Looks like it was also getting a new wing. Anyway, I think it looks excellent. I would have to put up the Supermarine 391 or Hawker P.1030 against it, in a situation where we are staying with props of course. From a flying prototype I'd also liked to have seen the MB5 reach the squadrons. A&AEE tests recorded it being 'infinitely better' than all comparable fighters like the Spit and Mustang so it must have been pretty awesome.
From a flying prototype I'd also liked to have seen the MB5 reach the squadrons. A&AEE tests recorded it being 'infinitely better' than all comparable fighters like the Spit and Mustang so it must have been pretty awesome.
That was in 1946 though. The comments from the test pilot who it during 1944 were rather different citing severe stability problems and calling it a pig to fly.
For Meteor/Vampire v. Me 262, I've been reading an account of the Korean war recently. Although rather outperformed on paper, the F.8s operated by the Australians didn't do that badly against the MiG-15. The score was three for four over a number of combats up to Dec 1951. The MiGs usually attacking by surprise with superior numbers. Its the numbers that seem to make more of the difference in the accounts, with pilots barely having time to line up shots before having another pair of MiGs diving down on their tail from above. There's also some comparative tests against the F-86 which noted that the F.8 had a "clear advantage" below 25000ft in a turning, twisting, climbing fight.
In terms of prototypes, I just look love the look of the Tempest re-engined with a Rolls-Royce Eagle.
Yes, it does look pretty mean. The P.1030 I mentioned earlier was the next development on from that and looked pretty similar except for no ventral intake and a Fury tail