GregP
Major
According to the Stormbirds group, who built six replica Me 262's so accurately that the Messerschmitt factory issued them consecutive serial number plates, the redline airspeed for a production Me 262 in WWII was 540 mph, where the replicas are redlined today. If you go faster than that, you are a test pilot, and they all wish you good luck.
The P-80 was quite good, especially without the wingtip drop tanks. Of course, being an early jet, it was woefully short ranged without same ...
Most WWII jets could take off, fly fast for a very short time, and then land. Any dogfighting would run them out of fuel quickly. There was no jet-on-jet combat in WWII, so any encounters were at what would have to be disparate speed differential ... for BOTH parties.
In the end, the Me-262 claimed about 545 kills agianst about 100 losses. Not bad for a new technology.
But not a war winner when compared with the war losses. Overall, it was a non-factor and was in service only from about mid-1944 (26 July 1944 was the first combat encounter with an Me 262). So, although revolutionary in design, it did virtually nothing for the war effort when compared with the conventional piston fighters in use at the time. Just the top three Me 109 Aces shot down about 960 aircraft ... never mind the rest.
So the Me 262 was NOT the great fighter it has been portrayed to be ... IN WWII.
After WWII, jets were supreme by virtue of being the only game in town but during WWII jets were a non-event except for a few kills by both sides. I wonder how many Me-262's were lost to engine failure and "teeting troubles" as opposed to combat? My bet is more.
We lost more Hellcats to operational issues than to combat. Why should the Me 262 be different? Methinks it wasn't, especially since it was a new technology at the time ... and axial-flow jets were NOT perfected in WWII.
The P-80 was quite good, especially without the wingtip drop tanks. Of course, being an early jet, it was woefully short ranged without same ...
Most WWII jets could take off, fly fast for a very short time, and then land. Any dogfighting would run them out of fuel quickly. There was no jet-on-jet combat in WWII, so any encounters were at what would have to be disparate speed differential ... for BOTH parties.
In the end, the Me-262 claimed about 545 kills agianst about 100 losses. Not bad for a new technology.
But not a war winner when compared with the war losses. Overall, it was a non-factor and was in service only from about mid-1944 (26 July 1944 was the first combat encounter with an Me 262). So, although revolutionary in design, it did virtually nothing for the war effort when compared with the conventional piston fighters in use at the time. Just the top three Me 109 Aces shot down about 960 aircraft ... never mind the rest.
So the Me 262 was NOT the great fighter it has been portrayed to be ... IN WWII.
After WWII, jets were supreme by virtue of being the only game in town but during WWII jets were a non-event except for a few kills by both sides. I wonder how many Me-262's were lost to engine failure and "teeting troubles" as opposed to combat? My bet is more.
We lost more Hellcats to operational issues than to combat. Why should the Me 262 be different? Methinks it wasn't, especially since it was a new technology at the time ... and axial-flow jets were NOT perfected in WWII.
Last edited: