Originally posted by uberkid:
The P-80 never flew an operational sortie during the war. It may have flow in europe, but never fired its guns in anger. The Me 262 was the best fighter of World War II in that it had a heavy armament practical in the anti-bomber role and anti-fighter role. It could out-run the P-51 by something like 100mph. It incorporated a swept-wing design, a very revolutionary thing back then. Was very maneuverable.
The only thing wrong with early variants were the throttle sensitivity, but that was fixed before the end of the war. The Jumo 004 engine had only a running life of 10 hours, thats the only thing that the Meteor and the P-80 had on it, the engines. The Meteor was unmanueverable so they put it to work busting V-1 cruise missiles. The P-80 was a poor design (the trainer variant is still in service today) coming from a country so economically and industrialy powered as the USA was. The German Genesis, the Me-262, was by-far the best fighter of WWII. And to come from a country being continually bombed is amazing.
The interesting thing is that the messerschimdt plant was never bombed. One of there production facilities was overlooked by Allied intelligence and not a single bomb was dropped on it.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. While from an engineering standpoint, the Me-262 was more
innovative than the P-80 (The swept wings on the 262 were what convinced North American that a swept-wing design for the P-86 was worth lookingt into), the P-80 was an excellent fighter design. It was practical, simple, maneuverable, reliable, easy to fly, clean, and fast. The guns were not as powerful as those on the Me-262, but the design was not an intercepter. .50's were also far more reliable than the guns used on the 262. The aircraft was exceptionably stable, and could do some very impressive things with a skilled pilot at the controls.
So in conclusion, despite the technological and engineering innovation of the Me-262, the P-80 was practically the superior design. It went on to serve in the Korean War, where it gave the United States an excellent and capable fighter, first for air superiority and later for ground support.
I hate to say it, but this statement:
"The P-80 was a poor design (the trainer variant is still in service today) coming from a country so economically and industrialy powered as the USA was." is utter hogwash, and an example of typical (and irritating) LW elitism. "If it was built for the Luftwaffe, it would sweep the skies of anything else. If it was built by the Allies, it was a poor, inferior design that prevailed solely through numerical superiority." This is utterly ridiculous. The P-80 was an
excellent aircraft. Do you think the trainer would still be in service if it wasn't? Of course not.
So please, try and open your mind a little more about the a/c in question. Innovative does not necessarily = better. Look at the He-162 for an example. The Me-262 was brilliant, the wave of the future, and a wonderful example of how a fighter should be designed and built, but it's performance (and reliability) simply weren't up to the same level as many contemporary designs that were more conventional.
[ 07-21-2001: Message edited by: ispar ]
