Me262 vs. P-80 (1 Viewer)

[FLYBOYJ]

Actualy it was, by then, almost ABSOLUTELY stealth!, since most WW2 radars were incapable of picking up things like birds.
And the radar cross section of the HO-229 was lower than the F-117 one(a much larger aircraft).

Very true, but I remembering reading that the Stealth characteristic was more by accident rather than an intentional design characteristic. The Mosquito was "Stealthy" not by intent...

 

[evangilder]

If you are referring to the Jauman absorber, it was not paint and was only used on submarines as the absorbent material was 3 inches thick. Radar Absorbent Material or RAM, was concurrently being developed in America, Germany and Britain. To call it a German invention is a bit of a stretch. I also don't think it would have been practical for an airplane in 1945. If it had, there would have been planes made with that material in the 1950s.

 

[balburdio]

The fact is, the germans lost the war because of Hitler megalomaniac ideias, not because they didn't had the "right stuff"

Agree - my point is the P-80 did improve and would of improved much quicker had the war lasted longer. All the mods that went into the "B" and "C" models were ready to be implemented in 1945, the government didn't want any disruption in the production line. Into the "C" models and into the T-33 the aircraft served well, it was reliable and easy to fly.

The statement that many pilots died while flying the early P-80 is not really true. We know about Bong and Tony LeVeir had a compressor wheel come apart on one he was flying, but the P-80 was no more deadly than any other early jet, it fact i believe it was more reliable. What killed pilots in early jets were the fact that they were hard to spool up (engine thrust) and hard to slow down. Many pilots (German, British and American) were killed during takeoff and landing because of this, you had to always be 30 seconds ahead of the aircraft as opposed to high performance WW2 piston engine aircraft

Veterans praised the Mustang, but not a single one had a nice word for the P-80. There is a reson for that!
P-80 development and early operational problems were eventualy mitigated, but the shooting star realy earned it's name, the hard way.

In the end of the war, the huckebein was ready for testing, wind tunnel tests revealed incredible (for the time) all round performances. It wold become the follow on for the Me-262 and the volksjagger.

The B and C models were only available in 1947, after the US got it's hands on secret german research material.
One of the german inspired mods was the ejector seat, absent in early models.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The fact is, the germans lost the war because of Hitler megalomaniac ideias, not because they didn't had the "right stuff"

Agree - my point is the P-80 did improve and would of improved much quicker had the war lasted longer. All the mods that went into the "B" and "C" models were ready to be implemented in 1945, the government didn't want any disruption in the production line. Into the "C" models and into the T-33 the aircraft served well, it was reliable and easy to fly.

The statement that many pilots died while flying the early P-80 is not really true. We know about Bong and Tony LeVeir had a compressor wheel come apart on one he was flying, but the P-80 was no more deadly than any other early jet, it fact i believe it was more reliable. What killed pilots in early jets were the fact that they were hard to spool up (engine thrust) and hard to slow down. Many pilots (German, British and American) were killed during takeoff and landing because of this, you had to always be 30 seconds ahead of the aircraft as opposed to high performance WW2 piston engine aircraft

Veterans praised the Mustang, but not a single one had a nice word for the P-80. There is a reson for that!
P-80 development and early operational problems were eventualy mitigated, but the shooting star realy earned it's name, the hard way.

In the end of the war, the huckebein was ready for testing, wind tunnel tests revealed incredible (for the time) all round performances. It wold become the follow on for the Me-262 and the volksjagger.

The B and C models were only available in 1947, after the US got it's hands on secret german research material.
One of the german inspired mods was the ejector seat, absent in early models.

The initial design for the first P-80 "Hot Seat" was started in 1944, Kelly Johnson stated that during a Lockheed management Club meeting I attended in 1982. It was stated by him that the last thing the AAF wanted to do was disrupt the production line. I don't know what veterans you are referring to disliking the P-80, Robin Olds flew -38s, -51s and thre P/F-80 and talked about new technology teething pains, but that's about it.

The Seats developed after the war had some German influance, in fact US Air Force research showed that the Heinkel ballistic system was not powerful enough to use on anticipated Air Force jet aircraft, as the catapult velocity was insufficient for safe ejection at the new Lockheed P-80's maximum operating speed.

 

[balburdio]

Actualy it was, by then, almost ABSOLUTELY stealth!, since most WW2 radars were incapable of picking up things like birds.
And the radar cross section of the HO-229 was lower than the F-117 one(a much larger aircraft).

Very true, but I remembering reading that the Stealth characteristic was more by accident rather than an intentional design characteristic. The Mosquito was "Stealthy" not by intent...

The mosquito "stealthness" was an accident, but not the the HO-229 's
It was designed with that intent.

So secret was the weapon, that the americans toke extra planning to capture it (yes, they knew of it's existance) so they launch a massive preliminary bombing raid on Thuringia, sparing the development complexes but killing some 8000 civilians around the area, just to prevent a possible evacuation of critical material.
The area was supposed to be on the planned russian offensive path. But Eisenhower spare no eforts to secure Thuringia long enough to allow the transfer to US soil of all german research material he cold find.
It's a known fact that at least 5 ME-262 were assembled under US orders in the german factory.

Aircraft historian Curtiss Peebles, in his "Dark Eagles: A History of Top Secret U.S. Aircraft Programs" (Presidio, 1995) relates just abouth ALL post war US jet development with assets, plans and personel transfered from germany to US in the so called "operation papper clip".
Face it! Like Von Brown said in the "right stuff": -'howr germans are better than their's!'.
You see, back in the 50s and 60s, aerospace technology was just another word for "volunteered german scientists"

 

[balburdio]

The initial design for the first P-80 "Hot Seat" was started in 1944, Kelly Johnson stated that during a Lockheed management Club meeting I attended in 1982. It was stated by him that the last thing the AAF wanted to do was disrupt the production line. I don't know what veterans you are referring to disliking the P-80, Robin Olds flew -38s, -51s and thre P/F-80 and talked about new technology teething pains, but that's about it.

The Seats developed after the war had some German influance, in fact US Air Force research showed that the Heinkel ballistic system was not powerful enough to use on anticipated Air Force jet aircraft, as the catapult velocity was insufficient for safe ejection at the new Lockheed P-80's maximum operating speed.

Yeap, and you expect those guys to be telling the truth, right!!
Sure!! American did made one great development in aerospace science back then: spin doctoring!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The mosquito "stealthness" was an accident, but not the the HO-229 's
It was designed with that intent.

Not denying this statement, but do you have proof of this? The reason why I ask is I've written many articles on Stealth Technology and it would of been apparent that this technology, if in full bloom would of been exploited right after the war. Lockheed engineers played with he concept during the 1950s developing "Iron Ball" paint and finally developing RAM material used on the leading edges of the SR-71's wings. Stealth wasn't taken seriously until the 1970s when "Have Blue" came on scene and the works of Russian mathematician Pyotr Ufimtsev was exploited. It just seems that if US intelligence was real interested in this, the technology would of blossomed much sooner.

 

[balburdio]

If you are referring to the Jauman absorber, it was not paint and was only used on submarines as the absorbent material was 3 inches thick. Radar Absorbent Material or RAM, was concurrently being developed in America, Germany and Britain. To call it a German invention is a bit of a stretch. I also don't think it would have been practical for an airplane in 1945. If it had, there would have been planes made with that material in the 1950s.

uhh, big confusion!!
Jauman is an early type of RAM material. I'am talking about paint, not material. Not the same thing you know?

As for the last argument, same thing goes for the swept wing, the ME-262 and the He-162 had swept-wings, but only 10 years lather wold the US adopt a swept-wing fighter (the F-86)


P.S.
A British BIOS report entitled "Production and Further Investigation of Wesch Anti-Radar Material, CIOS Black List Item 1 RADAR, BIOS Target No. 1/549" details the production of many types of RAM material by the germans with several intents in mind, including the so called "Schwarzflugzeug" (black aircraft) client project.

P.S. II
A more recent german come-back:
http://www.xmsnet.nl/hdejong/curious/Lampyridae.htm

 

[FLYBOYJ]

As for the last argument, same thing goes for the swept wing, the ME-262 and the He-162 had swept-wings, but only 10 years lather wold the US adopt a swept-wing fighter (the F-86)

Now that's incorrect - the first US fighter with swept back wings was the XP-55. The 86s wings were swept back in 1947. the -163 did not have a swept back wing, the -262 wasn't flying in 1937....

Work on the NA-134 project began in the late autumn of 1944. The NA-134 had a straight, thin-section wing set low on a rather tubby fuselage. It featured a straight-through flow of air from the nose intake to the jet exhaust that exited the aircraft under a straight tailplane. The wing was borrowed directly from the P-51D, and had a laminar-flow airfoil. It was to be powered by a single General Electric TG-180 gas turbine which was a license-built version of the de Havilland Goblin. The TG-180 was designated J35 by the military and was an 11-stage axial-flow turbojet which offered 4000 lb.s.t. at sea level. The Navy ordered three prototypes of the NA-134 under the designation XFJ-1 on January 1, 1945. On May 28, 1945, the Navy approved a contract for 100 production FJ-1s (NA-141).

At the same time that North American was beginning to design the Navy's XFJ-1, the USAAF issued a requirement for a medium-range day fighter which could also be used as an escort fighter and a dive bomber. Specifications called for a speed of at least 600 mph, since the Republic XP-84 Thunderjet already under construction promised 587 mph. On Nov 22, 1944, the company's RD-1265 design study proposed a version of the XFJ-1 for the Air Force to meet this requirement. This design was known in company records as NA-140. The USAAF was sufficiently impressed that they issued a Letter Contract on May 18, 1945 which authorized the acquisition of three NA-140 aircraft under the designation XP-86.

The Navy's XFJ-1 design had to incorporate some performance compromises in order to support low-speed carrier operations, but the land-based USAAF XP-86 version was not so constrained and had a somewhat thinner wing and a slimmer fuselage with a high fineness ratio. However, the XP-86 retained the tail surfaces of the XFJ-1.

The XP-86 incorporated several features not previously used on fighter aircraft, including a fully-pressurized cockpit and hydraulically-boosted ailerons and elevators. Armament was the standard USAAF equipment of the era--six 0.50-inch Browning M3 machine guns that fired at 1100 rounds per minute, with 267 rounds per gun. The aircraft was to use the Sperry type A-1B gun/bomb/rocket sight, working in conjunction with an AN/APG-5 ranging radar. Rocket launchers could be added underneath the wings to carry up to 8 5-inch HVARs. Self-sealing fuel tanks were to be fitted, and the pilot was to be provided with some armor plating around the cockpit area.

In the XP-86, a ten percent ratio of wing thickness to chord was used to extend the critical Mach number to 0.9. Wingspan was to be 38 feet 2 1/2 inches, length was 35 feet 6 inches, and height was 13 feet 2 1/2 inches. Four speed brakes were to be attached above and below the wings. At a gross weight of 11,500 pounds, the XP-86 was estimated to be capable of achieving a top speed of 574 mph at sea level and 582 mph at 10,000 feet, still below the USAAF requirement. Initial climb rate was to be 5850 feet per minute and service ceiling was to be 46,000 feet. Combat radius was 297 miles with 410 gallons of internal fuel, but could be increased to 750 miles by adding a 170 gallon drop tank to each wingtip. As it would turn out, these performance figures were greatly exaggerated.

A mock-up of the XP-86 was built and approved on June 20, 1945. However, early wind tunnel tests indicated that the airframe of the XP-86 would not be able to reach the desired speed of 600 mph. It is highly likely that the XP-86 project would have been cancelled at this time were it not for some unusual developments.

After the surrender of Germany in May of 1945, the USAAF (along with a lot of other air forces) was keenly interested in obtaining information about the latest German jet fighters and in learning as much as they could about secret German wartime research on jet propulsion, rocket power, and ballistic missiles. American teams were selected from industry and research institutions and sent into occupied Germany to investigate captured weapons research data, microfilm it, and ship it back to the USA.

By the summer of 1945, a lot of German data was pouring in, much of it as yet untranslated into English. As it turned out, German aeronautical engineers had wind-tunnel tested just about every aerodynamic shape that the human mind could conceive of, even some ideas even only remotely promising. A particular German paper dated 1940 reported that wind tunnel tests showed that there were some significant advantages offered by swept wings at speeds of about Mach 0.9. A straight-winged aircraft was severely affected by compressibility effects as sonic speed was approached, but the use of a swept wing delayed the effects of shock waves and permitted better control at these higher speeds. Unfortunately, German research also indicated that the use of wing sweep introduced some undesirable wing tip stall and low-speed stability effects. American researchers had also encountered similar problem with the swept-wing Curtiss XP-55 Ascender, which was so unstable that it flipped over on its back and fell out of the sky on one of its test flights.

In 1940, these German studies were of only theoretical interest, since no powerplants were available even remotely capable of reaching such speeds. However, such studies caught the attention of North American engineers trying to figure out ways to improve the performance of their XP-86.

It would do no good to build an aircraft capable of high speeds that would be so unstable that it would fall out of the sky at low speeds. The cure for the low-speed stability problem that was worked out by North American engineers was to attach automatic slats to the wing leading edges. The wing slats were entirely automatic, and opened and closed in response to aerodynamic forces. When the slats opened, the changed airflow over the upper wing surface increased the lift and produced lower stalling speeds. At high speeds, the slats automatically closed to minimize drag.

In August of 1945, project aerodynamicist L. P. Greene proposed to Raymond Rice that a swept-wing configuration for the P-86 be adopted. Wind tunnel tests carried out in September of 1945 confirmed the reduction in drag at high subsonic speeds as well as the beneficial effect of the slats on low speed stability. The limiting Mach number was raised to 0.875.

Based on these wind-tunnel studies, a new design for a swept-wing P-86 was submitted to the USAAF in the fall of 1945. The USAAF was impressed, and on November 1, 1945 it readily approved the proposal. This was one of the most important decisions ever made by the USAAF--had they not agreed to this change, the history of the next forty years would undoubtedly have been quite different.

North American's next step was to choose the aspect ratio of the swept wing. A larger aspect ratio would give better range, a narrower one better stability, and the correct choice would obviously have to be a tradeoff between the two. Further tests carried out between late October and mid November indicated that a wing aspect ratio of 6 would be satisfactory, and such an aspect ratio had been planned for in the proposal accepted on November 1. However, early in 1946 additional wind tunnel tests indicated that stability with such a narrow wing would be too great a problem, and in March the design reverted to a shorter wingform. An aspect ratio of 4.79, a sweep-back of 35 degrees, and a thickness/chord ratio of 11% at the root and 10% at the tip was finally chosen.

All of these changes lengthened the time scale of the P-86 development in comparison to that of the Navy's XFJ-1. The XFJ-1 took to the air for the first time on November 27, 1946, but the XP-86 still had almost a year more of work ahead of it before it was ready for its first flight.

On February 28, 1946, the mockup of the swept-winged XP-86 was inspected and approved. In August of 1946, the basic engineering drawings were made available to the manufacturing shop of North American, and the first metal was cut. So excited was the USAAF over the performance of the XP-86, on December 20, 1946, a Letter Contract for 33 production P-86As was approved by the USAAF. No service test aircraft were ordered. Although the 4000 lb.s.t. J35 would power the three XP-86 prototypes, production P-86As would be powered by the General Electric TG-190 (J47) turbojet offering 5000 lb.s.t.
The wing of the P-86 was to be constructed of a double-skin structure with hat sections between layers extending from the center section to the outboard edges of the outer panel fuel tanks. This structure replaced the conventional rib and stringer construction in that region. This new construction provided additional strength and allowed enough space in the wing for fuel tanks.

The wing-mounted speed brakes originally contemplated for the XP-86 were considered unsuitable for this type of wing, so they were replaced by a hydraulic door-type brake mounted on each side of the rear fuselage and one brake mounted on the bottom of the fuselage in a dorsal position. The speed brakes opened frontwards. These speed brakes had the advantage in that they could be opened at any attitude and speed, including speeds above Mach One.

The first of three prototypes, 45-59507, was rolled out of the Inglewood factory on August 8, 1947. It was powered by a Chevrolet-built J35-C-3 turbojet rated at 4000 pounds of static thrust. The aircraft was unarmed. After a few ground taxiing and braking tests, it was disassembled and trucked out to Muroc Dry Lake Army Air Base, where it was reassembled.

Test pilot George "Wheaties" Welch took the XP-86 up into the air for the first time on October 1, 1947. The flight went well until it came time to lower the landing gear and come in for a landing. Welch found to his shock that the nosewheel wouldn't come down all the way. After spending forty minutes in fruitless attempts to shake the nosewheel down into place, Welch finally brought the plane in for a nose-high landing. Fortunately, the impact of the main wheels jolted the nosewheel into place, and the aircraft rolled safely to a stop. The swept-wing XP-86 had made its first flight.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Wow I have to say this has all been very very good reading. I did not even know that anyone had developed RAM during WW2. I knew they were researching it but that they developed it, that I did not know.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Early "Iron Ball" paint was applied to corning towers and snorkles of US submarines...

 

[evangilder]

I have seen no evidence of radar absorbing paint in German aircraft in WWII. Material, yes, paint, no. That was my point. I do know the difference. Joe has already addressed your comment on swept wing designs. I suppose next you are going to tell me that the Germans invented the jet engine?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

They were not the first but they were developing at the same time as the Brits.

Even I have not either.

 

[delcyros]

May I add some things?

The max speed of the Me-262 a1 at sea level wasn´t 540 mp/h. Why could it be as fast at sea level as it would be in most optimal altitude? Equipped with Jumo-004 B3 or B-4 it could reach around 504 mp/h at sea level at best. A good number wasn´t even capable of 500 mp/h because they have been fitted with -004 B1 or -004 B2 powerplants.
The fastest produced subtype of the Me-262 was either the rocket assisted Me-262 C3 or the Me-262 HG-II. There are no certain datas avaiable (the HG-II with 30 degrees sweep back was damaged during taxiing badly and never took off), but most scholars estimate a top speed (powerplant Jumo-004D4) of something between 575 and 590 mp/h. The HG-I (V-9 prototype) delivered a speed of over 895 Km/h.
The stealthy abilities of the Ho-229 are possible but unproven. I read an article by it´s designer, Reimar Horten, who wrote in the mid fifties that it was indeed intended to be stealthy, esspeccially for the nightfighter duties. But it should be noted that no wartime evidence supports this claim, it´s post war.
Turingia wasn´t occupied mainly because of the Horten plane.
If you may take a single action than maybe the accumulation of german nuclear material in central Turingia, but even this is very doubtful.
Why has the Me-163 no sweep back? It indeed has.
Why should the He-162 have a sweep back wing? It indeed hasn´t (it was planned, yes, but not executed).
Thanks for your patience.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Yeap, and you expect those guys to be telling the truth, right!!
Sure!! American did made one great development in aerospace science back then: spin doctoring!

Yea and I hate to say it, WHO WON THE WAR!

And I have no reason to disbelieve them - Kelly Johnson (designer of the P-38, P-80, F-104, U-2, and SR-71 and Robin Olds (11 kill ace of WW2 and a 4 kill ace of Viet Nam, retired Brigadiar General), yea right, they have real motive to lie.

 

[book1182]

I have to agree with most people I think and go with the P-80. It had the benefit of coming later than the Me-262. I think if the Me-262 could have been developed more it might have been a closer fight. The Me-262 you have to remember was thrown into combat as a last attempt to stop the allies in world war 2. While the P-80 got to sit it out because the piston engine airplanes were winning for the allies. I would say the if the Me-262 would have had time it would have been just a good as the P-80.

 

[syscom3]

The biggest prob;em with the -262 was its engines were crap. Whether by design or lack of alloys, it doesnt matter.

The Germans had to get their jets in the air ASAP. The allies had the luxury of time to work out the bugs.

Note - once the allies were in Normandy in strength, the defeat of the nazi's was assured. The bombers made things easier, but in the end, the only thing that would have changed was the casualties on the allied side, and whether the Soviets would gotten into Germany sooner.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I have to agree with most people I think and go with the P-80. It had the benefit of coming later than the Me-262. I think if the Me-262 could have been developed more it might have been a closer fight. The Me-262 you have to remember was thrown into combat as a last attempt to stop the allies in world war 2. While the P-80 got to sit it out because the piston engine airplanes were winning for the allies. I would say the if the Me-262 would have had time it would have been just a good as the P-80.

If the 262 had had better engines the P-80 would have had no chance. Besides by that point if the P-80 had seen combat that would have meant the war was dragging on and the Ta-183 and the Me P.1011 would have been in service and the P-80 would have been all but outclassed.

 

[Parmigiano]

.. just some points about German tech achievements...

- Germans were maybe not the first in patenting a jet (I believe F. Whittle did it before Von Ohain) but were the first to actually fly a jet powered experimental plane (He 178), a fighter jet prototype (He 280) and at least two serviceable jet planes (Me 262 and Arado 234).

- German Jet engine design was the 'right' one (axial flow), British design was a dead end (centrifugal flow). History has proved that.

- Ejection seat was standard on Heinkel 219 night fighter and on Arado 234 Blitz (jet reconnaissance bomber), way before any other nation

- swept wing theory was presented in a meeting in Rome around 1935 by a German guy (don't remember details but I can document it once I get home). Research on swept wing planes was way ahead in Gemany by 1945, production designs were ready to go in production. No other nations was even close to that.

- Also the famous 'area rule' for supersonic flight was an outcome of Dornier (or Heinkel? not sure, i am going by memory)

There is little to argue about the fact that German aeronautical research and technology in 44-45 was far advanced than any other nation.

Luckily they did not had the chance to translate all this in industrial output.

 

[plan_D]

The centrifugal jet engine is still used on helicopters ...so it's not the 'wrong' one. And the British were also developing axial flow engines during World War II. Britain also produced the most powerful jet engine of the war, the Rolls Royce Nene - for the times, the British were ahead of the Germans in jet engine technology. Germany was living in fantasy land with it's paper statistics and pipe dream engines ...

And the X-4 was designed to be fired from single seat aircraft, it was tested on the Fw-190. That means the pilot had to control the missile while keeping his plane straight, level and slow ...prime pickings for any fighter escort. And the U.S escort would react in the blink of an eye ...the interceptors wouldn't want to stay in any one place long but the X-4 would make them have to.