Battle of Germany= Could LW have done better?

[Erich]

funny with Ethell book which is not correct and the so called LW hierarchy as I said the Ta was not design to take on the B-29, read my last line of my previous posting this was indeed the design for -----------taking on the P-51..this was told to me by a veteran of the unit that I have referred to in the past as just one instance.

the high altitude fighter was to be jet driven to take on higher flying bombers. for the summer and fall of 45 only JG 301 and parts of another JG were to have the Ta and in fact much of JG 300 was destined to have the Me 262 for Reich defense.

the 262 and similar jet propelled units were the wave of the future not prop driven

[HoHun]

Hi Erich,

>funny with Ethell book which is not correct

Hm, do you mean Milch never said what Ethell/Price attribute to him? Or do you mean Milch was not correct?

The latter is be obvious as the B-29 was not employed against Germany, but it still could have influenced their development programmes if they thought it would be.

>as I said the Ta was not design to take on the B-29, read my last line of my previous posting this was indeed the design for -----------taking on the P-51.

I thought the P-51 made a relatively late appearance, so how did it influence the development of the Ta 152H? Focke-Wulf received a contract over 6 prototypes for the Ta 152H on 6th of December, 1944 - by which time the P-51 had hardly made an impact on the Luftwaffe.

>the high altitude fighter was to be jet driven to take on higher flying bombers.

Hm, considering that the Germans were aware that the early jet engines' technlogical characteristics did not include great high-altitude performance, that comes as a bit of a surprise.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Erich]

I think the quote is incorrect.

the P-51 came out from December 1943 plenty time to work on high alt projects. the TA 152H was already in front line service with 35 of them in III./JG 301 in January of 45, according to the log buchs of JG 301 vets the P-51 unit was from the 9th AF 354th fg, Bill can confirm even much more so that his fathers 355th fg made a huge impact on the LW during the winter of 44 onward

as to the jets development the Me 262 was to be phased out and other projects come in, several of the FW designs had promise, Arado was another contender

all of this is documented via German archivs

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by HoHun

I thought the P-51 made a relatively late appearance, so how did it influence the development of the Ta 152H? Focke-Wulf received a contract over 6 prototypes for the Ta 152H on 6th of December, 1944 - by which time the P-51 had hardly made an impact on the Luftwaffe.

P-51D's arrived in Europe in the Winter of 1943/1944 and were escorting large bomber formations in early 1944.

[HoHun]

Hi Kris,

>Erich, the Germans very much believed the B-29 was to be used against them, there are several documents which can attest that. One of them I have even gives the altitude of 10 km at a cruising speed of 600 kmh. This is what the Germans thought the new bomber would be capable of.

Not so far off actually ... here is a graph a prepared a while back, showing the various B-29 power settings.

Basis is standard day, 6° cowl flaps, 90000 lbs weight. The data is from "The B-29 - Airplane Commander Training Manual for the Superfortress". There might be slight inaccuracies from reading the original graphs, or in the original graphs themselves, leading to the somewhat unsteady overall impression.

Power Setting 8 as indicated in the graph is Maximum Continuous, showing that 600 km/h at 9 km (not quite at 10 km) was about right. While for maximum range (and maximum engine life - the B-29 was a bit problematic in that regard) you'd normally use lower power settings, Germany was not so far off to force the B-29 to slow their speed. Engine life might have been more of a concern, though.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[HoHun]

Hi Erich,

>I think the quote is incorrect.

Hm, do you mean the content of the quote or the text of the quote? Quite a difference there ...

>the P-51 came out from December 1943 plenty time to work on high alt projects. the TA 152H was already in front line service with 35 of them in III./JG 301 in January of 45

Roger that, I made a typo there - the 6 prototypes were ordered on 7th of December 1943, according to Hermann's "Focke-Wulf Ta 152 - Der Weg zum Höhenjäger".

The corrected date explains why I doubt that the P-51 had made much of an impact for the genesis of the Ta 152H.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Erich]

all my data is buried on the TA 152H at the moment, but inception and career are being covered. I'm not at all impressed with Dietmars efforts on the Ta, for one his ops are not quite correct and there is so much more..........another reason why I am working on more for JG 301

the alternative to the H was an overblown Fw 190 like D with a huge copy-cat Mustang air receiver under the fuselage. techs and design crews were needed in early 44 to put together a competitor for the P-51 something above the ordinary A-8 and A-9 Fw. The Dora was a stop gap only

[Glider]

Originally Posted by Civettone

(...)

As the Fw 190A was rather bad at higher altitudes I would only use them as Sturmbock. Also for every Fw 190A two Bf 109s could be build (in terms of manhour). As such I would not increase production of the Fw 190 but only of the Bf 109.
But Tank should have been given to go ahead on the Fw 190C-1 with the DB 603 engine. This bird already flew in late 1943 and the DB 603A was sooner available than the Jumo 213A. I see no reason why the Fw 190C couldn't have been in service half a year before the Dora. The Fw 190C would have been slightly inferior to the D but still good enough. Plus, it could carry an extra cannon through the spinner. The Sturmbock versions could also be replaced by an up-armoured Fw 190C with 5 cannons! Sweet...

This whole section is full of the word, could. Unfortunately Kurt Tank wasn't given the go ahead and the rest didn't happen.

The Ta 152 was a great fighter but by 1945 it would have been inferior to the jet fighter and not much better than the Fw 190D-12. The Ta 152H was designed for high altitudes in anticipation for the B-29 which didn't turn out to be a high-altitude bomber (sic!). No reason to stop production of the Fw 190 for this version. Only a small production would suffice.

I don't disagree with this section at all.

The Bf 109G was far from outdated. The G-6 was no match for the P-51 but with the arrival of new engines in the Spring (the AM, AS and combined the ASM) the Bf 109 found its breath again. But only with the arrival of the Bf 109K at the end of 1944 did the Bf 109 become superior to the allied escort fighters. As such the Bf 109 would have been in trouble for most of the year. The only thing which could remedy this was better training or higher numbers. As already explained, a combination of both would have been the best option.

There is a slight contradiction here. In effect the 109G - 6 was outdated until the new engines arrived which only went some way to making up the difference. Only the K version truely made up the gap and the jury is out re it being better than the P51D. Its also worth noting that it was while the G-6 was outmatched that a lot of damage was done and the USAAF was able to build its strength.
As a match the allies had the P51H, P47N, MB5 ready for production, Tempest VI, Tempest II, Spit 21 and 18. These could also match the Ta152.

Zerstörer were on the way out. However the Fw 190 Sturmbock and Bf 109G-6/R6 basically took over their role as heavy fighter, and later the Me 262.

I agree with this

But to me, the Bf 109Z would have been the best stopgap measurement. This aircraft was a Zerstörer like the Me 110 or Me 410 but faster then the P-51 or any other fighter at the time! Armed with up to 5 cannons it could have been highly succesful, and still a cheap option as it would be much cheaper than the Me 410 and have about the same manhours and the Fw 190.

The 109Z as far as I am aware never flew. If it was half as good as it was supposed to be then why wasn't it flown? The prototype was destroyed but that is no excuse for a plane that was supposed to be so easy produce and there were plenty of airframes around. Its another could have/might have that never happened.
Even if it did the Hornet was in production.

Me 262 was a good fighter aircraft but needed time to get operational in numbers. Full priority should be given to this aircraft. Or ... another option would be to go for another jet aircraft. A jet aircraft build out of cheap material, easy to fly, decent armament, easy to maintain, and with a single jet engine, a Volksjäger, but then a year earlier. Also not with that dramatic time frame of a couple of months. Let's give it a year. There were several single-engined jet designs in 1943, like the Focke Wulf P II and P II projects, the Messerschmitt P 1095, the Arado E ??? and perhaps the best choice of all, the Lippisch P 20. Based on the Me 163 but with a landing gear and a turbojet engine, and with 4 guns, it would have been an excellent yet cheap jet interceptor! Best option would be to power it with the more reliable and cheaper BMW 003 which was availabe in the latter half of 1944.

Again nice ideas that never happened, but the P80 and Vampire did happen.

Messerschmitt Me 163 was used in a wrong way in which its limited endurance limited its operations. It should have been placed in areas which saw the most air combat. Place it close to the Ruhr area and that way it can intercept every bomber which bombs this industrial area. Another option are the Hamburg-Bremen-Kiel zone, the München-Nürnberg-Schweinfurt zone and the Northwestern Italian industry zone (Milan, Turin). Instead of building a new Me 163C and Me 263, a standard Me 163B should be used with the new dual-chambered HWK 109-509C engine which at least would have increased endurance by 50%! This version could have been in service before the end of 1944.

50% of not a lot = not a hell of a lot but the basic problems would remain and no doubt the accident would still be very high.

The real Wunderwaffe would have been the Natter though this would have appeared much later. The main advantage is that it didn't need trained pilots at all. Its aircraft were expendable and so were their pilots. And yet their rockets would have been very effective (as proved by the JV 44). Thousands could have been produced and placed near all major cities and industrial zones. Their real value is that they would have freed up the other fighter aircraft of the Reichsverteidiging which could then be redeployed to regular frontline units.

My understanding of the Natter must be flawed but I understood that it was launched from a fixed structure, flew for a very short time using a rocket motor, fired one volley of rockets, pilot leaves the battle, fires the bolts seperating the front from the back, pilot thrown out of the cockpit and depends on his own parachute. Engine comes down on a parachute and the airframe crashes to the ground and is scrap.
Hence my view that its a one shot weapon with a minimal range, and needs to be replaced (airframe).
Its totally impractical.

Then my notion of continued bomber/attack aircraft comes into play. These could then be equiped with the Panzerblitz or guided bombs and rockets. Now escorted by well trained and experienced fighters they could be used to turn the tide on the front. It would have been the only chance to come out of the war in favorable terms

Agree that its the only chance but a very faint one.

Finally, a word on Flak guns. They proved to be very ineffective until the arrival of new ammunition and improved guidance. The biggest problem was that they used an excuberant amount of shells, plus the fact that those guns and personnel could also have been used on the frontlines.
They were mainly used in such high numbers because of Hitler and their popularity among the civilian population. Their main use was to keep the allied bombers from spending more ToT and often disrupting their formations and accuracy.
However, production should be limited in favour of field artillery.
Later Flak guns could be replaced by the Taifun and guided missiles.

The problem with guided weapons has already been mentioned. I wold be interested as to how you believe that they would work given the problems that all nations had in real life.

David

[HoHun]

Hi Erich,

>I'm not at all impressed with Dietmars efforts on the Ta, for one his ops are not quite correct and there is so much more..........

Well, the specific question at hand is whether his date for the order of six prototypes is correct. If it is, it would be hard to maintain the point of view that the Ta 152H was designed to fight the P-51.

Personally I do not believe that the Ta 152H was specically designed to combat the B-29 either, but there is that Milch quote, dating less than a month after the prototype order was given, and obviously Milch is quite concerned about the B-29 ... that's at least food for thought.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Erich]

I'll say this again as the last time until my book is published. I asked a question to W. Reschke through Roman here on the forums, and that was "what was the Ta 152H built and used for?" His answer was to engage the P-51 at high altitude. to say that other Allied a/c whether in existance or only in prototype could thus match the TA 152H in performance is plain ridiculous unless you or we/all of us have the ww2 combat reports in hand. And in truth the Mustangs were encountered once in aerial combat with one being shot down. there were no losses of TA 152H's to aerial combat but to mechanical failures ............

alright then now you guys hand onto your bootstraps

nothing more, nothing less await for something then next year that will hopeful clear the air once and for all

[Soren]

The Allies had no piston engined fighter in development which would've been able to match the Ta-152H's equipped with the EB engine, this engine was very close to being fielded before the end of the war. As it was the Ta-152H out-classed any piston engined fighter in the air until the end of the war.

I myself believe that the Ta-152 wasn't meant to fight any specific Allied a/c, but just as a super high performance air superiority fighter with a high enough agility, performance & ceiling to allow it to easily engage and outfight any a/c the Allies might have fielded. Tank clearly succeeded in reaching this goal.

The future clearly was the Me-262 though..

[Glider]

Can I ask what the performance of the TA152 was to be with the EB engine?
I say this because as you say the piston engine was at its height at this time and I doubt that the TA 152 would have much if any advantage over the allied aircraft I listed.

[HoHun]

Hi Erich,

>I asked a question to W. Reschke through Roman here on the forums, and that was "what was the Ta 152H built and used for?" His answer was to engage the P-51 at high altitude.

I'm confident that is what Reschke was convinced of. However, how would he know? As far as I can tell, he was very far from the circles that conceived the Ta 152H. He is simply repeating the information that was given to him, and it probably didn't come directly from a member of those circles either.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

[Soren]

Originally Posted by Glider

Can I ask what the performance of the TA152 was to be with the EB engine?
I say this because as you say the piston engine was at its height at this time and I doubt that the TA 152 would have much if any advantage over the allied aircraft I listed.

With the Jumo 213E the Ta-152H boasted a 5,000 + ft/min climb rate, reaching 10km in 10.1 min, and had a top speed of 760 + km/h and a 15.1km service ceiling. With the Jumo 213EB this already unmatched performance would've been increased considerably at high alts, only SL performance would've remained the same.

[drgondog]

Originally Posted by Soren

With the Jumo 213E the Ta-152H boasted a 5,000 + ft/min climb rate, reaching 10km in 10.1 min, and had a top speed of 760 + km/h and a 15.1km service ceiling. With the Jumo 213EB this already unmatched performance would've been increased considerably at high alts, only SL performance would've remained the same.

At the end of the day, had the war been extended several months, the Ta 152H would have been confronted with P-51H, P-47N, P-80, Gloster, Spit XXI, Tempest V and maybe an F8F.

Maybe a marginal performance advantage but not overwhelming in the piston arena... and the 262 whether superior or equal to P-80 is also marginal.

Is this the time to discuss numbers and pilot skill out of training command available for combat? Or fuel supplies or security of any airfield in Germnay - day or night - from 50 Fighter groups from RAF and USAAF- day or night?