Ta 152H-1 vs P-51H

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Not open for further replies.


1st Lieutenant
Feb 6, 2005
Ta 152H-1 vs P-51H

Focke Wulf Ta 152H-1

Ta 152H-1 Statistics:

Empty weight: 4,031 kg
Fully loaded weight: Escort Mission = 5,220 kg - Fighter Mission = 4,750 kg
Maximum loaded weight: 5,220 kg

Internal fuel capacity: 594 L B4 and 85 L GM-1 in the fuselage, 400 + 115 L B4 and 70 L MW-50 in the wings - Total = 1,109 L B4 + 85 L GM-1 + 70 L MW-50

Ta 152H-1 Dimensions:

Wing span: 14.44 m
Wing area: 23.3 m2
Lenght: 10.71 m
Height: 4 m

Ta 152H-1 Aerodynamics:

Wing loading: 224 - 203 kg/sq.m
Span loading: 361 - 328 kg/m
Wing aspect ratio: 8.94
Wing profile: Root = NACA FW 23015.3 or xxx20.6 - Tip = NACA FW 23009
Wing thickness ratio: Root 15.3% - 20.6% - Tip = 9%

Power loading: 2.54 - 2.31 kg/hp

Ta 152H-1 Performance:

Max speeds:

- 598 km/h at sea level using MW-50
- 749 km/h at 9,500 m using MW-50
- 760 km/h at 12,500 m using GM-1 (MAX)

Note: These speeds were superceded in combat as engine performance apparently was better with the Ta152H's in service compared to the test-bed(s).

Climb rates and time:

- 20m/s at Start u. Notlesitung = 1,730 HP @ 3,250 RPM
- ~26m/s at Sonder Notleistung = 2,050 HP @ 3,250 RPM

- 10.1 min to climb 10,000 m using MW-50

Service ceiling: 14,800 - 15,100m

Jumo 213E performance:

- 1,580 HP @ 3,000 RPM = Steig u. Kampfleistung
- 1,730 HP @ 3,250 RPM = Start u. Notleistung
- 2,050 HP @ 3,250 RPM = Sonder Notleistung

Ta 152H-1 Armament:

1x 30mm MK108 cannon and 2x 20mm MG151/20 cannons

Ta 152H-1 Service record::

Service entering date: 27th January 1945
Losses to aerial combat: 0
Losses to accidents: 3 (two of them occured in combat)
Confirmed kills in aerial combat: 11

North American P-51H Mustang

P-51H Statistics:

Empty weight: 3,193 kg
Loaded weight: Escort Mission = 5,216 kg - Fighter Mission = 4,310 kg
Maximum loaded weight: 5,216 kg

Internal fuel capacity: 965 L of 100/150 grade fuel.

P-51H Dimension:

Wing span: 11.27 m
Wing area: 21.64 m2
Length: 10.15 m
Height: 4.16 m

P-51H Aerodynamics:

Wing loading: 241 - 199.1 kg/sq.m
Span loading: 462 - 382.4 kg/m
Wing aspect ratio: 5.86
Wing profile: Root = NACA 66-(1.8 )15.5 – Tip = NACA 66-(1.8 )12 "Laminar"
Wing thickness ratio: Root = 15.5% - Tip = 12%

Power-loading: 2.35 – 1.94 kg/hp

P-51H Performance:

Max speeds:

- 714 km/h at 1,524 m using (W)WEP
- 745 km/h at 4,570 m using (W)WEP
- 783 km/h at 7,620 m using (W)WEP (MAX)

Climb rates and time:

- ~24-25 m/s at sea level using (W)WEP

- 1.5 min to climb 1,524 m using (W)WEP
- 5 min to climb 4,570 m using (W)WEP

Service ceiling: 12,679 m

Packard V-1650-9 performance:

- 1,380 HP @ 3,000 RPM = Take Off Power
- 1,720 HP @ 3,000 RPM = War Emergency Power
- 2,218 HP @ 3,000 RPM = Wet War Emergency Power

P-51H Armament:

6x 12.7mm machine-guns.

P-51H Service record:

Non WWII aircraft.


Aerodynamic Facts:

Airfoil Thickness Ratio - Higher is better.
Wing Aspect Ratio - Higher is better.
Span-loading - Lower is better.
Power-loading - Lower is better.

Laminar wing info:
Laminar flow wings lowered the drag, but this came at the cost of lower lift, especially under high G loads. A Laminar flow wing will stall earlier and more violently than a conventional wing.

Wing aspect ratio info:
There is a component of the drag of an aircraft called induced drag which depends inversely on the aspect ratio. A higher aspect ratio wing has a lower drag and a higher lift than a lower aspect ratio wing.

Span loading info:
The turning drag/lift factor is proportional to the span loading (W/b^2) at a given G loading and indicated airspeed (IAS). It is related to induced drag and is familiar to aerodynamicists. It is the dominant parameter in calculating sustained G. In air-combat turns, the induced drag at a given G level is directly proportional to the span loading.
Well its 5 min to 15,000 ft according to my sources. Have you got any other figures ?
Yes, well what I've got is 5 min to 15,000 ft and 6.8 min to 20,000 ft. This might be at combat power however... I'll update the comparison as soon as I get the right figures.
Just checked in some charts, and its most likely at "dry" WEP. I'll see if I can get the "Wet" WEP figures.
ice cube liquid-injection my friend ........a nice 10/15 minute burst of excitement, actually longer in the Ta 152H-1. Heres something to ponder if Monogram ever gets it published ....

By Thomas H. Hitchcock
ISBN: 987-0-914144-55-4
Size: 9 x 12 inch (229 x 305 mm)
200 printed pages
Binding: Case bound hardcover
American retail price: $55.95

Contents: Introduction, Foreword, Chapters 1 – 5, Epilogue, Appendices: 1) Camouflage, Insignia and Markings; 2) Production and Werknummem; 3) Technical Description, Specifiications, Performance Equipment; 4) Pilot Operating Instructions, Bibliography, Index

155 Photographs; 31 in full color.
79 Drawing plates (3-views, sectionals, charts, detail views, general arrangement dwgs, plus maps.)
26 full color illustrations
If the P-51H ran at (W)WEP for any longer than 5-7 min its engine would be trashed.

I really hope it gets published Erich, currently I have Dietmar Harmann's book on the Ta 152, a great book.
Well just so know its only running at WEP, what we need is info on its performance at (W)WEP which was quite abit higher.
Typo ;)

It is 1,940 HP at 75" Hg and 2,218 HP at 80" Hg, and I'll eat my hat if it isn't true :)
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread