p-80 V Me 262

[kool kitty89]

I agree that the P-72 would have been a beter choice for a high performance escort. Speed almost up to P-80 standards, climb-rate over 5000 ft/min, 42,000 ft, longer range (at least 1200 miles combat), verry tough, strong armament, few development problems since based on well prooven P-47, more reliable, little or no need for conversion treining (especially for former P-47 pilots). Handeling was supposedly good especially compared to the P-47. It may have had a pressurizd cockpit as well. Had the initial production order for 100 P-72s not been canceled thy could have been in production by mid '44 and service by the end of the year.

It would have been the best intrim measure until the P-80 was ready (as Bell didn't seem to be making any apreaciable improvements on the P-59, unlike the improvements being made on the Meteor) and would have been excelent for ground support in Korea. Though if the Airacomet had seen the same rapaid improvements as the Meteor, it woul have been a good contender.(who knows what the P-59 would have been like with engens like the Derwent V, or even just the 2400 lbf of the Derwent IV, though the only US engine like this would have been the J36 copy of the Goblin with 2,700 lbf but its development was running behind)


With the P-80A's standard load I think it had better climb thn the 262 though...

And I found this in another discussion:
Well here's what Chuck Yeager said in his book, " I was among the first Mustang pilot's to shoot one down in the War, so I was facinated to discover that the 262 and the Shooting Star performed identically-the same range, top speed, acceleration, and rate of climb " from the book" Yeager ".
Of cours the range is without droptanks.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I know but Bong wasn't the only who had an accident in the P-80.

No there were exactly 4 others before the planes were grounded, one pilot survived a turbine coming apart and that was Tony LeVeir.

Directional control was great in the Me-262 infact it was excellent. You'd have to go below 160 km/h to loose directional control in the Me-262 (This is with flaps deployed)

Not with one engine, that's the point, engine outs on final killed more 262 pilots than enemy action.

Ditching the Me-262 on a field at 160 km/h wouldn't be that risky for the pilot.

No better or worse than any other WW2 aircraft except you had two blowtorches under each wing...

The reliability issue was because of the use of substitute metals.

My point and agree

I am not really aware of how big a part of the Jumo 004 production was carried out by slave labor, infact AFAIK the Jumo 004's werent constructed by slave labor but built completely with German hands - I could be wrong about this though.

Something I wouldn't want to bet my life on....

 

[Soren]

Not with one engine, that's the point,

Ok if that is what you meant then I agree. But this problem could be simply rectified by shutting the engine off and gliding in on the final.

engine outs on final killed more 262 pilots than enemy action.

Rookies were often responsible for engine outs, throttling up too fast.

A little over 100 Me-262's were lost to enemy action, over 90% being shot down on landing approach or take off.

 

[Soren]

With the P-80A's standard load I think it had better climb thn the 262 though...

Not according to official data.

The F-80C had a climb rate of 4,580 ft/min.

 

[AL Schlageter]

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Ok if that is what you meant then I agree. But this problem could be simply rectified by shutting the engine off and gliding in on the final.

Providing you were in gliding distance of the runway and you manage your airspeed for an approach.

Rookies were often responsible for engine outs, throttling up too fast.

As well as the mechanical failures...

A little over 100 Me-262's were lost to enemy action, over 90% being shot down on landing approach or take off.

Agree....

 

[AL Schlageter]

A little over 100 Me-262's were lost to enemy action, over 90% being shot down on landing approach or take off.

Does that mean the rest were lost due to mechanical failure because some 900 had been delivered to the LW?

 

[kool kitty89]

Not according to official data.

The F-80C had a climb rate of 4,580 ft/min.

And the Me 262's was... (you said earlier ~4000 ft/min.)

Note this is the avrage climb for the P-80C (to ~20,000 ft) while the max initial climb is over 6000 ft/min the P-80A's initial climb was about 4580 ft/min while its avg. climb to 20,000 ft was about 3,700 ft/min. (though its no Meteor F. 4 or 8 with an initial climb of over 7,000 ft/min)

There is some good (but not infallible) data at: Lockheed P-80/F-80 Shooting Star

 

[Micdrow]

der alder 1st gelandt is a dumbkopf

As far as Im concerned this is you last warning. Opinions dont matter, Facts do. Stick to the facts or you are gone!!!!!

 

[evangilder]

der alder 1st gelandt is a dumbkopf

Insulting a moderator is a quick way out of here. An apology is in order. Your antics on this forum are being closely watched and you better shape up. This is your only warning. Capiche?

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The reliability issue was because of the use of substitute metals.

And that changes what? If you are not using quality metals and that causes reliability issues then that makes it unsafe.

 

[kool kitty89]

FBJ, the 262 was controllable in flight on one engine so it could return to the airfield and shut off the engine on final approach, like Soren said, or idle it in case the aproach had to be aborted. Didn't the P-38 have similar problems on singe-engine landings?

The reliabillity problems were largely due to lack of materials, as said, but the 004B also had fuel control problems which caused the rapid spool-up flame-outs and engine stalls. The 004D largely solved this problem though.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

FBJ, the 262 was controllable in flight on one engine so it could return to the airfield and shut off the engine on final approach, like Soren said, or idle it in case the aproach had to be aborted.

All that is fine provided you could make the field and the problem with dead stick approaches is sometimes the pilot miscalculated his glide and needs power so he could make the field. Combine this with combat situations and you have many a pilot "rushing" (for better words) to get on the ground. Normally you won't dead stick a twin engine aircraft, you try to fly it on the one engine but this takes training, something many multi engine pilots of WW2 on both sides lacked.

The reliabillity problems were largely due to lack of materials, as said, but the 004B also had fuel control problems which caused the rapid spool-up flame-outs and engine stalls. The 004D largely solved this problem though.

To a point - all first generation turbines had spool up problems.

 

[kool kitty89]

I didn't mean it solved the spool-up problems entirely but it kept fuel frm flooding the engine, greatly reducing flam-outs and cut-outs (though the TBO was still low, thow better than the 004B and the D also had a higher max rev at 10,000 rpm)

I definitely agree on the landings. But at least you don't have to worry about torque in a twin jet, though assymetric thrust is still a problem. (except in the P-59 but this came at a price)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I definitely agree on the landings. But at least you don't have to worry about torque in a twin jet, though assymetric thrust is still a problem. (except in the P-59 but this came at a price)

You still had to deal controlling the aircraft along the vertical axis because of the engines being mounted on the wings. Twin engine training wasn't taken serious in the first part of WW2 and many pilots jumped into twin engine aircraft with little or inadequate training.

 

[kool kitty89]

That's what I meant by asymmetric thrust. And the P-59's inboard engine placement resulted in very little of this with one engine out, same with the Mig 9.

Totaly agree on the training though.

 

[kool kitty89]

Here's yet another comparison: P-80 vs Me 262

 

[Soren]

Koolkitty,

That comparison is beyond reason, the guy is making some very ridiculous claims and provides no facts to support them at all.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

And I actually agree....

 

[AL Schlageter]

Koolkitty,

That comparison is beyond reason, the guy is making some very ridiculous claims and provides no facts to support them at all.

You are not saying much Soren. What very ridiculous claims do you take issue with?