Grau, you took the words right out of my mouth;
Some comments - Zyzygie, you posted some good information here but it still seems you're trying to build justification to show that the Meteor was a better aircraft than the Me 262. It's obvious in the post war years the Meteor evolved into the superior aircraft but in mid 1944 the Meteor had a long way to go before it was a world class fighter.
First you attempted to show that the Me 262 was "difficult" to fly, there's been plenty of evidence posted to show just the opposite. There were things on the 262 that were "different" (just like other early jets) but through training, one learns these things. Like all early jets, it had its teething problems but when it functioned well there's no doubt it was deadly.
Now let's talk dog fighting - there is no doubt the Me 262 WAS NOT a dog fighter, it's obvious it couldn't rapidly slow down or accelerate and it was indicated that rapid pitch up attitude changes could induce a compressor stall. So with that said, why would one even considering dog fighting??? The use of its speed was the 262's best asset in taking on other aircraft, and that to include fighters. Why would anyone consider throwing away a major tactical asset just to get into a twisting/ turning fight that IMO would just be an extension of male testosterone!
Once again it seebomber destroyingms we are too hung up on "dog fighting" rather then hit and run tactics that are not only more effective but also provide a level of survive-ability especially when out numbered. I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts that most of the fighter claims by the 262 posted earlier were achieved during a "boom and zoom" attack.
Biff - any comment would be welcomed!
"Find the enemy and shoot him down. Anything else is nonsense."
Manfred Von Richthofen
I can pretty much agree with a lot of that. The Me262 was a good aircraft overall for bomber destroying.
But I think you'll agree that it wasn't fully ready for service:
Evaluation of the Me 262
(Project number NAD-29)
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA800524
Me 262 FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS:
Two airplanes, Nos. T-2-711 and T-2-4012 were used in this test program. General maintenance was very difficult on both airplanes. Number T-2-711 was flown 12 flights for a total of 10 hr and 40 min, and No. T-2-4012 was flown eight times for a total of 4 hr and 40 min. Four engine changes were necessary on No. T-2-4012 and five on No. T-2-711. Power failure in flight resulted in abandonment of the airplane and complete destruction of No. T-2-711.
Tests were discontinued on No. T-2-4012 after two single-engine landings resulting from engine failure in flight, because the value of further flights was not believed to be worth the risk and trouble of maintaining the airplane...
Handling and control at various speeds:
The handling characteristics were poor at all speeds above 350 mph. The airplane would not make a very satisfactory gun platform because of a tendency to hunt directionally, which resulted in snaking at speeds above 400 mph IAS.
CONCLUSIONS:
The handling characteristics of the Me-262 airplanes tested were very poor. However, it is believed that, with the exception of the directional hunting or yawing, they would have been considerably improved if the aileron and elevator servo tabs had been connected.
The pilots concluded that the Me-262 would not make a satisfactory gun platform because of its tendency to hunt directionally which turned into actual snaking the faster the plane went.
Which should make one take pause and consider the irony here... That one of the Me-262 strengths, i.e. its superior speed is also a weakness when it comes to stability and its usefulness as a gun platform.
FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS:
Cockpit Layout:
The cockpit is somewhat cramped and it is difficult to turn in the seat to obtain vision to the rear. The location of the instruments and controls is satisfactory except that the throttles and starting controls are located too far aft for easy manipulation.
Brakes and ground handling:
The brakes were very poor, which made ground handling difficult.
Take-off and initial climb:
All take-offs were running take-offs, due to the poor brakes. The ground roll was slightly longer than ordinarily required. The nose wheel could be lifted off at about 100 mph IAS, and the take-off was made at about 120 mph in a nose-high attitude.
Vision:
Vision was rather poor, due to the design of the canopy; many braces obstructed the line of vision and distortion was apparent when looking upward. Vision to the rear was poor because of the difficulty of turning in the seat to look aft.
But arguably the Meteor air brakes were pretty handy to have, either for dogfighting or ground attack...
"On 27 March 1953 Flight Sergeant George Hale and Flight Sergeant David Irlam were part of a flight of four Meteor F8s - led by Squadron Leader John Hubble - attacking ground traffic between Pyongyang, capital of Communist North Korea, and Sinmak with under-wing rockets.
Upon reaching Pyongyang the formation split with Hale and Irlam heading south in line astern at low level. Hale sighted three transonic swept-wing MiG 15 fighters preparing to attack two USAF RF-80 Shooting Stars. As he jettisoned the ventral tank on his Meteor - A77-851- and turned to intercept the MiGs, Hale fired off the last two of his underwing rockets in an attempt to distract the enemy pilots. This forced the two MiGs to turn away from each other.
As he turned to follow the enemy, Irlam reported that he was under fire and Hale turned into the new threat, which turned out to be two MiGs on Irlam's tail. While Irlam headed for cloud cover in his damaged Meteor, Hale's opponent extended his air brakes and turned in behind Irlam, but overshot. Hale extended his air brakes and slotted in behind the MiG. He opened fire and hit the enemy fighter squarely behind the cockpit. The MiG rolled on its back and fell away, spewing smoke. Just as Hale was about to follow his victim, two more MiGs dived on him. However, he managed to pull into them and fired but their speed carried them away. A third pair of Communist jets turned in on his tail but Hale turned back on them and opened fire on the second MiG, which left a trail of white smoke. Out of ammunition, Hale had to let the MiGs get away. Back at Kimpo, Hale and his wingman counted no fewer than 112 shrapnel holes in Irlam's Meteor. However, the two MiG silhouettes painted on Hale's cockpit by his crew chief lasted only a few days before Squadron Leader John Hubble ordered them to be painted out as they broke RAAF regulations. By the end of hostilities four months later though, 77 squadron had lost 32 Meteor pilots in 18,872 sorties but had deprived the Communists of 3,700 buildings. 1,500 vehicles and six MiG 15s."
