Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
the 262 was a marvelous achievement but without proper metals to make the turbine blades you had an engine that need replacement every 10 -20 hours that's a poor combat aircraft. though there are two engines i don't think you could land one with only one engine and that off center thrust.
That 10 - 20 hour lifetime was typical for all turbine engines of the period. What made this situation dangerous is you didn't know when the failure would occur and most failures on early turbine engines were catastrophic. Some recips of the period only lasted 50 hours in combat but usually gave signs that they were failing (low manifold pressures, not making RPM at certain power settings, backfiring when reducing power, etc.). Additionally the operators set manditory time for overhauls.the 262 was a marvelous achievement but without proper metals to make the turbine blades you had an engine that need replacement every 10 -20 hours that's a poor combat aircraft. though there are two engines i don't think you could land one with only one engine and that off center thrust.
Limited production vehicles designed for breaking through tougher then normal defenses. Tiger tanks served the same purpose as the U.S. M4A3E3 "Jumbo" and Soviet KV series, which were also produced in small numbers relative to overall tank production.the tiger I was unsuited to rail travel and most bridges yet the germans went even more massive with the tiger II
That 10 - 20 hour lifetime was typical for all turbine engines of the period.
The '262 was flyable with a single engine, but was very unstable at speeds under 190mph, and this would make for an extremely dangerous carrier landing attempt....i guessed that the 262 could fly with one engine, just like the p-38s but lots of planes were lost when one engine suddenly failed and the pilot did not react quickly enough...
~250. Sherman Jumbo Assault Tank.tiger I tank was limited production only because it took 350,000 man hours to assemble one and cost 250,000 reichmarks per tank. total production was a bit over 1400 to the shermans 40,000 and something like 50,000 T-34s.
Initially I believe the Welland was given a guesstimate of 20 hours and that was later raised. The I-40 and later J-33 were also around 20 hours and later raised, however....But thats not right is it, FBJ? According to the website enginehistory.org (quoted for convenience) "The Rolls-Royce Welland entered service with the RAF Meteor Mk.1 jet fighters EE211-229 and Meteor Mk.3/EE230-244. The first of these Meteors was delivered to No.616 Squadron RAF in May 1944, equipped with 1,600 lb thrust engines rated at180-hours between overhauls".
The time that occurred most was during take off and eventually pilots were trained to quickly recognize an engine out and respond accordingly. In some situations it would be easier to deal with in the Me 262 as you didn't have to feather or deal with torque.i guessed that the 262 could fly with one engine, just like the p-38s but lots of planes were lost when one engine suddenly failed and the pilot did not react quickly enough.
Initially I believe the Welland was given a guesstimate of 20 hours and that was later raised. The I-40 and later J-33 were also around 20 hours and later raised, however....
"Rated" I challenge you to find out how long they really lasted on the average.....
Well, I'll search through my resources if you will too, to support the 20ish hours figure of course