Zyzygie’s Mumbles and Rambles

[Admiral Beez]

The modern-day replica Me 262 is a wonder to see. With these reliable engines, I wonder how it would do against the Meteor.

 

[fubar57]

I think even with the original engines it would be all over the Meteor

 

[Admiral Beez]

I think even with the original engines it would be all over the Meteor

What was the first British jet that you think could match a well-built and piloted Me 262?

Per Wikipedia, the Me 262 has a top speed of 900 km/h (560 mph, 490 kn), faster than the Meteor and Vampire, but 30 mph slower than the Supermarine Attacker, first flown in 1946. By the time the Attacker is sorted, the faster Meteors should be ready.

 

[GrauGeist]

What was the first British jet that you think could match a well-built and piloted Me 262?

Per Wikipedia, the Me 262 has a top speed of 900 km/h (560 mph, 490 kn), faster than the Meteor and Vampire, but 30 mph slower than the Supermarine Attacker, first flown in 1946. By the time the Attacker is sorted, the faster Meteors should be ready.

The Germans had other jets in the works, including the 262's successor, the HGII/III series - and if I recall right, the P-80 was perhaps the closest match to the Me262's performance by early 1945.

 

[nuuumannn]

The Attacker was an unlikely fighter that suffered drag issues in development, but might have been able to defeat the 262, owing to its reliable engine, I say might cautiously though. it had a faster climb rate and better ceiling, but speed wise there was little between them - the 262 could probably accelerate faster. It was a tail dragger, which made it an odd choice for a carrier fighter, and its performance was not startling, even for its time. It was certainly no match for the MiG-15 with the same engine, the RR Nene, by which the MiG-15 prototype was powered. One wee historical side note was that the Attacker was the first fighter to enter service with a flight data recorder.

The Meteor F.8 would be able to take advantage of better performance and power than early variants, but a top Me 262 pilot might be able to win the day in a dog fight at low to medium height, save for the Meteor pilot waiting for the Me 262's unreliable engines to fail, otherwise I'd put money on the F.8 being able to outperform the Me 262 at height. The F.8 had the same Mach number as the 262 (.82) and had a faster climb rate, level speed and higher ceiling than the 262.

Britain missed the opportunity to exploit the increased power of the RR Nene engine that went into the Attacker and Sea Hawk - Hawker built a swept wing variant of that, the P.1052 which had excellent characteristics and it should easily have been able to defeat the 262, and it might have been an equal to the MiG-15, but the RAF didn't want this aircraft, it wanted an axial flow engine powered variant Hawker called the P.1067, which eventually became the Hunter. The delays in getting the Avon to breathe without massive compressor surge also made the early incarnations of the Hunter terribly unreliable, but the airframe was excellent. All of this did mean that Britain got left behind slightly because they had to hold onto the Meteor for longer than was necessary. RAAF Meatboxes in Korea were completely outclassed by the MiG-15s, although an Aussie pilot did shoot one down.

As a result of this gap in Britain's capabilities, the French, the Russians and the Americans were introducing the first generation truly supersonic fighters into service; the Super Mystere, the MiG-19 and the F-100 and the Brits had to swan about with the subsonic Hunter and Javelin until the EE Lightning, although that was very much a big middle finger to everything else in terms of all-out performance. Sorting the Avon meant improving the compressor by mating the forward section from an AS Sapphire engine, an unsung and far more reliable design than the early incarnations of the Avon, to the Avon hot section. That made it ready for the Lightning.

 

[wuzak]

Supermarine Attacker first flies in July 1946.
Hawker Sea Hawk first flies in September 1947.
Meteor F.8 first flight in October 1948.

These are the aircraft that will beat the Me 262 in 1945? Or is it expected that the Me 262 will not improve over the 1-3 years for those opponents to appear? Nor will its engines get more powerful and reliable?

The most likely Me 262 adversaries would be the Meteor F.3, Meteor F.4, Vampire I and P-80. Of those, the Meteor F.4, first flight August 1945, would appear to be the best match for the Me 262.

Long Span
Engine: Two Rolls-Royce Derwent V engines
Thrust: 3,500lb each
Span: 43ft
Length: 41ft
Gross Weight: 13,900lb
Maximum level speed at sea level: 583mph
Maximum level speed at 30,000ft: 570mph
Rate of climb at sea level: 7,900ft/min
Cruise Range at normal load: 510 miles
Cruise Range with external tanks: 713 miles
Armament: Four 20mm cannon in nose and two 1,000lb bombs or sixteen 90lb rocket projectiles under the wings

Short Span: As above apart from
Span: 37.2ft
Gross Weight: 15,175lb
Maximum level speed at sea level: 590mph
Rate of climb at sea level: 7,350ft/,in
Ceiling: 44,500ft

Gloster Meteor F Mk.IV

 

[Admiral Beez]

Brits had to swan about with the subsonic Hunter and Javelin until the EE Lightning, although that was very much a big middle finger to everything else in terms of all-out performance.

The Javelin was such a slug that its designer Richard Walker should have retired after his Meteor was finished.

And......... bringing us back to the Whirlwind thread, the Lightning and the Whirlwind were both designed by W. E. W. Petter. Sir Sydney Cam got his Knighthood, but only Petter managed to navigate the maze of government and defence ministry policy and strategy changes to get an all-British supersonic fighter into service.

 

[nuuumannn]

the Lightning and the Whirlwind were both designed by W. E. W. Petter

Yup, Teddy Petter was one of the more 'adventurous' designers out there - he was also responsible for the Lysander, Canberra and the Folland Gnat.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Yup, Teddy Petter was one of the more 'adventurous' designers out there - he was also responsible for the Lysander, Canberra and the Folland Gnat.

If there was a Petter only museum, I'd go.

 

[nuuumannn]

If there was a Petter only museum, I'd go.

The RAF Museum perhaps? Has a Lysander (currently on restoration at Cosford), Canberra, Lightning and Gnat at Hendon. Sadly no Whirlwind or Welkin, but then neither survive. And as a bonus, there is an Me 262 at Cosford, and there you can make direct comparison with a Meatbox.

Me 262

For added weirdness, at Cosford is also the prone pilot Meteor that Brown flew.

Prone Pilot Meteor

 

[Admiral Beez]

For added weirdness, at Cosford is also the prone pilot Meteor that Brown flew.

View attachment 560909Prone Pilot Meteor

How does that POS survive but no Whirlwind?!

 

[nuuumannn]

How does that POS survive but no Whirlwind?!

It's post-war? It's probably more of a travesty that no de Havilland Hornet survives, rather than no Whirlwind, but they are going to build a Hornet from original parts in New Zealand.

 

[Admiral Beez]

I'd like to see the replica Me 262 fly with a Meteor. That would be worth the price of admission to any air show.

 

[Thos9]

Probably the Me 262 as in most cases they were still being flown by experienced fighter pilots and the Me 262 was substantially faster.

The question depends to some extent on which Meteor
Meteor I with Welland engines, good for around 417mph, actually slower than FW 190D-9's and Me 109K-4's except for maybe sea level.
Meteor I with improved Wellands (good for about 440mph but still not better than a piston aircraft
Meteor III with early Wellands good for about 440 mph
Meteor III with Derwent II good for about 480mph (these were derated)
Meteror III with Derwent II just after end of war, good for about 490mph. (there was no Meteor II in service, this test only version had axial flow Vickers Beryl engines)

The Me 262 had a typical max speed of 540mph and about 515mph at sea level. Poor examples managed only 522mph but good ones did over 560mph due to airframe tollerances. On that basis we can say that the Me 262 could evade combat or escape if it were not on his terms. It's a big advantage.

The Meteor was most probably more manouverable in terms of turning circle (though the Vampire was much better) though I would doubt the turning rate was superior as the Me 262 was faster. The Meteor also had a higher service ceiling due to compressor surging issues that the Me 262 had. The Me 262 could be flown to a respectable 37,000ft but 30,000ft to 33,000ft represents a safe limmit for it due to those engine issues while the Meteor could get to 42,000ft. Me 262 had a higher Mach limmit and dive rate though the Meteor III's addition of speed brakes made it more able to exploit a dive. Messerschmitt could probably add speed brakes of a similar kind as the dive brake used on the Me 410.

After the end of the war highly modified Meteor III's with clipped wings, faired over gun ports and Derwent V engines managed speeds of around 600mph at sea level. The Derwent V was not really a Derwent but a scaled down Nene. The records had to be broken at sea level where the speed of sound was 750mph because at 36,000ft where the speed of sound was 660mph the Meteor would have exceded Mach limmit and possibly ended up in an irrecoverable "Mach Tuck" dive. These modifications were 'productionised' as the Meteor F4 but only in 1948. Till then Meteor III's held the line.

Bottom Line: Me 262 was much faster than Meteor and P-80A during the period of the hostillities. It could out accelerate and outclimbe the P-80A and likely the Meteor (especially as the Meteor approched its top speed) at around 25,000ft.

The Jumo 004B4 reliabillity showed promise of improving and some if well handled managed 60 hours before being refurbished. The life was not a nominal 25 hours but the MTBO (mean time between overhaul) was 25 hours. The 6 carbon steel combustion chamber cans were removed (due to corrision of the mild steel used) and the turbine blade was removed for recyling and replaced with a new one. (Officially it was x-rayed and reused for 12.5 hours if OK).

At the end of the war a new control system was meant to reach opperational service, the bescleunigungs ventile (accelerator valve) and I can provide a link to source documents. The Jumo 004B engine used a simple centrifugal governor to control RPM of the engine via the throttle, if the throttle was move to fast the gap between target RPM and actual lead to too great an increase in fuel that could burn out the engine combustion chambers and turbines or if throttleing down lead to fuel starvation.

The accelerator control valve added an aneroid capsule across the compressor to effetively measure true mass flow of air to keep the air-fuel ratio such that it neither overheated the engine or flamed it out. The system mde it onto the BMW 003. Another feature likely before the end of 1945 would be duplex nozzels whereby at low flow rates that are experience at idling or high altitude a second set of nozzles is engaged that maintains a fine fuel aerosol suitable for stable combustion. There was also postions for electronic temperature sensing in the Jumo 004B to further tame the engine and thereby extend its life and thrust.

The Jumo 004D, scheduled for 1945 production was supposed to increase thrust from 900kP to 1050 or 1100kP. Using a square root law this 19% increase in thrust should drive the Me 262 speed up by 9% or to its Mach limmit ie about 565mph at altitude and 575mph at sea level.

The Me 262 needed superior speed as its manouverabillity was likely limmited in comparison to allied jets.

Meteor III's addition of speed brakes made it more able to exploit a dive. Messerschmitt could probably add speed brakes of a similar kind as the dive brake used on the Me 410.

In May 1942 it was decided to equip the Me 262 with air brakes. However in May 1943, before any machine was so fitted, that decision was reversed (as also was one to fit an ejector seat). Both reversals were unfortunate for aircraft and pilots.

 

[ThomasP]

Hey Thos9,

Did your source give the reason for not fitting brakes?

 

[Thos9]

What was the endurance of a Gloster Meteor during April 1945? I suspect no better then a Me-262.

Rather less. The 262's engines were thirstier (sfc) but the Meteor's airframe was draggier. However the Meteor's fuel capacity was 325 Imp gal and the 262's was 565 (both clean).

 

[Greyman]

Basic figures I have (still air range, no extra tanks):

Me 262 - 650 miles
Meteor III - 580 miles

 

[GrauGeist]

Basic figures I have (still air range, no extra tanks):

Me 262 - 650 miles
Meteor III - 580 miles

The 650 miles figure is CAP range with no combat - if the 262 had to intercept/engage, that range dropped dramatically.

 

[Thos9]

Basic figures I have (still air range, no extra tanks):

Me 262 - 650 miles
Meteor III - 580 miles

The 262 figure of 650 miles relates to 396 gal in main tanks only. Other internal tanks held 169 gal. The Meteor III could carry an external jettisonable tank of 180 gal, adding range and drag.

 

[fubar57]

Range given here is 652 miles...https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=108
Fuel capacity 1800l, 395.9 imperial gallons here....Me 262 PROJECT TECHNICAL DATA