Interceptor vs Escort.

syscom3 said:

Were all amatures. Me, you and everyone.

Unless you have a bona fide degree from a reputable college in aviation history (or in some cases, one of the many fields in aerospace),, or have actually put stick time in flying the aircraft you talk about, I dont think you could be considered an expert.

Click to expand...

Experts are not trained in universities. Schools can only provide the tools required, they cannot make you a master craftsman. That comes as a result of hard work alone. You do not need a degree to become an expert. For example, Warren Bodie was not trained as a historian. He never worked for Republic Aviation. Yet, he is considered to be the foremost expert on the P-47 Thunderbolt. He attained this level of expertise through thousands of hours of research and interviews. In simple terms, through good old-fashioned hard work.

Within the aviation writers community, you will find only a handful of trained historians who are also successful writers. The bulk of this fraternity are ordinary people with an abiding love for aviation. Some are experienced pilots. Others are not. There's no prerequisites for the title of expert beyond the accumulation of vast knowledge. Personally, I prefer the company of the amateurs as they have a genuine passion and none of the attitude frequently displayed by the professionals. Indeed, I'd rather listen to the flawed account of a veteran fighter pilot than the dry recitation of the professional historian. One is real, with all the bumps and warts of reality. The other is often cold and detached from the experience, relying on facts generated by those who performed the deeds themselves. This does not mean that you don't separate the wheat from the chaff. It does mean that it adds color to an otherwise dull image.

We all know the old maxim that "those that can, do. Those that can't, teach (and those that can't teach, teach gym)".

So, don't be so certain that amateurs can't measure up to the professionals. They can, and often do. Moreover, they usually wear their passion on their sleeve, something that irritates the pros no end. But, I usually prefer the passion to the dull and analytical.

My regards,

NAVAIR

NAVAIR, didnt the swept back wings of the ME262 hurt its low speed and mid speed handling?

Also, I remember reading several years back that Germany was never going to solve the turbine reliability problems because it didnt have access to the metals they needed for the hot core section of the engine.

Plus, they were overstretched in engineering for that technology, as the V2 rocket program was also using up the engineers and scientists working on turbines.

One final comment/question: Isnt 45,000 ft the altitude where pressure suits should be worn? Something about the air pressure is so low, your lungs dont work properly, even if on a forced oxygen supply. Id hate to be pilot in any fighter in a zoom climb up there and pass through that altitude.....

Yes that was the main problem with the Me-262 engines and that would not have been solved unless the Gemans could get better raw materials, which they were not going to.

syscom3 said:

NAVAIR, didnt the swept back wings of the ME262 hurt its low speed and mid speed handling?

Also, I remember reading several years back that Germany was never going to solve the turbine reliability problems because it didnt have access to the metals they needed for the hot core section of the engine.

Plus, they were overstretched in engineering for that technology, as the V2 rocket program was also using up the engineers and scientists working on turbines.

One final comment/question: Isnt 45,000 ft the altitude where pressure suits should be worn? Something about the air pressure is so low, your lungs dont work properly, even if on a forced oxygen supply. Id hate to be pilot in any fighter in a zoom climb up there and pass through that altitude.....

Click to expand...

I would defer the first question to someone with greater knowledge of the 262. My understanding is that the wing sweep was not primarily designed in to forestall the onset of compressibility, but to balance lift (as seen in the C-47).

The typical demand O2 regulators of the era were insufficient at altitudes above 40,000 feet and hypoxia was almost assured should the aircraft remain that high for a prolonged period of time. This is why some aircraft were engineered with pressurized cabins or cockpits.

Having taken numerous altitude chamber rides, I am very familiar with the effects of hypoxia. Frankly, some people would conclude I am stupid enough at sea level...

My regards,

NAVAIR

My regards,

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

Well I have almost 1300 hours of crew time and I will tell you that you it still will never be realistic eneogh to compare to real flying. I dont care how many games some one plays. You do not get the feeling of the seat going up your butt crack in tight maneuvers, you dont feel the blood rushing to your head or to your feet. You dont feel the cold or the heat. You dont feel the vibrations or actually hear and feel the bullets hitting your aircraft. Having experienced all of that in my almost 1300 hours and climbing I can say that I dont find them realistic at all.

Click to expand...

I certainly appreciate your point, having had the experience of 7g turns that left me feeling like a wet dish rag. However, for old farts like me, the closest I can come to that experience now is via the flight sim.

However, you can add a great deal of reality on your own..

First, there is some preparation required. Drink at least 2 quarts of water 30 minutes prior to playing. Second, take an ice-cold shower in your skivies and do not dry off. Direct your air conditioner at your chair and turn it on full cold (or if in winter, open all the doors and windows). Place your lawn mower outside of the nearest window, start it and open the throttle fully. Next, get Larry's fat girlfriend over and when pulling G, have her sit on your lap. Finally, write a command that reformats your hard drive in the event you get shot down or otherwise crash. Begin playing..

So, now your're so cold your lips are turning blue. You have to pee like Seabiscuit, and every time you pull G your entire body screams out in agony. The constant engine noise has given you a headache and numbs your senses. Finally, you are scared half to death that any mistake will have expensive and troubling results.

That's about as close as one can hope to get sitting in your living room.

My regards,

NAVAIR

You must reeeeeeeeeally take your flight sims seriously.

First, there is some preparation required. Drink at least 2 quarts of water 30 minutes prior to playing. Second, take an ice-cold shower in your skivies and do not dry off. Direct your air conditioner at your chair and turn it on full cold (or if in winter, open all the doors and windows). Place your lawn mower outside of the nearest window, start it and open the throttle fully. Next, get Larry's fat girlfriend over and when pulling G, have her sit on your lap.

Click to expand...

However I may come across to u, THAT was some funny shit.... I have a friend named Larry who is dating a fat chick named Roxanne....

I'm originally from Hauppauge BTW, right off of 347........

Navair:

Yes I did "fly" in the IL-2 sim for some months. Not a PC game fan though.(differential equations, sea surfing and thongs on the beach are far more appealling)

I am afraid I´m a fast learner for after a few mere preliminary sessions I creamed absolutely all my foes in my Butcher Bird. La 5FNs made lovely pyrotechnics. Still, my personal "experience" as a sim "pilot" plays no role at all in forging my opinions on WWII airwarfare.


Back to the topic: I do not think you made the job in attempting to establish any clear and sound argument to differentiate a prototype from a (combat) operational plane.

The "protoype" Me 262 as Mr. Muller and many others depict it was in action, scrambling, intercepting and shooting down enemy planes. Yep, had its flaws, but was well ahead anything fielded by the winners.

Gloster Meteor? P-80? No. As I read on other forums, those were mere "hangar queens".

We are not talking about a number of victories you´d count just using your fingers Navair.

Again, Kurt Welter came real close to surpass the top USAAF ace in the ETO, not to mention he doubled or tripled the total scores of the great majority of all USAAF aces in Europe. Does that suggest anything? I do not care to what kind of superior breed pilot Welter did belong, had his plane been such a piece of unreliable crap Welter would have ended his days in quite another fashion.

So, how are we going to call all this Mr. Navair?

Again: you are predicting an undisputed supremacy of planes that did not reach operational service, but devote immense efforts to defame and put down planes which were combat proven.

It is useless to repeat it came too late, in little numbers; no use in mentioning what the weak points of the jet were, the allies had no jets flying not because "they did not need them" as I´ve heard some saying. Of course they needed jets. There were no allied jets for the simple reason the Germans were ahead of them in that department.


I will argue your comment the Fw 190 A was outclassed by 1945. You do not think the USAAF fighter menu in the ETO included only perfect and flawless machines do you?

Got to end this posting. I have issues with very long postings -hate PC reading-. Thinking of equal consideration toward my peers is that I want to produce the briefest possible postings.

Les: 8th math degree? Come on! Join me in the differential equation life, I can assure you you will love DE!! 8)

I was joking... I have a college education........

Udet said:

Gloster Meteor? P-80? No. As I read on other forums, those were mere "hangar queens".

Click to expand...

Having at least flown a T-33, I think the P-80 would of been a worthy opponent to the 262 in as much the Stormbird would of been overwhelmed like the -109s and -190s were by the P-51. Maybe not as fast and not as hard hitting as the -262, the P-80 was much more reliable and built a hell of a lot better in my book, having the opportunity to see both of them up close and personal.....

Would of, could of, should of - this has been discussed before and was in another thread....

NAVAIR said:

First, there is some preparation required. Drink at least 2 quarts of water 30 minutes prior to playing. Second, take an ice-cold shower in your skivies and do not dry off. Direct your air conditioner at your chair and turn it on full cold (or if in winter, open all the doors and windows). Place your lawn mower outside of the nearest window, start it and open the throttle fully. Next, get Larry's fat girlfriend over and when pulling G, have her sit on your lap. Finally, write a command that reformats your hard drive in the event you get shot down or otherwise crash. Begin playing..

So, now your're so cold your lips are turning blue. You have to pee like Seabiscuit, and every time you pull G your entire body screams out in agony. The constant engine noise has given you a headache and numbs your senses. Finally, you are scared half to death that any mistake will have expensive and troubling results.

Click to expand...

Very funny, I like that.

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

NAVAIR said:

First, there is some preparation required. Drink at least 2 quarts of water 30 minutes prior to playing. Second, take an ice-cold shower in your skivies and do not dry off. Direct your air conditioner at your chair and turn it on full cold (or if in winter, open all the doors and windows). Place your lawn mower outside of the nearest window, start it and open the throttle fully. Next, get Larry's fat girlfriend over and when pulling G, have her sit on your lap. Finally, write a command that reformats your hard drive in the event you get shot down or otherwise crash. Begin playing..

So, now your're so cold your lips are turning blue. You have to pee like Seabiscuit, and every time you pull G your entire body screams out in agony. The constant engine noise has given you a headache and numbs your senses. Finally, you are scared half to death that any mistake will have expensive and troubling results.

Click to expand...

Very funny, I like that.

Click to expand...

PERFECT!!!!

Next time I am pulling G's and it is -10 degrees here in Germany I will think of this.

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

Next time I am pulling G's and it is -10 degrees here in Germany I will think of this.

Click to expand...

Hey Adler, in your case shouldn't sometimes shrouds of shrapnel and small arms fire be flying by? Maybe a small fire could be stared in the corner of the room and then someone throws a handful of .22 rounds into it!

That would be a way to keep warm also!

The Bf 109 K-4 did, indeed, go 452mph. However, it was only a trickle at the end, and since the basic design wasn't changed, the ailerons were almost immovable at those speeds, and it still didn't have rudder trim.

In short, at a specific altitude, using water-methanol injection, the Bf 1098K-4 could flee in a relatively straight line at 452 mph for a short time.

It could NEVER fight at such a speed. The airframe simply wasn't designed for those speeds.

The Bf 109 was basically a 350 - 375 mph aircraft with a good angle of climb at low airspeeds, and a decent punch via a hub-mounted cannon. It was devently maneuverable, but not as maneuverable as the Spitfire (which had a similar short range) and not as maneuverable as the Mustang.

At normal altitudes and in normal situations, the Mustang was a better fighter. Were there exceptions? Sure. Erich Hartmann could probably down anythinh flying an armed ultralight.

The run-of-the-mill Luftwaffe pilot of 1945, flying a Bf 109K-43, wasn't an expert and was lucky to escape the numerous Mustangs roving around in German airspace in packs.

The Bf 109K-4 was a nice example of what can be done when you strip away all the excess weight from an airframe that has grown in weight beyond the original design intentions.

It is questionable that K-4 ever did 452mph other than in testing. Fuel in April 1945 was in short supply and the K-4 @ 1.98ata required C3+MW50 to get the 2000hp to reach 452mph. This was ~10mph faster than the 1.80ata boosted K-4. C3 was required by all BMW801 engined a/c like the 190A.

Only 4 Gruppen had authorization to convert to 1.98ata and of the 140 K-4 available only 79 were operational (Apr9 1945 OoB). Did they ever complete the converssion? Never came across any documantaion that they did.

Some sources state that the 190K4 WAS flown at 1.98 ata from approximately mid-March 1945 until the German surrender.


OKL, Lw.-Führüngstab, Nr. 937/45 gKdos.(op) 20.03.45

No. Unit Present type Convert to Notes
1. III./ JG 1 Bf 109 G-10 He 162 (April/May) -
2. II. / JG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
3. III. / JG 3 Bf 109 K-4 no change -
4. III. / JG 4 Bf 109 K-4 no change -
5. IV. / JG 4 Bf 109 K-4 K-4 -
6. III. / JG 5 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
7. IV. / JG 5 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
8. III. / JG 6 Bf 109 G-14/AS K-4 when deliveries permit -
9. II. / JG 11 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
10. I. / JG 27 Bf 109 K-4 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
11. II. / JG 27 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
12. III. / JG 27 Bf 109 G-10 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
13. I. / JG 51 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
14. III. / JG 51 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
15. IV. / JG 51 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
16. II. / JG 52 Bf 109 G-14/U4 K-4 when deliveries permit -
17. III. / JG 52 Bf 109 G-14 K-4 when deliveries permit -
18. II. / JG 53 Bf 109 K-4 no change -
19. III. / JG 53 Bf 109 K-4 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
20. IV. / JG 53 Bf 109 K-4 no change boost increase to 1.98 ata
21. I. / JG 77 Bf 109 G-14/U4 K-4 when deliveries permit -
22. II. / JG 77 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
23. III. / JG 77 Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
24. III. / JG 300 Bf 109 G-10/R6 via K-4 to Me 262 planned, deadline
25. IV. / JG 300 Bf 109 G-10/R6 via K-4 to Me 262 -
26. I. / KG(J) 6 Bf 109 G-10/R6 K-4/R6 when deliveries permit -
27. II. / KG(J) 6 Bf 109 K-4 K-4/R6 when deliveries permit -
30. I. / KG(J) 27 Bf 109 G-10/R6 K-4/R6 when deliveries permit -
31. I. / KG(J) 55 Bf 109 G-10/R6 - -
32. II. / KG(J) 55 Bf 109 K-4 - to industrial defense
33. Ist Italian FG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
34. IInd Italian FG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -
35. IIIrd Italian FG Bf 109 G-10 K-4 when deliveries permit -

FROM
Fritz X. Kober - Jakob Maria Mathmann : The Messerschmitt Bf 109 Vol.2. Schiffer Publishing, 1996. English edition.

Overview of unit strenghts for the units that used 1,98ata. As per 9th April 1945.
Source : Alfred Price : The Last year of the Luftwaffe

Unit - On hand - Servicable

I./JG 27 - 29 - 13
III./JG 27 - 19 - 15
III./JG 53 - 40 - 24
IV./JG 53 - 54 - 27
---------------------
Total : 142 on hand, out of which 79 is servicable at the given date


So it seems that there were a probable 140 or so K4s that flew with C3 fuel and the 1.98 ata rating, at least for the last month or two of the war.

Im just curious, but if the FW190 and Ta152 were the superior aircraft for bomber intercepts, why did the Luftwaffe ever bother with the -109K4 so late in the war?

syscom. the K-4 followed along the lines of the GEschwader gruppen that already had the Bf 109G on hands for their units duration previously.........dang I'm tired as it is about 10 after 4am where i am. the K-4 along with the G-10 variant was to take on the US and RAF escorts while the heavier Fw 190A's the bombers. Case in point is III. and IV./JG 4 flying Höhenschutze for the Fw 190A-8/R8's if II.Sturm/JG 4.

if I may add to the excellent geschwader listings the books on the K by JaPo

also the follwing German info :

Bf 109K-4 Bedienungsvorschrift-Fl. L. Dv.T.2109K-4, Teil 1 und 2, leden 1945

Me 109K-4, Beladevorschrift, Mtt-AG Augsburg, 1944

the information packets are sitting on a friends counter right now as I type // see ya all in a couple of days *I hope* ? this running around the world is old news....