Bf-109 vs Spitfire vs Fw-190 vs P-51

[renrich]

My book shows internal fuel of 364 imperial gallons(1618 ltrs) and ability to have one 66.2 imp gallon drop tank. Could that be a misprint? The range clean is 755 miles at 376 mph at 32810 feet. F4U4 could carry a total of 534 gallons. Obviously Vmax, service ceiling, max fuel carried and max range don't all happen in the same airplane at the same time which to me is part of the problem with the performance numbers which float about. Also I suspect that some numbers might be either bogus or honest mistakes. That is the reason I go with AC that have a lengthy operational history. The Mustang fought in two major wars and some minor wars, the Corsair likewise. The Corsair was in production longer than any piston engined fighter, I believe, and was a tried and true design.

[claidemore]

In defense of the Ta152 weapons, the two MG151/20s would be very effective against fighters, similar to the two cannons on a Spitfire, or La5/7. The 30mm cannon would also be effective in any sort of surprise attack, (which the majority of kills were).

OTOH, the famous 'shootdown' of a Tempest V by Willy Reschke appears not to be a shootdown at all, though definately a victory for the Reschke and the Ta152.

Three Ta152s jumped two Tempests that were strafing trains. One Tempest managed to shoot down one of the Ta152s and escape. The other one, flown by Mitchell, was caught by Reschke as he climbed up after completing his strafing run. They both went into a left hand turn with Reschke firing his two 20mmms (he calls them machine guns). Mitchells plane exhibited some erratic movements when Reschke fired (according to Reschkes account). Question is, was this because he was hit, or was he jinking to avoid being hit? I suspect he was not hit, as Resche does not mention seeing any strikes, pieces flying off etc, he just mentions the erratic movement and leaves interpretation to the reader. In any case, the Ta152 20mms jammed, Mitchell tightened his turn, his plane stalled, spun in, and Mitchell was killed in the crash. (As we can see, the Ta152 was able to pull lead for a deflection shot, though it's arguable whether or not it got any hits)

Score in this combat, 1 TA152 lost, 1 Tempest Mk V lost.

[Soren]

Wrong Claidemore, no Ta-152 was ever shot down. One crashed for unknown reasons long before the fight during the patrol of the day where Reschke shot down the Tempest, that's it. And Reschke notes that the Ta-152 wasn't even close to reaching its limits, while the Tempest obviously was riding right on the stall. Conclusion is that the Ta-152H clearly turns A LOT better than the Tempest, and the specs of the a/c support this fact.

Infact the Ta-152H turns as-well as the Spitfire Mk.XIV, and retains speed in turns better.

[Soren]

Originally Posted by renrich

The assertion that the TA152H was the best fighter developed in WW2 once again strikes me as comical. This vaunted AC keeps jumping up in this forum as the "best" without much evidence except paper numbers which may or may not reflect it's true operational capabilities. Let us examine that assertion. My source ,"The Great Book of WW2 Aircraft," has a whole section on the various FW fighters and it states that only a several TA152Hs reached combat units. It was essentially a prototype aircraft purpose built to intercept high flying bombers. It's performance figures showed very high speeds(similar to the P47N) at very high altitudes where little ACM took place. It's low altitude performance was substantially worse(not as good as P51D.) It's armament was obviously fitted for bomber shootdowns(3 cannon) although pilot visibility would probably limit it's ability to use full deflection shots so it would have to, of necessity, stick with headon or rear quarter attacks with the attendent danger of defensive gunfire. It's initial rate of climb, 3345 fpm with boost was good but not exceptional. The 3 cannon armament would not necessarily stand it in good stead in ACM against allied fighters and it of course labored with the handicap of the vulnerable cooling system of the liquid cooled engine. As with most European fighters it was range challenged with a max range clean of 755 miles and 1250 miles with a drop tank. These are yardstick ranges which would probably translate to combat radiuses of perhaps 275 to 400 miles. These were good for an interceptor but not competitive with P51D, P47N, P38L or F4U4. Now let us get away from paper numbers and talk about combat experience. How many kills did the TA152 have? Not many! How many AC did it destroy strafing? Probably none. How many tons of bombs and rockets did it belabor the enemy with? Probably none. How many bombers did it succesfully escort to their targets and back? Probably none. How reliable was it and how many were operational for a certain mission of the AC available? We don't know. What would have been the mission of the TA152 in the Pacific with tropical temperatures, coral landing strips and long distances? Probably very mission limited. How well could the TA152 have executed carrier landings and takeoffs? It could not have done any! The TA152 was essentially an experimental fighter, an elegant looking airplane with seductive performance figures on paper in certain flight regimes. "Best" fighter design in WW2. Not in my book!

Well Renrich despite getting all the performance figures wrong you need to consider the following; In the very limited time the Ta-152H saw service it established itself a 11 to 0 kill ratio in the air, and its pilots all note that it was completely the superior a/c in all of these engagements.


As for performance figures, find me a single Allied a/c that could match the below which is the actual performance of the a/c at full boost:

Top speed: 760 km/h (472 mph) at alt, 597 km/h (371 mph) at SL
Climb rate: 5,100 + ft/min (With MW50)
Time to climb 10km (32,808 ft): 10 min 06 sec.
Service ceiling: 15.1 km (49,540 ft)

The climb rate figure you presented (3,444 ft/min) was achieved at Steig u. Kampfleistung (1,590 PS), while 19.2 m/s (3,779 ft/min) was achieved at Start u. Notleistung (1,750 PS).

[Soren]

Originally Posted by davparlr

Come on renrich, just because the p-51H and F4U-4 had significant performance advantage over the Ta-152H-1 below 25k ft and the P-47M had eqivalent performance

Get your facts straight, that's all there is to say to that.

[bada]

Originally Posted by renrich

The assertion that the TA152H was the best fighter developed in WW2 once again strikes me as comical.

Not if you read about his abilities, from a english pilot that bring the plane to england

Originally Posted by renrich

This vaunted AC keeps jumping up in this forum as the "best" without much evidence except paper numbers which may or may not reflect it's true operational capabilities. Let us examine that assertion. My source ,"The Great Book of WW2 Aircraft," has a whole section on the various FW fighters and it states that only a several TA152Hs reached combat units. It was essentially a prototype aircraft purpose built to intercept high flying bombers.

Your book is so wrong my dear.
the prototypes are coded V-Series in the LW.
the 152H-0 was the pre-series airplane used for test flights(debugging) and school.
the 152H-1 was the first official production serie.

So, this productionserie is called "a protoype"???? man, it has to be really a good book

It's purpose was the aerial supremacy and not a destroyer like you seem to argue.

The performance of thise plane were simply "higher and faster", the goal for this plane was the bomber's escort!

Originally Posted by renrich

It's performance figures showed very high speeds(similar to the P47N) at very high altitudes where little ACM took place. It's low altitude performance was substantially worse(not as good as P51D.)"

It's peformances were ,like i've wrote above: higher and faster. No WWII plane could achieve the same specs at high alt as the ta152,none!

And about the comment on the low alt performance, i'd like to rember you the fact that those planes could out-maneuvre the tempest at the deck, ask the guys from the 486sq if you want.
and what is the p51 donwlow performance? how do you think it was flying the p51 i a domain that it wasn't build for?

Originally Posted by renrich

It's armament was obviously fitted for bomber shootdowns(3 cannon) although pilot visibility would probably limit it's ability to use full deflection shots so it would have to, of necessity, stick with headon or rear quarter attacks with the attendent danger of defensive gunfire.

that's a guess, right???? OR maybe you don't know that all the LW fighters were equipped with Canons????
that was their primary weapon. So, there were 2 mg151/20E and one 30mm mk108 high velocity canon,
you know, one bullet, one kill?!
Also, you don't seem to know the subject very well, the visibilty and especially deflection,in any 190 (yes, the ta152 is a 190 and their cockpit is the same), was better than in any spitfire.
About your last phrase in this quote : see above: NOT a bomber killer!

Originally Posted by renrich

It's initial rate of climb, 3345 fpm with boost was good but not exceptional.

it was good; but what is the RoC of a fully loaded p47N or p51D again????

Originally Posted by renrich

The 3 cannon armament would not necessarily stand it in good stead in ACM against allied fighters and it of course labored with the handicap of the vulnerable cooling system of the liquid cooled engine.

do you know the results af a 30mm shell in a spit-wing??? search on youtube, you'll see what happens to a wing that is not under stress,
and then simply imagine what it would be if the plane was bancked or loaded!

And what was is wrong with the water-cooling system? did the p-51 have a new magical undestructible plasma not leaking cooling system?

Originally Posted by renrich

As with most European fighters it was range challenged with a max range clean of 755 miles and 1250 miles with a drop tank. These are yardstick ranges which would probably translate to combat radiuses of perhaps 275 to 400 miles.

Again, a guess??? or did you calculated the engine fuel consumption? can help you with that if you want, got the 152 manual.

Originally Posted by renrich

These were good for an interceptor but not competitive with P51D, P47N, P38L or F4U4.

Not competitive with what? range only? Germans hadn't the need to fly far away, they were resticted to their territory!

Originally Posted by renrich

Now let us get away from paper numbers and talk about combat experience. How many kills did the TA152 have? Not many!.

12 official kills, losses to ennemy or ground-fire: none
Not bad for a plane the flew only in by the ennemy overpopulated sky.

Originally Posted by renrich

How many AC did it destroy strafing? Probably none.!

you're absolutly right, and how many kills or straffings kills or even bombs did the p51H have?

oups, none, because it even didn't flew operationnaly in the WWII! and then in corea, was too slow as fighter and too fragile as ground pounder!

Originally Posted by renrich

How many tons of bombs and rockets did it belabor the enemy with? Probably none.

not build as straffer or even bomber

Originally Posted by renrich

How many bombers did it succesfully escort to their targets and back? Probably none.

a lot actually, most of the jg301 missions were to escort 190d-9 harrassing mostly soviet troops.

Originally Posted by renrich

How reliable was it and how many were operational for a certain mission of the AC available? We don't know..

yes, we know, the story of each airframe can be found in GOOD-books about the ta152, not in a simplified 100 pages encyclopedy

Originally Posted by renrich

What would have been the mission of the TA152 in the Pacific with tropical temperatures, coral landing strips and long distances? Probably very mission limited.

What will the 152 do there??? What would your car do if put on the antarctic continent? or the moon?

Originally Posted by renrich

How well could the TA152 have executed carrier landings and takeoffs? It could not have done any!

Very well actually, the stall speed was 130km/h...or did you forget what those big,large wings do on airplanes?

Originally Posted by renrich

The TA152 was essentially an experimental fighter, an elegant looking airplane with seductive performance figures on paper in certain flight regimes. "Best" fighter design in WW2. Not in my book!

Yes, i admit, it was a kind of experimantal plane, but much less than the p80 for example

No, just jocking, see the first answer: they were chain-produced!

About you book: i would close it, never open it again and go on the web and search for real books (yes those are mostly exepensives) in any online book shop you can find, and if those books are written by polish, or french guys, buy them immediately cause at least, those books are'nt biased!

and about the reschke story:



Sorry Soren for the OT

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Soren

Wrong Claidemore, no Ta-152 was ever shot down.

Reschke:

"We reached the position at an altitude of 200 metres, just at the moment when both Tempests after diving started climbing again. Just as the dogfight was developing Sepp Stattler, on our side, was hit and his plane fell like a stone out of the sky [...] The Tempest which I attacked quickly reached the same height as me and was [at] approximately 10 o'clock before me. The dogfight began between 50 and 100 metres above ground level and very often the wing tips passed close over the treetops.[...] The whole fight was executed in a left-hand turn, the low altitude of which would not allow for any mistakes. Ever so gradually I gained metre by metre on the Tempest and after a few circles I had reached the most favourable shooting position. [...] I pressed my machine-gun buttons for the first time [...] I could see the Tempest for a short moment in straight ahead flight displaying slightly erratic flying behaviour. But immediately she went straight back into the left turn. [...] I sighted the Tempest very favourably in my cross-hairs and could not have missed but my machine-guns experienced feeding problems. I therefore tried to shoot it down with my cannon and forced her into a tight left-hand turn from where she tipped out over her right wing and crashed into a forest."


According to Reschke it was shot down.

[Soren]

Nope, it wasn't hit by any a/c. And read above, Sattler's aircraft fell to the ground long before the dogfight ever started, and I quote "For no apparent reason!".

Also please don't leave out that Reschke mentions in his own book that while the Tempest was riding on its very edge of performance, being very close to the stall, the Ta-152H was never even close to its limits. It's in the book, Wilde Sau..

[bada]

Zobacz co jest nagorze

English: please, look above.

[Soren]

To demonstrate just how effective those high AR wings were note that the Ta-152H needs a runway of just 295m, that's a shorter take off run than ANY Spitfire, 109, F4U & 190 model, and only a fraction of the distance the P-51, P-47 & Tempest needed!

This was just one of the Ta-152H very positive points, it needed a much shorter runway than any other fighter in service, allowing it to take off & land on much smaller airstrips.

It's no wonder that the pilots who transitioned to the Ta-152H were absolutely baffled by the extreme acceleration the airplane displayed, Reschke noting that it was like being strapped to a rocket, the head being thrown back into the head rest.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by bada

Zobacz co jest nagorze

English: please, look above.

We were posting at the same time, I haven't seen your post when I wrote mine.

But why Reschke says that "Just as the dogfight was developing Sepp Stattler, on our side, was hit and his plane fell like a stone out of the sky"?

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Soren

Nope, it wasn't hit by any a/c. And read above, Sattler's aircraft fell to the ground long before the dogfight ever started, and I quote "For no apparent reason!".

Also please don't leave out that Reschke mentions in his own book that while the Tempest was riding on its very edge of performance, being very close to the stall, the Ta-152H was never even close to its limits. It's in the book, Wilde Sau..

Personally I would be a little worried about planes that explode for no apparant reason. In a combat zone that normally means someone hit it, but no one saw what. Very common in air combat.

[Soren]

The effects of AR on the L/D ratio of a wing:

AR of 4

AR of 9


And why is the L/D ratio then important ?? Because it dictates the energy (Speed) retention in turns, i.e. everything else being equal the a/c with the highest L/D ratio can turn tighter for longer without losing speed.

And to demonstrate it mathematically:

L/D ratio = Lift / Drag

And so the L/D ratio is = Cl / Cd

And here to demonstrate the difference between a wing with an AR of 6 with one of 8 (We'll leave out Cd0 as it's irrelevant and wont affect the outcome):

Wing with an AR of 6:
(1.3^2) / (pi*6*.80) = 0.112071606

1.3 / 0.112071606
___________
L/D ratio = 11.59

Wing with an AR of 8:
(1.3^2)/(pi*8*.80) = 0.0840537043

1.3 / 0.0840537043
___________
L/D ratio = 15.46

That's a difference of 33.3% in favour of the wing with the AR of 8, which means the higher AR wing features 33.3% more lift for every amount of drag produced. (Or 33.3% less drag for every amount of lift if you will)

[Soren]

But why Reschke says that "Just as the dogfight was developing Sepp Stattler, on our side, was hit and his plane fell like a stone out of the sky"?

Where does he say that Marshall ??

What Reschke says is that upon approaching the opponents Sattler's a/c fell to the ground for no apparent reason. A mechanical malfunction, something medical with Sattler etc etc one of these could be the culbrit.

[ponsford]

W/O W. J. Shaw of 486 Squadron shot down the TA 152 of Ofw Sepp Sattler from Stab/JG 301.

Shaw’s report:
"I was flying Pink 2 & whilst diving to attack Met on a road about 10 miles east of Ludwigslust I saw a single Fw.190 flying east at deck level. I reported this to Pink 1 who ordered me to follow him in to attack. The 190 broke when we were out of range & as I could see that my No.1 would be unable to attack I dropped my tanks & climbed for height. As the E/A straightened out east I dived on it – passing my No. 1. This time the 190 broke rather later & again to port & I was able to pull my bead through until he disappeared beneath my nose. It was a full deflection shot & I opened fire when I judged I had 2 radii deflection on him. I fired a long burst & then broke upwards to observe results. As the 190 came in sight again I saw the flash of a strike just forward of the cockpit. An instant later, flames appeared from the port side &, enveloped in flames, the 190 went down in a gradual straight dive to the deck. I saw it crash in a field & explode.
Cine camera used
I claim 1 Fw.190 destroyed."

It's possible that it was a couple of 109’s that shot Mitchell down and not Reschke.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...-14april45.jpg