Ta152H questions

[Milosh]

One often hears that the Ta152H's roll rate was not that good when compared to the Fw190 and this put the Ta152H at a disadvantage in combat with Allied fighters.

What was the roll rate of the Ta152H? How did it compare to the roll rate of Allied fighters?

With its long narrow wings would/did the Ta152H suffer from wing flutter in dives?

 

[Erich]

there is no way of proving or disproving as it was in combat with Tempests in turns at mid-altitude something it was not designed for but it flew perfectly well in besides combating Soviet fighters at mid-altitude.

clearly there are many questions that will never be answered except to be put in as what if's

 

[jim]

Ta 152H was the high altitude version , itwas nessecery to have extended wings and naturally its rol rate degreased in comparison to Fw190 . Every german fighter was a compromise trying to satisfy controversial operational requirements. . -H lost RoR at medium low altitudes but had ( when the 3 speed 2 stage supercgarger worked properly) supremancy over 9000m And even in low altitude the new wing offered much better turning performance ( i would said comparamble to the Tempest but the Anglosaxons friends would disagree violently), much improved climbing ,better accelaration,better manouverability. III/JG301 flew the Ta 152H0 (Jumo213E0 ,no MW50) both in test flights and combat ,exlusively in low/medium altitudes and were had very good impessions besides the normal technical proplems. Faced Late war alleid fightres (you know +13 lb tempests, boosted P47s, superb Yak 9s, 450mph p51s) and proved competitive enough in manouverability and handling even at these altitudes even with the reduced RoR, end even with unreliable engines.. Some of them even claimed kills!
According to Mr Harmaan book, Rechlin test station reported these early inmature examles had instability during high speed dives and -of course - many problems with varius mechanical sub systems
Ta152H airframe and wings were at least fully equal to the best competition but never recieved the apopriate engines Jumo213 EB,213J and DB603L .And in my opinion that was the most crusial element in any WW2 aircraft.

 

[Erich]

problem is thus :

Ta 152 Pilot soldbuch do not agree with Allied and Soviet operations so we do not have conclusive proof that JG 301 whether III gruppe or Stab ever faced P-47's or P-51's at high altitude in fact Kurt Tanks rumble with what 4 P-51's on the follow cannot be guaranteed. The Tank never flew operations at altitudes it was designed for except for the lowly single mission when it was suppose to provide high cover for it's II gruppe Dora 9's and the report was that the TA III. gruppe was attacked by Bf 109g's and that in itself is somewhat of doubt as well. There are still so many myths involving the use of the Ta as well as the gruppe/stab reports that most needs to be shoveled out the doorway. Dietmars book is excellent but the operational history needs a good overhaul, this in my opinion why the Monogram book by the EE firm did not introduce the operations at any length on the bird..............at least not yet.

 

[davparlr]

There seems to be a limited amount of data on the Ta-152. There has been a lot of discussions on this aircraft but not a lot of performance info. Wasn't there a book due out?

 

[Erich]

Dave

go here : Eagle-Editions

note the new TA 152 decals and the book by Monogram in "what's new"

an you are so correct not much in the way of truthful works on the crate over the many years since the war, much speculation.............

a teaser for all of you TA 152 nutz : http://www.eagle-editions.com/moreta152book.htm

 

[bobbysocks]

E, didnt you have a story about someone flying a 152? i was reading the "stories" thread and you illuded to one... it ever come about? i have read a couple combat reports where someone claims to have taken down a long nose 190 i have yet to find where a LW pilot talks about taking one into combat. would be a good read.

 

[Erich]

D ~

there is still not 100 % proof that any Ta 152H was downed in combat, but we do know of accidents and death due to mechanical failures. several JG 301 Dora-9's were shot down in combat in 1945 by the 8th AF and of course these were called "long noses" by US forces.

Yes I have first hand accounts of Ta and Dora pilots for a future work ........ 8)

 

[jim]

I am afraid that i dont understand Mr Erich. While i believe is clear that no exact performance of Ta152 is known ,some facts we must accept.
a) No MW50 or GM1 use was made operationaly or in tests
b) Jumo 213E0 never worked properly over 10000m
C) There was no reason in 1945 for a Ta 152 to fight at over9000m .The enemy was at their doorstep.
d)The Kurt Tank story about the P51s is 99% a myth
e)Willi Reschke did fly the type. Now either is a terrible leier and in his book everythink is leies (as our anglosaxons friends imply ) or he is giving a generaly correct image with some inaccurancies normal for a witness. I accept the second version .So P47 ,Tempests (now is hard to deny the Tempests encounter because there are unfortunately two dead pilots),Yaks,P51s were met in combat and his impressions from the aircraft stand
f) How you judge Mr Hermaan s book excellent and the same time you dont accept the tests contacted by III/JG301 and its kommandeur reported in the book?(Reschke s book too)Or the mock dogfight at low level against the late Fw190A8 which was won easily by the Ta
g)I judge this book "good" as it is obvious after careful reading that the writer had dificulties finding specific informations and many details are unclear
h)) Several pilots report excellent competivnes of the aircraft even at heights not designed for.Also very good handling and flight behavior
Finaly the hard evidence, aircrafts specifications ,suggest that should be a good one. Also Eric Brown In the Wings of the Luftwaffe reports favorably on the aircraft while flying it without MW50 and GM1 and proper maintance
In my opinion we have enough evidence to make a general image about the performance of the Pre production inmature Ta152H-0 which in my opinion was very promising while a lot of development potential existed not only in engines but also in control surfaces and aerodynamics. The second option is to accept that everyone German was a leier and accept only alleid reports about P47 going supersonic in dives and Spits XIVs catching Me262s is level flight.

 

[Erich]

it is obvious to me we have a language barrier here Jim.

a is still not 100 % proven yet

c this is untrue as the Ta 152H-0 was needed to counter the P-51 threat in January of 45 but III. gruppe was never involved in those flights though Reschke himself has said he wanted to with his Comrades of III. gruppe.

d I have already stated that the Tank involvement with the P-51's is not true, while others are still trying to prove that it is.

e it has not been proven except in Soldbuch of flights that P-51 ad P-47's and this depends on which soldbuch you are referring to never met the US fighters in a combat operational instant. we know that at least 1 pilot of Stab JG 301 did not tell the truth in his reports so it stands to good reason this may have also been the case of several others or times/dates and the operational missions are not correct, I have already found this the case in several combat dates of Will Reschkes JG 301/302 book when III gruppe was flying the A-8 and A-8/R2.

f I was talking of the combat operations only and never said one word about doubting trails between the Tank and the Fw 190A-8.

g Reschke even points out at least 3 times that JG 301 records are misplaced and or lost, well I will admit that some are now available and in my hands for losses and victories with help of cross referencing even we know with some operational dates which US bomber and US fighter formations fought JG 301..this will be in my book on the JG 301 unit.

the softbound English edition of the Monogram TA 152H # 24 was the first booklet produced and gave an excellent but very brief account of operational testing by III./Jg 301 pilots and again let me point out this was tests for engine performance and altitude performance with some very impressive notes being taken, I have made many references to the EE Mongram book on the Ta 152H over the past year which if you are interested needs to be purchased.

my interest in JG 301 lies typically with having a relative that served in 5./JG 301 during the months of September to November 1944 upon being KIA on the 26th.

I hope this is now understandable to you. Am I calling my Familie liars ? yes I have German roots Jim.........

the major problem with writing up the Ta 152H operations history is the cross checking of Soviet, British and US units. this has not been done to any extent except for the downing of the Tempest by Reschke in the tight turn engagement. But now we can change much of that with the resources that we have and are receiving monthly.

 

[renrich]

The " Great Book of WW2 Aircraft" is a compendium of books that were written seperately and then all put together into one huge volume. There is a whole section (book) on the FW190 that was written by Robert Grinsell. At the end is a list of sources used in writing that section. These sources seem very authoritative. In the FW190 section part of it is devoted to the TA152 and other high altitude variants of the FW. There is a cutaway and the performance details of the TA 152H-1.

 

[jim]

Mr Erich
Who is the pilot that did not tell the truth?

Could you report the books that you have written about Luftwaffe and who publish them? Must be very interesting as you appear to have acces directly to survivors of the period.

 

[Gixxerman]

there is no way of proving or disproving as it was in combat with Tempests in turns at mid-altitude something it was not designed for.

Would this not be where the shorter-spanned 'Ta 152C' comes in?
Surely it was intended to be the low-mid altitude specialist?

clearly there are many questions that will never be answered except to be put in as what if's

Sad but true (at least if only on the level of knowing the abilities etc of these interesting types).

 

[Milosh]

All very interesting but I would still like to know how much the role rate of the Ta152H decreased compared to the Fw190.

In my inet search came across this:
Ludwigslust aerial combat

 

[drgondog]

Mr Erich
Who is the pilot that did not tell the truth?

Willi R. reports as he remembers, but his accounts of damage inflicted on US bomber and fighter forces have a typical 2:1 ratio when examining actual US losses. That doesn't make Willi a liar - just misinformed and that applies to fighter pilots of all nations in many cases.

BTW _ Galland in "First and the Last" is candid that Allied claims to awards review process was more rigorous on the Allied side. I might also add that the rigor for ETO was higher than for PTO for the Allies and the cross references between actual Japanese losses to US claim/awards support that comment

Could you report the books that you have written about Luftwaffe and who publish them? Must be very interesting as you appear to have acces directly to survivors of the period.

Jim - I understand your skepticism based on some of the past dialogues ranging from Dresden to this discussion about "fact, opinions based on fact and 'speculation'

Fact - the Ta 152 was a superb design
Fact - the Ta 152 had just a few more hours of operational experience than the P-80 (which had zero combat missions to my knowledge)
Fact - the Ta 152 had a variety of 'common' early series issues ranging from engines to subsystems - no more than the P-51B or Me 262 - but there was no time to iron them out and apply field modifications.
Fact - there are no substantive facts about engagements that correlate precisely between the combatants.

Opinions based upon facts.
The Ta 152 would have been a handful as an airframe in combat with near equal fighters in the West but apparently had more live experience in the East.
The Ta 152 had the potential to be the best fighter of WWII, including the P-51H and the Me 262 and the Meteor - but the war in the ETO ended before that conclusion could be fact based instead of opinion based.

I am not one of those that 'dismiss' the perspective of the German accounts out of hand.

 

[jim]

Jim - I understand your skepticism based on some of the past dialogues ranging from Dresden to this discussion about "fact, opinions based on fact and 'speculation'

Fact - the Ta 152 was a superb design
Fact - the Ta 152 had just a few more hours of operational experience than the P-80 (which had zero combat missions to my knowledge)
Fact - the Ta 152 had a variety of 'common' early series issues ranging from engines to subsystems - no more than the P-51B or Me 262 - but there was no time to iron them out and apply field modifications.
Fact - there are no substantive facts about engagements that correlate precisely between the combatants.

Opinions based upon facts.
The Ta 152 would have been a handful as an airframe in combat with near equal fighters in the West but apparently had more live experience in the East.
The Ta 152 had the potential to be the best fighter of WWII, including the P-51H and the Me 262 and the Meteor - but the war in the ETO ended before that conclusion could be fact based instead of opinion based.

I am not one of those that 'dismiss' the perspective of the German accounts out of hand.

i would like to add some more facts about Ta152
a)WEP on MW50 28 minutes (not continiusly) WEP on GM1 17 minutes
b)3rd prototype Ta 152 reached 13654m without GM1 ,defective presurized cabin,
c)wing profile produced lift even in high angle of attack. Wide Propeller blades helped climbing and manouverability
d) All pilots reported (inclunding Brown) short take off distance. Useally its indicative of high performance aircrafts (Okay Fieseler Storch had shorter take off distance...)
e)Brown reports 425mph at 35000ft without GM1 and unknown condition of the jumo s 213E supercharger condition
f)The nose extension was bolted directly to engine attachment points of the Fw190A8 fuselage. This was nessecary for production reasons but caused in my opinion weight penalty. Also It had 150kg of armor
g)Pre production examples of a dedicated high altitude fighter with 1750hp faced at low altitude a dedicated low altitude fighter (+13 lb tempest ~3000hp according to some claims) and proved competitive. Now if the score was 1-0 or 1-1 is not important .The same fighter faced russian dedicated low altitudes fighters ,very much lighter , in turning combat and proved competitive
h)Against P80 was inferior but against Meteor I &III i am not sure
Its development was harassed by constant bombing and lack of resources. P80s not .

OPINION BASED ON FACTS
Every single book i have about the final months , every self biography of german pilots, every memory of citizens,speakfor thousands american bombers and fighters flying over every corner of the Reich. Ta 152 should be unique not having met any. But I respect the deep knowledge of mr Erich and i dont insist
Victory claims is something we can speak for months. Air combat is chaotic.
P51H certainly could outrun these early Ta 152s . Outmanouver or outclimb? Who knows...
Its hard to tell that a warrior does not tell the truth intetionally. But if there are undisputed proofs ... . I would be very interesting in byuing a book that his name and the proofs would be presented.

 

[davparlr]

Opinions based upon facts.
The Ta 152 would have been a handful as an airframe in combat with near equal fighters in the West but apparently had more live experience in the East.
The Ta 152 had the potential to be the best fighter of WWII, including the P-51H and the Me 262 and the Meteor - but the war in the ETO ended before that conclusion could be fact based instead of opinion based.

I am not one of those that 'dismiss' the perspective of the German accounts out of hand.

I have no disagreements to your facts statement, or your first opinion statement. However, I don't agree with your second statement. In my opinion, the Ta-152 performance below 35k feet was not particularly challenging to contemporary fielded aircraft available to the allies. The Ta-152, even with the EB engine, was not faster than the P-51D, pulling 75" Hg, or the F4U-4, below 15k feet, and was significantly slower than the latest allied aircraft such as the P-51H and the Tempest II. For the P-51H, its continued speed superiority continued up to 25k ft. As far a climb is concerned, I have little data on Ta-152H climb ability, but if I assume it is similar to the Fw-190D-9, which has a higher wing loading but is 1000 lbs lighter, the P-51H will have equal to or better climb ability than the Ta-152H up to 25k ft, whereas the P-51D would be at a disadvantage. Above 25k ft the Ta-152 would have to contend with the very powerful (almost twice the power-to-weight ratio from 25k to 35k) and fast P-47M. All of these speed comparisons are with the EB engine in the Ta-152. I can see Ta-152s cruising at 45k and then diving on the B-17/24s but the faster, better accelerating and fast diving P-47Ms would be on them right away and then at 25k, at bomber level, swarms of better performing P-51H would eat them up. Then, they would either have to fight their way up through the P-47Ms or go down where the P-51H gets even better and also high performance Tempest and Spits come into their own. No good options. At combat at low altitudes, below 15k, it would be outclassed by very fast and maneuverable allied fighters.

Also, other potential great fighters are almost ready, the beautiful and powerful, and already flying Sea Fury, the agile and powerful F8F (which was actually already operational), and, in production but almost ready to be canceled, the awesome, well tested P-72.

The Ta-152 is indeed formidable but I don't think it had the overall performance to come anywhere near the threat as the Me-262 did to the bombers.

 

[riacrato]

I don't think anyone really knows how fast the Ta 152 was below or above 35k feet as it apparently never flew with GM1 or MW50 injection. Thus any performance comparison to P-51H is pure speculation.

 

[Erich]

I am seeing alot of perceptions here, reports recently found says otherwise about MW 50 as an example, and it has already been displayed on what the MW 50 could achieve in test results before the full compliment of 35 Tanks in III./JG 301

you all will have to wait as things will be revealed about the A/C and pilots and operations. as we do not know about the handling nor opponent opposition in flight combat experience with the P-51D and K it is best to leave this be.

 

[davparlr]

I don't think anyone really knows how fast the Ta 152 was below or above 35k feet as it apparently never flew with GM1 or MW50 injection. Thus any performance comparison to P-51H is pure speculation.

The airspeed referenced was taken from a German document provide by a knowledgeable source of Fw aircraft and is possibly a copy of an Fw document. It does not call out aircraft number so it may be an engineering estimate. It certainly reflects GM1 used at 11.5 km alt. and probably does include MW50, although I don't read German. It provides no data on climb.

The opinions stated are strictly mine an only reflect the data I have available. I have no way of knowing how accurate this data is, but it seems to reflect the only data currently available and does reflect some sort of authenticity. Like most others I am eagerly awaiting the latest info on this very interesting aircraft.