I believe that if both pilots were or equal proficiency in air to air combat, the P-51 Mustang would definately win. Please note, that pilot proficiency is really the trump card here, put a clearly better dog-fight pilot in the Me-262 and he would be victorious in that aircraft, even though it is not equal to the P-51 Mustang's dogfighting performance. Now, the Me-262 could go faster than the Mustang, but the Mustang had superior handling by far, could turn tighter and in the P-51D version, had clearly better visibility for the pilot. While I have not spoken with any pilot who was a vetran of any P-51 vs Me-262 combat, I HAVE spoken to a retired USAF fighter pilot who had flown F-84's, F-86, and F-4's. While he was stationed at Clark Air Base in the Philippines he had several chances to practice air to air combat with Philippine Air Force P-51D Mustangs, he said that while his USAF jet was clearly faster, and had longer range and superior armament, in any sort of real dog fight the Mustang was impossible to shake lose from. His only practical defense was to outrun the Mustang, and then only in a level or diving run, the Mustang could not outclimb his jets but could out-angle any jet.

I agree with deacon's answer but I would like to add that there would be no reason for an Me-262 to engage a Mustang in a dogfight. The "real" job of a Me-262 was to shoot down Allied bombers, not to engage other fighters. The 262 was 100 mph faster than the Mustang, hence a Mustang could not prevent a 262 from making a strafing pass at an Allied bomber, nor could the Mustang pursue the 262 afterwards. In other words, a Mustang simply could not prevent a 262 from shooting down Allied bombers, and that's the only thing that matters. If enough Me-262's could have been built, they would have stopped the Allied bombing campaign.

The greater disparity in speed, the less need to "dogfight" in the traditional sense, involving the familiar spiral of death. One cannot justify a position that the Mustang would win solely on its tighter turning radius, because the Japanese "Zero" could out-turn a P-40 also, but that did not keep them from being wiped out by the faster plane of the "Flying Tigers" . Their tactic was to dive at speed, strafing the Zero and then zipping off to regain altitude for another run........the Zero's turning abilities availed them naught against the strategy. Therefore, even though Chuck Yeager and others did actually shoot down a few 626's, usually it was as they were trying to land and were vulnerable. In fact, Yeager's free screensaver shows him shooting one down on approach to its field. Perhaps surprisingly, the first fighter to go fast enough to experience the problem of wing turbulence in a dive, was the P-38 Lightning, built before (and all during) WWII.

History had already proven the Mustang was superior. Once the shock of the jet had worn off, the American pilots learned to aim further ahead of the aircraft than usual, and the German would fly straight into the bullets. May I suggest getting IL2 Sturmovic and trying it out for yourself?

Having met General Adolph Galland at a fighter symposium cocktail party in Washington DC in the mid-90's, I had to ask the question "what was your favorite fighter aircraft to fly?" Galland answered me with "it depends on what the mission was." Apparently his favorite fighter to intercept bombers with was the Focke Wulf FW-190 A series because "That big radial engine gave a lot of protection against defensive fire from the bombers." He did make the comment to me that "if I had had 500 operational Me-262s I could have stopped the daylight bombing raids." I was rather amazed at this matter-of-fact statement. Captain Eric Brown (RAF) wrote a great book about German Fighter aircraft. He was a test pilot in a special unit in the RAF that flew and accessed all of the captured German planes. He rated the Me-262 as the flat out best fighter aircraft of WWII. He stated that he gave the 262 this rating having flown all versions of the Spitfire and the Mustang along with the Bf-109 and FW-190 Radial, Vee and Ta-152. Most 262 kills were made while the jet was vulnerable on final approach to the airfield and a "sitting duck." Tight turns are not the magic key to ACM. "Speed is life" is a fundamental rule for every fighter pilot. A good fighter must be both fast, quick, maneuverable, stable gun platform, good visibility for pilot, etc and the 262 was the superior to all others when considering these factors. The 262 could easily defeat a P-51 as long as the pilot did not fight inside the P-51's advantages and outside that of his own aircraft's. The historical answer from Galland of "give me a squadron of Spitfires" when asked by Feldmarschall Goering what he needed during the battle of Britain is a case in point. Galland was not suggesting that the Spitfire was superior to the Bf-109 but rather that the Bf-109 was not being utilized in combat properly (offensively) and that the Spitfire was a better choice for the defensive role which the Luftwaffe pilots were being ordered to take in escort missions during the Battle of Britain. the book "Fighter General" is an excellent read and gives some insight into these details of air combat.

If compared, the Me-262 will surely be better than P-51. The 262 was the pioneer of today's modern fighters. Even in WW2 the 262 outperformed maximum of the allied fighters. I'll vote for Me-262.

I believe it would be a draw if you use two equally skilled pilots. The Mustang will certainly get behind the ME-262, but the schwable will likely escape using superior speed. Though, not enough to totally turn the tables on the Mustang. I expect that after this close call the 262 pilot will fly home and live to fight another day. Alternately he could turn and fight, but if he does it too soon the P-51 will smoke him. If he is patient and gets enough room to complete the turn before closure he is putting himself into an almost certain head on fight. Now it's anybody's game. That sounds like a poor choice when the allies are far and away outproducing the axis. The 262 is too valuable to risk in this fashion.