Author Topic: 1944 Aircraft: Spifire XIV, Tempest V, Me 262, Fw 190D-9 (Read 2455 times)

funked · « **Reply #15 on:** June 27, 2000, 06:27:00 PM »

Pongo:

Thrust-weight ratios (sea level, empty):
Meteor III .32
Me 262A-1 .47

Wing-loading (empty)
Meteor III 28 lb/ft^2
Me 262A-1 36 lb/ft^2

Top Speed
Meteor III 492 mph
Me 262A-1 539 mph

I would expect the 262 to kick the snot out of the Meteor in every area of performance except sustained turning. And considering the disparity in T/W, sustained turning will be closer than indicated by the wingloading. Top speed, acceleration, climb, vertical maneuvering - these are all squarely in the 262's court. The only thing I am not clear on is the variation in thrust vs. altitude, whether one plane has an advantage in that area.

Perhaps Fw 190A-5 vs. Spitfire II would be a better analogy! I'd sure love to try out this matchup though!

And I agree about the armament packages UNLESS one is after B-17's and B-24's. For fighter-to-fighter combat, the 3cm round is overkill, and the Hispano's ballistics are better.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-27-2000).]

fd ski · « **Reply #16 on:** June 27, 2000, 09:05:00 PM »

First kill of Spitfire 14 was in March of 1944 - and it was a Ju88 or 288 on recon mission IRC.

------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF

Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998

Northolt Wing Headquarters

funked · « **Reply #17 on:** June 27, 2000, 09:25:00 PM »

Thanks Boss!

-lynx- · « **Reply #18 on:** June 28, 2000, 10:12:00 AM »

Just to stir the pot a bit:

"D9 could have flown in 1942..."
Tempest V FLEW in 1942

.

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

Karnak · « **Reply #19 on:** June 28, 2000, 10:43:00 AM »

Yes yes. And the Griffon engined Spitfires first flew in 1941.

But that is all meaningless because the standard we seem to be going with is this: When did it first face a piloted enemy aircraft? This is not a standard that I find unacceptable. It seems to be pretty egalitarian at this time.

Sisu
-Karnak

Hristo · « **Reply #20 on:** June 28, 2000, 11:52:00 AM »

Nice Dora. But JV 44 one looks cooler.

262 ? Perk it. Only dedicated JG members should fly it

funked · « **Reply #21 on:** June 28, 2000, 12:29:00 PM »

LOL Hristo!

jmccaul · « **Reply #22 on:** June 28, 2000, 12:54:00 PM »

The point of the meteor wouldn't
be to better the 262 but it would be
50 mph faster than the next fastest
prop plane and give it's pilot a
bit better chance of catching a 262.

[This message has been edited by jmccaul (edited 06-28-2000).]

Bombjack · « **Reply #23 on:** June 29, 2000, 05:35:00 AM »

Meteor versus 262 is a beautiful example of the "what-if" scenarios that never took place during the war, but we could get the chance to play out for ourselves. I don't know of anywhere it's been done.

This particular one looks like a sure win for the 262, but hell, I'm game

JEK · « **Reply #24 on:** June 29, 2000, 09:16:00 AM »

HI excused for my insufficient English we add also this to the list

airplane used for the defense of BERLIN against bombers

airplane REGGIANE RE2005

I love RE2005

Nashwan · « **Reply #25 on:** June 30, 2000, 12:21:00 PM »

The thrust to weight figures for the Meteor and 262 suprised me. I had always assumed they had similar power to weight, and that the superior aerodynamics of the 262 accounted for the speed difference.
The figures I was able to find, mostly from a couple of Jane's books, are:
Me262
Thrust
2x 1890lb at Sea Level at 560mph Fuel consumption 3680 lb/hr
2x 1605lb at sea level at 273mph fuel consumption 2920 lb/hr
Fuel Tankage 566 gallons
Range 650m
Speed 540mph at 20,000ft
Janes lists take off weight with 522 gallons of fuel, clean config 4 30mm guns and full ammunition as 15500lb

Meteor
Thrust
2x 2000lb static thrust at sea level fuel con 2360 lb/hr
2x 1550lb static thrust at sea level fuel con 1820 lb/hr cruising
Fuel tankage 330 gallons internal, 105 gallons fixed ventral tank
range 1340m
Speed various between 490 and 520mph. Also Bill Gunston gives the figure of 470mph at sea level
Weight. Janes lists 14000lb but doesn't say what configuration. The only reliable data I can find is 10684lb for an empty F8, which is presumably heavier than an F3

I don't know about the differences in thrust, wether 2000lb static is better or worse than 1890lb at 560mph. But I think in typical combat configuration, allowing for the much greater weight of fuel the 262 must carry, that the Meteor would be lighter than the 262, and should have a better thrust to weight ratio. I also presume the weight of the 30mm ammunition in the 262 would be greater than the 20mm in the Meteor, but I have no idea of the ammount the Meteor carried.

The 262 should still hold most of the advantages over the Meteor, but I don't think it's quite as bad as the figures suggest at first glance.

If anyone can provide definitive figures for any of this (SL speed of the 262 etc) then I would be gratefull).

funked · « **Reply #26 on:** June 30, 2000, 04:29:00 PM »

Nashwan, I got my thrust figures from the Elevon website. They are for a Mk. III, which is what fought in WW2. Are you sure those higher thrust figures are not for a later Mark?

Nashwan · « **Reply #27 on:** June 30, 2000, 05:28:00 PM »

I have multiple sources (Janes, Bill Gunstons Encyclopaedia of Aero Engines, several other books and mags) which agree that the first 15 Meteor IIIs were fitted with Welland engines of 1700lb thrust iirc. The next 195 production Meteor IIIs were built with Derwent I engines, 2000lb thrust. (one book list them as 1995lb thrust).
Janes reprint of 1946 all the worlds aircraft gives no performance or weight data for the meteor (presumably classified at that time) but gives the specs I quoted for the Derwent engine. Bill Gunston gives similar figures, and also gives the Derwent a SFC of 1.083. He contrats the Derwent favourably with the Jumo, stating the TBO for the Derwent at 150 hours in service, compared to 30 for the Jumo. He states 500 Derwent Is were produced for the Meteor in 1944.
The next mark of meteor, the F4, used the Derwent 5 of 3500lb thrust.

funked · « **Reply #28 on:** July 01, 2000, 09:39:00 AM »

Thanks Nashwan, I had used the Welland in my calculations. The question, I guess, is whether the Derwent-fitted planes made it into combat.

flakbait · « **Reply #29 on:** July 03, 2000, 04:18:00 AM »

How about something other than a jet....like a rocket plane. Me-163 would be a lot of fun to fly; perfect plane for buff intercepts. Nothing like screaming nearly straight up at 8k/min!!!!! Only problem I can see is the max. altitude; if HT put a limit of 40k you wouldn't be able to zoom clear up to 48k like the Komet could.

I wonder how far you could glide at that alt?

Flakbait