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

[Zyzygie]

"In any practice engagement I have had in the last 20 years where I have turned with another aeroplane in a bigger picture environment – rather than the static one by ones, two by twos or four by fours – every time I have tried to do that I have ended up being shot by somebody else who actually is not in the fight. As soon as you enter a turning fight, your situational awareness actually shrinks down because the only thing you can be operating with is the aeroplane you are turning with. The person who has the advantage is the person who can stand off, watch the engagement and just pick you off at the time. So you got to be really careful about how you use those KPIs."​

The F-35s Air-to-Air Capability Controversy​

In view of the disparity between the Meteor and MiG numbers in their Korean War engagements, it's remarkable that the kill ratio between the two was so close. Then there's the Meteor's ground attack record which arguably no other aircraft at the time could match, no?:

"The communist ground forces soon began to feel the effects of the continuous attacks on their supply lines, and by early May, began to send their MiGs south in the hope of intercepting the raiders before they could reach their targets. Once more, the Meteors were to clash with the MiGs. On 4 May 1952 a patrol of two Meteors sighted a flight of nine MiG-15s south west of Pyongyang. The MiGs immediately launched an attack, but on this occasion the odds lay with the Meteors. The MiGs were forced to fight the Meteors at low altitude, thus relinquishing the MiG's high latitude performance advantage. A MiG latched itself onto Sergeant E. Myer's tail but was quickly shaken off, enabling his number two, Pilot Officer J. Surman, to fire two bursts of cannon fire into the MiG. The starboard tail plane and the starboard side of the MGg's exhaust port were seen to disintegrate in a flash of flame, and Surman was credited with probably having destroyed the aircraft as neither Australian saw the MiG impact the ground. Four days later, in the same area, a flight of four Meteors were intercepted by two MiGs. Once again, the Meteors had a height advantage and Pilot Officer Bill Simonds (A77-385) was able to make a firing pass on one of the enemy jets. The MiG entered an uncontrollable spin, and the pilot was seen to bail out over friendly territory, resulting in the Squadron's ninth MiG claim since the beginning of the war."

"The MiG pilots gained their revenge on the 2 October 1952 when Flying Officer O. Cruickshank, a RAF exchange pilot with the Squadron, was shot down in a surprise attack. A flight of four Meteors had carried out a successful rocket strike and were returning to Kimpo when two MiGs jumped them from the 8 o'clock position. Sergeant K. Murray received a 37 mm hit in the port tail pipe during the MiG's first pass and observed Cruickshank bailing out of A77-436 over Cho'do."

Meteor Operations in Korea​

 

[Zyzygie]

And you're using this comparison against the F-86A, make the same paper comparisons with the F-86F. Even with the limitations with the F-86A below 20K, if you keep your speed up it still outclassed the F.8. Again, you'd have to be asleep at the stick to get suckered in to throw away your tactical advantage.

"On the other hand, if you managed to find F-86s below you and they were tempted to try and 'mix it', the Meteor could give them a very nasty fright."

If the queen had slightly different anatomy, she'd be the king!

Agreed. But arguably the fighter bomber was king in Korea:

The contribution made by 77 Squadron during the three years of the Korean War is totally out of proportion to its size. During the war the Squadron flew a total of 18,872 sorties, comprising of 3,872 Mustang sorties and 15,000 Meteor sorties. The effect this had on the enemy was devastating; 3,700 buildings, 1,500 vehicles, 16 bridges, 20 locomotives and 65 railway carriages destroyed. The outstanding results achieved by 77 Squadron, evidently much higher than usual for a single squadron, would not have been possible without the support of 391 (Base) and 491 (Maintenance) Squadrons. The level of technical support was outstanding, resulting in close to 100% serviceability for the Mustangs and Meteors. To achieve this, maintenance crews often worked up to sixteen hours per day under extremely harsh, and often wet, conditions.

It must not be forgotten though, that 38 personnel lost their lives and seven pilots were captured serving their country.

Meteor Operations in Korea​

See also attached.

 

[Zyzygie]

Sabre's in Korea had pretty much six .50 cal guns, the 20mm cannon don't show up until until late and then in limited numbers for test. Cannon armed Sabres , eight in number arrived in Korea in Jan 1953. They managed 282 combat sorties before the armistice in July 1953. No F-86Hs were issued to active squadrons, even in the US, until 1954.
However the six .50 cal guns in the Sabre's were not WW II guns. They were the M3 model that fired at around 1100-1200rpm or almost 50% faster than WW II guns. They also fired different ammo. The M23 incendiary round was a large part of the ammo load. I am not sure if it reached 100%. The M23 had about 500fpm more velocity but was essentially an incendiary round with NO armor piercing ability. It did carry 5.8 grams of incendiary material though.
The Meteor used MK V Hispanos which fired at about 720rpm which is better than most of the WW II Hispanos ( Tempests got the MK V) and at some point after WW II the British switched to aluminum fuses instead of brass for the 20mm HE rounds which made them lighter and improved velocity a bit.

Difference in climb was probably marginal. Yes the Meteor had better power to weight but climb is not just power to weight. It is power to weight AFTER you take out the power needed to maintain climb speed AND the power needed to overcome the extra drag of the aircraft flying at what ever incidence (angle of attack) was needed to get the climb rate desired.
The Meteor, being a much higher drag aircraft, was using a lot of it's extra power to fight the extra drag. Both planes, according to published specifications, had a very similar initial climb rate. I sure wouldn't bet much on a 3-5% difference in published figures as individual production planes could vary around 3% from each other when new.
However climb rate was very dependent on weight. 1954 Jane's gives the following figures for 3 different Meteors.
T. MK 7 at .......14,140lbs......8,000fpm at sea level
F. MK 8 at....... 15,675lbs......7,000fpm at sea level
PR, MK 10 at.. 17,345lbs......6,050fpm at sea level. This version reverted to the full span wings of the early MK III. which added 3-4,000ft to the ceiling.

Performance for F-86 versions can be found here: Sabre vs MiG

I would take the service ceiling numbers with a grain of salt (or more) and would note that the higher powered -27 engine didn't make into service in Korea until June of 1952 and then in increasing numbers until the armistice the next summer.

The time to 30,000 ft for the F86A was 8 minutes. The same for the Meteor F8 was 5.8 minutes... This is surely a significant margin.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

The time to 30,000 ft for the F86A was 8 minutes. The same for the Meteor F8 was 5.8 minutes... This is surely a significant margin.

The Saber was never a great climber when compared to the MiG-15 which climbed to 30K at under 5 minutes. This still doesn't negate the fact that the MiG-15 and F-86 (even the F-86A) outclassed the Meteor F.9. There were certain parameters where the Meteor had a slight performance advantage, but it suffered in other areas to the point that it was not going to effectively compete with either MiG or Saber.

From Joe Baugher's site - I disagree with his F-86 kill numbers,

Sabre vs MiG

 

[Zyzygie]

The Saber was never a great climber when compared to the MiG-15 which climbed to 30K at under 5 minutes. This still doesn't negate the fact that the MiG-15 and F-86 (even the F-86A) outclassed the Meteor F.9. There were certain parameters where the Meteor had a slight performance advantage, but it suffered in other areas to the point that it was not going to effectively compete with either MiG or Saber.

From Joe Baugher's site - I disagree with his F-86 kill numbers,

Sabre vs MiG

Agreed. There is absolutely no dispute that the Meteor was not competitive with the second generation jets as a specialist fighter.
Just check out my previous posts.

 

[Magnon]

No, I would say that the F-86 and Mig-15 were definitely comparable. I would consider the Meteor F-8 more in a class with the F-80C, F84G, F9f, and F2H.

See my previous post:

Here is an interesting little snippet from http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/p...n_kerosene.pdf

"...our opponents flew de Havilland Vampire and Gloster Meteor jets from England. The Vampires were pretty little single-engined fighters with twin tail booms. They didn't have the performance of the Banshee. The early Meteor F Mk 3, the ones we faced the most, were about an even match for the Banshees and made the air-to-air maneuvers an interesting challenge. There were a few late-model Meteor F 8 aircraft that had bigger engines and were easily identified in flight by the large nacelles on the wing. We never toyed with those unless we had a good starting advantage because they would eat up a Banshee..."​

This was in post war exercises over Europe around about 1948.
The Banshee had a much higher thrust than the F3 Meteor with two 3250 lb thrust Westinghouse J34-WE-34 engines. Its engines were mounted in the fuselage, so it should have had an excellent roll rate, giving it an important advantage in a dog fight. However, it also had a relatively high wing loading, at around 70 lb/sq.ft., compared to about half that for the Meteor F3. It was also pretty heavy fully loaded 25,214 lb (Wikepedia), which would give it a thrust to weight ratio of 0.26. The Meteor F3 was 12,614 (CFE Report), so the Meteor F3's thrust to weight ratio was better, especially if they had been fitted with Derwent IV engines of 2400 lb thrust (It would then have been 0.37). In common with the Banshee, the Me 262 also had a relatively high wing loading at around 60 lb/ft2, and had a slightly better thrust to weight ratio of 0.28, as against the Meteor F3's 0.32, based on using the Derwent I. The Meteor F8 had a thrust to weight ratio of 0.47.
Me 262 data from ch11-2​

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Folks, we're getting too wrapped up on thrust to weight ratio. AFAIK thrust to weight ratio needs to be examined at several times during operation. There could be a static measurement of when the aircraft is first accelerated and then one taken at various stages of flight. One must consider if the same thrust to weight ratio is continual during the entire speed range, I do not believe it is linear and once an aircraft is at speed one would have to consider the mass in motion and excessive thrust available. I believe that when comparing these second generation jet aircraft, you'll find in some speed ranges the F-86 could easily accelerate away from the MiG-15. I'm sure Bill (Dragondog) could add to this or correct my comments....

 

[Shortround6]

I would also note that the F2H was a rather variable airplane and the WIki figures are not only for the last version but the "loaded 25,214 lb " includes under wing stores or drop tanks.
The -1 version had 3,000lb thrust engines.
The -2 version had 3150lb thrust engines but had 12in of extra fuselage length to accommodate 177 US gallons of fuel plus wing tip tanks of 200US gallons each could be added.
The -3 version got 3600lb engines but got an even longer fuselage to accommodate not only search radar in the nose but two additional fuel tanks inside the fuselage.

The quoted passage probably refers to the F2H-2 version but might refer to the F2H-3
The quoted passage refers to exercises conducted in late 1953 (or possibly 1954) The pilot writing the passage (and the book it is from) didn't get his wings until 5th of March 1952.

 

[Zyzygie]

I would also note that the F2H was a rather variable airplane and the WIki figures are not only for the last version but the "loaded 25,214 lb " includes under wing stores or drop tanks.
The -1 version had 3,000lb thrust engines.
The -2 version had 3150lb thrust engines but had 12in of extra fuselage length to accommodate 177 US gallons of fuel plus wing tip tanks of 200US gallons each could be added.
The -3 version got 3600lb engines but got an even longer fuselage to accommodate not only search radar in the nose but two additional fuel tanks inside the fuselage.

The quoted passage probably refers to the F2H-2 version but might refer to the F2H-3
The quoted passage refers to exercises conducted in late 1953 (or possibly 1954) The pilot writing the passage (and the book it is from) didn't get his wings until 5th of March 1952.

Thanks for that information.

See http://history.nasa.gov/SP-468/app-a3.htm and attached excerpt for more.

 

[Zyzygie]

Zyzygie i would like to hear a little more about these " napalm tipped rockets" you mention in post #745.

Trying to attack a well-entrenched enemy with free-falling bombs was pretty dangerous, and getting more so:

Accurate enemy anti-aircraft fire was becoming a major problem for the Australian pilots, and on 6 February 1952, it claimed yet another Meteor; A77-616 flown by Flight Lieutenant J. Hannan. A large search was launched for Hannan who had been seen to parachute safely, but on landing in white snow, became invisible to the pilots overhead. Hannan was captured by the North Koreans and spent the rest of the war in a POW camp. One of the searching pilots, Flying Officer R. Wittman (A77-774) had a lucky escape, when an enemy .25 calibre slug passed through the aircraft's seat without touching him. The RAAF pilots found the accuracy of the conventional bombing in the mountainous Korean terrain left something to be desired and had a definite preference for the air-to-ground rocket. Late in 1951, the RAAF developed a new type of rocket containing napalm, known as the 'Flaming Onion', and after trials at Williamtown and preliminary testing in Korea, the first examples arrived at 77 Squadron early in February 1952.

The Americans showed considerable interest in the new weapon, and on 8 February 1952, when the napalm rocket was first used in combat, the USAF provided an RF-80 reconnaissance aircraft to record the results on film for later analysis. The Squadron's new CO, Wing Commander Ron Susans led four Meteors armed with the new rockets in an attack on several buildings with 75% of the rockets scoring hits on the targets, resulting in numerous fires. The new weapon was to prove extremely useful against the enemy vehicle convoys and troop concentrations and soon became the standard under-wing weapon carried by RAAF Meteors, with each aircraft capable of carrying eight rockets.

Meteor Operations in Korea​