Author Topic: Gloster Meteor  (Read 6816 times)

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8455
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #30 on: October 24, 2011, 02:59:18 AM »
 :furious Well hopefully we'll see about that Perdue3!
"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened" - Dr. Seuss

Offline Debrody

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4486
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #31 on: October 24, 2011, 05:29:41 AM »
I hate to argue with friends, but i have to disagree real bad, Shida.
AoM
City of ice

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8455
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #32 on: October 24, 2011, 06:21:46 AM »
That's okay, a good friendship can weather difference of opinion.  :salute

I'd like to see the Gloster Meteor in AH because it would be the perfect antidote for those tiresome days of being mercilessly ganged by flocks of Fw190A-8s and P-47s etc. I expect you take a 262 on those days Debrody.

I think it would also be a fun and interesting aircraft to fly. Not so fast as the 262 but a much better turner and far more challenging to fight in than a big fast prop. Plus the armament should be on a par with a Mosquito for long range shots. I increasingly enjoy my shooting and AH is the only opportunity I currently get  :old:



"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened" - Dr. Seuss

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8455
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #33 on: October 24, 2011, 06:29:42 AM »
P.S. Someone help me out here, I tried to calculate the wing loading for the Mark III, by using the data from Wikipedia for the Mark IV and adding back in the 6% loss of wing area which they apparently removed to protect the pilots from getting squished to death in a dive (I know, not the most accurate approach but I only wanted to get a feel for it). Assuming a middling load-out (was thinking about half fuel load etc.) I get a figure of 32.3 lb/ft².

That can't be right can it? I did have a look at a model recently and compared to its single engine peers the Meteor does have enormous wings.
"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened" - Dr. Seuss

Offline Debrody

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4486
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #34 on: October 24, 2011, 06:32:39 AM »
262 already can turn with jugs/190s when light.
That meteor must be a spit-outturner //paranoid face//   : )

Edit: thats the same wingloading as a light jug. Idk if thats calculated with fully loaded, light, or empty. The light 262 has around 45lbs/sq foot. hmm not bad. Still, i dont think it meets the criteria.
Btw!  calculate the wingloading for the 109 g6: you will be surprised, its around 38-40lbs/sq foot. Still, can a jug outturn a g6?  : )
« Last Edit: October 24, 2011, 06:42:46 AM by Debrody »
AoM
City of ice

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8455
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #35 on: October 24, 2011, 06:43:31 AM »
Wikipedia says (yes I know) 58.3 lb/ft² for a fully loaded D. They have comparable empty weights but the Meteor is huge with massive, massive wings. Die P-47s, die, die! Ha ha ha ha! Laces out! 100 m.p.h. speed advantage, hmmm, kill Clouseau, hmm hmm he he :banana:

"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened" - Dr. Seuss

Offline Ruah

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1083
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #36 on: October 24, 2011, 06:51:20 AM »
is this were the circle-jerk is?

(please don't ban me)

Kommando Nowotny
I/JG 77, 2nd Staffel
Mediterranean Maelstrom
HORRIDO

Offline nrshida

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8455
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #37 on: October 24, 2011, 06:55:28 AM »
is this were the circle-jerk is?

(please don't ban me)

No sorry. We're discussing aeroplanes. You'll have to look on other websites for that sort of thing. Good luck buddy.
"Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened" - Dr. Seuss

Offline coombz

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3701
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #38 on: October 24, 2011, 07:39:05 AM »
Did you see my dad on dogfights yet?
I'll be seeing you face to face possibly next month.

Offline ozrocker

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3640
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #39 on: October 24, 2011, 08:13:37 AM »
Bensonhurst
Isn't that where one of the nuthouses is?


                                                                                                                                 :cheers: Oz
Flying and dying since Tour 29
The world is grown so bad. That wrens make prey where eagles dare not perch.- Shakespeare
 
30% Disabled Vet  US ARMY- 11C2H 2/32 AR. 3rd AD, 3/67AR. 2nd AD, 2/64 AR. 3rd ID, ABGD Command TRADOC, 1/16th INF. 1st ID

Offline Debrody

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4486
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #40 on: October 24, 2011, 08:38:37 AM »
Wikipedia says (yes I know) 58.3 lb/ft² for a fully loaded D. They have comparable empty weights but the Meteor is huge with massive, massive wings. Die P-47s, die, die! Ha ha ha ha! Laces out! 100 m.p.h. speed advantage, hmmm, kill Clouseau, hmm hmm he he :banana:
Plz keep in mind that the fully loaded D means it has tons of fuel, 2*2000lbs bombs, an 500lbs bomb and 10 rockets. Uhm, feels worse than a heavy bomber... now see the light jug, the one whats able to turnfight: same 300sq feet wing area, around 12000lbs weight. 40 lbs/sq foot, isnt it?  : )  Now comes the 109 g-6: 6700lbs weight (light), 173 sq feet wing area: 38.72 lbs/sq foot. Yet a jug cant even get close.
Why is that? The 109 has an excellent power to weight ratio what helps it pulling over the corners. The jug is weak in this. I dont have information about the meteors jet engine's characteristics at slow speeds...
AoM
City of ice

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #41 on: October 24, 2011, 09:29:58 AM »
P.S. Someone help me out here, I tried to calculate the wing loading for the Mark III, by using the data from Wikipedia for the Mark IV and adding back in the 6% loss of wing area which they apparently removed to protect the pilots from getting squished to death in a dive (I know, not the most accurate approach but I only wanted to get a feel for it). Assuming a middling load-out (was thinking about half fuel load etc.) I get a figure of 32.3 lb/ft².

That can't be right can it? I did have a look at a model recently and compared to its single engine peers the Meteor does have enormous wings.

F Mk.III Meteor:
43ft 0 inch (span)
41ft 5 inch (Length)
13 ft 0 inch (height)
374ft (34.8) Gross wing area
2x 2000 (8.9) RR W.2B/23C Welland or Derwent I or 2x 2,400 (10.7) Derwent IV
486 S/L or 493 at 30,000ft (Max speed at sea level or at 30k)
3,980 (climb rate per minute)
46,000 ft (ceiling)

JG 52

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #42 on: October 24, 2011, 09:40:06 AM »
yep give us another jet to use perks on even if it wont match a 262 it can still be fun

What makes you think it wont match the Me262?  Yeah, it may be a bit slower but it has the same turning capability as the larger turning prop planes in the game.  I've maintained that is a Meteor and a Me262 get into a dogfight it will be no different in terms of a dogfight between  190A-5 vs a 190D-9: the speeds are close enough, yet the maneuverability of the Meteor/A-5 is that much better that once they get position the Me262/D-9 they will just go nose down and evacuate the area.

I am not looking at this as a Me262 vs Meteor Mk III, I see it as adding another LW bird was groundbreaking and historical.  I do not see the Beaufighter, Yak-3, or 410 filling in any gaps.  At least the Meteor Mk III bridges the gap between the fastest of the prop aircraft and the Me262.  I think all 3 of the afor mentioned need to be added, but not if they are a "best of" vote, at least not yet.  HTC just needs to look at AH's historical plane set and it has to be obvious what is missing: the D520, Ki-43, Beaufighter, He-111, 410, Yak3, MiG3, EW Buffalo, Pe2, Tu2, Wellington, Halifax, etc etc.    

Vs the Me262, the Meteor Mk III is 1200lbs lighter; has double the range at 1300 miles (vs 650  miles for the Me262); is 40-60mph slower depending on altitude, has half the wing loading (with almost double the wing aspect ratio)- meaning the wings are able to perform better ["expert" aeronautical engineers please elaborate]; and although I've not seen hard numbers I've read where the Meteor has the "categorical" turn as the P47, 190, Typhoon, and Tempest (at what speeds I'm not sure).  With the rate in which the jet fighters accelerate the Me262 pilot could be in for a rude awakening if he is zinging along at 450 TAS in and out of a furball and along comes a Meteor a few thousand feet higher and in a perfect position to pounce.    

 
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline SmokinLoon

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6166
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #43 on: October 24, 2011, 09:43:48 AM »
262 already can turn with jugs/190s when light.
That meteor must be a spit-outturner //paranoid face//   : )

Edit: thats the same wingloading as a light jug. Idk if thats calculated with fully loaded, light, or empty. The light 262 has around 45lbs/sq foot. hmm not bad. Still, i dont think it meets the criteria.
Btw!  calculate the wingloading for the 109 g6: you will be surprised, its around 38-40lbs/sq foot. Still, can a jug outturn a g6?  : )

I'm not sure you have been smoking, but in no way shape or form can the Me262 turn with any prop plane in the game at any speeds.  The slower the speeds are the worse the spread gets for the 262.   :)
Proud grandson of the late Lt. Col. Darrell M. "Bud" Gray, USAF (ret.), B24D pilot, 5th BG/72nd BS. 28 combat missions within the "slot", PTO.

Offline Bruv119

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15644
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: Gloster Meteor
« Reply #44 on: October 24, 2011, 09:54:06 AM »
Meteor!!    :x
The Few ***
F.P.H