Fw better then Me-262?

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Wespe

Airman 1st Class
102
0
Feb 13, 2007
In a House
I dont think the Fw was better as a whole then the Me-262, or a more versatile plane:
Especially not from August 1944 onward.

As a fighter: NO
As a Recon: NO
As a Nightfighter: NO
As a Ground: attackplane: Maybe
As a trainer: both did their job
What else? Sofar it is 4:2 for the Me-262

Wespe
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 256
As a fighter the Fw was as good as any fighter which makes it a successful fighter especially if you take the D and the Ta into the equation.
As a recon it didn't really perform this role as there were better aircraft available.
Again it didn't really perform the night fighter role as twin engined aircraft were more effective and better able to carry radar.
As a ground attack, yes the fw was more effective. It could carry more ordinance and therefore could do more damage.
As a trainer both did what they needed to do - train pilots - but at the same time they didn't do much of it as there was no/little fuel.

The only thing the Me-262 has over any plane in WW2 is speed (and armament). Speed is not going to enable you to beat your opponent, just pick and choose your fight. Besides the Me-262 took a long time to spool up and spool down when it was easy prey for any allied fighter. The engines were prone to flame-outs and easily damaged (unlike the Fw which had an engine that didn't flame-out as was able to take a lot of damage).

There you see that the FW was better in almost every respect apart from speed and speed isn't everything.
 
Alright Wespe. Here you go. First of all I am not saying the Fw-190 was better than the Me-262 in any given role. So dont use my words wrong in this thread either.

What I am saying is the the Fw-190 was a more versatile aircraft and it could perform more roles successfully than the Me-262.

Here is a list of roles the Fw-190 could perform and had versions therefore of.

Fighter
Night Fighter
Recon
Fighter-Bomber
Torpedo-Bomber
Ground Attack and Close Air Support
Trainer
Mistel-Carrier
Interceptor
Tank Buster

It performed all these roles very well and as a plus it did not have to worry about its engines flaming out because its engine actually had some life to it.
 
And if you really want to branch it out. The Fw-190 had fighter versions that were Long Range Fighters, All-Weather Fighters and specifically designed for attacking Bombers.

It also had Night Ground Attack versions as well as versions that were specifically designed as Attack Aircraft.

It has the Me-262 beat handsdown in versatility.
 
Wespe said:
1)The FwD's did not outmatch the Me-262 as a fighter, not on speed and not on firepower, of the Ta-152, I would estimate less then 15 ever in Action.

And you point being. The Fw-190 was as good as the allied fighters out there and it was in bigger numbers. It did not go up against Me-262s and therefore it was more successful.

Wespe said:
2)As a recon plane it was the fastest with the same cameras, means after taking the photos it was very sure to bring them back.

Still does not matter. The Fw-190 could do the recon role really well. Again no one is saying that the Fw-190 was faster than the Me-262. No one is saying that it was better overall. Besides the Fw-190 could run away without fear of his engines flaming out.

Wespe said:
3)Nightfighter: Since I am comparing Fw with the Me-262, I agree to your 2 engine argument, but it has no indication about the Fw-Me competition.So the under (1) given reason still aply.

The Fw served as a Night figher in larger numbers and was just as good as the allied aircraft out there. Fw takes this one again...

Wespe said:
5)Taking reliability into account, it looks bad for the Me-262, however this is not a criteria in order to evaluate the better aircraft under equal performances.

Yes it does look bad, because the Me-262 was not the most versatile fighter. Could it perform the most roles Wespe? If you say yes you are a fool...

Wespe said:
If so,the Fw-190 would never have been produced, since it took one year to get the BMW801 reliable.

And when did the Jumos of the 262 become reliable? Oh wait a minute they never did!

So it would still be:

Wespe said:
Torpedo bomber:both, however what should the Luftwaffe have torpedoed in 44 or 45?, and why should the 262 not be able to carry and launch a torpedo?

No you can not give Torpedo to the Me-262 since there were no versions that could carry a Torpedo. It would have been a shitty one anyhow since it could not carry the payload of a Torpedo...

Again you brought this up. You say the Me-262 is more versatile. I prove you it was not in that it could not perform as many roles. You still dont see the light...

Wespe said:
Mistel carrier: both, Why waste a good fighter for that - take the 109's
The Me-262 could also have been used as Mistel Plane, however I do not see a mistel carrier as anything realistic or needed.

I agree it is a stupid role, but the Fw-190 could do it and the Me-262 was never tested or used in that capacity. Therefore you can list it as a role for the 262 and another one for the Fw-190.

Wespe said:
The 262 could also carry extra fuel tanks, if range would be a problem

The Fw still had a longer range than the Me-262 in the long range role. Therefore the Me-262 loses again.

Wespe said:
6:4 for the Me-262, so what else?

Where do you come up with that? The Fw-190 is more versatile than the Me-262? You keep going around the subject and coming up with this 4-1 and then 6-4 crap.

Wespe said:
No matter how many roles you bring in, the Me-262 could have done the same but faster (and faster was the "only" desicive answer from 44 onward)

Negative. The Me-262 could not do half the roles the Fw-190 could do. Are you blind?

Go back to my list. Those were actual roles performed by the Fw-190. The Me-262 could not do half of those.

Your 35 years of reading books has not done anything for you, yet my 26 years of reading books, flying planes and fixing planes has done more for me obviously.

Wespe said:
It is only the Ground Attack role where the Fw could have performed better.
Wespe

And the other 10 roles that the Fw-190 could perform and the Me-262 could not...
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 251
By the way,from 44 onwards the primary function of the fighter squadrons was to shot down bombers and not fighters.

So firepower and "speed" was "everything"

Wespe
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 244
Ooops sorry about that. I accidently clicked on Edit instead of reply. Therefore it posted mine on Wespes post. :lol:

Sorry about that. So anyone can go back and look at my post on his post in his post until I correct that when I get back. Going out with the wife tonight.

Wespe I will correct that later when I get back.
 
The Me-262 would not of been a feasible torpedo bomber because of its speed, the torpedo would like disintegrate when it the water and if the Me-262 slowed down it would be extremely vulnerable to attack before it got up to speed again.

Jet engines are more thirsty than the radial in the Fw (especially with two of them) despite any extra fuel the Me-262 could carry the Fw should always have the legs on it.

Again faster is NOT best, just because it can out run anything it comes up against doesn't make it a good aircraft. The faster you the harder it is to hit anything, therefore I bet if you look at the hit ratios/tank kills for the Fw190 (A/F) compared to the Me-262 there will be a large difference between the hits achieved by each with the Fw190 having the higher ratio (thus making it more effective at this role and so a better aircraft).

Once the Me-262 had lost its speed (as would happen in a dogfight) it was less maneuverable than the Fw190. Put the two in a dogfight and I would put money on the Fw190 winning (especially a D or a Ta).

Speed is not the key to a successful aircraft! Speed doesn't make it the best aircraft! Speed isn't everything!

The Me-262 is no the "uber" plane you are trying to make it out to be (none of the first generation jets were that much better than their piston engined counterparts except in the speed category. Look at Erich's thread on jet kills and you will see how many were shot down by Allied fighters which you say should not be able to touch the Me-262. Seafury's and Corsair's shot down Mig's in Korea and the Mig was a lot better than the Me-262 so there wouldn't of been a problem (and there wasn't really for the Tempests, P-51's, Spitfires etc of the Allied airforces).

Your argument is rather baseless...
 
Some of You might find it interesting that the FW-190A in it´s early development stage (1941 and 1942 in France) had engine reliability problems.

The overhaul times for the BMW 801 by then was 20-25 hours! Compare that with the 15-25 hours for the early Jumo-004B1, not that much of a difference:shock:

However, this is a sidenote. In general, I strongly support the view expressed by Gnoomy, Adler Wespe.

regards,
delc
 
Hi Gnomey

I am not making an (ueber-plane) out of the Me-262. I am simply stating that the 262 was the better plane.

If you do not give a priority towards speed, you are right in a way to point out that speed isn't everything, but you seem to ignore that due to the overwhelming odds, it was the only thing that could give a Luftwaffe pilot a chance to survive, before and after maybe shooting down a bomber or fighter. I never said that a 262 is invincible. I can understand that from American or allied point of view, this all doesn't matter - free for the motto: who cares how fast they are we won the war anyway, or in 1944 - we will win anyway no matter how fast they are. So speed isnt everything from the allied point of view, but this does not apply to the Luftwaffe point of view. And if Galland would not have pushed this topic, the 262 would have been some funny sideshow flying meaningless ground attack sorties.

Torpedo and Mistel capabillities can be forwarded but to my believe are totally irrellevant.

Range,okay yes, but who needed a range in 44 or 45 that could not be provided by the 262, 1000km range.

Also to point out constantly, that the 262 was not in availability such as the Fw doesnt have any indication on a competition of a plane. When the RLM had its competitions or evaluations it was e.g. one Bf against one Fw and not the existing 2000? Bf in 1941 against the one Fw prototyp.

The only thing a Fw could do better, and I never dissagread was the ground attack role.
Anything else a 262 could do just as well but with one major advantage "speed". That the plane was in its early stages is known, and I would not use that in order to explain failures but also not to indicate that a modell that derived from 40/42 was better due to its development time.

And a F-86 was definatly not worse then a P-51 just because it could be shoot down by a prop or had engine problems in its early days.
The F-86 could just as well perform as a P-51 but "faster" and therefore bring the factor of "survival" to the US and UN pilots making it the better plane, no matter how many roles the P-51 could do and the Sabre could not.

Wespe
 

Attachments

  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 180
:rolleyes:

Even with the speed a lot of Me-262's got shot down. Yes at top speed it was faster but it could be caught by an Allied plane in a dive and then shot down. Without the advantage of altitude the speed of the Me-262 was rather wasted as the Allied prop planes could dive to catch up with it.
 
well I have to put my puny white butt in here..........

will not say much yet as I am in the middle of a couple big jobs in the snow , but be prepared Wespe (in fact go by you're real name please if you want a real answer) to get your fantaises smeared all over the skies.

what was the Me 262 A created for ? by answering this correctly you will gain a head full of knowledge which will help you realize where the Me 262 should be placed with the ranks of the Fw multi-variants.

It's simple the Fw 190 outperformed the 262 in everything but flat-out speed. Had the Me 262B-2a been available then it would of been the ultimate German night fighter but it did not ........ there is more .........

well I will tantalize your brain matter later tonight

bis bald E ♫
 
And a Fw going in for the landing or a dive could be wasted just as well by an allied plane. Come on this doesn't proof anything.

However the Luftwaffe claimes for the 262 a total kill of about 700 planes.

That would be a kill ratio of 2 or 3:1 for the 262. No 109 or Fw can claim that kill ratio, or did the Luftwaffe shoot down 100,000 allied planes?:rolleyes: .

So this figure already proofs significantly more or less everything about the capabilities of a 262 compared to a Fw or Bf or what ever axis or allied a/c.

Wespe
 

Attachments

  • cartoon.gif
    cartoon.gif
    9 KB · Views: 148
  • Signat.forum.bmp
    132 KB · Views: 165
Hi Gnomey


And a F-86 was definatly not worse then a P-51 just because it could be shoot down by a prop or had engine problems in its early days.
The F-86 could just as well perform as a P-51 but "faster" and therefore bring the factor of "survival" to the US and UN pilots making it the better plane, no matter how many roles the P-51 could do and the Sabre could not.

Wespe


You're comparing a 2nd generation jet fighter aircraft to a ww2 aircraft - apples to oranges. Look that the thrust, power to weight ratio and internal systems of the F-86 and they are light years a head of the P-51.

But going back to the -262, First generation jet with barely 1500 pounds of thrust per engine that will last 10 - 20 hours if you're lucky (BTW to enlighten you about jet engine operation, you can't fly 100% continually). I suggest you look into how long the -262 could sustain its top speed due to normal operating limitation, you'll be very surprised.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back