Me 262 should have been used as a bomber?

[Kurfürst]

Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski

Remi, read it again, the first aircraft able to intercept Spitfire XIX was MiG-15. The wing was identical as in Mk I.

Which doesn't mean aircraft were unable to intercept it, I guess it had to do with the relative late introduction and rarity of the XIX, rather than it's undeniably good performance. The Luftwaffe certainly had greater headaches in 1944-45 than high flying PR aircrafts. Technically, interception of it would have been possible even on 1942 technology, meaning the odd-numbered 109Gs here with GM-1 here.

Lone, high flying and fast targets are always difficult targets for interception. Radar might not pick them up, it tooks a lot of time to climb to their altitude in which they may slip away, and require accurate vectoring. Blandford's book gives some surprising examples of that, with He 177s penetrating the English airspace at high altitudes around 9000m with inpunity... and it wasn't because the huge heavy bomber was extraordinary fast or faster than the RAF interceptors.

As for the 262 as bomber, it's puzzling why, as the LW had a perfectly good and suitable desing for that purpose, in the form of the Arado 234. The 262 at best could have been just another Jabo, with greater speed but greater vulnerability of the engines to ground fire...

[Franek Grabowski]

Remi, 'typical' two stage compressor.

Roger, I am based on original papers, but I do not have them. My friend is keen on Spitfires and provided me some informations when I worked on early cold war incursions. It must be noted that post war flights were flown at a higher altitude, though.
Anyway, the problem of poor altitude performance was well known and identified, albeit not in popular history publications. The problem was with the engines, and IIRC, turbines providing air into them. Soviets also had Jumo technology and build them for their early jets, which also were unable to catch Spitfire. One of the most interesting facts is that in Soviet service MiG-15 replaced... Spitfire LF.IX, which still had excellent high altitude performances!
In regard of your and Richard's Me 262 data, it may be assumed that above 10 kms speed significantly dropped. Bombs would not add that much to the ceiling, their weight not being substantial comparing to the whole airframe, the most important penalty being drag inducing speed decrease.

[Roger Gaemperle]

Originally Posted by Graham Boak

Roger: can you identify Ar 234 flights over England? I know of none.

Graham, on September 9, 1944, Erich Sommer received orders to fly a reconnaissance sortie over the Thames Estuary. He carried this out the next day, extending the flight to cover London.

Yes, you are right, the 1:1 is only valid if you disregard the imbalance in numbers of aircraft employed (as I wrote in my last post as well).

Originally Posted by Six Nifty .50s

All this was well known to Me 262 pilots and their superiors. After a flyer from JG 7 claimed three Mosquitos (flying at heights not identified by the unit historian) Hermann Goering was apparently sceptical when he joked that it was a phenomenal achievement for a plane with engines that stop above 6,000 meters and self-destruct at speeds above 750 km/hr.

Hermann Goering was not sceptical, he just ironically referred to the Allied propaganda that the engines would stop above 6'000meters and self-destruct above 750 km/hr as the achievement demonstrated that this was not true.

Again, to summarize:
the Spitfire had a speed of 718 km/h at 7,9 km (source: Franek).
the Me 262 had a speed of 859 km/h at 8,0 km (source: Mtt Versuchsbericht 29 L 44)

The bombs made a difference of 35km/hr at 6km. Without bombs it was certainly possible to fly higher, Franek. While drag dictated speed, weight together with speed dictated the rate of climb (simplified). If it was less heavy, then less speed was required to produce the upward thrust to keep it at level flight. So, less weight, higher service ceiling.

Formation flight at 14'000m would not have been necessary if you attack single recon airplanes. Formation flight was much more important when attacking bomber formations.

Therefore, IMHO the reason for the few high altitude sorties were less due to poor performance but much more due to:

1) lacking pressurized cabin which prevented pilots to fly above 12'000meters

2) only few occasions where an interception would have been possible due to the time it took to rise to 14'000m. The interception would have required a well organized guidance via radio, which was often a problem.

3) The main focus for the Me 262 were the bombers. On 5 January, Hitler ordered on advice of Speer the Me 262 to be used primarily against bombers. It was estimated that in the long run the US could produce only one bomber as opposed to three fighters for the equivalent of one German fighter due to the increased demand on aluminum.

Regards
Roger Gaemperle

[Six Nifty .50s]

Originally Posted by Roger Gaemperle

Hermann Goering was not sceptical, he just ironically referred to the Allied propaganda that the engines would stop above 6'000meters and self-destruct above 750 km/hr as the achievement demonstrated that this was not true.

You are sadly mistaken. Goering's remark was not a public statement and the wartime Allied propaganda machine knew nothing about it.

[Roger Gaemperle]

Six Nifty .50s, I didn't claim that he said it in Public nor that the Allied propaganda knew about it, did I?

I only said that it was an ironic remark of Göring regarding the Allied propaganda which spread the rumor - partially appropriate, at least in summer 1944 - that the Germans had engine problems at high altitude. They indeed had troubles with the engines at the beginning since at high altitude the Jumo speed governor delivered too much fuel for the low air density and there were issues with the fuel nozzles which operated not so well at low pressure. But these problems were mostly solved towards the end of the war when they were just about to introduce a new type of governor (Beschleunigungsregler) that allowed the pilot to vary the throttle as fast as he wanted without risking a flame out or burning engine.

Regards
Roger Gaemperle

[Roger Gaemperle]

Some additional information regarding the Jumo 004s:

During the summer and fall 1944 Junkers, Messerschmitt and Rechlin tried to optimize the settings of the speed regulator and the adjustable exhaust area motor in order to increase the altitude performance. At the same time work was being carried out on new types of regulators and fuel nozzles that should have avoided a flame out at high altitude or a burning engine when the pilot moved the throttle too quickly. All these work gradually improved the reliability of the engine step by step.

On 3 January 1945 the Kriegstagebuch Chef TLR announced that the problems of the engines at high altitude and when the throttle was moved quickly were eliminated ("Ausgehen der Triebwerke in Höhe und bei schneller Drosselung bei Jumo 004 behoben").

On 4 April TLR mentioned that it was intented to introduce the new speed governor that completely eliminated the "throttle problems" at both the units and serial production by the beginning of April.

A post war interrogation report (A.D.I. Report 323/1945) by the Allieds said that "a new regulator had been developed to control the fuel flow from 0 rpm to maximum so that the throttles could be set at once at any point. ... The new regulator had been tested and found satisfactory".

So, while it is true that the Germans experienced engine problems in summer and fall 1944, R&D at both Junkers, Messerschmitt and Rechlin gradually improved the performance and reliability and at the end of the war the most severe issues had been resolved.

Of course by this point in time the German industry had suffered so heavily from the Allied bombing that material and supply issues became more critical than technical deficiencies.

Regards
Roger Gaemperle

[Franek Grabowski]

Roger, nobody says jets were not faster on their operational altitude below 10 km. Nonetheless we are talking about extreme (then) altitudes of above 12-13 kms. Weight of bombs certainly would add a little to climb speed, but please do not overestimate it. It was only 7 percent of total weight, and as such it had a limited influence on the ceiling. More, several Soviet designs like early Yak-15/17, Su-9 or MiG-9 jets used improved German technology of Jumo 004 and neither of them was able to intercept Spitfire nor reach its ceiling.
This is a limitation of the design in general and not anything else. Me 262 and its engines were not perfect, and had several imperfections. It is not surprising, considering it was one of the first jets to enter service, but there is no reason to glorify it.

[Roger Gaemperle]

Franek,

I completely agree with you, there is absolutely no reson to glorify it. Therefore, I tried to base all my statements on technical source documents. The 13.5km maximum service ceiling with bombs is given in a technical report of the Messerschmitt company. I even said that they had engine problems in summer and fall 1944. The fact that they found a way out of the most severe engine problems is based on the diary of the Technische Luftrüstung as well as Jumo reports and last but not least an US interrogation report. I hope you agree with me that using source documents is not glorifying the technical achievements of that time.

So, again, I couldn’t find any source document that states that it could fly above 13.5km. But they were able to fly at 13.5km with bombs according to Erprobungsbericht No. 50 (why should they lie in this report? There was no need for that). Assuming that it couldn’t fly much higher without bombs and assuming that your information regarding the maxium service ceiling (above 14’000m) is correct for the Sptifire, it has to assumed that the Me 262 could not reach it even if it had a pressurized cabin. But as I said in one of my earlier post, you will always find a special purpose aircraft that excels in its role but cannot outperform others in other roles. Just take the Me 163 and the Spitfire XIX as an example and talk about rate of climb. And then again, the Ar 234 could carry out reconnaissance missions as well over Allied territory without being harassed (which was less due to its maximum service ceiling but more due to the high speed at which it carried out these missions). And in the end it made no difference as there were much more serious problems the Luftwaffe was faced with than high flying enemy aircraft: inferior number of aircraft employed, fuel shortage, low quality of pilot training, collapsing logistics, enemy fighter bombers that waited over own airfields, etc. etc. The Me 262 could not win the war, neither did the Spitfire XIX. And as another member stated in this thread, if a technology did win the war, then it was the atomic bomb.

Regarding Soviet fighters. I am no expert of early Soviet jets, but I know that not only the engine but also the wing type and profile was important for the maximum service ceiling. But I really don’t want to start arguing about their performance as I believe that your information is based on true facts.

Regards
Roger Gaemperle

[Roger Gaemperle]

accidental double post

[Kutscha]

I am still waiting for Franek to tell us that the PR XIX ALWAYS flew at max altitude on EVERY mission. Hard to take photos from 14km when the cloud base is at say 10km.