Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

[Meyer1]

Not a jet, but I think a Ta-152H would be capable to deal with the Spit PR...

[Andy Fletcher]

Originally Posted by Juha

But in his Duels in the Sky p. 198 his assessment on Me 262A-1 was "The Me262A-1a was the most formitable aircraft produced in WWII..."

Hi Juha,

That may well be what he said during the documentary, I seem to remember the word formidable being used. Sorry for misquoting Brown in the first place.

Cheers

Andy Fletcher

[Six Nifty .50s]

The late-war PR Mosquitos flying at maximum height more or less operated with impunity. It seems that both German turbines and piston engines were less efficient and reliable above 35,000 feet than paper estimates might suggest.

So far I have read of just one recorded attempt by a Ta 152 pilot to catch a high-flying Mosquito and the interception was not successful.

[Roger Gaemperle]

It was less due to unreliable engines that the Me 262 operated rarely at heights between 12'000 and 13'500 meters but much more due to a missing pressurized cabin. Without a pressurized cabin it was only possible to fly up to 12'000 meters without risking to harm the pilot.

The testing report (Erprobungsbericht) Nr. 50 which deals with the time period from 28 September 1944 to 18 October 1944 states that 170303 had a maximum service ceiling WITH BOMBS of 13'500 meters (44'290 feet). So, I guess that without bombs it would have been able to fly even higher and catch the Spitfire (which according to a quick internet search had a s.s. of 42'600, hence already below the service ceiling of the Me 262 with bombs). But as I said the main problem was the missing pressurized cabin in the serial version.

There is also a Messerschmitt flight report 04 L 44 which contain a detailed report about the maximum service ceiling, but I don't have it at hand right know. Perhaps one of the other members do.

Roger Gaemperle

[Dan O'Connell]

Ok, as some of you may know, I've spent a little time investigateing the 262. And it's all out in print and documented.

First, the 262 was a lousy bomber, as it didn't have adequate bomb aiming. Not the fault of the pilots, they did the best they could at guessing. Initial altitude limits didn't help...

Second, it was a lousy dog fighter. ALMOST EVERY instance where the pursued pilot followed his instincts and turned into his pursuers, he was shot down.

Mind you, I have a very healthy respect for this aircraft, but I know it did ONE thing well...bomber interception. It excelled there. If it got through the fighter protection, it was most likely going to bring down a bomber. Fortunately for us still speaking English, that wasn't figured out until March 45 and the R4M's.

Guys, the 262 was a remarkable aircraft, the first of it's kind. And it should be looked at it as that. But endless "what if's" are pointless. It had engine problems that couldn't be solved with the loss of certain metals, and of course fuel was an issue. Oddly, many pilots were trained in it that didn't reach service with it.
Let's just look at it with the respect due, an engineering marvel of the time, with all it's flaws, but in real life, would never have been a war winner. But our respective Air Forces all enjoy the benefits of it's teething problems.

[Franek Grabowski]

Roger, you can find various data over the internet, but it cannot change the fact, early jets had poor altitude performance. Lack of pressurised cockpit is not an excuse, as the highest interception of WWII was flown without the one, in a Spitfire IX. Such flights were uncomfortable but certainly possible.
Discussing the performance during interception you must also have in mind time necessary for take off, climbing to the ceiling and finding the target, which is still moving his own way. More, tests performed by British post-war have shown, that Spitfire XIX was flying above range of British radar system, thus remaining undetectable! It was only in 1950 that (Swedish) Spitfire was for the first time intercepted by jets (MiG-15s) but still she was able to escape over Finnish territory. Nonetheless safety measures ceased those incursions.

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear All,

Perhaps the following will help with the argument of Me 262 vs. Spitfire Mk. XIX. Here is maximum Me 262 speed versus altitude as measured on Nov. 19, 1944:

807 km/h at 1 km
827 km/h at 2 km
842 km/h at 3 km
856 km/h at 4 km
866 km/h at 5 km
870 km/h at 6 km
868 km/h at 7 km
859 km/h at 8 km
846 km/h at 9 km
828 km/h at 10 km

Source: Versuchs-Bericht Nr. 262 29 L 44, Bl. 4. The above is without bombs. Adding bombs knocks off 35 km/h at 6 km.

Anyone have comparable data for the Spitfire Mk. XIX?

Regards,
Richard

[RT]

Without any doubt the spit couldn't compare with the 262, not same category, seems that even not comparable to the TA152 which was designed for high altitudes, quite normal at that time the spit was a 10 years old design, has the spit XIX larger wings than her predecessors ??

Rémi

[Juha]

Richard
thanks for the Me 262 data!

Juha

[Roger Gaemperle]

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

Roger, you can find various data over the internet, but it cannot change the fact, early jets had poor altitude performance.

Franek,

The data I provided was from a source document from 2nd World War (Messerschmitt test report from fall 1944) and not from the internet. And this source document I consider as fact but not a general statement like early jets had poor altitude performance.

Roger Gaemperle