Stability and Control characteristics of the Me-262

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Crumpp brought up the topic of the simulation of stability in flight sim (CoD) where he said..

Originally Posted by Crumpp

I think the light bulb will come on for most readers as to the importance of stability and control. It will lay the foundation for more informed discussions of other designs included in the game and in the future as the game grows.

Which is an interesting topic, and in that same spirt, and format, I would like to present EVALUATION OF THE ME-262 that was preformed by TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC). And what they discovered with regards to the Me-262's stability.

The Me-262 was the first operational jet fighter of WWII, but not the only jet fighter of WWII, and was not without its issues like many aircraft. Raw performance numbers for speed and climb do not tell the whole story about any design. The pilots ability to precisely maneuver and use a fighter to the edge of its envelope as an effective gun platform is just as important to the fighting ability of the design as any other performance parameter.

Many of the warring powers during World War II had measurable and definable stability and control standards. Stability and control was a young science. Airplanes had simply been two slow and light previously. The forces were small enough such that there was little need.

Stability and control is the measurable science of flying qualities as they appear to the pilot. This means it is the science of creating a control system that the pilot can safely extract maximum performance of the aircraft. Granted some subjective areas are lacking because historical data is incomplete and/or missing entirely missing, or was never preformed, keeping in mind the following was performed by trained test pilots who worked in conjunction with the engineers to determine the flying qualities of the airplane.

With that said, below I have provided some quotes from the PILOT's OBSERVATIONS section of the report that relate directly to the Me-262s stability.

FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS

Handling and control at various speeds
The handling characteristics were poor at all speeds above 350mph. The airplane would not make a very satisfactory gun platform because of a tendency to hunt directionally, which resulted in snaking at speeds above 400 mph IAS.

CONCLUSIONS

The handling characteristics of the Me-262 airplanes tested were very poor. However, it is believed that, with the exception of the directional hunting or yawing, they would have been considerably improved if the aileron and elevator servo tabs had been connected.

Things to notice....

The pilots concluded that the Me-262 would not make a satisfactory gun platform because of it' tendency to hunt directionally which turned into actual snaking the faster the plane went.

Which should make one take pause and consider the irony here.. That one of the Me-262 strengths, i.e. it's superior speed is also a weakness when it comes to stability and it's usefulness as a gun platform.

Hopefully by the time 1C creates a CoD sequel that includes the Me-262 the FM will be such that it is capable of simulating these negative aspects of the Me-262s stability.

Below I included some pilot observations that are not directly related to stability, but that I found interesting.

FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS

Cockpit Layout
The cockpit is somewhat cramped and it is difficult to turn in the seat to obtain vision to the rear. The location of the instruments and controls is satisfactory except that the throttles and starting controls are located too far aft for easy manipulation.

Brakes and ground handling
The brakes were vary poor, which made ground handling difficult.

Take-off and initial climb
All take-offs were running take-offs, due to the poor brakes. The ground roll was slightly longer than ordinarily required. The nose wheel could be lifted off at about 100mph IAS, and the take-off was made at about 120 mph in a nose-high attitude.

Climb
no unusual characteristics were noted in the climbs.

Vision
Vision was rather poor, due to the design of the canopy, Many braces obstructed the line of vision and distortion was apparent when looking upward. Vision to the rear was poor because of the difficulty of turning in the seat to look aft.

Enjoy!

[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"

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by robtek

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

So what aspects of the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) report do you consider to be less than credible?

Originally Posted by robtek

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."

Nothing was inserted by me, what I posted was directly from the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) that was published in 1947

Originally Posted by robtek

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!

So are you saying the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) was lying or are you saying Eric Brown was lying or are you wordly enough to realise there could have been differences in the Me-262 that Eric Brown tested vs. the TWO Me-262s that the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) tested?

Originally Posted by robtek

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)."

I think if you put aside your knee-jerk need to defend all things nazi for a moment.. And re-read what the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) report stated about the Me-262 again.. You should note they did NOT say the Me-262 wasn't agile and or aerobatic..

The TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) report simply noted that when it comes time to put bullets on the target, at high speed, the hunting/snaking effect of the Me-262 would make that hard to do.. Which is why they used the term poor GUN PLATFORM.

Originally Posted by robtek

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.

Ah, good so Eric agrees with the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) assessment that the Me-262 had a snaking problem

Originally Posted by robtek

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

Agreed 100%

[robtek]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

So what aspects of the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) report do you consider to be less than credible?


Nothing was inserted by me, what I posted was directly from the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) that was published in 1947


So are you saying the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) was lying or are you saying Eric Brown was lying or are you wordly enough to realise there could have been differences in the Me-262 that Eric Brown tested vs. the TWO Me-262s that the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) tested?


I think if you put aside your knee-jerk need to defend all things nazi for a moment.. And re-read what the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) report stated about the Me-262 again.. You should note they did NOT say the Me-262 wasn't agile and or aerobatic..

The TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) report simply noted that when it comes time to put bullets on the target, at high speed, the hunting/snaking effect of the Me-262 would make that hard to do.. Which is why they used the term poor GUN PLATFORM.


Ah, good so Eric agrees with the TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC) assessment that the Me-262 had a snaking problem


Agreed 100%

You know of shure the old 'joke' that intelligence and military are a oxymoron?

Be it as it may, i didn't say anything about the Me 262, i only cited Eric Brown, complete with source.

Of course there was a difference between the two 262 in the US of A and the one Eric Brown flew, the one flown by Eric Brown was maintenanced by germans who did know the plane.

Handling and control at various speeds
The handling characteristics were poor at all speeds above 350mph.

and

You should note they did NOT say the Me-262 wasn't agile and or aerobatic..

that is contradictory.

And for shure i don't have a 'knee jerk reaction' to defend all things nazi!!

I'm trying to counteract your bias that every german technology of that time embodies the nazi ideology and is therefore inferior to the technology of the so called free world.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by robtek

You know of shure the old 'joke' that intelligence and military are a oxymoron?

Yes, but I would not hold that against Eric Brown just because he was in and/or worked with the military.

Originally Posted by robtek

Be it as it may, i didn't say anything about the Me 262, i only cited Eric Brown, complete with source.

Be it as it may, i didn't say anything about the Me 262, i only cited TECHNICAL INTELLIGENCE (T-2 AMC)., complete with source

Originally Posted by robtek

Of course there was a difference between the two 262 in the US of A and the one Eric Brown flew, the one flown by Eric Brown was maintenanced by germans who did know the plane.

That is good news.. Because only a fool would try to imply that Eric and or the T-2 AMC were lying

Originally Posted by robtek

that is contradictory.

Not at all

Originally Posted by robtek

And for shure i don't have a 'knee jerk reaction' to defend all things nazi!!

Strange.. because I recall you also taking exception to the last time I pointed out some of the negatives of the Me-262 and/or dispelled some of the Me-262 myths

Originally Posted by robtek

I'm trying to counteract your bias that every german technology of that time embodies the nazi ideology and is therefore inferior to the technology of the so called free world.

I think you have me confused with someone else..

Or maybe your confusing me pointing out awhile back that the V2 technology stemmed from Goddards patents from the 20s and 30s..

Which means you have it 180 out.. In that than the V2 technology would NOT embodied nazi ideology, it would embody Goddard's ideology which stems from the free world

[Blackdog_kt]

Jesus...ok, it started as a light-hearted joke but it's getting closer to deliberate provocation territory (aka trolling) with each post. Don't bite guys

[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 !