Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Discussion > Post-WW2 Military and Naval Aviation

Post-WW2 Military and Naval Aviation Please use this forum to discuss Military and Naval Aviation after the Second World War.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 5th June 2005, 22:15
The Saint
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Me262 over Korea

Assuming it's engines had been uprated and made reliable, and the aircraft fully developed, would an Me262 still have been able to mix it with a 1950 Meteor, Vampire, Sabre or Mig 15 in Korean war type combat? Or would it have been totally outclassed by then?

Last edited by The Saint; 5th June 2005 at 22:27.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 13th January 2006, 19:04
drgondog's Avatar
drgondog drgondog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 892
drgondog is on a distinguished road
Re: Me262 over Korea

Interesting question and not really predictable w/o looking at some data, specifically wing loading, critical Mach No, and proposed engines.

Off hand I would guess that the MiG and the 86 would be faster, out turn, out dive and out roll the 262 no matter what you replaced the Jumo with as both the 86 and the MiG should be aerodynamically 'cleaner' with the single engines.

It's possible the 262 might acclerate faster initially, and even outclimb, if the thrust of both engines exceeded the Thrust to weight ratio of the 86/MiG 15.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 15th January 2006, 22:39
Graham Boak Graham Boak is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 1,583
Graham Boak is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Me262 over Korea

As a first generation jet with a straight wing (yes, it did, in aerodynamic terms) it could have been developed in parallel with the Meteor, F-80 and even F-84 - or indeed the Panther and Banshee. It could not have been made competitive with the later generation fighters such as MiG 15 and Sabre. It's thick straight wing could not compare in top speed, being limited to around 0.82M (I forget the precise number).

Given its design as a heavily-armed high wing-loading bomber destroyer, it could have been pretty murderous to the B-29s, but there's considerable room for doubt over its capabilities in dogfights with even the earlier generation.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 19th January 2006, 15:11
Kutscha Kutscha is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,099
Kutscha
Re: Me262 over Korea

But Mtt was working on better versions of the 262, and with real swept wings. There was better engines coming as well.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 19th January 2006, 17:52
drgondog's Avatar
drgondog drgondog is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 892
drgondog is on a distinguished road
Re: Me262 over Korea

Even with swept wings and better engines, the two engine wing mounted design would have been an aerodynamic hog, consumed much more fuel per mile of climb/flight. According to Yeager, who flew the 262 after the war, it would not do more than .9-.92 mach in a dive. While sweeping wings might have helped marginally, it was probably more drag related to engines/nacelles than airfoil. There were sound reasons that ALL future high performance twin engine fighters housed the engines in the fuselage

None of the later design twin engine fighters in the late 40's and early 50's could compete with the 86 or MiG 15... so 'new' 262 climb performance and turn performance would have been aligned with thrust to weight and wing loading respectively of the 'newer' Me 262.

I would have to look at the drag profiles and the Mach critical number to have a better feel but would bet large amount that it would be inferior to both except for armament- which does not diminish the importance of this marvelous fighter.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 19th January 2006, 21:29
Graham Boak Graham Boak is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 1,583
Graham Boak is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Me262 over Korea

Sorry, but it quite definitely was the aerofoil section that limited the top speed of the Me 262, and 0.92M seems highly optimistic, probably due to a pressure error effect. The engine nacelles being below the wing, they would not have interfered with the fuselage flow in the same was as they did on the P-38, for example. Swept wings would indeed have helped, but the resulting aircraft would not have been a 262.

As for your contention that all high speed twin jets had the engines in the fuselage, what about the multiple variants of the Yak 25 family? The Bristol 188 testbed and the SR71? Or, in more modern times, the Tomcat and the Flanker? Certainly there were many other projects, even if they didn't reach fruition, that retained podded engines.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 29th April 2007, 09:26
Six Nifty .50s Six Nifty .50s is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 246
Six Nifty .50s
Re: Me262 over Korea

The drag penalty of outboard jet engines is an interesting topic. But I would think that structural integrity rather than drag is the main strike against underwing engines. Simplicity and ease of maintenance might be the best reasons to use outboard engine pods.

It prompts me to wonder what sort of violent test pilot maneuvers that a multi-engine jet can withstand before the turbines were pulled off the wings (Me 262, Ar 234, SR-71, B-52, B-58, B-1, etc).
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 29th April 2007, 18:13
Franek Grabowski Franek Grabowski is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 2,141
Franek Grabowski
Re: Me262 over Korea

Graham, please note Tempest II and Tempest V or Beaufighter family. It was certainly dependant on government/parliament's policy, either willing to invest in new types or rather to rely on old ones. Concerning Airacobra, after the turbo-compressor was canceled, a new designation had been considered but not implemented after it had been realised there is no money in the budget for new types.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 30th April 2007, 00:37
Graham Boak Graham Boak is offline
Alter Hase
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lancashire, UK
Posts: 1,583
Graham Boak is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Me262 over Korea

[quote=Franek Grabowski;42132]Graham, please note Tempest II and Tempest V or Beaufighter family.


You could also add Wellington, or Sunderland, and I suspect others, to your list but by the start of WW2 it had stopped being the British habit to change the name of an aircraft just because the engine type changed. Given the rate of spend during WW2, economic/political influences were totally irrelevant on the choice of name, if it ever had been. Later, the Hunter, Buccaneer and Victor changed engines without a name change.

I can't think, offhand, of a single example of a British aircraft where the name was kept the same for economic/political reasons. The British system just doesn't work in that manner. It is much more an American habit, because of the US system of annual budget reviews passing through Congress and the Senate. Which might perhaps point the finger at the Harrier II, where a new name would indeed have been justified, but there the pressure would have been to go with the US name - it was 1942 when the British stopped giving aircraft different names than the US. And besides, the name Harrier had a particularly special cachet; perhaps like the Spitfire there was a popular/"political" reason but little to do with our democratic representatives.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 1st May 2007, 19:12
Nick Beale's Avatar
Nick Beale Nick Beale is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Exeter, England
Posts: 4,676
Nick Beale will become famous soon enough
Re: Me262 over Korea

Quote:
Originally Posted by Graham Boak View Post
Given the rate of spend during WW2, economic/political influences were totally irrelevant on the choice of name, if it ever had been. Later, the Hunter, Buccaneer and Victor changed engines without a name change.

I can't think, offhand, of a single example of a British aircraft where the name was kept the same for economic/political reasons. The British system just doesn't work in that manner.
Maybe ships are different, though? I remember how the Invincible class aircraft carriers appeared in 1970s defence budgets as "through-deck cruisers" to get them past sceptical politicians.
__________________
Nick Beale
http://www.ghostbombers.com
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pilots Missing Over Korea 1952/53 Chris Goss Post-WW2 Military and Naval Aviation 19 10th August 2010 03:02
Me262 at RAE Farnborough, Sept 1944 windfall Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 0 16th March 2005 19:29
Which Me262 downed B-26 (LT Sanders) on 04/20/45 (Memmingen) TCO Allied and Soviet Air Forces 2 30th January 2005 12:47
Which Me262 downed B-26 (LT Sanders) on 04/20/45 (Memmingen) TCO Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 0 27th January 2005 00:03
Me262 captured by British troops Douglas Jr. Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 4 4th January 2005 18:19


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:31.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net