Could the Me-262..

[Jester]

Get your facts straight. The YF-102 flew supersonic in level flight but it was below the design goal. In a dive it would be able to reach Mach 1 with the engine idling.

The F-102 concept was later redesigned useing the "Area Rule Concept" in developing the F-106 DELTA DART aircraft which could easily do over Mach 2 with virtually the same engine.



 

[Die Hard]

Area ruling was incorporated in the YF-102A prototype which led to the production F-102A. The F-106 (originally named F-102B) had so many changes that is was essentially a new aircraft. Your "virtually the same engine" argument does not hold water either. The F-102A's J57 produced 17,000 lbs of thrust. The F-106's J75 produced 24,500 lbs of thrust.

How hard can it be to look these things up? Get your facts straight.

[MaSonZ]

Not really. A 747 has more sweep on its wings which will allow it a far higher critical mach number than a 262. Wing section is probably better too. Also it has an all flying tail, which will allow it better control in the transonic region.

all flying tail meaning?

[33Vortex]

AFAIK the 262 was capable of transsonic flight, but was rarely ever able to recover from it due to structural failure as a consequence. If it actually ever broke the sound barrier is hard to tell (perhaps as it desintigrated), as we all know Germany lost the war and few 262 pilots lived to tell their tale. Even fewer experienced transsonic flight in the 262 and survived it, in fact, Mutke may be the only one.

[Motherland]

all flying tail meaning?

I think they're referring to a trim system where instead of trim tabs on the elevators the whole horizontal tailplane shifts. IIRC the 109 had this as well.

[Jester]

Area ruling was incorporated in the YF-102A prototype which led to the production F-102A. The F-106 (originally named F-102B) had so many changes that is was essentially a new aircraft. Your "virtually the same engine" argument does not hold water either. The F-102A's J57 produced 17,000 lbs of thrust. The F-106's J75 produced 24,500 lbs of thrust.

How hard can it be to look these things up? Get your facts straight.

1.  The YF-102 (NOT YF-102A - your original statement) DID NOT employ the area rule principle - one reason it was redesigned.
2.  Agreed, so many changes were made to the design - it was changed to the F-106 - but alot of these were internal and to the radar and fire control system. Nothing of what the post was talking about about the aerodynamics of the aircraft or how it related to the ME-262 breaking the sound barrier.
3.  If I am correct - the J57 is still a "J57" just a different version with more thrust so "essentually" it is the SAME engine isn't it? Virtually the same size and weight?

I would also suggest YOU might better spend your time looking up your facts and get off Wikipedi - while your at it you might want to see about learning some manners.

 

[Die Hard]

1.  The YF-102 (NOT YF-102A - your original statement) DID NOT employ the area rule principle - one reason it was redesigned.

You said "The F-102 concept was later redesigned useing the "Area Rule Concept" in developing the F-106 DELTA DART...". That is wrong. Area ruling was incorporated in the F-102 design before the development of the F-106. The production model F-102A included area ruling.

3.  If I am correct - the J57 is still a "J57"...

What?

[Widewing]

It may be worth mentioning that the F-80 Shooting Star was unable to exceed Mach .96 under any circumstances, verified by NACA wind tunnel testing.

The chances that an Me 262 exceeded Mach 1 are nil. Even the F-86, a genuine transonic fighter, could barely exceed Mach 1 (Mach 1.09) in an extended dive from 35,000 feet.


My regards,

Widewing

[Die Hard]

It may be worth mentioning that the F-80 Shooting Star was unable to exceed Mach .96 under any circumstances, verified by NACA wind tunnel testing.

Well look at it...

[33Vortex]

The 262 was aerodynamically superior to any other jet of it's era. Yes look at the P-80 and it's predecessor (P59??? don't recall the name of it but it looks like a porked pig on wheels when parked), look at the Meteor, no wonder the allies didn't consider the jet to be ready for front line use. They weren't fast enough to be considered worthwhile.

To compare the 262 with the P80 is like comparing the, well... Supermarine Spitfire MkI with the Hurricane MkI, they are that different. Aerodynamically and design philosophy, totally different but of the same time. (Actually that isn't true, the P80 is a later design, look at the P59 instead.) The angle of the swept wing of the 262 happened to be a very lucky configuration. The german engineers didn't know it when it was drawn (I don't know the particulars of it), but the test results of the a/c showed in black and white what a capable design it was.

[33Vortex]

Jets of the 1940's


USA - Bell P59 Airacomet


UK - Gloster Meteor


Germany - Messerschmitt Me262



So tell us, which design would appear to be the most advanced?

[Widewing]

Comparison testing at Wright Field showed that the P-80A was superior to the Me 262 in every performance category except dive acceleration. In a sustained dive, the 262 pulled away slightly initially. However, it entered full compressibility at Mach 0.84 and continued diving would result in the 262 nosing over through vertical and suffering a sudden catastrophic break-up. On the other hand, the P-80A pilot could simply pop his speed brake....

The YP-59s were testbeds... Never intended for combat. Also, the Meteor you show is a post-war F8 which outclassed the 262 by a considerable margin. The late-war (flying combat sorties before the surrender) F.MkIII was very much the equal of the 262.


My regards,

Widewing

[33Vortex]

Okay, there we have the answer, and I stand corrected. Does your sources tell the exact mach speed at which the 262 airframe would start to break up?

Also there are 262 replicas flying today, do you know how close to the original they are in performance?

 

[Delirium]

Those replicas aren't even using the same engine or anything even resembling the original engine. It is a much smaller engine inside dual housings to make it appear like the original Jumo and it also has greater thrust than the original Jumo.

To draw conclusions or based on the replicas would be erroneous.

[33Vortex]

They should still be able to simulate fairly closely the original 262 by limiting use of thrust to what the original had, no? The airframe should also be identical or nearly identical, though they would be stupid to fly near the high-speed end of the envelope with replicas.