Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The actual advantage(s) gained were amongst other things a huge advantage in performance. Once airborne nothing the Allies had could touch the Me262 if it was well flown. Problem was however that the lack of fuel trained pilots, as-well as the huge numerical disadvantage the German suffered from, kept them from ever being capable of capitalizing on the actual advantages the Me262 introduced.
As for its performance against fighters, it far from lost out, instead it outshined everything else out there. Several pilots scoring over 5 fighters in the Me262 without being shot down once. Also remember that the far majority of Me262's lost in combat were so by being bounced whilst trying to land or return to base. The escorts ganged up on the Me262's everytime one was spotted, never allowing a fair fight.
I think the difference lies between having a potential advantage and an actual one. On this we are going to have to differ. No one will disagree that the 262 had a huge performance advantage but the circumstances meant that it didn't deliver any strategic advantage.
Judging from the last few responses it doesn't seem like we were in disagreement at all then, FLYBOYJ, Bill Glider. Like I said in post #129:
The Me262 brought with it the biggest advantage any airplane had ever had above the rest at any time during the war, unfortunately for the Germans however the means to capitalize on such an advantage had passed by the time the Me262 was finally let into service.
Judging from the last few responses it doesn't seem like we were in disagreement at all then, FLYBOYJ, Bill Glider. Like I said in post #129:
The Me262 brought with it the biggest advantage any airplane had ever had above the rest at any time during the war, unfortunately for the Germans however the means to capitalize on such an advantage had passed by the time the Me262 was finally let into service.
Blimey, you, me, Bill and FJ all in agreement a first
absolutely NOT the first time - by far
Just to throw a thought into this. The often overlooked Arado 234 did give the germans something that hadn't had since around 1942. Not only did it have the performance to excell it did give the Luftwaffe a reliable PR capability.
Parsifal lets please refrain from misinterpreting what I wrote on purpose. If a lone Fw-190D-9 attacked a US bomber stream in late 1944 or 1945 with a swarm of escorts keeping a close eye, then sorry but the Fw-190D-9 is deadmeat in that case. It would be unable to escape the escorts, the P-51 being just as fast in level flight and on top of that featuring generally better performance at high alts whilst on top of that always flying above the bombers to come zooming down. Only the Me262 had a good chance of getting away with such an attack. It was nearly 200 km/h faster than its' closest opposition. Like many of the pilots who faced the Me262 in combat have put it: "It went by at a speed which made it look like we were standing still"
And directly from the gospel of fighter pilots: Speed is life!
I agree that the 262 had a tremendous advantage in survivability due to its speed, but I stick to my point. Its not absolutely essential for survivability to have a jet powered aircraft in heavily outnumbered situations....ther are many ways to gain speed advantages, and there are many examples of small numbers of fighters against large formations attacking and getting away with it.
During the Battle Of Britain it was Dowdings chief strategy to attack in small groups, using boom and zoom tactics. The average size of an incoming strike was usually in the order of 100+ bandits, versus just 3-12 Angels. Dowding believed that not engaging the Germans using big wing tactics....a full on meeting of the attack with an equally big formation of defenders was actually less costly to the RAF. It also meant less loss to the LW, but the relationship was not linear. Smaller sized attack formations meant smaller, but more attacks, that overall would cause more losses to the Luftwaffe, whilst overall meant less losses to the RAF. It was the chief reason why the RAF survived the battle, and thereby could claim victory.
Perhaps the situation over germany was different than in 1940, I suspect the long legs of the Mustang had a lot to do with it. Whereas an Me 109e might have the fuel to react to say one attack by RAF fighters, the mustang might have the ability to react to any number. Perhaps therein lies the diference as to why you say individual attacks were not successful over Germany
I agree that the 262 had a tremendous advantage in survivability due to its speed, but I stick to my point. Its not absolutely essential for survivability to have a jet powered aircraft in heavily outnumbered situations....ther are many ways to gain speed advantages, and there are many examples of small numbers of fighters against large formations attacking and getting away with it.
During the Battle Of Britain it was Dowdings chief strategy to attack in small groups, using boom and zoom tactics. The average size of an incoming strike was usually in the order of 100+ bandits, versus just 3-12 Angels. Dowding believed that not engaging the Germans using big wing tactics....a full on meeting of the attack with an equally big formation of defenders was actually less costly to the RAF. It also meant less loss to the LW, but the relationship was not linear. Smaller sized attack formations meant smaller, but more attacks, that overall would cause more losses to the Luftwaffe, whilst overall meant less losses to the RAF. It was the chief reason why the RAF survived the battle, and thereby could claim victory.
Perhaps the situation over germany was different than in 1940, I suspect the long legs of the Mustang had a lot to do with it. Whereas an Me 109e might have the fuel to react to say one attack by RAF fighters, the mustang might have the ability to react to any number. Perhaps therein lies the diference as to why you say individual attacks were not successful over Germany
Parsifal _ you and I normally see eye to eye but I have to agree with Soren that there is not only not a good anology between the tactics of LW over Germany vs BoB - but the tactical doctrines and the fact that a.) LW fighters were strictly tethered to their bombers and b.) engagements were at the limit of 109E range were diametrically opposite 8th AF FC capabilities.
I don't believe any other battlefield environment existed in WWII where an attacking force was at a consistent disadvantage as the LW during the Battle of Germany from March 1944 forward and certainly by October when the 262 first showed up.
The LW made some great hits in that timeframe but due solely to skilled LW controllers, good LW fighter leadership and usually a bomber navigation or fighter escort R/V screw up.
Bombers were the bait, LW were the fish and the USAAF escort fighters were the fishermen - using gil nets and boat hooks in the chum. The Mustangs had the performance and range to track the lone boom and zoom foray and make him pay.
one or two fighters getting through to whack a stray bomber only meant something to the guys affected and their friends and families.
Parsifal you can't compare BoB to the situation facing the LW from 1944 to 1945. In 1944 to 45 the Allied bomber streams had escorts with enough fuel to not only stay and fight the interceptors, but also chase them all the way back to their home bases and back if need be. During the BoB escorting LW fighters hardly had enough fuel to stay and fight off any attackers in the first place.
Sorry Parsifal, but there just is no comparison to be made here and I am sticking with my point as-well. A lone 190 attacking a heavily guarded Allied bomber stream in late 1944 to 45 was as good as dead.
Originally Posted by Glider
Blimey, you, me, Bill and FJ all in agreement a first
absolutely NOT the first time - by far
As for the landing gear being weak, I've heard this before but seen no proof at all.