Supersonic Me-262?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: The Land of the Sabbath and of the Priest
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Supersonic Me-262?
First time I've heard of this; comments, anyone?
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...9875253&type=1
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?f...9875253&type=1
No idea.
But looking at the titles of the photo albums on that account, the guy has clearly spent quite a bit of time studying (or reading picture books) concerning WW2.
He probably got that info from a source that he thought was credible.
Maybe.
[edit] Here is the original source photo (of a painting), with info.
But looking at the titles of the photo albums on that account, the guy has clearly spent quite a bit of time studying (or reading picture books) concerning WW2.
He probably got that info from a source that he thought was credible.
Maybe.
[edit] Here is the original source photo (of a painting), with info.
Last edited by Tarq57; 1st Dec 2014 at 09:25. Reason: Did a few more seconds research.
A similar event has been discussed elsewhere and whilst there is no question that one or more pilots seriously oversped the aircraft, which was not surprisingly a serious disciplinary offence, the expert view is that it was not possible to actually break the sound barrier. At least one pilot claimed (much later for the above reason) that he went supersonic and he may well genuinely have thought he did. But there was no way of proving it and the aerodynamic and instrumentation problems point against this.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hard to swallow...good one
just seeing a Prandtl-Glauert singularity does NOT mean you are going supersonic. (that cloud thingy).
the surest non instrumented test for supersonic flight is a sonic boom.
the
just seeing a Prandtl-Glauert singularity does NOT mean you are going supersonic. (that cloud thingy).
the surest non instrumented test for supersonic flight is a sonic boom.
the
I think that although a 262 could have possibly exceeded Mach One, it could only have done it in a near vertical dive under full power. It would have been completely out of control and would not have been recoverable.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: 40nm east of BLL
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering how long the development towards Mach-1 flying actual was, due to the american X-planes, and that even though the americans had captured ME262 to learn(?) from, I find it absolute unlikely that any plane before that have recovered an accidential(!) crossing of the sound-barrier (consider how that word was created).
Even propellar-planes have experied the troubles of getting close to the Mach-1 and I understand this picture as the artisits mis-conception of jet-propulsion = Mach-1!
Another thing is that Mach-1 not exactly would have been an advantage to the 262 in the actual situation: Even if unseen by the P51 the jet-pilot would probably overshoot the target(*)! Beside, the slow rate of fire of the 262's huge cannons would be a disadvantage with such high speed.
Finally it's common forgotten that the 262 was'nt a fighter as much as a bomber-destroyer (to wich the cannons were much effective) and any german jet-pilot would use the speed to avoid dogfights and instead return for refuelling for the next bomber-attack and the few downed jets was actual caught on inflight to their airbase.
Conclusion: The situation is unlikely in every detail :-|
(*) A Messerschmitt 109 on the eastern front is known to have overshot a polish Polikarpow biplane due to the speed-difference. The biplane didn't survive as it was hit in a second strafing-pass - But for this the 109-pilot had slowed his plane to an absolute minimum and stalled to a crash because of the recoil of the shooting.
Even propellar-planes have experied the troubles of getting close to the Mach-1 and I understand this picture as the artisits mis-conception of jet-propulsion = Mach-1!
Another thing is that Mach-1 not exactly would have been an advantage to the 262 in the actual situation: Even if unseen by the P51 the jet-pilot would probably overshoot the target(*)! Beside, the slow rate of fire of the 262's huge cannons would be a disadvantage with such high speed.
Finally it's common forgotten that the 262 was'nt a fighter as much as a bomber-destroyer (to wich the cannons were much effective) and any german jet-pilot would use the speed to avoid dogfights and instead return for refuelling for the next bomber-attack and the few downed jets was actual caught on inflight to their airbase.
Conclusion: The situation is unlikely in every detail :-|
(*) A Messerschmitt 109 on the eastern front is known to have overshot a polish Polikarpow biplane due to the speed-difference. The biplane didn't survive as it was hit in a second strafing-pass - But for this the 109-pilot had slowed his plane to an absolute minimum and stalled to a crash because of the recoil of the shooting.
I liked that too LOL 
Unlikely - and also from Aerospaceweb...
That's fairly hard to swallow.
Also important to note are the findings of Willy Messerschmitt who had designed the Me 262. Messerschmitt conducted a detailed series of wind tunnel and flight tests to determine the maximum speed his creation could achieve. Flight tests included a series of dives similar to that experienced by Hans Mutke. Messerschmitt concluded that the Me 262 could not exceed Mach 0.86 without becoming completely uncontrollable. Any higher Mach number would generate a nose-down pitch so strong that the pilot would not be able to overcome it. This pitch would constantly increase the plane's dive angle to the point that the aircraft would disintegrate under the negative g-loads. The Royal Aircraft Establishment in the United Kingdom later confirmed these findings during Britain's evaluation of the Me 262 after the war. The RAE found that the maximum safe speed that could be attained was Mach 0.84, and any higher speed would result in a fatal, uncontrollable dive from which recovery was not possible.
In light of this information, it seems very unlikely that Hans Mutke broke the sound barrier in 1945 while flying the Me 262. If he had, he would not have lived to tell the tale. Mutke probably reached speeds closer to Mach 0.85. It seems probable that he experienced the sudden changes in flight characteristics that often occur in transonic flight and believed he had flown faster than was actually possible.
In light of this information, it seems very unlikely that Hans Mutke broke the sound barrier in 1945 while flying the Me 262. If he had, he would not have lived to tell the tale. Mutke probably reached speeds closer to Mach 0.85. It seems probable that he experienced the sudden changes in flight characteristics that often occur in transonic flight and believed he had flown faster than was actually possible.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: UK
Age: 68
Posts: 736
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flybiker, although I agree with you, you have failed to mention any British contribution to breaking the "Sound Barrier" and only mentioned US X planes and P51.
In WW2 and shortly thereafter the British had some high speed piston-engined planes (e.g. Spitfire, Mosquito, Hornet etc) and (from 1944) jet planes, all of which (with their superb pilots and test pilots) contributed knowledge and experience towards supersonic flight. One of the most important contributions was by Denis Bancroft inventing the all-moving tail plane for the Miles M52.
In WW2 and shortly thereafter the British had some high speed piston-engined planes (e.g. Spitfire, Mosquito, Hornet etc) and (from 1944) jet planes, all of which (with their superb pilots and test pilots) contributed knowledge and experience towards supersonic flight. One of the most important contributions was by Denis Bancroft inventing the all-moving tail plane for the Miles M52.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: 40nm east of BLL
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joy Ride:
I didn't ignore the british efforts but only concentrate on the first mach-1 flights to describe how long the development from the ME262 had to be before the soundbarrier was defeated!
And I do know that among the tricks the americans had to use to achieve the record was the all-tail flipping of the Miles!
The P51 is only mentioned because of it's participation in the painting!
Beside I think that the P-38 have been the prop-driven plane of WW2 wich came closest to the sound-barrier :-/
I didn't ignore the british efforts but only concentrate on the first mach-1 flights to describe how long the development from the ME262 had to be before the soundbarrier was defeated!
And I do know that among the tricks the americans had to use to achieve the record was the all-tail flipping of the Miles!
The P51 is only mentioned because of it's participation in the painting!
Beside I think that the P-38 have been the prop-driven plane of WW2 wich came closest to the sound-barrier :-/
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Chessington, Surrey
Age: 76
Posts: 419
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I think the closest a prop driven aeroplane came to the speed of sound was a Spitfire at Farnborough which reached I think .91M, overspeeded and the prop came off."
Another contender must be Flight Lieutenant Ted Powles flying Spitfire PR.19 PS852 of 81 Squadron from RAF Kai Tak on 5th February 1952.
The full account of his epic flight can be found in "The Spitfire Story", Alfred Price ISBN 1-85409-514-5.
51,500 feet true, Mach 0.94, 690 mph.
Chiarain.
Another contender must be Flight Lieutenant Ted Powles flying Spitfire PR.19 PS852 of 81 Squadron from RAF Kai Tak on 5th February 1952.
The full account of his epic flight can be found in "The Spitfire Story", Alfred Price ISBN 1-85409-514-5.
51,500 feet true, Mach 0.94, 690 mph.
Chiarain.
A computer-based performance analysis of the Me 262 carried out in 1999 at the Munich Technical University concluded that the Me 262 could indeed exceed Mach 1.
Hans Guido Mutke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
From the Pilot's Handbook of the Me262 written by 1st Lt F D Van Wart of the Air Materiel Command, Wright Field, Dayton for the USAAF pilots evaluating the aircraft.
"Speeds of 950 km/hr (590 mph) are reported to have been attained in a shallow dive 20 to 30 degrees from the horizontal. No vertical dives were made. At speeds of 950 to 1000 km/hr (590 to 620 mph) the airflow around the aircraft reached the speed of sound, and it is reported that the control surfaces no longer effect the direction of flight. the results vary with different airplanes; some wing over and dive while some dive gradually. It is also reported that once the speed of sound is exceeded, this condition disappears and normal control is restored".
This was published on 15 Jul 46!
"Speeds of 950 km/hr (590 mph) are reported to have been attained in a shallow dive 20 to 30 degrees from the horizontal. No vertical dives were made. At speeds of 950 to 1000 km/hr (590 to 620 mph) the airflow around the aircraft reached the speed of sound, and it is reported that the control surfaces no longer effect the direction of flight. the results vary with different airplanes; some wing over and dive while some dive gradually. It is also reported that once the speed of sound is exceeded, this condition disappears and normal control is restored".
This was published on 15 Jul 46!
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Milford, Surrey
Age: 93
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All-moving tailplanes
Not sure what is meant by 'invented' here, but one of the Slingsby Petrel sailplanes c. 1939, had an all-moving tailplane,and I suspect a few other earlier aircraft did also.