Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: funked on June 27, 2000, 07:45:00 AM
-
A lot of B.S. is flying around on the other threads about these planes. I thought some of us might enjoy a refreshing diversion in to the world of facts.
Me 262:
The first deployment of the Me 262 with an operational fighter unit was on July 20 1944, with Kommando Nowotny. The unit had 15 aircraft of which 2 to 4 were operational at any time. First kills were acheived against recon aircraft during August.
Tempest Mk. V:
The "Tempest Wing", with Nos 3 and 486 Sqns flying Tempests, was declared operational on 7 May, 1944. However 56 Sqn did not recieve aircraft immediately, so the first combat (against Bf 109G) was delayed until 8 June 1944.
Fw 190D-9:
III./JG 54, under Hauptmann Robert "Bazi" Weiss, recieved the Fw 190D-9 in September 1944. After learning their new mounts, the understrength Gruppe (only two Staffeln) was deployed in October at Achmer and Hespe, providing cover for Kommando Nowotny.
Spitfire XIV:
All I have on this bird is that it was delivered to operational Sqns starting in January 1944. Somebody who knows Spitfires (I sure don't), please give us the date and unit of the Mk. XIV's entry into combat.
-
...and please, can we keep it peaceful? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
LOL kieren (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Spits XIV deployed in January 44? I thought it was a tad later but not sure.
Still we have to agree on the V1 matter anyway (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) If we let V1s apart first combat missions by SpitXIVs were done over Normandy beaches...so June 1944 is the date you are searching for (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
And yes, D9 was very late...more if we take in account that it could have been produced as soon as in late 1942...RLM was a really pissing off problem for Kurt Tank (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
So it looks like they all were in mass production and flying with REAL combat units (not training or development units) in 1944. If anybody wants to argue about which plane was first or last, we know such an argument is only about a few months difference - a waste of breath IMHO.
RAM, if Tank had been given control of all fighter production... *shudders* ...8th AF would have lost a lot more than 26,000 men.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
Those dates look right to me Funked.
-
Originally posted by funked:
RAM, if Tank had been given control of all fighter production... *shudders* ...8th AF would have lost a lot more than 26,000 men.
Yup...Fw190D9 in late 1942 and Ta152C maybe in mid'43 if DB603 behaved like it did in 1945 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Thanks god for RLM ineptitude...War lasted much less because 8th's strategic bombing.
-
610 Squadron "County of Chester" equipped with Spitfire MkXIVs on January 4th, 1944.
The info I've managed to find at work says that the Spit XIV was first used by 610 Squadron in the air campaign leading up to D-Day. That would put its introduction to combat in April or May, but I don't have the exact date.
The first V-1s fall on Britain on 12 June 1944, so that would not have been its first use, regardless of whether or not we consider it combat.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Thanks Karnak.
-
Ok so which ones are we getting?
P.S. Any information on the Meteor III?
-
I've heard rumors that we will eventually get the Spitfire MkXIV, the Fw190D-9, the Me262 and the Meteor MkIII but the rumor did not include any sort of timeframe, nor did it mention the Tempest.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Jets will ruin the arena.No fuss (and IMO ect ect), but jets in = I'm out.
danish
-
dbl
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
The first Meteor F.MK 1 squadron was No. 616 which was fully equipped by the end of July 1944 and scored its first kill, a V-1 in early August.
The Me 262 was superior to the Meteor Mk III in every respect though... 50 mph higher top speed, better armament, etc.
Kommado Nowotny was not the FIRST operational unit with the 262, that falls to Erprobungskommado 262 with Me 262A-0 aircraft, the first victories were 3 high-altitude photo-recon aircraft, a Mosquito and 2 F-5 Lightnings.
If Galland had been given control of the Luftwaffe alot more allied airmen would have lost their lives, imagine if the planned 'Der Grosse Schlag' had actually taken place, it was planned that 3,500 Luftwaffe aircraft would go in after Nowotny's 262 unit against allied bomber formations. The 262s would break up the formation and cause havok with the escorts, while the conventional fighters would finish up, it was planned that they could destroy 500 allied bombers with the loss of 150 pilots and 300 aircraft. However, Galland's plan was cut short with the wasteful efforts during Bodenplatte.
(http://www.mindspring.com/~nathownsj00/ww2/d9.jpg)
Josef Priller's D-9 of JG 26, January 45.
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 06-30-2000).]
-
Gorgeous pic Nath! I know we already have one of Pips' aircraft in the game, but I wouldn't argue if HTC gave us that beauty.
I agree with you about Galland's ideas for defending the Reich. Fortunately for the rest of the world, Hitler's cult kept men like him and Tank from being able to do their jobs properly.
I also agree that the 262 would be more than a match for the Meteor III. It would be a lot like Spitfire V vs. Fw 190A-5 - a real challenge for the RAF pilot.
P.S. I said "operational fighter unit" not "service test unit." My understanding (from the writings of Dr. Alfred Price) is that the kills of recon aircraft were achieved AFTER EKdo 262 had been renamed Kommando Nowotny.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 06-27-2000).]
-
That is a beautifle artists conception(have the book too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
I have to say that I would take 4 fuse mounted hispanos over 4 mk108s anyday of the week.
What was the accelleration difference between the two?
-
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).]
-
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 (http://www.raf303.org/northolt/)
-
Thanks Boss!
-
Just to stir the pot a bit:
"D9 could have flown in 1942..."
Tempest V FLEW in 1942 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF
-
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
-
Nice Dora. But JV 44 one looks cooler.
262 ? Perk it. Only dedicated JG members should fly it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
LOL Hristo! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
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).]
-
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 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
HI excused for my insufficient English we add also this to the list (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(http://digilander.iol.it/rikiber/RE2005v1.jpg) airplane used for the defense of BERLIN against bombers
airplane REGGIANE RE2005 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)I love RE2005 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
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).
-
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?
-
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.
-
Thanks Nashwan, I had used the Welland in my calculations. The question, I guess, is whether the Derwent-fitted planes made it into combat.
-
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
-
Me163? Only if AH models its tendency to blow up after a rough landing.. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) Me163 was rather dissapointing and killed more of its own pilots than it did harm to it's trgt: the buffs. For those with suicidal tendencies... you can always hop into a tank in AH.. :P
Effdub
-
It seems that the uber-plane thing is welled planned and will be comming to a future release.
I've said it before, and im entitled to say it again, even if its too late, but, I am strongly opposed to uber-planes only available to 'skilled pilots'. The best pilots should not be allowed the best planes if they arent available to everyone. What a mismatch. People say they are a good incentive. For what? The 'incentive' to slaughter newbies in spit Vs - come on. The 'incentive' to be untouchable - now thats fair.
Also, NO JETS - nuff said.
I dont normally grumble so much (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Spat.
-
Originally posted by Spatula:
It seems that the uber-plane thing is welled planned and will be comming to a future release.
I've said it before, and im entitled to say it again, even if its too late, but, I am strongly opposed to uber-planes only available to 'skilled pilots'. The best pilots should not be allowed the best planes if they arent available to everyone. What a mismatch. People say they are a good incentive. For what? The 'incentive' to slaughter newbies in spit Vs - come on. The 'incentive' to be untouchable - now thats fair.
Also, NO JETS - nuff said.
I dont normally grumble so much (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Spat.
I haveta agree with Spatula on this one..
LOL reverse the perk planes!! The better your stats the earlier model your plane has to be!! +) Much more balancing
j/k
SKurj