# Ta-152/Fw-190



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2005)

What do you class it is, to you, is the Ta-152 the same as a Fw-190D, or, due to it's different designation, do you see it as a different plane??


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 25, 2005)

Different!


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 25, 2005)

Seeing how the Ta-152B and H were originallly named the Fw190Ra-2 and Ra-3, the choice is obvious... The Ta-152H was a high altitude version of the Fw-190Ra-3...

The 190Ra-2 incorporated the standard 190D wing, and used the Jumo 213 engine, basically making a longernosed 190D...

All they did was rename the planes out of respect for the designers, Tank and Messerschmitt.... (Ta and Me)


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 25, 2005)

Yep.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2005)

well i think that as it had a different designation it was a different plane....


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 25, 2005)

Even if that designation was given and applied after the aircraft was already airworthy??


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2005)

yup, different designation, some slight changes, different plane.......


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 25, 2005)

It wasnt designed from the outset to be a new plane...it was an existing plane re-designated...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2005)

so was the seafire, to me, they're different planes........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 25, 2005)

The P-80 was redesignated F-80 after the war, still the same plane, simply redesignted to comply with new USAF designation systems...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 25, 2005)

but the Ta-152 and -190D were slightly different......


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 25, 2005)

But as les said, the Ta-152 was originally named as a 190, simply renamed to honor Kurt Tank.


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 25, 2005)

Was the Fw-190A-8 a completely different plane than the Fw-190D-9???


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 25, 2005)

Quoted from The Encyclopedia of Aircraft of WWII...........

"In 1944, the Reichluftfahrtministerium (German Air Ministry or RLM) decreed that all new fighter aircraft designations must include the chief designer's name. Thus was born the Ta 152, named for Kurt Tank, chief of design at the Focke-Wulf Flugzeugbau G. m. b. H. Except for designation, the Ta 152 series is directly related to, and a natural development of, the Fw 190. It was probably the fastest and most capable production, propeller-driven, fighter fielded by Germany during World War II."


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 25, 2005)

That pretty much confirms it if you ask me.


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 25, 2005)

Lanc can interpet the above as he sees fit....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2005)

this is still a matter of opinion, and in my opinion, it was a different plane......


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 26, 2005)

If Kurt Tank and The Luftwaffe Hierachy, as well as all the historical documentation, all say that the Ta 152 series was directly related to, and a natural development of, the Fw 190, I dont really see where an opinion is needed. 

Its a fact Lanc.... I dont think Ive ever seen u so stubborn before.......

But......

U never did answer my question Lanc...


> Was the Fw-190A-8 a completely different plane than the Fw-190D-9???


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2005)

yes, it was a different plane, but at the same time it wasn't because it carried the same designation, and i never said the -152 and -190 weren't related, because i know they are, i know they're almost exactly the same plane and that there's more differences between the -190A and -190D than there is between the -190D and -152, but the fact remains that it carried a different designation, to me, that makes it a different plane................

and the reason i'm being so stubborn is because i feel so strongly about it.......


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 26, 2005)

OK whatever...


> but the fact remains that it carried a different designation,


Out of respect for its designer


> yes, it was a different plane, but at the same time it wasn't because it carried the same designation


If u think thats true then I do not doubt that u think the 190D and the Ta-152 are different...
, not because it was a different plane.....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2005)

sorry i meant to say "yes, it was the same plane, but at the same time it wasn't because it carried a different designation", not "yes, it was a different plane, but at the same time it wasn't because it carried the same designation"


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 26, 2005)

So just because something has a different name makes it totally different? If I changed my name tomorrow to Micheal DeLaney would that make me a different person?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2005)

it would make you different because you have a different name, and i never said it was a completely different plane..............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 26, 2005)

It wouldnt make me a different person...Different yes, different person, no...

In your poll the option is "*completely different* because of the designation..."


----------



## wmaxt (Jun 26, 2005)

Both the P-51H and P-47M/N were redesigned down to the last stringer and brace but the basic design is still the same. With the P-47s new wings were added - essentialy the same mods as the Fw-190/Ta-152.

With the Fw-190 I feel there is more of a change going from radial to the inline engine than to a better wing/altitude configuration. 

I have read in a couple of places it was to Honor/Recognize Kirt Tank.

wmaxt


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 26, 2005)

yes that's why it was done, but i still feel that as it's been given a different designation it's a different plane........


----------



## lesofprimus (Jun 26, 2005)

OK...... Someones spamming the vote........ No way THAT many people think the wrong idea....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2005)

it's only 5 against 4!!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 27, 2005)

6 against 4 now...I think les is right...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 27, 2005)

well it wasn't me!


----------



## wmaxt (Jun 27, 2005)

You know the A-36/Mustang Allison version became the P-51/Mustang II with the Merlin because it flew like a whole new airplane.

If the 190 didn't change enough with the engine change for a new designation, it sure didn't when it changed a wing to become the Ta-152. 

wmaxt


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 28, 2005)

Well to be perfectly exact for you the Ta-152 was basically a Fw-190D with a larger wing span and slightly different powerplant. It used a Jumo 213E instead of a Jumo 213.



> Kurt Tank chose the same workhorse Jumo 213 powerplant used in the Fw 190D. For the Ta 152H, he selected an uprated version, the Jumo 213E, equipped with a 2-stage, 3-speed mechanical supercharger and MW 50 engine boost. The MW 50 system used methanol-water mixture to boost engine output from 1,312 kw (1,750 hp) to 1,537 kw (2,050 hp) for short periods. Because of aluminum shortages, Focke-Wulf made the wing spars from steel and built the rear fuselage and empennage. The wing contained two steel spars. The front spar extended slightly beyond the landing gear attachment points but the rear spar spanned the entire wing. The wing twisted 3° from the root to the flap-aileron junction. This 'washout' prevented the ailerons from stalling before the center section. This allowed the pilot to maintain roll control during a stall. Armament consisted of one 30mm MK 108 cannon firing 90 rounds through the propeller hub and one 20mm MG 151 cannon firing 150-175 rounds from each wing root.
> 
> During the fall of 1944, Tank converted an existing Fw 190 prototype airframe (Werk-Nummer or serial number 0040) into the Ta 152H prototype. This aircraft and several other Ta 152 prototypes crashed early in the test program, due largely to intense pressure from the RLM to field production airplanes. Critical components suffered quality-control problems. Superchargers failed, pressurized cockpits leaked, the engine cooling system gave trouble, the landing gear failed to properly retract, and oil temperature gauges gave false readings. These problems, combined with Allied bombing attacks, which disrupted transportation and caused severe fuel shortages, slowed the whole program. Test pilots conducted just 31 hours of flight tests before full production started in November. By the end of January 1945 this figure had not climbed above 50 hours. This was not nearly enough time to refine subsystems and debug major components but production forged ahead.
> 
> ...


----------

