Where were you 2 yesterday before I spend 4 hours talking with the egg heads[:)] everything you mentioned is correct. and compressor stall was what I was talking about. I got it confussed with the ramjet, scramjet talk. like I said all this is new to me. I’m just trying to figer it out.
The data we have indcated that a service ceiling of 37,500 feet. But reports from pilots both during the war and after indcate it at 41,000.
Pros. The 262 had very thin, strong wings. The fuselage has a arched shape to it. this makes it it not only aerodamically friendly and also strong (like NASA’s new lift body shuttle). The wings were attached to a load bearing part of the fuselage. Other structrucal refinments also made the 262 a strong stable platform for high speed flight. finally the 262 was proven to be stable through transonic and into the supersonic flight. The center of pressure and center of gravity along with airframe loads on key stress points were within limits upto a speed of mach 1.05.
Cons. The engines were not desinged for supersonic flight and did not provide alot of power quickly. The tail would have caused alot of drag and handling problems in transonic flight. With out assisted flight controls the 262 pilot would have had to really fight to manuver at those speeds. finally the control sufraces themselves would have given poor erratic or little performance at those speeds. What does this mean. The 262 at supersonic speeds would be stable (strait flight path) but any manuvering would be difficult to impossible.
What most believe happened. he went into a dive from high speeds and altitude. It’s well documented that when in a dive over mach .86 the 262 becomes unrecoverable. the 262 quickly went supersonic due to altitude, atomspheric condidtions, speeds and dive angle and whole slew of other condidtions that have to be meant to do so. Guido then regained control. When he went to pull out at this speed he put a crazy amount of aero stress on the airframe (wings more than anything). This leveling out along with danaged sustained during the transistion caused most of the damage to his plane.
So if he didn’t go supersonic and gain flight control how did he pull out of the dive? Every other pilot in that posistion put it in the ground. How did that much and type of overspeed damage occur? what about his experience of that flight? no other 262 pilot or any WWII pilot had ever repoted this before and it’s text book supersonic characteristics. If you go by raw data and that is generally known about supersonic flight it’s impossible for it to do so. Here is the problem with data. sometimes this are paper and things in actual use are very different or exceptions. There have been aircraft that on paper can’t do something but in actual service do it anyway. Not to mention that aircraft that should be able to do something do not perform up to spec. This is way I like this info. It’s a huge what maybe, with good info to support both sides of the arugment.
BWT I didn’t know this but this info is not new. People in the aircraft/aerospace field have debated this since the 80’s. and one of the guys I spoke with did a thesis on it in collage.
See it is a conversation piece[:D] I been told my models look like tanks, junked cars, super real looking, and very life like, but CIG image is a new one to me. I’ll have to add that to my list. Is that good or bad? Or do you think I made it up on the PC?
Ah, the friendly debate [:-^] I must say this is much more refreshing than ‘what airbrush do I need?’ or ‘how do you all do this?’ I like it. This is what sets these forums apart form the rest.
I do agree with a lot of what you are saying. The ceiling and speeds are accurate to my recollection. Just that Mustangs and whatever couldn’t get much past 25,000 and fight. I agree with some structural strengths, but question some others. The fuselage arched shape being stable enough to permit super sonic flight would re-write the flight dynamics that I was taught. And I ain’t that old [:P]. One factor that dis-proves the claim for me are the engines. On approach to the threshold, that is where the pressures are the greatest. It is at that point the engines would have failed, prior to crossing the threshold. IF they did, a pressure wave in front of the engines creating a vacant pocket in the air inlet may, may have only stalled them. At that point I could remotely see a slight possibility that they survived the transition, but they would have spooled down and when the aircraft slowed below the threshold, the pressure wave would re-impact the compressor with such force, you may as well throw a brick in to it.
Something that you wrote, “the 262 is unrecoverable in a dive over .86 mach”. That is a far cry from 1.0. And I would tend to agree with you. I believe that in a dive angle, at those speeds, the tail would be stalled out due to the turbulant votex’s created from the wings. Hence, why it would be uncontrolable.
I believe that the 262 in question came very close to the threshold that day. But as he was able to regain, through whatever conditions and luck, control with the engines in working order, he never actually crossed over to break the sound barrier.
One point the “egg heads” ( I like that BTW) should have made you aware of, you can over stress an airframe at any flight speed. It’s all in what the airframe egg brains want as acceptable. G-limitations were very low in the 262 compared to the Mustang and Spitfire. It had to do with the Engines on the swept wings in pods. I will try and get more on that also for you.
i can agree wit what you two r saying but the number one thing that I think would not make the the 262 uncontrolable is the elivator it is inpossable for the elivator to have any effect in pitching plane so the only way the 262 would gain control is to slow the aircraft down and get subsonic lamina flow over the elivator and both the x1 and f-86 had problems wit there elivators and modifided it to stabalators
DrewH your an egg head too[:)] sorry about that, I’ve known these guys for years and we poke fun at one another all the time. I have just enough brian cell in me that I cam understand what you guys are telling me most of the time. I’m an auto tech by trade and the hobby I share with them is we fly high power rockets. One did work for NASA and the other is an retired engineer for lockheed (sp).
On the flip side of the coin the general thought is this. He put this thing in a dive got it going so fast that he took it over it’s aerodamic limits the 262 first felt compressability (loss of control), but due to built up enegry kept accelerating anyway. Next he went to the point of transonic travel where due to design limitations it just would not allow it to go any faster. Shockwaves from transonic flight and (I forget what they called this next thing) but so much air got built up infornt of the 262 that it actually slow the aircraft down due to drag and like you said pushing that much air is like push against soild object (OR as explainedto me like a cussion of air so dense it acts like a speed brake). The 262 slowed down on it’s own. Guido could not have known this becasue speed indcators at the were inaccurate. He regained control pulled up. due to him pulling up way over what the 262 airframe could handle he did more structual damage. From what I was told most airframe failures are due to high speed forces acting on it from different angles during a turn or in this case a pull out of an dive. He never made it supersonic,but to him seem that way.
Yah I was told about that. Once an aircraft reaches max Q (I think) it either comes apart bacasue it stops functioning as an stable airframe or plain old just hits a point where due to lack of power, mass, and engery can’t go any faster like the 262. The 262’s engines in sims and testing after the war indicated that they not only lack the thrust to take the 262 supersonic (I left that out some what) and most likely have blown up upon reaching supersonic speeds.
I was taking the side of it could go supersonic becasue I figured most would side with it could not. play the devil so to speak. There is a very narrow possibiltiy that he did make it, and some out there believe he did. but from what I have been told very highly unlikey unless he got lucky and had the only 262 with 2 good engines on it. My personal take on it after taking to egg heads is it did not the 262 just didn’t have it in her.
What was interesting to me was that the 262 airframe was stable and well suited for high speed flight well into the transonic range and possibly beyond with mods. No allied aircraft could make that claim. With some mods and afterburning engines now were cooking [8D]
It was good talking to you all I had fun. Glad you like my new supersonic 262. Drewh you got more brains then I do your my goto guy for aircraft tech questions now you know that.
Egg head, oh man [:-,] You may want to re think using me as a reference [D)] You may be saying this a bit [#wstupid] then. LOL
By all means, don’t submit to me or my theory’s. Theory of flight is exactly that, THEORY. It can be changed at any time. The F-22 has me baffled as to it’s design. There is no"coke bottle" pinching in the aft fusalage that has been considered ‘mandatory’ for super-sonic flight. My ‘theory of flight’ is obviously out of date with that. I am very likely to be wrong, have in the past and will in the future. Don’t believe me, ask my wife [(-D]
You and your guys are very easily correct. I never said they were wrong. Never would. Like you said, if all the conditions are right, in the right place at the right time, with the right plane, and the right engines, anything it possible. I (and only me, does not need to be anyone else) think that it did not happen. Please believe that it did. That is your decision, not for me or anyone else to say otherwise. I just put some information and some other things out there for everyone to consider. Your points are all very valid and correct. I can’t argue with your sources that’s for sure. They are much more “egg headed” than me I’m sure. [:P]
I dropped out of the debate once you guys got into aerodynamic theory, what do I know, Im just a guy that slaps bits of plastic together. But two things occured to me while catching up on your posts which I think I shall call the Do & Dont Law.
DO.
Bumble Bees. On paper they don`t but in fact they do
DON`T.
X-3 Stilletto. On paper they should and it looks like it should but in fact they didn`t.
As to that last glass of falling over tonsil varnish, maybe I shouldn`t but I did[swg]
You are using indicated air speed (IAS). The higher the altitude, the lower the IAS and higher TAS (true air speed) and TGS (True ground speed) become. An aircraft at 40,000 ft ASL with an indicated air speed of .85 Mach is not going above the sound barrier, even though his TAS and TGS indicates he is. The MASI is based on IAS or as some call it calculated air speed. The old F-102A had a warning in the cockpit that read, “Limit, Mach 1.5 or 655 Knots, which ever occurs first”.
In collage we did some wind tunnel analysis on the ME-262. The aircraft in a dive could only hit .97 Mach at which time it would start to fall apart. The engines would compressor stall, roll back and start shedding internal parts at .96.5 Mach. At .97 Mach the airframe would start to come apart. There would not be enough left of the aircraft to reach Mach 1.
The way aircraft are designed today and the shape of the intakes, an aircraft can go Mach 1+ with no shock waves at all. Starting around Mach 1.7, intakes have movable vari ramps, cones or restrictors that block off part of the intake to slow down supersonic air. Look at the F-15 and you can see the top of the intake move at different power settings. Also look at the F-16 and you will see why it is restricted to Mach 1.7. It has nothing to slow down the supersonic air above Mach 1.7.
DrewH, At first when I read this guys report I thought wow he’s got something. But after my dinner descussion when the pros my thoughts changed. The big thing of the story how did he describe a phenomenom like that and not actually go throught it. In fact the 262 could have experienced all the thing that guido did and NOT go supersonic. Then when you look at the facts it really starts looking bad. So many thing would have to fall into place for this to happen it’s nearly impossible. I think he got close, hit the point where it just wouldn’t go any faster and thats it. I don’t have a good working knowledge of jet engines and supersonic flight, my forte is WWII piston fighters. Now there are very respected people that do believe this and they maybe right. Thats the fun part of the whole thing. What IF we are proven worng one day. Like garyallum and another guy said Do all the test you want. Actually flying in right to the edge may prove all the figures worng. It’s happened more then once in avation. But in opinion with what I have learned No I don’t think he did it. your argument alone didn’t change my mind, but all the info at hand did.
Garyallum Don’t be hording in on my spot as chief pest, That’s my job[:D] and you don’t have to be an expert or anything to have an opinion or thoughts about the info provided. As of yesterday I could tell you how a jet engine worked. I just thought this info was interesting enough to share and see what others thought. I could have just posted the pics and been done with it. Some of the readers of this probably think I’m nuts. I’m definately not Mr popular around here but this post is reaching 500 view mark a new high for me.
Before I forget thanks kenny, mark, wingnut and the others who replied. I like showing off even my work even though I now itching to add brake lines, drill out the guns, and add detail to the engines. My next one I’ll throw all the works at it.
As to opinions I have those in spades but not bothered enough to argue over em unless it really counts. Remember old hippies never die they just take longer to remember what your talking about[8-]
hey guys i am just trying to put what i learnt in com ground school a year ago to use i hope i have tought some one somthing new belive what you will i am not saying what u must belive all i am saying is just consider the facts
I’m no aeronautical engineer, but it is obvious with the available information that is readily accessible in a good public library, that the “supersonic” 262 is a fantasy, along with the diving P-47 story that has floated around for years.
Oh by the way, here’s a fact, the leading edge slats should be in the deployed position on the Me 262 when on the ground. you might want to consider this if you are in superdetail mode.
Crockett good eye. I was aware of that but becasue I was not including much add on detail I left this inaccuracy alone. on this kit the slant is molded to the wing and would require me to not only to cut away the thin tamiya wing, but also scratch build the inner wing surface lower slant surface and slant rails. While this is well within my skills to do I did not feel the added detail vs time was worth it for a non show level model. This is a big reason why I usually stick with the hasegawa kits as there slants are molded seperate and require only slight mods in 48 scale and no mods in 32 scale to display open.
On that note, I am building a Academy 1/48 BF109G. My goal is to add equal to or better detail then the hasegawa offering. I have not only cut the molded slants away but also all the other control surfaces including the coolers. Basically I am rebuilding both wings. At present time I have 20 hours invested in scratchbuilding and reconstruction. I am also trying to decide on if i want to add wing mounted cannons or rockets as I have only added this feature once. I build pretty slow but keep your eye out for it. I’m sure this will better meet your standereds.
I have not heard the P-47 dive story yet, but I’ll bet it’s like the 190D dive story in the luftwaffe board awhile back.
I recall a post on this board a couple of years past that quoted a few test pilots who swore that they had the jug supersonic in a vertical dive during compressability experiments at Wright Field in the mid-late war time frame. Indicated airspeed went off the gage and these accounts were of course documented before the X-1 and before the aerodynamics were fully understood. These pilolts were sound individuals, obviously, but the information was subjective to say the least.
The Air Force didn’t really understand the full dynamic until the development of the F-100, well into the 50’s. The hurdle of variable intakes and compressor stall was a major design issue for over a decade.
Rocket technology aside, had the Germans manufactured the Heinkel or Jumo jet engines with premium alloys, and of course, coupled jet development with the pioneering swept wing data, I think it is fair to speculate they could have fielded a supersonic jet in the late 40’s, well ahead of the allies. We will never know. Ernst Heinkel went on to field an excellent jet fighter in South America post war, and had he lived long enough, I am sure a supersonic jet was certainly likely from him.
633 and rising. Its amazing what can happen when you put together 2 words that you dont normally see like 262 and supersonic. As to the 109 build let us see asap. How about a blow by blow fly on the wall documentry.[:)]
yah, I expected to rattled a few cages but nothing I can’t handle. topices have been light around the old aircraft forum lately and this was a good debate topic. I’m sure I had at least a few people searching the net for info[;)]. It still beats the drama going on elese where on the forums. I don’t get bent out of shape much I find it to be a waist of time and counter productive. If I post something feel free to tell me what you think. I think I have proven the point that I don’t go postal[:P] Already offended the eggheads way not postal workers too[:)].Glad you got a kick out of it. gemini liked it even if he thought I was off my rocker. Benny also seems to know his stuff. This thread is over 600 hundred a new high by far for me.
Gary I work pretty slow when compared to others on here. My job sometimes prevents me from working on them at a study pace. So I step by step build with this much work would most likely go on for several months. I will post pic of it this weekend of what I have.