ADS NOT DISPLAYED TO REGISTERED USERS.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 165
Like Tree3Likes

What protoype do you wish had seen service in WW2?

Aviation Discuss What protoype do you wish had seen service in WW2? in the World War II - Aviation forums; Oh yes, I did realise that Elvis, it was imagining a dogfight that put me off the Meteor. Good interceptor ...

  1. #136
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,286
    Country
    United Kingdom
    Oh yes, I did realise that Elvis, it was imagining a dogfight that put me off the Meteor. Good interceptor for its day, but the Vampire could turn.



    In the fight you was imagining the Meteor would lose, and as a Brit I'd hate to see that. Also, the Vampire too missed the war, but flew in 1943, so it fits as my answer to the thread anyway, luvvly jubbly!

  2. #137
    Senior Member Elvis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Little Norway, U.S.A.
    Posts
    820
    Country
    United States

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Waynos View Post
    Oh yes, I did realise that Elvis, it was imagining a dogfight that put me off the Meteor. Good interceptor for its day, but the Vampire could turn.
    Hey, looks like I just learned something!
    I didn't realize the Vampire was more manuverable than the Meteor.
    I wonder how the Vampire compares to the P-80 and the Me-262, in manuverability? (uh oh, I forsee more reports about turning times! )
    Anyway, thanks for the info.


    Quote Originally Posted by Waynos
    In the fight you was imagining the Meteor would lose, and as a Brit I'd hate to see that. Also, the Vampire too missed the war, but flew in 1943, so it fits as my answer to the thread anyway, luvvly jubbly!
    I never meant to imply ANY Allied nation would loose any battle/sortie against any Axis nation.
    My apologies if my comments came across that way.
    BTW, you're correct. The Vamp did first fly in '43, but the Meteor flew 6 months prior (March vs. September).


    Elvis

  3. #138
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,286
    Country
    United Kingdom
    No apology needed, I know you didn't mean that. The Vamp could outturn the Spitfire according to RAE tests so it should account well for itself against the P-80 or Me 262.

  4. #139
    Senior Member fastmongrel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    1,142
    Country
    United Kingdom
    The Meteor and the Me 262 were pretty well matched iirc the 262 had the advantage in speed and roll the meteor climbed and dived quicker and they could both turn about the same. Post war tests usually reckon the advantage would as always have gone to the better pilot.

    The Vampire would have run rings around both of them.

  5. #140
    Senior Member Elvis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Little Norway, U.S.A.
    Posts
    820
    Country
    United States

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by Waynos View Post
    No apology needed, I know you didn't mean that. The Vamp could outturn the Spitfire according to RAE tests so it should account well for itself against the P-80 or Me 262.
    Ah, I see.
    Yes, in that case, I think would perform quite well in a (mock, wouldn't want fellow Allies shooting each other down) dogfight with the other planes.


    Elvis

  6. #141
    Senior Member Elvis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Little Norway, U.S.A.
    Posts
    820
    Country
    United States

    Smile

    Quote Originally Posted by fastmongrel View Post
    The Meteor and the Me 262 were pretty well matched iirc the 262 had the advantage in speed and roll the meteor climbed and dived quicker and they could both turn about the same. Post war tests usually reckon the advantage would as always have gone to the better pilot.

    The Vampire would have run rings around both of them.
    Funny how the more things change, the more they stayed the same.
    The Vampire is starting to sound like a jet powered Zero!


    Elvis

  7. #142
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    80
    Country
    United States
    Gotta go with either the Go 229 or the Do 335B-2 (gotta love those twin Mk 103's!).

  8. #143
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    119
    Country
    United Kingdom
    Quote Originally Posted by fastmongrel View Post
    The Meteor and the Me 262 were pretty well matched iirc the 262 had the advantage in speed and roll the meteor climbed and dived quicker and they could both turn about the same. Post war tests usually reckon the advantage would as always have gone to the better pilot.

    The Vampire would have run rings around both of them.
    If either the Meteor or Vampire had tried to dive with a Me 262 at high altitude, they would have quickly found that they could not match its 0.83 Mach (0.86 if you were very brave). The critical Mach number was about 0.76 for the Vampire and perhaps 0.78 for the Meteor.

  9. #144
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,286
    Country
    United Kingdom
    But that was terminal mach number, not a measure that is useful in combat. For example the highest dive speed of any prop fighter was that of the Spitfire which was even higher than that of the 262 at 0.9M, but heavieraircraft like the P-47, or even the Fw190 could dive away from it initially, which was actually useful.

    Not that I know whether the Meteor could initially out dive the 262 or not, just that there is a difference.

  10. #145
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cardiff
    Posts
    378
    Country
    Wales

    Gloster (piston) fighters

    I think the Gloster were unlucky with their fighter designs - either or both could have had a avaition history rather than just be a footnote.

    First - the Gloster F.5/34 which was well liked by those who flew it, could have had an order - cover if problems with the Merlin. Though would have helped if Gloster had got the prototype out earlier. For an aircraft with less h.p. the speed wasn't much different to the Hurricane. The big question would it have taken a bigger engine. Now, I am not suggesting it would have lasted throughout the War, but that it would have been better having it than the Gladiator!!

    See:
    HTML Code:
    http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_F.5/34
    Second - the Gloster F.9/37 a twin engined aircraft, smaller than both the Blenheim & Beaufighter. Like the earlier single engined aircraft - this Gloster was also well liked by those who flew her - 'highly manoeuvrable and extremely docile'. Designed to the same spec as the Whirlwind, it was based on an earlier design to the spec that the Defiant won - where the turret was dispenced with and cannons installed in the nose. If such a design had started earlier than OTL hence the eighteen months gap, then the RAF might have had a much more effective aircraft available rather than the Blenheim!
    Though powered by Taurus engines didn't help.



    And finally thanks Marcel, for your comments re: Fokker D.XXIII

  11. #146
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,286
    Country
    United Kingdom
    I think the F.9/37 is one of the great might-have-beens for the RAF. It sort of puts me in mind of a British Bf110, possibly an even better 'what if', even tghough it didn't get to fly, was Supermarine 327. 4 x 20mm cannon, 20% more wing than a Spitfire with a fuselage the same length and TWO Merlins. I'd have loved to see that airborne!

  12. #147
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Cardiff
    Posts
    378
    Country
    Wales
    Quote Originally Posted by Waynos View Post
    I think the F.9/37 is one of the great might-have-beens for the RAF. It sort of puts me in mind of a British Bf110, possibly an even better 'what if', even tghough it didn't get to fly, was Supermarine 327. 4 x 20mm cannon, 20% more wing than a Spitfire with a fuselage the same length and TWO Merlins. I'd have loved to see that airborne!
    Actually, I think the Gloster F.9/37 has more in common with the FW-187 than the Bf-110 - similar size and engine power. Even its successor the Gloster Reaper night-fighter looked like it regarding the cockpit and profile.

  13. #148
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,286
    Country
    United Kingdom
    Yes, on reflection you are right. It was closer to the Fw187. Still, Taurus or Peregrine eh. What a choice!

  14. #149
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    119
    Country
    United Kingdom
    Quote Originally Posted by Waynos View Post
    But that was terminal mach number, not a measure that is useful in combat. For example the highest dive speed of any prop fighter was that of the Spitfire which was even higher than that of the 262 at 0.9M, but heavieraircraft like the P-47, or even the Fw190 could dive away from it initially, which was actually useful.
    All very true although the Spitfire was not actually controlable at 0.89M, just able to survive often with a damaged prop and engine. However, the quoted maximum speed of a Me 262 at 6,000 m is already 0.76M. Thus in theory a Me 262 might be able to dive away after attacking a formation of Meteors at a speed that could not be followed. Looking at acceleration, the higher speed of the 262 suggests low drag compared to a Meteor F3. As the weight is similar, we might expect the 262 to accelerate better in a dive. The Vampire was smaller and may have had less drag but was also lighter. Thus I suspect that a 262 could evade either fighter by diving. Of course, being able to escape may not be enough to win!

  15. #150
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,286
    Country
    United Kingdom
    I suppose if I wanted to be argumentative I could say 'Ah but, Meteor III or IV?' But no. As the III was operational at the same time as the 262 while the IV was slightly later I'll leave it at that

+ Reply to Thread
Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88