Computational fluid dynamics is nowadays one of the pillars of modern aircraft design, just as impor­tant as experimental wind tunnel testing. Very ambitious goals in regards to performance, efficiency and sustainability are being asked of the aviation industry, the kind that warrant a virtual exploration of the edges of the flight envelope. High­ order has come to be regarded as a necessary ingredient to achieve breakthrough advances in this direction. So much so, in fact, that the major aircraft manufac­turers, governmental aerospace research agencies and top universities worldwide have been acting in coordination to increase the technology readiness level of these approaches, for the last ten years. In this work, I study in significant detail the one aspect that makes high-­order methods ideal candi­dates for enabling the use of more advanced turbulence models in industry: the cost­-efficiency of their discretization—they offer minimal amounts of dispersion and dissipation errors, for a given number of degrees of freedom. I consider three research objects: discontinuous Galerkin spectral method (DGSEM), flux reconstruction (FR) and a novel B-­spline-based discontinuous Galerkin formulation stabilized via algebraic flux correc­tion (DGIGA­-AFC), and characterize their order of accuracy, linear and nonlinear stability characteristics, as well as dis­persion and dissipation errors as a function of wavenumber. Afterwards, I experimentally investigate their relative suitability towards scale­-resolving simulation of compressible and turbulent flows, by solv­ing a number of simple test cases of increasing difficulty (linear advection, inviscid Burgers and Euler equations; all in 1D) using a purpose­-made MATLAB implementation. The proposed isogeometric method (DGIGA) has been found to be at least as viable as the other two, a priori, for the resolution of high­-speed turbulent flows. Moreover, I have found that low dispersion and dissipation need not always be associated to high order, but to a high number of degrees of freedom per patch instead; these two coincide in the more conventional schemes, yet not necessarily in DGIGA. As a nonlinear stabilization mechanism, however, the proposed combination of DGIGA with AFC has turned out to be inferior to existing limiters.