Zyzygie’s Mumbles and Rambles

Admiral Beez said:

Does a WW2-era Vampire or early postwar Attacker have a better chance with their inboard engine?

Did the FAA have any jets in Korea? The Supermarine Attacker entered fleet service in 1951. The USN at the time was operating equally straight wing jets in Korea.

Click to expand...

The Vampire had that advantage, but the power to weight ratio and hence acceleration and climb rate of the Meteor was unrivalled at the time, so there were "swings and roundabouts."

Looking the Meteor's configuration leads me to wonder how similarly outfitted Wally aircraft would do in Korea. Such as the Avro CF-100 Canuck (entered RCAF service 1952) and the English Electric Canberra (entered RAF service 1951). We'd need to get both aircraft into service a little earlier for them to make Korea.

Not that, with no gun and truck-like agility, I'd want to be flying the Canuck in Korea. Maybe as HA recon.

The Me262 HGII would have been no better than the A1/a as it still had the engines underslung on the wings. The HGIII *may* have performed better, as it's engines were moved onboard with the intakes at the wing-root - but still called for the 004 (or 003) engines, so any benefit gained by the redesign would still be negated by the troublesome engines.

Rockets

"...We normally carried eight or sixteen high-explosive heads on our rocket strikes. These were fired in salvo and packed a tremendous punch — said to be like a broadside from a six-inch cruiser. Fortunately the armament section did an efficient job in ensuring the reliability of our weapons. Cannon stoppages were infrequent. Rockets were reliable although we did occasionally return with 'hang-ups' — those which refused to leave the wing racks when fired. These were a hazard and could add a touch of interest to the approach and landing. Firstly we could never trust these temperamental and uncooperative missiles that refused to budge when the button was pushed. Could these fickle devices change their minds at an inconvenient moment, for example on touchdown..."

"..."I was leading four Meteors on a rocket strike against a target at Sariwon, in northwest Korea. As we attacked out of the sun, I could see enemy troops firing from gun positions near the target area. Immediately after my rocket release there was a terrific explosion behind the starboard side of the cockpit. A vision of my mother was before me and I realized I was in mortal danger. I slammed on port rudder, skidding sideways, hoping to confuse the gunners about my actual direction of travel. I released the ventral fuel tank as it was always considered a hazard once the aircraft had been hit. I flew low over damp paddy fields checking for any reflection of a fire, which would prompt me to climb and eject immediately. Fortunately there was no sign of fire and soon I was able to receive confirmation from Bob Strawbridge, who flew beside me, that there was no visible damage. Back at base I elected to land last in case some defect should cause a crash landing which could block the runway. I knew there had been some substantial damage somewhere in the aircraft."
"Inspection of my Meteor revealed: Three 40mm shells had hit the engine housings. One 40mm had blown a few inches off the tail plane. A 75/80mm shell had penetrated the starboard side of the aircraft, hit the underside of the lead platform supporting the two starboard 20mm cannons, and split this mechanism in two as it exploded. The remnants of the exploding shell then entered the cockpit. I was presented with the remains of this 'trophy' which had accompanied me home in the cockpit. One half was missing. It was eight inches long and the pointed head was flattened by one inch. It took two hands cupped together to measure the base. This was my 313th mission. The Commanding Officer told me I was finished, and would be going home..."

https://www.raafansw.org.au/docPDF/77SQN_KOREA_1950-53_COL_KING.pdf

Admiral Beez said:

It's too bad Britain couldn't follow Russia's example with Alaska and clear government dept by selling territory. Post-war Britain sells Burma to China or Newfoundland to the USA, for instance. Britain has no interest or ability to keep these places post war anyway, so might as well leverage their remaining value.

Click to expand...

Russia sold Alaska not to clear debt but to prevent the British from attacking and taking it into their possession. They lacked the navy and resources to hold it as the British had Canada as a nearby Colony already. They were glad to give it to the Americans than to inevitably loose it to a British Colonial war.

Zyzygie said:

"...One of many Allied pilots who got to evaluate the Me-262A after the war, Royal Navy Captain Eric Brown said the cockpit had "a complex but neat layout." Starting the jet was an involved affair, and its slow acceleration revealed how underpowered it was. But once it built up some speed, Brown said it was "a very responsive and docile aeroplane, leaving one with a confident impression of both a first-class combat aircraft for both fighter and ground attack roles." He reported a pleasant harmony of controls, but noted the "landing run was long and was always accompanied by that unpleasant suspicion of fading brakes that one had with all German aircraft of the period." Overall, though, he considered the 262 "in my view unquestionably the foremost warplane of its day...."

Ground attack? Not according to Adolf Galland:

"...Göring had already discussed the question with Messerschmitt, and replied, "Yes my Führer, theoretically yes. There is enough power to spare to carry 1000 pounds [of bombs], perhaps even 2000 pounds." This was a carefully formulated answer which objectively could not be disputed. Among aviators this reply would have created no disturbance. Because any expert knew it was purely hypothetical. The ME-262 possessed no fixtures for releasing bombs and no bombsights. According to its flying properties and its safety conditions it was highly unsuited for an aimed-bomb release; diving or gliding were out of the question because of the unavoidable excess of the permissible top speed [no air brakes]. At speeds of over 600 mph the aircraft became uncontrollable. At low altitudes the fuel consumption was so high that the operative range became unprofitably small; therefore low-level attacks, too, were out of the question. There remained high-altitude bombing, yet here the given target had to be at least the size of a large town to be hit with certainty under the given conditions..."

Galland, Adolf. The First and The Last. David Rehak. Kindle Edition.

Click to expand...

Galland, as Germanys chief fighter pilot, was of course a big champion of getting the Me 262A1 into production as a fighter interceptor designed to clear German airspace of Allied Bombers he loathed the strategy of using it as a bomber. Galland's version is now seen as biased and incomplete by some Historians. Galland had some rather testy personal battles.

Hitler wanted to have it as a bomber that could break through allied fighters screans and attack allied shipping during the upcoming allied invasion. He also wanted a Blitz bomber to take the bombing back to allied factories and towns. Hitler's interested in the Me 262 ensured it was well supplied with resources and only accelerated its development.
When the invasion came not only was the Me 262 not ready to attack and stop allied shipping, no practical preparations had been made to test it as a bomber. It said Hitler allowed no work on the design for around a month and would not talk about it, he was grievously hurt by this. A particularly empathetic and respected colonel was sent to break him out of his upset.
Lets breakdown Galland's negative claims:
1 "At 600mph the aircraft was uncontrollable". This is saying the aircraft was uncontrollable at Mach 0.91 at 36000ft or Mach 0.86 at 25,000ft. This isn't bad and more than the early Meteor III and P80A which were about 0.78 though the P80A could go beyond this and be recovered due to its air brakes. Both aircraft developed higher Mach limits (P-80B/C with compressibility strips Meteor III/IV with extra extra extended nacelles) but only after the war though both had air brakes. Me 262 Mach limit was Mach 0.81 but could be controlled up to Mach 0.85.
2 "Highly Unsuited to Bomb Aiming". The Bombsight to be used for the Me 262A2 (A2 = bomber version) was to use the TSA 2 or more specifically the TSA 2D Toss bombing sight. It was very well tested, worked well and was undergoing combat evaluation with KG51 during operation Nordwind. To use this bomb sight the pilot would line up the target in his normal Revi gun sight. A computer took in airspeed, dive angle, altitude, descent rate from the variometer and if available used the FuG 101a radar altimeter. The pilot then heard a buzz in his headphone and receives a flashing light. He pulled up. The pullup locked the altitude chamber for the altimeter/variometer and a accelerometer took over tracking. The bomb was released automatically in the arc. Accuracy was good. It was intended for Me 262, Ar 234, Fw 190 etc. worked better on jets due to the lower vibration levels. Also suitable for rockets.
3 "There remained high-altitude bombing, yet here the given target had to be at least the size of a large town to be hit with certainty under the given conditions..."
The Me 262 could use all of the German blind bombing aids such as the beam riding Zyklops system, the Oboe like Freya based EGON II and the new Neuling system. Neuling was the new IFF replacing Erstling IFF and had an in built ability to conduct blind bombing with Oboe like accuracy. I think 6 aircraft at once.
4 The Me 262A2 received Wikingerschiff bomb racks so called because they looked like "Viking Ships". These provided for a clean way for the bombs to detach and also a way of carrying drop tanks.

So the Me 262 was suitable for bombing.

Air brakes would be nice. Range was limited at low altitude but it still had a useful range at sea level. Fuel would last about 35 minutes at full thrust (510mph) at sea level.

Reality was that the engines were the real bottleneck. The Jumo 004B engines would have become a useful engine from April 1945 when the 'acceleration control valve' was to enter service. Called Beschleuniguns Ventile in German. The Jumo 004 used a governor that was set by the pilots throttle to control thrust by engine RPM. The new acceleration control valve added a differential pressure sensor across the compressor to effectively measure the air mass flow and dose in accordance to mass flow as well as RPM. This prevents over dosing causing overheating and under dosing causing stalls. It was a no brainer and no worse than multi point fuel injection but the need had been underestimated so it was late (US and Brits had same problem). Something called duplex nozzles that used a different outlet at low fuel flows to get proper fuel dispersion were also planed at some point.

If the Me 262 could have been ready as a reconnaissance aircraft in numbers before the Normandy landings it would have provided the German high command with accurate information of he invasion fleet before it reached the beaches. It might even have helped them estimate the timing of the invasion. The Germans estimated 2 weeks late.

Erhard Milch said the war was lost unless the Me 262 was in service by end of 1943. He was of course right. Had Me 262 been available when it was impractical for the allies to use their most effective tactic, patrolling above their bases it might have worked. It was about 10 months too late.

Some good information Koopernic. But arguably a lot of good stuff left out:

1. Galland was writing well after the War, when Luftwaffe politics had been left far behind. He had every reason to be telling the truth.

2. The statement "air brakes would be nice" should be "air brakes would be needed" for ground attack. The last thing you would want is speed running away on making a bombing or straffing run.

3. The 'acceleration control valve' was never going to fix the engine problem. Carbon steel flame tubes and what is essentially stainless steel turbine blades were hopeless.

3. I wouldn't go down the "if only" track. The Allies can do that too:

"...Performance characteristics shown in table I give a maximum speed for the Gloster Meteor F. Mk. 4 of 570 miles per hour, or a Mach number of 0.81, at 20000 feet. One source (ref. 162) indicates that at high speeds the Meteor experienced large trim changes, high aileron stick forces, and a tendency toward snaking. Snaking may be described as a self-sustained yawing oscillation; it plagued many of the earlier jet fighters [including the Me262]. According to reference 188, numerous modifications were tried in an effort to cure the problem on the Meteor - none of them were entirely successful. (Later research indicated that the problem was probably related to incipient flow separation from the relatively thick airfoil sections used in the tail.) Climb performance of the aircraft was outstanding. The sea-level rate of climb was 7500 feet per minute, and an altitude of 30 000 feet could be reached in 5 minutes. Clearly, the performance of the Meteor F. Mk. 4 was much superior to the performance of the Messerschmitt Me 262A for which data are given in table V. To put this comparison in proper perspective, however, the Meteor F. Mk. 4 did not fly until after the end of World War II and had a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.47 as compared with 0.28 for the earlier German aircraft. The author's analysis of the physical and performance characteristics of the two aircraft suggests that the superior performance of the Meteor was due to the higher thrust of its engines and not to any inherent superiority in aerodynamic design..."

"...Although a strictly subsonic aircraft, the Meteor did have high performance for a straight-wing fighter; it was rugged, versatile, and capable of being readily adapted to various missions..."

RE the ME262 air brakes:

"...The stabilizer angle could be varied with an electric motor activated by the pilot to provide rapid changes in trim with speed. This highly desirable feature was used on many later jet fighters. A deficiency in the aircraft was the lack of a speed brake, which is important for speed control in high-performance aircraft..."

Pioneer Jet Fighters

ch11-2

The Me 262 Stormbird: From the Pilots Who Flew, Fought, and Survived It
By Colin D. Heaton et al.

The Me 262 Stormbird

"The Me262 was a great beast when handled correctly. But if you lost control, especially at low altitude, it was very unforgiving."
Johannes Steinhoff
Luftwaffe Ace and Me262 pilot.

Refer the attached excerpt for a brief assessment of some Me 262 flight characteristics.

Zyzygie said:

The Me 262 Stormbird: From the Pilots Who Flew, Fought, and Survived It
By Colin D. Heaton

The Me 262 Stormbird

"The Me262 was a great beast when handled correctly. But if you lost control, especially at low altitude, it was very unforgiving."
Johannes Steinhoff
Luftwaffe Ace and Me262 pilot.

Refer the attached excerpt for a brief assessment of some Me 262 flight characteristics.

Click to expand...

"...Unexpected breakdowns and surprises cropped up in the conversion courses, primarily among the youngest pilots and those with little or no combat experience. The manipulation of the throttle lever was the major pitfall. From previous flying experience sitting behind a piston engine it was known that there had been no restrictions on moving the gas lever. Coming in to land too fast or too high one throttled back and went round for another try. To adjust position in formation you corrected by giving more or less gas. In practice, when dog-fighting you alternated between full throttle and feathering the motor as suited the situation. The Otto piston engines were always obliging, and if sometimes the engine choked on it, that was mostly harmless – a few splutters and then it burst back into life. But if you were anything robust about the way you pushed forward the throttle levers of the Me 262 jet turbines, they cut out and probably caught fire. Taking off, in the air, when landing. They caught fire if the throttle was advanced too quickly because more fuel came into the chambers than the engine could handle. It stopped the drive and the excess fuel then burnt off. If that happened before take-off, the airfield fire brigade or ground staff could quickly extinguish the fire once the jet was at a standstill. There would then be no further problem. At altitude an engine fire was dangerous, at low level usually fatal. At the outset of training especially it was a frequent occurrence, because pilots failed to observe the operating instructions from habit, inattentiveness or reacting in panic to an emergency..."

'Mein Führer, every child can see that that is a fighter and not a bomber!' - Hitler's Jet Plane: The ME 262 Story

Repeat:

"The Me262 was a great beast when handled correctly. But if you lost control, especially at low altitude, it was very unforgiving"

Johannes Steinhoff
Luftwaffe Ace and Me262 pilot.

Repeat:

"I flamed out once when I was in transition training. I was used to pushing the throttle full to increase takeoff power. This was a great error in the jet. I know that many of the pilots who were killed flying the jet probably died due to stalling out this way. The 262 was a very heavy aircraft when compared to the 109 and 190, and at low speed I would equate it to flying a brick..."

Walter "Graf" Kuprinski


"...'Tis a Pity She's a Whore..."

Title of a tragedy written by John Ford
ca 1626.

But in the hands of highly experienced pilots she was good at one important thing: taking out bombers. A good "bombenjaeger."

Zyzygie said:

Some good information Koopernic. But arguably a lot of good stuff left out:

1. Galland was writing well after the War, when Luftwaffe politics had been left far behind. He had every reason to be telling the truth.

2. The statement "air brakes would be nice" should be "air brakes would be needed" for ground attack. The last thing you would want is speed running away on making a bombing or straffing run.

3. The 'acceleration control valve' was never going to fix the engine problem. Carbon steel flame tubes and what is essentially stainless steel turbine blades were hopeless.

3. I wouldn't go down the "if only" track. The Allies can do that too:

"...Performance characteristics shown in table I give a maximum speed for the Gloster Meteor F. Mk. 4 of 570 miles per hour, or a Mach number of 0.81, at 20000 feet. One source (ref. 162) indicates that at high speeds the Meteor experienced large trim changes, high aileron stick forces, and a tendency toward snaking. Snaking may be described as a self-sustained yawing oscillation; it plagued many of the earlier jet fighters [including the Me262]. According to reference 188, numerous modifications were tried in an effort to cure the problem on the Meteor - none of them were entirely successful. (Later research indicated that the problem was probably related to incipient flow separation from the relatively thick airfoil sections used in the tail.) Climb performance of the aircraft was outstanding. The sea-level rate of climb was 7500 feet per minute, and an altitude of 30 000 feet could be reached in 5 minutes. Clearly, the performance of the Meteor F. Mk. 4 was much superior to the performance of the Messerschmitt Me 262A for which data are given in table V. To put this comparison in proper perspective, however, the Meteor F. Mk. 4 did not fly until after the end of World War II and had a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.47 as compared with 0.28 for the earlier German aircraft. The author's analysis of the physical and performance characteristics of the two aircraft suggests that the superior performance of the Meteor was due to the higher thrust of its engines and not to any inherent superiority in aerodynamic design..."

"...Although a strictly subsonic aircraft, the Meteor did have high performance for a straight-wing fighter; it was rugged, versatile, and capable of being readily adapted to various missions..."

RE the ME262 air brakes:

"...The stabilizer angle could be varied with an electric motor activated by the pilot to provide rapid changes in trim with speed. This highly desirable feature was used on many later jet fighters. A deficiency in the aircraft was the lack of a speed brake, which is important for speed control in high-performance aircraft..."

Pioneer Jet Fighters

ch11-2

Click to expand...

A point on the Meteors high speed snaking. This was a problem with all the early jet aircraft (Me 262, Meteor, P80).

It really has only one solution, the yaw damper.

It can be regarded as a problem with all jet aircraft and particular with swept wing aircraft. It can lead to a nasty Dutch roll developing as one wing generates more lift on the side opposite to the yaw. This is complicated but one reason it is a problem in jet aircraft is the absence of a propeller which provided a gyroscopic force. The other, and main one, is inertia coupling. Jets tend to have mass distributed in such a way that the aerodynamic restorative forces are less compared to the moment of inertia of the aircraft. The Dornier Do 335 initially had a bit of a snaking problem due to the mass of the engines at the nose and tail distributing the mass like a dumbbell. Jets look more like a Do 335 than say a Spitfire or Me 109 since the aerodynamic force on these single engine piston aircraft looked like big mass followed by a wing and tail on a long tail moment arm. I daresay the P.39 had some interesting stability issues. The other is airframe tolerances. If one wing is slightly different to the other it will reach critical Mach ahead of the other and cause stability issues. Precision and high tolerances is essential in jets as are airfoils that have a high critical mach.

The first yaw damper was developed by Dr. Karl Doetsch in Germany in 1942. After the war he went to work with the RAE and helped develop a yaw damper that was installed on a Meteor. I believe it found its way into the Meteor F8 as standard.

"A electronic yaw damper had been developed that took gyro rate information and used the derivative to kick opposite rudder. The Hs 129 yaw damper was developed by Dr. Karl Doetsch over the period 1942- 1944 at Berlin-Aldershot. Later "due to the bombing" he was transferred to Travemunde near Lubeck, where the Fighter Development Station was formed, and here he finished the work around January 1945, on what became the world's first series coupled yaw damper. Doetsch first thought of the idea after observing the effect of a misuse of the simple rudder course controllers. If a heading change of more than 30° was dialled into these systems the demand limited and the system became just an angular rate control, giving a damping effect about the yaw axis. He first tested the concept himself in an Fw 190 and later in an Me262. He was interviewed by British scientists, joined the RAE and a similar device was installed in the meteor."

If you look at this reference it seems that a simple version of Dr. Karl Doetsch's yaw damper may have been used as standard on the Hs 129 anti tank aircraft
http://www.icas.org/ICAS_ARCHIVE/ICAS1980/ICAS-80-0.4.pdf
See page 2 first paragraph:

"A new use of automatic control in aircraft occurred in the early 1940's with the invention of the yaw damper. Dr. Karl Doetsch developed a gyro operated bang-bang servomechanism that drove an aerodynamic tab on the rudder to damp out yawing oscillations(U. It was first applied to a German Henschel He 129 attack bomber (Figure 4). The Hs 129 had a small vertical fin and high yaw inertia due to extensive armour plating which resulted in low aerodynamic damping. Dr. Doetsch's yaw damper provided artificial damping to improve its flying qualities."

The Snaking on the Me 262 could develop above 480mph. With much effort it could often be gotten rid of by repeated flights and ground adjustment of balance and trim tabs. Factory test pilots for the Me 262 said some could fly at 560mph without a problem due to have a well built airframe and having good engines. Many Me 262 were made in forest factories without jigs.

Zyzygie said:

Rockets

"...Back at base I elected to land last in case some defect should cause a crash landing which could block the runway. I knew there had been some substantial damage somewhere in the aircraft."
"Inspection of my Meteor revealed: Three 40mm shells had hit the engine housings. One 40mm had blown a few inches off the tail plane. A 75/80mm shell had penetrated the starboard side of the aircraft, hit the underside of the lead platform supporting the two starboard 20mm cannons, and split this mechanism in two as it exploded. The remnants of the exploding shell then entered the cockpit. I was presented with the remains of this 'trophy' which had accompanied me home in the cockpit. One half was missing. It was eight inches long and the pointed head was flattened by one inch. It took two hands cupped together to measure the base. This was my 313th mission. The Commanding Officer told me I was finished, and would be going home..."

https://www.raafansw.org.au/docPDF/77SQN_KOREA_1950-53_COL_KING.pdf

Click to expand...

The Meteor was nothing if not rugged...

The report EVALUATION OF THE ME-262 was prepared by TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC). It tells a somewhat negative story in terms of the ME 262 handling characteristics:

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a800524.pdf

Handling and control at various speeds
The handling characteristics were poor at all speeds above 350mph. 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.

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 report was not negative overall re the Me262, but the point is that this section is very much at odds with the report from Royal Navy Captain Eric Brown, who said that once it built up some speed, it was "a very responsive and docile aeroplane, leaving one with a confident impression of both a first-class combat aircraft for both fighter and ground attack roles."

This may be explained by the fact that there is anecdotal evidence of a big variation in build quality between individual Me 262 aircraft, partly as has been mentioned due to the conditions under which they were built (without jigs), but also to deliberate sabotage:

"...The Allied bombing raids were also causing a shortage in parts and fuel and delaying production and deployment even further. Production of aircraft, parts and engines had to be dispersed to smaller factories, forests and even underground! The Nazi regime also resorted to using forced labour to produce aircraft – a dubious undertaking on a moral level at the best of times but also a major risk of deliberate poor workmanship and sabotage!.."

"...Me 262 losses were reported as only 100 in air to air combat but up to 1,200 Me 262's were destroyed on the ground and in accidents – on April 10th, 1945 a formation of 55 Me 262's went up to attack Allied bombers and by the end of the day 27 of them had been lost mainly to accidents!.."

https://prism.ucalgary.ca/bitstream/handle/1880/25239/Pavelec.pdf?sequence=1

What the report didn't cover, was that the Me262s evaluated by the US were cobbled together, with high-time engines/airframes and maintained by AAF mechanics.

Brown's test flight was with a newer airframe and had assistance from Luftwaffe personnel.

GrauGeist said:

What the report didn't cover, was that the Me262s evaluated by the US were cobbled together, with high-time engines/airframes and maintained by AAF mechanics.

Brown's test flight was with a newer airframe and had assistance from Luftwaffe personnel.

Click to expand...

Amercans had german ground staff and pilot also. The 262 were not cobbled together. Watson was a very abel pilot/officer and there was plenty to choose from.

I don't have my books available at the moment, but the Me262 tested in the US were rebuilt from several aircraft. There were virtually no pristine aircraft available by war's end - the 10 Me262s that were selected for testing, were pieced together from about 30 aircraft.

GrauGeist said:

I don't have my books available at the moment, but the Me262 tested in the US were rebuilt from several aircraft. There were virtually no pristine aircraft available by war's end - the 10 Me262s that were selected for testing, were pieced together from about 30 aircraft.

Click to expand...

I think that for whatever the reason, high build quality for the Me262 was going to be the exception rather than the rule. As Koopernic says:

"...The other is airframe tolerances. If one wing is slightly different to the other it will reach critical Mach ahead of the other and cause stability issues. Precision and high tolerances is essential in jets as are airfoils that have a high critical Mach."

The Meteor had the luxury of being able to build in relatively safe environments, and the work was dispersed over a large number of contractors, so rigorous standardisation had to be enforced:

"...From the outset, each Meteor was constructed from several modular sections or separately produced units, a deliberate design choice to allow for production to be dispersed and for easy disassembly for transport.[77] Each aircraft comprised five main sections: nose, forward fuselage, central section, rear fuselage and tail units; the wings were also built out of lengthwise sections.[78] The forward section contained the pressure cabin, gun compartments, and forward undercarriage. The centre section incorporated much of the structural elements, including the inner wing, engine nacelles, fuel tank, ammunition drums, and main undercarriage. The rear fuselage was of a conventional semi-monocoque structure. Various aluminium alloys were the primary materials used throughout the structure of the Meteor, such as the stressed duralumin skin.[79]"

"Across the Meteor's production life, various different companies were subcontracted to manufacture aircraft sections and major components; due to the wartime workload on producing fighter aircraft such as the Hawker Hurricane and Hawker Typhoon, neither Gloster nor the wider Hawker Siddeley Group were able to internally meet the production demand of 80 aircraft per month.[22] Bristol Tramways produced the forward fuselage of the aircraft, the Standard Motor Company manufactured the central fuselage and inner wing sections, the Pressed Steel Company produced the rear fuselage, and Parnall Aircraft made the tail unit.[80] Other main subcontractors included Boulton Paul Aircraft, Excelsior Motor Radiator Company, Bell Punch, Turner Manufacturing Company, and Charlesworth Bodies; as many of these firms had little or no experience producing aircraft, both quality and interchangeability of components were maintained by contractually enforced adherence to Gloster's original drawings..."

It was mainly due to this rigorous standardisation that the upgraded engine intakes could be retrofitted to the F3s in the field in Belgium.

From "Watson's Whizzers – Saving the Me-262"

Watson's Whizzers - Saving the Me-262

"..."This is all we know about the Me-262," he barked. "I want you to draw field gear and go to Lechfeld, Germany. I want you to train pilots to fly it and crew chiefs to maintain it." He'd already arranged for German mechanics and test pilots to help out. Watson spun around and left..."

"...One week after receiving orders from Watson, and less than three weeks after the German surrender, Strobell landed at that airfield and fell asleep alone on the floor of a shot-up barracks littered with glass, gripping a .45, after tying a string of cans across the building's entrance. The next morning he got his first close-up look at the Me-262s strewn around the field and hidden among the trees. German troops had damaged some on the way out, while Allied troops damaged others on the way in. Some lacked instruments and other parts that had been liberated by people roaming the countryside looking to salvage anything they could trade for a meal. Some had engines and some didn't; a few had a five-pound block of TNT strapped beneath the seat—a fine how-do-you-do for any pilot. The black list called for 15 in flying condition. Strobell scraped together 30-odd airplanes, from which to resurrect the 15..."

"...Anspach heard that intelligence wanted pilots to test-fly captured aircraft. No other details emerged, except that the pilots who got the assignment would be sent home quicker. He and Captain Fred Hillis were interviewed and picked. Same for Lieutenant Roy Brown, who was young, craved action and liked the secret detail because it sounded like it involved lots of flying time. Three other pilots made the cut: Captain Kenneth Dahlstrom and Lieutenants William Haynes and James K. "Ken" Holt. All flew to Lechfeld except Haynes, who joined them later. They formed the core of the 54th Air Disarmament Squadron, with Strobell in command. In addition to the pilots there were 10 American crew chiefs and 28 German mechanics."

"Days after their arrival, Watson himself landed and briefed the pilots. They were to fulfill the black list, then fly the rebuilt airplanes to Cherbourg, France, where the 262s would be loaded onto an aircraft carrier and shipped Stateside for a further shakedown. Watson had already gathered the Messerschmitt factory mechanics who'd worked on the jets, and chose six Messerschmitt test pilots to instruct the Americans. Among them: Ludwig "Willie" Huffman, who before the war had set several world glider records, and Karl Baur, Messerschmitt's chief test pilot, who knew more about the 262 than anyone alive, and more than he would confess to any Americans..."

Zyzygie said:

Some good information Koopernic. But arguably a lot of good stuff left out:

1. Galland was writing well after the War, when Luftwaffe politics had been left far behind. He had every reason to be telling the truth.

2. The statement "air brakes would be nice" should be "air brakes would be needed" for ground attack. The last thing you would want is speed running away on making a bombing or straffing run.

3. The 'acceleration control valve' was never going to fix the engine problem. Carbon steel flame tubes and what is essentially stainless steel turbine blades were hopeless.

3. I wouldn't go down the "if only" track. The Allies can do that too:

"...Performance characteristics shown in table I give a maximum speed for the Gloster Meteor F. Mk. 4 of 570 miles per hour, or a Mach number of 0.81, at 20000 feet. One source (ref. 162) indicates that at high speeds the Meteor experienced large trim changes, high aileron stick forces, and a tendency toward snaking. Snaking may be described as a self-sustained yawing oscillation; it plagued many of the earlier jet fighters [including the Me262]. According to reference 188, numerous modifications were tried in an effort to cure the problem on the Meteor - none of them were entirely successful. (Later research indicated that the problem was probably related to incipient flow separation from the relatively thick airfoil sections used in the tail.) Climb performance of the aircraft was outstanding. The sea-level rate of climb was 7500 feet per minute, and an altitude of 30 000 feet could be reached in 5 minutes. Clearly, the performance of the Meteor F. Mk. 4 was much superior to the performance of the Messerschmitt Me 262A for which data are given in table V. To put this comparison in proper perspective, however, the Meteor F. Mk. 4 did not fly until after the end of World War II and had a thrust-to-weight ratio of 0.47 as compared with 0.28 for the earlier German aircraft. The author's analysis of the physical and performance characteristics of the two aircraft suggests that the superior performance of the Meteor was due to the higher thrust of its engines and not to any inherent superiority in aerodynamic design..."

"...Although a strictly subsonic aircraft, the Meteor did have high performance for a straight-wing fighter; it was rugged, versatile, and capable of being readily adapted to various missions..."

RE the ME262 air brakes:

"...The stabilizer angle could be varied with an electric motor activated by the pilot to provide rapid changes in trim with speed. This highly desirable feature was used on many later jet fighters. A deficiency in the aircraft was the lack of a speed brake, which is important for speed control in high-performance aircraft..."

Pioneer Jet Fighters

ch11-2

Click to expand...

I'll quickly handle your responses.
1 Galland was spending a lot of time flying combat missions in Me 262A1 fighters he championed. He was certainly not keeping an eye on development in the Me 262A2 bombers such as TSA 2D toss bombing sights or integration of radar based blind bombing he had strenuously argued against and that led to his demotion. He had a side to take and he is interested in finding and emphasising the worst. He was right at the time, wrong in the long run.

2 Neither the Meteor I nor the XP80A had air brakes. Split flap style Air Brakes were introduced with the Meteor III which entered service in Jan 1945 We had to wait for conversion from Welland to Derwent Engines, from the release of the Derwent from thrust restrictions and no less than two engine nacelle upgrades (more to come). for the Meteor to be combat ready The P-80A was much the same as the YP-80A which preceded it, differing only in minor details. The P-80A introduced under-fuselage dive brakes which opened forward at the wing join.

Hence Dive Brake, eg Me 410 style split dive brakes, could have been fitted to the Me 262 as they were to the P80 and Meteor. As it stands sustained dives of greater than about 20-25 degrees were probably problematic but this was within the capability of the TSA.

3 You said " The 'acceleration control valve' was never going to fix the engine problem. Carbon steel flame tubes and what is essentially stainless steel turbine blades were hopeless. I wouldn't go down the "if only" track. The Allies can do that too:

You realise that all of the data and information you are providing relates to the Meteor IV or Meteor F8. The Meteor IV missed the war entirely. It missed 1945 entirely. It didn't fly till 1946 and wasn't in service till 1947 (in Argentina not the UK). What the UK had at the end of the war was the Meteor III with nacelles modified yet again and derated Derwents. The speed was 495mph. Before the nacelles were modified speed was 480mph. After the war the derating was lifted and speed improved to 515. So by all means keep this entirely before May 1945 because the Me 262A1 will be 45mph or 72km/hr faster with 2-3 times the roll rate than the Meteor III.

I'm keeping it to developments which were running but had not seen service.

Below is the entry to the diary of the Chief Luftwaffe Technical Intelligence officer for March 16 1945. It says the accelerator cotrol valves were expected in early April 1945 which is 3 weeks before he was writing the diary and 6 weeks before the war ended.

KTB-TLR part 8
109 - 004 (ie Jumo 004, koopernic)
Vorschau am Monatsanfang 1000, am Monatsende 900, geliefert 876. (planed production previous month 1000, actually delivered 876, koopernic)

Mehrfache Forderung eines Einbaues eines Beschleunigungsventils, (= intensive expedition of accelerator control valve) welches die Aufgabe hat, unzulässige Überheizung des Triebwerks bei plötzlichem Gas geben zu vermeiden. (=which has the purpose of preventing impermisable overheating of the jet propulsion system during acceleration, koopernic) Einführung bei der Truppe und soweit vorhanden in der Serie bis Anfang April 1945 vorgesehen. (=Introduction to the troops scheduled in the begining of April 1945, koopernic)

Fehlen von Ersatzteilen 004 macht sich bei der Truppe störend bemerkbar. General Kammler befiehlt, daß Ersatzteile unmittelbar zum Klarmachen von Einsatzflugzeugen, ohne Rücksicht auf Serienbelange, zu liefern sind. (=Missing spare parts deliveries to the troops are notably disruptive, General Kammler inists that in service aircraft are to be prioritised)

Me-262: Future in light of engine development

Here some observations from Eric Brown:

Regarding the brakes he wrote on page 245 :"After lining up the aircraft on the runway, the engines were opened up to 8500 rpm on the brakes, and a check was made that the Zwiebel (onion), as the exhaust cone had been dubbed, was protruding from each orifice.

Full power of 8700 rpm was then applied and a quick check was made on the jet pipe temperature, burner pressure, and fuel pressure."

Regarding handling characteristics he wrote on page 252:" The normal range of flight characteristics from aerobatic manoeuvres to the stall revealed the Me 262 as a very responsive and docile aeroplane, leaving one with a confident impression of a first class combat aircraft for both fighter and ground attack roles. Harmony of controls was pleasant, with a stick force per 'g' of 2.72 kg (6lb) at mid-CG position and a roll rate of 360 degrees in 3.8 seconds at 645 km/h (400 mph) at 1525m (5000 ft)."

Regarding the 'snaking' he wrote that the German engineers managed it better to tame it, during the war, than i.e. Gloster engineers with the Meteor I, which had the same problems.

So we have, for the Me 262 a roll rate of 360 degrees/3.8 seconds or 95 degrees second at 400mph. This is quite fast, Faster than the very fast rolling P-51B/D which at that 400mph speed rolled at 85 degrees per second and faster than the 80 degrees second of the long wing Meteor F.4 (I am assuming the normal British/US practice of 60lbs stick force, I do not have short wing meteor F.4 roll rate). The Me 262 had a telescoping joy stick to allow more leverage of the joy stick. I've seen turn rate charts which show that Me 262 turned faster (in degrees/second) than the P-51 though the P-51 could still turn inside the Me 262.

The poor handing refers to snaking at 350mph IAS. At 25000ft 350 mph IAS = 305 knots IAS which becomes 457 knots TAS or 525 mph TAS!. Hardly an impediment considering the P-80, Meteor III barely reached this speed. I have variously heard that the onset of snaking was 460mph, 480 mph or that it could be cured by methodical trim tab adjustments.

In other words the Me 262 was 45mph faster than the Meteor III and rolled faster than the Meteor IV hence it was vastly faster than the Meteor III which was very bad in this area.

Manoeuvring begins with rolling. An Me 262 jumped by a Meteor III would use its superior roll rate to jink or out turn the Meteor and then use its speed to escape. About 50 seconds gets it 1000m away.

Note, the link https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a800524.pdf you provided to an aircraft is clearly in bad shape. Its listed as having a maximum speed of 460mph. I think we can discount it.

4 "...The stabilizer angle could be varied with an electric motor activated by the pilot to provide rapid changes in trim with speed. This highly desirable feature was used on many later jet fighters. A deficiency in the aircraft was the lack of a speed brake, which is important for speed control in high-performance aircraft..."

Speed brakes are essential for jets. No argument there. However the Me 262 was useable without air brakes.

The proper solution to the Mach Tuck problem required some electronics. A Mach Meter needed to be installed with an electronic output. When the aircraft reaches critical Mach, say M0.8 the electric all moving stabiliser is progressively moved. For instance 0.1 degrees at Mach 0.81 and 0.5 degrees at Mach 0.85. This ensures the aircraft allways has enough pitch authority and also ensures the aircraft wont overstress as it slows down. These were in development.

Further to the engines the Germans had 4 relatively quick ways forward
1 the accelerator control valve to stop fuel overdosing
2 the Me 262 had thermocouples to measure EGT exhaust gas temperature. These thermocouples needed some electronics and to operate a bypass valve if the temperature became too high but also to damp down its rate of temperature increase. Easy for electronics to do.
3 the Jumo 004 had automatic control for the exhaust gas nozzle. Its purpose was to keep the pressure in the system (turbine, combustion chamber, compressor) approximatluy constant. It needed some improving.
4 duplex nozels to atomise fuel at low flow rates. A standard feature on the HeS 011 and planed for the Jumo 004.

The Me 262 does have a problem developing at the end of 1945 because both the US and UK are introducing 4000lb to 5000lb thrust engines. To this the Germans can answer only with 3000lbs.

Jumo 004B4 880kg (1980lbs)
Jumo 004C 950kg (2095lbs) some sources claim 1000kg
Jumo 004D (1030kg) 2270lbs) some sources claim 1100kg
HeS 011A 1300kg (2900lbs) (benching 1153kg in Feb 1945, meant to be ready for Ta 183 first flight in June 1945)
HeS 011B 1500kg
HeS 011C 1700kg

All these engines could be fitted to the Me 262
Development of an 1800kg/4000lb thrust Jumo 004H had started as a scaled down Jumo 012 with parts or mock-up beginning.

With some aerodynamic refinement eg the area ruling humps in my other post a 1945 Me 262 should be able to propel itself to 560mph Mach 0.85 and remain controllable as well as accelerate at high speed.

In all honesty, there was never a need for the Me262 to carry bombs (i.e.: "schnellbomber"), the Luftwaffe had the Ar234 for this mission profile and Galland was essentially correct, Willy was simply appeasing "Der Fuhrer" when asked if it could carry bombs - the 262 was NOT originally designed for that option and it should have never been adopted.

The Ar234 and Hs132 would have filled that role perfectly, allowing the 262 to continue on in it's intended role unhindered.