Dogfight: Me 262 vs. Meteor

[Jack_Hill]

Oops, forgot...
Read about heimatschutzers test flights.
Pretty impressive.
Imagine a 262 turned to nearly '163.
Nonono.... Not for beginners, but pretty fast climbers, test pilot, do not remember his name but easy to find, cutting rocket engine while throttleling back at 6000 m and still in overspeed at 9000 !

 

[Jack_Hill]

Hello Njaco,
I absolutly do agree with your opinions and arguments.
And i do question myself too : were Luftwaffe pilots consulted before switching to new a/c.
And what is a TE 262 ?

 

[Jack_Hill]

Roaaar, i forgot the citation : "not much bipede is a natural born eagle"
Leonardo da Vinci, 1500

 

[Njaco]

And what is a TE 262 ?

Me being Lazy. Twin Engine 262.

And i do question myself too : were Luftwaffe pilots consulted before switching to new a/c.

I think so. "Which is it? The Panzerfaust or the Schwalbe, Hauptmann?"

 

[zoomar]

Based on the scenario that Friendly Fire suggests, there wouldn't be much of a dogfight, since the Me262's fuel supply would be getting low...

Considering that the Me262 has already been airborn and vectoring on the bomber stream as well as engaging, the Meteor would have a slight advantage. The 262's pilot would have to make the decision as to wether he wants to engage the Meteor with it's full loadout versus his now very limited ammo or should he use his remaining fuel and better speed to just climb away and head for home...

Also the Me-262 would have expended at least some of its ammunition during the pass at the bombers. If he had managed to damage or cripple a bomber, most likely the German pilot would say to himself "mission accomplished" and decline combat with the Meteor, which he had the speed advantage to do.

 

[Jack_Hill]

Njaco said :
"I think so. "Which is it?
The Panzerfaust or the
Schwalbe, Hauptmann?"

Sad but true.

I'd choose the schwalbe !

But if no other choice :" may i get a sturmgewehr and a slice of bröt too with my panzerfaust, Herr Generalmajor ?"

Low fuel, low ammo, job done, still fast, Zoomar said it all.
I'd avoid combat with the meteor(s).

 

[BlacLord]

Why would a Me-262 fight a Meteor differently then a P-51D? The Me-262 is faster in both cases so he's going to boom zoom the enemy.

The top speed for the Meteor was a touch over 600 mph, no? With the maximum for the 262 a little more than 540 mph?

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The top speed for the Meteor was a touch over 600 mph, no?

No, not the early ones.

 

[pbehn]

The top speed for the Meteor was a touch over 600 mph, no? With the maximum for the 262 a little more than 540 mph?

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

OK to throw it out there on a thread dormant for three years but where do you get your figures? please bear in mind the 262 was retired in 1945. The F8 version is quoted on wiki at 600MPH records in excess of 600MPH were set but they were surely not a production machine. The F8 was in service from 1950 to 54.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The top speed for the Meteor was a touch over 600 mph, no? With the maximum for the 262 a little more than 540 mph?

Just thought I'd throw that out there.

None of the variants that where operational during WW2 could reach 600 mph. The Me 262's had a marked superiority in speed over the Meteor.

 

[kool kitty89]

I believe the Meteor Mk.IV also managed approximately 600 mph at low level (pushing close to its mach limit) but that was with engines nearly identical to the later F8. (the F8 had the improved tail unit taken from the Gloster 'Ace' prototype that improved high speed stability and control but didn't much impact top speed, thust increased from 3500 lbf with the Derwent V to 3800 lbf with the Derwent 8, though some references claim the Derwent 8 was capable of 4000 lbf but limited in operational service).

The operational Meteor F.3 of 1945 used 2000 lbf Derwent I engines (later 2400 lbf Derwent IV) but was initially limited in top speed by the short chord nacelles to something in the 440-450 mph range around 10,000 ft and slower at higher altitudes due to low critical mach number. (I forget the exact figures and heights) The long chord cowlings introduced at the end of the war increased that top speed to something a bit over 500 mph (I believe 514 mph at best altitude) and the Derwent IV powered versions were a bit faster still. (it's notable that the Vampire Mk.I managed better speed than the Derwent I powered Meteor and close to the Derwent IV but had poorer acceleration and climb due to engine thrust limitations -2700 lbf on the Goblin I, 3100 lbf on the II, the Meteor II also had a higher critical mach number than the Vampire, at least once the long cowls were fitted, so limiting dive speeds would be higher)

The F.3 also had the aileron controls wired heavy due to structural limitations and thus had the roll rate restricted.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I believe the Meteor Mk.IV also managed approximately 600 mph at low level (pushing close to its mach limit) but that was with engines nearly identical to the later F8. (the F8 had the improved tail unit taken from the Gloster 'Ace' prototype that improved high speed stability and control but didn't much impact top speed, thust increased from 3500 lbf with the Derwent V to 3800 lbf with the Derwent 8, though some references claim the Derwent 8 was capable of 4000 lbf but limited in operational service).

The operational Meteor F.3 of 1945 used 2000 lbf Derwent I engines (later 2400 lbf Derwent IV) but was initially limited in top speed by the short chord nacelles to something in the 440-450 mph range around 10,000 ft and slower at higher altitudes due to low critical mach number. (I forget the exact figures and heights) The long chord cowlings introduced at the end of the war increased that top speed to something a bit over 500 mph (I believe 514 mph at best altitude) and the Derwent IV powered versions were a bit faster still. (it's notable that the Vampire Mk.I managed better speed than the Derwent I powered Meteor and close to the Derwent IV but had poorer acceleration and climb due to engine thrust limitations -2700 lbf on the Goblin I, 3100 lbf on the II, the Meteor II also had a higher critical mach number than the Vampire, at least once the long cowls were fitted, so limiting dive speeds would be higher)

The F.3 also had the aileron controls wired heavy due to structural limitations and thus had the roll rate restricted.

An F.3 reached 606 mph in November 1945. I believe it was modified however. We don't know how the 262 would have been developed by thst point.

 

[kool kitty89]

I also mis-spoke on the Derwent 8, it was officially rated (as installed) at 3600 lbf, not 3800. I'd imagine that speed record setting modified F.3 was using prototype Derwent V engines. (that or Goblins, but I see no references to any Meteors being fitted with Goblin engines aside from the 1500 lbf restricted prototype engines used for the initial flight tests -same goes for Metrovick engines)

 

[Koopernic]

An F.3 reached 606 mph in November 1945. I believe it was modified however. We don't know how the 262 would have been developed by thst point.

The Speed meteors had clipped wings, no guns, faired over gun ports. Most of all they had Derwent V engines which were unrelated to previous marks of Derwent and in fact were scaled down Nene engines.

The Me 262 also had new engines in the pipeline. The most obvious one is the Jumo 004D4 which some sources credit with 1050kP or even 1100kP thrust as compared to the 880kP for the standard Jumo 004C. Hence a thrust increase of 18%.

The next Jumo in development was the massive Jumo 012 which featured high compression ratios and blow of valves. The Jumo 004H was a scaled down version of this rated at 1900kP.

Scaled up versions of the Jumo 004 were the Jumo 004E but it was decided to go rather for the scaled down 012 for this "class II category"

Here is one aerodynamic improvement besides swept wings:

 

[SpicyJuan11]

The Speed meteors had clipped wings, no guns, faired over gun ports. Most of all they had Derwent V engines which were unrelated to previous marks of Derwent and in fact were scaled down Nene engines.

The Me 262 also had new engines in the pipeline. The most obvious one is the Jumo 004D4 which some sources credit with 1050kP or even 1100kP thrust as compared to the 880kP for the standard Jumo 004C. Hence a thrust increase of 18%.

The next Jumo in development was the massive Jumo 012 which featured high compression ratios and blow of valves. The Jumo 004H was a scaled down version of this rated at 1900kP.

Scaled up versions of the Jumo 004 were the Jumo 004E but it was decided to go rather for the scaled down 012 for this "class II category"

Here is one aerodynamic improvement besides swept wings:

View attachment 296323

Was the Me 262 development with engines in the wing roots (HG III) designed for some of the larger engines?

 

[Koopernic]

Was the Me 262 development with engines in the wing roots (HG III) designed for some of the larger engines?

Yes, the HeS 011, the first of the "Class II" engines of between 1000kg and 2000kg thrust.

HeS 011A 1300kg
HeS 011B 1500kg
HeS 011C 1700kg
The engine was benching about 1150kg in Jan 1945. It was suited to wing root installation due to its diagonal flow compressor whose centrifugal intlet handled turbulence while not having the large diameter of a full centrifugal flow compressor.

The Jumo 004H also belonged in this class II and was to offer 1900kg. They had started making a few parts for the prototype but its big brother the class III Jumo 012 was ahead of it in construction. BMW had also received effectively a letter of intent for the P.3007, essentially a scaled up and refined BMW 003 also of 1900kg thrust.

 

[kool kitty89]

The Me 262 also had new engines in the pipeline. The most obvious one is the Jumo 004D4 which some sources credit with 1050kP or even 1100kP thrust as compared to the 880kP for the standard Jumo 004C. Hence a thrust increase of 18%.

I believe you meant 004B and not 004C there.

I know the 004H wasn't so much a 004 at all but a scaled down Jumo 012, but the 004G seems to be the odd case. Wiki makes brief mention of it and makes it sound like a more conventional evolution of the 004 with additional compressor stages and combustion chambers (and presumably larger turbine). So a single spool design somewhat closer to the American GE J35 (or later J47). If true, that seems like it'd be a safer bet to get into mass production than the twin-spool design.

There's also the 003D which switched to reaction compressor blading for improved compression ratio and efficiency resulting in a 1150-1200 kgf engine (no afterburning) and the major alternative to the HeS 011 project. (the most likely of the 'class II' engines to actually reach production close to the end of the war)

Of course, the big opportunity missed was any potential 'class II' follow-on derived from the HeS 30 ... rather than going with that HeS 011. (though had the 011 used a more conventional centrifugal compressor stage arrangement like the HeS 8 had along with the axial diffusor to minimize diameter -likely with additional axial stages- it should have been a good deal simpler to develop than the HeS 011 and far more practical to mass produce; going somewhat larger in diameter and omitting the axial compressor stages entirely would likely be even simpler and likely a good deal smaller in diameter than the contemporary Goblin -likely under 1 m in diameter- while still managing similar or better thrust, so that might have been the best 'conservative' option -ie a scaled-up HeS 8 compressor with the improved combustion chamber and turbine arrangements of the HeS 30)

Here is one aerodynamic improvement besides swept wings

I believe the limiting factor on the Me 262's critical mach number of .86 was actually the fuselage and not the wings. I'm sure reductions in transonic drag would have been possible (and were achieved in testing on the HG-I), but the broad, semi-lifting-body airfoil shaped fuselage remains a problem. Or at least that's what I've been led to believe.

.86 isn't bad at all though, and it may have been possible to curtail some of the more problematic critical mach behavior. (and strengthening the tail section to better avoid structural failure in dive recovery ... possibly also introducing dive recovery flaps similar to what the P-38 and P-47 used -I'm not sure, but I've seen some reference to the P-80's belly mounted dive break also being designed to counter pitch-down 'mach tuck' behavior in a terminal dive as well as obviously act as an air break in the more general sense)

 

[awack]

haven't read all post, but the top speed of the Meteor mkIII tested during 1st quarter of 1946 was 475 mph, (wih 2000 ids of thust) ive only heard of test during 1945 and that showed 466 mph, due to engine surging, the Meteor was very poor above 20000 ft being slower than the best prop fighters of the time at altitude...as of 1946, no AC equipped the 2000 ibs thrust engines, ever achieved a altitude higher than 37000 ft, range was 581 miles with a 180 gallon drop tank, my guess would be 360 miles on eternal fuel.

Most of the specs for the Meteor III come from estimations not only of engines of 2000 ibs but also 2200 and 2400 ibs thrust jets, on the other hand the 262 equipped (from test) b2/b3 004s 262s with what I call 2nd generation b4s seem to be averaging much higher speeds, US test showed the 262 to be 43 mph faster than the p 80 and almost 100 mph faster than the Meteor mk III, infact, it was also faster than the f84, actually xp84 (f84 was faster than the p80) thr 262 could also out climb it, the p80 could out climb it at low altitude (both the p80 at just under 12000 ibs and the 262 at normal TOW of 14100 ibs had a ROC between 4740 and 5000 fpm, at lower feul loads both could do almost 6000 fpm, from my reading the military wasn't as concerned about the 262 being superior to the p80 as it was how it compared so well against the xp84,, they wanted to know why it was faster than the xp84 at altitude, they mention the swept back wings, the wings being very thin, and symmetrical laminar flow wings (a lot of people don't know this)

), but the broad, semi-lifting-body airfoil shaped fuselage remains a problem

That's interesting, al I know of the fuselage was it was a semi lifting design and that it helped with airflow at the wing fuselage joint, oh, yeah supposedly the crit mach was ,86, it was its useful mach number that capt Eric Brown said gave it a marked advantage over every figher in the world.

 

[kool kitty89]

I was under the impression that the Meteor was test flown with the long chord nacelles (that substantially improved critical mach and transonic drag) prior to VE day and that some of the early production Meteor F Mk.3 aircraft may have been fitted with them prior to VE day as well. Without those, the Mk.3 was limited to the 440-460 MPH range at best altitude. ( closer to 410 mph with the 1600 lbf Welland engines)

 

[awack]

Oops, sorry, forgot about this thread...the last 15 Meteor mk 3 had the long nacelles, by the end of the war in Europe, they had only produced around 30 or so mk 3s, the test against the tempest where it achieved 475 mph (3 different AC) is dated April 1946, it wasn't until the last 15 mk 3s when they got the long nacelles, so it was some time after the war when they finally got them, I believe around 210 mk 3s were built.

The first 15 mk 3s delivered were still powered by the low powered wellends producing 1600/1700 ibs of thrust, these are the ones sent to Europe in 45 and painted white, they became fully operational (offensive and defensive) at the end of march/beginning of april 45, you can tell the difference between the wellend and derwent powered mk 3s by looking at the engine nacelles.

The me 262 also went through its own evolution, early B2/3 jumos, were averaging 542 mph, but me 262s equipped with later engines,(2nd gen B4 jumos) were averaging higher speeds, they seemed to have gotten better at getting these engines producing full thrust, on the other hand I cant find any evidence of them having longer life span, Galland stated that JV 44, they were getting 12.5 on average hours out of them.