Best German Plane of the war?

Looks like the rules are a lot more flexible than i was led to believe.

I will keep that in mind in future.

2650

 

Borderline OCD? I believe that we passed that borderline years ago..

 

Yeah...we are presently residing in an asylum. And to that, cheers.

 

" .....you have an asylum? Luxury!"

 

If you want to get technical...It's 3.

Where I work.

Where I sleep.

And the local funny farm(state mental hospital) just down the road.

 

Hi Smiley - these are very much the stock "textbook" answers on the 262...

In reality - the Germans were sitting on large amounts of their various aviation fuels, courtesy of the moritorium on training etc. in the later stages of the war; the problem was more specifically a "point of use" shortage, in that it couldn't be shifted to where it was needed because of the Allied tactical air superiority by day.

Regarding pilots - yes there was a general shortage because of wastage in combat vs. the moritorium on training - but part of the problem with the 262 was the conversion of prop pilots to jet aircraft. It was ANYTHING but painless, catching many out...and killing a lot of them, including a number of prop aces.

The 262 had a major issue thjat caught out a lot of pilots - it's non-castoring nosewheel combined with a too-weak undercarriage strut meant that if it didn't break....it wandered! Many pilots were hurt, and many killed, due to the taxiing problem.

What REALLY caught the 262 out was shortage of engines and engine spares. Often no more than a dozen or two were operational in a given day on BOTH fronts combined! At the end of the war the Allies found hundreds of airframes sitting rusting sans engines at the "forest factories", having ALREDY destroyed many in attacks on the factory strips. They also found many "operational " aircraft sitting waiting for spares for engines or complete replacement engines at airfields. This combined with the engine wear issues was THE bugbear of the 262. Heinrich Fey, the late-war 262 test/ferry pilot and defector reports sneaking out in a truck at night to bring back three engines to try and get a couple of aircraft in the air the next day...

Talking of the factory airstrips - another terrible problem the 262 encountered was it was a really HEAVY aircraft....and as well as the taxiing issues, it was impossible to get them off the ground if the ground was in any way wet. The Luftwaffe several times found it impossible to evacuate airworthy aircraft from incoming USAAF raids because of boggy grass runways after rain...

 

These were the problems of operating tyhe first of a new generation of aircraft. The engines had a very limited life and production was hampered by shortages of key materials, and the effects of allied bombing. Jet aircraft needed longer, concrete, runways. The WW2 piston engined fighters needed longer and firmer runways than the pre war biplanes.

There is no doubt that the Me262 was a very formidable aircraft, but the Germans never had enough to seriously challenge allied air superiority. Had the Luftwaffe 1000 Me 262s in France in 1944 they might have made a big difference, but they didn't.

 

Along with the FW-190, the Ju-87 was certainly a fine aircraft. Although its relatively low speed made it vulnerable, what it didn't make in speed, it made up in the accuracy of its 'firepower' which consisted of around 750 kg (est.) of bombs. It would be fitted with other weaponry to give it a bigger punch, but it certainly was a fine dive bomber.

 

They eventually needed longer, firmer runways...especially when flying off with drop tanks etc. became common...but for the first years of the war grass flightlines were in the great majority in both sides. And for a very good reason - a grass "field" with no actual designated runway except a compass indicator marked out on the grass, and the requirement for a free run into the prevailing wind meant that several aircraft...or a whole flight, even a whole squadron!....could get airborne together.

What happened in Occupied Europe was that as the years went by from 1940 on, airfields near maritime coasts needed to be all-weather strips....and often were home to BOTH multiengined patrol/bomber aircraft as well as fighters. So the Luftwaffe began metalling them. Some still in existence, such as Brest, STILL incorporate a stretch of the wartime tarmac into their longer, jet era runways. But a suprising number of LW fields retained grass flightlines right up to the end of the war.

In the UK metalled flightlines remained uncommon for RAF fields...until the advent of the Jet Age...with some of WWII's more famous RAF fields giving problems because of soft surfaces. Typhoons bogging down on Lympne's flightline, Lancasters bogging down at Scampton...the latter not even being developed for some years into the war, despite being identified as a potential field and bought up in the mid 1930s, because of the drainage issues and muddy surface.

The first generations of jet fighters needed long runways because they "landed long" - they made long, flat approaches as the pilot coaxed them right down to parallel with the runway, then lowered the undecarriage and persuaded them down the last few feet onto the ground. Taking off they picked up speed on the ground...then raised the undercarriage, then pulled slowly up and away from the ground...in an era before afterburners. And of course, leaving aside the issue of boggy ground and picking up speed - bumpy, uneven grass fields were a killer for a jet fighter "landing long". Those long, 3,000+ft runways had to be smooth and level...and concrete/tarmac was the obvious answer.

....and the 262 "enjoyed" ALL the behavioural characteristics if that first generation of jet fighters - further complicated by a tendancy to flame out on sharp throttle openings if the pilot had to abort and try to go round again..!