Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

Gloster Meteor

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Thursday, 22nd September 2005

  The RAF never used the Gloster Meteor to try and combat the ME262. Was this because the Gloster Meteor was no match for the ME262? How good a fighter was the Gloster Meteor, the only combat use that I am specifically of is for shooting down V1s.
  
  I am a distant relative of Sir Frank Whittle and so am interested in views on the plane.
  
  

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Friday, 23rd September 2005

  TimW,
  
  From what I understand (without checking thoroughly) the Me262 was a superior plane to the Gloster Meteor. The Meteor howver would have been much better at opposing the Me262 than the Mustangs and Spitfires it was up against. So, why wasn't it used?
  
  I'd advance the theory that by the time the Me262 was used the Western Allies realised that they'd won, the Luftwaffe was on its knees due to the lack of fuel and experienced pilots. Here is supposition but I also think that the transfer of experienced Allied pilots into the Meteor would possibly not have been smooth.
  
  From what I understand the Me262 was easily identified by escorting Mustangs and was followed after the attack by 2 or 3 Mustangs to the landing field where as the Me262 had to slow down to land it was then attacked and destroyed by the following fighters. As the Me262 also needed a long airstrip to take off from, they were easily identified and the runways and hangars subjected to ground attack by the Tactical Air Forces. Hence although a great aeroplane, its threat was limited.
  
  So the Meteor was employed on shooting down V1s rather than accompanying the bomber streams which were the Me262s target. (Without checking I'm not sure of the range of the Meteor but I suspect that it didn't match the Mustang).
  
  If you look at the Meteor it doesn't have the swept wings that can be seen on all modern jet fighters (and the Me 262). I suspect that it was the aerodynamics that hampered its performance rather than poor engines.
  
  Cheers AA.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Saturday, 24th September 2005

  AA
  
  thanks for the information. By the way do you or anyone else know if it was used in Combat after the war, say Korea.
  
  regards
  
  Tim
  

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by TonyG (U1830405) on Saturday, 24th September 2005

  The Me 262 was about 50 mph faster than the Meteor. Meteor 493 mph at 30,000 ft; Me 262 541 mph at 19,685 ft (6,000m). Surprisingly, my reference books quote the range of the Meteor as 1,340 miles - more than than the P51 Mustang (Mustang without additional drop tanks).
  
  Hitler, of course, ordered the Luftwaffe to use the Me262 as a strike bomber. The Luftwaffe High Command, knowing this was a waste of its capabilities, nevertheless had to make sure that th emajority of the planes were used this way and coul donly divert a few to fighter duties. It was only at th every end, when the German war system had largely broken down, that they set up e;ite 262 fighter units.
  
  The RAF was rather slow to bring the Meteor into active service and there were only two squadrons of Meteors posted to Europe during the closing weeks of the war. They never had the opportunity to come up against the Me262 in combat. Perhaps this was because the RAF recognised that the 262 would have had the edge? Of course, by that late in the war, the tactics Aenald has outlined above and the chronic lack of fuel and pilots had more or less crippled the Luftwaffe anyway.
  
  As an aside, my father was groundcrew in th eRAF during the war. He told me that he saw a Meteor and when he told his mates that there was a plane outside with no propellors, nobody believed him. The Meteor seem sto have been something of a secret.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  TimW,
  
  Having now done some checking the Meteor F.8 was in service with the Royal Australian Air Force in the Korean War in a ground attack role, approximately 90 were sent. The Meteor didn't do well against the MiG 15 or in this role. Losses are reported as 32.
  
  Approximately 100 were sold to Argentina and saw service during 1955 during civil unrest.
  
  From what I can gather the Meteor was then reassigned to reconnaisance, training and experimental duties, and possibly the ultimate disgrace to tow a target.
  
  All in all it was the worlds first jet fighter and its engines were revolutionary, however from what I understand the engines didn't match the airframe, hence it became a bit of a dinosaur. In further answer to my original post the Meteor pilots operating in WWII in Europe were ordered not to fly beyond friendly lines. Possibly so the aircraft couldn't be examined if shot down, possibly because the command didn't want the Germans to know it was a bit of a dog?
  
  Cheers AA.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  Arnald,
  
  I think you'll find that the Me 262 was the worlds first jet fighter, closely followed by the Meteor.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  Steelers708,
  
  I suspect this may come down to semantics about "first", "operational" and "jet fighter".
  
  The "first" Me262s were "operational" prior to the Meteor being "operational", however the "first" Me262s were not "jet fighters", being fighter bombers.
  
  Hope that clears it up.
  
  AA.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  Arnald,
  
  I realise some people may argue about sematics, but it doesn't alter the fact that the first production and operational model of the 262 was the Me 262A-1a (Schwalbe) single seat jet interceptor, operational with EKdo 262 at Lechfeld in July 1944.
  
  The first fighter bomber version was the Me 262A-2a (Sturmvogel) which began to leave the production lines in July 1944.
  
  The only differance between the two was that the Me 262A-2a had bomb fusing equipment and a pair of pylons from which either two 551lb or a single 1,102lb bomb could be hung.
  
  The Fuhrer-Befehl instructing the Me 262 to be used as a Fighter-bomber was issued on the 8th June 1944, but that doesn't alter the fact that there were two distinct models of the Me 262 and that the jet interceptor was the first off the production line and the first in operational service.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  TonyG and AA
  
  thanks for the information. I am glad that that the engine of Sir Frank Whittle gets a clean bill of health. I once read that if he had been listened to GB could have started WW2 with jet fighers.
  
  

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  <QUOTE' USER='Steelers708' USERID='1831340'>Arnald,<BR /><BR />I realise some people may argue about sematics, but it doesn't alter the fact that the first production and operational model of the 262 was the Me 262A-1a (Schwalbe) single seat jet interceptor, operational with EKdo 262 at Lechfeld in July 1944.<BR /><BR />The first fighter bomber version was the Me 262A-2a (Sturmvogel) which began to leave the production lines in July 1944. <BR /><BR />The only differance between the two was that the Me 262A-2a had bomb fusing equipment and a pair of pylons from which either two 551lb or a single 1,102lb bomb could be hung.<BR /><BR />The Fuhrer-Befehl instructing the Me 262 to be used as a Fighter-bomber was issued on the 8th June 1944, but that doesn't alter the fact that there were two distinct models of the Me 262 and that the jet interceptor was the first off the production line and the first in operational service. </QUOTE><BR /><BR />Ahem, according to my sources, the first Meteor flew on 05/03/43 (5th March 1943). This predates the Me262. I'll admit that some German sources may be difficult to obtain, but surely this makes the Metoer the "first" "jet fighter"?<BR /><BR />Cheers AA.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Sunday, 25th September 2005

  Double Ahem,
  
  The 'first' flight of the Me 262 was on July 18 1942 which definately predates the Meteor, thus making the 262 the 'first' 'jet fighter'.
  
  Cheers,
  Steelers708

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message11

• Message 12

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Monday, 26th September 2005

  Okay, you got me!
  
  Cheers AA.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message12

• Message 13

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Monday, 26th September 2005

  I donot claim any expertese on this but I thought the first jet to fly was not the Me262 or the Gloster but another German plane, a Heinkel possibly.
  
  

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message13

• Message 14

  , in reply to message 13.

  Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Monday, 26th September 2005

  Tim,
  
  The worlds first jet plane was indeed a Heinkel, the Heinkel 178 to be precise which made its first flight on 27th August 1939, it was however a single seat jet research aircraft.
  
  Strictly speaking the worlds first jet fighter was the Heinkel He 280 which made it's first flight on 30th March 1941, however only 8 prototypes were built.
  
  One other first the He 280 had was the compressed air ejection seat.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message14

• Message 15

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by steveP (U1775134) on Monday, 26th September 2005

  <QUOTE' USER='TimW' USERID='1736633'>TonyG and AA<BR /><BR />thanks for the information. I am glad that that the engine of Sir Frank Whittle gets a clean bill of health. I once read that if he had been listened to GB could have started WW2 with jet fighers.<BR /><BR /></QUOTE><BR /><BR />Tim<BR /><BR /> My company occasionally organises lectures by visitors and a while back there was one by Frank Whittle's son. He actually first patented the jet design about 1930 after the RAF have decided that there was no need to keep his work a secret. Unfortunately it appears that the top scientist who was assigned to examine his proposals had only a few years before formally stated that jet propulsion would not work and seemed unwilling to rethink his conclusions. The fact that Whittle's work cut out an entire stage from earlier designs that made it far more efficient didn't seem to register with him.<BR /><BR /> Steve<BR />

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message15

• Message 16

  , in reply to message 15.

  Posted by Tim of Acleah (U1736633) on Tuesday, 27th September 2005

  Steve
  
  thanks for the information. I used to take by son to University and pick him up going through Lutterworth and the first time noticed that it had a notice up about Sir Frank but it had someone else in front of him but did not notice him name. My reaction was who can they possibly rate as more important thatn Sir Frank Whittle but was what molified on the return journey when I saw it was also where John Wycliffe worked.
  
  regards
  
  Tim
  

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message16

• Message 17

  , in reply to message 16.

  Posted by DL (U1683040) on Wednesday, 28th September 2005

  Hi All,
  
  Just to go off on a tangent, I think that the main reasoning behind the lack of "Jet-v-jet" combat at the end of WW2 was that the allied Air Forces simply found that the easiest way to shoot down Me262s was to put combat air patrols over Luftwaffe airfields where the 262 was based, and (as put in earlier post) simply shoot them down as they came in to land, or shoot them up on the ground. The airfields used by 262s were very easy to identify, since the jets left distinctive black smears from exhaust on the runways. So rather than fight them through dogfights, simply wait till they are slow and unmanoeuvrable with their landing gear down, and sneak up behind them. Late model Spitfires, Tempests and Mustangs were suited well enough to this job, and indeed better so than the Meteor.
  
  A lot less risky a policy than engaging in direct combat with them!
  
  Cheers
  DL

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message17

• Message 18

  , in reply to message 17.

  Posted by Gilgamesh of Uruk (U211168) on Wednesday, 28th September 2005

  Re operational use of the Meteor - I think one of the bomber marks served with the Israeli Air Force.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message18

• Message 19

  , in reply to message 17.

  Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Wednesday, 28th September 2005

  DL,
  
  I think I agree, see my #2? It's so hard actually agreeing with someone on the new MB's!
  
  Cheers AA.

  Link to this forum: Gloster Meteor

  Report message19

Back to top