You have to be kidding right? The game comes no where close to the real thing. It is an X Box game man. It is very unrealistic and you cant even think of getting the feel for flying these great planes from that game!
p-80 V Me 262
- Thread starter MAV_406
- Start date
You have to be kidding right? The game comes no where close to the real thing. It is an X Box game man. It is very unrealistic and you cant even think of getting the feel for flying these great planes from that game!
SoD Stitch
Banned
The only "special weaponry" I can think of that the Germans had and the Allies didn't was "Schrag Musik", which is a loose German translation of "Jazz Music". I'm sure others could describe it better than I could . . .
drgondog
Major
Soren - lets look at one example which illustrates aerodynamics and priorities - you can cite others.
The Republic XP-72 was ordered in July, 1943 with an initial order for 100. It was designed around the PW 4360-13, counter rotating props and mustang like 'thrust radiator'. It first flew on 2 Feb, 1944 with the following Flight Test results - 480mph at 32K, ceiling at 42,000, 1200 miles range, 5280fpm initial climb.
That was with the -13 engine. The planned performance with the 4360-19 was 5,500 fpm climb and 540mph at 32K.
The program was cancelled because the USAAF believed the a/c was not needed and only a small incremental increase in performance over the P-51H.
So, this a/c which had similar to greater performance to Ta152H was never produced despite flying six months before the Ta152!
Below from various sources - maybe correct (Erich?)
The Ta152 was initiated in late 1942 and because of priorities did not really get much done until late 1943, with first delivery in July 1944 and first flight in August 1944. It went into serial production in October producing the first Ta152 in November - getting 34 delivered and went into ops Jan27, 1945.
So I suspect you won't use the Ta152 as an example of a German design 'easy to get into production from concept to first flight' in contrast to the P-80 and the P-51?
In contrast to the XP-72 which a.) flew seven months before the Ta152H, and b.) was faster and climber much faster with the -13 engine and projected 10% even higher performance with the -19, the Ta152 was
a. ) 'Buggier' with several crashes and other issues due to the extremely high pressure to get into production (31 hours total test by end of November, 50 hours by January 1945?)
b.) Had a much higher ceiling at 48K (but who was it going to fight there?)
c.) Did go into ops - but the latter was a conscious decision by US to NOT bring the P-72 into production and Germany to force the Ta152 into ops before it was ready.
For similar reasons the P-51H was ready and fully operational and deployed to units in US in March 1945- approximately 35 days later than the Ta152H but far more reliable at that stage of development.
The XP-51G first flew in August 1944 (like the Ta152) and attained the highest performance of any Mustang achieving 495TAS at 22,800 feet, climbing to 20,000 feet in 3.4 minutes with 2,000 hp at 20,000 feet. Only lack of a pressurized cabin limited the ceiling to 46,000 feet. The engine was a special Merlin 100 with a five blade Rotol prop. The latter tests were performed at both NA facilities and Boscomb Down and completed by Nov 1944.
The first P-51H (production) flew on February 3, 1945 and the first operational squadron was equipped in March 1945. This ship had a 'no stores' maximum speed of 487mph - still higher than the max Ta152H
So, except for the the superior 'design to flight cycle', 'flight to production cycle' of the Allies, equivalent fighters (recip) in flight (XP-51G, XP-72) before or same time as Ta152HV1, where do you want to demonstrate superior aerodynamicists and engineering programs with just the stellar Ta152H?
It's all about putting the right tool in place at the right time. The Germans were suprised that we (US) didn't assign Japan as highest priority and initially weren't worried about US daylight bombing.. but they had from Aug 1942 to the end of the war to design and implement the 'stoppers' - but they failed.
The US with help of UK recognized that daylight bombing was going to be prohibitive without escort fighters - modified the P-51 with Merlins in summer of 1942 and put the P-51B into production in March 1943.. about six months after 8th AF started combat ops... the first ones reached UK in Sep 1943.
The Germans saw the disaster coming at high altitude escort by P-51s in Dec 1943 - and put the Ta 152H into combat one year later despite starting design in 1942.
As to your pocket Battleship - contrast away. Give it your best shot. The Japanese actually take top honors on the BB's from a firepower standpoint but perhaps behind in fire control. Dig up your data on the fine German 'pocket' BB's and contrats against Alaska Class Cruisers and Iowa Class BB's?
And BTW, the double hull design of German U-Boats did give them superior crush depths to the Balao and Trench boats but fewer torps , shorter range, more time to get to station... but your best boat only put two into ops by end of war. Different designs for different priorities. Still, THAT U-Boat was superior to all Allied designs..
The Republic XP-72 was ordered in July, 1943 with an initial order for 100. It was designed around the PW 4360-13, counter rotating props and mustang like 'thrust radiator'. It first flew on 2 Feb, 1944 with the following Flight Test results - 480mph at 32K, ceiling at 42,000, 1200 miles range, 5280fpm initial climb.
That was with the -13 engine. The planned performance with the 4360-19 was 5,500 fpm climb and 540mph at 32K.
The program was cancelled because the USAAF believed the a/c was not needed and only a small incremental increase in performance over the P-51H.
So, this a/c which had similar to greater performance to Ta152H was never produced despite flying six months before the Ta152!
Below from various sources - maybe correct (Erich?)
The Ta152 was initiated in late 1942 and because of priorities did not really get much done until late 1943, with first delivery in July 1944 and first flight in August 1944. It went into serial production in October producing the first Ta152 in November - getting 34 delivered and went into ops Jan27, 1945.
So I suspect you won't use the Ta152 as an example of a German design 'easy to get into production from concept to first flight' in contrast to the P-80 and the P-51?
In contrast to the XP-72 which a.) flew seven months before the Ta152H, and b.) was faster and climber much faster with the -13 engine and projected 10% even higher performance with the -19, the Ta152 was
a. ) 'Buggier' with several crashes and other issues due to the extremely high pressure to get into production (31 hours total test by end of November, 50 hours by January 1945?)
b.) Had a much higher ceiling at 48K (but who was it going to fight there?)
c.) Did go into ops - but the latter was a conscious decision by US to NOT bring the P-72 into production and Germany to force the Ta152 into ops before it was ready.
For similar reasons the P-51H was ready and fully operational and deployed to units in US in March 1945- approximately 35 days later than the Ta152H but far more reliable at that stage of development.
The XP-51G first flew in August 1944 (like the Ta152) and attained the highest performance of any Mustang achieving 495TAS at 22,800 feet, climbing to 20,000 feet in 3.4 minutes with 2,000 hp at 20,000 feet. Only lack of a pressurized cabin limited the ceiling to 46,000 feet. The engine was a special Merlin 100 with a five blade Rotol prop. The latter tests were performed at both NA facilities and Boscomb Down and completed by Nov 1944.
The first P-51H (production) flew on February 3, 1945 and the first operational squadron was equipped in March 1945. This ship had a 'no stores' maximum speed of 487mph - still higher than the max Ta152H
So, except for the the superior 'design to flight cycle', 'flight to production cycle' of the Allies, equivalent fighters (recip) in flight (XP-51G, XP-72) before or same time as Ta152HV1, where do you want to demonstrate superior aerodynamicists and engineering programs with just the stellar Ta152H?
It's all about putting the right tool in place at the right time. The Germans were suprised that we (US) didn't assign Japan as highest priority and initially weren't worried about US daylight bombing.. but they had from Aug 1942 to the end of the war to design and implement the 'stoppers' - but they failed.
The US with help of UK recognized that daylight bombing was going to be prohibitive without escort fighters - modified the P-51 with Merlins in summer of 1942 and put the P-51B into production in March 1943.. about six months after 8th AF started combat ops... the first ones reached UK in Sep 1943.
The Germans saw the disaster coming at high altitude escort by P-51s in Dec 1943 - and put the Ta 152H into combat one year later despite starting design in 1942.
As to your pocket Battleship - contrast away. Give it your best shot. The Japanese actually take top honors on the BB's from a firepower standpoint but perhaps behind in fire control. Dig up your data on the fine German 'pocket' BB's and contrats against Alaska Class Cruisers and Iowa Class BB's?
And BTW, the double hull design of German U-Boats did give them superior crush depths to the Balao and Trench boats but fewer torps , shorter range, more time to get to station... but your best boat only put two into ops by end of war. Different designs for different priorities. Still, THAT U-Boat was superior to all Allied designs..
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
You have to be kidding right? The game comes no where close to the real thing. It is an X Box game man. It is very unrealistic and you cant even think of getting the feel for flying these great planes from that game!
Yeah, check my responce from earlier. The PC version was slightly better (at least you could use a joystick, though still no cockpit =( ). And as said the historical aspect is decent, though as said not 100% corect (even from an adaptation standpoint). I would have thought consulting Planes of Fame would have had a more significant effect on the game. (I wonder what their oppinions of the final version are, as it comes far short from what they claimed to be aiming at)
Still, despite the unrealistic performance of all the planes, they do perform realitively accuratly in comparison to eachother. And at least the Germans and Japanese speak their own languages (compared to Blazing Angels' horrid accented english vouces)
I sttand by my statements of IL-2 1946 though... One of the most realistic combat sims out there, though the voice acting could be a little more enthusiastic (partiularly the Americans...).
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
drgondog, the XP-72 was great, at the projected speed it would have given the 262 a run for the money. I've also read that the increased power not only increased speed and climb, but along with improved control systems markedly improved the maneuverabillity. Addition of dive-flaps increased crit-mach, which was already pretty high, all things considdered. (the P-47 could dive at 550 MPH without the use of dive-recovery-flaps!) Imagine the look on the Me-262 pilot's face when he can't outrun or outfly a prop-driven piston-engined fighter!! 
Don't forget the P-47J though (tested over a year before the Ta 152): "The first and only XP-47J was first flown in late November 1943. When fitted with a GE CH-5 turbosupercharger, the XP-47J achieved a top speed of 440 knots (505 mph, 813 km/h) in level flight in August 1944, making it one of the fastest piston engine fighters ever built. However, by that time Republic had moved on to a new concept, the XP-72." P-72 with the P-47N's wings would have made a nice escort.
This has been discussed thoughly here: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/av...-side-would-you-develope-further-2805-13.html
Don't forget the P-47J though (tested over a year before the Ta 152): "The first and only XP-47J was first flown in late November 1943. When fitted with a GE CH-5 turbosupercharger, the XP-47J achieved a top speed of 440 knots (505 mph, 813 km/h) in level flight in August 1944, making it one of the fastest piston engine fighters ever built. However, by that time Republic had moved on to a new concept, the XP-72." P-72 with the P-47N's wings would have made a nice escort.
This has been discussed thoughly here: http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/av...-side-would-you-develope-further-2805-13.html
Al,
1.) SchrägeMusik
2.) I am afraid the 109T never saw service.
3.) LoL, lets see the details.
On the subject of U-boats:
The method of reaching the target destination for U-boats of the era was to travel on the surface, which made them very vulnerable to detection, except ofcourse for the German U-boats. German U-boats were equipped with the "Schnorchel", a device which allowed them to run on diesel engines at periscope depth, this allowed them to travel all the way to their target destination fully submerged, this meant a dramatically decreased chance being detected. The Schnorchel also allowed the Germans to ventilate their subs while still being submerged. Another smart anti-detection measure used by German U-boats was the sonar-absorbing rubber materials covering their U-boats from 1942 (IIRC it was 1942) and onwards, this increased their stealth capability while engaged in combat with destroyers.
As to the weaponary targeting system of the German U-boats, again here were far ahead compared to their allied counterparts. The German U-boats featured a torpedo targeting fire-control computer [KommandoGerät] which automatically calculated the correct angle deflection needed to strike the moving target on pre-chosen areas transferred this directly to the chosen torpedo. This ensured a far greater chance of not only hitting the target but also taking it out with the first shot, as German U-boat commanders could (If the intelligence on the target was correct) pick the most vulnerable spots on the target (Such as the fuel depot) and hit with pinpoint accuracy at very long ranges. This system remained unrivalled in the world until the end of WW2.
And then ofcourse comes the torpedoes themselves, and ofcourse the Germans were years ahead in this field as-well fielding self guided acoustic homing torpedoes [ZaunKönigs], one of the first true fire-and-forget weapons. So effective were these first self guided torpedoes that the Allie quickly had to develop a countermeasure, the Foxer sound device, this in turn had the Germans develop new versions of their ZaunKönigs with a more fine tuned accoustic detection capability. This weapon was mostly used against escorts as their course was unpredictable, but also if the U-boat had been detected and it proved very successful, esp. early in its deployment.
Bill,
You failed to note that the XP-72 was a prototype a/c, an during its speed trials it wasn't packed with ammunition. By contrast the combat ready Ta-152H-1 reached 500 + mph at altitude and climb rate was in excess of 5,000 ft/min reaching 32,808 ft in just 10.1min. The Dora-13 topped at 480 mph at VH.
Still the XP-72 was an impressive a/c no doubt about it, and like the Ta-152 it was pushing the performanc limit of piston engined fighters.
That having been said the Germans were by mid 1944 to 1945 more interested in Jets, which was one of the reasons the Ta-152 didn't recieve the engine most desired for it.
The Germans weren't going to be bothered with wasting funds on any piston engined fighter by mid 1944 as they had already topped 900 km/h with their first operational Jet by then and were aiming to reach 1,000 + km/h with their next designs. The Jet engine the way forward and that had been fully recognized by the German engineers since the first flights of the Me-262, and by some even since 1939 after the very successful flights of the He-178.
The He-162 was the fastest German jet to make it into service at 890 km/h at SL and 905 km/h at VH.
1.) SchrägeMusik
2.) I am afraid the 109T never saw service.
3.) LoL, lets see the details.
On the subject of U-boats:
The method of reaching the target destination for U-boats of the era was to travel on the surface, which made them very vulnerable to detection, except ofcourse for the German U-boats. German U-boats were equipped with the "Schnorchel", a device which allowed them to run on diesel engines at periscope depth, this allowed them to travel all the way to their target destination fully submerged, this meant a dramatically decreased chance being detected. The Schnorchel also allowed the Germans to ventilate their subs while still being submerged. Another smart anti-detection measure used by German U-boats was the sonar-absorbing rubber materials covering their U-boats from 1942 (IIRC it was 1942) and onwards, this increased their stealth capability while engaged in combat with destroyers.
As to the weaponary targeting system of the German U-boats, again here were far ahead compared to their allied counterparts. The German U-boats featured a torpedo targeting fire-control computer [KommandoGerät] which automatically calculated the correct angle deflection needed to strike the moving target on pre-chosen areas transferred this directly to the chosen torpedo. This ensured a far greater chance of not only hitting the target but also taking it out with the first shot, as German U-boat commanders could (If the intelligence on the target was correct) pick the most vulnerable spots on the target (Such as the fuel depot) and hit with pinpoint accuracy at very long ranges. This system remained unrivalled in the world until the end of WW2.
And then ofcourse comes the torpedoes themselves, and ofcourse the Germans were years ahead in this field as-well fielding self guided acoustic homing torpedoes [ZaunKönigs], one of the first true fire-and-forget weapons. So effective were these first self guided torpedoes that the Allie quickly had to develop a countermeasure, the Foxer sound device, this in turn had the Germans develop new versions of their ZaunKönigs with a more fine tuned accoustic detection capability. This weapon was mostly used against escorts as their course was unpredictable, but also if the U-boat had been detected and it proved very successful, esp. early in its deployment.
Bill,
You failed to note that the XP-72 was a prototype a/c, an during its speed trials it wasn't packed with ammunition. By contrast the combat ready Ta-152H-1 reached 500 + mph at altitude and climb rate was in excess of 5,000 ft/min reaching 32,808 ft in just 10.1min. The Dora-13 topped at 480 mph at VH.
Still the XP-72 was an impressive a/c no doubt about it, and like the Ta-152 it was pushing the performanc limit of piston engined fighters.
That having been said the Germans were by mid 1944 to 1945 more interested in Jets, which was one of the reasons the Ta-152 didn't recieve the engine most desired for it.
The Germans weren't going to be bothered with wasting funds on any piston engined fighter by mid 1944 as they had already topped 900 km/h with their first operational Jet by then and were aiming to reach 1,000 + km/h with their next designs. The Jet engine the way forward and that had been fully recognized by the German engineers since the first flights of the Me-262, and by some even since 1939 after the very successful flights of the He-178.
The He-162 was the fastest German jet to make it into service at 890 km/h at SL and 905 km/h at VH.
AL Schlageter
Banned
- 220
- Oct 9, 2007
Then how did I/JG.77 fly 109Ts in Norway?
I am going to have to disagree with you, but that is for another discussion. We have gone over it many times here.
Sorry Soren but you are completely wrong.
They were used out of Norway. I have a great book at home on the Bf 109T called Sea Eagles. I will post the source for the book so you can buy it yourself and educate yourself on the subject. It also includes pics of the Bf 109Ts in service.
The book also includes complete Werk Nummer for all the aircraft that entered service and the fates of each one. It also includes kills for each aircraft and the pilots that were flying them.
Ok I was partly wrong as I remembered the project had been cancelled, and not that the few prototypes had been sent to Norway. But Germany didn't have any carrier fighters cause they didn't have any carriers Adler - that was my point. The Germans didn't develop any up to date carrier a/c after 1940 as they didn't have any carriers, hence why they didn't have an equal to the Allied carrier fighters by 1944.
The few 109T's made (7 according to my book) operated from land, not from any navy vessel.
The few 109T's made (7 according to my book) operated from land, not from any navy vessel.
AL Schlageter
Banned
- 220
- Oct 9, 2007
Sure Soren. That is why at least 15,000 Ta152s were to be produced by March 1946.
Then why was money being spent on the Bv155?
AL Schlageter
Banned
- 220
- Oct 9, 2007
I think you need a geography lesson. Norway is not Finland.
70 109Ts built is a an awful lot of prototypes.
I corrected it to norway AL, and you need to learn your history cause only 7 prototypes were ever finished before the project was cancelled, and they were actually still test-beds when they flew in Norway, so my initial statement stands - the 109T never saw service, or atleast not as anything but a test-bed.
Try 73 were built. I have the werk nummer for each and every one of them. There were 7 prototypes built and 73 total with the larger wingspan, folding wings and arrester hook.
When the program was canceled the 73 production aircraft that were built were sent to Norway and operated out of Trondheim and othe places. I will post info and the book as soon as I get home.
No Soren you are completely wrong. There were 73 production Bf 109Ts built. Later the Bf 109T-1s had the arrester hooks removed and were renamed T-2s.
You need to admit when you are wrong...
As I said I will post the proof as soon as I get home.
Reading "Messerschmitt Bf 109 Recognition Manual" right now and according to it 70 were planned to be made but only 7 were completed when the project was cancelled.
But I'd be happy to read what you've got on the bird as it havent been a subject of study for me.
AL Schlageter
Banned
- 220
- Oct 9, 2007
Hermanns's Ta152 book.
Why were 46 109Ts parked on Pillau airfield on March 29 1943 if only 7 were built?
I have that book, which page ?
