There is a parallel thread which some might be interested in:
http://warbirdsforum.com/showthread.php?t=451&page=4
I'm a BIG believer that the Me-262 was the forerunner of several generations of great jet fighters. It had swept wings, was fast, and hit very hard when everything worked.
However, the engines were a roll of the dice, the guns jammed, and it was anything but a dogfighter against the best of the piston fighter generation that was fielded about the time the Me-262 was fielded.
All the piston people had to do was fly around the Me-262 base and wait for it to run out of fuel ... and shoot it down on approach.
If it slowed down to dogfight, it was shot down. If it jammed, it was ineffective. When [it] ran out of fuel it was vulnerable.
These are all characteristics of many early jets, but the 262 had them all.
Nevertheless, it was a wonder. A flawed wonder, but a wonder when it worked well and was flown well.
I consider it as a footnote in WWII effectiveness, but a pioneer in jet fighter development that was apparent into the 4th generation of jet fighters.
Imagine an Me 262 with reliable turbojets and non-jamming armament and 1.5 hours of fuel!
Didn't happen, but COULD have. Even as it DID exist, it was a game changer, but that was not sharply apparent at the time due to limited numbers, fuel shortages, gun jamming, engine shortages, and inability to take battle damage.
GregP
http://warbirdsforum.com/showthread.php?t=451&page=7
I'd like to add that the very subject of the development and operational use of the early jet aircraft is still controversial and not so easy to research.
There are long standing myths that, despite several debunking efforts, find scores of supporters – a good number of them in not so good faith – who seem to be bent on keeping the whole matter confused, for reasons only the Almighty knows…
Unfortunately, the Me-262 seems to be on the receiving end of quite a few of these myths so much so that one gets the feeling that the 262 has become the Holy Grail of aviation and questioning any aspect of its performance envelope, operational record or – worst of all – its missed opportunity to ensure Nazi Germany's victory is tantamount to an attempt on the historical accuracy's life!
It is worth remembering that the aircraft was never supersonic, (unless in a terminal, perhaps wingless dive) and its wing sweep was never designed with a critical-mach reduction in mind, but as a quick-fix to restore the cg, following the switch from the BMW 109-003 turbojets to the heavier Junkers Jumo 109-004's.
The 262 was designed as a zerstörer, i.e. a 'destroyer', which was the German idea of the heavy fighter/interceptor, whose main purpose was to keep as may enemy bombers as possible from reaching their target.
This also explains why speed and heavy armament were paramount factors while maneuverability was not. The aircraft had not been designed to 'mix it up' with the escort and the fact that many a German "ol' hand" managed to shoot down enemy single-engine fighters, only testifies to their skills.
The aircraft proved also to be a decent reconnoiter and even the operational results of the fighter/bomber (JaBo) conversion, as well as Hitler's staunch support for such a conversion, are lately being more benignantly reconsidered by some revisionist historians.
The 262's place in aviation history and aeronautical development should not be dismissed or, even worse, pooh-poohed, but at the same time, the writing was on the wall so far as its superiority and invincibility were concerned!
Had the conflict continued into late 1945 and 1946, the appearance of the British D.H. Vampire and especially the US Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star would have redressed the balance, spelling the end of the 262's supremacy, hopelessly outclassed in terms of maneuverability, ceiling and climb rate by the Allied machines and now unable to exploit its greater speed to escape.
The performance charts testify to this and yet many a website, magazine or book is quick to point out a purported superiority of the German machine by taking out of context the results of ONE of the tests conducted by the AAF right after the end of the conflict (an often used piece of 'evidence'): "Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 907 kg (2,000 lb), the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number, from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter." (from wiki).
The fact that the flight envelope of the P-80A had, by then, not yet completely been explored by NACA and, most of all, the fact that at the time, in the period of economic austerity that followed the end of the conflict, the military establishment had to fight for every cent of the budget allotted and, showing an alleged technological inferiority would have, no doubt, ensured better funding, is systematically and conveniently neglected. Further evidence is that this, same tactic was later used throughout the Cold War to ensure the Department of Defense the R&D funds to develop better aircraft than the allegedly superior Soviet aircraft.
Regards,
__________________
Pete57
Just something to think about.
Regards,
Magnon
