Sorry, but thats nonsense.
Even good players suffer in the 262 at it´s BR vs way worse enemy players. The Plane makes a hughe difference. IIt´s not just the player.
O would you say all XP55 players are better than all players arround? No. most of them are really bad players. And they just dominate…
But hey. so like you saied… It´s not the plane. Why not putting the 262 in BR 6.0 to be the fiirst jet to fly, like it was?
That shouldnt be a problem. Coz it´s the player, not the plane…
Planes make a huge difference only if both players are competent. The P51H is god of all props, but I can kill the average P51H in a Ki-27. If the usual player’s entire strategy is to put their gun reticle at the enemy name tag, it just does not matter what planes are involved. The way the average player flying a 262 will die to a Su-11 will be the same way he dies to a Spit Mk V.
The player skill distribution is heavily skewed to the right (from the looks of it), so the average WT player is significantly bad.
Don’t know what you’re saying about the XP55. I haven’t met any XP55 that dominated so far.
The Me-262, in its most famous A1a version, is only a heavy ambush fighter that climbs poorly on these small maps…
All other versions are just prototypes or blueprints…
A1a, was primarily intended as a destroyer of allied heavy bombers… When the pilot made a mistake and got into a dogfight with the Mustangs, that was his last mistake… (aka Rudolf “Nowi” Nowotny) … Luftwaffe pilots themselves who survived the war , wrote that the tactics of using Schwalbe were formed directly with the units and for many pilots of piston fighters, it was a problem to switch to a jet aircraft.
Hartmann refused to switch to the Me-262 to the unit led by Galland, because he knew that it was a machine that was new and a lot of pilots were not used to this new technology…
In the game - climb high, maintain high speed and use Boom and Run tactics…
Me 262 A-2a…
This. That would make it more realistic and yeah, 6.3 is wayy too low as it would be fighting p51’s. That’s doable, but still slightly unfair.
It was Walter Nowotny…
Actual combat losses whilst attacking fighters or their escorts were rather low (see Galland & Schuck biographies / memoirs) - allied (including the few USSR claims) kills of Me 262s happened mainly by camping their airfields.
The term dogfight is actually misleading - if you study 262 air kills you might realize that the leading jet pilots killed actually more escort fighters than bombers, there is no need for ACM if you are able to attack and disengage at will.
No, developing (fighter) tactics was the Job of Kommando Nowotny and subsequently of EJG 2.
This is not what he wrote in his memoirs. You might share the source to your claim?
See previous exchanges - this is an opinion based on the LW doctrine that enemy bombers were the main targets and fighters were not seen as a threat. The aircraft in itself was a fighter. That it was optimized to take down the main treat (=bombers) was logical.
Have in mind that there were no USAAF bombers present whilst the aircraft saw it’s maiden flights in 1941 and 1942; the 8th AF arrived later…
What most people forget in some discussions (like interceptor or not) was the rather limited flight time of a 262 of roughly 30 minutes (with reserves) - a 109 with a drop tank had roughly 100-110 minutes. It is therefore logical that 262s were used in a defensive role. That’s why the night fighter variants carried drop tanks to increase the limited flight time…
Agreed. kinda surprised tbh the 262 didn’t get mentioned in the proposed br changes
Yes, you are right. Rudolf Nowotny was Walter’s brother and wrote his biography… The Tiger of Volchovstroj…
We have not been able to find an exact list of downed pilots flying the Me-262 … The general list is about 540 kills against about 100 Me-262 downs, most of the downed are four-engine bombers…
There are a lot of opinions and claims as to how it was back then, I am based on the fact that not everyone managed the transition to jet aircraft.
It is unclear how it was with Hartmann and the Me-262 … many variants and opinions … and probably only Hartmann, Galland and perhaps Graf also participated in the truth knew the truth …
For props it doesn’t really matter that much, which 7.0 Jet they face.
Lowering the Me 262 A-1a to 6.7 would just cause some new 5.7-6.7 uptier black hole.
The me262 facing late tier props is historically accurate. The problem is me262 always get uptiered to fight cold war jets which has better acceleration and higher top speed so 6.7 is the maximum br the early 262 (especially A-1a variant) supposed to be in
That might be true, but have in mind that you have to see the overall context, especially what kind of pilots flew them - and what was their previous role.
The transitioning process for (trained) single engine fighter pilots was rather easy, the main part was to learn how to fly a twin engine fighter in case of an engine failure of one them.
The pilots of II./KG 51 (J) flew 410s before, so it was even easier.
The pilots of KG 54 (J) had no problems with the aircraft, but they lacked the aggressiveness and skill of fighter pilots as they were formally bomber pilots. That’s why most published combat losses were allocated to them.
Whilst agree in general you might consider that historical accuracy and wt are two seperate things - and wt game play is purely fictional and not even remotely somewhere near irl scenarios.
So if untrained pilots drag props way too low in BRs (like P-51 H-5) and they do the same with Cold War jets you have exactly the current BR set up.
On top of that wt sets BRs still partly based on potential firepower and not if you are actually able to bring guns on target.
So if the majority of pilots are unable to avoid turnfights and the guns of the 262s are hard to use you have the situation that the British Meteor F 3 sits even higher in BR - despite it is technically seen the inferior aircraft.
It boils down that you need an US premium version of 262 A-1a to lower the BR:
US Me-262 - #16 by Uncle_J_Wick
Whilst i see your point i think the fellow players asking for a lower BR have some valid points. I would even argue that the necessary adaption of play style from prop to jet is especially for the fellow German players artificially hampered as the age and technology gaps to other 7.0 and 7.3 jets (except Meteor F 3) is far too large.
I mean if you have watched some vids on yt regarding the 9.3 F-104 A you might agree that the played nation decides if a plane is able to dominate a BR or not. Gaijin decided to push Korean war era jets lower just to avoid an uptier of the 104.
The imho decisive top speed difference of a 262 A-1a to a fast 5.3 or 5.7 fighter is within the range of the top speed difference of a 4.7 F8F or a 4.3 Wyvern (both at certain altitudes) in a full downtier. Same as a P-51 H-5 to an A6M5 Ko with around 240 kmph top speed difference.
But - if i see 776 kmph for the H-5 and 870 kmph for the 262 A-1a - where is the problem to have the same BR? All the Mustang pilot has to do is to drain the energy of the 262 - like every other pilot in a slower plane…
Have a good one!
Vs at a BR where nothing ever struggles to kill it, and it struggles to kill anything due to its shit guns?
To my knowledge, the Meteor F3 is an outright superior plane to the Me 262, largely due to significantly increased engine power. It was the Meteors F1 and F2 that were inferior to the 262, and in my opinion these should be added somewhere in the 6.3-6.7 bracket alongside the early Me 262s. This BR suggestion for them is based on their engines, as while they were historically noted as being more manoeuvrable than the 262, we don’t know how Gaijin would implement that.
Can you fight the He 162? The majority of players seem to think it’s a hard plane to fly and an easy plane to beat (through frustrating to fight). The Me 262 would be very much of the same, but with somewhat better performance and thus somewhat higher BR.
Personally I love the He 162, but it’s absolutely balanced where it is. The pilot has to fly extremely cautiously to fight the enemy, and you can’t carry a game in it unless the enemy is mentally challenged.
This is how the Me 262 would play at 6.7, as it would be outturned, likely outclimbed, and often outgunned by enemy superprops (when you factor in muzzle velocity). Any time it turned to face a prop it would make itself a huge target, and against .50 cals and anything larger it almost always loses all functionality of at least one engine or wingroot (which is admittedly how it should be).
Is the Heinkel He-162 Salamander the Messerschmitt 262? Cause last I recalled
These weren’t.
Honestly, if there was a Spoiler feature similar to what Discord had I probably would have spoiled them.
I wrote:
Imho you have to distinguish between wt and irl.
Maybe you mix it up with the 2 1948 prototypes called Sea Meteor F 3 sitting somehow at the same BR of 7.3?
Whilst i agree to your claim regarding engine power - have in mind that the thrust increase was just about 20% from the F 1 to the final version of the F 3. The increase from the F 1 to the 1948 Sea Meteor F 3 is about 70% - and it is still slower than a 1944 Me 262.
The technical inferiority i claimed was based on the design and aerodynamics in itself (swept wings), used engine concept (axial flow) and the most decisive performance feature of a jet: Top speed including way higher critical Mach numbers.
So imho you are not wrong about your claim regarding the game setup wt can offer (and how planes are used by their players) that the F 3 performs better in wt, but irl manoeuvrability was not decisive - otherwise A6Ms would have won the war in the Pacific. Same as the ability to bring guns on target (including range and ballistics) - decisive in wt, secondary irl.
Edit: After a longer search i found no evidence that F 2 versions were produced or saw service. If you really want to add two Meteor versions i would recommend the F 1 and a F 3 (early) version as they had the same (and compared to the final F 3 version) weaker engines.
Iirc the top speed of the F 1 was about 660 - 670 kmph…
Have a good one!
Edit: Despite it is almost irrelevant within this context i tried to research the total number of Meteors put into WW 2 service. It looks like that i was unable to find any reliable data how many Meteors in which version were provided to No 616 squadron RAF. Even their armed reconnaissance sorties over the Low Countries and their 46 ground kills speak either just about 4 aircraft or “the squadron” and is not telling any numbers.
As i direct result it is for me totally unclear if the RAF actually used the F 3 as presented in wt (with the mentioned 20% thrust increase) before VE day or not as the production numbers were very low and the first 15 aircraft had the weaker engines of the F 1 version and therefore obviously a much slower top speed than the 780 kmph of the implemented F 3 version.
There is!
To be fair it was also thanks to doctrines and such that allowed us to learn the flaws of the A6M5, good thing the pilot meant to shoot the Aleutian didn’t destroy it as he believed the pilot of this craft was still alive, rip to that guy but still a weird happy and sad accident.
The 162 remains broken in this silly game though. There have been numerous topics on this:
I don’t fully know what your point is. I did not say or imply that the two were the same plane. I’m comparing two German early jets from around the same time period that would fight in roughly the same BR bracket if the 262 were lowered. Seeing how the He 162 performs at 6.0 is not a bad way to start thinking about how the Me 262 might perform at 6.7.