Author Topic: New Jets maybe? (Read 1167 times)

Tac · « **Reply #15 on:** March 11, 2002, 12:46:01 PM »

CC wilbus.

Plus, its a brit plane. And knowing the brits, it prolly was a turnfighter

Pongo · « **Reply #16 on:** March 11, 2002, 01:14:45 PM »

The meteor with 4 center mounted Hispanos has a vast fire power advantage vs the 262.

Staga · « **Reply #17 on:** March 11, 2002, 02:12:43 PM »

If Meteor MkI's max speed was so slow maybe it could be the cheap jet, something like 50-100 perk points ?

Tac · « **Reply #18 on:** March 11, 2002, 02:18:16 PM »

Pongo, id take four nose mounted 30mm's instead of 4 hispanos in a JET any day.

Wilbus · « **Reply #19 on:** March 11, 2002, 02:31:47 PM »

Yes Staga, have to be more expensive then Tempest but cheaper then 100 IMO, it's definatly a plane worth adding though.

Nashwan · « **Reply #20 on:** March 11, 2002, 03:47:38 PM »

The Meteor III flew combat sorties from bases in Holland from March 45.
No air to air kills, but quite a few ground targets, and a 190 damaged iirc.

Production plane, saw service, every bit as valid as Ta152 imho.

Perormance of Meteor III:
about 490 max speed (don't know altitude)
almost identical thrust to 262.
range about 1300 miles
heavier than 262 with full fuel, lighter than 262 with fuel for the same distance

Replicant · « **Reply #21 on:** March 11, 2002, 04:57:31 PM »

The Natter pilot notes are damn funny. "After you regain consciousness from the launch, proceed to intercept target....." More like IF you regain consciousness!

Yeah, the Meteor would be nice as would the He162 Salamander.

Regards

Nexx

funkedup · « **Reply #22 on:** March 11, 2002, 05:21:33 PM »

Meteor Mk. III with Derwent engines (493 mph) was the major wartime version. 200 were built and they were used in combat from January 1945 onward with 504 and 616 Squadrons from bases in Belgium. AFAIK the Luftwaffe never challenged them and they just ended up doing strafing and tearing up the sky.

The really slow version (415 mph) was the Meteor Mk. I with the Welland engines. 20 Built. 616 Sqn used these from July 1944 until they converted to the Mk. III and moved to Belgium. They were used for combat air patrols over Britain. There were few Luftwaffe sorties over Britain by this time, so they ended up knocking down V-1s.

If you crunch the numbers, it's obvious both Meteors would have a turning advantage on the 262 and that they have a better armament suite for taking on fighters, with higher muzzle velocity, rate of fire, and ammo load. However they are both inferior to the speed of the Me 262, although the Mk. III could climb with the 262. I think it would be something like Fw 190A-5 vs. Spitfire Vb. Pretty fun matchup IMHO.

SageFIN · « **Reply #23 on:** March 12, 2002, 06:12:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by funkedup
I think it would be something like Fw 190A-5 vs. Spitfire Vb. Pretty fun matchup IMHO.

Mmh, Meteor I vs 262 maybe, but looking at your analysis, I've a gut feeling that the Mk III would eat 262's alive.

Wilbus · « **Reply #24 on:** March 12, 2002, 08:12:22 AM »

Mk III never saw action, if it is added, then so could many other "what if" planes.

K West · « **Reply #25 on:** March 12, 2002, 08:54:43 AM »

"never saw action" does not make a plane a "what if" type.

Never saw action = Vampyre/Tempest II/F8F/P-80A/DO-335.
What if = Kikka/ B-35/GO-229

The MK III Meteor saw action. It was in mass production, it was deployed into service with combat uinits and it was based on the continent where it flew armed sorties without encountering any appreciable opposition. About the same with the HE-162 'Salamander.' The H-162 flew sorties and even had one reported "kill."

That's not "what if" in the least.

On the other hand a hand full of the YP-80 were sent to Italy and England. While they say the planes flew "sorties" they were IMO more of a morale booster to the troops by saying "see? we got em too!" And the P-80A was in the Phillipines in '45 but unusable due to missing wing tip tanks and batteries - which for some unfathomable reason were not sent with the planes themselves (duh!). So technically even the P-80 passes my "mass production and deployed to combat units" criteria but it never saw any reported "action." So even I would question adding the P-80 to the AH planeset.

Westy

Wilbus · « **Reply #26 on:** March 12, 2002, 08:59:53 AM »

Meteor MK III never saw any combat, it was in service on the other side of the channel (S side). P80 definatly should not be added, if Meteor Mk III is added, so should the Do335.

K West · « **Reply #27 on:** March 12, 2002, 09:58:46 AM »

Well the thing for me is the DO-335 and the HE-162 are valid WWII aircraft and I'd not have any problem with them being included in the AH planeset. Whether they saw action or not imo is irrelevant. They were beng produced and were deployed.
Much the same way I think the MS.502, Fokker XXI (?) or PZ.11 were in the early war period. Not having had any action nor being in very little doesn't make a WWII plane.

Westy

Nashwan · « **Reply #28 on:** March 12, 2002, 12:03:27 PM »

Quote

Meteor MK III never saw any combat, it was in service on the other side of the channel (S side).

South side? The closest to a south side for the channel would be Normandy.

Meteor IIIs operated on both sides of the channel, in the UK and Holland/Belgium.

Extracts of 616 squadron activity in 45 (only sorties flown from Kluis are shown)
13.4.45. Arrived at B-91 Kluis, Nijmegen from B.77 Gilze-Rijen
16.4.45. Operations in Utrecht/Amsterdam/Leiden/Wageningen area.
17.4.45. M.T. in IJmuiden area.
18.4.45. M.T. attacked in West Holland. Flack bursts reported at same hight as Meteor but always well behind. 'A good thing to see' says the pilot ! B.B.C. news bulletin refers to 'British jets in action in Holland' !
19.4.45. M.T.
20.4.45. Move to B-109 (Quackenbruck in Germany)

Wilbus · « **Reply #29 on:** March 12, 2002, 12:31:45 PM »

And what do you think I ment with South side?