Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Zacherof on May 22, 2013, 12:05:29 AM
-
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/military/read.main/45665/
look they did the discussion already! :neener:
-
The 262 wins the HO.
-
Imo the f86 had the advantage in the climb turn radius and the dive. Had decent slow speed characteristics and were known to exceed mach 1 in the dive but that is the aircraft. Now i. Terms of pilot skill relation time and processing of information in mere seconds the outcome could change. Furthermore the sabre has the 262 to thank for leading the way in aerdynamics. I may be off key but my money is on the f-86.
-
The 262 wins the HO.
:rofl
-
Well, the Me 262 would have major trouble with the F-80A... The F-86A is in a completely different league. The Me 262 was obsolete by 1947, at the latest. Technology overtook it almost immediately after the war. It was brilliant in 1943, and not much more than a target by 1947. Why? Because aeronautical technology was racing ahead at a pace never before seen. And yes, much of that technology was pioneered by German scientists.
-
"Which would win in a fight; an M1 Abrams, or an M48 Patton?"
Of course, that the question can still be asked without being laughed off of the internet says a lot about the German's aeronautical engineering.
Anyone able to explain why they were more advanced? Was it just allocation of resources?
-
The F-86A is in a completely different league. The Me 262 was obsolete by 1947, at the latest. Technology overtook it almost immediately after the war. It was brilliant in 1943, and not much more than a target by 1947. Why? Because aeronautical technology was racing ahead at a pace never before seen.
My thoughts also
-
"Which would win in a fight; an M1 Abrams, or an M48 Patton?"
Of course, that the question can still be asked without being laughed off of the internet says a lot about the German's aeronautical engineering.
Anyone able to explain why they were more advanced? Was it just allocation of resources?
Mr Hitler was a big fan of the most advanced equipment. So a lot of resources where put into the super weapons. The 262 was slowed down because he wanted it to be a fast bomber too, if it had been in the air in numbers before the end of 43, the daylight bombing offenses of the allies might have been slowed or even halted.
If there was enough 262s to chase off the defending fighters and then attack the bombers along with the heavy fighters like the 110,210, 190As etc. You could have 262s covering returning 262s so that the allied tactic of hitting them near their fields would not be as effective.
I think this would have forced the meteor into the front line to counter those jets far more.
-
http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1935149466
great book on willy and the 262
-
"Which would win in a fight; an M1 Abrams, or an M48 Patton?"
Of course, that the question can still be asked without being laughed off of the internet says a lot about the German's aeronautical engineering.
Anyone able to explain why they were more advanced? Was it just allocation of resources?
The simple answer is that they weren't
Germany had a lot of the same/similar stuff on the drawing board in 1944, 1945 as the US, USSR and UK. Jet engines were simultaneously invented in the UK, Germany and Italy, and the US and the USSR got their own jets from the UK and were building lack luster jet fighters at the same time Germany was. Unlike the latter powers, however, which just continued to develop them into the post war years, in Germany there were a lot of half baked designs that were pressed into service out of desperation. The reality of the situation is that by late 1944 Germany was relying on fighters that were supposed to be phased out at least a year before hand, but couldn't because development resources were focused on experimental aircraft that really should've never been fielded in the first place.
"Of course, that the question can still be asked without being laughed off of the internet says a lot about the German's aeronautical engineering."
Not really, it says a lot more about the myth of German technical superiority. The idea that the Me 262, which is honestly the second-best jet of that war anyway, could compete with the F86 is actually ridiculous.
There's a gigantic myth about German military technology during the Second World War that has surfaced because a lot of designs and novel ideas were put forth that never got far enough into development for everyone to say 'hey, this is stupid and it will never work', and to us they look like amazing creations from some sort of fantasy sci-fi world... because that's exactly where they came from.
-
The OP's intention was for laughs I'll have you know :old:
-
The Germans to this day are still an engineering marvel. P.s the gun on the abrams is developed by the Germans and employed on there leopard 2 models
-
Not really, it says a lot more about the myth of German technical superiority. The idea that the Me 262, which is honestly the second-best jet of that war anyway, could compete with the F86 is actually ridiculous.
What would you consider the best jet of the war if not the 262?
-
Against the F-86 the 262 would stand little chance. However the P-80 did manage to kill a few MiG-15s, so it isn't inconceivable that the 262 could prevail against an F-86.
The P-80A and Meteor was markedly inferior to the 262 in almost every respect; the only WWII jet that was superior in performance was the He 162, but it was very limited in endurance.
-
Motherland:
just take a look on the Mig-15 and the Sabre. Do they look alike? What about the Messerschmitt P.1101, from '44? Any simmilarities?
Now tell me that the Mig and the Sabre werent massively influenced by the 1101 - im going further, i think they are the 1101 reborn.
Germans had no superior developements? Come on, they had the 1950 fighters on the drawing board in '44!
-
262 was hands down the best jet fighter used in WWII in any real numbers. He-162 was better, but theres only a handfull that saw combat service it seems.
And if you actually read into some of the German's projects, a lot of them were quite inspired. Given their limited electronics technology, the Germans were damn brilliant at using analog technology to solve problems.
-
262 was hands down the best jet fighter used in WWII in any real numbers. He-162 was better, but theres only a handfull that saw combat service it seems.
And if you actually read into some of the German's projects, a lot of them were quite inspired. Given their limited electronics technology, the Germans were damn brilliant at using analog technology to solve problems.
So was everyone else. Really analog/mechanical technology got really advanced- try wrapping your head around an automatic transmission, beyond basic concepts, and that was invented in the 20/30's.
The Volksjaeger was trash and everyone knew it was trash which is why it was flown by boy scouts. Adolf Galland called it one of the biggest mistakes of the war
Motherland:
just take a look on the Mig-15 and the Sabre. Do they look alike? What about the Messerschmitt P.1101, from '44? Any simmilarities?
Now tell me that the Mig and the Sabre werent massively influenced by the 1101 - im going further, i think they are the 1101 reborn.
Germans had no superior developements? Come on, they had the 1950 fighters on the drawing board in '44!
And the Spitfire and the Yak and the 109 all look similar. The AK-47 looks similar to the STG-44 despite lack of direct lineage. Every bolt action service rifle looked practically identical. Designs from similar time periods hoping to achieve the same thing with similar technology tend to look similar. The F-86 and the MiG-15 were both just jet engines with airplane parts attached to them in concept, there's not a whole lot of room for variation in what their designs could look like, and really there was about as much as there could be. The Germans were certainly ahead of the curve in certain areas but they were behind in others and everyone was copying off of each other the entire war.
-
The F86 and the MiG17 owe their designs to the Ta-183 Huckebein. Stealing plans for use after the war was very lucrative for both of the allies.
Without those plans the P80 would've been the American jet going into the Korean war and the Russian Jet, the Yak 15.
-
And the Spitfire and the Yak and the 109 all look similar.
Thats a big fatarse NO.
The F-86 and the MiG-15 were both just jet engines with airplane parts attached to them in concept, there's not a whole lot of room for variation in what their designs could look like, and really there was about as much as there could be.
Both the Sabre and the Mig were started to be designed right after the capitulation of Germany. They do look alike, and they share the concept with the most advanced german design.
Also the other early jets look completely different, except they have two wings. Aye, they are simmilar... geez. Still: F84, De havilland Vampire, Jak23, Hawker Hawk, Meteor, Supermarine Attacker, P59 Airacomet, P80, FH Phantom, in my eyes, they have nothing common with the german technology. But in the other hand, look at those what were designed right after the war: Mig-9, Mig-15, Dassault Mistére, Sabre... and youre telling me they arent the copyes and the improved versions of the 1101??
-
The F86 and the MiG17 owe their designs to the Ta-183 Huckebein. Stealing plans for use after the war was very lucrative for both of the allies.
Without those plans the P80 would've been the American jet going into the Korean war and the Russian Jet, the Yak 15.
Actually the F-86 owes more to the Me262 and FJ-1 than it does to the Ta183. The F-86 went from straight wing to swept wing because of the swept wing research for the Me262. The XFJ-1 was ordered in late 1944.
-
Motherland, what would you consider the best jet fighter of WWII?
-
Mr Hitler was a big fan of the most advanced equipment. So a lot of resources where put into the super weapons. The 262 was slowed down because he wanted it to be a fast bomber too, ...
I believe that is largely a myth. Hilter wanted it to carry a bomb, and was upset when he found out the production version couldn't carry one, but development was not slowed by any attempts to convert it a bomber. :salute
-
The biggest problem the 262's were the engines. Willy ordered engines and they were never delivered. And when they were they had terrible performance(lacking the power out put that was promised) Not to mention there was the political game played by ernhard milch hated willy and tried to stop him every chance he had.
The 262 is a huge what if thought. Could have been running daily sorties late '43 and '44. And who know what would have happened if the war was dragged on and how many more people would have died.
And kinda wrong thread but I want my 24 rockets the 262's commonly used.
They had several kills and were either salvo fired or all of them were fired.
-
Seems I read once Howard Hugues owned an ME-262 and wanted to race it but was turned down. I looked but didn't find the article. Anyone ever read that? I think he up graded the engines laterbut I read so much stuff I just can't recall if I am correct.
-
The MiG-15, the deadly Soviet fighter of the Korean War.
vs.
The Ta-183, the advanced proposed Nazi jet fighter that would have carried the world's first air-to-air missiles, had it ever been built.
Only one can be THE DEADLIEST WAR MACHINE!!!
Deadliest Fiction Wiki
On the Wiki
Wiki Activity
Random article
Videos
Photos
Chat
Forum
Policies
Community
D • W • N
Contribute
Watchlist Random article Recent changes
Comments6
Deadliest War Machine: MiG-15 vs Ta-183
SPARTAN 119 SPARTAN 119 October 8, 2011 User blog:SPARTAN 119
The MiG-15, the deadly Soviet fighter of the Korean War.
vs.
The Ta-183, the advanced proposed Nazi jet fighter that would have carried the world's first air-to-air missiles, had it ever been built.
Only one can be THE DEADLIEST WAR MACHINE!!!
Contents
[show]
Combatants
MiG-15Edit
800px-MiG-15 RB1
SPARTAN 119Added by SPARTAN 119
The MiG-15 is was a Soviet-built jet fighter most famous for its use against the American F-86 Sabre in the Korean War. The MiG also possessed the innovation of swept wings to reduce drag at high-speed. The aircraft was also the winner of the first jet-vs-jet dogfight in the early days of the Korean War.
Ta-183Edit
Ta 183 ModellA Model of the Ta-183.
SPARTAN 119Added by SPARTAN 119
The Ta-183 was an advanced jet fighter designed by Nazi Germany in the last days of World War II. The Ta-183 was never built, but had it been constructed, it would have, like the MiG-15 after it, had swept wings, and carried the Ruhrstahl X-4, the world's first guided air-to-air missile.
Armament
Close-Range WeaponsEdit
NS-23 23mm cannon x2 (MiG)Edit
The NS-23 is a Soviet single-barreled autocannon firing 23mm shells. The weapon had a rate of fire of between 650 (USAF test of captured weapons) and 850 official Soviet numbers. The weapon had a muzzle velocity of 690 meters/second.
MK 108 30mm cannon x4 (Ta-183)Edit
The MK 108 was a German 30mm single-barreled autocannon with a rate of fire of 650 rounds per minute. The 30mm round had a muzzle velocity of 540 meters per second, and four rounds could reliably bring down an Allied bomber such as a B-17.
119's EdgeEdit
The Ta-183's MK 108 for its greater number of guns and their larger 30mm rounds.
Long-Range WeaponsEdit
N-37 cannon (MiG) x1Edit
The N-37 was a large, powerful 37mm cannon capable of destroying an enemy bomber aircraft in a single shot. The weapon had a rate of fire of 400 rpm and a muzzle velocity of 690 meters per second.
Ruhrstahl X-4 (Ta-183) x4Edit
Ruhrstahl X-4 missile
SPARTAN 119Added by SPARTAN 119
The Ruhrstahl X-4 was an experimental German wire-guided air-to-air missile. The missile was never deployed in combat, but was intended to have a range of 1.5-3.5 kilometers, carry a 20 kilogram explosive warhead.
X-Factors
MiG-15 X-Factor Ta-183
1075 kph Top Speed 955 kph
15,500 meters Service Ceiling 14,000 meters
0.54 Thrust to Weight Ratio 0.37
240.8 kg/m˛ Wing Loading 196 kg/m˛
ExplainationEdit
The MiG takes the X-factors of Speed, Service Ceiling, and Thrust/Weight, but has a higher wing loading, meaning, while its wings will produce more lift, it will be less maneuverable than the Ta-183.
Other Notes
Match ends on Saturday, 10/15.
Battle
MiG-15: 800px-MiG-15 RB1 800px-MiG-15 RB1800px-MiG-15 RB1 800px-MiG-15 RB1800px-MiG-15 RB1
Ta-183: Ta 183 ModellTa 183 ModellTa 183 ModellTa 183 Modell Ta 183 Modell
A flight of five MiG-15s flew over North Korea when, suddenly, all five pilots were blinded by a flash of light. When they opened there eyes, none of the landmarks that were below them could be seen, instead they were flying over what looked like... Berlin during the Second World War...
"What the hell just happened!?", one of the pilots said into the radio.
"I don't know. It looks likes like were somewhere else... If I didn't know better, I'd say we were somewhere in Europe, probably Germany.... Berlin, maybe.", the lead pilot said.
"How is that possib...", the MiG pilot was cut off when a rocket of some sort flew at him, "Incoming!!!"
The pilot began to maneuver his plane to avoid the missile, but it seemed to follow the MiG, scoring a direct hit and blowing apart the aircraft 800px-MiG-15 RB1. The surviving MiGs turned in the direction of the attacking aircraft. They looked a bit like their own MiGs, but marked with the iron cross on their wings and a swastika on the tail.
"What the hell is going on here!?", the lead pilot thought, seconds before a Ruhrstahl X-4 streaked towards his aircraft. The lead MiG pilot turned sharply away from the missile, dodging it.
The pilot of the lead Ta-183 was surprised, the Russians weren't supposed to have anything this advanced. The lead MiG pilot flew at one of the outer two Ta-183s, 23mm cannons blazing. The Ta-183 tried to return fire, but too late, the Ta-183 took several explosive shells to the left wingroot. The wing was blown off and the aircraft plummeted from the sky Ta 183 Modell.
A Ta-183 launched an X-4 in retaliation, hitting a MiG and blowing off its tail, sending the aircraft down in a fireball 800px-MiG-15 RB1. Suddenly, the Ta-183 pilot saw tracer tracers fly over his canopy and took made evasive maneuvers.
The Ta-183 managed to out maneuver the MiG on its tail, but it maneuvers lead it right into the gunsight of the lead MiG pilot. The pilot fired off his cannons, a 37mm round blowing away the front of the Ta-183 Ta 183 Modell.
The Ta-183 that escaped the MiG tailing it turned his attention to the Russian leader's wingman, firing off his four 30mm cannons into the tail, setting it ablaze and taking down the MiG 800px-MiG-15 RB1.
The Ta-183, however, didn't notice a MiG coming up from above. The MiG pilot fired his 23mm cannons at the enemy, one of them hitting the German aircraft in the cockpit, killing the pilot. The aircraft went of control and crashed Ta 183 Modell.
The Ta-183 lead pilot took down another MiG with an X-4 missile 800px-MiG-15 RB1. At the same time, the MiG pilot shot down the Ta-183 leader's wingman Ta 183 Modell.
The Ta-183 flight leader, infuriated by the loss of his squadron, fired off an X-4 at the MiG. The MiG leader, however, maneuvered his plane so that missile missed. The two aircraft flew at each other, guns blazing. Tracer's flew over the Russian pilot's canopy as he held down the trigger. His guns hit their mark, hitting the remaining X-4 missile on the German aircraft's wing. The warhead exploded and the wing was blown off, sending the Ta-183 spiraling down to the ground Ta 183 Modell.
The MiG pilot turned to the east. Even if this was another time, and perhaps some kind of sci-fi alternate universe, one thing remained. He did'nt have the fuel or ammunition to get into any more fights.
(http://i1361.photobucket.com/albums/r678/nathan_simon1/800px-Ruhrstahl_X-4_missile_zps5fa5d8f6.jpg)
(http://i1361.photobucket.com/albums/r678/nathan_simon1/800pxTa-183_zps9e76afae.jpg)
-
The simple answer is that they weren't
Germany had a lot of the same/similar stuff on the drawing board in 1944, 1945 as the US, USSR and UK. Jet engines were simultaneously invented in the UK, Germany and Italy, and the US and the USSR got their own jets from the UK and were building lack luster jet fighters at the same time Germany was. Unlike the latter powers, however, which just continued to develop them into the post war years, in Germany there were a lot of half baked designs that were pressed into service out of desperation. The reality of the situation is that by late 1944 Germany was relying on fighters that were supposed to be phased out at least a year before hand, but couldn't because development resources were focused on experimental aircraft that really should've never been fielded in the first place.
"Of course, that the question can still be asked without being laughed off of the internet says a lot about the German's aeronautical engineering."
Not really, it says a lot more about the myth of German technical superiority. The idea that the Me 262, which is honestly the second-best jet of that war anyway, could compete with the F86 is actually ridiculous.
There's a gigantic myth about German military technology during the Second World War that has surfaced because a lot of designs and novel ideas were put forth that never got far enough into development for everyone to say 'hey, this is stupid and it will never work', and to us they look like amazing creations from some sort of fantasy sci-fi world... because that's exactly where they came from.
Nailed it.
-
Not sure what's worse nate. You typing that, or me reading it word for word :D
-
Wow - the F86A had 40% more thrust, 2/3 the W/L, cruised at Me 262 top speed, was ~ 20% faster - when the 26s engines were working Perfectly... and some think hypothetically the 262 was a match?
The 86 could out turn, out climb, out dive, out accelerate, plus had a higher ceiling and longer range - usually two of those will work for you... and had a radar ranging computing gunsight.
-
The F86 and the MiG17 owe their designs to the Ta-183 Huckebein. Stealing plans for use after the war was very lucrative for both of the allies.
Without those plans the P80 would've been the American jet going into the Korean war and the Russian Jet, the Yak 15.
The F-86 was designed long before German technology was available. It started out as a straight wing design, and the design was later modified to take advantage of German swept wing research.
-
The F86 and the MiG17 owe their designs to the Ta-183 Huckebein. Stealing plans for use after the war was very lucrative for both of the allies.
Without those plans the P80 would've been the American jet going into the Korean war and the Russian Jet, the Yak 15.
Tank had the opportunity to build his fighter after the war in Argentina, the FMA IAe 33 Pulqui II... It was considered a failure for reasons not all related to the design. It was not a great performer. The Argentines bought the F-86, which was fully developed and offered significantly better performance.
-
I think it was mentioned in one of the later posts in this thread, but that radar assisted/computed gun sighting system in the F86 would have been a huge advantage over the Me262. Those poopy Mk108's with their blooby trajectory and extremely slow velocity versus the accuracy of that little nose radar telling the gunsight in the F86 exactly where the bullets will strike....no contest in the shooting department. It was the first time a gyro assisted gunsight was combined with a radar system in a production airborne platform, which would give the already excellent gyro system accurate range information which made the firing solution even better. PEW PEW PEW!
Stolen from an article in Air Force Magazine:
The later acquisition of the radar gunsight in the F-86 was probably the greatest single improvement of the airplane during the Korean War. Expert gunners such as Lt. Col. Vermont Garrison and Maj. Manuel J. Fernandez could hit a MiG at 3,000 feet and high angles off with the radar gunsight, and the shooting problem was also considerably lessened for the more inexperienced pilot.
Widewing, do you have any really precise information regarding the gunsight system on the F86, as well as the F86D which used it for shooting rockets at ground targets at night?
-
The simple answer is that they weren't
Germany had a lot of the same/similar stuff on the drawing board in 1944, 1945 as the US, USSR and UK. Jet engines were simultaneously invented in the UK, Germany and Italy, and the US and the USSR got their own jets from the UK and were building lack luster jet fighters at the same time Germany was. Unlike the latter powers, however, which just continued to develop them into the post war years, in Germany there were a lot of half baked designs that were pressed into service out of desperation. The reality of the situation is that by late 1944 Germany was relying on fighters that were supposed to be phased out at least a year before hand, but couldn't because development resources were focused on experimental aircraft that really should've never been fielded in the first place.
"Of course, that the question can still be asked without being laughed off of the internet says a lot about the German's aeronautical engineering."
Not really, it says a lot more about the myth of German technical superiority. The idea that the Me 262, which is honestly the second-best jet of that war anyway, could compete with the F86 is actually ridiculous.
There's a gigantic myth about German military technology during the Second World War that has surfaced because a lot of designs and novel ideas were put forth that never got far enough into development for everyone to say 'hey, this is stupid and it will never work', and to us they look like amazing creations from some sort of fantasy sci-fi world... because that's exactly where they came from.
Lookit that! The oldman and Motherland agree on something again!
- oldman
-
You may agree with him all you like, but it won't make it true. In 1944 and 1945 the 262 was far, far superior to both the Meteor and the XP-80/P-80A. Legendary test pilot Eric Brown flew both the 262 and the Meteor and he told me personally that the Meteor was a "pedestrian aircraft" compared to the 262, and that it would be "no contest". Even after the war when the 262 was tested against the P-80A at Wright Field by another legendary test pilot, Al Boyd, the 262 outperformed the P-80A to such a degree that the report was suppressed. The report concluded: "Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb, the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number, from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter."
-
Tank had the opportunity to build his fighter after the war in Argentina, the FMA IAe 33 Pulqui II... It was considered a failure for reasons not all related to the design. It was not a great performer. The Argentines bought the F-86, which was fully developed and offered significantly better performance.
Argentina was broke, and Tank couldn't live a day without pain killers.
-
Even after the war when the 262 was tested against the P-80A at Wright Field by another legendary test pilot, Al Boyd, the 262 outperformed the P-80A to such a degree that the report was suppressed. The report concluded: "Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb, the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number, from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter."
Air Materiel Command Flight Test Report, Serial No. TSFTE-2008.. do you have a copy of it?
IIRC the CDo of the 262 was ~ .019, the P-80A-1 was ~.0134 ( the P-51 was ~.017).
The 262 had a slightly swept wing which accounts for a slightly higher Mcr. I don't have the report but I have heard the 262 was borrowed from Howard Hughes and especially prepped to race in the Bendix race, having stripped >1000 pounds from the airframe and modified Jumo's.. while the P-80A-1's were from those at Wright Pat at the same time WP was testing some randomly selected a/c against 44-85075 - a notoriously poor performing P-80A-1 (see http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/p-80/P-80.html for reference tests of 44-85075).
Additionally the P-80A's all had full internal fuel, guns and ballast to account for ammo - tested at 11,550 pounds.
If you have the above mentioned report we can see what the test GW and engine thrust was for the 262 during the tests?
Last, I doubt that Al Boyd who was Chief, Flight Test at Wright Pat actually flew the 262. Johnson and Yeager were the two primary test pilots for the jets then.
-
No I do not have a copy of the TSFTE-2008 report, I just have quotes from it in books. The 262 used for the test was a recon version with a glass nose, which they put a fighter nose on prior to testing. The report's conclusion states that the 262 was almost 2,000 lbs heavier than the P-80A; If the P-80A had a normal load it would be just over 12,000 lbs, which gives the tested 262 a weight of around 14,000 lbs. The normal loaded weight of a fighter 262A-1a is 14,272 lbs.
I feel the need to point out that this test was conducted in 1946, and the report issued on September 3rd, more than 2 years after the 262 entered combat. Still it proved superior to the P-80.
-
What would you consider the best jet of the war if not the 262?
AR-234B Hands down.
-
Best jet bomber, no doubt. However, it was a hundred mph slower than the 262, so a fighter it wasn't.
-
And kinda wrong thread but I want my 24 rockets the 262's commonly used.
They had several kills and were either salvo fired or all of them were fired.
Not quite correct the vast majority of 262 kills were done by rockets.
Here is some pictures of a B24 that met it's end in such manner.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21734563@N04/2113721262/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21734563@N04/2112941421/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21734563@N04/2112941171/in/photostream/
-
Best jet bomber, no doubt. However, it was a hundred mph slower than the 262, so a fighter it wasn't.
Well it was designed to be just that & was relegated to other tasks as they pushed the 262 forward. Speed it was slower how ever they did do mock dog fights with a 262 & 234. The 234 out turned the 262 every time. In AHII it would have been the new runstang for anyone silly enough to try turn with it.
Would have been interesting if any of the C models had of come on line in time. These were going to be dedicated air to air combat planes depending on the variant.
-
Every aircraft in AH out-turns the 262. Doesn't help them one bit. ;) Speed is the dominating factor of air combat with guns only. A lesson the Japanese were rudely taught by the US.
-
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA800524
OK - here is the Test of T-2-711 and T-2-4012 (no mention of Howard Hughes). Stripped of 4x 30mm Mk-108's and reduced to 13,100 pounds GW from 15620 GWmax,
It is unclear from the report how a.) critical mach number was determined for either a/c or b.) any assumption about drag could be concluded, or c.) how T/W was calculated for the P-80 as it is clear from all the 1945 and 46 test reports that accurate Thrust data was not available - and the wide range of performance for different engine changes makes that clear..
-
No I do not have a copy of the TSFTE-2008 report, I just have quotes from it in books. The 262 used for the test was a recon version with a glass nose, which they put a fighter nose on prior to testing. The report's conclusion states that the 262 was almost 2,000 lbs heavier than the P-80A; If the P-80A had a normal load it would be just over 12,000 lbs, which gives the tested 262 a weight of around 14,000 lbs. The normal loaded weight of a fighter 262A-1a is 14,272 lbs.
Not according to the flight test reports giving the weight of the 262 at 13,500 w/0 4x30mm mk 108 and ammo but full fuel. The P-80A-1's were at 11,560 which was full internal combat load but using 113 pounds of ballast for the 50 cal ammo. I published the report.
I feel the need to point out that this test was conducted in 1946, and the report issued on September 3rd, more than 2 years after the 262 entered combat. Still it proved superior to the P-80.
The conclusions of the test were that the 262 was faster and had about the same rate of climb but read the rest of the report relative to stability, along with questions regarding rigging...
-
You may agree with him all you like, but it won't make it true. In 1944 and 1945 the 262 was far, far superior to both the Meteor and the XP-80/P-80A. Legendary test pilot Eric Brown flew both the 262 and the Meteor and he told me personally that the Meteor was a "pedestrian aircraft" compared to the 262, and that it would be "no contest". Even after the war when the 262 was tested against the P-80A at Wright Field by another legendary test pilot, Al Boyd, the 262 outperformed the P-80A to such a degree that the report was suppressed. The report concluded: "Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb, the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number, from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter."
You're reading a very small portion of Motherland's quote and ignoring the main gist. Whether the 262 was the second best or the best of the WWII jets is a small point. Whether Germany wasted its efforts pursuing too many bizarre designs, and whether the 262 would stand even the faintest of chances against an F86, are the main points.
- oldman
-
The conclusions of the test were that the 262 was faster and had about the same rate of climb but read the rest of the report relative to stability, along with questions regarding rigging...
That's a later (1947) report on the tested 262s, that interestingly share the same conclusion. From 1945 to 1947 they tested three different 262s, so which one was used in TSFTE-2008 is still unknown. The TSFTE-2008 report conclusion does still state that the 262 was almost 2,000 lbs heavier than the P-80A. That makes it about 14,000 lbs, and a couple hundred pounds give or take isn't going to change a whole lot in such a heavy plane. The difference between 14,000 and 13,500 is less than 4%. The max TO weight of 15,620 lbs could only be achieved by using external ordnance. Top speed would not be affected by a 4% reduction in weight. Given a nominal climb rate of 3,900 ft/min a 4% reduction in weight (4% increase in thrust/weight ratio) would make for a difference of about 150 ft/min.
As for the questions regarding rigging and stability it is clear that the 262(s) were tired and in poor condition, not even having functional servo tabs; they probably weren't in very good condition to begin with having been built with basic tools in a forest clearing somewhere in Germany during the closing months of the war in Europe.
Btw. thanks for the report. Interesting reading. :)
-
A Me262 of 1947 would not be the Me262 of 1945. It would have had 45 degree swept wings and more powerful engines.
-
Indeed. The 262 HG I prototype flew in late 1944. The HG II would have had a low-drag canopy, 45 degree wing sweep and a flying V-tail. In this 1946-47 "what if" the Allies would also not have benefited from German research into swept wings.
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o265/WDW_Megaraptor/il2fb202006-12-042015-27-48-21.jpg)
-
Sexy vixen they are! Most wishthe war would have been different to see thar stuff
-
Sexy vixen they are! Most wishthe war would have been different to see thar stuff
Yea, and an other couple millions would have died.
-
Top speed would not be affected by a 4% reduction in weight. Given a nominal climb rate of 3,900 ft/min a 4% reduction in weight (4% increase in thrust/weight ratio) would make for a difference of about 150 ft/min.
As for the questions regarding rigging and stability it is clear that the 262(s) were tired and in poor condition, not even having functional servo tabs; they probably weren't in very good condition to begin with having been built with basic tools in a forest clearing somewhere in Germany during the closing months of the war in Europe.
Btw. thanks for the report. Interesting reading. :)
T-2-711 and T-2-4012 and 711 crashed after engine failure.
As to 'no affect' to 4% reduction in Weight? W=L ; the CL' (new CL) is a function of (1-.04)*W/(qS) = (1-.04)W/(1/2*rho*((1-.04)*V')>>2)*S) where v' is slightly more than V at GW=14000.
It ain't much but CL for the 13500 is less than CL for 14000 and CL>>2 is less for induced Drag, enabling higher speed for same thrust... and lower W/L and more excess power over drag for 13,500 vs 14000 which enables higher ROC. I'm too lazy to run the iterations for v' and solve for CL'.
Summary - weight reduction consistent with structural integrity improves all key performance metrics.
-
The 262 carries approx. 3,200 lbs of fuel. Take one up offline set fuel burn to 0.001 and see how much of a difference there is in top speed with 100% and 25% fuel. You'll notice that the difference in top speed at SL is no more than 1-2 mph, and that's with a weight difference of approx. 2,400 lbs. You seem well versed in aerodynamic nomenclature, so I'm sure you know that induced drag only represents a minute part of total drag at such high speeds. A 4% reduction in weight would not affect top speed of the 262 in any measurable way; at least not with 1940s instruments.
-
Yea, and an other couple millions would have died.
I've stated on other threads how for theoriretical reason why it would be interesting to see what germany would produce, along with japan.
Of coarse more would have died and I'm glad and it was ended when it was
-
I'm also glad the war in Europe ended when it did. It would have ended in 1945 no matter what fancy aircraft the Germans thought up, with the USAAF dropping a fat boy or a little man on Germany first, rather than Japan.
-
I'm also glad the war in Europe ended when it did. It would have ended in 1945 no matter what fancy aircraft the Germans thought up, with the USAAF dropping a fat boy or a little man on Germany first, rather than Japan.
thank god for the incompetance kf the German high command and ignorance towards the field commanders.
-
Sounds like a the A8 would win in all parameters without the extra armour we have in AH ;)
T-2-711 and T-2-4012 and 711 crashed after engine failure.
As to 'no affect' to 4% reduction in Weight? W=L ; the CL' (new CL) is a function of (1-.04)*W/(qS) = (1-.04)W/(1/2*rho*((1-.04)*V')>>2)*S) where v' is slightly more than V at GW=14000.
It ain't much but CL for the 13500 is less than CL for 14000 and CL>>2 is less for induced Drag, enabling higher speed for same thrust... and lower W/L and more excess power over drag for 13,500 vs 14000 which enables higher ROC. I'm too lazy to run the iterations for v' and solve for CL'.
Summary - weight reduction consistent with structural integrity improves all key performance metrics.
-
Every aircraft in AH out-turns the 262. Doesn't help them one bit. ;) Speed is the dominating factor of air combat with guns only. A lesson the Japanese were rudely taught by the US.
I wouldn't say speed is everything, planes still have to manoeuvre into a shooting position to kill anything. In some cases when 2 planes have to actually dogfight and there is no way out, I know which attributes I would rather have on my side. ;)
-
Our A-8 doesn't have that much armor. It isn't a sturmbock model. However a few hundred pounds less weight will make a noticeable improvement in agility, but not in speed.
-
The OP's intention was for laughs I'll have you know :old:
laughing at the OP :lol :aok
-
I wouldn't say speed is everything, planes still have to manoeuvre into a shooting position to kill anything. In some cases when 2 planes have to actually dogfight and there is no way out, I know which attributes I would rather have on my side. ;)
If you have greatly superior speed you won't have to dogfight anyone. That's why the 262 is just about impervious to everything in AH, except the ineptness of its own pilot.
-
laughing at the OP :lol :aok
If you have greatly superior speed you won't have to dogfight anyone. That's why the 262 is just about impervious to everything in AH, except the ineptness of its own pilot.
check your messages :old: both of ya
-
T-2-711 and T-2-4012 and 711 crashed after engine failure.
As to 'no affect' to 4% reduction in Weight? W=L ; the CL' (new CL) is a function of (1-.04)*W/(qS) = (1-.04)W/(1/2*rho*(*V')>>2)*S) where v' is slightly more than V at GW=14000.
I had a brainfart in carrying around the 1-.04 factor which only belongs to the reduced Lift from 14K to 13.5K
It ain't much but CL for the 13500 is less than CL for 14000 and CL>>2 is less for induced Drag, enabling higher speed for same thrust... and lower W/L and more excess power over drag for 13,500 vs 14000 which enables higher ROC. I'm too lazy to run the iterations for v' and solve for CL'.
Summary - weight reduction consistent with structural integrity improves all key performance metrics.
-
In other words you now agree that a 4% reduction in weight is insignificant with regard to top speed?
-
The thing about speed is that it gives one the ability to dictate the terms of the fight in large measure. I mean lets face it, if you just refuse to turn with an A6M and keep your speed up, they're about the most harmless fighters in the game.
Thats not to say they aren't good fighters, just that they lack the ability to force a fight on their own terms.
The same situation occures when one tries to engage a 262 with a slower aircraft from co-alt. You'll get one pass at most, that being a HO or extreme deflecton shot, and then he's gonna either stay away from you, or convert that 500mph into about 6-8k of altitude, and bounce you from above.
-
Thats not to say they aren't good fighters, just that they lack the ability to force a fight on their own terms.
Actually that does make them not so good fighters. Zekes, KI43, Brewsters and co. do somewhat well in the MA because of the very unrealistic conditions - they basically feed of scraps of the 1945 speed monsters. I remember many scenarios and special events of A6Ms vs. F4Us. The A6Ms never stood a chance when there were no fast fighters to force the F4Us to slow down and duke it out. In real life, a pilot in danger will simply dive to the clouds and happily RTB without kills, but with his life. In AH it is the exact opposite - most players will prefer to take a bad chance for a kill rather then spend 30 minutes buzzing about and RTB with nothing to their credit.
-
In AH it is the exact opposite - most players will prefer to take a bad chance for a kill rather then spend 30 minutes buzzing about and RTB with nothing to their credit.
uhm, unfortunately thats not always true, there are many extraordinary timid pilots out there.
Otherwise, i pretty much agree with your post. AH is much more of an air quake than a realistic environment.
-
The 262 carries approx. 3,200 lbs of fuel. Take one up offline set fuel burn to 0.001 and see how much of a difference there is in top speed with 100% and 25% fuel. You'll notice that the difference in top speed at SL is no more than 1-2 mph, and that's with a weight difference of approx. 2,400 lbs. You seem well versed in aerodynamic nomenclature, so I'm sure you know that induced drag only represents a minute part of total drag at such high speeds. A 4% reduction in weight would not affect top speed of the 262 in any measurable way; at least not with 1940s instruments.
You're right.
I ran the numbers for a test case - assuming top speed, level, on the deck at 510mph TAS and got ~ 2 mph with some assumptions, namely that the drag rise due to compressibility was less than a delta of .002 of total CD at .66M at STP and therefore not yet into the onset drag rise region of CD vs M for both the Me 262 and F-80. Induced drag is low (CDi=~.000399 for 14K and ~, .00029 for 11.6K). Parasite drag will dominate until the wing moves into Mcr, where in a short time if V continues for both of these ships, Compressibility drag will dominate CD. Actually because of the Mach range for both the 262 and P80 flying at top speed neither will realize benefit of losing 4-10% of their weights with same thrust of more than 2+ mph.
That much weight reduction would positively affect climb rate significantly, however.
-
In other words you now agree that a 4% reduction in weight is insignificant with regard to top speed?
Yes - CL reduced from .000399 at 14K to .000299 at 11,600 - which would ~ 1/2% change in CD at 510mph/SL
-
:)
Yes, climb rate would be affected, but at 4% it would be about 150 ft/min (correct me if I'm wrong). However, given the general poor condition of the tested 262s and the maintenance difficulties mentioned in the report I would not be at all surprised if those 262s underperformed despite any weight loss during testing.
-
:)
Yes, climb rate would be affected, but at 4% it would be about 150 ft/min (correct me if I'm wrong). However, given the general poor condition of the tested 262s and the maintenance difficulties mentioned in the report I would not be at all surprised if those 262s underperformed despite any weight loss during testing.
Let's back up a bit. We started at discussing differences in dash speed by reducing the weight from 14000 to Depending on the altitude and the Thrust for that altitude, It should be proportional to ~ W2/W1 14000/(1-.04)*14000 = ~4.2 %higher ROC than at 14000 pounds.
ROC = V*Sin(Theta). If you hold the thrust and Velocity constant for both GW's, and assume small variation in airspeed due to reduced Induced drag, then for 14000, (T*V-D*V)/W1=ROC1 in vertical component of Freestream velocity = (T*V-D-V)/14000..
Similarly at 13,440; (T*V-D*V)/W2 = (T*V-D*V)/13,440= ROC2 for lower GW. Of course its not precise because the lighter weight ship at same top end velocity is climbing at different angle from Theta@14000 pounds and vortex drag due to lift will play with Drag total by increasing it and cause the Me 260 to slow down a bit in the climb.
So, it 'depends' but the 'delta' ROC2 at seal level is closer to 187 fpm (3fps) from ~510mph and 4500 fpm at 14000 pounds (using a number quoted but not from that Test paper).
As an aside One of the P-80s at Wright Pat undergoing tests was 44-85044 which was described in the 1946 Test Reports as the worst performing P-80A-1 in USAAF inventory. Have no idea what aircraft were used.
Having said that, it was clear that T-2-711 and 4012 had issues with the engines as 711 crashed due to engine failure and multiple engine changes had to be made during the evaluation.
-
If it helps, the best climbing speed of the Me 262 was about ~450 km/h IAS.
-
If it helps, the best climbing speed of the Me 262 was about ~450 km/h IAS.
ahh, it doesn't really. my 510mph was a guess 'best dash' at SL, pegging Drag = Parasite Drage + Induced Drag + Compressibility Drag + Wave Drag at that speed of .66 M, then stripping out everything but Parasite Drag in the assumptions, knowing that Drag in level flight is less than at a positive angle of attack in a climb... why should I obtain 'real data'? when I made so many assumptions..
I was looking for a rule of thumb/close enough type result.
-
Ok, let's agree on 187 ft/min then. I bet that number is well within the variances of different 262 airframes and engines. After all, the 1945 ones that the Allies got their hands on were built from scrap under the open sky; some of them even had wrinkles and bumps.
-
The best way to peg the potential performance is to put reliable 1900 pounds of thrust engines to the calculations but I have never seen a validated CD0 or a CD vs M drag plot....
And my 187fpm delta is a swag based on stripping some 390 gallons of jet fuel (and armament) from the loaded mission weight.
-
uhm, unfortunately thats not always true, there are many extraordinary timid pilots out there.
Otherwise, i pretty much agree with your post. AH is much more of an air quake than a realistic environment.
Ain't that the truth.