Could the Me-262..

[Jester]

Big BLACKHAWK fan there Widewing?   

[MiloMorai]

Comparison testing at Wright Field showed that the P-80A was superior to the Me 262 in every performance category except dive acceleration.

If so, then why was the Boyd report suppressed? The report had the 262 superior in speed and acceleration and equal in climb. The P-80 was better in handling and had better visibility.

Also, if you are to make comparisons with the P-80A, then compare it to the 262 which would have been using more powerful Jumo 004 engines.

............................. ............................

The replica 262s use J-85 engines with thrust pushing 3000lb. Because of the excess of power, they they have flight restriction so as to not over stress the airframe.

[Widewing]

If so, then why was the Boyd report suppressed? The report had the 262 superior in speed and acceleration and equal in climb. The P-80 was better in handling and had better visibility.

Also, if you are to make comparisons with the P-80A, then compare it to the 262 which would have been using more powerful Jumo 004 engines.

............................. ............................

The replica 262s use J-85 engines with thrust pushing 3000lb. Because of the excess of power, they they have flight restriction so as to not over stress the airframe.

If I recall correctly, wasn't the early comparison test done with the surviving XP-80A (Silver Ghost)? I have heard about this report for years, but haven't found anyone who has actually seen it.


My regards,

Widewing

[33Vortex]

Inconvenient and/or counterproductive test results are often supressed by authorities in order to prevent that the general public and even concerned professionals get upset. Especially in times of war, such as WW2 or the "cold war". It's been done by all nations throughout history, in all aspects of society. I very much doubt the USofA to be a exception in that regard.  I'm not saying that it happened in this particular case, just saying that there's a official truth, and a inofficial and confidential truth. All nations, no exceptions.

[Die Hard]

(Image removed from quote.)


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

Your image:





So the Me 262 was longer, had a greater wingspan, and grater weight than the P-80. The P-80's Allison J33 turbojet engine rated at 5,400 lbs of thrust, and the Me 262's two Junkers Jumo 004B-1 turbojets only managed a combined 3,960 lbs of thrust.

So the Me 262 was bigger, heavier and had only two thirds the power available, but still managed to be almost as fast as the P-80. What does that say for the relative aerodynamics of the two aircraft?

[Die Hard]

As for the Meteor III being the equal of the Me 262 I put great faith in the words of Eric Brown who flew both aircraft (and he told me this personally), I paraphrase: "In a fight between the Me 262 and the Meteor there would be no contest. The Meteor was a pedestrian aircraft by comparison."

[Widewing]

So the Me 262 was longer, had a greater wingspan, and grater weight than the P-80. The P-80's Allison J33 turbojet engine rated at 5,400 lbs of thrust, and the Me 262's two Junkers Jumo 004B-1 turbojets only managed a combined 3,960 lbs of thrust.

So the Me 262 was bigger, heavier and had only two thirds the power available, but still managed to be almost as fast as the P-80. What does that say for the relative aerodynamics of the two aircraft?

This is incorrect. You are describing the J33-A-35 that was installed in the last 561 F-80C fighters, which didn't begin delivery until the fall of 1948.

The P-80A was powered by a J33-A-9 generating 3,850 lb of thrust.

Thus, the P-80A was notably faster on less thrust.....


My regards,

Widewing

[jerkins]

Actually its interesting to look at the speed vs. altitude. 

The 262 is slower on the deck that at 15000, then slows again at 33000.

The P-80 is fastest on the deck, and decreases in speed with altitude.

What I determine from this is that the P-80s speed is limited by thrust.  It goes higher, less air density, less thrust, lower speeds.  The 262 on the other hand is more limited by drag.  On the deck the engines should be making the most thrust, but the drag of the plane slows it down.  The ideal altitude is 15000ft were the density allows for good thrust and lower drag.

Conclusion, P-80 is the aerodynamically superior design.

[Wotan]

Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb (907 kg), 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.

World War II Fighting Jets
ISBN 1-55750-940-9
Jeffrey Ethell and Alfred Price
Motorbooks International, 1994
page 180

[Angus]

Was Eric Brown quoting the Meteor III or the I then?

[Old Sport]

Immediately after World War II, Kelly Johnson, the legendary Lockheed Skunkworks engineer, built a six-foot-wingspan, 600-pound, solid-steel model of thee Lockheed P-80A Shooting Star (later designated F-80) and had it dropped from a P-38 at altitudes close to 40,000 feet. “In a vertical dive,” he wrote in a letter to Fisher, “the model would not exceed a true airspeed of higher than Mach .94. With the full scale model of the Lockheed F-80A, these results were confirmed, and there was no recorded case where this jet fighter, clean as it was, could ever exceed Mach .9.”

http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Mach_1.html?c=y&page=9

Personally I doubt the two big Jumo pods of the 262 let it go any faster.

[Widewing]

http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Mach_1.html?c=y&page=9

Personally I doubt the two big Jumo pods of the 262 let it go any faster.

This is a good article and the next page goes into detail about Herb Fisher. I know Herb's son (Herb jr.) and have a large collection of Herb's data and photos. Some of these are published on my website at: http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Fisher.html

For more info on who, in all probability was the first man to exceed Mach 1 (certainly in controlled flight), you can read about it here, http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/mach.html and on my site, here: http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Welch2.html

My regards,

Widewing

[Widewing]

World War II Fighting Jets
ISBN 1-55750-940-9
Jeffrey Ethell and Alfred Price
Motorbooks International, 1994
page 180

Again, I am aware of the this. However, no one has yet to produce the original test document. The only P-80 that I am aware of that was ever tested head to head with a captured Me 262 was S/N 83022, which was the second XP-80A.

My regards,

Widewing

[Die Hard]

Was Eric Brown quoting the Meteor III or the I then?

The Meteor in general. He flew them all and the 262 so I guess he's the authoritative test pilot source on these early jets.

[Die Hard]

Interestingly the Me 262 "survived" the war. 12 were made post-war by Avia in Czechoslovakia and flew into the 1950's.