[tools4fools]

Based on that one can only conclude they were referring to the WHOLE WING DESIGN..

That note is not o0n a page called 'the design evolution of the 262', it's called 'plagiarism'.

Saying the swept wing design is to correct for CoG and design aesthetics leaves room for other reasons, but once again, this is not an article mabout 262 design evolution.

Stormbirds does nowhere go in the detail of the design evolution on their page.

Only you believe that the 262 was designed with straight wings and then woops it had swept wings and that was it.
As we have seen the design evolution is much more complicated.

As the photos have proven only the outer wings was swept to correct for CoG. The fact that the 262 got the engines mounted, outer wing swept, inner wing not, proves that the inner wing sweep was not done for CoG.

From Stormbirds, btw:

Quote:
The Me 262 was a stunning design triumph, and the influence of the plane can still be seen in contemporary combat aircraft. Swept wings, automatic slats, modular construction ... all were leading advances for the time.
One more thing you dispute above - despite it coming from your one and only source.


Now back to the questions for you, those that you refuse to answer:

How did you come up with this? Supported by what?

Quote:
And the high speed wind tunnel testing the Germans were working on was for planes flying faster than that.. Which is why they did not immediately make the connection that a swept wing is beneficial at sub sonic speeds.
Links to his working ballistic missile please:

Quote:
In that it was all done before by Robert Goddard
Why do you know the reason for those Stormbird pages being under construction for a long time:

Quote:
So even STORMBRIDS had/has trouble making the wiki link types of connections between the Me262 and post war jet fighter designs that you claim are 'there' and easy to make..
How come you know more than 'under construction'?

++++++