Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

[Roger Gaemperle]

Nick

I understand that tactical value was not only limited to speed. Also, maneuverability and as you said how fast it could intercept, etc. is important. Nevertheless, due to the high speed of the jets they could reach a target much faster than e.g. a Me 109 once they were at the same level. Of course there are pros and cons of the Me 262 (low manouverability compared to piston engined aircraft, unreliable engines, etc.) but if it hadn't been a superior aircraft IN GENERAL and the Spitfire and Meteors far superior the Allied wouldn't have touched it after the war (e.g. only very few Me 109 K-4 were captured and tested after the war compared to Me 262s).
Of course, if you compare it with aircraft that were specifically designed for special roles (e.g. rocket interceptor, high altitude recon aircraft, pure fighter bomber, etc.) you will always find an aircraft superior in one specific feature: The P-51 was more maneuverable, the P-47 the more accurate fighter bomber, the Spitfire XIX the higher (and faster?) flying recon aircraft, the Me 163 the faster climbing fighter, the Lancaster the more weight carrying aircraft, etc. etc. So, there won't be an ultimate truth to this discussion but only arguments for and against one's point of view. And I don't want to say that one was better than the other as it is very difficult to compare aircraft that had different purposes.

What I just wanted to say is that IN MY OPINION (and I don't claim this to be the absolute truth neither) what caused the higher losses of Me 262 to Allied fighters than vice versa was the far superior number of enemy aircraft in the sky of the Reich at the end of the war. Of course there are many other factors that added to this: poor quality of training of young German pilots at the end of the war, unreliable technology, unexperience with flying jets at high speed, new tacticts, etc. etc. And even if the Germans had enough fuel, experienced pilots, sovereignty over their airspace, larger numbers of own fighter in the sky than Allied ones, there would still have been losses of Me 262, but I think the balance would have looked quite different. But as this is a "what if" question, nobody can answer it but just argue for or against it.

Franek, thanks for the correction. As I said, I am not a Spitfire expert and didn't even know that the XIX is an unarmed recon variant. Sorry for my ignorance.

Regards
Roger Gaemperle