Me262 vs. P-80

Just for fun, lets compare the Me262 to the P-80, since had WWII proceeded into fall 1945 these two jets would surely have met in combat.

Me262-1A Specifications -
Engines: 2 x Jumo-004B engines with 1,980 lb S.T. (900 kg) each.
Weights - empty: 8,380 lb (3,800 kg) Operational: 14,110 lb (6,400 kg) Maximum: 15,720 lbs (7,130 kg)
Maximum speed - typical: 503 mph (810 kph) @ sea level, 519 mph (835 kph) @ 19,685 feet (6000 m)
Maximum speed - best: 515 mph (825 kph) @ sea level, 540 mph (870 kph) @ 19,680 (using -4A engines)
Cruise Speed: unknown
Initial climb: 3937 fpm (1200 m/min)
Sustained Climb: 6.8 mins to 19,685 ft (6000 m)
Service ceiling: 37,565 ft (11,450 m)
Range: 650 miles (1,050 km) on internal fuel
Gunsight: Revi 16b reflector sight
Armament: 2 x 30mm MK108 cannon with 100 rpg, 2 x 30mm MK108 cannon with 80 rpg, all nose mounted

P-80A specifications -
Engine: One General Electric J33-GE-11 or Allison J33-A-9 with 3,850 lb S.T. (1,746 kg)
Weights - empty: 7920 lbs. Operational: 11,700 pounds Maximum: 14,000 lbs
Maximum Speed - typical: 558 mph (898 kph) @ Sea Level, 577 mph @ 6000 feet (1828 m), 492 mph (792 kph) @ 40,000 ft (12,192 km)
Maximum Speed - best: 624 mph (929 kph) @ unknown alt (probably with -17 4000 lbs S.T. engine, Sept. 1946)
Cruise Speed: 410 mph (660 km/h)
Initial climb: 4580 fpm
Sustained Climb: 5.5 minutes to 20,000 ft (6,096 m)
Service Ceiling: 45,000 ft (1,3716 m)
Range - Normal: 780 miles (1,255 km) Maximum: 1,440 miles (2,317 km) {note: wingtip tanks actually improved performance!}
Gunsight K-14 lead computing gunsight
Armament: 6 x .50 caliber M2 machine guns with 200-225 rpg , 10 x 5" HVAR's or 2000 lbs bombs.

I think the numbers speak for themselves. On top of these figures, the Me262 rolled poorly, the P-80 rolled extremely well. The P-80 also out-turned the Me262. I really cannot see any aspect of the Me262 that beats the P-80.

The P-80 would have blasted the Me262 from the skies with ease!

Let the debate begin!

=S=

Lunatic

[cheddar cheese]

Despite that Im saying Me-262. Better armament and combat proven. The P-80 might have been weak and unreliable.

[plan_D]

Yes, RG you stick too closely to specs. Okay, use them but you have to take into account pilot accounts and opinions, proven combat and such. Specifications don't always show the true combat potential.

[Nonskimmer]

F-80 Shooting Stars were active in Korea, and while they may not have been overly successful against the Mig-15's there (thanks largely perhaps to the F-86 Sabre), against the Me-262 I believe they would have proven to be superior in a dog fight. The 'bugs' in the P-80 would have been rectified fairly quickly, once it began to see combat.

Agility I think would be a crucial factor, which the P-80/F-80 had in spades over the 262. It was a relatively nimble aircraft. In a one on one fight with equally skilled pilots at the controls, I have little doubt that the P-80 would win.

[plan_D]

Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe the P-80 was the superior aircraft of the two.

[R Pope]

The T-33 two seat development of the P-80 was a delight to fly, and soldiered on for decades. I actually read a comparison of the P-80 and the Me-262 years ago, and they came out about equal, but the 262 was harder to fly, due mostly to the lack of vital alloys making it heavy.t

[Nonskimmer]

Hmm, interesting.

[the lancaster kicks ass]

but the pilots in the 262s would have more combat experience..........

[plan_D]

They would but if both pilots are the same skill, checking aircraft against aircraft. I don't think the P-80 would have swept the -262 away with ease. I do think it was a better aircraft though, in conditions on which they were both built.

[Gnomey]

It would have been a close fight had they met in combat but if the pilots where of the same skill then the P-80 with its better turning ability and agilty would probally win but if the 262 was behind its heavier armament would come in to its own. It would be close but I think the P-80 would just win. Maybe someone could put a poll on this thread?

[cheddar cheese]

Ill add it to the thread

[GermansRGeniuses]

Originally Posted by plan_D

Yes, RG you stick too closely to specs. Okay, use them but you have to take into account pilot accounts and opinions, proven combat and such. Specifications don't always show the true combat potential.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, if specifications were everything, the Me-163 would have been the best of the war (as well as being fast, it was pretty agile), and the Stringbag would have been one of the worst..!

[cheddar cheese]

Yes, but as a matter of fact it was the other way around

[GermansRGeniuses]

Exactly!


RG, SPECS ARE NOT EVERYTHING!

I certainly agree. However, when making this particular comparison the "specs" are all we have to go by. The P-80 never faced the Me262 in combat. It did face the Mig-15, but that plane was far superior to either of them.

As for the armament, I totally disagree. The 6 x .50's were far superior for dogfighting than the 4 x MK108's. It is unlikely that the Me262 would have been able to hit the P-80 from any range beyond 100 meters (and even that would require an expert marksmen), where the P-80 could have reached out over 400 meters and touched the 262. The MK108 was an anti-bomber weapon, nearly useless in a high speed dogfight.

Furthermore, the .50 M3 was available at this time, and was in fact mounted on the F8F's, of which 2 carriers full of them were steaming toward Japan on VE day. The .50 M3 BMG fired at 1200 rpm, giving the six guns the firepower of 9 M2's. The .50's could also be loaded with the M23 incendiaries, which reduced effective range to about 250 meters but were specifically made to quickly kill the Me262 (these were in use in early 1945).

=S=

Lunatic