Stability and Control characteristics of the Me-262

[CaptainDoggles]

Probably going to be a long long time before we see a 262 in game

[robtek]

AoA, a more subtle approach would have brought a bit more credibility with it.

Here some observations from Eric Brown:

Regarding the vision from the cockpit it seems youve inserted the lines from the Bf109, as Eric Brown wrote in "Wings of the Luftwaffe" about the 262 at page 243 "View from the cockpit was excellent and every upper part of the aircraft was within the pilot's field of vision."

About the brakes he wrote on page 245 :"After lining up the aircraft on the runway, the engines were opened up to 8500 rpm on the brakes, and a check was made that the Zwiebel (onion), as the exhaust cone had been dubbed, was protruding from each orifice.
Full power of 8700 rpm was then applied and a quick check was made on the jetpipe temperature, burner pressure, and fuel pressure."
NO running take off!

About the handling characteristics he wrote on page 252:" The normal range of flight characteristics from aerobatic maneuvres to the stall revealed the Me 262 as a very responsive and docile aeroplane, leaving one with a confident impression of a first class combat aircraft for both fighter and ground attack roles. Harmony of controls was pleasant, with a stick force per 'g' of 2.72 kg (6lb) at mid-CG position and a roll rate of 360 degrees in 3.8 seconds at 645 km/h (400 mph) at 1525m (5000 ft)."

About the 'snaking' he wrote that the german engineers managed it better to tame it, during the war, than i.e. english engineers with the Meteor I, which had the same problems.

And yes, i hope to see the IL2 series again reaching 1945 and beyond.

[TomcatViP]

Seems some forgot to read those lines :
"they would have been considerably improved if the aileron and elevator servo tabs had been connected."

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

Seems some forgot to read those lines :
"they would have been considerably improved if the aileron and elevator servo tabs had been connected."

Seems some forgot to read those lines : "with the exception of the directional hunting or yawing"

[TomcatViP]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

Seems some forgot to read those lines : "with the exception of the directional hunting or yawing"

C'mon get a ZR1, put sleek tires, and goes on mountainous road on a rainy day and you'll wish you'd buy a Renault !

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

C'mon get a ZR1, put sleek tires, and goes on mountainous road on a rainy day and you'll wish you'd buy a Renault !

Granted, the Me-262 is not everything the myths would have us belive!

But just because you missed the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) statement, i.e.

"with the exception of the directional hunting or yawing"

That is no reason to equate the Me-262 to a Renault!

[Al Schlageter]

Originally Posted by TomcatViP

C'mon get a ZR1, put sleek tires, and goes on mountainous road on a rainy day and you'll wish you'd buy a Renault !

I wouldn't drive a Renault on 'slick' tyres either on a rainy day on a mountain road..

[justme262]

It did have 4x 30mm canon! Big low velocity rounds... ridicules fire power.
So it wasn't a sharp shooting sniper of a plane at high speed. The weapons they put on it did not need to be aimed terribly precisely I suspect.

[tools4fools]

Didn't Galland, who flew both the 262 and the Meteor F4, say that the 262 with the engines of the F4 would have made for the best plane?

262 was not alone, Meteor had snaking issue too, as had Lockheed P-80:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...-80A-85044.pdf

[Crumpp]

Meteor had snaking issue too, as had Lockheed P-80:

Most did at that speed, however the Lockheed's issue seems to stem from its hydraulically boosted ailerons.

There is a good reason nobody else in the world used hydraulically boosted controls at the time.

Lockheed pushed them but it was well into the 1950's before they technology worked even close to what was intended.