I’m home and ready now, it’ll be the G2, not the G6 btw.
The in-game F.3 version is technically seen a piece of junk vs a the 262 A-1a. Because early jets air in the ETO were developed to overcome the limitation of props: very high top speed.
The effective combat power of an early jet is determined by critical and tactical mach numbers, so if you can fly very fast (critical) and if your are able to control the aircraft and bring guns on target (tactical). That’s why the slower aircraft is inferior by default. And that’s why the Spit Mk 24 is an amazing aircraft as it had an extremely high tactical mach number for a prop.
So if you choose the wt setup / game play and try to turn fight you conclusion are technically seen correct (jets vs jets and jets vs props) - but only for wt, not for irl. I read decades ago about the problems to develop suitable combat tactics for the 262, in a nutshell: They proved that your in-game observations are correct. That’s why 262 pilots irl played in actual squads and relied on speed only.
Have a good one!
PS: Not as a direct response, but a few words to the F-80 C in wt. First of all: Comparisons of the Me 262 A-1a and a P-80 C make no sense as you compare a 1944 production jet with a 1948 production jet. The in game advantage of the US plane solely relies on engine power, not by design.
Contempary P-80s are described as following on wikipedia:
After the war, the USAAF compared the P-80 and Me 262 concluding, “Despite a difference in gross weight of nearly 2,000 lb (900 kg), the Me 262 was superior to the P-80 in acceleration, speed and approximately the same in climb performance. The Me 262 apparently has a higher critical Mach number (the Me 262A’s being at M 0.86), from a drag standpoint, than any current Army Air Force fighter.”[12]
1 Like
Just added you
So, I did a little dance with zyranovos, and as I stated, the 106g2 didn’t stand a chance. I did every kind of fight, 2c rate fight, 1c, going scissors and what not just to see if the 106 could get a badly flown meteor and it never stood a chance, never once having a gun solution. (The lucky bastard actually hit me once when he was spinning out of control in flames, but just made a scratch so that does not count =p). Then we tried a few more planes like the J29 (don’t recall which) but same results. Not that he played badly, just that a bf106 gets outclassed in about every way possible.
f2h has a 24 second turn time if I remember correctly
No, it has a 18s turn / 20ºdeg/s
Then why does the Me 262 perform so poorly if what that Wiki says is true cause it’s acceleration is non exitance I have been out accelerated by normal props and all other jets move faster and turn better and everything else.
Yeah, it was A-29B attacker variant. Yes, 109G2 gets outclassed very easily, and even the A29B, the meteor is one of the best jets in the BR, and always will be, good fighting though. If I had the Spitfire Ml.XXIV id like to say it has a chance, but, I couldn’t say for sure, against the Meteor, it still doesn’t stand, but you should be on the same team anyway.
These stats don’t ever actually line up. Just keep that in mind
The actual time given is completely stock, with a reg pilot, not ace, or expert. That given, it’s still wrong, and can be pushed past that, or worse than that, as it never actually lines up completely with the stat.
1 Like
Stats lie, this is well known
Pilot skills have no bearing in turn rate or any other performance metric for the plane
G-lock will stop you partway through a turn if you attempt to sustain it, that’s what I mean by that, but yeah, other than that, yes.
Yes, I just don’t want people to get confused
1 Like
People today are so easy to get confused.
I heard multiple times people saying that they need expert/ace crews in order to turn better…
1 Like
Good, kinda tired tho, getting to go home early today. 🥳
I’m sorry, what? This got flagged?
1 Like
Ah yes, the “direct official wiki”! The most credible source!
1 Like
Imho you mix irl and wt. They are just loosely connected.
Based on the hard cut VE day in May '45 there were just 2 potential adversaries: The few Meteors F.3 and the few YP-80s - both were slower and had lower critical (controllable at high speed) and tactical (ability to bring guns on target) mach numbers.
There were no other jets.
I described this in another thread :
Me 262 A-1 interceptor spawn - #90 by Uncle_J_Wick
Me 262 A-1 interceptor spawn - #86 by Uncle_J_Wick
So if you face opponents which are faster (decisive) or turn better (not decisive) it is simply based on this effect:
…which boils down that you can pimp up your ride with more available forward trust - even if your ride is not really suited for high speed.
So the Meteors / P-80s were based on their design inferior - the effects you might notice or suffer were all engine related - as the increase in trust was able to compensate the conceptual disadvantage of straight wings and missing high speed research.
And these solely engine related avantages play a role in your game experience - as the increase in engine power happened after VE day. In o other words: If you want to have a pleasant Me 262 game play experience, you might ask for an adjustment of BRs which disables the current set-ups - or you ask for the implementation of Me 262 versions / prototypes like this one:
The USSR jets irl were before the MiG -15 era not competitive - just based on missing research efforts and lack of engines. Thanks to the UK they got access to the the RR jet engine which made the Ta-183 copy (wehraboos usually claim this) aka as MiG-15 a success.
If you see a non-WW2 combat P-51 D-30 at 5.0 or a non WW2 combat P-51 H-5 at BR 6.3 you might get the idea, that if we assume that the BR of 7.0 for a 1944 production aircraft like the Me 262 A-1a is correct, we just see that the whole BR setting policy of gaijin follows mainly economic goals.
1 Like