Which jet was better, the Me 262 or the Gloster Meteor?

[Civettone]

For me this is like reading Chinese .... but I'm loving it


Kris

 

[Messy1]

For me this is like reading Chinese .... but I'm loving it


Kris

+1 Totally over my head, but worth every second!!

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Magnon, Bill posted his resume. If you are such a genius, you better post yours. Put your money where your mouth is!

Bill, I would not have posted that resume. It is nobodies business here, especially not that of Magnon's. I do commend you though.

 

[drgondog]

Magnon, Bill posted his resume. If you are such a genius, you better post yours. Put your money where your mouth is!

Bill, I would not have posted that resume. It is nobodies business here, especially not that of Magnon's. I do commend you though.

Ordinarily I wouldn't - but it is on Linkedin and several professional sites, Chris.

Have to confess that magnom is such an odious toad that I chose not to be passive. Kinda like Soren in the early days when he challenged my background.

Oh well - made another 'friend' on the forum..

 

[Magnon]

Magnon, Bill posted his resume. If you are such a genius, you better post yours. Put your money where your mouth is!

Bill, I would not have posted that resume. It is nobodies business here, especially not that of Magnon's. I do commend you though.

Magnon's CV:

1 Is very humble (Admittedly has a great deal to be humble about).
2 Has never even swept the floor of the 'skunkworks.'
3 Tries to back up any thesis with some data. Doesn't argue from a position of 'skunkworks' authority.​

Regards,

Magnon

PS. I have to commend you too, Bill. I wouldn't have posted that CV of yours...

By the way, I got the impression somewhere that you had worked in aerospace development for 45 years. In fact only two years as a graduate at the skunkworks, then helicopters, then it seems other miscellaneous.

Thanks for clearing that up...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Magnon - I commend you for your response.

Bill -

 

[Magnon]

DragonDog QUOTE: The 104 sucked in a turn - far more than the Me 262... but it would roll nearly 2x turns per sec... faster than a pilot could really utilize. UNQUOTE

I have to admit I'm a complete amateur here, Bill, but why did the Me 262 suck in a turn? In your considered opinion was it a structural problem, or did it just have too high a wing loading, or a combination of the two?

Regards,

Magnon

 

[drgondog]

Magnon's CV:

1 Is very humble (Admittedly has a great deal to be humble about).
2 Has never even swept the floor of the 'skunkworks.'
3 Tries to back up any thesis with some data. Doesn't argue from a position of 'skunkworks' authority.​

Regards,

Magnon

PS. I have to commend you too, Bill. I wouldn't have posted that CV of yours...

You demanded it it Magnon - without a sliver of knowledge to judge my credentials out of pure ego

By the way, I got the impression somewhere that you had worked in aerospace development for 45 years. In fact only two years as a graduate at the skunkworks, then helicopters, then it seems other miscellaneous.

Thanks for clearing that up...

Thank you for the parting shot - I worked in co-op apprenticeship for two years - developing low earth orbit models applying Bessel Functions to predict non linear atmospheric effects on satellite orbit degradation, hands on aeorspace engineering applying finite element modelling techniques to structural engineering for six years, have a Co-Patent on a Nodal pylon suspension system for Helicopters, have developed applied distribution of source/sink combinations for potential flow pressure distributions using navier stokes equations as well as management roles in the development or preliminary designs for airframes - in six plus years.

I didn't come to this discussion on a boatlod of tunips.

If I "developed an impression that I have been in aerospace development for 45 years' that is your impression - not what I communicated in this forum. Please refer me to a thread where I immplied such lengthy experience in the airframe biz?

I soloed at 15, I have about 56 solo hours in a P-51D, I have twin engine, and IFR qualifications and wish a heart condition had not grounded me. I am not 'all theory'.

If you wish to denigrate the background compared to yours or any person you seek to use as a comparison - have at it. If you think my MS in Aero engineering and my hands on experiences as an airframe structures engineer at Lockheed and Bell from 1967 to 1972 does not meet your standards of compentency - have at it.

What separates us, respect wise, is that you challenged my academic and industry credentials with zero qualifications of your own - screw whatever 'impressions' you developed - and ditto for your public challenge when you have zero basis other than the gall to shoot your mouth off in these discussions about subjects you have only a Google's worth of expertise in.

I was ok with your peace offering until the 45 years comment..

 

[Magnon]

Some details of the Me 262 wing for your information:

The best of Wings magazine - Google Books

Here's where I got the information on skin thickness.

It's also noteworthy that steel was used in conjunction with aluminium. In conjunction with condensation, this generated a galvanic cell and a consequent high tendency for corrosion to occur. Airframes left out in the weather were soon fit only for landfill (sadly). See the full article.

Regards,

Magnon

 

[Magnon]

I was ok with your peace offering until the 45 years comment..

OK, sorry about that. That's just the impression I got, rightly or wrongly. I admit that you did not explicitly claim that.

I do have a high regard for your background knowledge. That doesn't mean that I'm going to always agree with you. On the other hand, I think it's most productive for everyone's purposes if we keep personalities to a minimum, and concentrate on the facts.

Regards,

Magnon

 

[Magnon]

Magnon - I commend you for your response.

Thanks. But as the Good Book says: "A soft answer turneth away wrath..."

Regards,

Magnon

 

[Magnon]

WRONG - this has nothing to do with the fighter and everything to do with the pilot and his ability to gain a firing solution during the pursuit. I suggest you research fighter tactics.

Again this is meaningless. At what speeds are we talking about in a dogfight between a tempest and a Mosquito or Meteor?!?! And you keep comparing the 262 with the F.3. The F.1 is a fairer comparison.

Well, I'm a complete amateur in terms of fighter tactics, but Hans Fey writes that the Me 262 was relatively poor in terms of manoeuvrability and needed nine to twelve thousand feet for a split-S. To my understanding this was the standard manoeuver used to escape if you were jumped from altitude while cruising. If you do the sums, and limit the Gs to eight at the bottom of the pull out, the speed of the aircraft would have to be very moderate. That would indicate that the Me 262 was capable of manoeuvring at relatively low speed when it had to.

In terms of slowing down to get a bead on the Mozzie, some airbrakes would have been handy. It could be argued that the Me 262 was the first aircraft to have sweepback. It was also probably the last fighter not to have airbrakes.

Regards,

Magnon

 

[Magnon]

More on dogfighting the Me 262 for those who are interested. First the Mozzie:

The first actual encounter had taken place about a month earlier, on 25 July, when the crew of an RAF photo recon Mosquito managed to survive a lengthy encounter with a 262 by using the Mosquito's superior maneuverability.​

Then some anecdotes of US encounters:

There had been, however, earlier encounters with the rocket-powered Me163, and one, in fact, had been shot down on the 16th of August. On that date, an Me163 pilot made the mistake of trying several relatively tight turns, allowing Lt. Col. John Murphy of the 359th Fighter Group to close in and clobber the unfortunate 163, for Murphy's 9th and final victory of WWII.

Although Murphy's accomplishment was the first jet aircraft in history to be shot down by another fighter, the 163 was, with its rocket engine, a developmental dead end in the fighter field. Of more significance was Myers' and Croy's destruction of the 262 12 days later, as this was the first victory over a turbine-powered aircraft- the real wave of the future. This is also the airplane that was to cause the biggest headaches for the Allied Air Forces and was also the only jet type which the YOXFORD BOYS were to encounter. For these reasons, it is worthwhile quoting portions of Joe Myers' encounter report:

"I was leading Surtax Blue flight and, in conjunction with Yellow flight, was providing top covet for the rest of the Group, who were engaged in dive bombing and strafing.

"While stooging around west of Brussels at 11,000 feet, I caught sight of what appeared to be a B-26, flying at about 500 feet and heading in a southerly direction and going very fast. I immediately started down to investigate and although diving at 45 degrees at 450 IAS, I was no more than holding my own in regard to the unknown aircraft. When approximately, 5,000 feet above and very nearly directly over the aircraft, I could see that it was not a B-26, although it had the general overall plan of the B-26. It was painted slate blue in color, with a long rounded nose, but I did not see any guns at this time, because at this point he started evasive action, which consisted of small changes in direction not exceeding 90 degrees of turn. The radius of turn was very great and, although I was diving at around 450 IAS, I had very little difficulty cutting him off and causing him to change directions. He made no effort to climb or turn more than 90 degrees at any time. I closed to within 2,000 feet above him and directly astern and had full power on in a 45-degree dive in an effort to close. At this distance I could readily see the similarity between the aircraft and the recognition plates of the Me262. With full power on and the advantage of altitude I gradually started closing on the enemy aircraft and drew up to within 500 yards astern and was about to open fire when the enemy aircraft cut his throttle and crash-landed in a plowed field. He hit the ground just as I fired, so I continued to fire until within 100 yards of him, observing many strikes around the cockpit and jet units. It skidded over several fields and came to rest and caught fire. The pilot hopped out and started to run. The rest of my flight came over and strafed the plane and No. 4 man hit the pilot running away from the plane. The enemy aircraft was burning brightly, giving off great clouds of black smoke. There were no propellers on the plane or on the ground near it. I claim one Me262 destroyed, shared with Lt. M.D. Croy, Jr., my No. 4 man.

"As compared to the drawings of the Me262 I noticed the following differences. Wings: The wings were tapered on all both edges and the tips were rounded. The chord of the wing is greater than that as shown in the drawing, especially at the wing roots. Fuselage: Fuselage including the cockpit is very similar to the drawings; also the placement of the cockpit. The nose is not quite so pointed, being about as long: as a P-38 nose. Tail: Almost exactly as illustrated. Nacelles: The engine nacelles stick forward as shown by the drawing, but they don't extend beyond the trailing edge of the wing quite as far as those in the pictures. The overall size of the plane appeared to be about the same as a P-38, and when viewed directly from above, similar to the B-26."​

See the full article on theyoxfordboysandtheme262

A pity they continued firing at the pilot after he had left the aircraft...

Regards,

Magnon

 

[riacrato]

What is you point, the Mosquito has a smaller turning circle than the Me 262? That with an altitude advantage of 1500m and in a 45° dive a P-47 D could intercept an Me 262 if the inexperienced pilot started maneuvering?

What you will then bring up is an anecdote of how a Meteor got on the tail of a Tempest. Then by combining anecdotes, random sources on the internet with varying degrees of credibility and of course using informations out of context and in a way they were never meant to be used, you arrive at the conclusion that the Meteor is superior to the oh-so flawed Me 262 which, if it even got off the ground, either broke apart or never got close to the specified performances. A conclusion btw, that you had form the start and that you tailored your "research" to, now what does that tell about your academic sills?

People here with ten times the knowledge and infinite times the experience counter your arguments with a patience you clearly don't deserve and what do you issue: an "apology" that is basically nothing more than another try at discrediting them. Real class at work.

Btw. does anyone with actual experience on both types think that the Meteor was the better of the two. I guess Eric Brown is the only one who might have that experience?

 

[Magnon]

Btw. does anyone with actual experience on both types think that the Meteor was the better of the two. I guess Eric Brown is the only one who might have that experience?

Adolf Galland did:

The flight lasted about an hour and when it was finished, he said: If the Me-262 had had the Meteor's engines, it would have been the best fighter in the world! He qualified the plane of being very good and of having very refined lines.​

Lt. Gen. Adolf Galland in Argentina 1948-1955: The German ACE Adolf Galland and the Argentinian Air Force

That begs the question. What did he think was the best fighter in World War II?

Despite the fact that it was obsolescent by the time of the Korean war, the Meteor went on to score three certain kills, two probables and five damaged against MiG 15s there, for the loss of five of its own. It was also usually heavily outnumbered.

By that war's end it had also been credited with the destruction of 3700 buildings, 1408 vehicles, 16 bridges and 98 railway carriages in the ground attack role. Its squadron was given a presidential citation. Does anyone think the Me 262 would have been able to achieve the same?

Regards,

Magnon

 

[Colin1]

Does anyone think the Me 262 would have been able to achieve the same?

It's an outlandishly naive question
we're assuming a Luftwaffe presence in Korea implies their survival of WWII, so for whatever reason the Germans have decided they have business in the Korean peninsular, we can make the far more modest assumption that they now have access to the specialist metals that they require for reliable jet powerplant construction. If Meteor F8s saw service in that war, then we're probably looking at something along the lines of the Me262F/G/K-1A, with all the inherent improvements in the original design that were afforded the Meteor in the same time frame.

So with more adventurous airframe aerodynamics and powerplants that would by now be coming on-song, the harder-hitting Me262 would more than likely be faring at least as well as the Meteor.

 

[bada]

It's an outlandishly naive question
we're assuming a Luftwaffe presence in Korea implies their survival of WWII, so for whatever reason the Germans have decided they have business in the Korean peninsular, we can make the far more modest assumption that they now have access to the specialist metals that they require for reliable jet powerplant construction. If Meteor F8s saw service in that war, then we're probably looking at something along the lines of the Me262F/G/K-1A, with all the inherent improvements in the original design that were afforded the Meteor in the same time frame.

So with more adventurous airframe aerodynamics and powerplants that would by now be coming on-song, the harder-hitting Me262 would more than likely be faring at least as well as the Meteor.

i'd like to add simply that Messerschmitt would have build the successor to the 262 HG3, not the P1101 as everyone would think, but the P1112.
The P1101 was considered by willly as a testbed (from messerschmit secret projects) 8).

 

[tail end charlie]

So with more adventurous airframe aerodynamics and powerplants that would by now be coming on-song, the harder-hitting Me262 would more than likely be faring at least as well as the Meteor.

Colin it seems from that post that the only thing worth keeping from the 262 is its guns.

I think the biggest concern for the designers of both planes was

To be able to change the engines quickly,
To be able to put different bigger engines in if required
To have lots of room for fuel
To find out what problems occurred in a jet plane


I cant think of any combat plane that followed the 262s lead and very few followed the meteor. Most post war jets followed the arrangement of the Gloster E.28/39 and I am sure that is coincedence

 

[Colin1]

Colin it seems from that post that the only thing worth keeping from the 262 is its guns

You possibly misunderstood me
the Me262 had from the outset more radical aerodynamics than the more conservative approach adopted by Glosters, the existing airframe coupled with powerplants that were

getting access to the specialist metals
were a few more years down the line

would have made the most of the Me262s hard-hitting armament.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Well, I'm a complete amateur in terms of fighter tactics, but Hans Fey writes that the Me 262 was relatively poor in terms of manoeuvrability and needed nine to twelve thousand feet for a split-S. To my understanding this was the standard manoeuver used to escape if you were jumped from altitude while cruising. If you do the sums, and limit the Gs to eight at the bottom of the pull out, the speed of the aircraft would have to be very moderate. That would indicate that the Me 262 was capable of manoeuvring at relatively low speed when it had to.

In terms of slowing down to get a bead on the Mozzie, some airbrakes would have been handy. It could be argued that the Me 262 was the first aircraft to have sweepback. It was also probably the last fighter not to have airbrakes.

Regards,

Magnon

Again, to accurately judge an aircraft's turning ability, you have to factor in speed and bank angle as both are part of the equation. Airbrakes "would have" been handy but considering this was the first operational jet fighter, speed brakes became eventually became the norm. Tactics could have enabled the aircraft to overcome this.

Adolf Galland did:

The flight lasted about an hour and when it was finished, he said: If the Me-262 had had the Meteor's engines, it would have been the best fighter in the world! He qualified the plane of being very good and of having very refined lines.​

Lt. Gen. Adolf Galland in Argentina 1948-1955: The German ACE Adolf Galland and the Argentinian Air Force

That begs the question. What did he think was the best fighter in World War II?

Despite the fact that it was obsolescent by the time of the Korean war, the Meteor went on to score three certain kills, two probables and five damaged against MiG 15s there, for the loss of five of its own. It was also usually heavily outnumbered.

By that war's end it had also been credited with the destruction of 3700 buildings, 1408 vehicles, 16 bridges and 98 railway carriages in the ground attack role. Its squadron was given a presidential citation. Does anyone think the Me 262 would have been able to achieve the same?

Regards,

Magnon

The Meteor that Galland flew and the models used during the Korean War should not be compared to the Me 262 and you keep doing this. Compare the aircraft with the F.1 Meteor as they were developed at the same time.