Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Independent of your 'intention', you are quite accomplished at insults. Insulting thoughts transcribed on paper or written in a forum become public expressions rather than private thoughts?
If you wish to differ in opinion, you will find many folks here that will debate facts to support their position - and do so Very well. If you see a comment you don't like, find facts from reliable sources to use for your thesis. Opinions are less valuable unless supported by a foundation of referencable fact.
.It s out of question that simply illustrates the propable challenges that the US GROUND CREW faced having to deal with Foreign equipment? Or the fact that the us ground crews had 0 experience with jet aircraft? You suggest that because us crews were unable to maintain correctly the german aircraft that represents also the service history of the aircraft in luftwaffe service. It s unacceptable to you that the german mechanics knew the me 262 a bit better than the American mechanics?
It s well known that even captured Fw190 s were not correctly serviced while in us captivity
Also notice about 3/4 into the film, the Me262 in a flat spin, taking hits?Why did the last piece of the film about P-51s shooting down Me 262s include some gun camera footage of the destruction of a V-1? TV documentary producers forever show film out of time or context like this and it really grinds my gears
Considering how few Me 262s saw active service a lot were indeed shot down by their allied, piston engine, adversaries. They were far from invincible.
Cheers
Steve
"What I had to learn, was that unlike in the Me 109, I could not easily reduce power or flaps to tighten a turn, getting in behind an enemy fighter. It would not work; you could flame out the engines, or go into an unrecoverable stall, usually a flat spin. Bleeding off airspeed by pulling up into the enemy was also not as effective due to the higher speeds, but it would work. The great danger was in diving into the attack.You could rapidly build up so much airspeed the control surfaces would freeze, and bailing out would not be possible due to the external forces.
We also learned that dogfighting against these fighters sheer suicide; hit and run, close in fast, fire and get away, and the return for another pass is possible was the only feasible way to successfully engage, especially if the enemy fighters were in large numbers.
By late 1944 through the following year, it was pretty much all we had; swarms of American fighters hitting every corner of Europe. I would say that the best attack method was the ambush, but if you could dive in, close fast, sight in and fire a one to two second burst accurately, your target went down, often brilliantly."
Also consider that you could only fly the Me 262 at 100% for 5 minutes at takeoff (8,700 +/- 200 RPM) and then for 10 minutes for "war emergency." After that the high power setting was 90% (8,400 RPM).
Is there any fighter which can go with max power continuous?
cimmex
Not the case with Col. Watson.It was not that easy. Not all germans co operated. Eric Brown also says that several of the german mechanics were not that happy to work with him. To the point that one of them sabotaged the engine of a Ar234. It exploded while Brown was ready for take off .The guilty mechanic was sent to a prisoner camp.
Again, that was Brown the the British experience with these aircraft. the biggest issue was spare parts as was previously mentioned.He also Reports lack of manuals, documents, engines history booklets. Several of his flights were conducted without having the Official german manual
He Reports that had severe maintance problems with the 335.
Finally he confess that did not test the latest german aircraft to their full capabilities since they had not MW50 or gm1 in england.
Finally ,very often the captured german aircraft showed lower performance in us, British and soviet captivity than in german tests . Doesn t it means somethink?
PS By the way Flyboy J, is not that easy to install PROPERLY a metric screw using an anglosaxon tool...
In case of the Me262 I think it was not easy for American mechanics. They had never worked at an axial jet engine before.
cimmex
Tell me - what part of performing maintenance you think would be harder?In case of the Me262 I think it was not easy for American mechanics. They had never worked at an axial jet engine before.
cimmex
Very few captured Axis aircraft were "factory fresh" and in some cases, war weary. It will be difficult to get exacting results from such aircraft.Finally ,very often the captured german aircraft showed lower performance in us, British and soviet captivity than in german tests . Doesn t it means somethink?
I had to laugh a little at this comment...PS By the way Flyboy J, is not that easy to install PROPERLY a metric screw using an anglosaxon tool...
The Americans had been working on domestic turbojet engines: General Electric J31 and the Allison J33In case of the Me262 I think it was not easy for American mechanics. They had never worked at an axial jet engine before.
cimmex
Assumptions: Me-262 has a higher "rate" of turn with a larger "turn circle" than a Mustang.
Biff - this assumption isn't true. The Me 262 has a higher Velocity than the Mustang in a sustained turn, say at 4G, but the slower Mustang has so much smaller turn Radius that it will complete a 360 turn much faster, and therefore keep the 262 in the pipper at will. Also the 51 pilots were 100% using Berger type G suits.
There are two types of turns (for the most part) when talking dogfighting (Basic Fighter Maneuvers or BFM in todays speak). They are energy sustaining or depleting (max performance usually up against airframe / pilot limits). The depleting is what you do to give an offender / attacker the most problem you can or get into a position to employ, and the sustained turn is when you are using patience over time to defeat your opponent.
Agreed - but because the G limits on the pilot are more likely to dictate the ability to sustain the turn, the Mustang (or Spit or Tempest or Jug) pilot is able to turn at a higher G than the 262 pilot. Someone can step in and tell me that the 262 pilots wore G suits and that would kill my argument here.
The way to visualize this is from the God's eye view of two circles, one 20% bigger than the other. The Me-262 would be on the larger, the Mustang on the smaller. When sustaining you are holding a fairly constant airspeed while descending (most likely). If the Me262 is at it's optimum sustained airspeed would go around it's larger circle faster than the Mustang at it's optimum sustained speed.
If you put both aircraft in sustained 3G turn at SL (one with G suit and one without), then at 3G and a W/L of 60 at GW =14000, and CLmax of 1.6 (w/o compressor stall), the Me 262 Velocity around the circle is about 210mph or 308fps. The Mustang (slowest rate of turn compared to Spit and Tempest) at 3G with a WL of 41 at GW=9600 and a CLmax of 1.4 is moving at 273fps = 186mph and get around the 771 ft radius circle in 13% LESS time than the 262 around its 982 ft radius circle..
At 6.6G the Me 262 V= 297mph and the P-51 is at 263mph but the turn Rate for the same diameter circles as at 3G is about 13%less for the 262 than for the P-51 at 6.6G - but the P-51 has a.) reached max Limit load for 9600 pounds GW whereas the 262 still has some room - if the pilot and a/c can handle it... The 51 will rapidly lose energy and airspeed faster than the 262. Somewhwere between 4g and 7g a 262 pilot w/o G suit will have a problem but the 51 will run out of sustained energy in that range. .
There are both plus's and minus's to this. We use both to this day. The way it's used from the Me-262 perspective would be to go to lag on a Mustang while holding at optimum airspeed and wait until the Mustang had depleted it's hard turn portion, transitioned to it's sustained airspeed, then misalign turn circles (make the God's eye view look like two circles from the Olympics icon) which allows you to come back inside the smaller turn circle and employ.
The 51's ability to sustain the turn at a constant airspeed and altitude and smaller radius is limited to about 180-200 mph even though its Corner Velocity is about 273-276mph at 6.6G. I honestly don't know what the 262 capability is given the issues with the engines and AoA sustenance in a higher G turn. With engines of today at 2000 pounds each thrust is should be able to get up to 4G perhaps with no compressor stall issues of the Jumo and it will match the turn RATE of the 51 at 3G while traveling faster along the 984x2x3.14ft diameter circle. Any sustained turn above 4G will be advantage Me 262 while the 51 is trucking at 3G
If I were to be employing a Me262, after having flown Me-109s or Fw-190s I would do hit and run, exactly as stated above. That would be only if I had the perfect bounce (tap in todays speak), and then would move on. As for bouncing bombers I would find the speed which allowed me to shoot effectively AND minimized my time in .50 cal hell zone. My motors wouldn't allow me to do big throttle swings due to fear of flameout or engine damage.
The ones that lived past May 1945 mostly chose this approach.
Another advantage the Me-262 would have is the ability to leave (as long as he didn't anchor or start the fight too slow). While it's dive Mach is similar to the previously mentioned piston fighters, it also could be attained at a much shallower angle than the piston guys. You just have to make the decision to leave BEFORE it's too late.
Agreed - and it did have perhaps .02-.04M advantage over the 51/47 but perhaps zero edge vs Spit.
It is my opinion that if you were in a Me262 and anchored with a piston fighter you would much more often than not lose.
Another case of don't get target fixated - and become a target of the unseen foe. Nothing a 262 does to stay in a maneuvering fight against a piston engine fighter in 1945 can be a good thing. I would suspect that using speed advantage to go vertical is the best of all options.
I flew F15s for many years, and fought F16s many, many times. They turn better than I did/do which required me to adjust the way I fought in order to be successful. Its a matter of knowing his and your strengths weakness's and bringing your strengths to bear on his weakness, all the while staying away from his strengths. Also realize that the Eagle and Viper don't have AOA restrictions for airflow into the engines which I suspect that the Me262 did. The Eagle has a vari ramp which controls the airflow and also provide lift.
Cheers,
Biff
Very few captured Axis aircraft were "factory fresh" and in some cases, war weary. It will be difficult to get exacting results from such aircraft.
The Allied test pilots also had to famiarize themselves with the idiocyncracies of the Axis aircraft just as much as Axis pilots had to take some time to learn the nuances of captured Allied aircraft.
I had to laugh a little at this comment...
This may come as a total surprise, but mechanics know the difference between a 13mm bolthead and a 1/2" bolthead. Metric tools weren't that difficult to obtain or use back then.
I had no difficulties working on my 1966 VW bug with a Type I 1.3L engine or my 1979 BMW 320i (E21) with a 2.0L E21 engine.
lol...yep, classic one is the M8-1.0 versus 5/16-18 bolt...which a 1/2" or 13mm wrench will fit the M8 nicely. Other SAE wrenches that fit metric boltheads are 3/8" (10mm), 9/16" (14mm) and so on...A few of them actually do interchange, 7/16 and 11mm works pretty good. And for those with Whitworth tools there are a few more happy coincidences.
You are much more likely to get into problems with thread diameters and pitches than the size of the bolt heads. 6 point sockets can solve a few points too.
I mean it's not like metric threads are left hand or something else really weird.
Tell me - what part of performing maintenance you think would be harder?
variable nozzle, Riedel- Starter, to name only two things the J31 J33 did not have…