Me 262 Questions

[HagarTheHorrible]

36 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

Yes. It can do very well so, even at 650+ km/h.

 

According to the Canberra instructor the problem was asymmetric thrust.  It couldn't have been helped by an unintentional airbrake on the opposite side.  The Canberra, on the other hand isn't a 262, I'm just saying the instructors experience of what was possible didn't neccesarily concur with officialdom.  

 

Are there accounts of 262's returning on one engine, actually flying rather than a low powered glide ?

[ZachariasX]

6 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

According to the Canberra instructor the problem was asymmetric thrust.  It couldn't have been helped by an unintentional airbrake on the opposite side.  The Canberra, on the other hand isn't a 262, I'm just saying the instructors experience of what was possible didn't neccesarily concur with officialdom.  

 

Are there accounts of 262's returning on one engine, actually flying rather than a low powered glide ?

 

Yes, there are accounts of Me262 running away on one engine. I have no idea whether they made a nice landing back home, as having a little fire going under one wing makes things certainly interesting for the pilot.

 

But genearlly, the 262 seems to be a well mannered aircraft if you treat her right. Not having spoilers is a bummer, but I see no reason for it not going well on one engine, as you need relatively little power to keep it going. It flys and glides well, this being even problematic for landings.

[CrazyDuck]

I'm seeing quite some claims in style "It's not a dogfighter" "It turns like a locomotive" etc.

 

Well, I woudln't be so sure about this. Comparing wing loading (empty weight), Me 262 is comparable or even better than P-38, P-47 and Fw 190, plus it has leading edge slats over entire length of the wing.

 

Consequently, I wouldn't be surprised if this thing exhibited outstanding high-ish speed maneouverability (E-bleed might be a problem tho), and good stall-speed behavior.

 

Of course Me 262 pilot should avoid dogfighting whenever possible and only resort to it when forced to (since this negates the biggest advantage he has), but this has nothing to do with dogfighting capabilities of the aircraft.  Let's wait and see.

 

[Ehret]

46 minutes ago, CrazyDuck said:

I'm seeing quite some claims in style "It's not a dogfighter" "It turns like a locomotive" etc.

 

Well, I woudln't be so sure about this. Comparing wing loading (empty weight), Me 262 is comparable or even better than P-38, P-47 and Fw 190, plus it has leading edge slats over entire length of the wing.

 

It's not matter of a plane construction but differences in speed between adversaries, G-loads and the human tolerance. The radial acceleration is (v * v)/r; the 262 flying 900km/h will have to pull +1.6x more G than a prop at 700km/h to follow the same path. Say, a P-51 pilot will have only to do 5G turn to evade the high speed 262 because the latter will exceed 7.5G trying to stay on the target's six.

 

The other option is to slow down to match G-loads but it is a risky move for an early jet like the 262. A prop can match, or even exceed the jet's acceleration at lower speeds thus turning contents will not favor the 262.

 

Another thing is the closure rate... just few seconds to aim your shoot and the trajectory of MK-108s will not be helpful.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Ehret

[Zooropa_Fly]

Just going on IL21946 experience (none of this engineering crap), it really is a bugger to turn.

And once you've bled your speed it's slow to pick up again, remembering you have to be smooth and gentle with the throttles, plus it can't sustain a steep climb.

 

S!

[ZachariasX]

25 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Just going on IL21946 experience (none of this engineering crap), it really is a bugger to turn.

And once you've bled your speed it's slow to pick up again, remembering you have to be smooth and gentle with the throttles, plus it can't sustain a steep climb.

 

S!

I don‘t see it having a „large turn radius“ as such. It most certainly turns WAY better than any Bf-109 @450 mph. Most prop aircraft lose much of their agility at these speeds due to control restrictions.  But there are notable exceptions like the Tempest or the Fw-190D for instance. And you‘d be stupid to go slower than that in the Me-262. At 400 mph already you‘d have a nasty time with Tempests or well flown Mustangs.

[Pict]

15 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

You misunderstand when I say "level playing field".  I certainly don't mean all aircraft should be the same.

 

That's very likely, but even if you apply some kind of balancing act, the 262 will still be available, unless you ban it?

 

And if the 262 is still there, then the odds are some intrepid pilot will attempt to dogfight with it. I don't see the point, but if a 262 pilot manages to "club" you in your prop job, then he deserves the kill, as you weren't up too much.

 

Other than blitz bombing, I think the 262 would be good drag & bag bait for Dora's & late 109's, as the pony jockey's are sure to want to try and shoot a jet down

 

And if your looking for historical 262 scenarios, then you'll need to allow vulching, no?

Edited September 19, 2018 by Pict

[MiloMorai]

How many historical Me262 airfields would be on the map?

Edited September 19, 2018 by MiloMorai

[HagarTheHorrible]

ACCELERATION

[Talon_]

16 minutes ago, MiloMorai said:

How many historical Me262 airfields would be on the map?

 

Cross reference this:

 

 

With this: 

 

 

NOTE: The first list is not exhaustive or complete AFAIK.

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by Talon_

[Hirachi]

as long as it limited number and allies outnumber the axis team i don't see it being much of a problem.. I use to fly with a German squad in 46 and when one of the chaps and me use the 26 we always have to coordinate with the other guys flying 109 or 190's when both of us are going back to the base... let be honest the finals are long the acceleration is slow and if you get jumped by the 25 pound spit or a MK III mustang it can really become work ...

Edited September 19, 2018 by Simba

[Duckman]

From flying it in Il2 (years ago):

 

- Engines are sensitive and throttle response slow, som best leave it at 80-90% and don't fiddle too much.

 

- It's kind of like a train that builds up speed slowly, so fly accordingly (i.e. mostly in a long straight line).

 

- Even early jets have much better climb than props, which is handy. Look up best climb angle.

 

To sum it up it has quite a few limitations and is strictly a boom and zoom aircraft, meaning you can still turn but don't do it too much or hard. Very heavy armament makes up for some of the downsides. All in all quite a different and fun plane.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Duckman

[Bremspropeller]

8 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

According to the Canberra instructor the problem was asymmetric thrust.  It couldn't have been helped by an unintentional airbrake on the opposite side.  The Canberra, on the other hand isn't a 262, I'm just saying the instructors experience of what was possible didn't neccesarily concur with officialdom.   

 

Are there accounts of 262's returning on one engine, actually flying rather than a low powered glide ?

 

Vmca should be around 280 or 290kph*.

That means there's a dead man's region between getting airborne and Vmca.

 

___

* acc Eric Brown

[IVJG4-Knight]

I wonder why you can't find a comparison 262 vs allied fighters on WW2 aircraft performance  ?

 

[HagarTheHorrible]

4 minutes ago, IVJG4-Knight said:

I wonder why you can't find a comparison 262 vs allied fighters on WW2 aircraft performance  ?

 

Knock it off.  Picking an argument for arguments sake is pointless.

 

Maybe the Germans realized the 262 was not ideally suited to attacking fighters which is maybe one reason why it was used against bombers and as ground attack.

[MiloMorai]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

Vmca should be around 280 or 290kph*.

That means there's a dead man's region between getting airborne and Vmca.

 

___

* acc Eric Brown

 

Landing

Minimum approach speed is 260kph(162mph)  Altitude drops 1-2m at full throttle with u/c lowered.

 

Air starts only possible under 4000m and at speed between 300-350kph.

 

There is a wonderful series of 4 books on the Me262 by Smith/Creek that should be read. 

[IVJG4-Knight]

21 minutes ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Knock it off.  Picking an argument for arguments sake is pointless.

 

Maybe the Germans realized the 262 was not ideally suited to attacking fighters which is maybe one reason why it was used against bombers and as ground attack.

 

It's true my response was childish .Lol.

 

" the 262 was not ideally suited to attacking fighters"

 

The opinions are split on this toppic.

 

Some said it was a great fighter because it's easy to achieve surprise.

I know the germans devised a tactic where if the flight leader missed the enemy fighter that the wingman will hit it.

Some german commanders said attacking a bomber from behind is is very dangerous because of vulnerable jet engines and attacking from front was too hard since the pilots had little time to train at this stage of the war with the much faster jet.So considered it more suited for attacking fighters.

In korea the mig 15 couldn't possibly turn with a p51 but the got lots of p51 kills .And  projectile speed of the cannons on the mig wasn't all that better from the mk. 108 

 

The really bad part about the 262 is the acceleration.

 

In games I don't know what to say.

In DCS considering the difficult spoting and how many times i achieved surprise it would have been a great fighter .

In the old IL2 considering the big dot sistem it was so so.

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by IVJG4-Knight

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, MiloMorai said:

How many historical Me262 airfields would be on the map?

 

Both airfields for Kommando Nowontny and AFAIK all of KG 51's for the timeframe being depicted are on the map. 

[Bremspropeller]

15 minutes ago, MiloMorai said:

 

Landing

Minimum approach speed is 260kph(162mph)  Altitude drops 1-2m at full throttle with u/c lowered.

 

Air starts only possible under 4000m and at speed between 300-350kph.

 

There is a wonderful series of 4 books on the Me262 by Smith/Creek that should be read. 

 

I do have the two-series german translatzion of the Smith/Creek books. The original four-copy series is priced pretty astronomically.

 

Vmca = Minimum control airspeed (air)

 

That's basicly the minimum speed which you can fly without losing control. Usually the latter happens due to running out of rudder during an asymmetric thrust application.

E.B. noted that due to the sluggish acceleration on takeoff and the known reliability issues with the engines, the duration between getting airborne and crossing this Vmca was rather unsettling.

 

Can't find my copy of WotL atm.

Maybe you could have a look at it on your own. I figure you're in possession of that book, Milo

 

Edit:

Just found it.

The 290kph are most probably* due to the low thrust available, which implies that below 290kph there's insufficient thrust on one engine to keep level flight.

Disregard my Vmca comment.

 

___

* My german version isn't all too clear about the issue; maybe the original copy is a bit more elaborate.

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by Bremspropeller

[MiloMorai]

Yes Brem got them new when they were at a reasonable price.

 

landing data is for 1 engine.

[MiloMorai]

[Ehret]

1 hour ago, IVJG4-Knight said:

In korea the mig 15 couldn't possibly turn with a p51 but the got lots of p51 kills .And  projectile speed of the cannons on the mig wasn't all that better from the mk. 108

 

P-51s in Korea were flying ground support missions, mostly. They would be encumbered by racks and ordnance and without complete air superiority - it had to be a very risky business. The Mig-15' cannons shot at 690m/s where the MK-108 at 505m/s; not insignificant difference. Besides, the Mig offered a much better performance than the 262.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Ehret

[JG5_Schuck]

If i remember rightly, 

You'll need a long concrete runway, with an escort for take off and landing (without you're a sitting duck for the vulchers!)

Low speed handling is equal to a house brick, and the engines made of glass (model dependent)

You'll need a few kms to accelerate to speed, and even further for your slow steady approach for landing. (draw distance allowing!)

I'm guessing landing accidents will be frequent, as people come in to 'hot' and overshoot, (little chance to gun it and take off again!)

Collisions will probably be normal, with the high closing speed (especially in a shallow dive) and little chance to maneuver if the target tries to avoid you.

And if you don't manage to 'kill' a fighter on the first pass, he'll probably turn and shoot you in the ass!

Other than that it should be great........looking forward to it!

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by JG5_Schuck

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Like any plane it will have its pros and cons. I think if you spot a 262 it will not be able to get u but spotting it will be no easy task. I imagine a 190 on steroids. 

[Ehret]

32 minutes ago, JG5_Schuck said:

And if you don't manage to 'kill' a fighter on the first pass, he'll probably turn and shoot you in the ass!

 

If the bounce was at high speed then the defending fighter will have mere seconds to do this.

 

27 minutes ago, AeroAce said:

Like any plane it will have its pros and cons. I think if you spot a 262 it will not be able to get u but spotting it will be no easy task. I imagine a 190 on steroids. 

 

And there will be the major pro of 262s hanging around, imho - just their presence will be a drain on the enemy's stamina. Flying in the constant fear of being bounced not matter what you do...

 

That's why it is a little pity we will not be getting the backward warning radar in the P-38 and others.

Edited September 19, 2018 by Ehret

[Bremspropeller]

The biggest problem with the 262 doing patters is the lack of speedbrakes.

That way, you have to fiddle around the cumbersome throttles way more than you'd wish to.

 

[Talon_]

14 minutes ago, Ehret said:

That's why it is a little pity we will not be getting the backward warning radar in the P-38 and others.

 

Is this confirmed?

 

The last dev blog to mention subtypes quoted P-51D-25 which was fitted with the tail warning radar as standard, though I myself think this is a typo.

 

The tail warning radar was however retrofitted to earlier blocks of P-51Ds and P-47Ds including the D-28.

[sevenless]

6 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Is this confirmed?

 

The last dev blog to mention subtypes quoted P-51D-25 which was fitted with the tail warning radar as standard, though I myself think this is a typo.

 

The tail warning radar was however retrofitted to earlier blocks of P-51Ds and P-47Ds including the D-28.

 

It was a typo. They need the D-15 to have the plane available in 9/44. IIRC Blacksix mentioned that.

[Ehret]

13 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

The tail warning radar was however retrofitted to earlier blocks of P-51Ds and P-47Ds including the D-28.

 

Would be great to have it as a mod but after the P-38-L was changed to the P-38-J it seems to be unlikely.

[Legioneod]

13 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

Would be great to have it as a mod but after the P-38-L was changed to the P-38-J it seems to be unlikely.

Imo it will be little help, by the time it goes off you'll be in his sights already, or you'll be dead.  Nothing can replace keeping your head on a swivel imo.

That being said, it would be nice to have for defense against props, they have a slower closure rate so you'll have more time to react.

[HagarTheHorrible]

http://zenoswarbirdvideos.com/Images/Me262/ME262PILOTDEBRIEF.pdf

[Godspeed]

I hope Sturmovik will get AI overhaul or otherwise Me 262 will lose to I-16.

 

[InProgress]

5 hours ago, Godspeed said:

I hope Sturmovik will get AI overhaul or otherwise Me 262 will lose to I-16.

 

It will get one shot from AAA at 5k while going 800km/h

[JV69badatflyski]

in the old il2-46, when making missions with the 262, i always set flak alleys, a lot of flak in the landing pattern en fewer in the start pattern, anyway, making an vulching on a landing 262 was really suicidal. 

[CountZero]

Just had look on il-2 46 and this is what loudouts it had there:

 

Me-262A-1a, 4x30mm
2xSC 250
2xSC 500
2x WfrGr.21
R1: 24xR4M
U1: 2xMG151/20 +2xMK103 +2xMK108 (single prototype)
U4: 50 mm (2 in) MK 214 (or BK-5) anti-tank gun in nose (two prototypes)
U5: 6x MK108

 

Me-262A-2a, 2x30mm                     
2xSC250
2xSC500
2xWfrGr21

 

Dont expect to see thouse prototype versions here, but rest is probably gona be as modifications

Edited September 20, 2018 by 77.CountZero

[Zooropa_Fly]

IL2 also has the HG variant with the modified tail, which is a little faster if I recall..

Only a couple of prototypes tested in '45 I think and never saw active service, so don't expect that on here anytime soon !

 

Aside from all the technical and gameplay concerns, it should be remembered this is one beautiful plane.

Simplistic in a design, that always reminds me of a Great White's torso. It could almost have been evolved by nature itself.

It is easy to fly as long as you take care of those engines, but that's a good thing and should be celebrated - it can't help not having a prop and the associated complications of engine management.

 

Very much looking forward to flying it in an up to date arena.

S!

 

[Duckman]

21 hours ago, IVJG4-Knight said:

I wonder why you can't find a comparison 262 vs allied fighters on WW2 aircraft performance  ?

 

 

That can get a bit weird because with the late-war Axis wonders you risk comparing theoretical performance that was rarely achieved (because of sucky manufacture, maintenance etc).

 

I know it’s a controversial subject, but I’d love to see random failures and performance degradation when appropriate. That way you’d never know exactly what you’d get when you jump into that Shiden Kai or Me 262  - could be a world beater or a reason to abort ASAP.

 

 

19 hours ago, Ehret said:

 

P-51s in Korea were flying ground support missions, mostly. They would be encumbered by racks and ordnance and without complete air superiority - it had to be a very risky business. 

 

Not to mention that the pilots would not be in the mindset, or perhaps even trained, for air to air. The Corsair was probably the worst off, with the late versions turning the WWII sports car into a bomb truck.

 

 

19 hours ago, AeroAce said:

I imagine a 190 on steroids. 

 

That’s a good comparison.

 

 

18 hours ago, Ehret said:

That's why it is a little pity we will not be getting the backward warning radar in the P-38 and others.

 

Fighters actually had tail warning radars in WWII? I had no idea.

 

 

18 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

The biggest problem with the 262 doing patters is the lack of speedbrakes. That way, you have to fiddle around the cumbersome throttles way more than you'd wish to.

 

 

Those throttles were indeed a weak point. I almost imagine mechanics and flight leaders putting "do not touch!" signs on them.

 

 

13 hours ago, Godspeed said:

I hope Sturmovik will get AI overhaul or otherwise Me 262 will lose to I-16.

 

 

Given the one-on-one turnfights beloved by computer fliers it wouldn’t necessarily be unrealistic. I’ve read numerous stories of veteran pilots kicking the rookies’ butt in an old hack just to show them that (cliche alert) ”it’s the  machine, not the man” and try to get any big-headedness out of them as soon as possible.

 

 

43 minutes ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

Aside from all the technical and gameplay concerns, it should be remembered this is one beautiful plane. Simplistic in a design, that always reminds me of a Great White's torso. It could almost have been evolved by nature itself.

 

I always liked its look for the same reason. Nice, clean, predatory.............as long as you don't mention the engines. ?

 

In the aestethics department we should also note the lack of propeller noise, a feature much appreciated by contemporaries. I assume less vibration also made for a smoother ride.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Duckman

[klebor]

29 minutes ago, Duckman said:

That can get a bit weird because with the late-war Axis wonders you risk comparing theoretical performance that was rarely achieved (because of sucky manufacture, maintenance etc).

 

I know it’s a controversial subject, but I’d loveto see random failures and performance degradation when appropriate.

 

If manufacture quality and random failures would be simulated in IL-2 it would be impossible to fly Soviet planes. You would end the flight more often because of some failure than being hit by the enemy.

 

29 minutes ago, Duckman said:

Fighters actually had tail warning radars in WWII? I had no idea.

AN/APS-13 was a standard equipment of some planes.

 

29 minutes ago, Duckman said:

Those throttles were indeed a weak point. I almost imagine mechanics and flight leaders putting "do not touch!" signs on them.

 

Please do yourself a favour and read Me262 manual and you will see real operation procedures and limitations of the engines. What you write is a huge simplification and it looks childish.

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by sereme1

[Duckman]

16 minutes ago, sereme1 said:

 

If manufacture quality and random failures would be simulated in IL-2 it would be impossible to fly Soviet planes. You would end the flight more often because of some failure than being hit by the enemy.

  

Please do yourself a favour and read Me262 manual and you will see real operation procedures and limitations of the engines. What you write is a huge simplification and it looks childish.

  

 

I'd like to see poor manufacture and maintenance simulated where it's appropriate, including in Soviet and even Western Allies cases. Why not? As simmers I feel we are often too focused on getting every last engine detail and variant correct while ignoring bigger issues related to factors like reliability. Perhaps they are seen as messy and not easily quantifiable, but they still existed and had a huge effect on WWII air operations. 

 

As for your suggestion, I'd gladly look at a Me 262 manual but a) I don't have one and b) I don't read German. My impression is based on Il2 (that great fountain of piloting knowledge) as well as various books and websites. It may of course be wrong.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Duckman

[Kurfurst]

14 minutes ago, sereme1 said:

AN/APS-13 was a standard equipment of some planes.

 

 

Fun fact - one the 109 pilots I have read mentioned that they always knew if Mustangs were nearby. They made a BZZ BZZ BZZ -like interference in their on FuG 16 radio set. He thought it was caused by them firing their machine-guns, but it might be just the tail warning radar was effecting the German VHF set somehow.