Horton

[tools4fools]

Stormbirds nowhere specify that the 'entire' wing was swept to correct for CoG. Nowhere on their webpage do they go into detail about the 262's development.
There's nothing I disagree with Stormbirds.
You however just interpret what they say in the way your faith wants it to be - not the way they say it. Nor do you look at any other resource.

V1 prototype photographs with outer swept wing only:
http://www.luftwaffen-projekte.de/lw...v/me262_v1.jpg
http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/att...-me-262-v1.jpg

Evolution of wing design:
http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e6...111/SW2623.jpg

As the world can see between 41 and 42 the V1 had only the outer wing swept.Which brings up the question why the inner wing was swept later on too.

From Stormbirds, btw:

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.

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

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

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:

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:

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'?

++++++