Mk24 completely mogs 262
even the worse J6K mogs 262
id doubt that
but both of them are definitely way simpler to play
262 accelerates slowly, loses speed badly in turns, climbs poorly, and has shit guns. All either of those really have to do is get above it and dive on one.
2 Likes
My like was for your first sentence 👍
But regarding the analog tracking computer - i have serious doubts.
Have in mind that the 262s had severe issues with the very slow cruising speeds of B-17s. As the B-29s were way faster, they would have been a much easier target. There are a lot of books / memoirs from both sides describing the attack patterns.
Regarding the assisted aim - if you look up the data you end up at around 16 B-29 losses to MiG 15s - whilst B-29 crews claimed 16 MiG 15s shot down. If you are aware of the overclaiming by the USAF in Korea - you should use everything from that war with great skepticism. Just look how how the F-86 kill claims melted away - from 11:1 to ~ 1.3:1.
So even as the MiG 15 was faster and had better high alt performance: The problems for the fighter were the same: High closing speeds, limited time to fire - and heavy armament necessary to get “one-pass” kills. That means technically that the effective firing window for the gunner vs 262s is just by a a few seconds longer. And this does not consider the usage of R4M rockets.
Remember the ammo too.
It won’t be like P-51s/P-47s vs A6Ms where the american in practice have infinite tries on the attacks.
262 has 100 rounds per gun at most and 80 at least.
1 Like
and unlike those planes, the guns are just straight ass
1 Like
That’s what beating them is. Beating just means winning. It doesn’t dictate that you need to win by shooting in aerial combat. If the ground crew and anti-air crew cannot protect said crafts preparing to take off and/landing.
Then you still beated them.
Literally, the only thing you need to do to NOT die agaisnt a Me-262 its just turn and not fly on a straight line 😭
The moment you force the 262 to turn to get a chance at aiming at you, it will bleed lot of its energy.
I play em and their gameplay style is just climb with rockets boosters and dive enemies and try to maintain your energy at all cost. Till you find a f86 or something with afterburner or someone with missiles.
The 262s are very limited
1 Like
Thank you, Mr Obvious.
Not quite. You can say then that Stukas beat YaKs and P-39s because they bombed the airfields. Destruction on the runway is basically opposite of “beating”
1 Like
First, only Malta has destructable airfields now, so it only applies on 1 map, at least on ARB.
Second, Even with the superior airframes and armament said Yaks and P-39s didn’t intercept the Ju-87 MULTIPLE times (because airfields are very tanky)
Yak and P-39 had the tools to stop the Ju-87 at any moment and I dare say it was in their favour even, yet they didn’t.
If the Yak and P-39 died on the runway, then it was Ju-87’s best play, kill them on a vulnerable state.
Why did the Ju-87’s opponents decide to rearm in the forward airfield, if they knew there was no air cover and an enemy still around? Bad decision that Ju-87 exploited.
1 Like
I don’t even argue this one.
…It wasnt about ingame
Partly because the crosshair is actually placed far too low which puts the instructor out of center and thus making it feel incredibly wonky to aim and roll.
If you look at it while firing the tracers shoot out of the barrels at a like 10-15° downward angle…
Believe me 6.7 is necessary. In a prop match 262 is not to dominant usually because there are so many props at altitude but in a uptier it is just fodder.
You would be surprised how dangerous late war and post war props are.
Especially when the 262 is trying to achieve more than survival.
6.7 is the ideal Br for the classic ME 262 variants.
Props can survive 262.
ME 262 can not survive jets that outclass it in all aspects.
1 Like
MiG-15 would like a word.
This looks like a misunderstanding - i see the mentioned BR 6.7 as too high exactly due to the inferiority vs post-war / Korea jets. Therefore 6.7 seems reasonable for experienced players able to “survive”, but the “untrained” majority needs a lower BR like 6.3 to minimize the threats from 7.0 and 7.3 jets - exactly due to the fact that they are otherwise “just fodder”…
1 Like
I see your point but placing it lower than 6.7 would make certain matches to easy.
At 6.7 262 enjoys some room to breath but is still “kept on it’s toes”.
Of course compression is the main issue.
Even at 6.3 some jets you can face in an uptier would wreck 262 easily if their players knew what to do.
If I get downtiered to face 262 I am happy to get a few kills for free while I would play it decently myself.
It is true that props even below 5.7 do not necessarily need to fear 262 any more than a 6.3 prop would but the acceptable margin for error on the side of the 262 player increases quite a bit.
While in a uptier it doesn’t necessarily matter wether it is a F-86A5 or F2H-2 that kicks your face in.
The same way props of various battle ratings can survive a 262 the 262 can not survive against aircraft build around the same principles which outclass it beyond a certain margin.
In short I would agree that 262 is easier to downtier than to uptier assuming it is supposed to be cempetitive but there are limits. Going below 6.7 is pushing it while some of the uptiers are still ruining the plane.
Decompression is the issue but while it remains elusive 6.7 is the best spot I think.
I have played all the classic 262 variants. A1 suffers, Jabo (airspawn) gives you some energy at least but 6.7(A2A) really takes the edge of.
Whilst i agree with your general view on things (like compression) your mentioned margin of error is exactly my point - just from another angle.
The question is exactly this:
Does a 6.3 Me 262 A-1a or A-2a at 6.3 offer free kills for average players or not - and is there a noteworthy difference between 5.3 and 5.7 props or not. And does the performance of a 262 increase the margin of error for average pilots or not.
And from my pov the answer for the majority of average 262 payers to all of these questions is “no”.
-
I would argue that the problems for the average player in a 6.3 Mk 108 262 vs 5.3 props are the same as fighting 5.7 props - speed management and bringing guns on target.
-
The speed performance gap is irrelevant without the ability to bring guns on target - and even today there are full uptier fights vs certain opponents which allows them to get away with basic mistakes whilst you can’t afford to make even a slight mistake - in fights with way smaller performance gaps.
-
There is a reason why basically all turnfighters go up in their BRs and energy / BnZ fighters stay stable get their BRs lowered - turnfighting requires way less skill than energy fighting - and the only thing you can outturn in a 262 is a F-84 at low alt of a Hornet at very high alt (if you are really fast)…
Example for #2:
I was one of the few guys actually enjoying playing in the 6 vs 6 Ju 288 black hole - deliberately flying with the 5.0 IT P-47 D-30 (Rank IV those days) getting paired with another German 5.0 aircraft (mostly 190s) in infinite full uptier loops as you had always 4 Ju 288s with you.
Even as i ended ~40% of of those several hundred matches with 0 points (i landed and left when my team was dead before i was at 4-5 km alt) - the other 60% were exiting and really demanding matches as you faced often pure US/UK fighter lobbies against planes (like the F2G) which enabled their players to get away with multiple mistakes in a row. So the challenge was to make no mistakes.
I noticed this last year and acknowledged your successful use of them 😎👍. But you might agree that exceptional pilots like you are very rare to see in 262s - because it is way easier to fly something else in order to rack up kills.
1 Like