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

Which is better, Me 262 or the Gloster Meteor?


  • Total voters
    131

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

As for the Mk. III accelerating faster than a 262 I believe it is because that has been the general rule that has been written. Now if it is false then there is a whole lot of false information out there, but you know what that has been a proven thing also about false info.
 
but if i did vote in a poll like this i would, out of insticnct, vote for the british plane so it makes sence that i'm the guy that voted meteor..........
 
Too bad the jets never met. I mean, the Allies were already fighting them anyway with P-51's! Why didn't they let the Glosters take over battling the me's and have a good slug out to decide the better first time jets? :) :)


Thats the one sad thing about modern airwar. Jets can't even engage in dogfights very well because of the fast speeds they go at and all those fancy self-guiding weapons that do the work for them......
 
8th may, 1945. the top 23 Luftwaffe jet aces had some 187 confirmed kills between them, Unconfirmed? how many victories did the meteor pilots have on this date? in my mind the 262 was a much better bird as it was in combat and shooting down enemy aircraft. The Meteor, What if? What if? By then the war had ended, and we will never know. I'll take the 262 any day as it was shooting down aircraft untill the end....also both planes were honestly outdated at the end or shortly after the war...single or dual fuslage engined jets were the wave of the future.....just trying to hit the nail on the head here.
Kevin
 
and there's always the risk that the ruskies would get their hands on a meteor and thus more advanced jet technology than their own if one was shot down and fell into their hands, although they got a fair few -262s as it was........
 
and the Me-262 would be easier to maintain as the engines are faired into the wing, there wasnt much difference in the reliability of jet engines for both sides
 
it's generally accepted that the Meteor was more reliable and more manouverable, but, apart from looking better they're the only real advantages over the -262............
 
the lancaster kicks ass said:
it's generally accepted that the Meteor was more reliable and more manouverable, but, apart from looking better they're the only real advantages over the -262............

Agree, although the -262 was superior the early Meteors had a RR Welland, The Wellands had 180 hours between overhauls. The Jumo 004, entering service only a few weeks earlier, was rated for only 10 hours.
 
Wasn't the 262 faster? However, I would prefer a Meteor as the 262 had rubbish turn capability
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back