wuzak
Captain
The reason for the Ta 152H's performance, particularly at altitude, was the NO2 system. Without that, how well did it go?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The performance was never used for anything, so it is all supposition. It has almost no record in combat and all this "great" stuff is but a paper comparison of the "Best" numbers from hand-made prototypes. How many threads have I read where the real production planes had less performance than the hand-made prototypes?
The true test is the crucuble of combat and the performance achieved by combat-ready production aircraft, which the Ta-152 barely faced at all, and came up quite short when it did. There was never a true "production" representative aircraft in service at any time.
Greq p you keep making statements about Ta 152 that have absolutely no contact with reality. According to what source the aircrafts of JG300 were "hand made prototypes??"
Tell me one resercher on whom you base your statement. They were standard production Fw190 a8 fuselages with the nessecary extentions . And these early production examples were OF INFERIOR performance to the intended production machines, because they had not all the intended improvements and equipment and were equiped with he jumo 213E-0 engine, not the production E-1. As i wrote earlier a whole series of improvements were not introduced in those early examples because of the war conditions
If you want to speak about specially prepared hand made prototypes look at the soviets. Their test aircrafts , were vastly superior to the front Line aircrafts.
A true production ready Ta 152H1, would have a much better performance than the 152h-0.I give evidence, you just make statements
Also ,regadless your statements, the Ta 152H 0 erformance was tested in combat, was used for military reasons, under impossible terms and proved at least competitive .Its pilots claimed that they were able to survive those impossible combat terms because of the aircrafts abilities, but i suppose you know better than them and we must accept your statement that the aircraft came quite short when it faced enemy "combat ready " aircrafts
That's a valid point, how well would have any of the long established "greats" done in 6 weeks under the same conditions as the Ta152?Potential doesn't make an aircraft 'one of the greats'.
Coulda, Woulda, Shoulda...
It takes time. Would we be talking about how great the P-51 was if we are restricted to talking about the first 50 produced? How about the Spitfire?
The 152 could have been a great aircraft, had it had time to develop and mature as a design. (That's the Ta152, not the C-152, the Cessna product has had plenty of time to mature )
As for it's title as the pinnacle of piston engine fighters, should in my opinion, read pinnacle of German piston engine fighters. The Mustang, Bearcat and P80 all enjoyed further refinement and use post 1945, while the Ta-152 died in it's infancy due to the end of the war. Could it have gone further, oh YEAH. Did it, nope.
I agree, but you did forget the Sea Fury, certainly the pinnacle of British piston engine fighters and right up there with the others you did mention.
Cheers
Steve