Me 262 losses due to engine problems? (1 Viewer)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

The following quote is from:

Canberra Boys
Fascinating Accounts from the Operators of an English Electric Classic

Andrew Brookes
Grub Street 2017

CHAPTER 23
LIFE IN THE OLD DOG

pp271 of 313




The above quote is from the following thread:


Thanks for the post! The second link however about "Terrible FAA Rule" is a bit out of context. If you read the accident report on that one, the crash was due to pilot error and an instructor pilot allowing the procedure to exceed established parameters
 
Thanks for the post! The second link however about "Terrible FAA Rule" is a bit out of context. If you read the accident report on that one, the crash was due to pilot error and an instructor pilot allowing the procedure to exceed established parameters
I only linked to the "FAA" thread to show what the source was and where I had gotten my information from.

I tried to only provide a link to the other thread.

Instead, no matter what I did, I could not provide just a link.

I am finding "Zenforo" type forums(such as this one) intrusive and not user friendly, like "VBulletin" type forums.
 
Last edited:
I couldn't find a lot of information on the original post. It's amazing how much isn't known about the 262; for instance, estimates of the number of victories by its pilots ranges from somewhere in the 100's to over 500. It seems like the legendary Nazi record-keeping fell apart in the last days of the war, along with everything else.

I did find this on Warfare History Network, but it doesn't say how common this was. It seems like the long range of the 30mm cannons would make it unlikely to fly into debris, but maybe not.

"The newly developed Jumo 004 engines presented challenges, occasionally pulling in debris after an enemy plane had burst apart, damaging the compressor, and causing a flame out. Flying on one engine, the Me 262 could not easily take evasive action or even outrun an Allied P-51 Mustang, Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, or the De Havilland DH.98 Mosquito. In that situation, the Me 262 pilot had to reach a friendly base as quickly as possible."
 
Tomo - IMO you have an impossible task to conclude % or aggragate losses due to engine 'issues' much less outright failure. Lack of eye witnesses in cloud cover for a/c shot down near airfield, 262s shot down in air to air in which pilot was KIA, 262s lost due to engine failuren, non-combat, but records lost or never reported, etc.

I had a real interesting time over 10 years of parsing USAAF 8th AF MACR's to separate into 'air to air', 'unknown but enemys fighters in area' ; Losses due to flak', 'losses unknown but on way home after strafing', 'Pure unknown - such as bad weather present, no fighters seen, 'not at low altitude (icing, oxygen mask failure, unexplained mid air explosion, etc'): 'pure mechanical failure of engine, coolant'; 'structural failure'; Pure Unknown - no survivor/no witness/no enemy contact reported but aircraft and pilot MIA.

Much refinement from MACR achieved in cases where a pilot Questionaire was completed after returning from POW status - and they often contradicted the witness/Macr conclusion.

You have smaller sample but far worse documentation sources confronting your research.
 
I only linked to the "FAA" thread to show what the source was and where I had gotten my information from.

I tried to only provide a link to the other thread.

Instead, no matter what I did, I could not provide just a link.

I am finding "Zenforo" type forums(such as this one) intrusive and not user friendly, like "VBulletin" type forums.

If you just want the link without the blurb, put the link inside URL tags.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back