He-162 Salamander

[drgondog]

Just curious - does any body have any facts on the skills and experience of the French test pilots?

Soren - why would the French assign poor or inexperienced pilots to test the He 162? I don't know one way or the other so I have no dog in this hunt.

As the 162, like the Me 262, was a single seat fighter, EVERY pilot that flew it was a 'rookie' in the sense that there was no possibility of transitioning at first with an experienced He 162 pilot.. true?

The result of having poor/inexperienced pilots transition into a totally unknown (transition training in that a/c) airplane woul be stupid. Further, if this practice was the norm for the French I suspect all of the he 162s would have gone down in quick order.

[The Basket]

I think the French would have only used high hour pilots on the He 162 just to get jet time. The idea would have been to get jet experience and not test the capability of the 162. Maybe it was the only game in town.

I still think the 162 was just an interesting side note. Yes it could this or that but it never flew combat and it never became operational and I have no proof that the French or British or Soviets or Americans used the 162 as a blueprint for their fighters.

The ejection seat idea was in other aircraft and the Me 262 certainly was the definitive ww2 jet.

I would rather have 100 Me 262s than 100 He 162s anyday.

[Soren]

The French pilots weren't poor, they were experienced pilots in piston engined a/c, but they had never before flown a jet a/c, and the He-162 wasn't the aircraft to be training in to do so.

Like FLYBOYJ correctly pointed out these French pilots would've been used to applying allot of rudder when flying piston engined a/c, something which wasn't necessary in the He-162, infact it was dangerous. And on top of this the He-162 was an unusually responsive a/c, so accelerated stalls & spins were a real hazard.

Basket,

I'd have 100 Me-262's over 100 He-162's as-well, no doubt about it.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by The Basket

I think the French would have only used high hour pilots on the He 162 just to get jet time. The idea would have been to get jet experience and not test the capability of the 162. Maybe it was the only game in town.

I still think the 162 was just an interesting side note. Yes it could this or that but it never flew combat and it never became operational and I have no proof that the French or British or Soviets or Americans used the 162 as a blueprint for their fighters.

The ejection seat idea was in other aircraft and the Me 262 certainly was the definitive ww2 jet.

I would rather have 100 Me 262s than 100 He 162s anyday.

They actually did become operational in late March, early April. I think Bar commanded JG1 complement of He 162s?

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Soren

The French pilots weren't poor, they were experienced pilots in piston engined a/c, but they had never before flown a jet a/c, and the He-162 wasn't the aircraft to be training in to do so.

Like FLYBOYJ correctly pointed out these French pilots would've been used to applying allot of rudder when flying piston engined a/c, something which wasn't necessary in the He-162, infact it was dangerous. And on top of this the He-162 was an unusually responsive a/c, so accelerated stalls & spins were a real hazard.

Basket,

I'd have 100 Me-262's over 100 He-162's as-well, no doubt about it.

In all fairness, neither was the P-80 or Me 163 or Me 262. Standing on a wing and walking a pilot through procedures is a very dangerous training process.

The first Me 262 pilots and Meteor pilots and P-80 pilots fit the same profile.

Rudder awareness and throttle and stick 'gentelness' is easily taught - if known, the training program would logically focus on transition differences from one a/ to another.

I have a hard time believing the French pilots assigned to test this a/c were either deficient or unknowing with respect to the He 162 characteristics.

The Germans were amazingly cooperative in working with USAAF pilots in transitioning the 262, and were at Gablingen in tutoring 355th FG pilots on the 109 and 190s.

[kool kitty89]

The P-59 Airacomet was probably a pretty safe a/c to transition in (with large, thick -albeit laminar flow- wings--resulting in good engine-out and stall characteristics, freindly handeling, and modest top speed for a jet), this was the only role it ever served operationally, and it was the same characteristics which made it unsuitable as a combat a/c. The Yak-15 would be similar. (although it had decent performance over piston a/c, although very poor range)

Another thing to note is that the He 162 wasn't expressly designed for the "people's fighter" competition, being largely based on a light-weight fighter design privately developed by Heinkel. So the design had been around much longer than the begining of the RLM's request. In fact Heinkel had been trying to get a fighter into service for much of the war but the RLM didn't particularly like Heinkel (somewhat frustrated with private projects like his jet program instead of focusing on Bomber production and devlopment, as well as for political reasons- having a strong bias tward Messersmitt pluss Heinkel's personal dislike of the Nazi regime) and they only realy chose his project as it was farther ahead in design and higher performing than the compeditors.

Also, as 100 Me-262's would certainly be more useful than 100 He 162's, rember that the He-162 was about twice as easy to produce and uded only one engine so you could easily have twice the a/c. (it was also faster, more agile, ans a better climber) Although 2x MG-151/20's are weak for an interceptor 2x MK-108 (although with only 100 rounds total, less than a third of what the 262 carried) were origialy planned, but prooved to cause structural problems (due to the large muzzel blast causing damage, not due to recoil iirc) but this problem was solved before te end of the war, though no production machines were built as such.


The endurance down low is only ~30-40 min, (range being only around 300 mi) but this is much improoved at altitude, the 600+ mi figure being accurate with a max endurance of 85 min at 11,000 m in cmbat cruise of ~440 mph and a range of 100 km. This would be one major reason not to use it as a grount attack a/c.

See: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/sto...62-a-3234.html (He 162) and: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/avi...-iii-2642.html (He-162 vs Meteor MK-III)


Also on the topic of fuel, Jets were actualy quite an advantage on this point compared to piston fighters, while they consumed much more fuel than prop fighters, they used J-2 fuel (basicly Deisel) which was still available in realitively large amounts in stockpiles in Germany throught the war and still at the war's end, while Galoline (particularly Avaition Gas) was in short supply. (the US Strategic Bombing Survey reporting over 100,000 tons of Deisel in reserve at the end of the war!) The main problem was that the German transportation network had been virtualy obliterated by Allied bombing, so getting the fuel to the planes was a major difficulty.

This fuel also has the advantage of poor flamabillity, meaning fuel-tank fires would be unlikely in combat. (although I wouldn't want to be in a jet with an engine fire/shot-up combustion chamber)

[The Basket]

The 162 reminds me of the Folland Gnat. They seem to have the same strenghts and weaknesses.

I would like to know what a realistic combat radius was for the 162.

True...the 162 was already on the drawing board before the competition and it did work for such a rushed fighter.

But it still did nothing. Its true worth will never be known.

[Juha]

IMHO its better to call rookies pilots with a limited flying experience. Pilots with much experience with different a/c usually cope better with a new a/c than pilots straight out from flying school. I’d not call Rudorffer, Weissenberger, Bär, Schuck etc rookies at the beginning of their Me 262 careers, even if they were by Soren’s definition.

French pilots seemed to have a considerable flying experience some hd flown also German a/c (Fw 190s for ex.) before their flights in He 162s. The articles I mentioned are good and recommended to those with interest to he 162.

Juha

[Elvis]

Basket,

With a listed range of approx. 600 mi., I would think a combat radius would be something in the range of 200-250 miles.

----------------------------

Kool Kitty,

Its my understanding that it wasn't so much that the regime disliked Heinkel, as they simply preferred Messerschmitt.
...after all, they did use his (Heinkel) bombers to great affect.
Also, J-2 is closer to Kerosene than Diesel fuel.



Elvis

[delcyros]

French pilots seemed to have a considerable flying experience some hd flown also German a/c (Fw 190s for ex.) before their flights in He 162s. The articles I mentioned are good and recommended to those with interest to he 162.

Thanks Juha, I wasn´t aware of them. Can You point me to a link of those articles? Thanks in advance.



According to the EHAG Baubeschreibung 162, Datenblatt Anl. 2, issued 1944, the He-162 range given for the different loads with:

A) at 2.500 Kg reference weight and 100% applied power (475 Kg* fuel): 20 min @ SL; 33min @ 6000m and 57 min. @ 11.000m. The latter figure translates into 660 Km range.

B) at 2.700 Kg reference weight and 100% applied power (675 Kg* fuel): 30 min @ SL and 85 min. @ 11.000m. The latter figure translates to 1.000Km range.


* fuel) not included in weight range calculation are 105 Kg fuel reserved for engine spool up, warming, taxiing, starting and acceleration to cruise speed. Calaculations include fuel burned to reach altitude.

Note that the powersetting is 100%! A more economical powersetting for this engine would be 80%.

[kool kitty89]

Originally Posted by Elvis

Basket,

Kool Kitty,

Its my understanding that it wasn't so much that the regime disliked Heinkel, as they simply preferred Messerschmitt.
...after all, they did use his (Heinkel) bombers to great affect.
Also, J-2 is closer to Kerosene than Diesel fuel.

Elvis

I seem to remember reading that Heinkel was quite upset with having his Jewish workers and engineers removed. (Hans Van Ohain also seemed unhappy with the Nazis, having left the flying club he'd joined after it came under Nazi control.)

I also remember reading that the RLM was annoyed with Heinkel continuously working on private projects (Jet and Rocket experemental craft, and later Jet fighters which eventualy attracted the RLM's intrest) instead of focusing on bomber production and development of the He 177 bomber. (a design hampered and flawed by the RLM's request for a heavy bomber capable of dive-bombing)


I thought that J2 was heavier -closed to paraffin oil- than the kerosene used by the allies (although the Meteor could technically run on anything from 100 octane Avgas to Paraffin) the only difference being that lighter additives were present as anti-gelling agents. (diesel and paraffin being superior in safty and energy content, but having problems with gelling at low temperatures, requiring either pre-warming or anti-gelling additives)


Delcyros what do you know about the composition of J2 fuel?

[Juha]

Hello Delcyros
articles I meant are Philippe Couderchon’s 2-part article in April and May 2006 Aeroplane, a British aviation magazine. Backnumbers maybe still available, the magazine has web-pages. The article is on the French use of He 162.
And to be exact the Fw 190s some of the French had flew before they flew He 162 were NC 900s ie French built Fw 190As.

Juha

[Evil_Merlin]

Originally Posted by The Basket

I still think the 162 was just an interesting side note. Yes it could this or that but it never flew combat and it never became operational and I have no proof that the French or British or Soviets or Americans used the 162 as a blueprint for their fighters.

The ejection seat idea was in other aircraft and the Me 262 certainly was the definitive ww2 jet.

I would rather have 100 Me 262s than 100 He 162s anyday.

Huh? The He 162 was used in combat, and it was operational (starting with I./JG1). In fact at least one aircraft was shot down by the He 162, a RAF bird on or around April 19th 1945.

Did you read the post I made earlier?

Yes the He 280 featured an ejection seat (and it was actually used by Helmut Schenk in 1942 when he collided with another plane) and yes the He 219 had ejection seats as well, but it was the He 162 that made the seats "famous" so much so the Luftwaffe started fitting them to Me 262's, Me 163's and other aircraft of the time.

[kool kitty89]

The He 162's ejection seat was more reliable than the He 219's or He 280's as it used a propellant charge instead of compressed air. (although a few deaths occured due to the canopy not releasing, but that's not a fault with the seat)

As I pointed out the He 162 was about twice as producable as the Me 262, so would you rather have 200 He 162's or 100 Me 262's?

I'd probably want a combination as the 162 would make a good comlement to the 262, though the 262 was certainly a better bomber killer. The LW could have used a light-weight single-engined Jet earlier on (with 004B's as those were the only ones produces) though...

[Soren]

Agreed Koolkitty, but you must remember that the Me-262 was a more versatile a/c. With the Jumo 004D (Or E) the Me-262 could be used effectively as an escort fighter, easily out-performing any Allied fighter.