Who Would Win?
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
Me 262 versus F-80
Discuss.
Also, which is better looking?
>>29809352
Me 262
>>29809359
How?
>>29809352
F-80 based on performance alone.
262 had cannons but has a service ceiling 6k feet lower than the f80 and it was slower at altitude
>>29809393
Also, the 262's cannons were known to jam/fail often, and when they didn't, they were so low velocity that engaging a target accurately at distance was difficult.
>>29809358
The P80.
>>29809393
Korean War A2A engagements indicate that having a cannon against MG-only opponents is not nearly enough to make up for being outflown, which the P80 would do.
>>29809698
This, cannons performed excellently against bombers, but volume of fire is much more important during a dogfight due to extremely limited time you have to actually get shots on target.
>>29809352
Winner is the first for any failure.
Question: what is the mtbf of each engine?
Tip: kek
>>29810069
Let's assume both planes are new so the mean time between failures of any component is moot.
Would be interesting if the Nazi engines were more reliable though.
>>29809352
Based on performance any sane commander would equip his forces with P-80s rather than Me 262 if he could.
However the aircraft are similar enough that either could win in a dogfight based off positioning and pilot skill. Individual battles are not really important. Strategically the P-80 is a better aircraft.
>>29810270
Mbtf on the ME262 engine was like 10 hours...
And there are two engines.
Changing two engines is a major job, the ME262 squad will have like 2/3rds of its planes out for maintenance at any one time.
>>29809768
Cannons were better either way.
The thing is that against other fighters it didn't matter so much.
6 fiddies or 4 cannons, it did not matter too much fighter vs fighter in WW2.
Only in the Korean War where the Mig-15s which could take more punishment than WW2 fighters the fiddie began to show heavier limitations.
It still didn't matter because pilot skills trumped the Russians
Not that Mk108s are perfect anti fighter cannons, mg151/20s were much better suited.
And the proposed mg213 would have been much better.
On paper the 80 has the most advantages.
Guns of the 262 don't matter when it's slower, less manouvrable etc. etc.
>>29809369
Well, the 262s climb should be closer to 20 m/s at sea level.
And they are really different planes. The 262 is made to fuck up bombers like there is no tomorrow. The guns have massive HE loads, but are slow in speed. An advantage and a moot point if you are shooting large, slow planes. Bit tricky when you shoot smaller, agile planes but it could still be done with a skilled pilot, since a single 30mm meinengeschoß (probs slaughtered the spelling of that) was usually enough to cripple a single engine plane.
Not that the six fiddies lacked anything if you were shooting smaller-medium sized planes, but they did seem to have some issues with MiGs during the Korean war (might have been the incendiary rounds and the altitude though).
The main thing is the engines, and its the biggest reason to pick the P-80. The 262 had shit engines. If it had the improved BMW ones that were ready by 45 this might have ended up differently, but with Jumos, the 262 is kinda sad, no matter how much I like it
>>29810832
>(might have been the incendiary rounds and the altitude though).
Not might, it was an issue.
>>29810728
The 108's were awful for anti fighter work. They only had 540 m/s muzzle velocity, and had terribly arcing trajectories as a result.
The pilot in the picture is talking about the Type 99, which has 750 m/s muzzle velocity, and he complains that it's too slow, and you need to be at 100 meters to reliably hit a target.
>>29810935
The type 99 muzzle velocity was 600 m/s.
Unless he specifically said it was the Mk2.
>The 108's were awful for anti fighter work.
Only needed 1 hit.
Low muzzle velocity but an enormous amount of explosive filler.
Also that Nippon never used fiddies.
Look at the UK
Look at the USSR
Look at Germany
All their airforces preferred cannons.
The mg151/15 had better ballistics than the 151/20 but the Germans still chose the 20.
Britain preferred cannons
Russians preferred cannons despite their fiddie being arguably better than the American.
And he said "20mms with bad muzzle velocity" which leads to believe he's talking about the Mk1.
Besides the fact that there were cannons with a 800+ m/s muzzle velocity
>>29810952
>countries that lost the war with their own TO&E
>>29810958
Not an argument.
And the UK and USSR didn't lose the war.
>>29809369
>How?
Aryan pilots
>>29810959
On their own they would have, both of them were well on their way to losing the war
>>29810971
Not an argument either way.
Considering the engine throttle problems alone for the me262......I would go for p80. At least you can use your throttles without fear of engine flame out.
>>29810952
Yes look at all the nations fighting in their back yards.
The main reason for sticking with 50s on the American planes was reliability and ammo load, if your rtb time is negligible you can afford to lose a gun or 2 for the firepower gain.
If you're flying across Europe flying escort that is not acceptable.
For more confirmation consider that British bombers never adopted cannons
>>29810984
>The main reason for sticking with 50s on the American planes was
Factories already being tooled for 50s and retooling costs time money and resources.
Besides, the US Marines did switch to cannons already in WW2 and they flew big distances.
>For more confirmation
Bombers are more complex.
Besides I don't think a bunch of .303s was adequate mid war.
>>29810973
>not an argument
>from the Latin meaning "I cannot refute"
Okay Stefan
>>29810997
What a refutation man.
You totally convinced me dude.
Fighter armament is the one and only reason why America won the war on their very own.
Bring the A-10 back to production.
Pierre Sprey is right
>>29811004
>Pierre Sprey is right
please kill yourself
>>29810952
He was talking about flying the N1K, which is a Mk2 only plane.
>>29809768
You can make exactly the same argument about killing power. If a cannon fires twice as slow but does three times more damage, which is better?
