Fastest Piston Engined Aircraft of WW2?

[SaparotRob]

I think one of them belongs to Chuck Yeager.

 

[GrauGeist]

Is there any info on the cause of the 262 shoot downs, ie by the bombers while attacking, by fighters while attacking the bombers, in ACM with fighters, while landing, etc?

I would be interested to see such numbers, even if only for the 76 sorties & 31 losses on 10 April 1945.

I still have not been able to get my books out of storage, but I beleive one of the books by Greil covers those numbers.

I beleive the leading cause of Me262 losses were due to being intercepted while landing.

 

[drgondog]

I still have not been able to get my books out of storage, but I beleive one of the books by Greil covers those numbers.

I beleive the leading cause of Me262 losses were due to being intercepted while landing.

Near airfields was a high percentage, but looking at the 100+ 8th AF Encounter Reports, an equally high percentage was chase after air to air combat in which a 262 was hit and speed reduced enough to be caught in airfield area.

 

[Macandy]

It was really moot how many 262's were notionally 'available', be it 44 or 72 or 200 - when the USAAF solution to them was to simply fly 400 medium bombers over any suspected airfield operating them and turn it into a good facsimile of the moon.

 

[drgondog]

It was really moot how many 262's were notionally 'available', be it 44 or 72 or 200 - when the USAAF solution to them was to simply fly 400 medium bombers over any suspected airfield operating them and turn it into a good facsimile of the moon.

I believe a majority of operational 262s in 1945 were located in Munich-Magdeburg-Prague triangle - well out of range of B-26s. Most damage in March -April 1945 were 8th AF fghter units.

 

[Macandy]

Was that the magic number where the pixie dust didn't work any more?

No, that's the magic number when beyond it took vastly more horsepower to gain much more speed as the propellors got huge and the tips neared supersonic speeds and lost efficiency.
See they brief move to contra-rotating props to gain some respite from the aeronautical dead end.
Even the early jet engines were shoving out twice the equivalent horsepower of the best piston engines, without the losses through a prop turning that into speed.

 

[GrauGeist]

No, that's the magic number when beyond it took vastly more horsepower to gain much more speed as the propellors got huge and the tips neared supersonic speeds and lost efficiency.
See they brief move to contra-rotating props to gain some respite from the aeronautical dead end.
Even the early jet engines were shoving out twice the equivalent horsepower of the best piston engines, without the losses through a prop turning that into speed.

So why were piston powered fighters (without contra-props) exceeding this magic 450mph number by 1944?

 

[Macandy]

I believe a majority of operational 262s in 1945 were located in Munich-Magdeburg-Prague triangle - well out of range of B-26s. Most damage in March -April 1945 were 8th AF fghter units.

B-26's crossed swords with 262's frequently over Bavaria near wars end.

 

[Admiral Beez]

What's the fastest four engined piston aircraft of ww2? The per Wikipedia, the B-29 was capable of 350 mph, quite a bit faster than the streamlined Avro Lancastrian I was initially going to suggest. Both are bested by the 357 mph B-32.

Top place seems to go to the 368 mph Nakajima G8N. I assume with a light load.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

No, that's the magic number when beyond it took vastly more horsepower to gain much more speed as the propellors got huge and the tips neared supersonic speeds and lost efficiency.
See they brief move to contra-rotating props to gain some respite from the aeronautical dead end.
Even the early jet engines were shoving out twice the equivalent horsepower of the best piston engines, without the losses through a prop turning that into speed.

Well as you can see there were OPERATIONAL (without contra-rotating props) that flew in excess of 450 mph. If this is a magic number in your mind, please show us the equation that validates this claim with the applicable propeller/ aircraft combination!

 

[pbehn]

Were contra rotating props ever fully sorted for 1940s fighters. I read that they solved one problem and created another, since they didnt take kindly to high "G" shenanigans.

 

[drgondog]

B-26's crossed swords with 262's frequently over Bavaria near wars end.

Agreed before Rheine was over run - but largely Defense of the Reich had consildated eastward near Berlin and south toward Regensburg, Munich, Obepfaffenhofen, Augsburg. IIRC one of Galland's last actions with JV 44 was against B-26s. That said, the end of the Bulge was the end of 262s being based anywhere near Munster, Gelsingkirchen, Rheine, etc.

 

[SaparotRob]

Well as you can see there were OPERATIONAL (without contra-rotating props) that flew in excess of 450 mph. If this is a magic number in your mind, please show us the equation that validates this claim with the applicable propeller/ aircraft combination!

View attachment 685343

I always forget there were P-51s after the D.

 

[Juha3]

Is there any info on the cause of the 262 shoot downs, ie by the bombers while attacking, by fighters while attacking the bombers, in ACM with fighters, while landing, etc?

I would be interested to see such numbers, even if only for the 76 sorties & 31 losses on 10 April 1945.

10 April is a bad day for analyses because fighter control did not succeed to assemble the 262s properly and numerous escort fighters broke down most of the small 262 formations so 262s attacked mostly in fours or pairs so most of the lost ones are simply marked as missing.
On 10 April 45 according to Foreman & Harvey The Messerschmitt Me 262 Combat Diary (1990) gives only the JG 7 losses as 20 Shot down, 4 shot down by fighters + 1 marked as shot down, Walter Schuck, but according to his memoirs he was shot down by 1st Lt. Joseph Peterburs from 20th FG and Franz Schall was killed when after combat with fighters while force-landing at Parchim his 262 rolled into a bomb crater and exploded. No info on I./KG(J) 54 losses but according to the 1996 edition two of its Me 262s were shot down by fighters, one crashed on combat flight and one was shot down while on approach to Stendahl. 1990 edition lists 18 262 kill claims by US fighters + 1 probable + 12 damaged. Boehme writes that US fighters claimed 20 262 kills and bomber gunners at least 5.

 

[Macandy]

Well as you can see there were OPERATIONAL (without contra-rotating props) that flew in excess of 450 mph. If this is a magic number in your mind, please show us the equation that validates this claim with the applicable propeller/ aircraft combination!

View attachment 685343

Ah yes, the decidedly unsuccessful P-51H, (quickly cancelled at wars end), a super stripped down ultra lightweight airframe fitted with a 2,270 hp Merlin to gain just 40MPH of performance over the much more durable P-51D that only required 1,315 hp while doing much the same job.
As we can see, the P-51D had a long post war service, because it rather proved the point, the extra bit of performance the P-51H provided with such great effort, was simply not worth the squeeze - and the huge extra maintenance headaches of running what was effectively a race plane.

There are plenty of other examples of late war piston engined fighters that required 50% or more power and the extra fragility to gain only an incremental gain in speed while even the first jets low powered were leaving them trailing helplessly in the slipstreams.

 

[pbehn]

Ah yes, the decidedly unsuccessful P-51H, (quickly cancelled at wars end), a super stripped down ultra lightweight airframe fitted with a 2,270 hp Merlin to gain just 40MPH of performance over the much more durable P-51D that only required 1,315 hp while doing much the same job.
As we can see, the P-51D had a long post war service, because it rather proved the point, the extra bit of performance the P-51H provided with such great effort, was simply not worth the squeeze - and the huge extra maintenance headaches of running what was effectively a race plane.

There are plenty of other examples of late war piston engined fighters that required 50% or more power and the extra fragility to gain only an incremental gain in speed while even the first jets low powered were leaving them trailing helplessly in the slipstreams.

That is just the laws of physics. Jets required the same doubling of power to get comparatively small increases in speed, it was easier to double the power of a jet though, and then double it again..

 

[EwenS]

P-51H unsuccessful?

Given the numbers of P-51D aircraft built and the many sitting in storage, and the prospect of new jet fighters, I'm not sure why when WW2 ended anyone would have continued to churn the P-51H out of the factories beyond the end of 1945. All that was on the horizon was a massive downsizing of the USAAF, the ending of Lend Lease and Peace.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Ah yes, the decidedly unsuccessful P-51H, (quickly cancelled at wars end), a super stripped down ultra lightweight airframe fitted with a 2,270 hp Merlin to gain just 40MPH of performance over the much more durable P-51D that only required 1,315 hp while doing much the same job.

Once again you are incredibly wrong! The P-51H (of which 555 were produced) was used by the USAF and National guard units well into the 1950s, 1957 to be exact, far from unsuccessful!!!

As we can see, the P-51D had a long post war service, because it rather proved the point, the extra bit of performance the P-51H provided with such great effort, was simply not worth the squeeze - and the huge extra maintenance headaches of running what was effectively a race plane.

And once again you make a laughable but yet almost delusional statement! If anything the P-51H offered better performance, lessons learned from the earlier P-51 series, so once again, please show us your basis for this bovine statement?!?!?

There are plenty of other examples of late war piston engined fighters that required 50% or more power and the extra fragility to gain only an incremental gain in speed while even the first jets low powered were leaving them trailing helplessly in the slipstreams.

Really? Name them! And I'm still waiting about your 450 mph rationale!

There was no doubt the piston engine fighter was doomed once the first jets flew, but your statements are far from accurate but yet entertaining, almost as entertaining as discussing Eric Brown's ability to speak German!

 

[wuzak]

Ah yes, the decidedly unsuccessful P-51H, (quickly cancelled at wars end), a super stripped down ultra lightweight airframe fitted with a 2,270 hp Merlin to gain just 40MPH of performance over the much more durable P-51D that only required 1,315 hp while doing much the same job.

Hmm, max power of the V-1650-7 in the P-51D was 1,900hp+ using PN150 fuel. About 1,700 with PN130 fuel.

 

[Juha3]

Ok, I checked a 4th source book on 10 April 45 combats, Caldwell's Day Fighters in Defence of the Reich. A War Diary, 1942 – 45 (2011). Again at least partly different numbers, 63 Me 262s scrambled against massive US bomber formation (1232 heavy bombers and 868 fighters). 63 is the same figure as Walter Schuck gives in his memoirs. Boehme writes that 55 262s and 12 Fw 190Ds were scrambled against the US raid, according to Caldwell besides the 63 Me 262s, 42 from JG 7 and 21 from I./KG(J) 54, only 4 Ta 152Hs and 1 Me 163B were scrambled. In the text Caldwell writes that "27 Me 262s were lost , although this number is uncertain." In his table he gives JG 7 losses only as 3+ for I./JG 7, 6+ for III./JG 7 T/O time 1400 and 1 for those taking of at 1430. 4 for I./KG(J) 54.

Boehme is a bit unclear, but it seems that his 55 Me 262s taking off and 27 lost includes only the JG 7 planes. When you add 21 scrambled KG(J) 54 planes and 4 lost ones, you get Price's 76 launched and 31 lost Me 262s.

BTW according to Caldwell bombers claimed 17-4-12 and fighters 10.5-0-13 but checking from Freeman's The Mighty Eighth War Diary the number of Caldwell's destroyed incl. only those by P-51 pilots escorting 1AD bombers and altogether escort fighters claimed 20-0-13 according to Freeman, the bombers' claims are the same. So no huge bomber gunners overclaims but very reasonable claims.