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

Fastest WW2 Fighter plane

Discussion in 'Aircraft' started by broke91hatch, Nov 6, 2008.

  1. ickysdad

    ickysdad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    31
    Is it fair though for USAAF & USN aircraft to be penalised because the war was taking place across the Pacific & Atlantic? I mean if the war was taking place over the US we'd probably have no problem considering the likes of the P-51H or F8F or P-80 being operational WW2 aircraft.
     
  2. Sentinel

    Sentinel Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    47
    I agree with Ickysdad. In a desperate situation such as faced by Germany in 1945, or Britain in 1940, or Russia in 1941, the definition of "operational" becomes much more flexible. Equipment that normally would be experimental is rushed into service. Even in 1943, tanks such as the Panther and Tiger weren't fully debugged, and suffered many mechanical problems, but were very much operational.
     
  3. Proeliator

    Proeliator Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2009
    Messages:
    615
    Likes Received:
    20
    People mistake desperation with lack of resources.

    The Me262 could've reached frontline service as early as late 1943 if the resources for it had been there. But because there was a serious lack of high temperature resistant metals, fuel and production lines being bombed etc etc the introduction of the aircraft was delayed. And when it finally did reach operational service it suffered from a multitude of engine troubles, not because of design, but again because of lack of proper materials. The design of the aircraft itself was supurb, way ahead of its time, something which was concluded again & again in both US & British postwar trials of the aircraft. It was an aircraft crammed with, for the time, state of the art technology & equipment, right from its wings to its engines and to its armament, and it along with the Messerschmitt P.1101 prototype proved highly inspirational & influencial to the F-86 sabre design.
     
  4. tikilal

    tikilal Ace

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    66
    The Brits did field the meteor but chose to keep them at home. The US could have organized a wing or squadron of P-80s at home but the choose to activate them in combat. Nothing personal against the US it was an ok plane but it was not 'operational' during the war.

    Yes the Germans rushed several designs but they felt that was in their best interest. Was it? That sounds like a great 'what if'.
     
  5. ickysdad

    ickysdad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    31
    Yes but if your going to cite lack of resources is it not also just as fair to cite the fact the Allies didn't push designs or investigate more? The US in the way of GE had looked into jet engines in the late 30's clearly the US had the resources but just not the desire to look at more advanced designs. The much,much vaunted German inspiration in the V-2 had over 200 US patents by Robert Goddard.

    What we saw in WW2 was two different design/technology/research philosophies...the Germans tried to develop 1950's technology during wartime when they clearly didn't have the resources to do that. The Allies,other then maybe the Manhatten Project, took 1930's technology and pushed it to the limit clearly having the resources actually to do both types of technology/research/deisgn. Both sides were brilliant in applying their respective philosophies but brilliance without common sense is a lost cause. The Germans did lack materials for making jets most notably chromium & nickel but those materials were needed to make something like gun barrels & such.
     
  6. tikilal

    tikilal Ace

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    66
    so are we rating the potential each nation had to make a fast airplane or are we talking about the fastest plane that saw service in the war?
     
  7. uksubs

    uksubs Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    547
    Likes Received:
    36

    The RAF Gloster Meteor did go to ETO in 1944 & was based in Belgium with Meteor MK 1 & Mk 3 but were mainly used in ground attack & shooting down V1
     
  8. ickysdad

    ickysdad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    31
    No It's the latter but Germany wasn't as far ahead in technology as some seem to think. If Luftwaffe jets were to have become much of a problem how long do you think it would be before the Allies caught up? Furthermore even if proper materials were forthcoming for the Me 262 I suspect getting into serial production would have been much more difficult then some seem to think.

    However the topic should be which is the fastest fighter in the war .
     
  9. RAF 1

    RAF 1 recruit

    Joined:
    May 26, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    which is fastest is subject to speculation, but in service the Mk XIV spitfire had no trouble catching FW190D or ME109K, and many times were able to catch them without releasing the drop tanks, there were limited numbers of ME 262`s and TA 152`s in service , the ME 262 was very vulnerable when taking off and landing and many FW 190`s and TA 152`s were used to try to protect the airfields of ME 262 Squadrons, both the Tempest V and Spitfire XIV were used extensively in action and performed well including against the V1`s, the Tempest being better at low altitude and destroyed over 600, while Spitfires destroyed over 300
     
  10. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    sorry but the Ta 152 was never used for airfield protection ........
     
  11. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    I disagree. Just because you choose to use an experimental vehicle due to extremis does not mean that vehicle is operational. It does qualify it as having seen service and if it shoots or is shot at it counts as having seen combat. The Me-262 is rather a special case as it was clearly not ready for operational use but the Germans chose to produce them and equip operational units with them despite that. As such it gets the nod as both the fastest operational fighter and the fastest one to see service unless on of the other German rocket or jet fighters was faster.
     
    brndirt1 likes this.
  12. tikilal

    tikilal Ace

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    66
    Yes, sorry this is what I meant, that they were not assigned as escorts, where they would engage in fighter to fighter combat.
     
  13. uksubs

    uksubs Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2007
    Messages:
    547
    Likes Received:
    36
    Using WW2 Jets as Escort fighters would not be a good idea as the early jets engine had high fuel consumption , with the RAF & the Gloster Meteor they did not want them to fall in to enemy & that why there was no rush to get them to the front
    The Mk3 had a top speed of 493 m.p.h:eek:

    The first 20 aircraft were delivered to the Royal Air Force on 1 June 1944; one was also sent to the U.S. in exchange for a Bell YP-59A Airacomet for comparative evaluation.
    No. 616 Squadron RAF was the first to receive operational Meteors, 14 of them. The squadron was based at RAF Culmhead, Somerset and had been previously equipped with the Spitfire VII. After a conversion course at Farnborough for the six leading pilots, the first aircraft was delivered to Culmhead on 12 July 1944.[1] The squadron now with seven Meteors moved on 21 July 1944 to RAF Manston on the east Kent coast and, within a week, 30 pilots were converted.
    The Meteor was initially used to counter the V-1 flying bomb threat. No. 616's Meteors saw action for the first time on 27 July 1944, when three aircraft were active over Kent. The Meteor accounted for 14 flying bombs. These anti-V1 missions of 27 July 1944 were the Meteor's (and the Royal Air Force's) first operational jet combat missions. After some problems, especially with jamming guns, the first two V1 "kills" were made on 4 August.
    After the end of the V-1 threat, and the introduction of the ballistic V-2 rocket, the RAF was forbidden to fly Meteor F.1 on combat missions over German-held territory for fear of an aircraft being shot-down and then salvaged by the Germans, in any case, the greatly improved F 3 was in prospect. No. 616 Squadron briefly moved to RAF Debden to allow USAAF bomber crews to gain experience in facing jet-engined foes before moving to Colerne, Wiltshire.
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    Gloster Meteor F.3


    No. 616 Squadron exchanged its F 1s for the first Meteor F 3s on 18 December 1944. This was a substantial improvement over the earlier mark, although the basic design still had not reached its potential. Wind tunnel and flight tests demonstrated that the original short nacelles, which extended fore and aft of the wing, contributed heavily to compressibility buffeting at high speed. New, longer nacelles not only cured some of the compressibility problems but added 120 km/h (75 mph) at altitude, even without upgraded powerplants. The last batch of Meteor F 3s featured the longer nacelles while other F 3s were retrofitted in the field with the new nacelles. The F 3 also had the new Rolls-Royce Derwent engines, increased fuel capacity, and a new larger, more strongly raked bubble canopy.
    On 20 January 1945, four Meteors were moved to Melsbroek in Belgium. In March, the entire squadron was moved to Gilze-Rijen and, then in April, to Nijmegen. The Meteors flew armed reconnaissance and ground attack operations without encountering any German jet fighters. By late April, the squadron was based at Faßberg, Germany and suffered its first losses when two pilots collided in poor visibility. The war ended with the Meteors having destroyed 46 German aircraft through ground attack and having faced more problems through misidentification as the Me 262 by Allied aircraft and flak than from the Luftwaffe. To counter this, continental-based Meteors were given an all-white finish as a recognition aid.
     
  14. ickysdad

    ickysdad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    31
    Weren't the D-9's used for this role? or some other model of the 190D?
     
  15. Erich

    Erich Alte Hase

    Joined:
    May 13, 2001
    Messages:
    14,439
    Likes Received:
    617
    yes Doras of III./Jg 54 tried to protect Kommando Nowotny 262's but failed.

    later the Würger staffel was suppose to provide cover for it's JV 44 262's most of the jet pilots never even knew they had a top cover flight.

    JG 301 Ta 152H's never were used in top flight cover role for any jet
     
  16. tikilal

    tikilal Ace

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,133
    Likes Received:
    66
    Sigh. The point I was trying to make was that the Me 262 was assigned primarily to shoot down bombers. In this mission they would fight bombers and fighters, in the missions assigned to the meteor the chance of encountering an enemy fighter were slim. This is all. Nothing more.
     
  17. ickysdad

    ickysdad Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    552
    Likes Received:
    31
    There's no problem with your point it's not exactly without merit.
     
  18. Sentinel

    Sentinel Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2008
    Messages:
    365
    Likes Received:
    47
    Which is pretty close to what I meant. If it has seen operation in combat, it's operational.

    From the Oxford Dictionary:

    From Mirriam-Webster:

    From these definitions, as well as the common understanding of the word "operational", I would take it as meaning any piece of equipment that was actually used in battle without gross failure. Thus, a device that didn't work at all would not be operational, but one that worked to some effect - and was actually used in battle - would be operational.
     
  19. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,312
    Likes Received:
    1,232
    Location:
    Michigan
    I have a tendency to use the modern US military defnition(s).
    See: https://acc.dau.mil/CommunityBrowser.aspx?id=28937
    or
    initial operational capability - definition of initial operational capability by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.
    initial operational capability
    But obviously there is nothing sacred about these defintions. If you use your defintions then we will get a different set. I'm still not sure I would ocnsider a 2 eingined plane ready for use if each engine has an MTBF on the order of 20 hours. That however is a judgement call.
     
  20. TiredOldSoldier

    TiredOldSoldier Ace

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2008
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    451
    AFAIK the 20 hour value of the Me 262 was MTBO not MTBF, an engine with an MTBF of 20 hours would be completely useless. And you must put that number in context, WW2 fighters had a very short life expectancy.

    English is not my main language but "operational" for me means issued to a combat unit not for experimental/evaluation purposes, to make an example the Me 210 and He 177 were "operational" though the availability rate was pretty low.

    The distinction is bound to be rather blurred in 1945 Germany where every air unit was on the front line, but using a modern definition that applies to a peacetime force doesn't sound right.
     

Share This Page