Schwalbes vs Meteors

[Nonkers]

If one took a squadron of 1945 Me262s vs a squadron of Gloster Meteors, what would, ceteris paribus, be the likely outcome?

[Nonkers]

Air Vice-Marshal
J.E.'Johnnie' Johnson:

"The Messerschmitt 262 and the Ardo 234 were the only proved and satisfactory non-piston-engined aeroplanes used by the Luftwaffe. These were well ahead of any Allied aeroplane, including the few Meteor 3s based near Brussels, whose poor climb and modest range made them unsuitable for combat; eventually, after more powerful engines were fitted, the Meteors carried out some strafing, but they never destroyed an enemy aeroplane in the air over Europe."


The 262 was faster but the Meteor turned better.

The 20mm on the Meteor were better fighter vs fighter than the 30mm in the 262

Overall the 262 would have the edge, but the 262 had a reliabilty problem with its engine.

Going against the Meteor Mk III is the fact that it had some stability problems, most noticably snaking at higher speed, which reportedly made accurate gunnery almost impossible when it exceeded 450 mph.

The type also suffered compressability problems when in high speed dives.

Adding nose ballast early on in the production run cured some of this, although a full solution had to wait until the F.4's redesigned engine nacelles.

The type was also hampered by an artifically dampened alieron respones, to slow the roll rate and not overstress the wings.

The Derwents also produced peak power at about 12,000 feet (Mk III's top speed was about 475 mph at 14,000 feet). Late mark Spitfires (XIV, 21 ect) were actually faster above 25,000 feet, with better throttle response.

In its favour is its excellent horizontal manouverability. In RAF comparative testing, it could easily out turn a Tempest V in a flat turn in either direction, as well as out zoom it and out dive it, at least until compressibility kicked in.

The early jet engines never had the greatest acceleration, but the centrifugal Derwents were better (and more powerful) than the axial flow Jumos attached to the Me 262, meaning that the Meteor would probably have an acceleration advantage if the fight got low and slow.

The Schwalbe has a couple of aces in the hole though.

It has the speed to dominate the fight. It probably has a roll rate advantage. The Mk III was slow in the rolling plane. The 262 can also dive and run away if it gets into trouble.

[Nick Beale]

And didn't the Meteor have air brakes as well? And a gyro gunsight? And (almost certainly) better trained pilots than the luftwaffe could provide?

[Graham Boak]

Air brakes are rarely used in combat: maintaining energy is generally the way to win not throwing it away. The air brake may be useful to force an overshoot if the enemy is already on your tail and shooting at you - but that might well be too late anyway.

Gyro gunsight was an Allied advantage, but was it fitted to the Meteors? I don't think there were enough for every fighter in late 1944, though it may have been the case in spring 1945.

For the pilot superiority: that has to be taken as an average. Most aerial successes are gained by the formation leaders and these would be equivalent on each side.

The Meteor does seem to be generally under-rated, but it took the Mk.IV to make it a world leader. However, given that P-51s killed more Me 262s than vice versa, clearly it wasn't a simple matter of speed.

[CJE]

better trained pilots than the luftwaffe could provide

Ho! ho!
Have you looked at JV 44's roster?
And even JG 7's?

[marsyao]

if you read Robert Forsyth's JV44 book, you would have known that majority of the JV 44 pilots were not Ace, and if you read Manfred Boehme's JG 7 book, you would have known that majority of the JG 7 pilots were not very exprience, and although Luftwaffe had some super pilots till the very end of the war, the average of the Luftwaffe pilots after 1944 were very inexperience, and were nothing but cannon folder comparing to USAF and RAF pilots.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by CJE

better trained pilots than the luftwaffe could provide

Ho! ho!
Have you looked at JV 44's roster?
And even JG 7's?

Yes Chris, I have.

JV 44: a nucleus of exhausted veterans, some of them retrieved from a rest home, and a whole batch of newer pilots who seem to have done much of the operational flying.

JG 7: I have before me a list of 39 pilots assigned to JG 7 as of 3 January 1945 (and which I'm not ready to post yet - sorry about that): 24 of them have no victories - and you know how hung up on individual scores the Luftwaffe was.

Graham's arguments are entirely valid but when he says "most aerial successes are gained by the formation leaders and these would be equivalent on each side" I'd just add that most of the dying was done by the poorly trained and inexperienced of whom the Luftwaffe had a great many by 1945.