Author Topic: Gloster Meteor (Read 4568 times)

Furball · « **Reply #60 on:** April 04, 2006, 06:19:18 PM »

the first Meteor I was July 1944.

Meteor III was operational from Belgium in January 1945.

Krusty · « **Reply #61 on:** April 04, 2006, 06:34:04 PM »

The Meteor I saw very little use, and was not even in squad strength, right? It was basically a year-long attempt to iron out the numerous problems the aircraft had (prolonged flight testing).

Guppy35 · « **Reply #62 on:** April 05, 2006, 12:02:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
The Meteor I saw very little use, and was not even in squad strength, right? It was basically a year-long attempt to iron out the numerous problems the aircraft had (prolonged flight testing).

616 Squadron had the Meteors, transitioning from Spits. Shot down V-1s with them, helped teach jet tactics to Allied fighter Groups on occasion, then got to the continent. Got to be friends with a former B of B vet Spit driver who flew Meteors with 616 from July 44 til the end. He was one of the first Allied drivers to fly the 262 when he and his CO went to Fassburg to grab a couple of 262s.

Definately operational.

Karnak · « **Reply #63 on:** April 05, 2006, 03:18:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Krusty
Karnak I believe somebody at HTC made some comment somewhere. However it was about other late war planes, perhaps the bearcat or the tigercat?

Bearcat and Tigercat meet the production model and squadron service requirements, true. They do not meet the combat zone requirement though, which the Meteor Mk III does meet.

The Meteor Mk III fired its guns in anger during WWII at living Germans.

Westy · « **Reply #64 on:** April 05, 2006, 10:53:43 AM »

"How the hell can you, with a straight face, say that bombers never saw air combat? That GVs never saw ground combat? That PT boats didn't see naval combat? Are you serious, or just a troll?"

No troll. I used the same twisted and limiting yardstick you and others tend to whip out at times to show you what a farce it is.

I certainly don't twist things around nor do I put words in HTc's mouth. As for the rest? Furball, Guppy and Karnak put the issue to rest (once again) very nicely. If it isn't then no amount of "But look at this!" will make the blind see.

Krusty · « **Reply #65 on:** April 05, 2006, 11:36:20 AM »

Westy you're rather full of yourself. There never was an issue to "put to rest."

And you're simply making stupid statements and saying "using your logic" -- when you're inventing your own brand on the spot.

We already knew that the Meteor III was in operation at the end of the war. However, we also know it never shot at an enemy plane, it never fought with anything other than buzz bombs (and that was mostly the Meteor I).

The question is not "was it active in WW2" but "did it ever see action." I brought up examples of an even rarer aircraft and say "Hell, at least plane XXX can prove it was in combat -- see it was shot down at least once!" and you start saying this wierd crap about no bomber ever having been in combat, no GV or PT ever having been in combat.

If you're trying to make a point you failed, as you did not communicate it effectively. The wording or phrasing didn't translate into what you wanted, is what I mean.

Brenjen · « **Reply #66 on:** April 05, 2006, 01:24:57 PM »

I think the meteor is ugly & the 262 is the more graceful looking of the two myself...but that's beside the point. The meteor did see limited service in WWII as was pointed out - HTC has a lot of options for vehicles to add to this game that saw limited service & in limited quantities....but they have even more options with the ones that were far more common, I think that's what some folks are trying to say. I can see both sides; side one - something to counter the 262 - side two - more common aircraft that are not so *uber* I think the word is. There were so many exotic vehicles that saw limited action in limited numbers that you could create an entire game just around them.

Myself I'd like to see the later model Panther tanks as a "middle of the road" tank that would give good speed & good punch & be able to give the Tiger a run for it's money without costing so many perkies. But; although they were common, it's just not high on HTC's list ( like jeeps

apparently were for some odd reason )

Karnak · « **Reply #67 on:** April 05, 2006, 02:01:43 PM »

I will point out that I am not advocating the Meteor's immediate introduction to AH. There are vastly higher priorities like the Russian and Japanese planesets as well as fleshing out the GV set.

Eventually? Sure. But it is a very low priority.

E25280 · « **Reply #68 on:** April 05, 2006, 02:07:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Brenjen
side one - something to counter the 262

IIRC the Meteor was both slower and a worse turner (due to the propensity of wing buffet) than the 262. Its only advantage afaik would be the better balistics on the 4 20mm hispanos vs the 262's 30mm guns. Perhaps if acceleration is better it would have a chance, but I don't know that to be the case.

In other words, if are under the impression that the Meteor out-classes the 262, you are mistaken. I don't mean to put words in anyone's mouth, just saying. . .

Hoarach · « **Reply #69 on:** April 05, 2006, 03:05:52 PM »

At least some of us (I know especially me) would be able to hit with the 4x20mms. The 30mms on the 262 I find very hard to hit with and planes can easily fly between the rounds.

Brenjen · « **Reply #70 on:** April 05, 2006, 04:04:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by E25280
IIRC the Meteor was both slower and a worse turner (due to the propensity of wing buffet) than the 262. Its only advantage afaik would be the better balistics on the 4 20mm hispanos vs the 262's 30mm guns. Perhaps if acceleration is better it would have a chance, but I don't know that to be the case.

In other words, if are under the impression that the Meteor out-classes the 262, you are mistaken. I don't mean to put words in anyone's mouth, just saying. . .

Well, maybe you didn't technically put words in my mouth, but you certainly read a lot into my post. I never went into technical flight data or flight characteristics on either aircraft. I was merely making mention ( in passing at that ) to someone elses mention of using it as a counter to the 262. If I'm not mistaken, ( I could be ) the Meteor was faster than any other British prop plane, that being said, the 262's speed is it's greatest ( maybe only ) advantage. Soooo; I assume that the Meteors speed would be the "countering factor" to the 262 as it's faster than the others & therefore the best weapon to counter the 262..right?

Karnak · « **Reply #71 on:** April 05, 2006, 04:23:45 PM »

The Meteor had a higher climb rate than the Me262 did, so as some speeds it would accelerate faster. It would also out turn the Me262 by a fair margin.

The Me262's high speed handling would be markedly better though and the top speed is 50mph faster.

Billy Joe Bob · « **Reply #72 on:** April 05, 2006, 07:24:31 PM »

so each has advantages and disatvantages. one for maneaurving and handling and one for speed. i vote it in because you could have a choice between the two flavors

Furball · « **Reply #73 on:** April 06, 2006, 03:48:46 AM »

Quote

The first operational jet fighter squadron was No. 616, based at Culmhead, Somerset, equipped with Spitfire F.Mk VIIs when its first two Meteor F.Mk Is arrived on 12 July 1944. On 21 July the squadron moved to Manston, Kent, receiving more Meteors on 23 July to form a detached flight of seven. The first operational sorties were flown on 27 July, and on 4 August, near Tonbridge, Flying Officer Dean destroyed the first Vl fiying bomb to be claimed by a jet fighter, using the Meteor's wingtip to tip it over into a spin after the aircraft's four 20 mm cannon had jammed. On the same day, Flying Officer Roger shot down a second V1 near Tenterden.

Conversion to Meteors was completed towards the end of August, and the autumn was spent preparing for operations on the continent. Between 10 and 17 October, however, four Meteors were detached to Debden, to take part in an exercise with the USAAF 2nd Bombardment Division and 65th Fighter Wing, to enable defensive tactics against the Luftwaffe's Messerschmitt Me 163 and Me 262 fighters to be devised. The first Meteor F.Mk III aircraft were delivered to Manston on 18 December, and on 17 January the squadron moved to Colerne, Wiltshire, where the remaining Meteor F.Mk Is were replaced. On 20 January 1945 one flight of No. 616's Meteors joined No. 84 Group, 2nd Tactical Air Force in Belgium, and in March No. 504 became the second Meteor F.Mk Ill unit to operate on the other side of the English Channel.

The Meteor F.Mk Ill, the second and last mark to see operational service during World War 11, had increased fuel capacity and a sliding bubble canopy in place of the sideways-opening hood of the Meteor Mk.l. Fifteen F.Mk IIIs were completed with Welland engines and 195 with Derwents, some in lengthened engine nacelles. Derwents also powered the Meteor F.Mk IV (subsequently Meteor F.Mk 4), later examples of which were modified by a 1.78 m (5 ft 10 in) reduction in wingspan. Of 657 built, 465 were supplied to the RAF, enabling Meteor F.Mk Ills to be passed to auxiliary units.

Quote

The Meteor III is superior to the Tempest V in almost all departments. If it were not for the heaviness of its ailerons and the consequent poor maneuverability in the rolling plane, and the adverse effect of snaking on it as a gun platform, it would be a comparable all-round fighter with greatly increased performance.

E25280 · « **Reply #74 on:** April 06, 2006, 08:29:18 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Brenjen
Well, maybe you didn't technically put words in my mouth, but you certainly read a lot into my post. I never went into technical flight data or flight characteristics on either aircraft. I was merely making mention ( in passing at that ) to someone elses mention of using it as a counter to the 262. If I'm not mistaken, ( I could be ) the Meteor was faster than any other British prop plane, that being said, the 262's speed is it's greatest ( maybe only ) advantage. Soooo; I assume that the Meteors speed would be the "countering factor" to the 262 as it's faster than the others & therefore the best weapon to counter the 262..right?

I used your quote of "counter to the 262" as it was the closest to my post and the most succinct phrase of what I thought some might be thinking. Your point is well taken though -- "counter to" does not necessarily mean "superior to".

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
The Meteor had a higher climb rate than the Me262 did, so as some speeds it would accelerate faster.

I looked at a couple sites, and both planes seem to be right at 3,900fpm climb rate. But I do not know if that is a max climb rate from level max speed, or exactly how that figure is arrived at. I know the 262 seems to accelerate slowly (during take off, for example). So is the even climb rates I have seen strictly a function of the 262's superior speed? i.e. if both started at 400mph, the meteor would climb at a markedly better rate?