 | The Ta-152.... The Best High Altitude Fighter?????| Aviation Discuss The Ta-152.... The Best High Altitude Fighter????? in the World War II - Aviation forums; Gents I think we are in need of seperating this long thread into two or three especially if we start ... |
|
03-08-2005, 03:48 PM
|
#61 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 8,998
Country:  | Gents I think we are in need of seperating this long thread into two or three especially if we start up again on the 262 vs Meteor or the Arado 234.
I posted the kill info by 352nd fg ace Don Bryan over a Arado 234 didn't I ?
back to the slight variation, RG is correct the Arado was hardly felt but could of been. It was a fantastic recon plane with 2 rearward 2cm weapons fitted. first flown over Normandie beaches taking numerous fotofilms and not touched by any Allied A/c which is surprising to me. Several piston units such as the four engine Ju 290 unit FAgr 5 dumped their Junkers on KG 200 and took hold of a staffel sized unit of Arado 234's in spring of 45 and flew ?recon missions without any Allied interference.
The night version initially was flown by Kurt Welter before he decided upon the me 262A-1a for his nf kommando. Kurt felt that over burning cities that a front cover or darkened windscreen was needed so the earchlights and burning fires would not blind the pilot from underneath. this u it did not have any radar fitted and was the typical recon version with bottom of the glass nose open. Apparently his mentions did get noticed and a revised experimental nose was fitted to house the pilot and right behind him and R/O, the nose was enclosed like other nf's with FuG 218 installed and experiments with the newest Berlin 240A set. But again no operations were done.
Two other nf's of sorts were tested in Italy, kampfgruppe Bonow actually morelike 4-5 pilots but a phone propaganda name was used. the nf's were radarless but under the belly was housed two 2cm weapons and they were used to some effect in Italy on night harassing ground attack missions...... | 
|  | |
03-08-2005, 04:28 PM
|
#62 | | Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by RG_Lunatic Quote: |
Originally Posted by cheddar cheese I think that the Ar-234 was perhaps the best jet of the war though. | But with only about 38 having seen action, 12 bombers, 24 reconnaissance, and 2 night-fighters, it was truely insignificant. Once again, a huge effort to produce 210 airframes of which only about 15% saw any kind of action typifies the German jet program.
And the P-80 could carry about the same bombload.
=S=
Lunatic | CC, we know that Lune has all the op reports for all the LW units that flew the 100 had that had been deliverd, so he can't be wrong. 
There was at least 19 of the 234s from KG76 lost on operations.
Sure it could, on the P-80C.
Erich, I think you are wrong on the recon having guns. There was no room for them as that is were the ammo and guns went. | |
| | |
03-08-2005, 04:40 PM
|
#63 | | | Armament options for the P-80A are 6 x .50 BMG's plus 2000 lbs bombs or 10 x 5" rockets.
=S=
Lunatic | |
| | |
03-08-2005, 04:42 PM
|
#64 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 8,998
Country: | yes the bomber versions had rearwards fring 2cm weapons but so did the newere B-1 given to the units on a very limited basis. the dual camera approach stationed to foilm vertically was towards the rear tail, but what happened is the a small protrusion was formed underneath for the recon B-1 housing the dual cannon. the protrusion was right underneath the belly and did not interfere with filming as it was placed forward of the cameras. | |
| | |
03-08-2005, 04:50 PM
|
#65 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 8,998
Country: | heres a bit of additional info on the ar 234.
17 Ar 234's were in
9./KG 76 : 12
Kommando Sperling (Recon) : 4
Kommando Hecht (recon) : 1
this was for the date of 10 January 45. Pretty skim I would say. 148 Arados deliverd in 1944 but only a small portion arrived. Allied bombing put the B series into late production.
10 April 1945 only 38 Arado 234B's in action
Stab KG 76 : 2
6./KG 76 : 5
III./KG 76 : 5
______________________________________
1./FAGr 33 : 7
1./FAGr 100/old FAGr 5 : 6
1./FAGr 123 : 8
Kommando Sommer : 3
______________________________________
Kommando Bonow flying AR 234 nf's : 2
E ~ | |
| | |
03-08-2005, 05:05 PM
|
#66 | | Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| | |
| | |
03-08-2005, 06:36 PM
|
#67 | | the old Sage
Join Date: May 2004 Location: Platonic Sphere
Posts: 8,998
Country: | actually the only recon B variant I have seen pics of was a snow camou'd jet, 2 views so will have to look for it. the underbelly trough is very deceptive and I can only describe it as a subtle bulge but it runs the length of the underside of the craft to make it streamlined.........sorry this really isn't a good description
E ♪ | |
| | |
03-08-2005, 10:07 PM
|
#68 | | | Quote: |
Originally Posted by KraziKanuK | Just like on most USA fighters, bomb racks were optional. But from the get-go the design included mounting points for bomb and rocket racks. This was pretty standard for US fighter designs.
=S=
Lunatic | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 05:46 AM
|
#69 | | Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| Quote: |
Originally Posted by RG_Lunatic
Just like on most USA fighters, bomb racks were optional. But from the get-go the design included mounting points for bomb and rocket racks. This was pretty standard for US fighter designs.
=S=
Lunatic
| The P-80C built first in 1948 had its wings strengthened to carry 2000lb worth of bombs. Now why would that be be if the A could already carry 2000lbs worth of bombs? Many P-80As (and P-80Bs) still in service were rebuilt to P-80C standards. So no bombs til the P-80C. | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 12:13 PM
|
#70 | | Der Crewchief
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 29,456
Country:  | Im staying out of this one, mostly cuz I dont know much about the P-80 but I thought this was about the Ta-152
__________________  US Army Blackhawk Crewchief 2000-2006 Classic ww2aircraft.net quotes: fly boy said: "isn't that the first jet bomber? becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" "wait what ok who made the b-2 crash come on people that messed up its a b-2" "ah yes the mistel those things are so annoying is games and in real life" | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 12:13 PM
|
#71 | | | Quote: |
Originally Posted by KraziKanuK Quote: |
Originally Posted by RG_Lunatic
Just like on most USA fighters, bomb racks were optional. But from the get-go the design included mounting points for bomb and rocket racks. This was pretty standard for US fighter designs.
=S=
Lunatic
| The P-80C built first in 1948 had its wings strengthened to carry 2000lb worth of bombs. Now why would that be be if the A could already carry 2000lbs worth of bombs? Many P-80As (and P-80Bs) still in service were rebuilt to P-80C standards. So no bombs til the P-80C. | Actually, the sources I've seen indicate a 2000 lbs bomb, not "2000 lbs worth of bombs", indicating a single bomb on a center station.
Besides, what does it matter? If the P-80 had entered service in WWII, and the desire to mount bombs on them came about, any needed changes would have been quickly implemented.
=S=
Lunatic | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 12:39 PM
|
#72 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Saffron Walden/Sheffield
Posts: 3,001
Country:  | It is about the Ta-152, it's just gone wildly off-topic.
I don't know much about the aircraft but I think it could provide a big problem to all other fighters
__________________ 
When you realise that the light at the end of the tunnel is actually an oncoming train, you know it's time to run for your life | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 12:44 PM
|
#73 | | Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| if, if, if, if is a long way from your claim that it could. 
Produce a pic of a fuselage mounted bomb for I doubt very much an AN-M66 GP would fit under a P-80. | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 01:24 PM
|
#74 | | Der Crewchief
Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Ansbach, Germany
Posts: 29,456
Country: | You see RG here you are being hypocritical (spelling?). You always talk about the Luftwaffe or British aircraft being crap because they were not combat tested or used operationally during the war, but for you it is okay to use the "IF" if it as American aircraft. So why is it any different for the P-80? It was not used in combat in WW2 and dont give me that combat patrol crap. Did it shoot down any German aircraft, did it get shot down by any German aircraft? No.
__________________ US Army Blackhawk Crewchief 2000-2006 Classic ww2aircraft.net quotes: fly boy said: "isn't that the first jet bomber? becasue i have flown one in a flight sim before and i know how it handles" "wait what ok who made the b-2 crash come on people that messed up its a b-2" "ah yes the mistel those things are so annoying is games and in real life" | |
| | |
03-09-2005, 02:34 PM
|
#75 | | | I disagree. When we start talking about "what if" the Luftwaffe had survived and been strong in the summer of 1945 and beyond, the P-80 is a legitimate plane for consideration.
=S=
Lunatic | |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:04 AM. | | |
