p-80 V Me 262

[twoeagles]

My feeling on the lack of mock dogfighting between the -262 and Allied prop fighters is simply that those aircraft were in the rear view mirrror now, and everyone was looking forward - the future was jets. So it was probably a case of 'why bother'. A lack of sufficient servicable spares was no doubt also a big driver in the post-war flight evaluations.

[W@CC0]

@ udet

I don't know what software you are using and what format the movie is, but divx has a nice conversion program. It converts a lot of movie files to the divx format.
You can download a free 15 day trail here Download DivX for Windows

[Udet]

You are right twoeagles.

But many of those Me 262s were intact, and ready to fly. It is most likely that spare parts should not have been an issue at the moment. It would have been yet interesting to see if the P-51s and P-47s were as hot as they affirm in aerial combat against the jet.

I have several shots of Me 262s getting hit and others getting shot down, in all cases i am able to see the ground, and even small buildings and trucks.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Udet

I know what the value of guncamera footage can be, but this film made me beginning to wonder if the allied version that points out to the fact the Me 262 "was dead meat if it turned" is true. Too bad i am a low tech creep and do not know how to convert the episode into .mpeg file to include it here.

I could tell you that reading about the Me 262 and then flying an L-29 gives me a feeling that both aircraft were/ are similar in their lack of acceleration power. In the L-29 it takes a good 5 or 6 seconds for things to spool up and the aircraft to start accelerating. This is quite nerve racking when on final and if you get yourself too low and too slow. Even though the L-29 lands at about 95 knots, it will drop like a rock with one wing dipping if you stall it over the runway.

Now I think about this and picture the Me 262 with its 2 engines and having one fail on final and I "pucker" as a continue thinking about it.

As reported I think the Me 262 would be most vulnerable when its airspeed was allowed to diminish enough where a recip fighter could take advantage of its rapid acceleration and this may have happened if a 262 allowed itself to get suckered into reducing airspeed so it could tighten a turn. Once the 262 was brought into the operating speed realm of piston engine fighters they had the upper hand because of their ability to accelerate a hell of a lot quicker than the 262 and the 262s total lack of rapid acceleration.

And of course, we can't forget the me 262s diminished perfomance when landing....

[Udet]

fLYBOY, i agree with you on most accounts.

But the questions:

Aren´t all planes vulnerable when approaching the runway from the air with the undercarriage out?

So, let´s suppose a Bf 109 or P-51 that approaches the runway or landing strip gets tailed by an enemy plane, you mean they had bigger chances to get out of problem because they could accelerate faster than the Me 262 could?

Finally, and please forgive my ignorance, i do not know what aircraft the L-29 is...to what type of craft are we here referring to?

[Civettone]

Originally Posted by W@CC0

I completely disagree with what you say on the Horton IX/gotha 229. The first prototype did 4 very satisfying test flights, before it crash landed due to an engine failure. The plane was allmost completely build from wood and welded steel tubes, not so advanced huh. The plane flew well, so the concept worked. Fact is, only the V1 flew. When allied troops overran the gotha factories, some 5 or 6 more prototypes were discouvered in various states of readiness. Some even with weapon bays. Sadly for the german warfare machine, gotha didn't had enough skilled woodworkers, unbombed workshop space and influence to make the fighters in a high tempo. Other projects were found to be more urgent. If the Horton plane got the same recourses availible as for messerschmitt or focke wulf projects, a lot more planes would have flown.

Dag Tom, I agree that the Ho IX would have been a great aircraft though I feel that it would have taken a long time before the aircraft had been operational. I don't think you can blame that on Gotha not having the resources (I mean, they built wooden gliders, didn't they?) but Gotha was also working on its own version, the P 60. Not only did that slow down the development of the Ho IX, it also shows that there was room for improvement. Although not a dramatic problem, the directional stability and especially the stability in turning and banking tailless aircraft is rather weak. Especially the CoG of the Ho IX was a serious disadvantage and could only be remedied by adding 600kg of ballast. The P 60 solved this by moving the engines backward and outward.
AAF TRANSLATION NO.525 COMPARISONS OF THE 8-229 AND THE GO P-60 ALL-WING AIRPLANES

Personally, I think the directional problems would have kept it from being an effective fighter plane. I think the future for Horten's designs laid in long range aircraft and especially bombers where directional stability and turns are less of an issue.

And one more little thing, the V1 only flew as a glider. It's the V2 that flew few hours before an engine failure caused its crash landing. Or at least, that's what I read at Farnborough_05.
Kris

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Udet

fLYBOY, i agree with you on most accounts.

But the questions:

Aren´t all planes vulnerable when approaching the runway from the air with the undercarriage out?

Absolutely - they are "dirty," gear down flaps down and creating a lot of drag - it will take several seconds to get cleaned up and accelerate, even in modern aircraft. They are also limited on how fast they could fly with the gear extended before damage is caused to the airframe.

Originally Posted by Udet

So, let´s suppose a Bf 109 or P-51 that approaches the runway or landing strip gets tailed by an enemy plane, you mean they had bigger chances to get out of problem because they could accelerate faster than the Me 262 could?

Yes - recip aircraft at lower transonic speeds have an acceleration advantage over most jets, especially if we're talking about first generation jets. You give power to just about any WW2 fighter and she will move immediately, a jet on other hand will lag for several seconds and the spool up is slow

Originally Posted by Udet

Finally, and please forgive my ignorance, i do not know what aircraft the L-29 is...to what type of craft are we here referring to?

Ex-Czech AF trainer - its M701 engine is a huge centrifugal similar to the nene or RD-45. Once it gets going it has a top speed of about 400 MPH (On a good day)



I've actually worked on and flown in this one. My friend Bob Stambowski is flying it.

[Udet]

Flyboy: great explanation. Thanks a lot!

[FLYBOYJ]

My pleasure...

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by W@CC0

I completely disagree with what you say on the Horton IX/gotha 229. The first prototype did 4 very satisfying test flights, before it crash landed due to an engine failure. The plane was allmost completely build from wood and welded steel tubes, not so advanced huh. The plane flew well, so the concept worked. Fact is, only the V1 flew. When allied troops overran the gotha factories, some 5 or 6 more prototypes were discouvered in various states of readiness. Some even with weapon bays. Sadly for the german warfare machine, gotha didn't had enough skilled woodworkers, unbombed workshop space and influence to make the fighters in a high tempo. Other projects were found to be more urgent. If the Horton plane got the same recourses availible as for messerschmitt or focke wulf projects, a lot more planes would have flown.

Civittone addressed this quite adequately. Pitch stability was very marginable and directional stability was practically non-existant. Solving these problems was going to take a lot of work and may be impractical for a fighter (without the flight control computers we have today).

The plane may have been built of wood but aerodynamically, it was very advanced and required a lot of work.

On the Ta-183,
The only thing that actually was "wrong" with the huck, was that it didn't had wing fences. In a turn, the air would just follow the leading edge of the wing or run parrallell with the wing's leading edge, and so, no lift would be produced anymore and the plane would fall down. On the pulqui II, this was resolved by putting fences on the wing (small fin like things, in somewhere in the middle of the wing.) The russians did the same on the mig 15.

Tom

For some reason, the wing structure was raised from mid-ship to shoulder placement, a major design change. Again, with such a new design, much work would have been needed.

[W@CC0]

I didn't say the 229 would have been an effective fighter aircraft! I only sayed it was allmost in production.

My source is the book from Reimar Horten

The RLM's E-stelle's order to build 40 pre production aircraft is dated 13 october '44, 2 months before the maiden of the V2 (indeed, my mistake, V1 was the glider which made several more flights and was captured by US troops) 20 were to be builded by gotha, 20 by klemm. Later this was changed, and gotha would have builded all the 40 aircraft.
Horten also tested a longer nose variant with a H-II with new center section to test the longer nose.
The cg on a flying wing is critical indeed. A lot of ballast was needed in the nose. But the armament wasn't installed yet, and with the longer nose of the V6, I think the problem could be solved, because the cockpit would be further to the front, and so creating a bigger moment. (V6 was to be a 2 seater/night fighter) Also, the planking of the wing was changed from a 17mm thick laminat to a 8 mm thick one. This would save 574kg.
On 14 july 44, the decision was taken, by gotha, to build the first 20 wings. A furniture workshop was contracted to do this. On 21 september '44 the Jäger sonderprogramm was made public and the furniture workshop could order through Gotha. Horten says it took 2500 hours to build a wing, I ask myself then why not more wings were captured by allied troops? If Gotha contracted a furniture workshop, it seems to me that they hadn't enough skilled woodworkers availeble,no?

Tom

[davparlr]

Originally Posted by W@CC0

I didn't say the 229 would have been an effective fighter aircraft! I only sayed it was allmost in production.

My source is the book from Reimar Horten

The RLM's E-stelle's order to build 40 pre production aircraft is dated 13 october '44, 2 months before the maiden of the V2 (indeed, my mistake, V1 was the glider which made several more flights and was captured by US troops) 20 were to be builded by gotha, 20 by klemm. Later this was changed, and gotha would have builded all the 40 aircraft.
Horten also tested a longer nose variant with a H-II with new center section to test the longer nose.
The cg on a flying wing is critical indeed. A lot of ballast was needed in the nose. But the armament wasn't installed yet, and with the longer nose of the V6, I think the problem could be solved, because the cockpit would be further to the front, and so creating a bigger moment. (V6 was to be a 2 seater/night fighter) Also, the planking of the wing was changed from a 17mm thick laminat to a 8 mm thick one. This would save 574kg.
On 14 july 44, the decision was taken, by gotha, to build the first 20 wings. A furniture workshop was contracted to do this. On 21 september '44 the Jäger sonderprogramm was made public and the furniture workshop could order through Gotha. Horten says it took 2500 hours to build a wing, I ask myself then why not more wings were captured by allied troops? If Gotha contracted a furniture workshop, it seems to me that they hadn't enough skilled woodworkers availeble,no?

Tom

After the war, I believe John Northrop tried to get Walter Horten to come to America to work for him. Unfortunately, he could not pull the right governmental strings. I saw John Northrop once, he was very old and in a wheel chair. He had been given a one day clearance to be briefed on the B-2 bomber. After the meeting he said "Now I know why God has kept me alive so long."

[Civettone]

Tom, I know you didn't say it would have been an effective fighter. That was a personal statement of mine ... and said so.

I thought the ballast would go to the rear of the plane...

And about the building of the wings. In 1944 there may have been a small shortage of professional woodcraftsmen but I'm sure there were enough people around to build a couple of flying wings. Just look at the He 162 project which started weeks later.

Kris

[Udet]

Monsieur Civettone:

Not sure if i am recalling it right, but was it you that suggested on some other thread it could have been more viable to the Germans to produce more Bachems to have them launched in numbers during the final stages of the war? (or something to that effect).

If so, do you recall what thread was it?

Merci beaucoup

[W@CC0]

Originally Posted by Civettone

Tom, I know you didn't say it would have been an effective fighter. That was a personal statement of mine ... and said so.

I thought the ballast would go to the rear of the plane...

And about the building of the wings. In 1944 there may have been a small shortage of professional woodcraftsmen but I'm sure there were enough people around to build a couple of flying wings. Just look at the He 162 project which started weeks later.

Kris

Goeie morgent Kris

Owkay on the statement, I think I misunderstood you.
No idea if the balast had to go on the back or the front in the Horten. All flying wings I've seen so far, in modelling, needed balast in the nose, also the Horten types. I may have been wrong, thinking it was the same on the real thing. On the production planes, they were lightening the wing planking, to save weight, and most of the planking is behind the cg, I would not change it if I needed weight behind the cg. But as I said, I don't know this.
And true, there were skilled woodcrafting man in germany. The heinkel 162 is a nice example, and the Ta-154 was also a wooden plane. But if workers were availeble, and wood was availeble, and they had some sort of semi decent glue, why did the program progressed then so slow?

Tom