Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Steam Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Duel: Messerschmitt Me 262 vs. Gloster Meteor


  • Please log in to reply
334 replies to this topic

#321 TheArtOfFlight

TheArtOfFlight

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Joined 4 Months and 27 Days
  • 5 topics
  • LocationUK

Posted 30 December 2016 - 02:31 AM

Yes, indeed. That's exactly why i mentioned his statement. He is one of only a very few airmen to have flown both jets. And im talking about the few British and American test pilots who got to evaluate captured (or in some cases defected Me262 machines/pilots) during the last stages of ww2. Just the same as F/O Stanton Tuck got to fly and compare the Spitfire Mk ll against the Bf 109E-3/4 His opinion was the Spitfire just had the edge over the Emil but he was probs being a little bias. But then again it does really usually come down to the pilot. The Hawker Hurricane was a fine aircraft that doesnt get the recognition it deserved. It was stronger than both Spit & 109, although about 30-40mph slower. But a more stable gun platform and believe it or not it could turn to starboard far more quickly than either of them. And was perfectly capable of dogfighting and destroying the 109. Many myths have arisen from ww2 that usually only focus on the most glamorous aircraft and not so much the workhorses. Another case in point would be the DeHavilland Mosquito and the Bristol Beaufighter. The Mossie probably has the edge but they were both excellent aircraft. The Beau was excelled in the PTOs.



#322 Heräkulman Ruhtinas

Heräkulman Ruhtinas

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Joined 1 Year, 10 Months and 2 Days
  • 12 topics
  • LocationRiga, Latvia

Posted 30 December 2016 - 02:27 PM

I read somewhere that when asked this question Adolf Galland said the ideal jet would have been the 262 with the Meteors engines. But im guessing he was just being diplomatic and even though it hurts my national pride i do believe with better materials for more reliable engines the Me262 would have been the better aircraft but who knows. A lot of the time it simply comes down to the pilot, skill and experience. There is no doubt that while the Meteor was a perfectly good first jet for the British, the Me262 had the edge on wow factor. These two will always be a good what if scenario. But i have one for you all.....

 

How about if the P51 D had come up against the Spitfire Mk lX? Now that would be interesting.....

 

I have also seen some accounts of P51 pilots attacking Russian fighters by mistake (if the claims are to be believed) such as Russian fighter ace Ivan Kozhedub who claimed that while flying his La - 5 was jumped by two P51s and after a short dogfight he shot them both down. He also claimed a Me262 kill in the same aircraft on the same day, so i personally find his claims rather dubious to say the least.

 

Me 262 was better aircraft than any other first generation jet fighter. However, quality of materials and work let much to be desired. Meteor and P-80 (in their wartime versions) did not suffer from material shortages and they had no rush in building those. This in very much simplified way.

 

P-51D, iconic plane, is much overrated, the value of it was mostly the long range. If Spit IX can handle Fw190A and Bf109G-2, it can handle the P-51D.

 

Reportedly, there were dogfights between Red AF and 8th AF, for instance Erich Hartmann writes in his memoirs about one over Vienna. 


  • TheArtOfFlight likes this

-<HR>-

Heräkulman Ruhtinas

Prince of Heräkulma

 


#323 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,456 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 3 Days
  • 175 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 30 December 2016 - 10:05 PM

 

P-51D, iconic plane, is much overrated, the value of it was mostly the long range. If Spit IX can handle Fw190A and Bf109G-2, it can handle the P-51D.

 

 

I agree to a degree. Other than that, WOOPS! The value of the P-51B/Mustang III was its beautiful high altitude Merlin.

This gave it the ability to dance all over the opposition at high altitudes. The Spit IX could handle a P-51D? Under what

conditions? 600 miles from home? Good luck with that one. I am not a salesman for North American. I love all the WW2

fighters. I am not sure I have a favorite. I have favorites that I like to research, but that's that. The truth is the truth. If the

Spit can handle the Fw 190A and Bf 109G-2, it can handle the P-51D? In what text? I have heard gamers call the P-51D

The RunStang. You know why? Because the Mustangs greatest attribute is its ability to hit and run and NOBODY can

catch it....Not even a highly boosted Spitfire Mk.IX. Overated? I believe it is by todays standards, but It could hold its

own against anything when decked out properly. That's all I have to say about that, Jeff :)

 


Edited by CORSNING, 31 December 2016 - 10:22 AM.


#324 TheArtOfFlight

TheArtOfFlight

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Joined 4 Months and 27 Days
  • 5 topics
  • LocationUK

Posted 31 December 2016 - 02:41 PM

Me 262 was better aircraft than any other first generation jet fighter. However, quality of materials and work let much to be desired. Meteor and P-80 (in their wartime versions) did not suffer from material shortages and they had no rush in building those. This in very much simplified way.

 

P-51D, iconic plane, is much overrated, the value of it was mostly the long range. If Spit IX can handle Fw190A and Bf109G-2, it can handle the P-51D.

 

Reportedly, there were dogfights between Red AF and 8th AF, for instance Erich Hartmann writes in his memoirs about one over Vienna. 

You know i find it quite refreshing that someone else is honest enough to admit the P-51 was not the "absolute/war winning/untouchable/glory glory hallelujah aircraft a lot of people think/assume. Im not saying it wasnt a good fighter. But i agree the hype and status its been given over the years is just so ott. It was after all a flying fuel tank. And if experienced pilots didnt use the fuel in a set sequence ie belly tank first etc, it could be a real pig to fly. And another thing many dont take into account is the fact by the time the P-51 was escorting bombers into Germany nearly if not all Luftwaffe aircraft were set up for bomber destroying. The increased armament and add on cannon blister packs/extra fuel meant that for German pilots at least they stood little chance in combat against allied fighters that once over the target were at their optimum weight to engage. It was a total mismatch. A weighed down Bf-109 with around X4 20mm cannons + the engine mounted 30mm cannon meant that in a dogfight they were effectively neutralized. Same goes for the Fw-190. 

 

I have nothing personal against the P-51. But there were many more very good fighters around that made up a big percentage of Luftwaffe kills during the air campaign. Hitler enraged by the bombing of German cities ordered fighter bomber or Jabo (think i spelled that right? [You did, RT]) Lone fighters like the 190 and 109 with a 500kg bomb strapped to the bottom and sent them over to England at low level for fast hit and run missions. And many of those fighters were shot down by planes like the Hawker Tempest & Spitfire. I personally think after all the gremlins had been ironed out that the Tempest was a better aircraft than the P-51 & Spit lX. That will no doubt make me unpopular but having heard accounts of some men who flew the Tempest said pretty much the same. And also German pilots have stated (both fighter and jet) that the Tempest was the fighter they feared the most. Simply because even if they felt it wasnt right to engage and wanted to bug out (flee) they found the Tempest would chase down and catch even the fastest fighters Germany possessed at that time. Im not saying they could catch a Me262. But they did hang around the German air bases and wait to catch them coming back in to land. They called it "rat catching" i believe. And that was the very reason they had to resort to having Fw190Ds patrol/give top cover over 262 air bases. The famous red and white stripe camo underneath the 190Ds was to give the German anti aircraft gunners recognition that they were observing Luftwaffe planes. As im sure you know by that time German ack ack would fire at anything in the sky such was the Allies presence.


  • flying kiwi and Heräkulman Ruhtinas like this

#325 TheArtOfFlight

TheArtOfFlight

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Joined 4 Months and 27 Days
  • 5 topics
  • LocationUK

Posted 31 December 2016 - 02:48 PM

 

I agree to a degree. Other than that, WOOPS! The value of the P-51B/Mustang III was its beautiful high altitude Merlin.

This gave it the ability to dance all over the opposition at high altitudes. The Spit IX could handle a P-51D? Under what

conditions? 600 miles from home? Good luck with that one. I am not a salesman for North American. I love all the WW2

fighters. I am not sure I have a favorite. I have favorites that I like to research, but that's that. The truth is the truth. If the

Spit can handle the Fw 190A and Bf 109G-2, it can handle the P-51D? In what text? I have heard gamers call the P-51D

The RunStang. You know why? Because the Mustangs greatest attribute is its ability to hit and run and NOBODY can

catch it....Not even a highly boosted Spitfire Mk.IX. Overated? I believe it is by todays standards, but It could hold its

own against anything when decked out properly. That's all I have to say about that, Jeff :)

 

 

As i just stated above. A Hawker Tempest V could easily chase down a P-51. But everyone seems to ignore it and compare the Spitfire instead....


  • Heräkulman Ruhtinas likes this

#326 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,456 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 10 Months and 3 Days
  • 175 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 31 December 2016 - 03:44 PM

The Tempest was an exceptionally fast bird down low and medium.

 

As i just stated above. A Hawker Tempest V could easily chase down a P-51. But everyone seems to ignore it and compare the Spitfire instead....

That is totally dependent on the altitude, boost used and model of Mustang. And It would not be easy for the Tempest if

the Mustang pilot was aware the Tempest was racing. I do believe the Tempest had better acceleration low to

medium heights.


Edited by CORSNING, 31 December 2016 - 07:34 PM.

  • TheArtOfFlight likes this

#327 Heräkulman Ruhtinas

Heräkulman Ruhtinas

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Joined 1 Year, 10 Months and 2 Days
  • 12 topics
  • LocationRiga, Latvia

Posted 31 December 2016 - 06:15 PM

The Tempest was rather large beast, but powerful. I read somewhere that the RAF pilots accustomed to Spitfires and Hurricanes were a bit afraid of Tempest initially.  Source may be Clostermann though, who "salted" the things a bit.  :D

 

Given that the tactical and tactical situation was rather abysmal for the Luftwaffe at the time they started to make good use out of P-51 (lack of fuel and numbers and need to choose whether can make effect to bombers with added firepower or be able to skirmish with escort fighters), the reputation of the plane is hugely exaggerated.

 

Bf109 did not have 4x cannons. It had 2 fuselage-mounted MG:s of 7.92mm/13mm depending on version and 20mm or 30mm cannon firing through propeller hub as base armament. Armament could be amended with 2x 20mm or 30mm single-gun pods or 21cm Wf.Gr. rockets, plans were for the more effective R4M rockets but I doubt they materialized for Bf109.

 

Fw190 had, depending on version 2x fuselage-mounted MG:s of 7.92mm/13mm, 2x 20mm cannons in wing roots and 2x 20mm or 30mm cannons in wing outboard position and possibility to carry the same gun pods or rockets. Often the outboard guns were removed for better roll rate.

 

And, frankly, gamers can say whatever, there is noticeable bias in modeling of certain games  :lol:  Like the indestructible LaGG-3 in Il-2 or the I-153 in War Thunder.


  • TheArtOfFlight likes this

-<HR>-

Heräkulman Ruhtinas

Prince of Heräkulma

 


#328 TheArtOfFlight

TheArtOfFlight

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Joined 4 Months and 27 Days
  • 5 topics
  • LocationUK

Posted 02 January 2017 - 11:59 AM

The Tempest was rather large beast, but powerful. I read somewhere that the RAF pilots accustomed to Spitfires and Hurricanes were a bit afraid of Tempest initially.  Source may be Clostermann though, who "salted" the things a bit.  :D

 

Given that the tactical and tactical situation was rather abysmal for the Luftwaffe at the time they started to make good use out of P-51 (lack of fuel and numbers and need to choose whether can make effect to bombers with added firepower or be able to skirmish with escort fighters), the reputation of the plane is hugely exaggerated.

 

Bf109 did not have 4x cannons. It had 2 fuselage-mounted MG:s of 7.92mm/13mm depending on version and 20mm or 30mm cannon firing through propeller hub as base armament. Armament could be amended with 2x 20mm or 30mm single-gun pods or 21cm Wf.Gr. rockets, plans were for the more effective R4M rockets but I doubt they materialized for Bf109.

 

Fw190 had, depending on version 2x fuselage-mounted MG:s of 7.92mm/13mm, 2x 20mm cannons in wing roots and 2x 20mm or 30mm cannons in wing outboard position and possibility to carry the same gun pods or rockets. Often the outboard guns were removed for better roll rate.

 

And, frankly, gamers can say whatever, there is noticeable bias in modeling of certain games  :lol:  Like the indestructible LaGG-3 in Il-2 or the I-153 in War Thunder.

Luftwaffe ground-crew ("black men") positioning a Bf 109 G-6 "Kanonenvogel" equipped with theRüstsatz VI underwing gondola cannon kit. Note the slats on the leading edge of the port wing. JG 2, France, late 1943. This is of course is just a simple example i found. But some 109s/190's did have x4 20mm cannons. The amount of infield add on kits the Luftwaffe used was quite extensive. Fw 190s came with x 4 20mm cannon almost as standard.Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-487-3066-04%2C_Fl



#329 curmudgeon

curmudgeon

    Regular Member

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,037 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 4 Months and 5 Days
  • 25 topics

Posted 02 January 2017 - 10:09 PM

This stuff is way, way off topic (Me262 - Gloster Meteor). Please start your own thread.


  • CORSNING likes this

#330 MilitaryAttractions

MilitaryAttractions

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 19 posts
  • Joined 2 Months and 4 Days
  • 3 topics

Posted 27 March 2017 - 01:40 AM

I'll see if I can find a picture but at the RAF Museum in Hendon outside of London you can see an Me262 and a Meteor right next to each other!  Pretty cool if you'd like to compare both aircraft.


Help me reach 100 subscribers!

YouTube Channel 

Facebook Page





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users