Warbird Information Exchange

We looked at arms as a primary need for a fighter, now I think the second important category would be speed. Remember it's for prop combat planes in WWII. We can have 2 parts, max dive speed and level speed. The top Mach Crit dive speed I know is Spifire at least .85mach, perhaps a little more to .88. I have heard a P-51 ace say a Spit could not exceed .80 and a 51 was faster. My flight manual clearly list .85 as vne. They test dove Mk XI to over .90, before having spinner problems. My 51 manual list .77 as max. I think a 47 would also dive fast. Some, 38,don't do well here. The top level group may be Spit, and Corsair, with P-51, mayby 47 close behind, then FW, 109. The 38 at 414mph is a ways back. Opinions are nice, but whose got facts? Speed is important, mybe even prime because with it you can decide to either attack or flee. The ME 262 was dangerous and only had guns and speed. Let's stay on this a couple of days.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

Might I tender one more suggestion, via testimonial?

"The Messerschmitt Me 262's most dangerous opponent was the British Hawker Tempest—extremely fast at low altitudes, highly-manoeuvrable and heavily-armed."—Hubert Lange, Me 262 pilot.

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

Just as a speed comparison, I think mach at Reno assuming a 10,000' density altitude is around 690 MPH, therefore 500 MPH at Reno = .72 mach.

Do you have any speed figures for Tempest? I don't, but seem to remember them chasing buzz bombs. Didn't they have engine problems? Was it a Typhoon derivative See p217 of the J. Quill bokk on a race of 3 fighters? Why would Me 262 be at low altitude unless takeoff or landing. The good thing about the 2 stage Merlin engine (60's70's) is it allowed 51 and Spit's to perform from ground all the way up, which was the weak spot of anything Allison and some radials.

_________________
Bill Greenwood
Spitfire N308WK

The Tempest was developed as a thin-wing Typhoon. By the time they'd finished extending the fuselage to replace the missing wing fuel tanks and increasing the fin area to compensate it was considered a different design.
The most common marks were the MkII with the Bristol Centaurus and the MkV with the Napier Sabre.

The Sabre initially gave problems with the sleeve valves until Bristol were instructed to hand over the secret of centrifugal casting.

The only book I have immediately to hand only gives performance at medium altitude, 15-18,000 ft. Depending on engine, 426 to 442 mph.

Hmmmm, Tempest...

_________________
Olivier Lacombe -- Harvard Mk.4 C-GBQB

Just based on speed, it would be the Dornier Do-335 Arrow.

I was out at War Eagles and happened to be fortunate to run into Scott Crossfield. We were looking at the NACA Mustang and he remarked that he had flown the postwar dive tests in the P-51. They were investigating the possibility of going Mach I in a propellor driven aircraft. This claim had been made by several pilots during the war. His feeling was that it never happened. He told me that during the tests as he was going transonic that he could see the shock wave off of the wingtip, he was never able to push it any further. This was done in the Mustang with the beefed up tail, full power, in a dive.

whilst not as fast as the do335 in post war testing the ki84 was faster than both the p51 d and p47 at a top speed of 427 mph.
paul

"The Messerschmitt Me 262's most dangerous opponent was the British Hawker Tempest—extremely fast at low altitudes, highly-manoeuvrable and heavily-armed."—Hubert Lange, Me 262 pilot."

Correct me if I remember this incorrectly, but, were not more Me262's destroyed on final approach to landing rather than in anything resembling a dogfight at higher altitudes? This was due to the Me262 high speed at altitude and low speed, plus poor jet engine response, on final, yes?

If this is correct, than the Tempest, appearing to be "extremely fast at low altitudes, highly manueverable and heavily armed" might appear pretty scary to an Me262 pilot in combat.

...just a few thoughts...

The Tempest didn't just appear to be fast at low altitudes, it was. I believe the only WWII prop-driven design faster than the Tempest down low was the F2G, but which never made it into combat.

30,000 feet was a different story...probably Do-335 followed closely by P-47M.

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

Actually the F2G was slower than had been anticipated...the fastest of the Corsair line during WWII was the F4U-4 at 446 mph, while I have seen varying top speeds for the F2G at between 437 to 450 Mph, but not sure on which number they settled at finally...the F4U-4 could do 446 at around 25,000 ft (don't have my books with me here at work right now) but it was very capable in the dive also, but not one of the FASTER divers of the war as I recall....earlier Corsairs had top speeds of I believe 417 mph for the F4U-1A and 425 mph for the F4U-1D...will check my books when I get home...post war the F4U-5 could do 469 at altitude but was not a WWII variant.

M

_________________
Mark Morris

Down low, Mark, down low...F2G leaves a -4 in the dust (or spray) down low.

Low, low, low...nothing touches the F2G down low.

Maybe I'll repeat it one more time.

Low altitude. Low. F2G is the fastest down low. Cook Cleland understood.

_________________
It was a good idea, it just didn't work.

So....you're saying....'down low'?

How do you open this roll of toilet paper.....wish there were instructions..

M

_________________
Mark Morris

A Spitfire flown by Sqn Ldr Tony Martindale (IIRC) achieved Mach 0.9 plus in testing but it wasn't just the spinner he lost, I believe it was the entire reduction gearing and prop.
Very fast, yes, but I suspect it doesn't really count.

How come the F2G is mentioned at all?
Bill said "remember it's for prop combat planes in WWII".