#1 Jet of World War II

"Gordon" wrote in message
...

The Mosquito bomber had no guns to shoot with, front or back, PB. The FB
did,
but that is not what Keith was referring to.


Indeed, I recall a Mosquito observer who had previously been on
Blenheims who described his shock on being told that the squadron's
new aircraft would be completely unarmed.

Of course when their loss rate dropped dramatically
when they started flying missions they changed their tune.

Keith

ubject: #1 Jet of World War II
From: "John Keeney"
Date: 7/8/03 11:32 PM Pacific

I don't know...
Seems to me when you're trying to blow up that much high-explosive,
at fairly close range, it might as well be shooting back.

Be careful what you wish for....(grin)


Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..

It doesn't have a pilot. It was a missile, not an aircraft.


The definition of "aircraft" includes "pilot"?

On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 23:17:08 +0100, (phil hunt)
wrote:

Shooting down V-1s, Piper Cubs, and unarmed transports may be a worthy
war-winning goal, like typing up the morning report, but it's not what
makes a fighter pilot--or plane.

Few people risked death typing up morning reports. Pilots did die as
consequences of Anti-Diver patrols. The level of risk is not
equivalent.

True but irrelevant;

No, I believe the parallels Dan Ford introduced are not in fact
proportionately equivalent, and as such the level of risk in
intercepting V-1s is relevant. Apparently I'm not alone in this
opinion, as other contributors on the validity of anti-V-1 air combat
seem to agree.

we were discussing the Meteor's ability as a
fighter aircraft, for which what is relevant is its record in combat
with other aircraft

Not if it's deployment is in a context where little or no meaningful
combat with enemy fighters occurred, in which case there aren't the
neccessary grounds for a reasonable judgement.

If you think judging the Meteor on it's first operational deployment
alone [i.e. against V-1s] is valid, compare it to the 262 in the *same
context*. What does that reveal? Kommando Nowotny being withdrawn
from combat. That doesn't look like much of a success story to me.

Note that I'm not actually bashing the 262 and seeking to inflate the
reputation of the Meteor beyond the supportable facts: I would just
prefer to see some rational objectivity involved instead of this weird
competitiveness which seeks to look at both types in some bizarre
polarized and binary contest.

Gavin Bailey


--

"...this level of misinformation suggests some Americans may be
avoiding having an experience of cognitive dissonance."
- 'Poll shows errors in beliefs on Iraq, 9/11'
The Charlotte Observer, 20th June 2003

(The Revolution Will Not Be Televised) wrote in message ...
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 23:17:08 +0100, (phil hunt)
wrote:

Shooting down V-1s, Piper Cubs, and unarmed transports may be a worthy
war-winning goal, like typing up the morning report, but it's not what
makes a fighter pilot--or plane.

Few people risked death typing up morning reports. Pilots did die as
consequences of Anti-Diver patrols. The level of risk is not
equivalent.

True but irrelevant;

No, I believe the parallels Dan Ford introduced are not in fact
proportionately equivalent, and as such the level of risk in
intercepting V-1s is relevant. Apparently I'm not alone in this
opinion, as other contributors on the validity of anti-V-1 air combat
seem to agree.

we were discussing the Meteor's ability as a
fighter aircraft, for which what is relevant is its record in combat
with other aircraft

Not if it's deployment is in a context where little or no meaningful
combat with enemy fighters occurred, in which case there aren't the
neccessary grounds for a reasonable judgement.

If you think judging the Meteor on it's first operational deployment
alone [i.e. against V-1s] is valid, compare it to the 262 in the *same
context*. What does that reveal? Kommando Nowotny being withdrawn
from combat. That doesn't look like much of a success story to me.

Note that I'm not actually bashing the 262 and seeking to inflate the
reputation of the Meteor beyond the supportable facts: I would just
prefer to see some rational objectivity involved instead of this weird
competitiveness which seeks to look at both types in some bizarre
polarized and binary contest.

Gavin Bailey


There is a story in a recent (1 yo) Air Enthusiast of A British
Gloster Meteor Pilot flying to a German airfield by arrangement (prior
to the cessation of hostilities) and being given a test flight/taxi
run in a Me262 while the Germans examined the meteor. (newagent
browse, never brought the mag)

He seemed impressed with the 262 but pointed out that the build
quality and materials of the meteor was much higher. The only thing
on the Meteor that he seemed to think was clearly superior was the
Meteors electric start vs the 2 stroke reidel motor in the 262.

The Me 262 had a EZ 42 computing gyro gun sight, a FuG 244 ranging
radar that could via the "Elfe" computer inject the firing solution
into the gun sight for the cannon and I believe unguided R4M 55mm
misiles as well. It could even set the timer fuses and fire the
larger unguided missile (100mm) the germans were developing that had a
forward facing conical fragmentation pattern)

It was an awesome weapons system.

All of the Me262s more serious engine problems could be traced to a
lack of refractory alloys Nickel and Chromium which were available in
very limited quantities from Finland and Turkey respectively.

The axial compressors of the German engines were while more efficient
also more difficult to control. That however would lead only to flame
outs. One of the major causes of jumo 004B failure was the
translating exhaust nozzle cone of the engine. Because this was mild
steel not stainless steel it softend and distorted under head and
would fall out to lodge in the exhaust oriface.

"The Enlightenment" wrote in message
om...
|
|
| There is a story in a recent (1 yo) Air Enthusiast of A British
| Gloster Meteor Pilot flying to a German airfield by arrangement (prior
| to the cessation of hostilities) and being given a test flight/taxi
| run in a Me262 while the Germans examined the meteor. (newagent
| browse, never brought the mag)
|
| He seemed impressed with the 262 but pointed out that the build
| quality and materials of the meteor was much higher. The only thing
| on the Meteor that he seemed to think was clearly superior was the
| Meteors electric start vs the 2 stroke reidel motor in the 262.
|
| The Me 262 had a EZ 42 computing gyro gun sight, a FuG 244 ranging
| radar that could via the "Elfe" computer inject the firing solution
| into the gun sight for the cannon and I believe unguided R4M 55mm
| misiles as well. It could even set the timer fuses and fire the
| larger unguided missile (100mm) the germans were developing that had a
| forward facing conical fragmentation pattern)




Similar article in "Flightpath" last year about Tony Gaze, Australian WWII
Spitfire and Meteor pilot, post war F1 driver.


Typical underachiever. ;-)


Landed as Schleswig and said "G'day" . Was offered a 262 flight, but
politely declined because at that stage 262's were still inviting unwanted
attention from Mustangs and Typhoons.


Interesting read.


Cheers

Dave Kearton

The Me 262 had a EZ 42 computing gyro gun sight,

Well, a few of them did. Not a large percentage at all. Look at it this way -
not one of the few survivor airframes were fitted with an EZ42, and 90% of Me
262 pilots never saw one.

a FuG 244 ranging
radar that could via the "Elfe" computer

Never entered service. No 262 flew a single sortie with this device.

inject the firing solution
into the gun sight for the cannon and I believe unguided R4M 55mm
misiles as well.

Galland et al always maintained they used the standard Revi gunsight for
sighting the R4Ms.

It could even set the timer fuses and fire the
larger unguided missile (100mm) the germans were developing that had a
forward facing conical fragmentation pattern)

X-4 or that X- or XS-100? Either way, the 262 didn't "have" the system, it was
only a proposal. Another dance of the mayflies for the Germans as they
frittered away the last days.

It was an awesome weapons system.

That it was.

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."

On 10 Jul 2003 14:45:23 GMT, Gordon wrote:
It could even set the timer fuses and fire the
larger unguided missile (100mm) the germans were developing that had a
forward facing conical fragmentation pattern)

X-4 or that X- or XS-100?

X-4 was a guided missile IIRC.

--
Phil
"If only sarcasm could overturn bureaucracies"
-- NTK, commenting on www.cabalamat.org/weblog/art_29.html

nt (Gordon) wrote in message ...
The Me 262 had a EZ 42 computing gyro gun sight,

Well, a few of them did. Not a large percentage at all. Look at it
this way -
not one of the few survivor airframes were fitted with an EZ42, and 90% of Me
262 pilots never saw one.

a FuG 244 ranging
radar that could via the "Elfe" computer

Never entered service. No 262 flew a single sortie with this device.

inject the firing solution
into the gun sight for the cannon and I believe unguided R4M 55mm
misiles as well.

Galland et al always maintained they used the standard Revi gunsight for
sighting the R4Ms.

How did the aim and at what range. Was it a ripple fire weapon? Did
they stand of outside 50 caliber range? It seems to have been very
effective?



It could even set the timer fuses and fire the
larger unguided missile (100mm) the germans were developing that had a
forward facing conical fragmentation pattern)

X-4 or that X- or XS-100?

I think XS-100.

The X-4 was a guided missile. It used two 0.22mm stainless steel
insulated pianowires trailing from the missile and simultaneously the
aircraft. It was guide by a joystick CLOS (Command Line Of Sight)

Another version was unpowered (or boost and coast maybe) and used an
accoustic homing warhead. As the whole missile rotated to simplify
control laws and require only 1 gyro it anyway it was only necessary
to add an of axis microphone to the nose which opperated the
flaperon/dragerlons as the missile rotated to home in on the propellor
sounds. If the target was strainght ahead the sound level would be
equaly balanced.

An accousitc fuse which opperated on the doppler shift as the missile
passed by the bombers propellors was to be installed in both. I think
the dveice were called kranich and dogge.

The XS-100 (I'm not sure about that name: its mentioned in a Monograph
book called Arado 234 blitz bomber) is a different unguided missile of
100mm diameter which nevertheless had a timer fuse and a powerfull
forward facing conical framnentation pattern warhead.

The Elfe computer in concert with a radar ranging device in the Me262
nose was supposed to set the fuse as well as prime the EZ 42 gyro
sight and presumably bracket the target with a salvo of these unguided
missiles and their rather nasty warheads but the missile was still
optically aimed albeit with the lead computed and the pilot relieved
of towsiting knobs to find the range optically.

Now I do know that there was supposed to be an elefe and elfe-3
computer which was meant to find its way into the Arado 234P (4 jet
engined BMW003 night fighter version of the Arado 234 jet bomber) In
concert with the Fug244 Berlin N3 radar it was supposed to take over
the aircraft via the autopilot and set the fuse and fire the XS-100
[SIC] fully automatically.

They were consciously heading towards fully automatic interceptions
for night fighters. I don't think this is far fetched because the
late war Bernhard/Bernhardine navigation system had shown itself
capable of delivering jam resistant location information and more
pertinently telemetary to night fighter aircraft.

The Germans seemed to have developed relay powered computers instead
of valves. Althought this sounds primitive the relays are actualy
more reliable than valves and less relays (1/4th I think) are required
to perform the same function.

Either way, the 262 didn't "have" the system, it was
only a proposal. Another dance of the mayflies for the Germans as they
frittered away the last days.

In their desperation and material shortages the Germans were sometimes
technically magnificent and were often only months to a year away from
deployment. Realistically one can find lots of clever allied
projects: the miles supersonic jet with its escape pod and the various
allied guided missiles like BAT but in many areas the German did lead
the way. Certainly they were the most technicaly matched opponent the
allies ever encountered.

Their attempts at stealth in the Go229, the fast type XXI subs and
their clever passive ranging sonar set, the assault rifles and the
dozens of sometimes farsighted innovations seen on Luft46


It was an awesome weapons system.

That it was.

Mig 15s seemed to have pushed B29s out of the sky over korea because
the US lacked a suitable escort. I think the Me262 would have done
the same "if" it had of been deployed earlier. Its development was I
think the end of the long range 4 engined slow bomber defended by guns
which is why it is so interesting.

Galland et al always maintained they used the standard Revi gunsight for
sighting the R4Ms.

How did the aim and at what range. Was it a ripple fire weapon?

Yes.

Did
they stand of outside 50 caliber range?

No, they couldn't loiter off and trundle up to take a rocket shot like the
earlier rocket shooters, due to the escorts. So the preferred method was to
come in astern and let the rockets go from between 1,500 down to 800 yards,
aiming for any overlapping targets they could find.

It seems to have been very
effective?

The pilots that used this configuration (Galland, Steinhof, Bar, etc) agree
that with the addition of the R4Ms, they now had a weapon perfectly capable of
sweeping the US heavies from the sky. Poodles of course, but that is what they
thought at the time.

It could even set the timer fuses and fire the
larger unguided missile (100mm) the germans were developing that had a
forward facing conical fragmentation pattern)

X-4 or that X- or XS-100?

I think XS-100.

I am always a bit perturbed about that particular one, because I can find so
little mention of it in German wartime documents. I am not a big fan of books
and try to keep my studies to the original documents which keeps at least one
layer of 'interpretation' from clouding the commentary.

snipabit

An accousitc fuse which opperated on the doppler shift as the missile
passed by the bombers propellors was to be installed in both. I think
the dveice were called kranich and dogge.

The sure loved those gadgets.

The XS-100 (I'm not sure about that name: its mentioned in a Monograph
book called Arado 234 blitz bomber) is a different unguided missile of
100mm diameter which nevertheless had a timer fuse and a powerfull
forward facing conical framnentation pattern warhead.

The Elfe computer in concert with a radar ranging device in the Me262
nose was supposed to set the fuse as well as prime the EZ 42 gyro
sight and presumably bracket the target with a salvo of these unguided
missiles and their rather nasty warheads but the missile was still
optically aimed albeit with the lead computed and the pilot relieved
of towsiting knobs to find the range optically.

But the pilots were having a dickens of a time adjusting their tactics to fit
the EZ42. KG 51 pilots hated it and were instructed to turn it off and use it
as a standard optical site. Conversely, JG 300 Bf 109 pilots that tested it in
combat _loved_ it and gave much credit for their success during the trials to
the new gunsight.

Now I do know that there was supposed to be an elefe and elfe-3
computer which was meant to find its way into the Arado 234P (4 jet
engined BMW003 night fighter version of the Arado 234 jet bomber) In
concert with the Fug244 Berlin N3 radar it was supposed to take over
the aircraft via the autopilot and set the fuse and fire the XS-100
[SIC] fully automatically.

I have all the Arado files regarding the nightfighter from BAMA and the PRO and
I think this didn't actually represent a planned production aircraft - its one
of dozens of proposals advanced by the engineers, desperate to keep a pencil in
their hands and not a Panzerfaust.

They were consciously heading towards fully automatic interceptions
for night fighters.

Agree - for lots of reasons.

I don't think this is far fetched because the
late war Bernhard/Bernhardine navigation system had shown itself
capable of delivering jam resistant location information and more
pertinently telemetary to night fighter aircraft.

Combined with the K-22 three-axis autopilot, I think the Bernardine-equipped
aircraft would eventually be intended to have a fully blind landing capability.
The Schlechtwetterjäger variant of the 262, precursor to all later "all
weather" aircraft, was a primative attempt to create a day fighter with
enhanced navigation, but the later Arado nightfighter projects as well as the
Me 262 B-2a were going to benefit from the K-22 and other advancements that
showed how agressively the bad guys were working on a true all weather a/c.

Either way, the 262 didn't "have" the system, it was
only a proposal. Another dance of the mayflies for the Germans as they
frittered away the last days.

In their desperation and material shortages the Germans were sometimes
technically magnificent and were often only months to a year away from
deployment. Realistically one can find lots of clever allied
projects: the miles supersonic jet with its escape pod and the various
allied guided missiles like BAT but in many areas the German did lead
the way. Certainly they were the most technicaly matched opponent the
allies ever encountered.

It was truly a wizard's war in the night skies over Germany.

Their attempts at stealth in the Go229, the fast type XXI subs and
their clever passive ranging sonar set, the assault rifles and the
dozens of sometimes farsighted innovations seen on Luft46

Thankfully, they were led by utter morons.


It was an awesome weapons system.

That it was.

Mig 15s seemed to have pushed B29s out of the sky over korea because
the US lacked a suitable escort. I think the Me262 would have done
the same "if" it had of been deployed earlier. Its development was I
think the end of the long range 4 engined slow bomber defended by guns
which is why it is so interesting.

It certainly signaled the end of the prop escort fighter!

v/r
Gordon
====(A+C====
USN SAR Aircrew

"Got anything on your radar, SENSO?"
"Nothing but my forehead, sir."