Dogfight: Me 262 vs. Meteor
- Thread starter Friendly Fire
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
And the Rand report took into account Soviet "claims" in lieu of actual confirmed victories that were already shown to be very flawed, if you look at the slides they provide no basis for their numbers. If you look at the actual admitted losses from all sides the Rand numbers don't fully add up.
Last edited:
Here's an excerpt from a US report on the Me 262 showing how the 'servo tab' was actually fitted. It was nothing more than a ground adjustable trim tab, barely more advanced than the bent metal tabs seen on earlier German aircraft.
Here are some comments on the standard of construction. They echo comments made by the Germans themselves when they compared their Bf 109 K with a US P-51. A huge gulf in quality had emerged.
Incidentally the 'unusual construction feature' mentioned was common to many Messerschmitt aircraft. It was highly regarded by both British and American engineers who examined earlier Messerschmitt aircraft. See the Vultee report on the Bf 110 for an example. By 1944/45 the German aircraft industry lacked the ability to put the rather well and cleverly engineered air frames together properly.
Cheers
Steve
Here are some comments on the standard of construction. They echo comments made by the Germans themselves when they compared their Bf 109 K with a US P-51. A huge gulf in quality had emerged.
Incidentally the 'unusual construction feature' mentioned was common to many Messerschmitt aircraft. It was highly regarded by both British and American engineers who examined earlier Messerschmitt aircraft. See the Vultee report on the Bf 110 for an example. By 1944/45 the German aircraft industry lacked the ability to put the rather well and cleverly engineered air frames together properly.
Cheers
Steve
Here's an excerpt from a US report on the Me 262 showing how the 'servo tab' was actually fitted. It was nothing more than a ground adjustable trim tab, barely more advanced than the bent metal tabs seen on earlier German aircraft.
Here are some comments on the standard of construction. They echo comments made by the Germans themselves when they compared their Bf 109 K with a US P-51. A huge gulf in quality had emerged.
Incidentally the 'unusual construction feature' mentioned was common to many Messerschmitt aircraft. It was highly regarded by both British and American engineers who examined earlier Messerschmitt aircraft. See the Vultee report on the Bf 110 for an example. By 1944/45 the German aircraft industry lacked the ability to put the rather well and cleverly engineered air frames together properly.
Cheers
Steve
Schwalbe Structural Workmanship [Hans Fey, Messerschmitt test pilot and technical inspector] says that the structural workmanship on the Me 262 is not as good as that on the Me 109.When testing the Me 262, it was not infrequent for parts to be stripped off in fast, steep dives and Fey has himself lost cockpit covers, bomb racks and the needle valve [read variable area nozzle] of the tail pipe during dives. In fact, because of these uncertainties, the pilots rarely did a roll or similar maneuver during acceptance flights... http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/Me262/ME262PILOTDEBRIEF.pdf
"…above 25,000 ft the Sabre was totally superior because all it had to do was take advantage of its greater speed range and dive away. If the Sabres were above you to start with, your only defence was to execute a hard break towards the attack. Each time you carried out such a defensive manoeuvre at height you lost energy and became progressively slower and more vulnerable, while the Sabres (if they knew what they were about) zoom-climbed back above you for another attack. On the other hand, if you managed to find F-86s below you and they were tempted to try and 'mix it', the Meteor could give them a very nasty fright. At 20,000 ft or below, the Meteor could out-turn, out-accelerate and out-climb a Sabre. It also had much more effective airbrakes, which, used at the right time, could cause a high-speed attacker to overshoot his target and become a sitting duck! This was particularly so against the F-86A, which was relatively underpowered and had automatic wing leading-edge slats. In a very hard turn the slats often operated asymmetrically, which caused the Sabre to flick out of the turn. At such a moment spectacular camera gun footage was possible, especially if you had your nose almost up his jet-pipe!"
"The Derwent was probably the most flexible and rugged jet engine of its day. In the Meteor it suffered terrible abuse but was incredibly reliable. Unlike many other early jet engines, particularly axial engines, it had good surge resistance, and with some care and understanding it could be accelerated to full throttle very quickly. It was possible to get it to surge on occasion – usually when above 25,000 ft – by banging the throttle open from a low power setting when the aircraft was at a very slow forward speed and a high angle of attack. The surge was announced by a series of muffled pops, accompanied by vibration, and the jet-pipe temperature needle jammed at the high end of the scale. Recovery was obtained by completely closing the throttle, then opening up progressively, all the time watching the JPT gauge. I do not remember a Derwent actually flaming out as a result of in-flight abuse, and they never seemed to have been damaged by the disgraceful hammering we gave them…"
Caygill, Peter Meteor from the Cockpit: Britain's First Jet Fighter Casemate Publishers
"The Derwent was probably the most flexible and rugged jet engine of its day. In the Meteor it suffered terrible abuse but was incredibly reliable. Unlike many other early jet engines, particularly axial engines, it had good surge resistance, and with some care and understanding it could be accelerated to full throttle very quickly. It was possible to get it to surge on occasion – usually when above 25,000 ft – by banging the throttle open from a low power setting when the aircraft was at a very slow forward speed and a high angle of attack. The surge was announced by a series of muffled pops, accompanied by vibration, and the jet-pipe temperature needle jammed at the high end of the scale. Recovery was obtained by completely closing the throttle, then opening up progressively, all the time watching the JPT gauge. I do not remember a Derwent actually flaming out as a result of in-flight abuse, and they never seemed to have been damaged by the disgraceful hammering we gave them…"
Caygill, Peter Meteor from the Cockpit: Britain's First Jet Fighter Casemate Publishers
GregP
Major
Regarding post 202, I noticed the inconsistent numbers, too. But I did like the Lanchester's Law reference and believe it to be quite accurate, even today.
The Pk figures are out in the mushrooms somewhere. Assuming a Pk of 1.0 for us and 0.0 for the Chinese was humorous, but I thought it was a realistic evaluation of the best possible outcome for us. What I didn't see was a "probable" outcome or a "worst day for us" outcome. All those things will happen in a conflict.
The Pk figures are out in the mushrooms somewhere. Assuming a Pk of 1.0 for us and 0.0 for the Chinese was humorous, but I thought it was a realistic evaluation of the best possible outcome for us. What I didn't see was a "probable" outcome or a "worst day for us" outcome. All those things will happen in a conflict.
GregP
Major
They seemed to do pretty well in the real world. But they rather obviously would have been better with better metals. The TBO was terrible, but when it was flying, it was a tough opponent.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Sorry, but there's so much wrong there, I don't really know where to start.
The He178 (powered by a Hirth engine) made it's first flight in 1939 and the He280 made it's first flight on 22 September 1940 (powered by Hirth engines)
The Me262 (V1) made it's first powered flight on 18 April 1941, powered by a Jumo 210 piston engine in the nose, because the BMW003 jet engines weren't ready.
V3 became the first Me262 to fly under jet power, on 18 July 1942, powered by Jumo004 engines.
The first Jumo004 was crudely tested in 1940 and officially benchtested three months later.
You can't argue with someone who lets their bias get in the way.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
True, but it's really a shame when facts are so readily available and yet people go to such great lengths to put out wrong information.
If the engineers hadn't resolved several issues with the 004a, the P-59 would have flown under jet power before the Me262 as the P-59's first flight was 1 October, just 2 1/2 months after the Me262.
As seen from the colour chart, the mild steel flame tubes were glowing "dull red."
They were coated with aluminium oxide to reduce the rate of oxidation.
See http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA800524 with regard to reliability and general flyability.
Factual data:
1. Introduction
The Me 262 is a German jet fighter bomber powered by two JUMO 004 axial-flow jet engines rated at 1980 lb thrust at 8700 rpm."
"Two airplanes Nos T-2-711 and T-2-4012 were used in this test program. General maintenance was very difficult on both airplanes. Number T-2-711 was flown 12 flights for a total of 10 hr 40 min, and No. T-2-4012 was flown eight times for a total of 4 hr and 40 min. Four engine changes were necessary on [the former] and five on [the latter]. Power failure in flight resulted in abandonment of the airplane and complete destruction of No. T-2-711. Tests were discontinued on No T-2-4012 after two single-engine landings resulting from engine failure in flight, because the value of further flights was not believed to be worth the risk and trouble of maintaining the airplane…"
The average engine life before overhaul (or throw-away) above is a bit over 3 hrs.
About 1400 Me 262s were produced and delivered, but the best that the Luftwaffe managed to get into the air on any given day was about 55. Twenty to thirty was much more typical.
Not any wonder...
GregP
Major
Also, the Me 262 was formidable, but not in any way "superb" except in speed.
In roll, pitch, and yaw it was inferior to almost any piston fighter. If it came under fire, it was almost exactly as susceptible as any other plane to being shot down.
Had they built the He 280 over 2 years earlier, the war might have gone a different direction. I'm glad it didn't, but the possibility remains that the He 280, in numbers, might have had the effect they were looking for with the Me 262 ... but a couple of years sooner. It wouldn't have had quite the speed margin of the 262, but WOULD have had a considerable speed margin, with whatever armament they finally decided upon.
To me, it seems the outcome of the war could possibly, but not certainly, be laid upon the prejudice by the Luftwaffe (or whomever it was) against Ernst Heinkel. He certainly COULD come up with a good aircraft. The issue was getting it selected for production.
Methinks it was Milch and cohorts, despite Milch being singled out as a genius. Perhaps, but he made a bad decision with Heinkel i, if so. Heinkel could have provided good planes in a timely fashion which, after all, is probably WAY more important than GREAT planes provided too late to be of real use.
In roll, pitch, and yaw it was inferior to almost any piston fighter. If it came under fire, it was almost exactly as susceptible as any other plane to being shot down.
Had they built the He 280 over 2 years earlier, the war might have gone a different direction. I'm glad it didn't, but the possibility remains that the He 280, in numbers, might have had the effect they were looking for with the Me 262 ... but a couple of years sooner. It wouldn't have had quite the speed margin of the 262, but WOULD have had a considerable speed margin, with whatever armament they finally decided upon.
To me, it seems the outcome of the war could possibly, but not certainly, be laid upon the prejudice by the Luftwaffe (or whomever it was) against Ernst Heinkel. He certainly COULD come up with a good aircraft. The issue was getting it selected for production.
Methinks it was Milch and cohorts, despite Milch being singled out as a genius. Perhaps, but he made a bad decision with Heinkel i, if so. Heinkel could have provided good planes in a timely fashion which, after all, is probably WAY more important than GREAT planes provided too late to be of real use.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
You're tossing out a mix of information that is out of context and misleading. For starters, the Me262s that the USAAF tested were late war, forest factory assembled and war-weary as were many Luftwaffe (and Japanese) aircraft captured and evaluated. VERY few aircraft manufactured late in the war had a clean fit and finish and the few airframes that survived the war had been used extensively (flying sorties from sun up to sun down) in an attempt to stem the overwhelming Allied tide.
The Jumo004B was much improved over the 004A and had a life of 12 to 15 hours under proper use and during ambient weather conditions. The BMW003 used in the He176 was a bit more reliable.
The numbers of Me262s that were in use after operation Bodenplatt diminished not because of reliability, but because of logistics. The Luftwaffe was running out of fuel, tires, spare engines and most importantly: skilled pilots. The fuel situation was so bad, that the Me262s were towed out to the flightline and assembled with Kettingrads or tractors, then started and took off.
And I agree Greg, about the He280. While it was only 45 miles an hour slower than the Me262, it was extremely agile and armed with 3 MG151/20 cannon in the nose, making it a potent adversary. It has always been my contention that the He280 would have made the perfect top cover for the Me262 during bomber interception, the He280 engaging and drawing away the escorts while the Me262 picked the bomber stream apart.
Starfighter91
Airman
- 19
- May 22, 2015
Hello,
Sorry but this is a wrong explanaition and claim.
The Jumo 004B was inferior to the Jumo 004A, because it was developed as a save alloy engine, able to be mass produced.
The Jumo 004A was from higher grade alloys, which were short at Germany during the war and the Jumo 004A was more reliable, more powerfull and had a longer service life then the Jumo 004B.
Sorry but this is a wrong explanaition and claim.
The Jumo 004B was inferior to the Jumo 004A, because it was developed as a save alloy engine, able to be mass produced.
The Jumo 004A was from higher grade alloys, which were short at Germany during the war and the Jumo 004A was more reliable, more powerfull and had a longer service life then the Jumo 004B.
Ref: http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA800524
With a more reliable engine the Me 262 would have been able to take the USAAF strategic bombing arm out of action.
But that would just have delayed the inevitable until the A-bomb was ready.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
That pre supposes that the USAAF does nothing to counter the 262. How about if they move to get B29s into action over Europe as fast as possible or go to night bombing or just turn every airstrip known to Allied intelligence into a Moon scape of craters. Yes craters can be filled in but a few time fused bombs would make driving a Bulldozer an interesting occupation.
One wonder weapon doesnt win a war it doesnt always win a battle.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
Errr, don't know about that!
It might have finished the war against Japan but it didnt win it
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
