Warbird Information Exchange

Steve, AFAIK the part on the metallurgy is not quite correct. I read that the developers very well knew how to make better engines (some very few prototypes did have the parts in metals as intended). There simply were not enough high quality metals available to produce the needed steel alloys for the fanblades. So they just had to use those far from best suited ones that were available (IIRC they had to use mild steel, due to shortages, but I am not certain with that one). And of course you are right on the quality - and quality control problems.

I think it is great FHC is restoring the 262 as close to the original as possible. It is astonishing how many unique aircraft they do have flying..... one of them the till then extinct original Fw 190 (at least flying a/c). Just amazing, never thought I would see any of them in the air, where they belong.

Michael

Lynn perhaps you should subscribe to CW

Messerschmitt Me 262 A-1a/U3, WNr.500453 ‘White 25’ of 1./NAG 6

I did a full history of each bird in CW 73, and yes it is the NMUSAF example that was Yellow 5

Dave

_________________
Classic Wings Magazine

https://www.classicwings.com/

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/ClassicWingsMagazine/

Preserved Axis Aircraft

http://www.classicwings.com

Thanks for the clarification. I knew that the availability of the allows was a big problem, but wasn't sure about the engineering.

Thinking about the early generation jets always makes me wonder, why did the Allies stick with the centrifigual flow engines so long (well into the 1950s) when the Germans used axial flow designs from the get-go? To my totally untrained eye, an axial flow engine just looks far more efficient and simple. I heard somewhere that the only reason that the Allies started with centrifigual flow engines was because centrifigual compressors were already proven technology, having been perfected in turbosuperchargers.

SN