Thank for the book reference will deffinatly have to buy it. I tried a search for Ta-152 cockpit pictures online and was unable to come up with any though.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
Clever said:
Clever, a Google image search found many Ta152 photos including these fantasict wooden models.
http://ggi.cool.ne.jp/solid/models/152H.htm
Another source is the Harmann Ta 152 book. (Erich what do you think of this book?)
I could find plenty of photos of the Ta-152 but could not find any cockpit photos of actual Ta-152's
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
Ta 152 cockpits
http://www.geocities.com/ta152uk/
This is the NASM one.
You can buy the Il-2 sim series for it has the Ta 152H in it. The developer insists on 100% authenticity.
http://www.geocities.com/ta152uk/
This is the NASM one.
You can buy the Il-2 sim series for it has the Ta 152H in it. The developer insists on 100% authenticity.
KraziKanuK
Banned
- 792
- Jan 26, 2005
This photo from the link is not a computer rendition.
Erich
the old Sage
KK the book you speak of is a combination of information from Will Rescheks book on JG 301 and the very old but excellent title from mongram publishers, the TA 152. Dietmar pretty much has done more of a tech book opn the Tank and he has done well. His operations is another story......still a book worth having for data on the fast a/c.
E ♪
E ♪
evangilder
"Shooter"
Did anyone else notice the radiation tag in the cockpit photo? I wonder what that's all about.
Erich
the old Sage
Asbestos ?
evangilder
"Shooter"
I didn't think asbestos was a radiation hazard, but it could be.
Yeah I dont know either. It would be neat to find out though. 5 Cool Points to the first to do so! Yeah!
DaveB.inVa
Airman 1st Class
- 225
- Dec 20, 2004
I'd say its more likely due to the gauges having a radioactive paint applied to make the marks visible at night. Lots of American aircraft had it, I don't know about British, German, Japanese or anybody else though!
I know the tag is tied around a bundle of wires but perhaps that was just a good place to tie it
I know the tag is tied around a bundle of wires but perhaps that was just a good place to tie it
- Thread starter
- #233
A
Anonymous
Guest
DaveB.inVa said:I'd say its more likely due to the gauges having a radioactive paint applied to make the marks visible at night. Lots of American aircraft had it, I don't know about British, German, Japanese or anybody else though!
I know the tag is tied around a bundle of wires but perhaps that was just a good place to tie it
It is possible. But the amount of radium used was tiny. It was used in watch dials too. It was the workers (mostly women) who painted them that suffered. They'd keep the brush wet with their tounges as they were working, and injested the paint.
=S=
Lunatic
Very good guess either way. It is the best guess from what I have seen so far. I remember when I was in training to learn about the Blackhawk, I now remember seeing a radiocative warning on the instrument panel, but I can not remember why, nor do i remember asking why.
CharlesBronson
Senior Master Sergeant
Some Messerschmitt proposals to compite with the TA-152.
BF-109H-1, tree stage supercharger DB-605.
3 x 30mm plus 2 x 13mm.
BF-109 H2 jumo 213.
BF-109H-1, tree stage supercharger DB-605.
3 x 30mm plus 2 x 13mm.
BF-109 H2 jumo 213.
The Bf-109H was only meant to be an Interim High Alltitude fighter. It first flew (werk Nmr - 15708) on 5 Nov. 1943. The second prototype was the end of the program due to the development of the Ta-152H.
There is much confusion and discrepancy in the Ta-152H1 war record. Some sources claim SEVEN wins for FOUR losses. Most of the rest of the records are related to the Ta-152C which was used to guard the Airfields used buy the Jets and as such they were at best only moderately successful.
An apparent failure in the post's logic, was that the Ta-152H1 had twist in the wings that gave it particularly forgiving handling at, near, or post stall. This is not true. Almost all planes have "Wash out" or reduced AoA nearer the tips so that the wing will maintain roll control in or near stall. But because of the very long span and subsequent high Aspect Ratio, the stall would have been less forgiving than planes with less span and much less than planes with leading edge slats, like the Me-109! ( Which by the way, was widely regarded as the single best single engined fighter plane of WW-II by the pilots who flew and fought them!) Kind of tough to argue with pilots who have over 100, 200, 250, 300, or even 352 confirmed victories?
Others have made the point that comparing any two planes depends on so many parameters that comparison is only valid under those specific conditions. At low altitudes, the Ta-152H1 was a dog when compared to several other planes and yet the superior skill of at least two Ta-152H1 Pilots allowed them to prevail against supposedly supirior aircraft! ( Spit Mk-XIV and Tempest/Sabre falling to Ta-152H1 guns!) I also note that none of the seven known kills recorded by Ta-152H pilots were at high altitude.
Finally, a more valid comparison would be, as has already been pointed out, between the P-51H and the Ta-152H1. (There were more P-51Hs in service at any one time than there were Ta-152s.) But under that condition, the P-51H was vastly superior to the Ta-152H1 below 40,000 WO using the GM-1! ( NO2 Injection.) Above that altitude, the P-51H could wait him out or out climb them after and before the GM-1 was in use. Having >1,000FPM advantage in Rate of Climb even when using GM-1 means that unless the Ta-152H1 starts significantly higher than 40,000' altitude, the Mustang can climb up and get him before he reaches the altitude band where the Nazi plane has the advantage, or climb up past the "Service Ceiling" and shoot him down after he runs out of GM-1, which is the ONLY condition in which the Nazi plane is superior! WO GM-1, the Ta-152H1 is a dog when compared to the P-51H and can not match any performance parameter! Not a one!
I find it kind of interesting that the F-8F was no match for the P-51D above 20,000'! Having seen a "mock combat" between the two that was flown for, IIRC, Flight magazine? There was much to compare between the F-8F and Fw-190A, except that the -2 'cat had the big engine that made all those numbers and the first gen version was not nearly so great! ( Relatively speaking that is! 424 Vs 440 MPH a thousand FPM less Rate of Climb, 50 MPH less dive speed, etc.)
Just to make some trouble for all the armchair pilots here, why not consider the P-38L Vs the bunch at altitudes above 25,000'? What can be said of the -38 is that it had better all around performance than all of the rest! But much more importantly, in the most vital performance parameters, it was heads and shoulders above them! ( Buy the way, those parameters were the ones no one talks about and few consider most important!)
As far as any one knows, not one single victory was won by Ta-152s of any type at more than 30,000'! Some sources say not one over 26,000'.
An apparent failure in the post's logic, was that the Ta-152H1 had twist in the wings that gave it particularly forgiving handling at, near, or post stall. This is not true. Almost all planes have "Wash out" or reduced AoA nearer the tips so that the wing will maintain roll control in or near stall. But because of the very long span and subsequent high Aspect Ratio, the stall would have been less forgiving than planes with less span and much less than planes with leading edge slats, like the Me-109! ( Which by the way, was widely regarded as the single best single engined fighter plane of WW-II by the pilots who flew and fought them!) Kind of tough to argue with pilots who have over 100, 200, 250, 300, or even 352 confirmed victories?
Others have made the point that comparing any two planes depends on so many parameters that comparison is only valid under those specific conditions. At low altitudes, the Ta-152H1 was a dog when compared to several other planes and yet the superior skill of at least two Ta-152H1 Pilots allowed them to prevail against supposedly supirior aircraft! ( Spit Mk-XIV and Tempest/Sabre falling to Ta-152H1 guns!) I also note that none of the seven known kills recorded by Ta-152H pilots were at high altitude.
Finally, a more valid comparison would be, as has already been pointed out, between the P-51H and the Ta-152H1. (There were more P-51Hs in service at any one time than there were Ta-152s.) But under that condition, the P-51H was vastly superior to the Ta-152H1 below 40,000 WO using the GM-1! ( NO2 Injection.) Above that altitude, the P-51H could wait him out or out climb them after and before the GM-1 was in use. Having >1,000FPM advantage in Rate of Climb even when using GM-1 means that unless the Ta-152H1 starts significantly higher than 40,000' altitude, the Mustang can climb up and get him before he reaches the altitude band where the Nazi plane has the advantage, or climb up past the "Service Ceiling" and shoot him down after he runs out of GM-1, which is the ONLY condition in which the Nazi plane is superior! WO GM-1, the Ta-152H1 is a dog when compared to the P-51H and can not match any performance parameter! Not a one!
I find it kind of interesting that the F-8F was no match for the P-51D above 20,000'! Having seen a "mock combat" between the two that was flown for, IIRC, Flight magazine? There was much to compare between the F-8F and Fw-190A, except that the -2 'cat had the big engine that made all those numbers and the first gen version was not nearly so great! ( Relatively speaking that is! 424 Vs 440 MPH a thousand FPM less Rate of Climb, 50 MPH less dive speed, etc.)
Just to make some trouble for all the armchair pilots here, why not consider the P-38L Vs the bunch at altitudes above 25,000'? What can be said of the -38 is that it had better all around performance than all of the rest! But much more importantly, in the most vital performance parameters, it was heads and shoulders above them! ( Buy the way, those parameters were the ones no one talks about and few consider most important!)
As far as any one knows, not one single victory was won by Ta-152s of any type at more than 30,000'! Some sources say not one over 26,000'.
See U-Tube of the Seafury at Reno! Note also the "Super" Seafury with R-4360 engine at the same venue!
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately I doubt you will get any responses from them. The posts you are referring to were written more the 7 years ago, and some of these members are no longer active.
The Convair F-106 Delta Dart was the primary all-weather interceptor aircraft for the United States Air Force from the 1960s through the 1980s. Designed as the so-called "Ultimate Interceptor", it has proven to be the last dedicated interceptor in U.S. Air Force service to date. My friend and F-106 pilot claimed that it was far and away the worlds best "Intercepter".
I also think the F-4 and EE Lightning were the same generation. (3.) About the same time fraim of first flight and entry into service? But it was not the first aircraft to have true super cruise! That was and still is the F-104! Even the early prototypes would cruise at M1.12 WO AB on the Saphire Engine! It just needed a shallow dive or briefe burst of AB to get through the Mach. The later J-79s would push any of them to exceed M1.27 WO the AB and the later mods were faster still!
