Greatest aviation myth this site “de-bunked”.

[fastmongrel]

If a Mossie saw a 262 coming in time and had altitude it would be a lucky 262 that got close before it ran short of fuel. The Mossies best tactic was to run hard in a shallow dive.

 

[Zipper730]

I'm just wondering about a 262 vs Mosquito encounter at high altitude. Just how much thrust did the 262 have up there?

Now that's actually a good observation. Service ceiling is set by lift and by power. The 262 actually probably had enough lift to fly above 37000 feet, but the engines seemed to run into cooling trouble up there.

 

[GrauGeist]

Now that's actually a good observation. Service ceiling is set by lift and by power. The 262 actually probably had enough lift to fly above 37000 feet, but the engines seemed to run into cooling trouble up there.

The Jumo004s did fine at higher altitudes and it was actually faster the higher it flew.
At 30,000 feet, it was rated at 550mph, with a service ceiling of 37,500 feet and a RoC of 3,900 f/m, a Mossie would be in trouble unless they knew to out-maneuver it until the 262 had to break off due to bingo fuel.

The 262 had roughly 90 minutes of fuel radius but that drops to 30 minutes if in a combat situation.

Also, unless your aircraft can exceed .86 mach, do NOT try and out-dive it...

 

[Koopernic]

You might be thinking of the Gloster Meteor. That had airbrakes from the beginning iirc.

Only Meteor III had air brakes. Meteor I did not. The Me 262 could have been fitted with something, split flap type similar to Me 410 maybe.

 

[Ascent]

I have mentioned this before but I heard a mosquito pilot say in an interview that if they knew a 262 nightfighter was hunting them they would head for the deck as they knew the jet fuel burn was much higher causing them to break off much earlier. Would that be a viable tactical option during daylight?

 

[GrauGeist]

I have mentioned this before but I heard a mosquito pilot say in an interview that if they knew a 262 nightfighter was hunting them they would head for the deck as they knew the jet fuel burn was much higher causing them to break off much earlier. Would that be a viable tactical option during daylight?

Back in '44, one of the first Allied encounters with a Me262, was a PRU Mossie.
They spotted an enemy aircraft closing on them (at 30,000 feet) and they opened the throttle, getting up to 400mph and the enemy was still closing. The enemy A/C was the unknown Me262, so they had no way of knowing what they were up against and when it opened fire, landing hits, they took violent evasive maneuvers.
One tactic they did, was a descending spiral which caused the Me262 to bleed off speed (the Mossie's saving grace) and then it would close again and they continued every trick in the book to shake it and this went on for nearly 15 minutes and then suddenly, the Me262 broke off.

So I would surmise that the Mosquito's pilot, by an astounding stroke of luck, found the 262's shortcomings in the first encounter: force the Me262 to slow down and run it out of fuel.

 

[Koopernic]

Back in '44, one of the first Allied encounters with a Me262, was a PRU Mossie.
They spotted an enemy aircraft closing on them (at 30,000 feet) and they opened the throttle, getting up to 400mph and the enemy was still closing. The enemy A/C was the unknown Me262, so they had no way of knowing what they were up against and when it opened fire, landing hits, they took violent evasive maneuvers.
One tactic they did, was a descending spiral which caused the Me262 to bleed off speed (the Mossie's saving grace) and then it would close again and they continued every trick in the book to shake it and this went on for nearly 15 minutes and then suddenly, the Me262 broke off.

So I would surmise that the Mosquito's pilot, by an astounding stroke of luck, found the 262's shortcomings in the first encounter: force the Me262 to slow down and run it out of fuel.

Bits fell of the mossie either from a hit or the intense manoeuvring and it disappeared into the clouds. That's why the engagement was broken of.

The mossie survives still in the RAF museum.
Under the RADAR: Mosquito versus Me 262 - YouTube

The Me 262 carried a huge amount of fuel, 650 miles worth, so it was short ranged only compared to a P-51

 

[Ascent]

The Me 262 carried a huge amount of fuel, 650 miles worth, so it was short ranged only compared to a P-51[/QUOTE]

650 miles at what speed and what altitude?

 

[nuuumannn]

The mossie survives still in the RAF museum.

Not the one the guy talks about in the clip. The RAF Museum only has two Mosquitoes and none of those saw action during the war. The aircraft in the background of the guy talking is a TT.35 and never saw combat, being delivered straight to storage in April 1945 as a B.35 but was later converted to a target tug. It wears the markings of the aircraft that Guy Gibson was killed in during a sortie in September 1944.

TA639

Here's the '262 from the clip, both across from each other at RAFM Cosford.

Me 262

 

[GrauGeist]

Bits fell of the mossie either from a hit or the intense manoeuvring and it disappeared into the clouds. That's why the engagement was broken of.

The mossie survives still in the RAF museum.
Under the RADAR: Mosquito versus Me 262 - YouTube

The Me 262 carried a huge amount of fuel, 650 miles worth, so it was short ranged only compared to a P-51

90 minutes cruise or 30 minutes of combat - having two turbojets consumed the 475 gallons of fuel quickly if it had to go into combat.
Hardly a comparison to any inline type...

 

[Milosh]

A couple of Mossie/Me262 encounters, German Jet Encounters (mossie.org)

25 July 1944, a PRXVI Mosquito from No. 544 Squadron RAF was intercepted in the Munich area and attacked by Leutnant Alfred Schreiber, flying an Me 262 A-1a. The German fighter made six passes at the Mosquito MM 273, crewed by F/L A.E. Wall and F/O A.S. Lobban, but they managed to escape into cloud after violent evasive manoeuvers, making an emergency landing at Fermo airfield in Italy. British airmen's first encounter with a jet aircraft – 26 July 1944 | Abroad in the Yard Yes I know the dates are different.

 

[SaparotRob]

I have mentioned this before but I heard a mosquito pilot say in an interview that if they knew a 262 nightfighter was hunting them they would head for the deck as they knew the jet fuel burn was much higher causing them to break off much earlier. Would that be a viable tactical option during daylight?

I've read the same thing somewhere about diving down low and get the 262 to burn up fuel. I wondered how the Allied pilots would know this.
After all, the initial encounters must have been a bit of a shock.

 

[Koopernic]

The Me 262 carried a huge amount of fuel, 650 miles worth, so it was short ranged only compared to a P-51

650 miles at what speed and what altitude?[/QUOTE]

The Me 262 had 2000L of internal fuel. Weight of this fuel is just under 1600kg or 3500lbs. (My rough conversions)

Specific fuel consumption of the engines is 1.39kg fuel per kg of thrust per hour. So with 2 x 900kg = 1800kg thrust the fuel burn would be 2520 kg fuel and hour which would last 0.63 of an hour, about 38 minutes at full thrust at sea level. This produced a speed of 520mph or so.

However at 20000 ft fuel burn would almost halve due to thinner air and even less at 10000m. Of course no one fly's WEP continuous rich in a piston fighter.

Me 262 pilots were under strict orders never to fly below 440mph. This is 80% speed and would need 64% thrust which would be about 45% thrust at about 25000ft.

So yes jets like to fly high.

 

[buffnut453]

I've read the same thing somewhere about diving down low and get the 262 to burn up fuel. I wondered how the Allied pilots would know this.
After all, the initial encounters must have been a bit of a shock.

Diving while manoeuvering in 3 dimensions was an accepted evasive technique during WW2, as per the famed Lancaster "corkscrew". I suspect the Mossie crew in this initial engagement simply tried what had worked before (diving to increase own speed, and manoeuvering to present a harder engagement target) and, luckily for them, it worked.

 

[SaparotRob]

I wonder how certain other aircraft may have performed doing that.
Not changing the timeline nor tactics. Heavy bombers flying daylight missions in tight formations suddenly doing the Lancaster corkscrew is ridiculous. But, as individual airplanes, doing these maneuvers, was the B-17 a joy to fly? Are their anecdotes about Liberators, Halifaxes, and maybe Sunderlands?

 

[pbehn]

I wonder how certain other aircraft may have performed doing that.
Not changing the timeline nor tactics. Heavy bombers flying daylight missions in tight formations suddenly doing the Lancaster corkscrew is ridiculous. But, as individual airplanes, doing these maneuvers, was the B-17 a joy to fly? Are their anecdotes about Liberators, Halifaxes, and maybe Sunderlands?

The Sunderland was much more agile and heavily armed than it looked, quite a few stories about them getting the better of Ju 88s. The Stirling was too. One Lancaster crew developed their own method of dealing with attacks. When the tail gunner warned the pilot a night fighter was approaching on a given signal the pilot throttled back, this gave the tail gunner a shot at the fighter as it overshot, the tail gunner opening fire was the signal to the pilot to open the throttles full and dive into a "corkscrew", they claimed 3 x Bf110s destroyed and a Bf109 damaged in a single action over France.

 

[Zippythehog]

I can't read anymore-everything I know is wrong-especially the "Greg" thing.

 

[fastmongrel]

I can't read anymore-everything I know is wrong-especially the "Greg" thing.

I heard a scientist (biologist I think) on a radio programme say that half of what he was taught at university 20 years ago is now wrong. He says by the time he retires he will have seen virtually everything he was taught be superceded.

 

[SaparotRob]

I showed them all. I never learned anything!

 

[Greyman]

... as individual airplanes, doing these maneuvers, was the B-17 a joy to fly?

I'm no B-17 expert but I've never heard of its manoeuvring capabilities described with superlatives -- though never noting any real downsides either. The A&AEE noted that the Fortress I (B-17C) had very nice handling, and though this was lost somewhat in the later models it never was a real drawback.

The B-17's strong suit always appears to be it's steadiness. If you wanted to fly in tight formations and bomb accurately -- the Fort was your girl.