Fw better then Me-262?

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

Hunter368 said:
But in real life knowing that I have about 100 other P-51's backing me up vs that 1 262 would make me feel much much better also. LOL But that is real life.
Click to expand...

I have never read anywhere where the P-51 pilots were afraid to take on an Me-262 if they spotted it, whether they had backup or not. And, in one on one combat, backup doesn't really help since if you are shot down, you are dead whether you have a 100 backups or none. Now, I am sure they were concerned about the ones they didn't see, just like other aircraft, as the Me-262 could come in very fast and hit very hard and go. That is what it was good at.

Alder said:
Now I will go as far as saying it was the best intercepter because of its speed and firepower, but not pure fighter per say.
Click to expand...

I agree with this 100%.

I don't think anyone is saying the Me-262 was a bad aircraft. It is for certain a milestone aircraft and showed the way to the future. They are just saying that it had some issues in WWII.
 
davparlr said:
I agree with this 100%.

I don't think anyone is saying the Me-262 was a bad aircraft. It is for certain a milestone aircraft and showed the way to the future. They are just saying that it had some issues in WWII.
Click to expand...

I agree as well. That is what I have been saying all along. Some people think those issues were minor but issues with engines and construction are quite serious with a combat aircraft.
 
I completely agree that there is more than speed or firepower to make a fighter the best fighter. But I strongly disagree with Erich's statement that the Me 262 wasn't the best because the P-51 could outturn the Me 262.

Every fighter in the world could be outturned by a Zero, even today's fighters. But can anyone say it was better than the Corsair? I don't think so. What did the Corsair have on the Zero? Speed! It would attack the enemy with superior speed and would get away with superior speed. The Zero didn't stand a chance. Likewise, the Bf 109 was more manoeuvrable than the P-51 though the Mustang outperformed the Bf 109. Sure, the Bf 109 could hold its own but its inferior speed was the major contributor to the losses (except for pilot quality of course). So, turning is important but becomes ineffective when confronted by power fighters. That's also why the Russians lost so many fighters against the German fighters. That's why the Italian CR.42 was one of the worst fighters of WW2.

The Me 262 was nice to fly, comfortable, manoeuvrable (sensitive controls) and had superior climb rate (at altitude) and dive speed. What does the Mustang have to counter this? Turn rate and roll rate? These were never qualities of the Mustang as in that field it was inferior to the Fw 190 and Bf 109, as well to the Spitfire and every Russian fighter.

If you're saying the Me 262 wasn't better than the P-51, you're saying that the P-80 wasn't better than the P-51...

(again, I'm talking about a Me 262 in a one-on-one situation with engines not due for revision.)
Kris
 
you guy's are misinterpreting my post which indeed pisses me off !

my point in my opinion was the Me 262 was not the best fighter due to mentions previously posted by others not just by myself. Was not this thread about FW vs the 262 and which one was better or has my Opa eyes tired out.

obviously several have not heeded my exclamation about turning problems, JG 7 vets that i have spoken with said at times the thing was just too fast the Mustang would get in their circle and give them a broadside. Speed does not always bring you victory ........ this has nothing to do with the Mustang being better than the 262 though I have my thoughts on that
 
Had the Germans just produced some greater heat resistant metals and had Hitler not issued the Me-262 an anti-ground role then yes, the Me-262 would've then been the very best fighter of WW2 - that is not how things went however..
 
Corsairs, Hellcats, and in some rare occasions a P-38 could turn with or even out turn a Zero, this is a subject of pilot skill.
 
Well, I hope Erich is not pissed off at me. I've known him for a while. Since I joined at LEMB, and that's a couple of years ago, I think.

I think everybody has the impression that people are misinterpreting their posts and don't see the point, I know I have that feeling a lot. That's the way it goes, I think...
So I just repeat myself a lot ...

FlyboyJ, of course you're right about the outturning of the Zero, but at which speed would they be able to do this? In any case, the pilot is always the central element, but in comparing two aircraft, we must assume that there are evenly qualified pilots in them. As such, the Zero pilot would be more often the better turner.
But the preferred tactic of the Corsair pilots was BnZ, and in fact it was the preferred tactic of all American fighter pilots since the Flying Tigers over China. Corsairs, Mustangs, (early) Lightnings, Thunderbolts, ... these were power aircraft, not turning and rolling dogfighters. And that won them the war (as one of the main contributing factors).
And it's exactly for that reason, that I believe the Mustang was better than the Bf 109G-6, and why I believe the Me 262 was better than the Mustang. They were in the same league.

Kris
 
There have been P-38 pilots who turned with the Zero below 300 mph - more the exception than the rule, but it was done...
And you are correct

Civettone said:
And it's exactly for that reason, that I believe the Mustang was better than the Bf 109G-6, and why I believe the Me 262 was better than the Mustang. They were in the same league.

Kris
Click to expand...
I could compare the G-6 and the P-51 all day - the 262 was a bomber destroyer with a 90 minute endurance - and even with it's superior speed, all the Mustang had to do is keep turning and make the 262 fight at its optimum speed and aparently many Mustang and other recip fighter pilots did the same...
 

You don't have to read about P-51 pilots being afraid going into combat.....they were. Anyone going into combat is afraid (German or American or anyone else) and anyone who says different is BSing you or has never been in combat.

But I was not talking about real American pilots (sorry if I was unclear).......I was talking about me flying the plane. I would of been very afraid if I was flying a P-51 and I saw a ME-262 was coming after me......if I was not I would of been a fool. Having a 100 other P-51's backing me up and covering my tail would certainly of made me feel better but I would still would of been afraid.

But to get back to ME-262 trying to turn away from a P-51...yes that would of been a foolish thing to do....but pilots sometimes tried. Why? Because air combat is much like fighting. You don'y have time to think only react. If you have to "think" what to do....then its to late or you make a mistake.

What you get taught in mixed martial arts is to train train train and when you think you know what you are doing train more train more train more. Like I said flying in combat has to be based of training yes, but in combat you can't think you have to just react (you only get to this point after many many many hours flying and training and combat). Many good talented pilots died from all nations b/c, they could fly with the best of them, but they had to think in combat. The true great pilots just reacted, that gave them the best chance to survive. Just like in fighting a pilot is only as good as he trains. One of the major problems for the Germans was in 44 and 45 there was too little fuel and safe airspace to train new pilots to become great pilots. Many rookies died in their first combat who "could" of become great pilots but they could never fully live up to their potentional b/c they could not be trained the way they should of been (b/c lack of fuel and safe airspace).
 
FLYBOYJ said:
There have been P-38 pilots who turned with the Zero below 300 mph - more the exception than the rule, but it was done...
And you are correct
Click to expand...

I do believe this is a case of the Zeke pilot not knowing he's being attacked, cause the P-38 wasn't worth a penny in a turn fight unless going REALLY slow - but even then the Zeke is still overwhelmingly superior.
 
Soren said:
I do believe this is a case of the Zeke pilot not knowing he's being attacked, cause the P-38 wasn't worth a penny in a turn fight unless going REALLY slow - but even then the Zeke is still overwhelmingly superior.
Click to expand...
If the Zero (or Oscar) is in a 30 or 40 degree bank, he knows something is happening. I posted this earlier for one example, again more the exception than the rule...

Secrets of a P-38 Ace. John Tilley's electrifying story
 
Civettone said:
Perhaps he's talking about the late P-38J and the P-38L with the hydraulic flaps? That apparently made the P-38 the best turner of ALL USAAF fighters!



Kris
Click to expand...

Actually the P-38 D was the first model with improved fowler flaps that could be deployed to tightern the turning radius. Again, more the exception than the rule and only done by a select few...
 
FLYBOYJ said:
If the Zero (or Oscar) is in a 30 or 40 degree bank, he knows something is happening.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily no. The Zeke pilot might have been concerned with another a/c, watching it carefully. Or he might have thought that there's no way a heavy bird like the P-38 is going to have a chance in even the slightest of turns and therefore chose to retain as much speed as possible for when the P-38 overshoots.

There are litterally hundreds of possible reasons for why the Zeke pilot was shot down, and since we weren't in the cockpit we can only guess.

I posted this earlier for one example, again more the exception than the rule...

Secrets of a P-38 Ace. John Tilley's electrifying story
Click to expand...


There has been debates about this before, and even with the help of the fowler flaps the P-38 isn't going to out-turn or even turn with a Zeke in a hard turn, its simply impossible.

In TAIC report No.38 from April 1945 it is made clear that from SL and up, even with the help of various combinations of maneuver and dive recovery flaps, the Zeke 52 (A6M5) is on the P-38's tail within approx. one turn.


 
I disagree Soren - you have flown aircraft - there is no reason why in the would you would fly around with your aircraft continually banked 30 or 40 degress - if one was avoiding enemy contact the usual method was to fly zig zag patterns and never stay straight and level -



Soren said:
There has been debates about this before, and even with the help of the fowler flaps the P-38 isn't going to out-turn or even turn with a Zeke in a hard turn, its simply impossible.
Click to expand...
Not unless you use diffenterial throttle settings, another issue discussed before and a technique that was used by a few exceptional P-38 pilots - not the norm or sane thing to do, but in fact it was done successfully.
Soren said:
In TAIC report No.38 from April 1945 it is made clear that from SL and up, even with the help of various combinations of maneuver and dive recovery flaps, the Zeke 52 (A6M5) is on the P-38's tail within approx. one turn.
Click to expand...
In a "normal" combat situation. The A6M5 was the more maneuvable of the Zero line - I'd like to see data with an A6M3...

Again, I'm not saying this was done as a normal combat SOP - it was possible however to turn with the Zero and Oscar in a p-38 and a very few select pilots accomplished this task....
 
Civettone said:
Every fighter in the world could be outturned by a Zero, even today's fighters.
Click to expand...



And I still disagree with the Me-262. Again there is more to it than speed and performance.

We can not change history so we can not talk about what if the Germans had done this with the Me-262.

It is proven fact that the construction was shotty because of disimiliar metals. It is a proven fact that the engines were unreliable. It is a proven fact (as all early jet fighters were) that they were not really maintenance friendly.

The list of problems with the Me-262 can go on and on.

Was she a step in the right direction? Absolutely. Could she have been the best? Yes but this is not about could have should have...

I would rather have 100 reliable Fw-190s which were good eneoght o tangle with the allies than 1 flying Me-262. And therefore the Me-262 is not the best in my opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

G
Better Dambusters
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
GTX
S
Italian series 5/6 fighters really better?
Replies
8
Views
1K
GregP
A
A better Armstrong Whitworth Whitley
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
wuzak
W
Making better Italian aircraft, 1933~1945
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
3K
Shortround6
S
K
Overlord/D-Day and the Me-262
2 3
Replies
52
Views
4K
pigeon
Menu
Log in
Register