Early Gloster Meteor vs ME262
Discussion
irocfan said:
V8 Fettler said:
There is a general misconception that the Me262 was an air superiority fighter, it wasn't. It was a bomber destroyer.
but wasn't that down to our mate with the dodgy 'tache? IIRC it was actually designed asa fighter but uncle Adolf insisted it had to be able to fulfil a fighter/bomber roleSimpo Two said:
irocfan said:
V8 Fettler said:
There is a general misconception that the Me262 was an air superiority fighter, it wasn't. It was a bomber destroyer.
but wasn't that down to our mate with the dodgy 'tache? IIRC it was actually designed asa fighter but uncle Adolf insisted it had to be able to fulfil a fighter/bomber role
t crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer irocfan said:
nope IIRC the Me410 was a "bomber destroyer", the Me262 was designated a fighter bomber (possibly similar role to a Typhoon or Whirlwind?), the 262 could have been used as an air-superiority fighter leaving the bat-st crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer
Yes, it was V8Fettler who first coined the term 'bomber destroyer' on this thread, wrongly in my opinion.t crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer Simpo Two said:
irocfan said:
nope IIRC the Me410 was a "bomber destroyer", the Me262 was designated a fighter bomber (possibly similar role to a Typhoon or Whirlwind?), the 262 could have been used as an air-superiority fighter leaving the bat-st crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer
Yes, it was V8Fettler who first coined the term 'bomber destroyer' on this thread, wrongly in my opinion.t crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer The key to identifying the 262's original design purpose is to consider the armament and the almost complete lack of dogfighting capability. High speed passes shooting at large, resilient, relatively immobile targets.
Simpo Two said:
irocfan said:
nope IIRC the Me410 was a "bomber destroyer", the Me262 was designated a fighter bomber (possibly similar role to a Typhoon or Whirlwind?), the 262 could have been used as an air-superiority fighter leaving the bat-st crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer
Yes, it was V8Fettler who first coined the term 'bomber destroyer' on this thread, wrongly in my opinion.t crazy Me163 as another bomber destoyer Wow!
There's some utter bks being spouted on this thread...
Firstly, 'Air Superiority Fighter' was not a concept that existed in WW2. In terms of the RAF the concepts were Fighter High Level, Fighter Medium Level, Fighter Low Level.
I would warrant that the late mark Spitfires were the 'Air Superiority Fighters' of their day.
Secondly V8Fettler is talking utter bks about Air Combat Manoeuvring - yes a Mustang could out turn a 262 in the horizontal but it could do bugger all against a 262 turning in the vertical. If you don't believe me try Googling 'High Speed Yo-Yo'.
He's also talking bks about the P51s flying at B17/B24 speeds. Utter fking cac. If you think a Fighter is going to give up Energy-Manoevre you are an idiot.
A very good friend of my family, Major Richard E Turner, commanded the 356th FS of the 354th FG - the first Group to operate the P51. He was probably the first P51 pilot to come up against a 262 and he was adamant that the P51 could not defend against the 262. If you don't believe me, try reading his book 'Mustang Pilot'.
The bottom line is that a well flown 262 will always defeat a P51.
In the 1960s a trial was performed using a Lightning F3 vs a Spitfire PR19 (the Lightning hardly being an 'Air Superiority Fighter') to assess whether a Fast Jet could defeat a late war piston fighter (the Malayan crisis being ongoing and the Communists having access to P51s). The Lightning won every time.
QED
There's some utter b
ks being spouted on this thread...Firstly, 'Air Superiority Fighter' was not a concept that existed in WW2. In terms of the RAF the concepts were Fighter High Level, Fighter Medium Level, Fighter Low Level.
I would warrant that the late mark Spitfires were the 'Air Superiority Fighters' of their day.
Secondly V8Fettler is talking utter b
ks about Air Combat Manoeuvring - yes a Mustang could out turn a 262 in the horizontal but it could do bugger all against a 262 turning in the vertical. If you don't believe me try Googling 'High Speed Yo-Yo'.He's also talking b
ks about the P51s flying at B17/B24 speeds. Utter fking cac. If you think a Fighter is going to give up Energy-Manoevre you are an idiot.A very good friend of my family, Major Richard E Turner, commanded the 356th FS of the 354th FG - the first Group to operate the P51. He was probably the first P51 pilot to come up against a 262 and he was adamant that the P51 could not defend against the 262. If you don't believe me, try reading his book 'Mustang Pilot'.
The bottom line is that a well flown 262 will always defeat a P51.
In the 1960s a trial was performed using a Lightning F3 vs a Spitfire PR19 (the Lightning hardly being an 'Air Superiority Fighter') to assess whether a Fast Jet could defeat a late war piston fighter (the Malayan crisis being ongoing and the Communists having access to P51s). The Lightning won every time.
QED
Part of the reason the Meteor and Me262 never met in combat was that Meteors were not allowed to fly over Germany in case they fell into enemy hands. Given the state of German technology could the Germans really have learnt anything they didn't already know from the fairly small pieces crashed jet fighters tend to leave?
Jet aircraft can crash and remain fairly intact too. Don't forget, the RAE at Farnborough were able to reconstruct pretty accurately a V2 from bits and pieces of one that had flown off course from Peenemunde to Sweden.
A lot of V1s landed relatively intact as well when they glided down rather than nosedived into the ground.
A lot of V1s landed relatively intact as well when they glided down rather than nosedived into the ground.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Firstly, 'Air Superiority Fighter' was not a concept that existed in WW2. In terms of the RAF the concepts were Fighter High Level, Fighter Medium Level, Fighter Low Level.
I would warrant that the late mark Spitfires were the 'Air Superiority Fighters' of their day.
thanks for clearing that little bit up - I didn't realise that.I would warrant that the late mark Spitfires were the 'Air Superiority Fighters' of their day.
Dr Jekyll said:
Part of the reason the Meteor and Me262 never met in combat was that Meteors were not allowed to fly over Germany in case they fell into enemy hands. Given the state of German technology could the Germans really have learnt anything they didn't already know from the fairly small pieces crashed jet fighters tend to leave?
616 Squadron sent a detachment of Meteor F.3's and some F.1's across to the continent (based in Belgium, whilst the war in the E.T.O. was still in progress) to evaluate their effect under combat conditions, some 6/8 Meteors in total, between late March '45 & VE day on May 8th.They were painted in an overall white distemper finish - this was supposedly to help Allied air & ground forces gain instant recognition.
During this time only on two occasions did they come into contact with the Luftwaffe.
On the first, whilst patrolling, a flight of Meteor's positioned themselves to attack a larger force of F.W. 190's when at the crucial moment, just as they were about to commence the attack - the Meteors themselves were bounced + attacked by a flight of Spitfires.....the white distemper & countless air recognition symbols apparently having no effect on the Spitfire pilots - thereby causing the cursing Meteor pilots to break off the attack.
The second incident was when a flight came upon a hapless Fiesler Stoch which they were unable to shoot down because of the speed differential and the excellent pilot skills of the Storch pilot, but they succeeded in making it force land, whereupon the Storch crew legged it before the Meatbox pilots straffed the Storch into fragments with cannon fire!!
However, the Germans wouldn't have exactly learnt anything they didn't already know, and in many ways, the Me262 was technically more advanced than the Meteor anyway, and it was only the lack of the higher tech materials the Germans really needed that was the limitation on the Me262, not to mention, fuel, and sufficient quality pilots by late 44/early 45.
aeropilot said:
The second incident was when a flight came upon a hapless Fiesler Stoch which they were unable to shoot down because of the speed differential and the excellent pilot skills of the Storch pilot, but they succeeded in making it force land, whereupon the Storch crew legged it before the Meatbox pilots straffed the Storch into fragments with cannon fire!!
Given that on trials they were able to land a Storch vertically on a carrier I'm not surprised they found it hard to hit 
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
Wow!
There's some utter bks being spouted on this thread...
Firstly, 'Air Superiority Fighter' was not a concept that existed in WW2. In terms of the RAF the concepts were Fighter High Level, Fighter Medium Level, Fighter Low Level.
I would warrant that the late mark Spitfires were the 'Air Superiority Fighters' of their day.
Secondly V8Fettler is talking utter bks about Air Combat Manoeuvring - yes a Mustang could out turn a 262 in the horizontal but it could do bugger all against a 262 turning in the vertical. If you don't believe me try Googling 'High Speed Yo-Yo'.
He's also talking bks about the P51s flying at B17/B24 speeds. Utter fking cac. If you think a Fighter is going to give up Energy-Manoevre you are an idiot.
A very good friend of my family, Major Richard E Turner, commanded the 356th FS of the 354th FG - the first Group to operate the P51. He was probably the first P51 pilot to come up against a 262 and he was adamant that the P51 could not defend against the 262. If you don't believe me, try reading his book 'Mustang Pilot'.
The bottom line is that a well flown 262 will always defeat a P51.
In the 1960s a trial was performed using a Lightning F3 vs a Spitfire PR19 (the Lightning hardly being an 'Air Superiority Fighter') to assess whether a Fast Jet could defeat a late war piston fighter (the Malayan crisis being ongoing and the Communists having access to P51s). The Lightning won every time.
QED
Air superiority has been a concept since the dawn of manned flight, a definition: There's some utter b
ks being spouted on this thread...Firstly, 'Air Superiority Fighter' was not a concept that existed in WW2. In terms of the RAF the concepts were Fighter High Level, Fighter Medium Level, Fighter Low Level.
I would warrant that the late mark Spitfires were the 'Air Superiority Fighters' of their day.
Secondly V8Fettler is talking utter b
ks about Air Combat Manoeuvring - yes a Mustang could out turn a 262 in the horizontal but it could do bugger all against a 262 turning in the vertical. If you don't believe me try Googling 'High Speed Yo-Yo'.He's also talking b
ks about the P51s flying at B17/B24 speeds. Utter fking cac. If you think a Fighter is going to give up Energy-Manoevre you are an idiot.A very good friend of my family, Major Richard E Turner, commanded the 356th FS of the 354th FG - the first Group to operate the P51. He was probably the first P51 pilot to come up against a 262 and he was adamant that the P51 could not defend against the 262. If you don't believe me, try reading his book 'Mustang Pilot'.
The bottom line is that a well flown 262 will always defeat a P51.
In the 1960s a trial was performed using a Lightning F3 vs a Spitfire PR19 (the Lightning hardly being an 'Air Superiority Fighter') to assess whether a Fast Jet could defeat a late war piston fighter (the Malayan crisis being ongoing and the Communists having access to P51s). The Lightning won every time.
QED
RAF said:
Air Superiority. That degree of dominance in the air battle of one force over another
which permits the conduct of operations by the former and its related land, sea and air
forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by the opposing force.
from this pdf http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/374F7380_1...which permits the conduct of operations by the former and its related land, sea and air
forces at a given time and place without prohibitive interference by the opposing force.
The RAF certainly had various descriptions for various fighter types in WW2, but the concept is not a description. Various authors refer to the P51 as an air superiority fighter. Possibly, but that was never the design objective.
I wasn't aware that a climb or a dive could be described as a turn, but life is an education. At some point, a 262 will have to laterally turn (is that a better description?) and dive for home, and that's when it becomes vulnerable.
P51s flying top cover would generally match the speed of the bombers below, their height providing the (potential) energy for manoeuvre. P51 escorts at lower levels would indeed range far and wide. Additionally, P51s would arrive at the target 15 minutes or so before the bomber force to suppress the Luftwaffe (including 262s)
I'm pleased that you have a friend who served in the 354th, I had a relative who was an air gunner on B17s over Europe from 1943 to 1945. His memories reflected those of many B17 (and B24) crew: the P51 was a life saver, no matter what the Luftwaffe threw at them.
There are no absolutes in air combat. A well flown 262 should typically able to decline a dogfight with a P51, as long as the 262 has sufficient fuel. When the 262's fuel is low the advantage switches to the P51. A well flown P51 will typically be able to avoid a high speed pass from a 262 by virtue of its greater lateral turning ability. But why would a P51 accept a 1:1 confrontation? 5:1 in favour of the P51 would be a typical encounter over Germany in late 1944 / early 1945. The great Schell (10 P51s confirmed) eventually fell to a P51.
How well could the P51 defend the USAAF bombers? Compared to the unescorted raids of 1943, the influence of the P51 was spectacular (Perret 1993). The best way to defend against the 262 is to shoot it down, see here for details of P51 successes against the 262 http://www.afhra.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-... Approx 130 262s destroyed by P51s out of a total of perhaps 300 262s that flew in combat.
Your comparison between the 262 and the Lightning is bizarre, the Lighting would have been at least twice as quick as the 262 (with weapons to match), but the PR Spitfire would not be much faster than a P51.
I'll not be responding to your pathetic name calling or your feeble attempts at verbal abuse; Boats, Planes and Trains is better than that, as should you be. I suspect that you might be an irascible old codger, and I have a lot of time for irascible old codgers, primarily because that's what I intend to be in a couple of decades.
aeropilot said:
V8 Fettler said:
The great Schell (10 P51s confirmed) eventually fell to a P51.
Who...?If you mean Franz Schall, no he didn't. On the 10th April '45, his 262 rolled into a bomb crater during an attempted emergency landing at Parchim, and exploded, killing him instantly.
V8 Fettler said:
from this pdf http://www.raf.mod.uk/rafcms/mediafiles/374F7380_1...
Huh? You quote AP3000, a relatively recent document to prove that the concept of an Air Superiority Fighter existed in 1944/45? Aside from the fact said AP never mentions such a fighter. Hmm good luck with that!Air Superiority as a Doctrine did not exist until the 1970's. While local Air Superiority was talked about during the Vietnam era, the idea of an Air Superiority Fighter resulted as post Vietnam. Indeed it was Vietnam as drove the idea - the first aircraft being designed as Air Superiority Fighters being the 'Teen' series a/c - ie the F15 and F16.
But then what would I know? I only spent in excess of 2 decades professionally dealing with the application of Air Power.
V8 Fettler said:
I wasn't aware that a climb or a dive could be described as a turn, but life is an education. At some point, a 262 will have to laterally turn (is that a better description?) and dive for home, and that's when it becomes vulnerable.
Obviously. From your posts it shows that you are an 'armchair' 'expert' who has no real idea about ACM (Air Combat Manoeuvring). You persist in thinking in 2D whereas in reality ACM is all about 3D.V8 Fettler said:
P51s flying top cover would generally match the speed of the bombers below, their height providing the (potential) energy for manoeuvre.
Utter rubbish. A fighter does not willingly give up Energy-Manoeuvre. The Luftwaffe tried that in 1940 (tieing the Fighters to the Bombers) and it did not work . Do you really think the USAAF would make the same mistake in 1944? HINT. They did not, top cover flew about 2000ft above in weaving patterns keeping their airspeed (energy) up. Further HINT. 2000ft doesn't give you that much energy conversion in a piston fighter.V8 Fettler said:
A well flown P51 will typically be able to avoid a high speed pass from a 262 by virtue of its greater lateral turning ability.
As I said before, Google 'Hi Speed Yo-Yo'. Yet again you are forgetting that a Fighter with a greater specific excess thrust can turn in the vertical. V8 Fettler said:
Your comparison between the 262 and the Lightning is bizarre, the Lighting would have been at least twice as quick as the 262 (with weapons to match), but the PR Spitfire would not be much faster than a P51.
No. It's only 'bizarre' if you really don't get it. I was trying to point out that an a/c with a HUGELY worse wing loading (ergo hugely poorer lateral turn radius) can wax a more (laterally) manoevrable a/c by using its specific excess thrust and turning in the vertical. Just like the 262 could against the P51V8 Fettler said:
I'll not be responding to your pathetic name calling or your feeble attempts at verbal abuse; Boats, Planes and Trains is better than that, as should you be.
If you post bullst about flying Military a/c I will challenge you on it every time.V8 Fettler said:
I suspect that you might be an irascible old codger, and I have a lot of time for irascible old codgers, primarily because that's what I intend to be in a couple of decades.
I am an 'Old Codger' who has spent more time flying DACT (Dissimilar Air Combat Tactics) and developing ways to survive against FJs on a number of a/c than I care to think about.Do you still want to argue with me?
Condi said:
aeropilot said:
V8 Fettler said:
The great Schell (10 P51s confirmed) eventually fell to a P51.
Who...?If you mean Franz Schall, no he didn't. On the 10th April '45, his 262 rolled into a bomb crater during an attempted emergency landing at Parchim, and exploded, killing him instantly.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff