- Thread starter
-
- #41
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I read somewhere, possibly on this forum that 2 ta152's were shot down by spitfires whilst being delivered?
does that jog any memories?
Were the Ta-152s armed while being transported?
They were being flown, not transported on the back of a truck. Would any German fighter not be armed in spring 1945?
If so, the pilots were the most optimistic folks ever known..
From " The Great Book of WW2 Airplanes" page 499, TA152H-1 data
Takeoff power 1759 HP at 3250 rpm or 2050 hp with MW50
max hp at 32810 feet-1320 hp or 1750 hp with GM 1 boost
Vmax 332 mph at SL, 350 mph with MW50
Vmax at 29860 feet-465 mph with MW50
Vmax at 41010 feet-472 mph with GM-1 boost
initial climb-3445 fpm with MW50
service ceiling-48550 feet with GM-1
range(clean) 755 miles
max range-with 300 ltr drop tank 1250 miles
Seems to me if all the bugs were worked out the airplane would be a formidable high altitude interceptor but at the altitude the bombers were operating, the premier fighters, P51, P47, P38 or F4U would not be at a significant disadvantage
This data appears suspect. The Fw charts I have show the Ta-152H with top speed of 374 mph at sea level and 467 mph at 30k ft. At 25k ft (B-17 alt), top speed is 449 mph, and at 20k ft (B-24 alt) a airspeed of 441 mph. I am not sure I have good data on climb except 2854 ft/min at 30k ft. With this performance, it would take the latest model allied aircraft the P-51H, P-47M, or F4U-4, to counter this aircraft.
The P-47M was in theatre before the Ta 152 and while the Ta 152 was slightly faster than a P-51D at WEP, the ability of the Ta 152 to consistently perform to spec is debatable..
At any rate, by that time the ratio of 51s to Ta152 in any given area was higher than the corresponding ratio of 51s to Me 262s and did well despite a 100mph speed difference.
I am not saying the Ta 152 wouldn't have an edge in the 20-30K range on the 51D but it didn't have an edge on the P47M. Further there were more operational 47M's in the 56th FG than there were ever operational 152s. P-47Ns were going to the PTO in Feb and the 51H could have been there in April so there was no lack of competition in airframes but a huge gap in pilots.
The P-47M was in theatre before the Ta 152 and while the Ta 152 was slightly faster than a P-51D at WEP, the ability of the Ta 152 to consistently perform to spec is debatable..
At any rate, by that time the ratio of 51s to Ta152 in any given area was higher than the corresponding ratio of 51s to Me 262s and did well despite a 100mph speed difference.
I am not saying the Ta 152 wouldn't have an edge in the 20-30K range on the 51D but it didn't have an edge on the P47M. Further there were more operational 47M's in the 56th FG than there were ever operational 152s. P-47Ns were going to the PTO in Feb and the 51H could have been there in April so there was no lack of competition in airframes but a huge gap in pilots.
jim said:Ta 152 had its teething troubles but also P47M was not exactly a legend as far as reliability and fuel consuption was conserned, nor the reliability of alleid aircrafts running at150 oct fuel.
Jumo 213E -01 (1750-2050 with MW50)could not provide desicive -if any- edge performance against the later alleid fighters . but it was indented only for the initial baches (H-0,H-1) .The engines Jumo 213EB(2300hp)
, 213J (2400+), DB 603EM (2400), DB 603 L were ready or almost ready and DB603N (2700HP) well advanced
Only limited information is available on the Ta-152 to support or deny this comment. From SL to 25k the P-51H was 40 to 15mph faster the Ta-152H (EB), and with a SL climb of over 5000 ft/min at SL, was not likely to be out climbed, however I only have limited data on the Ta climb capability..And aerodynamic evolution was still in progress But i beleive the Ta 152H-o 1 showed evidence of the airframes superior manouverability and handling enough to provide parity even against low level fighters low.
Against american fighters i expect clear superiority in manouverability (except F8F -if its wings do not break) while providing lower pilot workload, heavier armament,150kg of armor, advanced avionics ,gyroscopic sight.
The numbers I quote are from military flight test data sheets or contractor engineering estimates for the P-51D and H, P-47M, and Ta-152.Books trying to cover many aircrafts often are suspect of inaccurancies.
Yes, because the need was no longer there. It is interesting to note that the highly successful and performing XP-47J (research this) was cancelled because the better performing XP-72 was in the line. The AAF was very impressed by the XP-72 but jets made it obsolete.P72 was rejected by american air force,i beleive with a cause
Yes, there were probably two reasons. One, P-51Ds were in abundance, and two, the P-51H was stressed to be optimized for air combat and that role was being filled by jets, thus making the H obsolete, and the air to ground role would be better served by the higher stressed and more abundant P-51D.P51H never saw combat although there were many conflicts in late 40s , i beleive with a cause.
F8F made a far better carrear with Blue Angels and air racing than with combat units, i beleive with a cause
P47M &N too heavy for dogfighting Ta 152s ,still great performers .Accelaration is important too.
The Sea Fury is also beautiful. I got the opportunity to see one fly.Sea Fury excellent, well balanced aircrfat ,and Hornet so beautiful
I feel Ta 152 more complete as weapon system and with great potential but competiton was close ,
I am not belittling the Ta 152. Had it been developed in 1943 and in production in 1944 it would have been a game changer to many 8th and 15th AF crews to the extent that a lot more bombers and escort fighters would have been lost. Having said that, it was only a beautiful footnote in the 'might have been' lists.
Ta-152 loaded weight was about 12,000lbs. Late war P-47 loaded weight was approaching 20,000lbs. About two thirds heavier then a Ta-152.The production P-47M engine was already producing 800 hp more than the DB603N at 33k.
Ta-152 loaded weight was about 12,000lbs. Late war P-47 loaded weight was approaching 20,000lbs. About two thirds heavier then a Ta-152.
A P-47 engine must produce two thirds more HP then a Ta-152 engine to maintain a similiar power to weight ratio.
Ta-152 loaded weight was about 12,000lbs. Late war P-47 loaded weight was approaching 20,000lbs. About two thirds heavier then a Ta-152.
A P-47 engine must produce two thirds more HP then a Ta-152 engine to maintain a similiar power to weight ratio.
Balderdash.
try comparing like to like. While the P-47N had a MAXIMUM gross weight of just over 20,000lbs that was with a full 556 US gallons of internal fuel and 680 US gallons of external fuel. Over 4,000lbs of external fuel plus the weight of the tanks. Weight in combat would be just over 16,000lbs or less depending on fuel and ammunition load. 1/3 heavier than the TA 152.
Or to be more accurate lets cut the drop tank from the TA 152. 11,500lbs using internal wing tanks for the TA 152 for take-off vs the P-47s 16,300lbs? That does improve things for the TA 152 but still not quite 2/3 heavier for the P-47N.
Without getting into the "IF ONLY" engines didn't the Jumo 213E-1 top out at about 2050hp with MW 50 down low and 1740hp with GM 1 at altitude?
I could be wrong but the TA 152 couldn't carry both at the same time?
It was one or the other depending on mission.
P-47N could get 2800hp at 32,000ft with WER (water alcohol =MW50)
Get that P-47N to drop external fuel early and it's escort mission is over. No need to actually shoot it down. That should be an objective for the defending air force.P-47N had a MAXIMUM gross weight of just over 20,000lbs that was with a full 556 US gallons of internal fuel and 680 US gallons of external fuel.