Spitfire vs. Dora mass battle (1 Viewer)

[spicmart]

I thought he said that about the TA152 not the Dora?.

He said that about the Dora. The Ta 152 he flew was an H model with longer wings which had greatly reduced roll rate but was a superb turner.

He assessed the Ta 152 to be the equal of the latest propeller-driven Britsh fighter aircraft given that the 152 has MW 50 injection.

In pure dogfighting terms a Dora with the same propulsion as a Ta 152 would be better as it is much lighter and has less wet drag area.

 

[PAT303]

I remember him writing about the Spitfire XIX and TA152 also, the TA got the nod above 40,000ft?, I don't have my books with me to check.

 

[spicmart]

I remember him writing about the Spitfire XIX and TA152 also, the TA got the nod above 40,000ft?, I don't have my books with me to check.

He gave the nod to the 152 above 10,000 meters (32,800 feet) against a Griffon Spit.
But he never flew with MW 50 injection without which the Ta 152 reached 684 km/h which was 56 km/h slower than that Spitfire.
(Somehow I memorized these figure but not which mark of Spitfire.)
Brown mentioned the Ta would have reached that speed, too, or even more with MW 50.
German sources gave the Ta a top speed of about 760 km/h with GM-1 injection at very high altitude.

 

[dedalos]

He gave the nod to the 152 above 10,000 meters (32,800 feet) against a Griffon Spit.
But he never flew with MW 50 injection without which the Ta 152 reached 684 km/h which was 56 km/h slower than that Spitfire.
(Somehow I memorized these figure but not which mark of Spitfire.)
Brown mentioned the Ta would have reached that speed, too, or even more with MW 50.
German sources gave the Ta a top speed of about 760 km/h with GM-1 injection at very high altitude.

The spitfire that brown compared the Ta was the xxi. As you mention there was neither mw50 or. gm1. Additionaly , it's highly doubtful if the third speed of the 2 stage supercharger was working properly. Generally brown reviews are excellent but lack details about the condition of the aircraft under test
For example for the bf109 says " tested the bf109g". Obviously a g6 with 3 20mm guns is another universe than a g10 clean and using mw50.
Ammo loads, fuel loads are not mentioned at all.
Generally the Ta was a decent design but handicapped by poor materials and very poor building quality.
Personally I don't understand why the development of ta152, do335 continued after July 1944 when the Me262 entered combat.
As the original question , the operational D9s were far inferior from what their designers intended because of lack of materials and production capacity, and inferior fuel
They had no chance against Spit xiv.
A D13 produced as it should and with c3 fuel would be close but such an aircraft never existed.

 

[Snautzer01]

Personally I don't understand why the development of ta152, do335 continued after July 1944 when the Me262 entered combat.

Engines. And metals needed.

 

[GrauGeist]

A D13 produced as it should and with c3 fuel would be close but such an aircraft never existed.

Two were built, one survives.

 

[dedalos]

Two were built, one survives.

Yes two, possibly more . But without aerodynamic features intended as standard, with no c3 fuel, suspicious operation of the 2 stage supercharger at the second stage, and surface finish below the American standards
No D series aircraft built according to their potential. The Tiger 2 was a similar case. A good design that never had the quality armour of mid war, and a transmission built with the proper alloys