Eclectic Aviation - Other Aircraft
Index
American Spitfires?
Yes. I noticed in "World At War", episode "Tough Old Gut: Italy", on a beach in Italy, a destroyed Spitfire was shown. The non-retractable tail-wheel is definitely of a Spitfire. Yet it had an American star marking. This happened in early 1942, before fighters like the P-47 and P-51 were available. The US was planning to form P-39 squadrons for Europe, but the British convinced the Americans the P-39 wouldn't survive against German fighters. Therefore, the British supplied America with Spitfires ("Reverse Lend-Lease").
Uncle Sam's Spitfires
"American Spitfire Aces of World War 2 (Aircraft of the Aces)"
Messerschmitt Me-262
- The shark-shaped Me-262 is one of the most menacing-looking airplanes.
- The Me-262 was no dog-fighter.
The plane had a high wing-loading and turned too wide.
- Hitler has been criticized for wanting to deploy the Me-262 as a bomber.
But he may have been right.
Hitler only requested that it carry a light bomb (around 100 or 200 pounds),
so a more accurate term would be a "fast strike aircraft" rather than a "bomber".
Hitler's idea was for Me-262s to fly past Allied prop fighters and bomb ground troops in Normandy.
- To destroy US bombers, Me-262s had to slow down to aim its cannons.
If a Me-262 had to turn around after missing, it became vulnerable to P-51 Mustangs,
since its acceleration was slow and turn radius was wide.
However, at the end of the war, Me-262s did become effective in destroying US bombers
after a squadron was equipped with rocket-propelled missiles.
- The Me-262 was not the wonder weapon that would recapture air supremacy for Germany.
The Allies's fastest propeller fighter, the P-51 Mustang, managed to catch
Me-262s jets by diving (a P-51 could reach 500 MPH in seconds by doing a Split-S)
or while the jets were losing speed while turning.
P-51s shot down about 100 Me-262 jets.
The US and UK had (less advanced) jet fighters but no jet-vs-jet dogfighter occurred in WWII.
Adolf Galland had high hopes for the Me-262 as an air-superiority fighter,
but in actual combat, the jet proved disappointing.
Its only advantage, speed in level-flight, disappeared in a dogfight.
No more than a dozen Me-262s were operational at a time.
Luftwaffe pilots were hopelessly out-numbered.
Each Me-262 would eventually be attacked by swarms of Mustangs attacking it from every direction.
- Biased to the P-51:
The P-51 was far more maneuverable.
The P-51 could out-accelerate the Me-262 at any altitude.
The P-51, with its laminar-flow wings, could follow the Me-262 in a dive [ref: Yeager and Ziegler]
and reach Mach 0.80 (Mach 0.85 would damage a P-51).
At low altitude (<700m), the P-51 was faster.
The light-weight P-51H (too late for the war) top straight speed was 490 MPH (with water injection, how long could it be sustained?).
- Biased to the Me-262:
Top straight speed according to German sources was 515 MPH (altitude unspecified, limited to 10..15 minutes).
Cruise speed was 460 MPH (altitude unspecified).
The Me-262 had far more powerful guns packed into its nose.
The Me-262 with its quiet engines was comfortable to fly (the deafening loudness and vibrations of piston engines fatigued pilots).
Although its turn radius was wider, it kept its speed in a turn better than straight-wing designs.
- For the F-86 Sabre, North American didn't copy the Me-262's swept-back wings.
Rather, they copied its wing slats to improve low speed flight.
The F-86 Sabre's wing was laminar-flow (which the Germans never discovered) and its sweep angle was 35 degrees,
while the Me-262's sweep angle was too narrow to be effective against supersonic drag.
My review of the book "Hitler's Jet Plane: The Me-262 Story" by Mano Ziegler:
Not a typical airplane book. Instead of technical specs, this is a well-written narrative story composed from memoirs and biographies. The title "Hitler's Jet" isn't a marketing gimmick, as the book explains how Hitler derailed and micro-managed the Me-262's development (a pilot who proposed a change in tactics for a single Me-262 had to meet Dolfie in-person for approval). Because of its fast speed in level flight, the Germans had high hopes for the Me-262. But their hopes were dashed when it entered combat, since the outnumbered jets couldn't accelerate fast enough to escape the "swarms of [P-51] Mustangs" (quote).
more about P-51 vs. Me-262
Grumman F-14 Tomcat
- Quotes from an Iranian Tomcat pilot [Air & Space magazine, September 2006]:
- "We trained with many U.S. Navy [F-14] pilots who shot down U.S. Air Force and Israeli F-15s and F-16s almost at will in [training] exercises," recalls Colonel Javad.
- Grumman's ADCA (Advanced Design Composite Aircraft) was a possible successor to the F-14:
- F-14 Tomcat's size compared to a car.
-
Notice the parking lot at the bottom with a white car.
- F-14D Tomcat at Florida Air Museum in Lakeland, FL.
-
Looking at a real F-14 is an entirely different experience than looking at pictures. The plane is big -- its wings are above a person's head. Even its ventral fins are big. I was disappointed when the F-14 fleet was retired and replaced by the inferior F-18. But the F-14's construction does seem a bit crude. The panels weren't flush. Some panels were attached with rusty philips-head screws. The picture below shows the wing glove and the wing's pivot point, where corrosion and cracking occurred on this F-14.
F-22 Raptor
Sheer SPECULATION follows...
The F-22 is extremely difficult to shoot down.
Its stealthy shape is only effective against radar. But what if a heat-seeking missile is fired at an F-22 after an enemy is lucky enough to visually see the F-22? Heat-seeking missiles might have a chance of locking-on to the F-22.
Does anyone think an F-22 is simply going to beep when an enemy has fired a missile?
If a heat-seeking missile is fired at an F-22, its avionics would grab control, and execute maneuvers to evade the missile. Automatically. A computer can execute the evasive maneuver before a human pilot could even turn his head to try to spot the missile.
My reasoning is that 20 years was needed to develop the F-22. Most of the time was probably spent in developing its avionics. Then microprocessors became powerful and quick enough to process radar input, compute the trajectory of a missile, and use fly-by-wire to outmaneuver it. The F-22 might be a semi-UAV in that it might be capable of autonomous combat while only needing a human for take-off/landing and commands.
F-35 Lightning II
The F-35 is a turkey. Look at this configuration -- it ruins stealth!
Too many compromises and conflicting requirements -- the result is a bad design.
The F-35 is another F-111B, the Navy version of the F-111A, that proved useless.
It's no fighter.
It's too wing-heavy and under-powered to be a fighter. The F-22 already fits the stealth fighter role.
It's no strike aircraft.
Its internal bay is too small to be effective. Yet if munitions are carried under its wing, it loses its stealth advantage, then becomes inferior to the existing F-16. Not to mention that dozens of $10 million strike-capable Predators can be built for the same price (each F-35 costs $200 million).
Thank the US military bureaucrats who've never flown an airplane and marketing/salesmans at Lockheed-Martin for distributing its construction across 50 states so that no Congressman will veto it (Lockheed was found guilty of bribing officials, BTW).
Pierre Sprey (who influenced the F-16 design), said, "As soon as you go do a multi-mission airplane, you're sunk".
And if it has any critical technological advantages, why is Lockheed selling the F-35 to non-NATO nations? Remember whose hands the export versions of the F-14 Tomcat and AIM-54 missile fell into?