Best WWII Air-Force

Bill,

The Dora-13's excellent high alt performance was in great part due to the fact that it featured the GM-1 system.

The Ta-152H-0 entered service in October 1944, 20 being delivered between October and Novermber.

And as to other transport a/c, well the Ju-252 beats them all in terms of speed cargo capacity (Except the Me-323 which could carry 12+ tons of cargo).

Soren said:

....
The Ta-152H-0 entered service in October 1944, 20 being delivered between October and Novermber....

Click to expand...

Only 20?

That was the daily production figure for the P51 and Spitfire.

Once again, you're proving one thing..... the LW had the capability to build fine aircraft, but sure as hell couldn't build enough of them when it mattered.

If only 20 of them were built, it had better of have a kill ratio of a 100 to 1 to make an impact.

The Ta-152 was an incremental improvement over existing aircraft. Not enough to change any rankings.

67 Ta-152H's saw service in WW2, that's it.

pbfoot said:

just for arguments sake as i agree the USAAF was the best in size and in projecting power but was it as efficient as I mentioned earlier a RCAF fighter wing was 54 aircraft 78 pilots 345 maintainers and 300 admin ,logistics etc. for a total of 728 all ranks and trades so for an extra 10 aircraft you have 170 more personal .
you asked earlier for the breakdown on numbers trained in Canada
Pilot Nav. B Nav. W Nav. AB WO/AG AG Naval AG FE
RCAF 25,747 5,154 421 7,280 6,659 12,744 12,917 0 1,913
RAF 17,796 3,113 3,847 6,922 7,581 755 1,392 704
RAAF 4,045 699 0 944 799 2,875 244 0 0
RNZAF 2,220 829 30 724 634 2,122 443
Total 49,808 9,795 4,298 15,870 15,673 18,496 14,996 704 1,913 include in the RAF numbers are the Czechs ,Poles , Dutch, Norwegians

Click to expand...

Pb - how would you measue efficency? Certainly number of total persons to support the mission is one. Are we comparing one to one on all the organization support orgs to support the Fighter Group

For example - did all RCAF/RAF fighter wings have a Service group and hanger battery to repair (sheet metal, wing replacement, kits), perform engine changes and most modification on the base? that was a 40-50 person shop doing all the stuff not requiring full Division Depot mods (like a Malcolm hood).

The figures I gave you wer somewhat imprecise but it was based on the 1945 scenario when approximately 72 ships (plus 'oddball' AT-6, B-26, Norseman, etc in the case of Steeple Morden).. but the 72 did include WW and Clobber College a/c when 495 and 496 FTG's were shut down in November, 1944.

I really don't know how to compare the two doctrines and orgs between RAF and USAAF in England.

Last, it just occured to me that my reflection on headcount was on 355th FG which like the 55th and 364th, also housed the Scout Force as part of the TO&E (another 'complete' Flight per each Squadron - or a 25% increase in Fighter strength and crews, maybe 6 adds to HQ) when compared to 56th or 4th.

But at the end of the day that only represents perhaps 60 personnel as it was no extra headcount to do Security, Service Group, depot type functions

I have to do some research to see what the 'average' looked like in early 43, 44 and 45 as the 8th grew.

Thats what I'm trying to impart is the whole unit was smaller manwise per aircraft the same holds true to this day . A good example of this is the Snowbirds the total group is 22 guys ... 11 techs 11 pilots one being the PA guy 10 aircraft and a spare ,

Soren said:

Bill,

The Dora-13's excellent high alt performance was in great part due to the fact that it featured the GM-1 system.

The Ta-152H-0 entered service in October 1944, 20 being delivered between October and Novermber.

And as to other transport a/c, well the Ju-252 beats them all in terms of speed cargo capacity (Except the Me-323 which could carry 12+ tons of cargo).

Click to expand...

Everything I can find on both ships (Ju 252 and Ju 352) suggest
Ju 252 - max range at cruise of 208mph = 2,473 15 built
Ju 352 - max range at cruise of 150mph = 1,120 45 built

Ju 252 - Delta Empty to Max TO = 24,000 pounds
Ju 352 - Delta " " = 16,000 pounds

I can't find data on either that would map out comparisons of payload to range like I could on the C-69 (of which more were built than the two above combined)

C-69
Delta - Empty to Max TO = 31,000 pounds
Max range @275mph (cruise) and 7,800 payload = 4,150mile
Max range @275mph and 18,400 payload= 1,760 miles

I assume LW design teams are good - so payload to max Delta between empty and Max TO for C-69 = 7,800/31,000 ---> .25% of payload plus fuel/crew/oil, etc fro extreme range of 4,000 miles

If the best of the above Ju 352 or 252 has 25% of Delta as cargo that would give the 252 the edge over the 352 and yield 6,000 payload at 2400 miles and 208mph.

Just compare the two Ju's to the C-69 in total payload, max speed, max cruise and range - tough to make a case that either was close much less better. I have to look but think the C-54 also has an edge, that the C-46 is close and the C-47 inferior.

I suspect nothing matched the Me 323 in payload for a transport unless you wish to compare B-29 when it was ferrying fuel over the hump to advance bases in china.

Back to the Dora -13. Which squadron was it deployed to for combat ops? and did it have a serious problem with third stage blower in Jumo 213E? At what point in time was that problem solved to enable it to achieve it's excellent high altitude performance over the -9?

I don't know much about 152, I recall it coming out of production line in late October. Where did they go - operationally, or did they stay in an evaluation unit?

In all fairness to these discussions about the superlatives of the Ta 152, the Dora -13 and even the He 162, it has to be noted that 12 YP-80s were produced before December, 1944 about the time the Ta 152H-0 was out, and that production release to operational squadrons for P=80A started in February, 1945 and that P-51H was into operational squadrons in March 1944.

It is difficult to make a case that the Ta 152 and Fw 190D-13 was far superior to any Allied fighter when the Allied fighters that were equal or superior were produced in greater numbers and delivered to operational squadrons before WWII ended. Admitted only 80+ P-80s were delivered but I think they alone exceeded all the operational Ta 152s and He 162s combined (and maybe D-13s?).. I have to check but approx 150 P-51H were delivered before VE Day

Also the F7F-1 and -2 were delivered in late 1944 with a higher dash speed at 25,000 feet than any USN fighter and 15mph faster than the P-51B at that altitude, nearly 800fpm better initial climb rate (4530fpm) and 20mph faster on the deck. It beat the F4U-4 in nearly every important combat manuever except roll, and equal in turn.

Agree, Adler. With all the superior technology, brains, etc. I am beginning to think I misread my history and Germany won the war. Just kidding as that is not a fair comment. No question that the Germanic race has always had a penchant for engineering and science which has allowed it in time of war to develop some extraordinary equipment. However, the US and Britain and France have had their share of boffins also as well as Japan. Germany had no corner on that market. Just because an AC first flew in 1943 doesn't mean it was operational. The Corsair first flew in 1940 and set a single engine fighter speed record in the US in that year. It was not operational until 1942 and not carrier ready until 1943. My source on the TA152 says,"Various models of the Ta152B, C and H were proposed and/or planned by FW and the LW; few, however, progressed further than the conceptual or prototype stage, with only several air craft ever reaching combat units," Doesn't sound like it had much if any impact on the war. It was said on this forum that the Ta152 had trouble with the Jumo 213E engine. I thought the engine was an integral part of the AC. Perhaps the Ta152 would have been the wunderkind claimed if they had left off the Jumo engine. LOL

renrich said:

Agree, Adler. With all the superior technology, brains, etc. I am beginning to think I misread my history and Germany won the war. Just kidding as that is not a fair comment. No question that the Germanic race has always had a penchant for engineering and science which has allowed it in time of war to develop some extraordinary equipment. However, the US and Britain and France have had their share of boffins also as well as Japan. Germany had no corner on that market. Just because an AC first flew in 1943 doesn't mean it was operational. The Corsair first flew in 1940 and set a single engine fighter speed record in the US in that year. It was not operational until 1942 and not carrier ready until 1943. My source on the TA152 says,"Various models of the Ta152B, C and H were proposed and/or planned by FW and the LW; few, however, progressed further than the conceptual or prototype stage, with only several air craft ever reaching combat units," Doesn't sound like it had much if any impact on the war. It was said on this forum that the Ta152 had trouble with the Jumo 213E engine. I thought the engine was an integral part of the AC. Perhaps the Ta152 would have been the wunderkind claimed if they had left off the Jumo engine. LOL

Click to expand...

Rich - in all fairness (re: my recollection of the 3rd stage blower issue with the Jumo213E), I could be wrong about the problems it caused for the Fw 190D-13 which is why I posed it as a question mark?

We certainly had issues with the P&W 3350 throughout the war in the B-29A which resulted in B-29B/B-50 post WWII... as well as Allison system at very high cold ETO altitudes in the winter of 1943/1944.

Like you and Chris I have enormous respect for German engineering talent and they were at leading edge/bleeding edge fron for rockets and ject engines at end of WWII as well as high speed aerodynamics... but it WAS bleeding edge for the Ta 152/Me 262 and He 162 when necessary to make operationally reliable to same degree as Fw 190A and 109 G/K. The YP-80 and P-80A was no worse (reliability) than Ta 152H-1 or He 162 at end of war, in my opinion, in ETO.

drgondog said:

.

Like you and Chris I have enormous respect for German engineering talent and they were at leading edge/bleeding edge fron for rockets and ject engines at end of WWII as well as high speed aerodynamics... but it WAS bleeding edge for the Ta 152/Me 262 and He 162 when necessary to make operationally reliable to same degree as Fw 190A and 109 G/K. The YP-80 and P-80A was no worse (reliability) than Ta 152H-1 or He 162 at end of war, in my opinion, in ETO.

Click to expand...

Exactly. There is more than just being technically the best. Just having quality does not cut it.

While I believe believe the Germans were ahead of there time in many areas and made many advanced and superior aircraft, I would never kid myself and argue that everything German was better. If it were that way, Germany would have won the war.

Adler,

Note who Renrich thinks your comment was directed at

Bill,

IIRC the Ju-252 could carry about 8 tons of cargo (Same as Ar-232) and unlike the C-69 it featured a loading ramp for loading larger cargo. Also the Ju-252's 2,473 mile range with max payload is pretty darn impressive.

The Ju-290 had a slightly higher payload capacity than the Ju-252 but was faster and had an even greater range, and it also featured a rear loading ramp.

Ju-290


Another great German transport plane was the BV-222 flying boat, which with a 10 ton payload capacity and 3,737 mile range was a very impressive a/c. It featured wide side doors for loading cargo and was VERY well armed.

Now about the C-69, well according my sources only 21 were ever delivered to the USAAF during WW2, which means less than the Ju-252 Ju-352 combined.

Also the max payload for the first C-69 L-049's couldn't have been very high considering the ~22,000 kg empty weight and the ~32,000 kg max weight.

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

Exactly. There is more than just being technically the best. Just having quality does not cut it.

While I believe believe the Germans were ahead of there time in many areas and made many advanced and superior aircraft, I would never kid myself and argue that everything German was better. If it were that way, Germany would have won the war.

Click to expand...

One remark: like in sports the best does not always win, a lot of factors play a part in it and having to fight against the majority of the world without many powerful allies is one of them.

Bill,

Regarding the Jumo 213 engine;

The Jumo 213E had a three-speed two-stage supercharger and induction cooler, and there were no problems with it. There was a problem with some batches of Jumo 213A engines at one point, Mike Williams using performance figures reached with some of these underperforming engines on his site.

The problem plagueing the Jumo 213 was the lack of raw materials Germany was experiencing, causing the quality to often vary from batch to batch. However the Jumo 213 engine, while being the Ta-152H's only problem late in the war, was after-all a very reliable engine when built to the minimum German quality standards, however sadly for the Germans this was far from always possible.

Marcel said:

One remark: like in sports the best does not always win, a lot of factors play a part in it and having to fight against the majority of the world without many powerful allies is one of them.

Click to expand...

Exactly Marcel.

Having the best aircraft means nothing if you're lacking the fuel and trained pilots to fly them.

Yep, according to Churchill," the only thing worse than fighting a war with allies is fighting a war without allies." Another Churchillism. When told by Von Ribbentrop, "this time we will have Italy on our side." Churchill said, "that seems fair, we were stuck with them last time." However, I think that going from having almost no army, a small air force and perhaps having only the third largest Navy in the world in 1939 to launching an amphibious assault across the Atlantic (with considerable help from the Brits) in Novenber, 1942, while still fighting a major war in the Pacific, was a prodigous accomplishment possibly underappreciated.

Soren said:

IIRC the Ju-252 could carry about 8 tons of cargo (Same as Ar-232) and unlike the C-69 it featured a loading ramp for loading larger cargo. Also the Ju-252's 2,473 mile range with max payload is pretty darn impressive.

Specifications (Ju 252A)
General characteristics
Crew: 3-4
Length: 25.10 m (82 ft 4¼ in)
Wingspan: 34.08 m (111 ft 10⅛ in)
Height: 5.74 m (18 ft 10⅓ in)
Wing area: 122.63 m² (1,320 ft²)
Empty weight: 13,100 kg (28,880 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 24,000 kg (52,911 lb)
Powerplant: 3× Junkers Jumo 211F 12-cylinder inverted-vee engine, 1,006 kW (1,350 hp) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 437 km/h at 5,800 m (272 mph at 19,030 ft)
Cruise speed: 334 km/h (208 mph)
Range: 3,980 km (2,473 miles)
Service ceiling: 6,300 m (20,670 ft)
Rate of climb: 228 m/min (748 ft/min)

Soren - I dont know if these data are accurate. If so here some key points

Max Gross less Empty is 24,000 pounds - all you have to deal with for all fuel, payload, crew armament, etc.
Max Range, unspecified load is 2,473 mi (I suspect in the 6,000 pound range at max, if comparable to C-69 below)
Cruise is 208mph

But there is zero reference (and would not be credible) to suggest it can carry max payload to max range. Physics doen't work that with a/c that require a fuel load to take off.

Do you have a source that better differentiates max paylod for one range, and max range for another payload?

C-69 - Model L049, 22 delivered to Army, balance of production run converted back to civilian airline config - I believe about 70 more.




Now about the C-69, well according my sources only 21 were ever delivered to the USAAF during WW2, which means less than the Ju-252 Ju-352 combined.

But had a several hundred ship production run up to the 1049 which was the C-121/Super Connie. Locheed bought back the C-69s and converted tham to the L049 (military version = C-69) commercial version through 1946

Also the max payload for the first C-69 L-049's couldn't have been very high considering the ~22,000 kg empty weight and the ~32,000 kg max weight.

I think you misread your source - the 'delta is 39,000+kg less 25,000+Kg or about 31,000 pounds. Further if you look at the payload for 2290 miles at 275mph (18,000+) pounds you will note that is 76% of the TOTALdifference between Empty and Gross Max of the 24,000 pounds of the Ju 252

Click to expand...

This is hard to read Soren but the L049 is the C-69 and the derivative commercial liners from the L049 (same airframe, different engines) were produced around 100 through the L749. The L049 was suborned by USAAF but kept production into late 1946, when it was modified enough with spar and gear mods to become the L149.. and so on through L749

The Lockheed Constellation - USA

Lockheed Constellation Specifications:
Dimensions:
Model 049 Model 749 Model 1049G Model 1649
Wing span: 123 ft 0 in (37.49 m) 123 ft 0 in (37.49 m) 123 ft 5 in (37.62 m) 150 ft 0 in (45.72 m)
Length: 95 ft 2 in (29.00 m) 95 ft 2 in (29.00 m) 113 ft 7 in (34.62 m) 116 ft 2 in (35.41 m)
Height: 23 ft 8 in (7.21 m) 23 ft 8 in (7.21 m) 24 ft 9 in (7.54 m) 24 ft 9 in (7.54 m)
Wing Area: 1,650 ft² (153.28 m²) 1,650 ft² (153.28 m²) 1,654 ft² (153.66 m²) 1,850 ft² (171.87 m²)
Weights:
Empty Weight: 55,345 lbs (25,104 kg) 58,970 lbs (26,748 kg) 73,016 lbs (33,120 kg) 91,645 lbs (41,969 kg)
Loaded Weight: 86,250 lbs (39,122 kg) 107,000 lbs (48,534 kg) 137,500 lbs (62,369 kg) 160,000 lbs (72,575 kg)
Performance:
Max. Speed: 329 mph (529 km/h)
@ sea level 358 mph (576 km/h)
@ 19,200 ft (5,852 m) 370 mph (595 km/h)
@ 20,000 ft (6,095 m) 377 mph (606 km/h)
@ 18,600 ft (5,669 m)

Cruising Speed: 275 mph (442 km/h) 327 mph (526 km/h) 305 mph (491 km/h) 290 mph (466 km/h)
Service Ceiling: 25,500 ft (7,770 m) 22,300 ft (6,795 m) 23,700 ft (7,223 m)
Max Range: 3,680 miles (5,920 km) with
7,800 lb (3,538 kg) payload 4,150 miles (6,678 km) with
3,300 lb (1,496 kg) payload 5,250 miles (8,449 km) with
8,500 lb (3,856 kg) payload 6,180 miles (9,945 km) with
8,000 lb (3,628 kg) payload
Range
Max Payload: 2,290 miles (3,685 km) with
18,400 lb (8,364 kg) payload 1,760 miles (2,832 km) with
16,300 lb (7,393 kg) payload 4,140 miles (6,660 km) with
18,300 lb (8,301 kg) payload 4,940 miles (7,950 km) with
19,500 lb (8,845 kg) payload

Summarize The C-69/L049

Empty Weight: 55,345 lbs (25,104 kg), MAX wt 86,250 pounds
Delta = 31,000 and of that

18,400 could be transported 2,290 miles at 275mph or
7,800 could be taken 3,680 miles at 275mph

Remember this specific model Constellation didn't stop use on VE day, it flew a long time in this configuration and moved a lot of military, civilan and dope over the years

Even the Germans were glad to see the unarmed warbird that held off the Russians for 10 months and delivered the first cold war victory. A hero under-appreciated.

davparlr said:

Even the Germans were glad to see the unarmed warbird that held off the Russians for 10 months and delivered the first cold war victory. A hero under-appreciated.

Click to expand...

one helluva airplane - and Curtis Lemay's only peacetime statement

Soren said:

Adler,

Note who Renrich thinks your comment was directed at

Click to expand...

I dont care who he thinks it was directed it. I was talking to Bill...

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:

Exactly. There is more than just being technically the best. Just having quality does not cut it.

While I believe believe the Germans were ahead of there time in many areas and made many advanced and superior aircraft, I would never kid myself and argue that everything German was better. If it were that way, Germany would have won the war.

Click to expand...

The single largest factor I think that won the war for the Allies was = numbers.

Look at USA and Russia as leading examples.

I am not saying they did not produce fine machines, they did, but the numbers game won them the war more then any other factor IMO.

Hunter368 said:

The single largest factor I think that won the war for the Allies was = numbers.

Look at USA and Russia as leading examples.

I am not saying they did not produce fine machines, they did, but the numbers game won them the war more then any other factor IMO.

Click to expand...

Agreed 100 percent. I have never claimed anything different.

I just get tired of the everything the allies built was inferior to what the Germans built thing that goes around...