p-80 V Me 262
- Thread starter MAV_406
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Hard to say. Both had advantages over the other. I am keen to say Me-262 however. Too hard to tell really though at the time.
- Thread starter
- #3
6 x 0.5" Machine guns.
I too will go with the Me-262 in this case although with a late model P-80 it would of been a better fight than with an early model.
I too will go with the Me-262 in this case although with a late model P-80 it would of been a better fight than with an early model.
Yeap I agree with a later model P-80. However this is only a what if in the case of a later model P-80 because if a later model P-80 were to see combat in WW2 (no P-80s saw combat in WW2 anyhow) that would mean the war would not be going very well for the allies and by that time more better German jets would be in service such as the Messerschmitt P.1011 and the Ta-183. Both were ready for test flights when the aircraft were captured at the end of the war.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
ME 262 for speed and firepower. P-80 for stability, endurance and maneuvability. I'd say the P-80 was more reliable but both aircraft had their bugs as 1st generation jet combat aircraft.
From Wikipedia....
Specifications (Messerschmitt Me 262 A-1a)
Data from Quest for Performance[2]
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 10.60 m (34 ft 9 in)
Wingspan: 12.51 m (41 ft 0 in)
Height: 3.50 m (11 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 21.7 m² (234 ft²)
Empty weight: 3,800 kg (8,400 lb)
Loaded weight: 7,130 kg (15,720 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 6,400 kg (14,100 lb)
Powerplant: 2× Junkers Jumo 004B-1 turbojets, 8.8 kN (1,980 lbf) each
Aspect ratio: 7.23
Performance
Maximum speed: 870 km/h (541 mph)
Range: 1,050 km (652 mi)
Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,565 ft)
Rate of climb: 1,200 m/min (3,900 ft/min)
Thrust/weight: 0.28
Armament
4x 30 mm MK 108 cannons (A-2a: two cannons)
2x 250 kg (550 lb) bombs (A-2a only)
24x 55 mm (2.2 in) R4M rockets
Specifications (P-80A/F-80)
USAF P-80A of the first production series.Data from Quest for Performance[2]
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 34 ft 5 in (10.49 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft 9 in (11.81 m)
Height: 11 ft 3 in (3.43 m)
Wing area: 237.6 ft² (22.07 m²)
Empty weight: 8,420 lb (3,819 kg)
Loaded weight: 12,650 lb (5,738 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 16,856 lb (7,646 kg)
Powerplant: 1× Allison J33-A-35 centrifugal compressor turbojet, 5,400 lbf (24.0 kN)
Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0134
Drag area: 3.2 ft² (0.30 m²)
Aspect ratio: 6.37
Performance
Maximum speed: 600 mph (965 km/h)
Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h)
Range: 1,200 mi (1,930 km)
Service ceiling: 46,000 ft (14,000 m)
Rate of climb: 4,580 ft/min (23.3 m/s)
Wing loading: 53 lb/ft² (260 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.43
Lift-to-drag ratio: 17.7
Time to altitude: 5.5 min to 20,000 ft (6,100 m)
Armament
6x 0.50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns (300 rounds per gun, 1,800 rounds total)
2x 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs
8x unguided rockets
From Wikipedia....
Specifications (Messerschmitt Me 262 A-1a)
Data from Quest for Performance[2]
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 10.60 m (34 ft 9 in)
Wingspan: 12.51 m (41 ft 0 in)
Height: 3.50 m (11 ft 6 in)
Wing area: 21.7 m² (234 ft²)
Empty weight: 3,800 kg (8,400 lb)
Loaded weight: 7,130 kg (15,720 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 6,400 kg (14,100 lb)
Powerplant: 2× Junkers Jumo 004B-1 turbojets, 8.8 kN (1,980 lbf) each
Aspect ratio: 7.23
Performance
Maximum speed: 870 km/h (541 mph)
Range: 1,050 km (652 mi)
Service ceiling: 11,450 m (37,565 ft)
Rate of climb: 1,200 m/min (3,900 ft/min)
Thrust/weight: 0.28
Armament
4x 30 mm MK 108 cannons (A-2a: two cannons)
2x 250 kg (550 lb) bombs (A-2a only)
24x 55 mm (2.2 in) R4M rockets
Specifications (P-80A/F-80)
USAF P-80A of the first production series.Data from Quest for Performance[2]
General characteristics
Crew: One
Length: 34 ft 5 in (10.49 m)
Wingspan: 38 ft 9 in (11.81 m)
Height: 11 ft 3 in (3.43 m)
Wing area: 237.6 ft² (22.07 m²)
Empty weight: 8,420 lb (3,819 kg)
Loaded weight: 12,650 lb (5,738 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 16,856 lb (7,646 kg)
Powerplant: 1× Allison J33-A-35 centrifugal compressor turbojet, 5,400 lbf (24.0 kN)
Zero-lift drag coefficient: 0.0134
Drag area: 3.2 ft² (0.30 m²)
Aspect ratio: 6.37
Performance
Maximum speed: 600 mph (965 km/h)
Cruise speed: 410 mph (660 km/h)
Range: 1,200 mi (1,930 km)
Service ceiling: 46,000 ft (14,000 m)
Rate of climb: 4,580 ft/min (23.3 m/s)
Wing loading: 53 lb/ft² (260 kg/m²)
Thrust/weight: 0.43
Lift-to-drag ratio: 17.7
Time to altitude: 5.5 min to 20,000 ft (6,100 m)
Armament
6x 0.50 in (12.7 mm) machine guns (300 rounds per gun, 1,800 rounds total)
2x 1,000 lb (454 kg) bombs
8x unguided rockets
Morai_Milo
Banned
- 43
- Jan 22, 2007
Never heard of any Ta183 ready for test flights. It still had a lot of work to be done to it to make it flyable as the Puqui and MiG15 showed.
Flyboy, how can you say speed for the 262 when the specs you posted show the P-80 to be faster by 95kph? MK108s are not the best fighter weapon being slow firing and with a bad trajectory especially for high speed fights. A hit though would be not so nice. A 20mm would have been better, either the MG151/20 or the MK213.
Flyboy, how can you say speed for the 262 when the specs you posted show the P-80 to be faster by 95kph? MK108s are not the best fighter weapon being slow firing and with a bad trajectory especially for high speed fights. A hit though would be not so nice. A 20mm would have been better, either the MG151/20 or the MK213.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Simple - the data is posted for a P-80C which was 95KPH faster than the early Me 262. The original P-80 A was probably around 540 at altitude.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Morai_Milo
Banned
- 43
- Jan 22, 2007
OK but it does not state it was for the P-80C, so the confusion.
"USAF P-80A of the first production series. Data from Quest for Performance"
Here is another comparison chart
"USAF P-80A of the first production series. Data from Quest for Performance"
Here is another comparison chart
Civettone
Tech Sergeant
As the Me 262 primarily relied on its speed, it's difficult to imagine what it would do against a faster opponent. As it has two engines, I think the P-80 would have the advantage in terms of manoeuvrability. The heavier armament of the Me 262 is also a non issue. The 6 MGs of the P-80 would be more than sufficient.
That's why I think the P-80 held the advantage (once the air inlet problem was resolved).
But ... and this is a big BUT if the P-80 would take on the Me 262 in sufficient numbers it would have been mid 1945. By that time the Me 262 would have been powered by the Jumo 004D or even Jumo 004E. In THAT case, the Me 262 is once again in the lead. Just my 2 cents...
Kris
That's why I think the P-80 held the advantage (once the air inlet problem was resolved).
But ... and this is a big BUT if the P-80 would take on the Me 262 in sufficient numbers it would have been mid 1945. By that time the Me 262 would have been powered by the Jumo 004D or even Jumo 004E. In THAT case, the Me 262 is once again in the lead. Just my 2 cents...
Kris
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Agree.....
Yes you are right. The P.1101 was ready for test flight and when the facility was overun. However if the facility of the Ta-183 had not been overun, the Ta-183 was scheduled to have a maiden flight for May/June 1945.
Let me toss a fact grenade on the fire............
There were six P-80A's stationed in Northern Italy prior to the war's end but poor serviceability the lack of German Jets airborne at that time made the question academic.
A 262 would have a hard time of it with unreliable engines......however ifyou had a factory fresh 262 with Ju004A's instead of "B"s it would be a close battle.
Ka-Boom!!!
There were six P-80A's stationed in Northern Italy prior to the war's end but poor serviceability the lack of German Jets airborne at that time made the question academic.
A 262 would have a hard time of it with unreliable engines......however ifyou had a factory fresh 262 with Ju004A's instead of "B"s it would be a close battle.
Ka-Boom!!!
Actually only 4 were sent to Europe and 2 of those were in Northern Italy. The other 2 went to England. The 2 that went to Italy were 1st Fighter Group at Lesina, Italy.
krieghund said:
The P-80s were held to only CAP patrols and were no more reliable than the Me-262. One of the jets in England even killed its test pilot.
krieghund said:
As stated above the P-80 was no more reliable than the Me-262. It had problems with its Fuel pump and they were all grounded in Jan. 1945 for several months. Major Frederic Borsodi was killed in a crash caused by an engine fire on 28 January 1945, demonstrating YP-80A 44-83026 at RAF Burtonwood.
On 20 October Milo Burcham was killed in a P-80 crash that was caused by failed fuel pump. Toly LeVier was able to get out of the aircraft but it crashed because of a turbine blade that broke. Major Bong was killed by a P-80 when the fuel pump failed.
The point is the P-80 was like all first generation jets and had its own reliability problems when it first came out.
Morai_Milo
Banned
- 43
- Jan 22, 2007
- YP-80As 44-83026 and 44-83027 were shipped to England in mid-December 1944
and
- 44-83028 and 44-83029 were shipped to Italy.
The P-80s that went offshore were YP models.
Adler, the P.1101V1 was not completed by the end of Apr '45. It was still many, many months away from production and still had to be test flown. The Americans even thought of having the Germans finish the a/c for them, so they did not have to.
Erich
the old Sage
not again ! we have beat the pants off the bush with this comparison and it gets nowhere............ wheres Santa when you need em ?
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Hehe, too true Erich... The next generation 262 would be meeting the P-80, so the comparison is irrelevant... The 262 was and would have been better in a fight..
