Me-262 had two main advantages in principle: speed and armament. If the pilot is smart enough to fly fast and high he can avoid any enemy contacts if he wants, or then he can just play cat and mouse with them. On the other hand, if the pilot engages in a low-altitude turning fight they are mincedmeat, as I just demonstrated in IL-2 Sturmovik FB just for testing purposes. First, I got myself against four "Ace" pilots in Me-262's and myself in a Brewster B-239. I was able to drop all but one 262's and the last one was still flying because i run out of ammo. It was as if I used incentiary bullets, the engines bursted in flames whenver I got a good firing solution. Poor bastards tried to overturn me,.
Then I tested the same mission with myself in a Hurricane IIC with 4 cannons, and this time all of the Me's died.
This proves one thing about the Me262: it is untypically prone to engine failures under fire. Smallest hit can destroy the plane. Of course a smart pilot would avoid being hit by flying fast enough not to be hit, but it seems that IL-2 AI is not that good tactically. Secondly, the plane was definitely not designed to engage in turning fight.
The main problem with Me-262 was that Hitler wanted it to be a fighter-bomber, for which reason the development was unnecessarily delayed (at least I've been told so). Also, Heinkel's version of a jet fighter would probably been better in terms of performance, but Messerschmitt got the job by Bf109's reputation IMO. As a result, a raw alpha test version was pushed to the front, main fault being highly untrustworthy engines.
Of course the faults of 262 are not to expanded to hole group of "jet fighters" as 262 is as far from a Su-37 as Spitfire was from Wright Flyer...
Anyway, my main point in this matter is that in military or economical point of view, jets pwn propeller-driven planes with points 100-12. However, aestethically, acustically and nostalgically propeller-driven airplanes are much nicer than jets. I know it's a bit irrational but I can't help it.
