was deemed superior to the P80 nd in some regards superior to the XP84, T24012, was flown against the xp80 and a p80 of unknown condition, this P80 achieved 525 mph at sea level, t2-4012 achieved only 522 mph, this is close average, but by 5000 ft the 262 cought up with and passed the P80, supposedly this 262, t2-4012, was faster than the better known t2-711,t2-711 of course achieving 568 mph at 20200 ft and 546/548 mph at 32500 ft, this speed at 32500 ft is absolutely amazing by the way, a lot of early jets were having a hard time at high altitude due to surging, the 1946 Meteor mkIII could barely do 400 mph at that altitude, the 465 mph at 30000 ft you see a lot is only an estimate, you see on the chart, its dashes or dots above 20000 ft which is where surging starts, pilots have to progressively reduce rpm the higher they fly in the Meteor, for some reason I like the Meteor, but it really wasn't a very good fighter when compared to the P80a and ME 262. damn, this is horrible writing...any way T2-4012 was superior to the P80a in climb, that's where that statement comes from by the way, the pilot went on to say it wouldn't be till a couple years that the P80 would approach the me 262, hes referring to the P80 c of course which in a couple of years would become operational.
The P80 and 262 carried a hell of a lot of fuel, not hundreds of pounds like other fast climbing interceptors ( me 109 and spitfire) they carried thousands of pounds, their rates of climb increased exponentially when compared to mentioned fighters. We have a lot of climb test for the p80 at different weights, we can see how the 262s climb from 15700 ibs too 14100 ibs matches those of the P80, sure, they are different aircraft, but the way every thing matches is amazing, its what any one who studies history would call a gold mine. The P80 at a reduced fuel weight in which it still has the ability to fly over 200 miles can climb at 6000 fpm or better, the me 262 has a similar increase, but an even more impressive result.
Just to finish up on this aspect of the 262, one of the p47 pilots who became one of whatsons whizzers, went into some detail about this, I forget which one, I don't think it was Strobell, he said, the me 262 had the most responsive handling of any air craft he had flown up to that time, including the p47 of course as well as the p40, he mentions the p40, because from the little I know about this fighter, it had superb handling role rate, he said that time from which input was made through control column to the 262 reacting was instant , no delay or mush.
I realize this is going to go on fore ever, im going to break this up into multiple post. The part im going to talk about next is pretty much universally known amongst people who does a lot of reading about the 262, and that is its greatest virtue, its most useful in many ways combat capability, the aspect that was used by most fighter pilots, in defense and attack, im talking about its climbing ability, this acpect of the 262 flight envelope is many times described in super natural terms, as ive said in other post, more than one pilot thought the me 262 could accelerate while climbing, this is simply due to there aspect, from there view, behind the me 262, the jet seems to be accelerating, the auther Walter boyne think that's his name, described allied as saying that the 262 could defy gravity, could stand on its tail for an unbelievable amount of time, I could fill a 100 page book on the reactions, statements, etc, from allied pilots, another resent, interview ive seen about a famous german ace, stated the 262 highest rate of climb of any fighter of that time, including the 190 d9 and 109 k4, or any allied fighter, when they got allied pilots to described the me 262 who had faced it in combat, it was unanimous, the 262 could easily out climb any prop fighter. There isn't a lot of writings about the Russian view on the me 262, but one of course states that the me 262 is much faster with far better rate of climb than any of our fighters, meaning Russian. Ive also written about combat between me 262 and spit fires, im pretty sure these were Spitfire IXs, one allied pilot described a 262 pulling into a climb leaving the chasing spitfires stalling thousands of below, never had he seen any thing do this, shouldn't be possible, by the time it had reached his altitude, it had slowed down some, but still traveling at a high velocity, he was able to position himself behind the jet an strike the engine before it climbed away, A similar encounter between a 262 and I believe spitfire XIVs this time there was one waiting thousands of feet above him,in his words the Spitfire stalled 6000 ft below him at which time he leveled his fighter and accelerated away, the 262 apparently not close to stalling, the not close to stalling is my opinion. There is also the.... I forget, its the recon variant of the MK XIV, anyway, it made the mistake of trying to out climb the 262, knowing he could out climb any German prop plane at that altitude, the 109 k4 might have been better than the spit XIV 18 boost at lower altitudes I believe, the pilot actually survived and was captured. The German pilot said he should have turned, especially at that altitude in the thin air the couldn't hope to follow.
Damn. I could go on for ever with this stuff, ill just add one more thing, on a intercept of a Mosquito at a much higher altitude, the pilots of the Mosquito and escorting p51s, saw the 262 climbing at an unbelievable rate, remember most fighters had little chance in intercepting the wooden wonder even when at same altitude, this is true for all nations, hell even when the interceptor had an altitude advantage it was difficult, but the 262 had no trouble quickly over taking the Mosquito while in the climb, the escorts not being able to do anything but tell the Mosquito how to maneuver to avoid interception...Two test were done in Germany, in both test the me 262s weight was 15700 pounds, or as the Germans wrote 7100 kg which I think is actually 15652 pounds, one test got a result of the now famous 3937 fpm, the other result was 3790 fpm, this is at max weight, with both auxiliary tanks filled. you will see people giving climb rates of 5000+ or 5500+ fpm at normal take off weight, no idea where the over 5500 fpm stat comes from, but we can compare it with post war testing, the Russians, got 4240 fpm, its not known what weight the 262 was, but the rates of climb seem to be very close with the max TOW( 15 660 pounds) at 20000 ft and 30000 ft, so this might have been a above average 262 or a below average 262 weighing 14100, which is its normal take off weight, the way we figure out its rate of climb at 14100 ibs, is to look at the allied testing, I think there is more info on the 262s flight performance than any air craft in history, we know that the P 80A, climeb at between 4750 fpm and 5000 fpm, at 11700 and 12000 pounds, we also know that the 262 T2-711 unpainted had approximately the same climb as the P80(superior zoom climb though) the t2 4012, with fighter nose and gloss paint job to simulate battlefield conditions(later hughes would give it a more extensive make over, this is the condition that it is most well known for) where is the t2-711 was flown and compared to the average P89 and the XP 84, in which it was deemed superior to the P80 nd in some regards superior to the XP84, T24012, was flown against the xp80 and a p80 of unknown condition, this P80 achieved 525 mph at sea level, t2-4012 achieved only 522 mph, this is close average, but by 5000 ft the 262 cought up with and passed the P80, supposedly this 262, t2-4012, was faster than the better known t2-711,t2-711 of course achieving 568 mph at 20200 ft and 546/548 mph at 32500 ft, this speed at 32500 ft is absolutely amazing by the way, a lot of early jets were having a hard time at high altitude due to surging, the 1946 Meteor mkIII could barely do 400 mph at that altitude, the 465 mph at 30000 ft you see a lot is only an estimate, you see on the chart, its dashes or dots above 20000 ft which is where surging starts, pilots have to progressively reduce rpm the higher they fly in the Meteor, for some reason I like the Meteor, but it really wasn't a very good fighter when compared to the P80a and ME 262. damn, this is horrible writing...any way T2-4012 was superior to the P80a in climb, that's where that statement comes from by the way, the pilot went on to say it wouldn't be till a couple years that the P80 would approach the me 262, hes referring to the P80 c of course which in a couple of years would become operational.
The P80 and 262 carried a hell of a lot of fuel, not hundreds of pounds like other fast climbing interceptors ( me 109 and spitfire) they carried thousands of pounds, their rates of climb increased exponentially when compared to mentioned fighters. We have a lot of climb test for the p80 at different weights, we can see how the 262s climb from 15700 ibs too 14100 ibs matches those of the P80, sure, they are different aircraft, but the way every thing matches is amazing, its what any one who studies history would call a gold mine. The P80 at a reduced fuel weight in which it still has the ability to fly over 200 miles can climb at 6000 fpm or better, the me 262 has a similar increase, but an even more impressive result.
Last edited:
You know what, as many who have actually flown the early jets will tell you, their initial or sustained climb isn't whats impressive about theor climb performance, its their, what some call combat climb, high speed climb or zoom climb, this is in fact the most important aspect in climbing ability for a fighter, for instance the me 109 has a fantastic sustained climb, but other fighters such as the Tempest and P51 have better combat climbs/zoom climbs, having read so many clashes between the 109 and P51, its clear that when pulled into a sharp climb almost every time the P51 gains more altitude, and the me 109 dies, the Tempest is probably even better than the P51, after reaching over 500 mph than pulling up from near sea level, the Tempest is able to make a 6900 ft zoom climb, this is nothing for one of the better jets of the time of course this is amazing for a prop fighter of WW2.
The 262 high speed climb is freaky, I have three different combat reports that say basically the same thing, they all involve the P 47, in all of them they spot the 262 much lower than them, they dive, the Me 262 obviously notices the threat and increases speed, then the 262 enter a some what high angle climb at around 45 or more degress, the 262 in no time is out of sight, one p47 pilote says its the most amazing hes ever seen, imagine something leaving a p47 standing, in a zoom climb just after the p47 dived on it from a much higher altitude,
Anyway, im tired, there is much to say about dive and high mach behavior, I just wrote a big glop of mess, im very tired so Im sure it will be hard to read, as im not good at writing when I have energy. I hope at least one person likes it and remember, im no expert, most people on here are smarter than me, im sure I got some things wrong
I just saw what I posted and dang, those are some huge paragraphs, if that's what you would even call them, HAHA, and I had to cut and past due to size and lost some stuff.
The 262 high speed climb is freaky, I have three different combat reports that say basically the same thing, they all involve the P 47, in all of them they spot the 262 much lower than them, they dive, the Me 262 obviously notices the threat and increases speed, then the 262 enter a some what high angle climb at around 45 or more degress, the 262 in no time is out of sight, one p47 pilote says its the most amazing hes ever seen, imagine something leaving a p47 standing, in a zoom climb just after the p47 dived on it from a much higher altitude,
Anyway, im tired, there is much to say about dive and high mach behavior, I just wrote a big glop of mess, im very tired so Im sure it will be hard to read, as im not good at writing when I have energy. I hope at least one person likes it and remember, im no expert, most people on here are smarter than me, im sure I got some things wrong
I just saw what I posted and dang, those are some huge paragraphs, if that's what you would even call them, HAHA, and I had to cut and past due to size and lost some stuff.
Last edited:
To put its handling into perspective, the Meteor III is said to have a roll of 9 seconds or more at 300 to 400 mph at 10000 ft, I don't know if any one knows exactly roll numbers are, but its roll with out question was horrible due to restrictions imposed upon it, rightfully so by the way, the other British jet, the Vampire MK I, even though its controls are described light has a roll of 6.2 seconds at 270 to 320 mph at 10000 ft, at 400 mph, it would of course be worse.
The Spitfire which is, lets face it, freaking awesome air superiority/ interceptor, pilots at the end of the war were ask to name the worst things about the spitfire, late war spit fires, one was its poor diving ability, when compared to contemporary fighters, this has to do with dive acceleration which is the most important aspect of diving while in combat along with how the air craft behaves at high mach numbers, another was the stiffening of the ailerons as speed increased, if you look at test that have been done while the spit fire handles beautifully at more moderate speeds it can take 9 seconds or more to complete a 360 degree roll, according to the parameters of the test, remember though, most air craft are in this category, only a handful such as the p 51, the fw 190.
The 262 uses more tricks in the book than any other ww2 fighter that I know of, symmetrical/laminar flow air foil, unbelievably thin wings for the time, see these air craft in person, its crazy how much thinner the wings are, and of course something like 18.5 degree sweep of the main wings, as well as the horizontal and vertical tail surfaces leading edges having an eve higher degree of sweep, oh and the semi bullet shaped fuselage, with a high degree of taper at the front and back..alot of this stuff meant that the 262 was never going to be able to turn with prop fighters of lower wing loading, but the trend was towards high performance, fast climbing diving fighters with excellent handling, particularly at speed, the 262 would deploy full leading edge slats to tame this, which they did very well, to show the influence the 262 had on post war designs, most of you know about the supposedly using of me 262 slats on the first few f86s, from my reading this isn't the case, north America only used certain parts of the me 262 slats, I forget which parts, but they use quite a few parts, they also recognized the importance of the fully articulating horizontal stabilizer for high speed flight found on the 262, in the fly offs against the p80 and xp84, it was also recognized the importance of the very thin wings on the me 262.
It should also be known that what ever the reason of sweeping the wings back on the me 262, it was described as a swept wing air craft in reports, documents and writings of pilots of the time. Infact, when you look at modern fighters of today, what do you see, in some ways these are superficial, you see swept wings, full leading edge slats, flying tails,(progression in ways of the all moving tail) flat underside of fuselage, long slinder axial flow turbo jet, with some extras of course, instead of the engines being under the wings they under the fuselage, with varying degrees of separation, for instance the su 27, a rounded fuselage at the front,just look at most modern fighters, su 27, mig 29, f18 f16 and so on, these do not serve the same purpose, but they do enhance the air craft flight characteristics, and aerodynamics, especially the 262, it helps with air separation/turbulence at the wing fuselage junction, for modern fighters I believe its for AOA reasons, some one correct me if im wrong.
The Spitfire which is, lets face it, freaking awesome air superiority/ interceptor, pilots at the end of the war were ask to name the worst things about the spitfire, late war spit fires, one was its poor diving ability, when compared to contemporary fighters, this has to do with dive acceleration which is the most important aspect of diving while in combat along with how the air craft behaves at high mach numbers, another was the stiffening of the ailerons as speed increased, if you look at test that have been done while the spit fire handles beautifully at more moderate speeds it can take 9 seconds or more to complete a 360 degree roll, according to the parameters of the test, remember though, most air craft are in this category, only a handful such as the p 51, the fw 190.
The 262 uses more tricks in the book than any other ww2 fighter that I know of, symmetrical/laminar flow air foil, unbelievably thin wings for the time, see these air craft in person, its crazy how much thinner the wings are, and of course something like 18.5 degree sweep of the main wings, as well as the horizontal and vertical tail surfaces leading edges having an eve higher degree of sweep, oh and the semi bullet shaped fuselage, with a high degree of taper at the front and back..alot of this stuff meant that the 262 was never going to be able to turn with prop fighters of lower wing loading, but the trend was towards high performance, fast climbing diving fighters with excellent handling, particularly at speed, the 262 would deploy full leading edge slats to tame this, which they did very well, to show the influence the 262 had on post war designs, most of you know about the supposedly using of me 262 slats on the first few f86s, from my reading this isn't the case, north America only used certain parts of the me 262 slats, I forget which parts, but they use quite a few parts, they also recognized the importance of the fully articulating horizontal stabilizer for high speed flight found on the 262, in the fly offs against the p80 and xp84, it was also recognized the importance of the very thin wings on the me 262.
It should also be known that what ever the reason of sweeping the wings back on the me 262, it was described as a swept wing air craft in reports, documents and writings of pilots of the time. Infact, when you look at modern fighters of today, what do you see, in some ways these are superficial, you see swept wings, full leading edge slats, flying tails,(progression in ways of the all moving tail) flat underside of fuselage, long slinder axial flow turbo jet, with some extras of course, instead of the engines being under the wings they under the fuselage, with varying degrees of separation, for instance the su 27, a rounded fuselage at the front,just look at most modern fighters, su 27, mig 29, f18 f16 and so on, these do not serve the same purpose, but they do enhance the air craft flight characteristics, and aerodynamics, especially the 262, it helps with air separation/turbulence at the wing fuselage junction, for modern fighters I believe its for AOA reasons, some one correct me if im wrong.
Last edited:
bits from a German tests on the 262 in comparison with the Ar234 from mid 44 "the forces on the ailerons were too high.flying characteristics were found to be particularly unpleasant,especially obvious was the much larger turning circle,
the reason to be found in the excessive elevator forces,Herr Major Behrens could not pull up from maximum speed"
the reason to be found in the excessive elevator forces,Herr Major Behrens could not pull up from maximum speed"
The RAND report (http://www.mossekongen.no/downloads/2008_RAND_Pacific_View_Air_Combat_Briefing.pdf) made reference to "recent scholarship" of F-86 v MiG-15 combat over Korea and concluded that the actual kill:loss ratio for the F-86 was 1.8:1 overall, and likely closer to 1.3:1 against MiGs flown by Soviet pilots.
