Zyzygie’s Mumbles and Rambles

[FLYBOYJ]

Agreed:
"...Galland said that persistent allied attacks on Axis fuel supplies also hindered Me 262 operations. Toward the end of the war, Me 262s were often towed to the end of the runway by draft horses in order to conserve fuel. In addition, many airframes sat idle waiting for engines that never arrived."

"Although it was the first by a considerable margin, the Me 262 was not the best jet of its era. Britain's Gloster Meteor, which used more reliable centrifugal-flow turbojet engines, joined the Royal Air Force in 1944. The first practical U.S. jet fighter, the P-80 Shooting Star, reached Europe by May 1945, but saw no combat in World War II..."
The Messerschmitt Me 262 Jet Fighter | Defense Media Network

Beating a dead horse -

In terms of performance, the 1944 Gloster Meteor and P-80 were both inferior to the Me 262 despite the -262's engine reliability issues, compare all 3 aircraft (in their 1944 configuration) and this is quite evident. You could speculate all you want what would have been the final outcome if they met in combat. In the post war both the Meteor and the P-80 still had some development before they both became an effective weapon platform.

 

[Zyzygie]

Engines : The Heart of Aircraft Performance

"It is noteworthy that with very few exceptions, almost all improvements in aircraft speed and load-carrying capability during World War II came from increased engine power and not from aerodynamic, structure, or system improvements in airframes..."

"...Jet engine development was accomplished by teams led by Anselm Franz of Junkers , Stanley Hooker of Rolls-Royce and Hermann Oestrich of BMW. At General Electric, Donald F. Warner, Dale Streid, Glen Warren and Alan Howard pioneered, and later Gerhard Neumann would become prominent."

"Engine development always took longer than airframe development, and aircraft designers usually received more public acclaim than engine designers. Yet aircraft designers would be the first to recognize the absolute necessity of having good engines to obtain good performance..."

This article was first published inAviation 100: Celebrating a Century of Manned, Powered Flight.

The Aircraft Engines of World War II | Defense Media Network

 

[GrauGeist]

I'm trying to figure out how the author of this statement:

"Although it was the first by a considerable margin, the Me 262 was not the best jet of its era. Britain's Gloster Meteor, which used more reliable centrifugal-flow turbojet engines, joined the Royal Air Force in 1944. The first practical U.S. jet fighter, the P-80 Shooting Star, reached Europe by May 1945, but saw no combat in World War II..."

has come to that conclusion.
The Me262 certainly downed more Allied aircraft than the Meteor and Shooting Star combined.

And the Meteor and P-80 certainly had their share of issues - the P-80 even killed Major Bong and a handful of test pilots...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Engines : The Heart of Aircraft Performance

"It is noteworthy that with very few exceptions, almost all improvements in aircraft speed and load-carrying capability during World War II came from increased engine power and not from aerodynamic, structure, or system improvements in airframes..."

"...Jet engine development was accomplished by teams led by Anselm Franz of Junkers , Stanley Hooker of Rolls-Royce and Hermann Oestrich of BMW. At General Electric, Donald F. Warner, Dale Streid, Glen Warren and Alan Howard pioneered, and later Gerhard Neumann would become prominent."

"Engine development always took longer than airframe development, and aircraft designers usually received more public acclaim than engine designers. Yet aircraft designers would be the first to recognize the absolute necessity of having good engines to obtain good performance..."

This article was first published inAviation 100: Celebrating a Century of Manned, Powered Flight.

The Aircraft Engines of World War II | Defense Media Network

And your post don't match the final outcome. You do realize that you're doing nothing but cut and pasting comments to try to support your already debunked argument? A waste of cyberdata.

 

[Zyzygie]

"...Britain had the luxury to evaluate, develop and refine the Meteor, but as the war progressed, the Meteor became less urgent. The Luftwaffe was being drained maintaining a defense on the Russian front and the Hawker Typhoon was proving itself against the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 at low altitude. By the end of the war, the Me 262 and Meteor were leagues apart in safety and reliability. The Meteor's engines could operate 180 hours before overhaul, while the Me 262's Jumo 004engines were required to be overhauled after only 10 hours.1 And more than a hundred Me 262s were lost in air-to-air combat against enemy piston-engine fighters, whereas not a single Meteor was lost to enemy action..."


"...The F.Mk I was used to familiarize the USAAF bomber crews with jet fighter tactics before No. 616 Squadron moved to RAF Colerne to re-equip with F.Mk IIIs in December 1944. Four aircraft were detached to Melsbroek in Belguim. They later moved to Gilze-Rijen where they were joined with the rest of the squadron. Thereafter, they were limited to the air defense role so as not to be shot down in enemy-held territory. (The Brits were wary of the Germans getting hold of their Nimonic technology, which was the key factor in making a viable gas turbine). Four Meteors engaged Focke-Wulf Fw 190s, but were forced to break off after being intercepted by Spitfires and Tempests. On May 2, 1945, a single Meteor forced down a Fieseler Storch and then destroyed it on the ground. By the end of the war, Meteors destroyed 46 German aircraft through ground attack..."

Gloster Meteor

 

[fubar57]

"And more than a hundred Me 262s were lost in air-to-air combat against enemy piston-engine fighters, whereas not a single Meteor was lost to enemy action..."

Kind of hard to be lost against enemy action when you are forbidden to fight enemy aircraft. The only time the Meteor had a chance at another jet was when an AR 234 attacked their airfield in Mar. '45

Gloster Meteor during the Second World War

 

[FLYBOYJ]

And more than a hundred Me 262s were lost in air-to-air combat against enemy piston-engine fighters

And how many aircraft did the -262 shoot down?

whereas not a single Meteor was lost to enemy action.

It's easy not to lose when you don't play!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

"The Me 262 was a more capable aircraft than the wartime versions of the Meteor. Its top speed of 540mph was 50mph faster than even the Derwent IV equipped version of the Meteor III. However by the end of the war the Meteor IV was almost ready, and had the speed to match the German jet. On the plus side the Meteor was much more reliable than the Me 262, which suffered from famously unreliable engines."

Gloster Meteor during the Second World War

"Almost" counts in nuclear wars and hatchet fights...

 

[Shortround6]

"Almost" counts in nuclear wars and hatchet fights...

You forgot horseshoes and handgrenades

However the two quotes in post #625 also explain what was going on if the ready looks past just the parts that support his argument.

One squadron of 12-16 planes operating over allied controlled territory was seldom going to encounter German aircraft.

"No. 616 Squadron moved to RAF Colerne to re-equip with F.Mk IIIs in December 1944. Four aircraft were detached to Melsbroek in Belguim. They later moved to Gilze-Rijen where they were joined with the rest of the squadron. Thereafter, they were limited to the air defense role so as not to be shot down in enemy-held territory. "



The Germans had several hundred 262s deployed (lots of arguments about actual numbers) and from Dec 44/Jan 45 there were few areas of Germany (and increasingly none) that were safe from Allied piston engine fighters.

trying to compare the operational history of the Meteor and the 262 when the numbers involved are so far off and the conditions they operated in were so different is not going to prove anything.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

using the argument that the Meteor was never shot down in combat in WW2 as evidence of its superiority is pretty funny.

It never faced combat with another aircraft.

 

[Dana Bell]

In post-war tests the Army Air Forces discovered the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 and P-84 in most performance capabilities. Washington was displeased and demanded explanations and improvements.

Cheers,



Dana

 

[Zyzygie]

"...Britain had the luxury to evaluate, develop and refine the Meteor, but as the war progressed, the Meteor became less urgent. The Luftwaffe was being drained maintaining a defense on the Russian front and the Hawker Typhoon was proving itself against the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 at low altitude. By the end of the war, the Me 262 and Meteor were leagues apart in safety and reliability. The Meteor's engines could operate 180 hours before overhaul, while the Me 262's Jumo 004engines were required to be overhauled after only 10 hours.1 And more than a hundred Me 262s were lost in air-to-air combat against enemy piston-engine fighters, whereas not a single Meteor was lost to enemy action..."


"...The F.Mk I was used to familiarize the USAAF bomber crews with jet fighter tactics before No. 616 Squadron moved to RAF Colerne to re-equip with F.Mk IIIs in December 1944. Four aircraft were detached to Melsbroek in Belguim. They later moved to Gilze-Rijen where they were joined with the rest of the squadron. Thereafter, they were limited to the air defense role so as not to be shot down in enemy-held territory. (The Brits were wary of the Germans getting hold of their Nimonic technology) Four Meteors engaged Focke-Wulf Fw 190s, but were forced to break off after being intercepted by Spitfires and Tempests. On May 2, 1945, a single Meteor forced down a Fieseler Storch and then destroyed it on the ground. By the end of the war, Meteors destroyed 46 German aircraft through ground attack..."

Gloster Meteor

The fact that the Meteors were looking at dogfighting with Focke-Wulf 190s is interesting.
The Me 262 pilot would be very foolish to deliberately seek to tangle with a Spitfire or Mustang.

 

[GrauGeist]

The Me 262 would be very foolish to deliberately seek to tangle with a Spitfire or Mustang.

There were a number of Allied fighters downed by the Me262...it was not a turn-n-burn fighter, but it could (and did) bring the fight if in the hands of an experienced pilot.

 

[fubar57]

The fact that the Meteors were looking at dogfighting with Focke-Wulf 190s is interesting.
.

A pilot in a Sopwith Camel would look to fight a 190. That's a pilots job

 

[GrauGeist]

A pilot in a Sopwith Camel would look to fight a 190. That's a pilots job

That would be a hellova fight to see.

 

[Zyzygie]

That would be a hellova fight to see.

Did I read somewhere that a Gloster Gladiator biplane actually shot down a Me109 or a Zero monoplane during WWII?

American volunteer in the Chinese air force, John 'Buffalo' Wong, flying a Gloster Gladiator shot down a Mitsubishi A5M in 1938, the direct predecessor of the famous Mitsubishi A6M "Zero".

Sergeant Kristian Fredrik Schye and Kaptein Dag Krohn flying Gladiators for the Norwegian air force shot down two Me Bf 110 heavy fighters. Although reportedly one of them was only damaged by air to air and was finished off by ground fire.
On May 11, 1940 several Belgian Air Force Gladiators became involved in a dogfight with eight to twelve German Me Bf 109s from I/JG1. During this dogfight, Sergent Winand claimed a damaged Me Bf 109 and Sergent Rolin was credited with one Me Bf 109 probable damaged. He didn't see if his victim dived away or crashed because right after this he was shot down and taken prisoner.

For the RAF, Lewin Fredman had one inconclusive (He 111?) damage/kill on May 10th while in a Gladiator. The Malta defense also had many many kills against the Italian air force, but no gladiator kills on 109's or 110's.

Did I read somewhere that a Gloster Gladiator biplane actually shot down an Me 109 or a Zero monoplane during WWII? - Quora

 

[Admiral Beez]

Beating a dead horse -

In terms of performance, the 1944 Gloster Meteor and P-80 were both inferior to the Me 262 despite the -262's engine reliability issues, compare all 3 aircraft (in their 1944 configuration) and this is quite evident. You could speculate all you want what would have been the final outcome if they met in combat. In the post war both the Meteor and the P-80 still had some development before they both became an effective weapon platform.

I've never understood this POV. Sure, a fully functional, reliable and fueled Me 262 would hypothetically beat the Meteor (and P-80), but that's not the accurate comparison. If they met, the Meteor would be facing a Me 262 with dangerously unreliable and limited stress engines, reducing the German's advantages. This is the comparison we need to make.

 

[Shortround6]

I've never understood this POV. Sure, a fully functional, reliable and fueled Me 262 would hypothetically beat the Meteor (and P-80), but that's not the accurate comparison. If they met, the Meteor would be facing a Me 262 with dangerously unreliable and limited stress engines, reducing the German's advantages. This is the comparison we need to make.

The engines on the 262 may have reduced the advantages of the 262, they did not eliminate the advantages.

There is also a difference between short life/time between overhaul and unreliable.
I am also afraid that the 180 hour life of the engines in Meteor may be a bit exaggerated in real life. Most American and British jet engines had a lot of trouble meeting their suggested overhaul times at the end of the war and just after.

 

[Zyzygie]

The engines on the 262 may have reduced the advantages of the 262, they did not eliminate the advantages.

There is also a difference between short life/time between overhaul and unreliable.
I am also afraid that the 180 hour life of the engines in Meteor may be a bit exaggerated in real life. Most American and British jet engines had a lot of trouble meeting their suggested overhaul times at the end of the war and just after.

The time between FAILURE of the Me262s undergoing trials in the US after the War was documented as around 3 hours.

Admittedly this was using maintenance engineers who were not trained on the type, although they had comprehensive maintenance manuals.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Did I read somewhere that a Gloster Gladiator biplane actually shot down a Me109 or a Zero monoplane during WWII?

American volunteer in the Chinese air force, John 'Buffalo' Wong, flying a Gloster Gladiator shot down a Mitsubishi A5M in 1938, the direct predecessor of the famous Mitsubishi A6M "Zero".

Sergeant Kristian Fredrik Schye and Kaptein Dag Krohn flying Gladiators for the Norwegian air force shot down two Me Bf 110 heavy fighters. Although reportedly one of them was only damaged by air to air and was finished off by ground fire.
On May 11, 1940 several Belgian Air Force Gladiators became involved in a dogfight with eight to twelve German Me Bf 109s from I/JG1. During this dogfight, Sergent Winand claimed a damaged Me Bf 109 and Sergent Rolin was credited with one Me Bf 109 probable damaged. He didn't see if his victim dived away or crashed because right after this he was shot down and taken prisoner.

For the RAF, Lewin Fredman had one inconclusive (He 111?) damage/kill on May 10th while in a Gladiator. The Malta defense also had many many kills against the Italian air force, but no gladiator kills on 109's or 110's.

So let me guess you believe the Gladiator was a better fighter?