PDA

View Full Version : Post patch Me-262 A-1 is deadly.



XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:06 PM
in QMB with full real except for icons, I flew a Me-262 A-1 against 16 Pe-8 bombers.

Those four 30mm cannons are extremely deadly after the patch. I took out an entire squadron of four in one pass . . a touch of the trigger will tear those giant wings right off. I even killed on by landing about 4 shells in its mid-fuselage . . its just detonated.

and the gunners only got a few hits on my which did nothing to my jet . . .

I flew online with it today, and enjoyed similair results. the 30's are good for almost single hit kills . . . and with four of them and a good refire rate . . a touch of the trigger will destroy any aircraft.

Its something else, I love it now.

engines are still touchy, but its more fun that way.

well, heres to the 262! Lets hope we get the P-80 shooting star here soon! now it will be fun to see who wins!

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:06 PM
in QMB with full real except for icons, I flew a Me-262 A-1 against 16 Pe-8 bombers.

Those four 30mm cannons are extremely deadly after the patch. I took out an entire squadron of four in one pass . . a touch of the trigger will tear those giant wings right off. I even killed on by landing about 4 shells in its mid-fuselage . . its just detonated.

and the gunners only got a few hits on my which did nothing to my jet . . .

I flew online with it today, and enjoyed similair results. the 30's are good for almost single hit kills . . . and with four of them and a good refire rate . . a touch of the trigger will destroy any aircraft.

Its something else, I love it now.

engines are still touchy, but its more fun that way.

well, heres to the 262! Lets hope we get the P-80 shooting star here soon! now it will be fun to see who wins!

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:11 PM
I love it too but stayed away cuz it was overmodelled.Now it`s closer to what it should be - sluggish but deadly in good hands.

It was a true bomber buster ,so fighting with prop fighters is a pain.

"degustibus non disputandum"

<center>http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

<center>"Weder Tod noch Teufel!"</font>[/B]</center> (http://www.jzg23.de>[B]<font)

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:18 PM
carguy_ wrote:
- I love it too but stayed away cuz it was
- overmodelled.Now it`s closer to what it should be -
- sluggish but deadly in good hands.
-
- It was a true bomber buster ,so fighting with prop
- fighters is a pain.


Now that's what I really like about these forums, everybody got an oppinion about anything without backing it up. Carguy do write this ten times as your homework:

Me-262 WAS THE FASTEST ACCELERATING WW2 PLANE (SPEEDS OVER 300KMH)


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:18 PM
killing props is easy! just don't engage unless you are going 700 km/h!

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:20 PM
I love the a1a as well. However, the a2a is an excellent aircraft IMO. You can bomb almost anything before the enemy can even retaliate! I love them both! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

To be able to fare well,
To avoid the frustration of misfortune,
That, in this world, is happiness.
-Euripides' Electra

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:28 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- Me-262 WAS THE FASTEST ACCELERATING WW2 PLANE
- (SPEEDS OVER 300KMH)



Hmm I thought Me262 was famous for very slow acceleration./i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif


"degustibus non disputandum"

<center>http://carguy.w.interia.pl/tracki/sig23d.jpg

<center>"Weder Tod noch Teufel!"</font>[/B]</center> (http://www.jzg23.de>[B]<font)

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 08:35 PM
I looooved the pre-patch 262, lets see if I like the post patch one.

-----------------------------------
http://www.liquidgeneration.com/quiz/images/wannabe-pimp.jpg

To link it (the actual code): <a href="http://www.liquidgeneration.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.liquidgeneration.com/quiz/images/wannabe-pimp.jpg"

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 09:09 PM
the me 262 was a slow accelerator but veryy fast the reason why they got killed off is cos the novice pilots tried to turn away from the pursuing p51's but if they jst kept going they would of got away

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 09:48 PM
It accelerated slow after take-off.

But acceleration at higher speeds is better than that of prop fighters, because jetengines don't lose thrust at high speeds, as props do (and because the topspeed is higher /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ... so, a La7 will need more time to accelerate to 500 or 600 km/h than the 262 /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif ).

-------------------
http://320015073007-0001.bei.t-online.de/il2-forum/signatur.gif
III/JG51_Atzebrueck

JG51 (http://www.jg51.de)
Virtual Online War (http://www.s-driess.de/vow/index.php?page=homeÔžion=home)
"Ich bin ein Wurgerwhiner"

Message Edited on 08/20/0310:51PM by Atzebrueck

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 09:54 PM
As otehrs have said, I loved the 262 pre patch but am still getting used to post patch but those 108s, wow!

From what I have read and speeds obtained I think the truth may be between the two somewhere. Prepatch at 7000m I could get 800+km/ IAS, so approx. 1200km/h TAS, I struggle to get over 550km/h IAS at similar altitudes now. Just how it seems to me in game offline; dunno about RL but were plenty were shot down in combat situatuions. Was that all due to mistakes of novice LW pilots?



http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_07.gif


She turned me into a newt, but I got better.

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 10:02 PM
A lot of 262s were shot down trying to land. Their approaches were very long and gave Allied planes a considerable window to seek and destroy at their most vulnerable.

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 10:13 PM
Indeed, General Yeager downed one in just this cirumstance.

XyZspineZyX
08-20-2003, 11:02 PM
undoubtedly the case, but they were also shot down, at least I saw some American WW2 pilots claim that they developed tactics to shoot them down, in circumstancs other than take off/landing i.e. at speed and in 'true' combat situations. But then equally JV44 did for 45 planes in one month in 1945 when it had 6 servicable planes. In my eyes the 262 is a bit of an enigma.

Would like to understand the speed issue a bit more though -at height it doesn't seem so much faster than a 190D9 now and maybe that's right.

And why are there two hands on the speedo? Is it TAS and IAS? Anyone?

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_07.gif


She turned me into a newt, but I got better.

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 04:17 AM
seems your posting with your statements based on your thoughts Carguy

carguy_ wrote:
- Hmm I thought Me262 was famous for very slow acceleration


BTW you is wrong

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 04:37 AM
262s zoom climb is all wrong post patch. The 262 jumos were very slow to accelerate, but once at speed, the aerodynamicly slippery design allowed it to keep energy in climbs. It also had the best sustained turn rate, but the turning circle was wide. This is the only flaw in the 262 post patch. Hope it gets fixed

http://www.stormbirds.com/warbirds/header.jpg


<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 06:15 AM
Aflak wrote:
- Its something else, I love it now.
-
- engines are still touchy, but its more fun that way.

I usally dont like jets.. but I like flying this one now.. It now seems to fit the impression I get from books.. poor acc.. but once it is up to speed.. it holds it well.. A whole differnt style of flying.. as it should be!

Only bad thing left.. which there is not fix for is online LAG! LAG is bad in any game.. but in high speed manuvers where you only have a split second to do your thing. A little LAG goes a long way to ruien a fast movers day! That is to say LAG has a much bigger impact on fast movers in general.. The faster your are, the bigger negative effect LAG has on you.





<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 06:25 AM
Oh.. forgot to mention.. but offline play is porked! The Me262 AI is still having trouble starting both eng.. But god bless them for trying! In that it still does not stop them from trying to take off.. Problem is they never do and just taxi right off the end of the run way and go on a little cross country 4x4 run.. until they run into something... I avg 2 out of 8.. Cant finish a campain like that! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 07:26 AM
You can shout at some people and they still won't get it. Me-262 was slow on acceleration only from take off roll to the moment the pilot retracts the gear and flaps. By this time Me-262 already has 300kmh and it is the FASTEST ACCELERATING plane in the air (compared to its contemporaries).

Please do not spread such awful errors anymore!


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 09:02 AM
I don't fly the 262 online but I tried it in QMB with overheat off and 100% throttle and best speed I could do was something like 800Km/h.
Tried it twice.
Looks like the top speed is porked unless I'm missing something.
Anyone care to comment on that?
I had set up a fun mission with the 262 in the campaign builder pre patch where I fought about a dozen Yaks and Las for fun taking advantage of the top speed but in it's current guise I'm rather put off by it.


<center>http://users.compulink.gr/ilusin@e-free.gr/bf109[2)1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 09:16 AM
There seems to be a serious error in the post-patch FM for the 262. At heights above 5,000 m the top speed starts to drop and by 7,500 m it can only just sustain level flight.It seems unable to climb above 7,500 m, and so could not actually intercept B-17s if/when we had them in the game.

Please try it out and if you have the same experience send a polite bug report form to il2beta@1c.ru as per the patch readme. If we are lucky it will be corrected in the 1.1 final patch. After the P-47 episode we know 1C do respond to gentle but sustained pressure about errors in the FMs.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 12:38 PM
Go to 10000m in the 262 and make a dive /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.uwm.edu/~meganp/images/illustrator/gir.gif

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 01:26 PM
I hate to burst your bubble boys ...but it's overated/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
oh and Sig test.

<CENTER>http://invisionfree.com:54/40/30/upload/p837.jpg
<CENTER>><FONT COLOR="blue">Please visit the 310thVF/BS Online at our NEW web site @:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="orange"> http://members.tripod.com/tophatssquadron/
<CENTER>A proud member Squadron of IL-2 vUSAAF
<CENTER>310th VF/BS Public forum:
<CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW"> http://invisionfree.com/forums/310th_VFBG/
<CENTER><CENTER><FONT COLOR="YELLOW">
Proud Sponsor of IL-2 Hangar Forums
<CENTER> Visit the Hangar at:
http://srm.racesimcentral.com/il2.shtml

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 03:13 PM
- And why are there two hands on the speedo? Is it TAS
- and IAS? Anyone?
-

Yes.

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 04:15 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- You can shout at some people and they still won't
- get it.

Because shouting one's interpetation of what someone else wrote, or one's interpetation of some data sheet does not mean squat to people who understand how easy it is for one to mis-interpete what someone wrote or a data sheet.

If you want to get something changed, than you have to be more like the IAN boys with regards to the P47 roll rates. YOU HAVE to post your SORCES!! That is to say SHOUTING out your FEELINGS means nothing to me and most.

If you want to impress me, show me your sorce, show me what you read that gives YOU the impression oh what your trying to get changed.



<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 04:46 PM
I'm very much surprised that somebody needs any proof for the fact that Me-262 was the fastest accelerating ww2 plane (except rocket planes of course). It is such an elementary concept and it really shows the level of knowledge on this forum. But I'll post the data though. Until then I'm curious where from did you get this obviously erroneous impression. Post your source.


And for the story with Ian Boys, I'm sorry but I'm very much unconvinced. The only thing that mattered was the close relationship between Ian Boys and Oleg, over any charts posted here. And Buzzshaw had a very week case, no roll rate tests for the models in the game. Roll rates are very difficult to compute, and you cannot extrapolate the test results for C-1 model to D-27. Even that C-1 test result is very much controversial since it is not detailed in any way, we don't even know if that was a calculated roll rate or measured. In another NACA report you can clearly read that full lateral stick deflection was not possible together with applying of rudder, so you could not counter the adverse yaw, meaning that if you want a fast roll, it will be a fast roll into the ground.


<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

Message Edited on 08/21/0311:17AM by Huckebein_FW

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 05:46 PM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- I'm very much surprised that somebody needs any
- proof for the fact that Me-262 was the fastest
- accelerating ww2 plane (except rocket planes of
- course). It is such an elementary concept and it
- really shows the level of knowledge on this forum.
- But I'll post the data though. Until then I'm
- curious where from did you get this obviously
- erroneous impression. Post your source.
-
-------------------------------------------------------

S!,
I agree. The jumos were known for the slow acceleration 'during takeoff'. Once in the air and up to speed, the jumos could accelerate the me262 w/ ease due to the slippery nature of its fuselage.

Not to hi-jack this thread, but can some help me help me get TAS speeds for the me262 at different altitudes?

2000m 3000m 4000m 5000m 6000m 7000m 8000m
829kph 829kph 832kph 839kph 849kph 808kph 691kph
9000m 10000m

600kph 500kph

These numbers were posted earlier on a different board and my test seem to come close. I'm at a loss to explain why the numbers drop so drastically as altitude increases. With these numbers, the me262 is 2nd rate compared to the late model 109s & 190d series.

WR,
JV44HB

American by birth; Southern by the Grace of God!

www.jagdverband44.com (http://www.jagdverband44.com)
http://www.jagdverband44.com/JV44Banner400x75.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 07:49 PM
The 262 was much close to real live plane in version 1.0
the way the plane loses its energy now is a joke!

go on stormbirds.com and read about it! the plane should keep its Energy and thus speed much better than it does now

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 10:26 PM
thats my understanding to,slow on take off,slow to land.that was the reason the allies kept watch on all the 262 airfields,it was there best chance at brining 1 down,to catch during take off or landing.once it was in the air they couldn t catch it.now feels like flying a brick(against
other fighters),imho.

After it was refeuled i climbed in.With many manipulations the mechcanics started the turbines.I followed their actions with the greatest of interest.The first one started quite easily.the second caught fire.In no time the whole engine was on fire.Luckily as a fighter pilot i was used to getting quickly out of the cockpit.The fire was quickly put out.The second plane caused no trouble - Adolf Galland (first time in a ME262)

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 11:03 PM
HeinzBar wrote:
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- I'm very much surprised that somebody needs any
-- proof for the fact that Me-262 was the fastest
-- accelerating ww2 plane (except rocket planes of
-- course). It is such an elementary concept and it
-- really shows the level of knowledge on this forum.
-- But I'll post the data though. Until then I'm
-- curious where from did you get this obviously
-- erroneous impression. Post your source.
--
--------------------------------------------------------
-
- S!,
- I agree. The jumos were known for the slow
- acceleration 'during takeoff'. Once in the air and
- up to speed, the jumos could accelerate the me262 w/
- ease due to the slippery nature of its fuselage.
-
- Not to hi-jack this thread, but can some help me
- help me get TAS speeds for the me262 at different
- altitudes?
-
- 2000m 3000m 4000m 5000m 6000m 7000m 8000m
- 829kph 829kph 832kph 839kph 849kph 808kph 691kph
- 9000m 10000m
-
- 600kph 500kph
-
- These numbers were posted earlier on a different
- board and my test seem to come close. I'm at a loss
- to explain why the numbers drop so drastically as
- altitude increases. With these numbers, the me262 is
- 2nd rate compared to the late model 109s & 190d
- series.
-
- WR,
- JV44HB
-
- American by birth; Southern by the Grace of God!
-
- www.jagdverband44.com (http://www.jagdverband44.com)
- <img
- src="http://www.jagdverband44.com/JV44Banner400x75
- .jpg">
-
-
-
-
-
Here is some performance data of the real 262-1a to compare with the post patch 262-1a to prove it is now undermodeled:

sea level 827km/h (514mph)

3000m 852km/h (530mph)

6000m 869km/h (540mph)

8000m 856km/h (532mph)

initial climb rate 1200m (3,937ft)per minute

service ceiling above 12190m (40,000ft)

range 1050km (652miles) at 9000m (29,530ft)

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 11:21 PM
Good Mustang pilots learned that they could catch 262s doing a wide turn if they had the height/speed advantage. Plenty were downed this way in WWII besides the normal 262 landing kills - go read the books, its all in there........

<center>http://mysite.freeserve.com/zensamurai/Madbadvlad5.jpg

'Whirlwind Whiner'
The First of the Few

Ex Ungue Leonem - 'By his claws one knows the Lion'
</center>

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 11:43 PM
MadBadVlad wrote:
- Good Mustang pilots learned that they could catch
- 262s doing a wide turn if they had the height/speed
- advantage. Plenty were downed this way in WWII
- besides the normal 262 landing kills - go read the
- books, its all in there........
-
- <center><img
- src="http://mysite.freeserve.com/zensamurai/Madbad
- vlad5.jpg">
-
- 'Whirlwind Whiner'
- The First of the Few
-
- Ex Ungue Leonem - 'By his claws one knows the Lion'
- </center>
-
-
But that dosn't account for the poor performance of the 262 postpatch
and anyway they were usualy outnumbered around 100:1 if numbers were even im sure it would have been very different....

XyZspineZyX
08-21-2003, 11:54 PM
johno UK wrote......anyway they were usualy outnumbered around 100:1 if numbers were even im sure it would have been very different....

An overestimate to be sure, but a valid point in that they were outnumbered generally. If numbers were even the Mustang pilots would still have scored many kills simply because most of the veteran LW pilots had already been killed and the training period of the late war 262 pilots was necessarily and seriously short. Speed might be an advantage in the 262, but if you don't know how to use it you are basically stuffed........


<center>http://mysite.freeserve.com/zensamurai/Madbadvlad5.jpg

'Whirlwind Whiner'
The First of the Few

Ex Ungue Leonem - 'By his claws one knows the Lion'
</center>

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 12:13 AM
MadBadVlad wrote:
- johno UK wrote......anyway they were usualy
- outnumbered around 100:1 if numbers were even im
- sure it would have been very different....
-
- An overestimate to be sure, but a valid point in
- that they were outnumbered generally. If numbers
- were even the Mustang pilots would still have scored
- many kills simply because most of the veteran LW
- pilots had already been killed and the training
- period of the late war 262 pilots was necessarily
- and seriously short. Speed might be an advantage in
- the 262, but if you don't know how to use it you are
- basically stuffed........
-
-
-
- <center><img
- src="http://mysite.freeserve.com/zensamurai/Madbad
- vlad5.jpg">
-
- 'Whirlwind Whiner'
- The First of the Few
-
- Ex Ungue Leonem - 'By his claws one knows the Lion'
- </center>
-
-

I suppose the only way the jets would have made a big difference is if they had entered service earlier in the war if it wasnt for hitler interfering with the 262 program, then i think it would have been much harder for them to protect the bombers especialy with the 262's hit and run tactics

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 12:27 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- I'm very much surprised that somebody needs any
- proof for the fact that Me-262 was the fastest
- accelerating ww2 plane (except rocket planes of
- course). It is such an elementary concept and it
- really shows the level of knowledge on this forum.

Yes, I know, it must be hard being the smartest guy in the world and all.. but please, if you dont mind all us idots here would apreaciate your help, what with your vast knowlege on the subject. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- But I'll post the data though.

Do you mind if I dont hold my breath on that one?

- Until then I'm curious where from did you get
- this obviously erroneous impression.

Erroneous? Funny, I think I even saw a post by you on the subject of the Me262 being slow to acc at take off? Are you saying your wrong?

- Post your source.

Ah, big differance here is Im not whinning about it, that is Im not calling for a change in the way it is. Thus I dont need to post my source. Now if I felt it acc too fast, and was requesting a change than I would.\


- And for the story with Ian Boys, I'm sorry but I'm
- very much unconvinced.

Im sorry, where you operating under the impression that I give a rats a$$ about you being convinced? Just know that Im not, I simply pointed out that if you want anyone to buy into your whinning about the acc of the Me262 than you will have to do more than shout at people about your FEELINGS!

- The only thing that mattered was the close
- relationship between Ian Boys and Oleg, over any
- charts posted here.

Do I detect a hint of jellously? Maybe you were just too smart for Oleg too? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- And Buzzshaw had a very week case, no roll rate
- tests for the models in the game. Roll rates are
- very difficult to compute, and you cannot extrapolate
- the test results for C-1 model to D-27. Even that C-1
- test result is very much controversial since it is
- not detailed in any way,

Well what ever they did or didnt provide... it is alot more than you have provided on the Me262 acc topic at hand!

- we don't even know if that was a calculated
- roll rate or measured. In another NACA report you
- can clearly read that full lateral stick deflection
- was not possible together with applying of rudder,

Correct me if Im wrong, but when testing roll rates your not supose to use rudder.. it is a pure test of alerions. Which is not to imply one would not use rudder in daly use, but if you want to measure the effect of alirons to roll the plane you wouldnt want to use rudders. I have alot of old NACA reports at my house, you woundndt happen to have that number of that report... Oh and if you feel better, feel free to shout it out to me! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- so you could not counter the adverse yaw, meaning
- that if you want a fast roll, it will be a fast roll
- into the ground.

My guess would be it depends on the alt your starting from.



<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 12:28 AM
Johno_UK wrote........I suppose the only way the jets would have made a big difference is if they had entered service earlier in the war if it wasnt for hitler interfering with the 262 program, then i think it would have been much harder for them to protect the bombers especialy with the 262's hit and run tactics..........

Absoloutely right there Johno. Hitlers misguided wish that the 262 should be used as a bomber instead of a B-17 B-24 killer arguably cost the Germans any advantage they may have gained in the late air war over Europe.


<center>http://mysite.freeserve.com/zensamurai/Madbadvlad5.jpg

'Whirlwind Whiner'
The First of the Few

Ex Ungue Leonem - 'By his claws one knows the Lion'
</center>

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 12:44 AM
MadBadVlad wrote:
-
- Absoloutely right there Johno. Hitlers misguided
- wish that the 262 should be used as a bomber instead
- of a B-17 B-24 killer arguably cost the Germans any
- advantage they may have gained in the late air war
- over Europe.


It makes me wonder if the horten 229 and he162 had become available in numbers earlier too then the going would have been realy tough for allies and maybe wouldhave changed the outcome of war slightly or lengthened it thenkful it didnt happen though. I also wonder how the go229 will perform in FB when we get it because in the books i have info about it in apparently when test flying it had a lot of potential and handling characteristics where excelent and had very high top speed...one of the main reasons it got set back was just because of an engine faliure on a test flight....

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 01:14 AM
johno__UK wrote:

- I suppose the only way the jets would have made a
- big difference is if they had entered service
- earlier in the war if it wasnt for hitler
- interfering with the 262 program, then i think it
- would have been much harder for them to protect the
- bombers especialy with the 262's hit and run tactics

Not so sure about this. I've read several histories that analysed the development of the 262 and concluded that Hitler's famous intervention only delayed the deployment by a few weeks.

In fact, I think the Me 262 doesn't really deserve its popular reputation as an effective war machine. We get a very misleading impression of the aircraft's abilities in FB 1.0, but the real-life combat effectiveness of an aircraft depends on much more than its performance.

When it was working and teamed with an experienced pilot the Me 262 could be difficult to intercept and posed a serious threat to bomber formations, but it had to get into the air first and it had to fly the rest of the mission too.

Critical weaknesses of the Me 262 included:

1. Dreadful engine life and reliability. I have several sources that quote a ten-hour engine life. This alone rendered the aircraft little more than a curiosity and was a major factor in the recall of the 262s from active service at the end of 1944.

2. It could only operate from concrete runways, not from improvised grass strips. This meant that the Me 262 could not be operated from dispersed airfields, and by late 1944 the loss of air superiority over Germany made operating from conspicuous airfields of known location extremely dangerous.

3. The aircraft had a high pilot workload because of the twin jet engines. Worse, the LW had almost no twin-engined fighter expertise left by the time the 262 was deployed. In the last months of the war bomber pilots were reassigned to fighters - but the results were unfavourable because of the lack of fighter tactics training. There was almost nobody left who could fly the new aircraft at a high level of skill (the time required to develop new tactics also contributed to the withdrawl of the Me 262s in late 1944).

4. The absence of any effective stand-off weapons. The 30 mm cannon of the Me 262 were a formidable weapon, but the muzzle velocity was not great so it had to be fired from close range. This brought the aircraft within the range of defensive fire from the bombers. Further, the very brief interval available for firing in a rapid merge made accuracy a serious problem.

The Me 262 is a very interesting aircraft from a technical point of view. But in the end it highlights the failure of German science and engineering rather than its success.

The only way an aircraft of such advanced design could have been worked up to a useable state (i.e., both reliable and available in sufficient numbers) would have been if the German war effort had fully integrated the nation's science and engineering potential into the service of the armaments industry and allowed for its speedier development. But for various reasons this didn't happen, and so the 262 was delivered too late, in too small numbers and with too many weaknesses to be of any military signficance. A good example of this failure to harness science and engineering to the war effort is the lack of anything resembling the operational analysis used with great success by the allies.

The Luftwaffe needed a fast, reliable, simple aircraft with stand-off weapons that could be operated by inexperienced pilots from concealed airfields. What they got was the Me 262.

Regards,

RocketDog.

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 01:30 AM
tagert wrote:
- Huckebein_FW wrote:
-- I'm very much surprised that somebody needs any
-- proof for the fact that Me-262 was the fastest
-- accelerating ww2 plane (except rocket planes of
-- course). It is such an elementary concept and it
-- really shows the level of knowledge on this forum.
-
- Yes, I know, it must be hard being the smartest guy
- in the world and all.. but please, if you dont mind
- all us idots here would apreaciate your help, what
- with your vast knowlege on the subject.

You certainly are one of those idiots. First of all learn to make correct deductions. That I was complaning about ignorant posts about Me-262 here on the forum it does not mean that I was bragging in any way with my knowledge on the matter.



-
-- But I'll post the data though.
-
- Do you mind if I dont hold my breath on that one?

I always posted proofs to support my statements, but I'm not living my life on this forum. Maybe in a week, maybe tomorrow I'll start to post them. On the other hand I never remember you posting anything to support your claims regading Me-262. I do not remember you posting something anyway.



-
-- Until then I'm curious where from did you get
-- this obviously erroneous impression.
-
- Erroneous? Funny, I think I even saw a post by you
- on the subject of the Me262 being slow to acc at
- take off? Are you saying your wrong?


This is absolutely true, on take off until pilot retracted the gear and flaps, and reached in this process 300kmh, it's acceleration was not outstanding. After 350kmh it was the fastest accelerating aircraft of it's time.
Reason for this behaviour is the fact that jets do not have impressive static thrust (especially ww2 ones) but they keep their rating over all speed range. Piston engine aircraft on the other hand have a lot of static trust and at low speed, but they soon loose it, and by the time they reach max speed thrust is only half the thrust produced at take off. This is the reason for the difference in behavior: prop fighters accelerated well compared with Me-262 until 300kmh, but Me-262 outaccelerated them all at speeds over 350kmh.


-- Post your source.
-
- Ah, big differance here is Im not whinning about it,
- that is Im not calling for a change in the way it
- is. Thus I dont need to post my source. Now if I
- felt it acc too fast, and was requesting a change
- than I would.

Are you sure? There was a lot of whining here that Me-262 was overmodelled before the patch, and nobody brought a single proof for this. In the current version we have just a erroneous Me-262 FM. I'm very much sure that it will be corrected in the definitive version. FB we'll see even more jets, so jets FM cannot stay this way.



-
-- And for the story with Ian Boys, I'm sorry but I'm
-- very much unconvinced.
-
- Im sorry, where you operating under the impression
- that I give a rats a$$ about you being convinced?
- Just know that Im not, I simply pointed out that if
- you want anyone to buy into your whinning about the
- acc of the Me262 than you will have to do more than
- shout at people about your FEELINGS!

I'm sorry but all you gave us until now were you personal feelings and oppinions, no proof at all. But sometimes I care, because those boards exhibit are many times very convincing, especially to people not really willing to research the data they read.



-
-- The only thing that mattered was the close
-- relationship between Ian Boys and Oleg, over any
-- charts posted here.
-
- Do I detect a hint of jellously? Maybe you were just
- too smart for Oleg too?

Not jealousy just disappointment. As you can see only Ian Boys did not appear here to tell us the little victory, because he knows very well the true. It is just a little compromise to calm down the mob. On the other hand the awful cockpit struts of Fw-190 have not yet disappeared thought plenty of photos were posted, showing clearly that pilot vision was not obstructed by them. Yes I am disappointed.



-
-- And Buzzshaw had a very week case, no roll rate
-- tests for the models in the game. Roll rates are
-- very difficult to compute, and you cannot extrapolate
-- the test results for C-1 model to D-27. Even that C-1
-- test result is very much controversial since it is
-- not detailed in any way,
-
- Well what ever they did or didnt provide... it is
- alot more than you have provided on the Me262 acc
- topic at hand!


Yes what they did provide was little and irrelevant. I did not post data on Me-262 yet.



-- we don't even know if that was a calculated
-- roll rate or measured. In another NACA report you
-- can clearly read that full lateral stick deflection
-- was not possible together with applying of rudder,
-
- Correct me if Im wrong, but when testing roll rates
- your not supose to use rudder.. it is a pure test of
- alerions. Which is not to imply one would not use
- rudder in daly use, but if you want to measure the
- effect of alirons to roll the plane you wouldnt want
- to use rudders. I have alot of old NACA reports at
- my house, you woundndt happen to have that number of
- that report... Oh and if you feel better, feel free
- to shout it out to me! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
-
-- so you could not counter the adverse yaw, meaning
-- that if you want a fast roll, it will be a fast roll
-- into the ground.
-
- My guess would be it depends on the alt your
- starting from.


Roll rate testing is made with the airplane on a path parallel with the ground. Pilot should be able to counter the adverse yaw generated in roll. Anyway NACA found aileron effectiveness below USAAF requirements:

http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1952/naca-tn-2675.pdf

Read the conclusions at page 9-10, there is a mention there for the aileron+rudder problem, more details you'll find in text.




<center> http://www.stormbirds.com/images/discussion-main.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 01:45 AM
I'm not aware of the technical speed/acceleration specs/issues with the real world Me-262, but i'm sure enjoying the lethality it posess'. I've found though that you are practically limited to highspeed attack runs or else you lose too much energy at lower speeds in attacks on enemy aircraft (pre-patch lost less energy, yes?). I'm not sure what tactics you guys on the forum here use but the dive and climb attack seems to work well for my style of flying, and the cannons are brutal in the extreme, besides giving hideous recoil they tear enemy aircraft apart very quickly of course you don't see that because you overshoot them rapidly. Turn fighting is useless for me because i find that the Me-262 is too unstable for tight maneuveurs and needs to be guided quite gently.

Anyway can anyone here recommend any good books about the Me-262 or general Luftwaffe aircraft that a bloke could read? Anyone disagree with anything i've said?

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 01:48 AM
I'm lead to believe that if they were willing to commit to it, the British could have had thousands of Vampires in service by 1944.

Not stellar performance, but as good as top of the range piston engined jobs and much easier to fly.


Now theres a what if to ponder.

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 05:10 AM
the 262 looses speed at higher alts while in realy life, they gained speed at higher altitudes, and the top speed is about 30-100km/hs(altitude varying) slower in fb, and they are not as energy effcient as they were in real life,thats basically my only problem with post patch 262

Deutschland wird ├╝ber allen regieren

(Nationale Sozialisten k├┬Ânnen meinen arsch k├╝ssen)

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 07:28 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- You certainly are one of those idiots.

Really? Well, I guess it is a good thing that I dont give a rats a$$ about what you think of me than too.

- First of all learn to make correct deductions.
- That I was complaning about ignorant posts about
- Me-262 here on the forum it does not mean that I
- was bragging in any way with my knowledge on the
- matter.

No, first of all you should learn to make correct deductions, in that when I made referance to your bragging, I was not refering to your complaning about ignorant posts in "previous" post, What I was making referance to was your "last" post.. you know the one I replyed to, where you said.. And I quote:

--- I'm very much surprised that somebody needs any
--- proof for the fact that Me-262 was the fastest
--- accelerating ww2 plane (except rocket planes of
--- course). It is such an elementary concept and it
--- really shows the level of knowledge on this forum.

So, please pull your head out of your A before you try and act smart! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

- I always posted proofs to support my statements, but
- I'm not living my life on this forum.

Emmm Hmmm, sure, but you still havent answered my question.. "Do you mind if I dont hold my breath waiting for you to do so?" Which is just another way of saying "see is beliving" or "put up or shut up".. Hmmmm I kind of like that later.

- Maybe in a week, maybe tomorrow I'll start to post them.

Ok.. so.. is it safe to assume that you wont whine about it agin until than? Oh, never mind, Im sure the answer is no.

- On the other hand I never remember you posting
- anything to support your claims regading Me-262.

Well.. once again Ill explain.. in that you still dont seem to understand the simpleness of it. I like the way it is, I dont think it needs to be changed, thus I HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN OR LOSE if nothing changes.. Thus no motivation to post anything to back up my FEELINGS.. Where as on the other hand, YOUR NOT HAPPY with the way it is, you feel soemeting is wrong and you require a change.. You should be motivated to PROVE YOUR POINT. But it is clear you dont really want to fix it, because it is clear all you want is an excuse to whine like a beyach!

- I do not remember you posting something anyway.

Well now I can not be held responsable for your brain malfunctions. If you need to write your home address on the back of your hand each day.. dont blaim me, blaim god or someone who cares!

- This is absolutely true, on take off until pilot
- retracted the gear and flaps, and reached in this
- process 300kmh, it's acceleration was not
- outstanding.

Ah, so you agree with me.. funny, cuz you whine like you dont?

- After 350kmh it was the fastest accelerating aircraft
- of it's time.

Never said it wasnt, never said it was, I simply pointed out that you shouting about it will not help your cause! You FEELINGS based on your interpetations of what you read mean nothing to people who understand how easy it is for someone to missinterpet things they read. Post what you read for all to read, and if the majority agrees with you, then you stand a very good chance of getting a change.. Note I said good chance, dont confuse good for certain. In that like the Fw190 forward view, sometimes all the proof in the world will not mater.. But you are allmost garinted that shouting your feelins with nothing to back them up will get you nothing.

- Reason for this behaviour is the fact that jets do
- not have impressive static thrust (especially ww2
- ones) but they keep their rating over all speed
- range. Piston engine aircraft on the other hand have
- a lot of static trust and at low speed, but they
- soon loose it, and by the time they reach max speed
- thrust is only half the thrust produced at take off.

Never said ohterwise... Or is this just another one of your shouting things?

- This is the reason for the difference in behavior:
- prop fighters accelerated well compared with Me-262
- until 300kmh, but Me-262 outaccelerated them all at
- speeds over 350kmh.

*Yawn* Hey Im glad you FEEL that way.

-- Ah, big differance here is Im not whinning about it,
-- that is Im not calling for a change in the way it
-- is. Thus I dont need to post my source. Now if I
-- felt it acc too fast, and was requesting a change
-- than I would.
-
- Are you sure?

Positive.

- There was a lot of whining here that
- Me-262 was overmodelled before the patch, and nobody
- brought a single proof for this.

What part of me when I said Im did you not understand?

- In the current version we have just a erroneous
- Me-262 FM.

Based on... your feelings?

- I'm very much sure that it will be corrected in the
- definitive version.

For your sake I hope so, and for the sake of the forum I pray so.. In that this forum can not handle many more whinning topics!

- FB we'll see even more jets, so jets FM cannot stay
- this way.

*Yawn* Hey Im glad you FEEL that way.

- I'm sorry but all you gave us until now were you
- personal feelings and oppinions, no proof at all.
- But sometimes I care, because those boards exhibit
- are many times very convincing, especially to people
- not really willing to research the data they read.

See above about the differance between someone that does not require change and someone that does.

- Not jealousy just disappointment.

Emmm no, it is jealousy for sure.

- As you can see only Ian Boys did not appear here
- to tell us the little victory, because he knows
- very well the true.

WOW! Not only are you the smartest man in the world but you can read minds too? WOW!

- It is just a little compromise to calm down the mob.

LOL! Yeah.. that is it.. And that is why the Fw190 forward view got change too!

- On the other hand the awful cockpit struts of Fw-190
- have not yet disappeared thought plenty of photos
- were posted, showing clearly that pilot vision was
- not obstructed by them. Yes I am disappointed.

Huh? So even you dont buy into your "FOR THE MOB" theory.. So.. if they didnt change the P47 roll rate to.. How did you say it, "a little compromise to calm down the mob" then why did they do it? Couldnt be they presented some information/data that Oleg could buy into... Naaah that would be just crazy talk! Eveyone knows... even the smartest guy in the world knows that the only way to get things changed is to shout about his FEELINGS with nothing to back it up!

-- Well what ever they did or didnt provide... it is
-- alot more than you have provided on the Me262 acc
-- topic at hand!
-
- Yes what they did provide was little and irrelevant.
- I did not post data on Me-262 yet.

LOL! Yet! HEHEHAHEHAHehahehahaaa... Well sense you missed the point, let me POINT it out to you.. PUN INTENDED.. THEY presented MORE on thier topic than YOU have... And noting that it was *little* only magnfiys how *little* you have presented.

- Roll rate testing is made with the airplane on a
- path parallel with the ground.

Never said they werent.

- Pilot should be able to counter the adverse yaw
- generated in roll.

Again, never said they didnt.. Only pointed out that if you wanted to test the alerion athority you would only use alerions.

- Anyway NACA found aileron effectiveness below USAAF
- requirements:

Once again the smartest man in the world missed the point... next time read my mind instead of what I wrote! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif



<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 07:53 AM
Huckebein_FW wrote:
- Roll rate testing is made with the airplane on a
- path parallel with the ground. Pilot should be able
- to counter the adverse yaw generated in roll. Anyway
- NACA found aileron effectiveness below USAAF
- requirements:
-
- http://naca.central.cranfield.ac.uk/reports/1952/naca-tn-2675.pdf
-
-
- Read the conclusions at page 9-10, there is a
- mention there for the aileron+rudder problem, more
- details you'll find in text.

LOL! Well here is a PERFET example of somene miss interpeting the things they read.. I cant wait to see your Me262 post.. If your conclusions are as flawed there as they were here, well lets just say I dont see the Me262 getting changed based on anything you post! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


<font size= 3> <font color= blue>
TAGERT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If WAR was not the ANSWER.. Than what the H was your QUESTION?

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=forum
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=discussion

XyZspineZyX
08-22-2003, 09:28 AM
reh34fdvc wrote:
- I'm lead to believe that if they were willing to
- commit to it, the British could have had thousands
- of Vampires in service by 1944.
-
- Not stellar performance, but as good as top of the
- range piston engined jobs and much easier to fly.
-
-
- Now theres a what if to ponder.
-
-

Yes this is true i wonder why they seemed more interested in getting the meteor operational in numbers first, the vampire was very easy to fly and had good manouverability would be great if someone would do one for FB but no one seems interested in vamp or meteor the vampire would definately kick some *** in this game....