Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: dirtdart on March 07, 2011, 07:33:07 PM
-
It seems a bit odd to only have one jet fighter. What jet airplanes were operational in ww2? I readheard there were P80s in italy prior to the end of the war.
-
(http://bunga2ku.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/meteor.jpg)
Need a Gloster Meteor
But I'd first like to see what we have now get remodeled.
-
See, I saw this thing here, and I didn't understand... something about MILFs... so I googled it....
:rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock :rock
-
The 262 has many peers in this game. The Gloster wasn't one of them. The 262 is more than readily brought down by p51s, p47s, p38s, spitfires, 109s, and more often than not the first ping from any bomber formation inside 1000 yards.
It's a false argument to request the gloster because it's the "262's peer" -- it wasn't. It was hoarded and hidden and kept safe from all harm. Because of that it saw precious little actual combat and never proved itself.
The 262 was operational in number as early as mid 1944. And seeing combat. Keep that in mind when you consider what "peers" it had.
-
You have to be careful in speaking in such absolutes Krusty. While I'm not one who sees the Meteor as a need, it certainly warrants consideration for addition to the game at some point. Based on conversations I had back in my Spit XII researching days, with a B of B vet turned Supermarine Service test pilot, then a 616 squadron Meteor pilot, the Meteor was a peer of the 262. He was on the continent with 616 and ended up flying a 262 prior to the end of the war. He described the performance as similar. He saw the 262 armament as the biggest difference.
Remember the RAF had the luxury of easing the Meteor into action. Neither the 262 or Meteor were used on offensive ops. The 262 had to get into action fast as the fight was over it's turf. When the V-1s started flying to England the Meteor got in the game. both the 262 and Meteor essentially were forced into service to deal with the terror weapons of the time. Had the tables been turned and the airwar was driving over Allied turf, you can bet the Meteor would have been much more in the thick of it. As is, it was there, saw operational service, killed some V-1s in the summer of 44 and was on the Continent with 616 and another squadron when the war ended.
Certainly there are other birds that should get in game first in my opinion, a certain Bristol made twin engined bird being one of them, but the Meteor would not be a bad idea.
-
I mentioned the Meteor because it seemed what dirtdart was asking for. I would like to see it in AH, but sometime in the future, there are a lot of other things that we need before this.
By "peer" I think he meant something that was jet powered as well.
-
I dont think p80s were in Italy becouse the european war ended before the p80 entered service ('45 late july). Also i dont even think the meteor seen any flying enemy aircraft during the war.
-
The Meteor Mk. I certainly wasn't the Me262's peer in terms of performance. It was very lack luster in that department, just a little faster then the best prop fighters at the time.
The Meteor Mk. III on the other hand would definitely be a better choice in terms of "adding something of value" in terms of performance. As it stands, there's a massive jump in top speed from the K4/P51D/La7/Tempest to the Me262; the Mk. III would fit somewhere in between.
The Mk. III saw extremely little action in the last month of the war in Europe. The war ended with the Meteors having destroyed 46 German aircraft through ground attack. However, the Mk. III does indeed meet HiTech's criteria for adding new planes to Aces High: It was in squadron service and fired its guns in anger. It would definitely be the most rare and exotic additions to the sim.
Finding plausible performance data for the Mk. III is proving rather hard. But I found the following information posted in ww2incolour's forum:
"I was lucky to find the following data in a book "WW2 - Aircraft", by Christopher Chant, (Orbis Publishing Limited, London, 1975)." which stats the following performance data:
(http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a137/Langnasen/GlosterMeteorFMK4.jpg)
Gloster Meteor F. Mk III
Powerplant: 2X Rolls Royce Derwent I, 907 kp of static thrust at sea level
Maximum speed: 793 km/h (492MPH) at 9150 m; 737 km/h (458MPH) at sea level
Armament: 4X20 mm Hispano Mod. III, 195 shells per cannon
Range: 2157 km, with 563 km/h cruising speed at 9.150 m
Service ceiling: 13,100 m (42,979ft)
Velocity of climb: 1213 m/min. (3979ft/min)
-
(http://bunga2ku.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/meteor.jpg)
Need a Gloster Meteor
But I'd first like to see what we have now get remodeled.
That's not a version which saw combat during WWII, note the clipped wings and longer engine nacelles, paint, markings among other things.
-
Anyway, the meteor would be perfect to intercept v1s, and there is a huge gap between the temp and the 262, at the 100 perks range.
-
.
-
From what I understand wouldnt it be better then the 262 for fighting other fighters?
-
120 perks for a Meteor :aok
Now we have the B29 only the sky is the limit!
What I find interresting is that the meteor's deck speed is not much lower than the Alt speed, I wonder if it would be a brick like the AH 262 up there? The wing's shape hints that it would be pretty decent :angel:
-
I bet the meteor would be better against fighters, not against bombers. What would be its turn rate compared to the 262?
-
All the words Krusty wrote are true, don't knock him for that, it's all very accurate in terms of historical usage. With that said, here in AH, and although we do have ground rules that follow a reasonable semblance of fairness, now with the B29, it might prove a sound decision to insert a few more "cusp" birds...... Ones that although never flew at squadron strength or saw "much" action.
Why not?
And perhaps the real value of these things could be confined to a special "1945 arena."
And BTW MILF guys........... (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/Luke_831/MILF3.png) Having both the acronym and the word Meteor is sorta........... stupid........ It's like say HIV virus.
+1 for the Meteor, +1 for the future!
-
And BTW MILF guys........... (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/Luke_831/MILF3.png) Having both the acronym and the word Meteor is sorta........... stupid........ It's like say HIV virus.
It's no different then the S.A.P.P
-
Please do explain that sir? S.A.P.P. is fine, but if it said S.A.P.P. Pilots that would be like M.I.L.F. Meteor.
It's no different then the S.A.P.P
-
And BTW MILF guys........... (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/Luke_831/MILF3.png) Having both the acronym and the word Meteor is sorta........... stupid........ It's like say HIV virus.
+1 for the Meteor, +1 for the future!
lol wtf!
-
well there is no reason to say meteor after MILF. i mean if you read it... "Meteor Interception of Luftwannabe Forces Meteor"... just saying. dont want to start a figth here.
-
All the words Krusty wrote are true, don't knock him for that, it's all very accurate in terms of historical usage. With that said, here in AH, and although we do have ground rules that follow a reasonable semblance of fairness, now with the B29, it might prove a sound decision to insert a few more "cusp" birds...... Ones that although never flew at squadron strength or saw "much" action.
Why not?
And perhaps the real value of these things could be confined to a special "1945 arena."
And BTW MILF guys........... (http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/Luke_831/MILF3.png) Having both the acronym and the word Meteor is sorta........... stupid........ It's like say HIV virus.
+1 for the Meteor, +1 for the future!
Hey logan hop off of it one time.
-
well there is no reason to say meteor after MILF. i mean if you read it... "Meteor Interception of Luftwannabe Forces Meteor"... just saying. dont want to start a figth here.
I understand, I just intimidate the very popular B.O.S.S logo. Any mistake made on their part with the wording was copied.
-
Krusty? Not somebody I hump on a regular basis, no. Sorry pal. :noid
Hey logan hop off of it one time.
-
Wasn't talking about ankle pal.
-
:lol :cheers: :lol
Wasn't talking about ankle pal.
-
Just checked the BOSS logo. yes you are rigth! :D
-
I will elaborate a bit for Krusty.
1. AH is a game based on WWII aircraft. How they were employed is irrelevant. I have deacked a town with a 262, something more than likely not in its design specs (although with the whacko at the helm it would not surprise me.)
2. There has been some BB discussion about a "Korea Arena". I say Bah.
3. If there were other jet powered aircraft used in the strengths required by HTC, then why not?
4. A while back I made a thread titled "Apex Aircraft". As a method of applying logic to the plane set, I argued we should have the earliest and latest airplane in each category by country. The meteor could be argued as the apex of british fighter planes during WWII. In that same vein, the fighting biplanes should also be considered such as the Cr-32 and 42.
The bottom line is, and I really have no evidence other than this anecdotal comment, I think a variety adds to what makes the game interesting, because just about any airframe is competitive, properly flown. Watch Lusche land 5 kills in a hurri1 in skies filled with P51s. What I wonder is what is the actual tangible cost of developing an airframe, and does its introduction preserve or enhance subscriptions?
-
1. AH is a game based on WWII aircraft. How they were employed is irrelevant.
^THIS^
If it fits the criteria (supposedly) laid out for inclusion by HTC, then it should be considered for addition. No whines about where it fought, what it shot down, what role was it used in.....
That is up for the players to decide in game....
+1 for the Hot Mamma Plane
-
Any number of experimental configurations, designs, and prototypes saw as much if not MORE "combat" than the Meteor saw, leading the way to open the doors for any number of 'Luft '46 designs.
IMO one of the things I like about the inclusions in AH is that you could very well have experienced the war like that. Not so much a what-if as if you added the Do-335 or the Meteor Mk.III. Heck at least the He162 had air to air combat and everybody agrees it was really too late to make a difference.
I'm not totally against the Meteor as a plane. I'm against thinking it's a WW2 plane. It had a long long career after WW2 and was developed and improved many times (post-war). Overall it doesn't fit the mold for other AH planes in this game.
So, IF we had it, I wouldn't mind. If it appeared in-game magically. However, in the petition (in the mental debate, the arguments on the forums) to include it into AH I'd say "no" because it wasn't much of an impact, it wasn't much of a threat, it saw next to no service/combat.
-
Your logic would exclude the Ta152 then Krusty considering it's limited use. Meteor was operational and firing it's guns long before the 152. It was on the continent initially as a defense against the 262 but they never met. They were flying ground attack in the last month of the war.
-
You are right for the most part, the exception being the 152s saw quite a bit of use in those last days of the war, claiming a number of enemy fighters in combat, both Eastern and Western in origin.
From my perspective, we already had the 152. We're not arguing/debating it's new addition.
I think that IF it were absent from the game and folks were debating it now, I'd be less for it than, say, a Me410 or a Ju188 (or heck, a Ju388!!) or the He162 or any number of other planes.
Since we have it, I'm fine with it. It's done with, I'll enjoy it.
If it were a fresh debate, that's another matter.
-
This whole convo makes me think that my page 1 idea has more and more merit than first thought......
And perhaps the real value of these things could be confined to a special "1945 arena."
-
Any number of experimental configurations, designs, and prototypes saw as much if not MORE "combat" than the Meteor saw, leading the way to open the doors for any number of 'Luft '46 designs.
IMO one of the things I like about the inclusions in AH is that you could very well have experienced the war like that. Not so much a what-if as if you added the Do-335 or the Meteor Mk.III. Heck at least the He162 had air to air combat and everybody agrees it was really too late to make a difference.
I'm not totally against the Meteor as a plane. I'm against thinking it's a WW2 plane. It had a long long career after WW2 and was developed and improved many times (post-war). Overall it doesn't fit the mold for other AH planes in this game.
So, IF we had it, I wouldn't mind. If it appeared in-game magically. However, in the petition (in the mental debate, the arguments on the forums) to include it into AH I'd say "no" because it wasn't much of an impact, it wasn't much of a threat, it saw next to no service/combat.
I think that your logic may be a bit off. We have a few planes/vehicles whose overall impact to the war could be dubious. Again, I defer to the "what makes the game interesting" for folks as the measure, not how many planes it shot down or vehicles it destroyed. I would think that having an alternative jet to the 262 would be "interesting". I have read, but do not have original source stuff that there were P-80s flying out of Italy in early 45'. More than likely this is false or the "squadron strength" piece may be missing. That leaves the Salamander and the Meteor. Given the natural tendancy for rivalry, we might see the luft guys fighting 262s against the Spit guys in meteors. Just saying.
Planes that are interesting to me are those that can add a new challenge. Trying to best a 262 in a meteor might be a hard task, but at least you will not need a 5k dive to catch it (just a 2k lol....).
This whole convo makes me think that my page 1 idea has more and more merit than first thought......
Nah brother... that would be a mess me thinks. Seafurys/tigercats/bearcats/p-51Hs/DO-335s etc..... might as well make the Korean War come about (noooooooooooo!)
(or heck, a Ju388!!)
That would be the plane to run down a 29'.....
-
I think that your logic may be a bit off. We have a few planes/vehicles whose overall impact to the war could be dubious.
Impact? That's different from actual experience in the war. I'm not disagreeing there, just saying 1) those are already in-game as mentioned I'm discussing new additions rather than existing ones, and 2) I wouldn't really be for a plane that saw no action in the war (note: that's not to say no IMPACT on the war, just some noteworthy amount of actual action)
-
Impact? That's different from actual experience in the war. I'm not disagreeing there, just saying 1) those are already in-game as mentioned I'm discussing new additions rather than existing ones, and 2) I wouldn't really be for a plane that saw no action in the war (note: that's not to say no IMPACT on the war, just some noteworthy amount of actual action)
I conceed to your point on not discussing what is in the game.... I was going to go Ostwind on ya... :aok
Define noteworthy.... should we have the Swordfish because it disabled the Bismark?
-
Define noteworthy.... should we have the Swordfish because it disabled the Bismark?
I vote YES!!! :aok The B5N just does not cut it in scenarios when we're supposed to be flying the Swordfish. :)
-
lol wtf!
Might not know about original milf
Trying to best a 262 in a meteor might be a hard task,
Ahhh I gotta question that.
but at least you will not need a 5k dive to catch it (just a 2k lol....).
Thats more like it. Dont sound challenging to me.
Your logic would exclude the Ta152 then Krusty considering it's limited use. Meteor was operational and firing it's guns long before the 152. It was on the continent initially as a defense against the 262 but they never met. They were flying ground attack in the last month of the war.
Must account for circumstances: losing country on tail end of attrition
-
I like dpaste
-
I have read, but do not have original source stuff that there were P-80s flying out of Italy in early 45'. More than likely this is false or the "squadron strength" piece may be missing.
Two. YP-80s. No combat. Just flying around.
wrongway
-
That's too bad really, cause it's a beautiful plane. Easily better looking than the Meteor IMPO
Found this looking up the YP80:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_Meteor_F8_%22Prone_Pilot%22
Too bad there doesn't seem to be any pics of a non-R&D non-quasimodo-looking single pilot version
-
+1 for Meteor Mk III, a jet that the newer pilot can land hits in
-
Understand this: The Meteor with its lighter wingloading would be much more maneuverable than the 262, and have four easy-aim lazer Hizookas in the nose, while still out-running everything with a prop. IOW, by all rights it would need a HIGHER perk price than the 262.
-
Please do explain that sir? S.A.P.P. is fine, but if it said S.A.P.P. Pilots that would be like M.I.L.F. Meteor.
Secret alliance p38 people
-
Understand this: The Meteor with its lighter wingloading would be much more maneuverable than the 262, and have four easy-aim lazer Hizookas in the nose, while still out-running everything with a prop. IOW, by all rights it would need a HIGHER perk price than the 262.
In the perk subject I would make it the exact same perk price as 262's. 262 is faster, more maneuverable at higher speeds, 30mm cannons.
-
more maneuverable at higher speeds
source?
-
Secret alliance p38 people
Secret Association of P-38 Pilots....and nowhere in the logo is it redundant :)
-
Secret Association of P-38 Pilots....and nowhere in the logo is it redundant :)
I was wrong, I didn't say it was redundantsource?
Gloster Meteor F Mk. III Vs Me262 comparison.
Meteor pros:
Better low to mid speed handling.
Better cannon for fighter engagements.
Slightly lighter.
Can equip 2x 1,000lb bombs or 16 anti tank rockets.
Me262 pros:
Faster.
Better high speed handling.
Better cannon for buff hunting.
Longer range.
Smaller profile.
Both had equal rate of climb at sea level.
This is where I saw the info...someone who did research
-
I was wrong, I didn't say it was redundant
It's ok, I still love you :D
-
Where's that quote from?
-
Provided there are no unexpected quirks in the meteor modeling, you can count on Meteor sorties outnumbering 262 sorties by a factor of five to 1 if both are given the same perk value.
-
Understand this: The Meteor with its lighter wingloading would be much more maneuverable than the 262, and have four easy-aim lazer Hizookas in the nose
Wrong. The meteor Mk 1 was extremely underpowered. The MkIII had better engines, but with control limiters installed to prevent loss of aircraft (wasn't cleared for aerobatics at all), and had slushy response, as quoted by pilots serving with it. The nose was very difficult to slave to a target and hold. The roll rate was described as "atrocious". Pilots who flew both the 262 and the Meteor stated the 262 was much more nimble and control responsive, as well as a much steadier guns platform...let alone being faster.
The 262 would hold all the cards, and more importantly, would control the terms of the fight, disengaging at will.
-
Neither the 262 or Meteor were used on offensive ops.
What is consider a "offensive ops"?
-
Wrong. The meteor Mk 1 was extremely underpowered. The MkIII had better engines, but with control limiters installed to prevent loss of aircraft (wasn't cleared for aerobatics at all), and had slushy response, as quoted by pilots serving with it. The nose was very difficult to slave to a target and hold. The roll rate was described as "atrocious". Pilots who flew both the 262 and the Meteor stated the 262 was much more nimble and control responsive, as well as a much steadier guns platform...let alone being faster.
The 262 would hold all the cards, and more importantly, would control the terms of the fight, disengaging at will.
Such handling defects will not appear in AHII.
-
Such handling defects will not appear in AHII.
Lol. Another "overlook the truth moment".
-
+1 for the RAF's first jet aircraft that saw action during WW2 in squadron service. Nuff said.
-
+1 for the RAF's first jet aircraft that saw action during WW2 in squadron service. Nuff said.
I mean, if you count the 4 that were on the continent from 616 Sqdrn in January 1945 as a "squadron".
The most engaged Meteor's got was by their own forces, from misidentification problems.
-
Lol. Another "overlook the truth moment".
Such handling defects do not typically appear in AHII. For instance, look at our 109s and Zeros, both of which can still contentedly pull Gs at nearly 400mph IAS.
For purposes of AHII, it does not matter whether an aircraft could be handled well with two fingers on the stick or whether you really had to muscle it to get full deflection at speed, since we are all interfacing through little plastic joysticks sitting on our desks.
-
Such handling defects do not typically appear in AHII. For instance, look at our 109s and Zeros, both of which can still contentedly pull Gs at nearly 400mph IAS.
Well the 109 is overmodelled. Should lock up at 250 :P
Btw, if the meteor really outmaneuvers the 262, its a beast. But be realistic plz, and request for that meteor which seen action during the war. It was in service inm '44, was produced in numbers, but dont THINK it ever met any flying enemy aircraft. I dont know much about that aircraft tho.
-
You have to be careful in speaking in such absolutes Krusty. While I'm not one who sees the Meteor as a need, it certainly warrants consideration for addition to the game at some point. Based on conversations I had back in my Spit XII researching days, with a B of B vet turned Supermarine Service test pilot, then a 616 squadron Meteor pilot, the Meteor was a peer of the 262. He was on the continent with 616 and ended up flying a 262 prior to the end of the war. He described the performance as similar. He saw the 262 armament as the biggest difference.
No it doesnt. Men much more qualified than anyone here have stated unequivocably that the Meteor would not have stood a chance against the 262. One of those men is Capt. Eric Brown Chief Naval Test Pilot at RAF Farnborough 1944-1949... C.O. Captured Enemy Aircraft Flight 1945-1946:
"Pedestrian compared to the 262. The Meteor wasnt in the same class. The Meteor 4 picked up quite a bit and was moving in the right direction but neither of them rose to the challenge of beating the Me 262. The Vampire the first jet to land on a carrier would never have kept up with the Me 262."
I dont know who your BoB vet was but I would call him on it.
-
Where's that quote from?
Private forum
-
Nice comments, thanks. Bummer on the P-80s. :cheers:
I wonder which one would win in a AH stallfight.....
-
Well the 109 is overmodelled. Should lock up at 250 :P
Btw, if the meteor really outmaneuvers the 262, its a beast. But be realistic plz, and request for that meteor which seen action during the war. It was in service inm '44, was produced in numbers, but dont THINK it ever met any flying enemy aircraft. I dont know much about that aircraft tho.
I stumbled across this, not exact figures but something rough to go off.
(http://img20.mediafire.com/38848cc6f343c5c391e46465300c73285g.jpg)
-
Such handling defects do not typically appear in AHII. For instance, look at our 109s and Zeros, both of which can still contentedly pull Gs at nearly 400mph IAS.
For purposes of AHII, it does not matter whether an aircraft could be handled well with two fingers on the stick or whether you really had to muscle it to get full deflection at speed, since we are all interfacing through little plastic joysticks sitting on our desks.
Control forces are clearly modelled in AH. Wether or not you think they aren't high enough on 109s and Zeros is irrelevant. Control forces are modelled within the game the particular game controller everyone uses doesn't matter. Even if you move your stick to its full left position the game only gives the control surface movement that's available at any given time due to the force limitations of our "virtual pilot".
One thing that Meteor was known for was it's poor directional stability and that for example is something that is different from plane to plane in AH.
-
I stumbled across this, not exact figures but something rough to go off.
(http://img20.mediafire.com/38848cc6f343c5c391e46465300c73285g.jpg)
LOL not bad then it wont be in the 100ish range.
-
I have to disagree with where they have the Jug. Most of our Thunderbolts turn very well, and with some flaps they can out turn a spit from time to time.
I stumbled across this, not exact figures but something rough to go off.
(http://img20.mediafire.com/38848cc6f343c5c391e46465300c73285g.jpg)
-
I have to disagree with where they have the Jug. Most of our Thunderbolts turn very well, and with some flaps they can out turn a spit from time to time.
Not in a sustained turn given equal E states, IIRC.
-
Good point, I'll have to check that offline. :salute
Not in a sustained turn given equal E states, IIRC.
-
From Kweassa's 2.06 trials. Turn radius with no flaps
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2085/2307680173_fe1c3b0bd1_o.gif)
That's about 75 feet difference or a little more then 1/3 more radius in a jug.
-
just noticed.
Kazaa, there is something wrong with that diagram. The 109G can pretty much compete with the spitfire16 in the turn radius (not the turn rate), but at least clearly better than the mustang III. But otherwise looks correct. Maybe that pic is showing the performance without flaps?
-
Maybe no use of flaps, could be a heavy G14?
-
From Kweassa's 2.06 trials. Turn radius with no flaps
From everything I've seen, the J and the L have the same radius. They should, since they are the same weight (in AH), have the same fuel tanks/loads, and the dive flaps have no effect on turning radius (again, in AH).
I'm not sure I'd call that graph a reliable source.
-
Moray, you describe the 262 as owning the Meteor, but I don't see it that way... the characteristics you describe seem to follow a close parallel to the 190a8 vs the spit8. One rolls worse, one has better firepower. However the one with much better turn rate and much more docile stalling characteristics, coupled with the hispano firepower and the trajectory that goes with it owns the other. That is to say the spit8 is uber compared to the 190a8.
While the meteor may be slower than the 262 (especially that Mk.I Meteor) it will still own a 262. 99% of the time the reason I can't get a kill in a 262 is the horrible 30mm rounds. Put 4x hispano on any fast moving plane and it's instant death.
It will be a faster tempest, only more manuverable. Far cry from being owned by the 262, regardless of the slower roll rate.
My $0.02
-
Moray, you describe the 262 as owning the Meteor, but I don't see it that way... the characteristics you describe seem to follow a close parallel to the 190a8 vs the spit8. One rolls worse, one has better firepower. However the one with much better turn rate and much more docile stalling characteristics, coupled with the hispano firepower and the trajectory that goes with it owns the other. That is to say the spit8 is uber compared to the 190a8.
While the meteor may be slower than the 262 (especially that Mk.I Meteor) it will still own a 262. 99% of the time the reason I can't get a kill in a 262 is the horrible 30mm rounds. Put 4x hispano on any fast moving plane and it's instant death.
It will be a faster tempest, only more manuverable. Far cry from being owned by the 262, regardless of the slower roll rate.
My $0.02
That's just it. The Meteor suffered from very poor stall characteristics and a nose that couldn't track a target well at all. Add to that it was slower in all flight regimes, sluggish and unresponsive to control inputs, and had horrible roll rate... and the 262 controls the parameters of the engagement. This means the 262 controls how the fight starts, what regime it flows into, and when it ends... being able to disengage at will. Sorry Krusty, I don't have any agreement with you in this, other than the Meteor III had a better flat turn radius and guns with better ballistics.
The fight basically comes down to an A6M (better flat turn, less acceleration, lower top end) versus a Ki84 (higher top end, higher acceleration, more stable), in prop plane comparison. The Ki controls the how the fight progresses. If the 262 refuses to enter into a turn fight at medium/low speeds (like the Ki in that example)...a Meteor should present hardly a problem.
Capt. Eric Brown Chief Naval Test Pilot at RAF Farnborough 1944-1949... C.O. Captured Enemy Aircraft Flight 1945-1946:
"Pedestrian compared to the 262. The Meteor wasnt in the same class. The Meteor 4 picked up quite a bit and was moving in the right direction but neither of them rose to the challenge of beating the Me 262. The Vampire the first jet to land on a carrier would never have kept up with the Me 262."
Stolen quote, but tells the whole story.
-
You know the Mk. IV did around 600Mph on the deck and had a rate of climb at sea level of 7,350ft/min. So unless there was a better version of the Me262 we have, the Mk. IV would be superior in all aspects.
-
You know the Mk. IV did around 600Mph on the deck and had a rate of climb at sea level of 7,350ft/min. So unless there was a better version of the Me262 we have the Mk. IV would be superior in all aspects.
Not according to the actual pilot who tested both.
And it didn't go into production until 1946..... :rolleyes:
-
La-7PVRD :D not as fast but 6 times the sexy
-
That's just it. The Meteor suffered from very poor stall characteristics and a nose that couldn't track a target well at all. Add to that it was slower in all flight regimes, sluggish and unresponsive to control inputs, and had horrible roll rate... and the 262 controls the parameters of the engagement. This means the 262 controls how the fight starts, what regime it flows into, and when it ends... being able to disengage at will. Sorry Krusty, I don't have any agreement with you in this, other than the Meteor III had a better flat turn radius and guns with better ballistics.
The fight basically comes down to an A6M (better flat turn, less acceleration, lower top end) versus a Ki84 (higher top end, higher acceleration, more stable), in prop plane comparison. The Ki controls the how the fight progresses. If the 262 refuses to enter into a turn fight at medium/low speeds (like the Ki in that example)...a Meteor should present hardly a problem.
Stolen quote, but tells the whole story.
The Me262's stall isn't exactly perfect either. I've lost count how many times I've pushed the Me262 to complete vertical stall and had the thing do a couple backflips before I could regain controlled flight.
I know nothing of the Meteor Mk. III acceleration, I know it's rate of climb is exactly the same as the Me.262.
-
Most of the comments I've read about the Meteor say (despite whatever handling/trim) it was very manuverable and gave spitfires a run for their money. So maybe it was PICKY... but it still turned very tightly while being picky.
-
I strongly believe that the Me262 was the dominant jet fighter of the two. I also believe the Metoer Mk. III would have a much easier time picking off prop planes. :aok
-
I agree about fighting other planes, the 262 is very easy to avoid when flown right if you are paying attention, and they are easy kills if they hang around and try to 1v1 you
-
It seems a bit odd to only have one jet fighter. What jet airplanes were operational in ww2? I readheard there were P80s in italy prior to the end of the war.
Do you think it's odd that we only have one rocket fighter? Don't we have all the fighter jets that meet HTC's criteria for inclusion? :headscratch:
-
Regarding the maneuverability, in tactical trials against the Tempest Mk.V Meteor Mk.III turned inside the Tempest and could get to the Tempest's tail in approximately four turns. Considering the weight of the Me262 in AH, Meteor had a wingloading of only roughly half of that of the Me262's. The directional instability of the Meteor was really bad and the oscillation (snaking) just increased with speed. Trying to lessen this tendency with rudder just made it worse.
On thing that would have given Me262 a huge tactical advantage especially in real life is significanly higher critical mach. This along the fact that it was faster makes it overall the better fighter. In Aces High things are different from real life/war in many ways and many of these differences skew the situation for the Meteor. In real life it would be squadron of Me262s against squadron of Me262 and that would rarely happen in the AH MAs. In real life the higher critical mach and top speed are very important. In AH the fights would be mostly against prop planes and in these situations people do things in 262s what they wouldn't do so readily in real life like slowing down, that would make it easier prey for the Meteor. Also, even with poor directional stability the hispanos are dangerous to clearly longer distancies than they normally were in real life.
-
I strongly believe that the Me262 was the dominant jet fighter of the two. I also believe the Metoer Mk. III would have a much easier time picking off prop planes. :aok
Here we go, you wanna an even easyer picking machine :lol
Anyway, i dont mind, just perk it. Simmilar to the 262. Btw could you get a report that a meteor killed any flying enemy aircraft? If yes, its almost sure sooner or later you can fly it.
-
From everything I've seen, the J and the L have the same radius. They should, since they are the same weight (in AH), have the same fuel tanks/loads, and the dive flaps have no effect on turning radius (again, in AH).
I'm not sure I'd call that graph a reliable source.
Yep it's outdated but it should be good enough for ballpark. I deleted all my AH stuff last year or I'd work an up to date chart from those datasets with sustained turn radius/corner speed/revolution time/flap setting/etc.
The Me262's stall isn't exactly perfect either. I've lost count how many times I've pushed the Me262 to complete vertical stall and had the thing do a couple backflips before I could regain controlled flight.
Borderline hair splitting, but that sounds like as good a stall as you could expect from a low thrust heavyweight with wingloading at least as bad as any prop dogfighter in the game.
-
dp again
-
Borderline hair splitting, but that sounds like as good a stall as you could expect from a low thrust heavyweight with wingloading at least as bad as any prop dogfighter in the game.
The 262's backflip stall is bad, it looses all speed, falls like a rock. I can see why you say it's "good stall" because your main ride was a 152
-
The 262's backflip stall is bad but not nearly as bad as the misuse needed to get it there. The 262 wasn't made for extreme low speed stall fighting and yet it recovers on its own. In fact you'll have more trouble pulling out of a spitfire's inverted tail-first spin than the 262's autonomous recovery.
"It loses all speed and falls like a rock". ORLY? It's got less low speed thrust, more weight, at least as much uneven weight distribution, and worse wingloading than most planes in the set, and it's the least designed for low speed agility.
-
Do you think it's odd that we only have one rocket fighter? Don't we have all the fighter jets that meet HTC's criteria for inclusion? :headscratch:
He162 was fielded in at least 2 units, and 2 more "youth groups" (aka rushed civilian volunteers) were also set up -- but not so many records left about those. They saw combat and even a couple were shot down at the end of the war. Despite mostly being grounded due to lack of aviation fuel, they meet the criteria..
I'd love to have the 162 with both 30mm and 20mm options. 30mm for bomber hunting, 20mm for fighter killin'!
-
Could be interesting to see a meteor in a furball. All the 262s (with the exception of a very elite few) zip by and pick. Maybe a tempest level perked jet is in order. It seems clear the 262 was the king of the WWII jets, time to let some of the princes in the fray.
-
The Spitfires "inverted tail first spin" is very easy to recover from, just cut the engine and relinquish all control.
-
What a ludicrous comparison....
-
Comparisons of r/l handling is NOT the point. However much the Meteor may have been a dog in r/l, I am almost willing to guarantee that if it ever ends up added to AHII, it will be modeled in such a way that it will make the 262 (and probably quite a few prop jobs) look like the dog.
-
. Btw could you get a report that a meteor killed any flying enemy aircraft? If yes, its almost sure sooner or later you can fly it.
It never even shot at a piloted aircraft, let alone killed one. It is credited with V1 knockdowns only. I read that there was one singly time where they "reportedly" actually were setting up for a bounce on a squadron of FW-190's..... but were jumped by friendly aircraft that mis-identified the Meteors as Me262's. I seem to recall it was a squadron of Tempests that happened over top and bounced the Meteors. i would have to get a source on that, though.
So, in short, no. The Meteor is frequently said to never have encountered a Luftwaffe aircraft in flight.
-
Comparisons of r/l handling is NOT the point. However much the Meteor may have been a dog in r/l, I am almost willing to guarantee that if it ever ends up added to AHII, it will be modeled in such a way that it will make the 262 (and probably quite a few prop jobs) look like the dog.
So they model the crap fuel of the Ki84... but not the actual performance of the Meteor. Seriously, what are you smokin?
-
BnZ if the Meteor's nose is as vague at speed as the Yak's can get at lower speeds... Would you consider that a significant issue for the Meteor? Considering its other attributes. eg "atrocious" roll rate.
-
So they model the crap fuel of the Ki84... but not the actual performance of the Meteor. Seriously, what are you smokin?
The Ki-84 should be able to generate X horsepower at Y boost with Z fuel...this is a simple numerical data. Descriptions of snarky handling traits is not.
-
It never even shot at a piloted aircraft, let alone killed one. It is credited with V2 knockdowns only. I read that there was one singly time where they "reportedly" actually were setting up for a bounce on a squadron of FW-190's..... but were jumped by friendly aircraft that mis-identified the Meteors as Me262's. I seem to recall it was a squadron of Tempests that happened over top and bounced the Meteors. i would have to get a source on that, though.
So, in short, no. The Meteor is frequently said to never have encountered a Luftwaffe aircraft in flight.
In the context of AH why would you assume they would have had to engage luftwaffe aircraft in combat? Unless you thought that the AvA was the most popular arena.
When we have spit vs spit, temp vs temp, 262 vs 262, meteor vs meteor etc. If they tangled in that engagement during WW2 try telling those pilots whose lives were on the line that it didn't matter.
-
BnZ if the Meteor's nose is as vague at speed as the Yak's can get at lower speeds... Would you consider that a significant issue for the Meteor? Considering its other attributes. eg "atrocious" roll rate.
I consider how poor/badly the Meteor will handle when actually modeled at best luck of the draw.
It could have every little quirk modeled to the hilt-like the Ta-152.
Or its handling difficulties could disappear down the same hole where the F4U's mean stall and the Zero's vulnerability in high-speed dives went.
-
In the context of AH why would you assume they would have had to engage luftwaffe aircraft in combat? Unless you thought that the AvA was the most popular arena.
When we have spit vs spit, temp vs temp, 262 vs 262, meteor vs meteor etc. If they tangled in that engagement during WW2 try telling those pilots whose lives were on the line that it didn't matter.
Because that is the criteria for inclusion in the game. Actual combat.
-
It never even shot at a piloted aircraft, let alone killed one. It is credited with V2 knockdowns only. I read that there was one singly time where they "reportedly" actually were setting up for a bounce on a squadron of FW-190's..... but were jumped by friendly aircraft that mis-identified the Meteors as Me262's. I seem to recall it was a squadron of Tempests that happened over top and bounced the Meteors. i would have to get a source on that, though.
So, in short, no. The Meteor is frequently said to never have encountered a Luftwaffe aircraft in flight.
V2 kills!! Wow it must be a whole lot faster than reported! :O
-
V2 kills!! Wow it must be a whole lot faster than reported! :O
lol bud
Btw, im not against the meteor, but with the same theory there could be a DOC (Do335 Operation Command), whose motto could be "kill the RAF wannabes", so got my point. OK it was a dumb example, but still.
-
I think he is laughing because you typed in V2, ie the Cruise missile and DOC's "motto could be I wish they could have built more then 22 of us" :lol
-
lol bud
Btw, im not against the meteor, but with the same theory there could be a DOC (Do335 Operation Command), whose motto could be "TRY to kill the RAF wannabes", so got my point. OK it was a dumb example, but still.
:aok
-
omfg, you still cant see it. What makes you blinded, Mick? :cry
-
the Meteor MK. III is one purty airplane
+1
-
V2 kills!! Wow it must be a whole lot faster than reported! :O
LOL, yeah uh, fat fingers.. V1 kills.
-
omfg, you still cant see it. What makes you blinded, Mick? :cry
too much hand loving :joystick:
-
Because that is the criteria for inclusion in the game. Actual combat.
I don't know about you, but I would consider shooting down V1s as combat; it wasn't easy and it was certainly dangerous.
-
I don't know about you, but I would consider shooting down V1s as combat; it wasn't easy and it was certainly dangerous.
:aok
-
If we count the v1s planes, the meteor fits the criteria better than a couple planes we already have.
-
Think of a V1 as a bomber with a bomb, and it was still very dangerous to attack them
http://www.hawkertempest.se/res/Movies/v1kill.mpa (http://www.hawkertempest.se/res/Movies/v1kill.mpa)
-
I don't know about you, but I would consider shooting down V1s as combat; it wasn't easy and it was certainly dangerous.
The same people that consider shooting V1's combat probably think shooting buildings is too.
-
see the link above...
-
If the Luftweenies get a jet then so should we!
-
The same people that consider shooting V1's combat probably think shooting buildings is too.
You are kidding, right? I'm not talking about what happens in a game, I'm talking about the historical pilots having a flying bomb literally blow up in their faces. Every sortie was dangerous in war time, even if you didn't find the enemy/V1s. Besides, these guys were trying to prevent these things from hitting civilian targets. If memory serves, 5k people were killed or wounded from these V1s.
That is a very low comment, even from you, Moray. Then again, by your definition even the guys that flew in Operation Jericho never saw combat, since they were only shooting at buildings.
-
Moray, that was clueless to say the least. Suggest you look up Jean Maridor, a Free French pilot from 91 Squadron in regards to V-1s.
Dixie Deans of 616 gained a bit of attention when he tipped a V-1 with his Meteor wing tip. Some Spit drivers and an RAF 51 driver had managed that trick but it was a dangerous one. It was a last resort after running out of ammo.
-
Moray, that was clueless to say the least. Suggest you look up Jean Maridor, a Free French pilot from 91 Squadron in regards to V-1s.
Dixie Deans of 616 gained a bit of attention when he tipped a V-1 with his Meteor wing tip. Some Spit drivers and an RAF 51 driver had managed that trick but it was a dangerous one. It was a last resort after running out of ammo.
Listen, I'm not saying it wasn't inherently dangerous. I'm not saying it wasn't noble. But it's flying in a straight line. It's a known flightpath. It's NOT shooting at you or inherently trying to kill YOU. There has to be some guideline to warrant inclusion into the game.... and that is the airframe had to be involved in combat. Shooting down a drone, whether stuffed with explosives or teddy bears, isn't combat. It's not a thinking being actively trying to kill you.
How the hell did this go from "include the meteor" to some kind of moral referendum? Seriously, not taking away from the pilots that did these things... but drones aren't combat.
-
define combat moray
-
He 162. :D
-
define combat moray
combat
n combat [ˈkombӕt, (American ) kəmˈbat]
(an act of) fighting The two knights met each other in single combat. stryd, geveg يُقاتِل، يُحارِب сражение boj kamp; strid; dyst der (Zwei-)Kampf μάχη combate vġitlus نبرد؛ مبارزه taistelu combat קְרָב युद्ध borba küzdelem, ütközet pertarungan bardagi combattimento, battaglia 戦闘 전투 kova kauja; cīņa bertempur gevecht (nĉr)kamp, strid walka combate luptă поединок boj boj borba kamp, strid การต่อสู้ çarpışma, muharebe 戰鬥 бій لڑنا ، جنگ کرنا trận đánh 战斗
v
to fight against; to oppose
Please explain to me how a V1 drone is actively opposing the Meteor, any more than the ground is? How is it actively fighting the Meteor by flying in a straight line? How is this even a discussion for inclusion?
-
Maybe the V1 isnt opposing the meteor, but but shooting it down the meteor is opposing the V1 is it not? there for it is fighting against it, is it not? let me ask you this, is a boat opposing a B-25H? or is a train opposing a fighter bomber? or what about a tank opposing an Il-2? are you saying that all of these acts of attacking an enemy are not combat?
-
If the Luftweenies get a jet then so should we!
luftweenies dont have spit16 or tempest lol
-
they have a dora and its not perked, its pretty much like both of those combined :D
-
luftweenies dont have spit16 or tempest lol
they do have a 262 and 163 though.
The slogan just needed something for L and kaz thought that wannabee wasn't too personal seeing as we are talking about a cartoon game. So do at least try and see the humour rather than taking everything so personally. ;)
-
Anyway, I +1 for the Meteor Mk. III because the game needs a perked ground attack aircraft. :devil
-
luftweenies dont have spit16 or tempest lol
But they do have a K4, 262, 163, 152, and a dora.
-
Also the g-6 :banana:
so i can be the 109 twit :cheers:
-
No allied jets in game at all something needs to be done to address this chronic imbalance. Life just isn't fair until this gets resolved :ahand
+1 for M.I.L.F
-
Youre british, its natural you wanna fly your nations best plane. I respect that. But first we need something russian.
-
Just a general comment...
Considering that the game is missing...
- Most important fighter of the IJA
- Later war Japanese Dive/Torpedo bombers
- Soviet level bomber of any kind
- Most of the Soviet fighters from '41-'42
- Numerically most important Italian fighters
...it's plain insane to even remotely suggest that a late war British jet that saw limited combat is somehow "needed" at this point.
Meteor should be far, far away from becoming any kind of priority.
-
IMO I wouldn't add the G-6 to the tops of the german plane set however it is good. Id just rather be shooting 30's instead of 1 20.
-
I'm all for the Meteor (even though WMaker is right, far far more aircraft that should be on the list first), but I'd rather have this for killing 262's...
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/He-162A-2DSCF0846.JPG/800px-He-162A-2DSCF0846.JPG)
-
Youre british, its natural you wanna fly your nations best plane. I respect that. But first we need something russian.
Seems like there are a lot of people here who are not British and want the Meteor. Like me.
-
you know that V1 tipping was banned after the germans started to booby trap them to explode if it started to bank after the coarse was set. a couple of spit XII were lost that way . plus at 600yrds that 1000lb bomb would hurt
-
Maybe the V1 isnt opposing the meteor, but but shooting it down the meteor is opposing the V1 is it not? there for it is fighting against it, is it not? let me ask you this, is a boat opposing a B-25H? or is a train opposing a fighter bomber? or what about a tank opposing an Il-2? are you saying that all of these acts of attacking an enemy are not combat?
The boat has people in it, as do the train and tank. Last I recall, the V1 didn't have a pilot...or even guns to defend itself. Boats would shoot back, as did trains and tanks.
With all this talk about the Meteor, I've yet to see anyone provide a definitive report or record of the Meteor being engaged with the Luftwaffe in the air. So far, it would only seem that it was used in a ground attack role. "The wiki check" only revealed this...
"On 20 January 1945, four Meteors were moved to Melsbroek in Belgium. In March, the entire squadron was moved to Gilze-Rijen and then in April, to Nijmegen. The Meteors flew armed reconnaissance and ground attack operations without encountering any German jet fighters. By late April, the squadron was based at Faßberg, Germany and suffered its first losses when two pilots collided in poor visibility. The war ended with the Meteors having destroyed 46 German aircraft through ground attack[citation needed] and having faced more problems through miss-identification as the Me 262 by Allied aircraft and flak than from the Luftwaffe.[citation needed] To counter this, continental-based Meteors were given an all-white finish as a recognition aid."
If it has records and reports of it being engaged with Luftwaffe planes in the air, then by all means, add it. Otherwise it's the Allied version of the Do-335...
-
Just a general comment...
Considering that the game is missing...
- Most important fighter of the IJA
- Later war Japanese Dive/Torpedo bombers
- Soviet level bomber of any kind
- Most of the Soviet fighters from '41-'42
- Numerically most important Italian fighters
...it's plain insane to even remotely suggest that a late war British jet that saw limited combat is somehow "needed" at this point.
Meteor should be far, far away from becoming any kind of priority.
I agree with all of the above wmaker but HTC included the B29 and Brewster before all of those seemingly more deserving gaping hole fillers. ;)
-
but HTC included the B29 and Brewster before all of those seemingly more deserving gaping hole fillers. ;)
Yep, so they did, and those planes are done now. It is just my opinion that it should be the actual work horses' turn from now on. Just my opinion obviously, I have no control over what HTC decides to do.
-
I agree with all of the above wmaker but HTC included the B29 and Brewster before all of those seemingly more deserving gaping hole fillers. ;)
True, HTC is serving customers. Thts why we got the b29, couse the majority wanted it.
But in the other hand, we have a lot of very late war über rides, while some core types are missing even though they were playing major role in the war ( i know, the 152 or the Comet is in this category, but the p47M or the f4u4 too). The meteor would be an über picker ride.
-
Yep, so they did, and those planes are done now. It is just my opinion that it should be the actual work horses' turn from now on. Just my opinion obviously, I have no control over what HTC decides to do.
If only it were that simple WMaker. I agree with you, but it goes back to some of my original thoughts on, what makes keeps people playing. I don't really care about flying scenarios and whether or not the plane was used in X role with X load out. I enjoy having a variety of planes to challenge my inability to fly. Adding another jet to the arsenal (not the weak English team) would make for an interesting skill set to learn, seeing as how you could foreseeably fight it in a way distinct from the present jet.
-
"The Meteors flew armed reconnaissance and ground attack operations
I wonder if any German ground AA batteries fired on the meteors during any of these ground attack missions. If so, there's your "combat" qualifier. Nowhere in what people have generally discussed as the accepted qualifications for inclusion into this game have I ever read that a plane had to engage other planes in air-to-air combat specifically, but combat in general. And ground attack sorties are most certainly combat, especially if there is anti-aircraft fire present.... I'm pretty sure going in low to bomb ground targets in WWII was a lot quicker way to find yourself dead in a smoking hole in the ground than was flying high altitude fighter sweep missions.
-
I agree with all of the above wmaker but HTC included the B29 and Brewster before all of those seemingly more deserving gaping hole fillers. ;)
:rofl :aok
-
Youre british, its natural you wanna fly your nations best plane. I respect that. But first we need something russian.
Seeing as we already have my nations best plane, I can be content for now and wait till my friends get a meteor :)
-
True, HTC is serving customers. Thts why we got the b29, couse the majority wanted it.
But in the other hand, we have a lot of very late war über rides, while some core types are missing even though they were playing major role in the war ( i know, the 152 or the Comet is in this category, but the p47M or the f4u4 too). The meteor would be an über picker ride.
Yes it will be a picker ride just like most of the other perked planes.
-
Vote yes for M.I.L.F. :aok
-
Haha this intense campaign :lol
Best luck with your ride :salute
-
If only it were that simple WMaker. I agree with you, but it goes back to some of my original thoughts on, what makes keeps people playing. I don't really care about flying scenarios and whether or not the plane was used in X role with X load out. I enjoy having a variety of planes to challenge my inability to fly. Adding another jet to the arsenal (not the weak English team) would make for an interesting skill set to learn, seeing as how you could foreseeably fight it in a way distinct from the present jet.
If the Meteor's acceleration is anywhere near as sluggish as the 262's, I don't know if you can bet on its effective flying style in the MA moshpits being all that different from the 262's. A high perk price wouldnt help.
-
you know that V1 tipping was banned after the germans started to booby trap them to explode if it started to bank after the coarse was set. a couple of spit XII were lost that way . plus at 600yrds that 1000lb bomb would hurt
Which Spit XII were those?
Never heard that anywhere in terms of Spit XII losses and I've got info on all of them
-
if I have to settle down for a spitXII...I'll do it
-
if I have to settle down for a spitXII...I'll do it
Bah thread stealer, besides, clipped XIV with bubble or the XIX....
Anyway, this is a jet thread, leave your silly R. Mitchell uber machines out of out and let the boys at gloster show their stuff.
-
Bah thread stealer, besides, clipped XIV with bubble or the XIX....
Anyway, this is a jet thread, leave your silly R. Mitchell uber machines out of out and let the boys at gloster show their stuff.
LOL what would you do with a Spitfire 19? It's a recce bird with no guns. Clipped XIV with the bubble was postwar, The very few bubble Spit XIVs that go into the game at the very end were full span wings as they were used as fighters, not ground attack birds like the IXs and XVIs.
-
I agree with all of the above wmaker but HTC included the B29 and Brewster before all of those seemingly more deserving gaping hole fillers. ;)
To this, I just wanted to add that Meteor isn't even remotely comparable to B-29 nor Brewster when it comes to amount of action they saw.
What is indeed true is the fact that, compared to the Brewster and B-29, there are planes that saw roughly as much or more action yet to be modelled.
-
If only it were that simple WMaker. I agree with you, but it goes back to some of my original thoughts on, what makes keeps people playing. I don't really care about flying scenarios and whether or not the plane was used in X role with X load out. I enjoy having a variety of planes to challenge my inability to fly. Adding another jet to the arsenal (not the weak English team) would make for an interesting skill set to learn, seeing as how you could foreseeably fight it in a way distinct from the present jet.
I'd like to think that it's the history and interest to WWII aircraft and friends that keeps us playing. Of course this isn't the case for everybody.
To some, it's the fastest ride with the easiest guns.
-
I'd like to think that it's the history and interest to WWII aircraft and friends that keeps us playing. Of course this isn't the case for everybody.
To some, it's the fastest ride with the easiest guns.
Or the most uber turners.
-
Or the most uber turners.
I suggest you don't talk about things you don't have the faintest clue about.
-
:banana: Seems to me like you got it all figured out.
-
Touched a nerve aye Mick? :lol
-
I'd like to think that it's the history and interest to WWII aircraft and friends that keeps us playing. Of course this isn't the case for everybody.
To some, it's the fastest ride with the easiest guns.
True. For me I have a passion for WWII. I use WWII vignettes frequently when I instruct my young Captains. When it comes to the game, I see the MA, that is it. I have flown in scenarios, and I have flown in the AvA. Both are fun, but the MA is where I go to relax. I was shot down in a 262 by a Hurri 2c. I can't think of a historical example of that. Dude caught a D1000 PW on a snap shot. Was amazing. Anyway, I digress. We have the zero, it has the P-40. We have the Spits, they have the 109s. We have the Jugs and Ponys, they have the 190s. We have a rudimentary balance in terms peer airplanes, in most categories. Fighters, yes. Attack planes...not as much. Bombers, no, not really. But in Jets, all are german. It would be nice to see another jet from another country.
Besides, I think the British planes have more comfortable seats and the relief tubes are bigger than the german planes...for obvious reasons. :banana:
-
Touched a nerve aye Mick? :lol
Not funny. Take your trolls to another thread.....
-
Not funny. Take your trolls to another thread.....
i apologise, it was too easy.
-
:banana: Seems to me like you got it all figured out.
Well, I assume you are talking about me flying the Brewster. Brewster was implemented to the game in late summer 2009. I started flying AH in the main arenas in October 2000.
You've been here two seconds. Considering that, I suggest you wouldnt try to draw too many conclusions as most of them will be quite far off the mark.
--------------------
As for the Meteor, I guess I was a bit harsh there earlier when I quoted dirtdart. My point is that I doubt it's the history why Meteor is wanted for. To me, the "why's" are pretty clear. They can be condenced to top speed, Hispanos and British roundels. It is kind of hard to come to any other conclusion when many people that ask for it don't seem to know much more about than the said three things.
As far as HTC's business goes, dirtdart certainly has a point in that adding the Meteor might seem like a good business move. And it might draw couple new people and oldtimers that don't have accounts anymore to try it out, but in the end I think it would end up being more of an annoyance for the average AH player just like the Me262 can be right now, admittedly.
-
Besides, I think the British planes have more comfortable seats and the relief tubes are bigger than the german planes...for obvious reasons. :banana:
:D
And better suction? :P
-
Well, I assume you are talking about me flying the Brewster. Brewster was implemented to the game in late summer 2009. I started flying AH in the main arenas in October 2000.
You've been here two seconds. Considering that, I suggest you wouldnt try to draw too many conclusions as most of them will be quite far off the mark.
(http://th651.photobucket.com/albums/uu232/otherbliss/th_TrollFaceSmall.png)
-
But in Jets, all are german. It would be nice to see another jet from another country.
The two jets mostly talked about here are both fighters you know. ;) It's just that not many nations fielded jets during WWII. Where 262 saw it's share of action Meteor is not much more than a footnote. Same can of course be said about the Ta152. In many ways it's even less of a footnote than the Meteor, depends how one looks at it. Ta152 was added during the same time as the perk plane system was implemented. Perk planes were needed at the time and Ta152 was wished a lot back then. Now, we have a quite healthy perk plane set.
I don't see how one country having jets entitles other country to have them "just because" especially considering the WWII work horses, WWI planes, remodels of old planes yet to be done. There's no German heavy bomber in the game either and some nations didn't have jets or heavy bombers at all.
-
At ease keyboard warriors! Take a couple of minutes to remove any worn out keys and well get back to business.
-
And better suction? :P
(http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/173304-1/serioused.jpg)
-
Service test pilot, then a 616 squadron Meteor pilot, the Meteor was a peer of the 262. He was on the continent with 616 and ended up flying a 262 prior to the end of the war. He described the performance as similar. He saw the 262 armament as the biggest difference.
Remember the RAF had the luxury of easing the Meteor into action. Neither the 262 or Meteor were used on offensive ops. The 262 had to get into action fast as the fight was over it's turf. When the V-1s started flying to England the Meteor got in the game. both the 262 and Meteor essentially were forced into service to deal with the terror weapons of the time.
Certainly there are other birds that should get in game first in my opinion, a certain Bristol made twin engined bird being one of them, but the Meteor would not be a bad idea
which one, the blenheim or the beau? :aok
-
which one, the blenheim or the beau? :aok
Points to Avatar and the patch in my Sig that inspired the MILF guys :)
-
Points to Avatar and the patch in my Sig that inspired the MILF guys :)
thank you for the corrrect sig! :aok
-
Some of the comments got me thinking about the volksplane there, did they have a more stellar service record than the meteor? Did a He-162 ever shoot down an enemy fighter?
-
Some of the comments got me thinking about the volksplane there, did they have a more stellar service record than the meteor? Did a He-162 ever shoot down an enemy fighter?
Some sources quote up to 3 kills in the very last days of the war. And yes, the Salamander was in squadron strength, as well. It was also the first operational fighter to use an ejection seat. It actually met other piloted aircraft, AND was in squadron service....
Quote is from "World War Two Fighting Jets"
During the work-up period He 162 pilots had
orders to avoid enemy aircraft whenever possible. With Allied fighters conducting frequent offensive sweeps over every part of the territory still held by German troops, however, such contacts were inevitable. On 15 April Leutnani Rudolf Schmitt of I. /JG 1, a pilot straight out of flying training making his fourth flight in the He 162, reported that he encountered a Spitfire but successfully avoided combat.
On 19 April a He 162 pilot was credited with the
first aerial victory while flying the new jet fighter, shortly before the same aircraft became the first He 162 lost in air combat. Feldwebel Guenther Kirchner of Ist Gruppe was credited with shooting down a British aircraft, after the pilot of the latter was taken prisoner and told his captors that he had been shot down by one of the new jet fighters. On his way back to base, however, Kirchner's own aircraft crashed and he was killed . That is the German side of the story.
The 2nd Tactical Air Force lost a number of
aircraft over enemy territory on that day and from British records it is not possible to confirm or refute the claim that one of them was shot down by a He 162. The loss of the German jet fighter does find confirmation from British records, however. During a strafing attack on Husum airfield Flying Officer Geoff Walkington, flying a Tempest of No. 222 Squadron, reported
encountering an unidentified jet aircraft with twin fin and a single engine - obviously an He 162. Walkington went after the enemy machine but it was very fast at low altitude and even at 360 mph he was unable to close the distance. The German pilot got safely clear, but then he made the fundamental mistake of entering a sweeping turn to starboard which allowed the Tempest to close to within firing range. Walkington fired a series of short bursts at the German aircraft and saw his opponent suddenly enter a spin which continued until it crashed into the ground.
On 26 April Unterofizier Rechenbach was
credited with the destruction of an unspecified
enemy aircraft and his victory was confirmed by at least two independent witnesses. Again, this was a day when the 2nd Tactical Air Force lost several aircraft over enemy territory and the claim cannot be confirmed or refuted from British records. Early in May II./JG 1 moved to Leck to join the Is t Gruppe, and on the 4th the two Gruppen amalgamated into a single operational He 162 unit, Einsatz-Gruppe JG 1 under the command of Oberst Herbert Ihlefeld . That morning Rudolf Schmitt claimed the destruction of a Typhoon near Restock, and this time there is clear verification of the victory from British records. The 'Typhoon' was in fact a Tempest of No. 486 Squadron piloted by Flying Officer M. Austin, who parachuted to safety and was taken prisoner. The fact that the novice German pilot had been able to shoot down
one of the Royal Air Force's best fighters illustrates the Heinkel's formidable combat potential.
(http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii190/orca37/162Flight.jpg)
(http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii190/orca37/162sJG1.jpg)
(http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii190/orca37/Salamander.jpg)
-
The 163 was a step back in every way, compared to the 262. But still played as much role as the gloster :neener:
-
Double.
-
The 163 was a step back in every way, compared to the 262. But still played as much role as the gloster :neener:
Ummm not so much, sorry. The numbers don't play out with respect to what I think you meant as the He-162, not Me-163.
He-162 had a top speed only 18mph less than the 262, at 522 mph. It was lighter, much more maneuverable, and had very good aerodynamic properties.
The Gloster Meteor Mk1, for comparison, topped out at around 410 mph. The Mk III (wartime version) around 465-495mph (depending upon source, and also whether the version had lengthened nacelles fitted). The Meteor III still had the roll rate issues, and control limiters placed on it. It wasn't even cleared for aerobatics. It was horribly unstable as a gun platform, and the nose snaked constantly when tracking. These issues were corrected, post-war, but that isn't the version you're talking about so highly. It should speak volumes that they were held back, so far from actual combat.
Capt. Eric Brown Chief Naval Test Pilot at RAF Farnborough 1944-1949... C.O. Captured Enemy Aircraft Flight 1945-1946:
"Pedestrian compared to the 262. The Meteor wasnt in the same class. The Meteor 4 picked up quite a bit and was moving in the right direction but neither of them rose to the challenge of beating the Me 262. The Vampire the first jet to land on a carrier would never have kept up with the Me 262."
Also, unlike the Meteor, the He-162 actually flew against other aircraft that had pilots, killed some, and was in full squadron service at the end of the war...not arguing for inclusion, but it is a much better bird than the Brit.
-
oops im sorry, i meant, 162.
The 162 had only 1 engine, what is inportant couse those days jet engines werent so reliable, see Nowotny's death.
Also, from aerodinamic viewpoint, the 262 used more advanced features, just like the angled back wings (sorry for the poor english).
It could be well-constructed tho.
They played about the same (almost zero) role in the war.
-
The swept wing was an accident. They needed to push the weight back, so they cranked the wings backwards.
The 163 is lighter and has less range, but it could actually engage the enemy fighters. The 262 could not claim this. If it made any manuvers other than a nose-down run it would be shot down by vastly better turning planes. It was killer not a fighter. The 162 was potentially both.
It also weighed a heckuva lot less, needing only 1 engine on the frame. The engines were not doubled on the 262 because of reliability. They weren't powerful enough otherwise.
-
oops im sorry, i meant, 162.
The 162 had only 1 engine, what is inportant couse those days jet engines werent so reliable, see Nowotny's death.
Also, from aerodinamic viewpoint, the 262 used more advanced features, just like the angled back wings (sorry for the poor english).
It could be well-constructed tho.
They played about the same (almost zero) role in the war.
Yes, one engine is important.... But not in the context of AH. No mechanical failure is modeled. Basically, the He162 is a lighter, MUCH more agile 262, with 18 mph less top end. It would have been a real issue, had they gotten it into service with decent pilots. It had the ability to deal with fighters, which the 262 did not possess. The angled wings of the 262 were also an accident.
Again, I'm not pushing for the 162, just by the criteria that they have set forth for inclusion, it fits, where the Meteor does not.
-
The swept wing was an accident. They needed to push the weight back, so they cranked the wings backwards.
Havent know it, thanks
-
Havent know it, thanks
I might be wrong on the facts. It was either weight shift, or it was to shift the landing gear further back. One of the two.
-
+10 on both the Meteor and the He 162, at about 80% or so of the perk price of the 262...
:aok
-
I wouldn't mind a 162 at all either
-
I might be wrong on the facts. It was either weight shift, or it was to shift the landing gear further back. One of the two.
Yeah I am going to have to go home and read up on that one. I am pretty sure it was researched and done for flight characteristics and not just to solve a schematic problem. The were knee deep in areo research. Swept wing goes back to the 20s... Actually applying it to a/c and making it work is a different story. MTF.
-
Swept wing itself goes back, yes, but when they designed the 262 it was originally with a straight wing. So was the He280. So was the 162. So was the ar234, the me328, the 109 airframe they wanted to fit with 262 engine pods (if the 262 wasn't ready in time -- but was scrapped because the 262 was ready). They swept the wing back for practical reasons. I think it might have had to do with the engine available, and needing to shift that engine further back (so they swept the wing back moving that engine's weight further back over the center of gravity).
After that practical reason for sweeping the wings they found it helped a bit with top speed and so forth, and used it in some very late designs. Up until then they saw little merit in swept wings.