Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Those German Jet Fighters?

Discussion in 'Aircraft' started by Jon52, Jun 5, 2014.

  1. Jon52

    Jon52 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    I recently saw a History channel episode on the first jet fighters the Nazi's built. It was very interesting and I was surprised to learn before they could build the planes they had to build caves to construct the jet's in. Last night I saw an enjoyable movie called Red Tails. In the last action scene those Nazi jet fighters show up, and while they cut our planes to shreds, the Red Tails with their propeller driven fighters did a good job defending the bombers.

    My question is why didn't we have jet fighters also? Considering the Nazis had to build caves first, and we had our whole big country to build what we needed, why didn't we have fighter jets too?
     
  2. Gunney

    Gunney Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    8
    You have to remember that German scientists and engineers were quite ahead of their time in theoretical and practical science such as jet engine technology considering they had a jet engine powered Me-262 flying by 1942. but America did actually have a working jet fighter by 1943, the P-80 Shooting Star http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_P-80_Shooting_Star which were flying but not combat ready by the time World War 2 finished.

    You also have to consider that British scientists and engineers beat America to the point by having the allies first operational jet fighter squadron in WW2, No. 616 Squadron RAF which commenced operations on the 27th of July in 1944 flying the Gloster meteor http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloster_Meteor, although it took about 8 years to develop the engines (development started in 1936) the actual airframe didn't start development until 1940.
     
  3. green slime

    green slime Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,150
    Likes Received:
    584
    Jon52, the Allies did.

    the Gloster Meteor

    "The Meteor first flew in 1943 and commenced operations on 27 July 1944 with No. 616 Squadron RAF. Nicknamed by pilots the "Meatbox", the Meteor was not a sophisticated aircraft in terms of its aerodynamics, but proved to be a successful combat fighter."

    [​IMG]


    The P-80 Shooting Star

    "The Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star was the first jet fighter used operationally by the United States Army Air Forces (USAAF). Designed and built by Lockheed in 1943 and delivered just 143 days from the start of the design process, production models were flying but not ready for service by the end of World War II."

    "The impetus for development of the P-80 was the discovery by Allied intelligence of the Me 262 in spring 1943, which had made only test flights of production prototypes at that time. After receiving documents and blueprints comprising years of British jet aircraft research, the Materiel Command's Wright Field research and development division tasked Lockheed to design the aircraft. With the Germans and British clearly far ahead in development, Lockheed was pressed to develop a comparable jet in as short a time as possible. The legendary Kelly Johnson submitted a design proposal in mid-June and promised that the prototype would be ready for testing in 180 days. The Skunk Works team, beginning 26 June 1943, produced the airframe in 143 days, delivering it to Muroc Army Airfield on 16 November."

    [​IMG]


    But as it was not they that were getting crushingly defeated on all fronts of the War, they had no need to press unready airframes into service prematurely.
     
    belasar likes this.
  4. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    9,503
    Likes Received:
    3,037
    Exactly...the piston fighters were doing a good job already...Most things werent truly "ready".
    The P-80 did see some service in the war (end of war) flying protection for the relief bombers over Germany...to disuade the Russions from attacking and sending a message for the near future...The meteor was a pretty ordinary design...Used as a ground attack platform was its real vocation...Australians had to change our meteors role during Korea and go to Sabres. I've always thought the Canberra bomber was a pregnant Meteor..hehe...
     
  5. Gunney

    Gunney Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2011
    Messages:
    192
    Likes Received:
    8
    Never heard that description before :') I always thought of it as a beefed up meteor but not a pregnant one
     
  6. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    AFAIK two P80 were deployed to Italy in 1944 for operational trials. there were no Me 262 in Italy but there was a detachment of Arado 234 Jet reconnaissance planes but the two never met.
     
  7. Jon52

    Jon52 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    I really felt sorry for those Red Tail pilots when the Jets showed up. And twice as sorry for the bombers. But I do know that in war the lives of the men mean less than the overall success of the missions. As GreenSlime said, we weren't being crushed, and I think we had started to win by then.

    I thought the answer was going to be, because we had too much research going in to develop the A-Bomb before the Japanese did.

    If I may just boast a little bit here. One of my Uncles was involved in designing one of those fighter jets. I don't know which one. He was a very modest man and all his life he never spoke of it. He only told me near the end of his life. So I'm boasting for him. :S!
     
  8. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    155
    Jon - The Me262 wasn't constructed in underground factories; it was last-ditch items like the He 162 that were - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinkel_He_162

    Me262 production was more typified by the so-called "forest factories", small, in some case literally open-air assembly facilities all over Germany tucked away out of sight, with a grass runway to get the aircraft off the ground when finished, tested and delivered to combat units...

    Unfortunately - the Allies found HUNDREDS of completed Me 262s sitting rusting away, stored up for lack of engines to complete them and make them airworthy. And in several cases Allied bombers attacked 262 production facilities and destroyed dozens of completed jets on the ground...they were a quite heavy aircraft, and couldn't take off if the grass runway was any way soft or boggy!
     
  9. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    The ME262 wasn't really "all that" in actual combat. It had speed but lacked maneuverability, so attacks were pretty much limited to high speed passes against bomber formations. The German kill claims have never been checked against allied sources so are likely wildly inflated.

    A British test pilot pilot who evaluated the ME262 after the war said:

     
  10. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    What the test pilot is not mentioning is that four MK108 30mm cannons pack a huge amount of destructive power, two seconds of fire gave a very god chance for hits and a couple of 30mm minengeschloss rounds were likely to bring down a four engine bomber. Slowing to increase firing time would increase exposure to defensive fire as the MK 108 didn't outrange the 12.7 Brownings, most reports I read put their "ideal" range at around 300m well within the defensive range of the bomber. IMO as a bomber destroyer the Me 262 was in a class of it's own. Why dogfight when "Hit and zoom" gives you a large chance of success with little risk ?. One limitation of the MK 108 was it's limited muzzle velocity that made if far from ideal for engaging manoeuvring fighters, had they wished the Germans could have mounted a quartet of MG151/20 for about the same weight, but engaging bombers was the priority.
     
    CAC likes this.
  11. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    Let's look again at the idea of jet vs prop plane combat. It is true that a jet can't turn inside a propeller but as is said, there are other ways to skin a cat. First of all, even in prop vs prop combat, most victims never saw the fighter that shot them down or even knew they were there until they were hit. It is very, very hard to hit a twisting, turning aircraft, especially when one is twisting and turning too. Therefore, the minority of fighter kills were downed by this method. Most were shot down by the spot and stalk method. This method is especially suited to a jet like the 262. A jet with its vastly superior speed can attack from behind and below, in the prop fighter's blind spot. If it took five hits from one to down an American bomber (Luftwaffe statistic) then how many hits would it take to down a single engine fighter? Not very many I think. In fact, quite a few kill claims were made by 262 pilots on single engine fighters. When you think about it, it's not very different from the tactics we used in combatting the Japanese Zero at the beginning of the war.

    As another alternative to the Mk 108 cannon, how about 2-3 Mk 103s? Almost the same blast effect and much better trajectory and penetration.

    P.S. The Mk 108 fired about 10 rounds a second. Four cannon firing for two seconds equals 80 rounds. VERY good chance of killing!
     
  12. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    452
    Look at this for the effect of the 30mm on a fighter
    http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1061

    The MK 103 woud allow to engage fro 600m or more thanks to a much flatter trajectory but weighted a lot more than the MK 108 and had a lower ROF.

    60 Kg. and 600RPM (505s m/s) for the MK 108 versus 141 Kg, 360 to 420 RPM and 690 to 920 m/s with minengeschloss ammo (a bit higher with the APCR round used for anti-tank role but that was totally unsuitable to fire at bombers).
    Tony Williams quotes another German study that gives 48 rounds fired from a MK108 versus 40 from a MK103 to down a bomber,

    AFAIK a few Me 262 had 2 MK103, two MK 108 and 2 MG151/20 that combination was likely to send bullets all oover the place as the 3 guns had significantly different balistics.
     
  13. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    TOS, et al,

    Yes, I've seen that before and perhaps it was the same test, or maybe a German one where they fired just one round into the empennage of a Spit. The entire tail dropped off. If you've ever seen a pix of one of those Mk 108 rounds or perhaps an actual one, they are really strange looking, with a very small case heel crimped onto a very long projectile. What many people don't realize is that those 30mm projectiles were deep drawn and had very thin walls and thus had more explosive than conventional rounds.

    Actually, if you went with a mix of minengeschloss and AP (Mk 10-3), as they did with their 20mm you would have explosive damage plus rounds that would penetrate armor and engines!
     
  14. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    It's all very nice theoretical information, but it would be more interesting if someone took the time to comb through German kill claims and compare them to actual losses in allied records. I suspect the British test pilot quoted above had it right when he pointed out the difficulty of getting a burst on target in two seconds. Count it out loud - one Mississippi, two Mississippi - then picture yourself strapped into a shaky jet at 550 mph with tracers from a half dozen bombers coming at your face and getting that aiming dot on the target in that time frame.

    I suspect those claims are wildly inflated.
     
  15. Wgvsr

    Wgvsr New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Collierville, TN
    As I recall, a number of the -262s became casualties on their own after slowing down to take a proper shot at the B-17s.
    Bill
     
  16. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    Indeed, some pilots did indeed have quite a bit of a problem getting their timing right. Interestingly, it was quite often the old hands that were use to fighting at 100mph slower, that had the most problems. Kill claims were always much higher than confirmed kills in all air forces. When most of the 262 combat missions were flown it was right at the end of the war and the Lw administration and infrastructure were crumbling. However, they didn't all miss and I've read of several Allied accounts of 262's getting into the bomber formations and wreaking havoc. Galland's last two kills weren't confirmed or counted until well after the war, by the USAAF pilot that wounded him (Finnigan was his name I believe).

    An interesting story of jet vs. prop fighter action: It seems JG 7, the main unit using the fighter version of the 262 initially did very poorly with the jet. After Novotny's death they were taken out of the line and given more training. After they came back on line they did much better. On one of their missions a bunch of 262's got into a rhubarb with a bunch of mustangs. The result: a 0-0 tie! Both sides used their birds to best advantage and neither scored.
     
  17. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    155
    The problem of course is that no matter HOW many rounds per second are fired - they're still in four paths that need to intersect with the target at SOME point....and the excess of speed made this even more difficult than normal.

    A cannon shell...and of course a mine round...meant that rounds that DID hit did more damage - but the speed of the Me262 complicated the ever-polling equation in the back of the fighter pilot's mind between his aircraft's path, the target's path, and that bullet path betwen the two that needed, for an instant or preferably more, to all connect.

    The old prop pilots didn't just have timing issues - they had a lot of issues with the 262's behaviour on or near the ground - it's "landing long", and the front wheel's not castoring...and the strut itself being weak. A lot were injured and several killed in taxiing accidents on the ground that they would have aced (sic) in a taildragger prop fighter.

    It's understandable - I still have a few moments' pause swapping between motorcycles after 32 years...what must it have been like acclimatising to the behaviour of a jet-propelled tricycle undercarriage coming from a prop-driven three-point taildragger...
     
  18. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    No, I was talking about the ability to set up for a firing run. The older pilots needed more time to adjust their brains. Some, like Heinz Bar were able to. Others, like Krupinski had a hard time. The other things you talk about were more of a challenge for the less experienced pilots. I know what you're saying though, because I fly two airplanes, one a C172, the other a Piper Commanche. I really have to adjust my thinking when I'm used to one then go to the other and their performance envelopes are very similar.
     
  19. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,381
    Likes Received:
    155
    I'm not so sure; IIRC its the Osprey "German Jet Aces" book that notes the ratio imbalance in ground-handling incidents between old war-long prop flyers and newcomers. Not that there were too many "newcomers" by then with the moritoriums on flight training to save fuel etc....

    That's what I mean about the deflection issues and bullet path. Old hands will have thought about doing it in old terms THEN corrected for the excess speed etc....

    It's a bit like being fluent in another language - REALLY fluent is thinking in the second language, rather than thinking in your own native tongue first THEN translating it...which is inconveniently slow at the sort of converging speeds between a 262 and its target we're talking about.
     
  20. green slime

    green slime Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    3,150
    Likes Received:
    584
    With a 200km an hour difference (assuming an approach from the rear vs propellor-driven fighter), from 4km out, it takes 1 minute, 12 seconds to close. The window of time for the 200m to 800m range is then 10.8 seconds (assuming of course, you can approach undetected).

    If the difference is greater (such as chasing a B-17 bomber), the time would be as much as halved.

    Approaching from the front, the combined difference in airspeed reduces this window further dramatically, to the ca 2 seconds described.

    The reason the LW jets attacked from the front, was because their inferior numbers of aircraft, piloted largely by below average skilled pilots (due to lack of training) meant they couldn't afford to trade blows on an equal footing at all. They needed all the luck they could get, and to expose the airframes and pilots to as little danger as possible, while still causing damage (or at the very least, causing bomber crews to break formation). Remember there was never many me-262's operational at any one time. Many bombing raids had more bombers involved, never mind the escort fighters, than the LW's entire collection of operational Me-262s.
     

Share This Page