Ta183 vs Vampire

Engaging each other in numbers, who's going to win it?

  • Total voters
    66

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

Yeah pretty much every aircraft design will have issues at the beginning of its full scale prototype testing phase, and in the case of the Ta-183 the absence of wing fences or LE slats was one thing which would've quickly been rectified, wouldn't take them 2 test flights to figure that out.

Other than that there's the landing, stalling, low and high speed handling characteristics of the a/c which need to be examined, these are afterall the most important areas that the a/c must be good at. Now I'd suspect that German pilots would at first be quite surprised over the high approach angle that the a/c no doubt would exhibit with such a high sweep wing, and it would take a bit of time to get accustomed to that. So I'm also quite sure that there'd be other issues as-well, as like Adler says it was a veyr advanced a/c design for its time.


Hey guys, how about a Horten 229 vs Vampire thread ??
 
Last edited:
The Ho-229 can turn on a dime in IL2

Now of course I never flew in any of them, but if I had to guess, I'd say that the Vampire turns like a P-38.
 
The Ho-229 will no doubt turn tighter than the Vampire and about any other fighter, I mean it's pretty much just one big wing

The lack of a vertical stabilizer however means that lateral stability wont be the best, and the Ho-229 will have a tendency to skid. But besides from that I can't find a single negative thing about the Ho-229 design. Excellent excellent excellent design, thank god Hitler didn't get to play around with it!
 
Something else that has gone unremarked is the quality of the pilots in the cockpits. By 1945 the Luftwaffe has lost many of its experienced pilots whilst the Allies were still increasing theirs. The scenario as proposed would seem to be pitting inexperienced pilots trying to handle an advanced design (that was more than likely plagued with bugs) against experienced pilots in a more mature design. Let us also consider the respective production rates that were possible on each side. Finally the Allies had all the fuel and materials they needed whereas the Germans were short of everything.
 
Yeah with the average pilots available to the Luftwaffe in late 44 to 45 they were pretty much screwed nomatter what a/c they came up with. And the lack of fuel would also make sure that most of all these wonderful a/c would just sit there, not being able to do squat.
 
All good points lingo
but the idea of most polls and what-ifs is a technical face-off, not a history-this-is-how-it-happened lesson - we know how it happened; for this to work, we need to assume all external and internal variables to be equal.
 
Going back to the other design which I was championing in the thread, how realistic might an operational P.1101 been?

With the benefit of hindsight we can see it has probably the best wing in existence at the time ( and which would incidentally have been denied North American in this scenario so even a swept wing F-86 would have had an inferior wing).

It is a much less risky proposition than the Focke Wulf with its near conventional fuselage boom and low tail. The usual bugs notwithstanding, I think it would have had a clear lead over the DH 107 and Hawker P.1047 (the design that begat the P.1052) in terms of in-service date. The Gloster Ace would have been pretty conclusively outclassed as would the P-84 as I see it.

However I'm sure that you guys who study Luftwaffe projects more intently than me will be able to enlighten me on some pitfalls I am unaware of.

Soren, I greatly admire the Horten IX/Go 229 as well but I think it would probably have been too much of a handful to fly in combat.I think the Hortens forte would have been as a bomber interceptor rather than A2A combat with other fighters.

I don't actually think that flying wings have ever been able to turn that well, but I may have been conditioned by the majestically cruising Go 229's in FCS 3, and I know I shouldn't let that happen, but I can't recal any agile flying wing at all?

A pet theory I have too, which may be completely unfounded as its just a guess, is that might not Allied aircraft have been developed (ie improved models of P-80, Vampire et al) with the razor thin wings that would have been validated on the M.52 had the war continued? In this way the gap in performance opened up by German swept wing knowledge might have been closed quite quickly. Especially since later tests proved that Miles' 'Gillette' wing delivered exactly as promised. Imagine if this was proven as early as 1946?

Now I am off on a flight of fantasy, of course, but what if, eh?
 
Last edited:
Waynos,

I can tell you for a fact that flying wings are generally a lot better turners than anything else, the reason is quite simple really, very high lift low drag, it really is just a big wing, so it will turn on a dime. The reason you might not have heard about this is either because haven't read much about flying wing designs or because you've only read about bombers, and the turn peformance of a bomber isn't really of any importance, the extremely high lift of the flying wing design however is as it allows for a much bigger bomb load to be carried.

But I can assure you that the Ho/Go-229 will outturn most if not any WW2 fighter without too much trouble, even a A6M2 Zero will be hard pressed trying to follow the Ho/Go-229 through a turn. So as a turn fighter the Ho/Go-229 is far superior to the far majority of WW2 fighters.

The only problem the Ho-229 will have is its lack of total lateral stability, making it somewhat of a tricky gun platform, so in that sense it will be inferior to all the regular fighters as it will tend to skid.

Hope that helps mate
 
Oh forgot to respond to your P.1011 question, sorry.

Yeah a comparison with this a/c would indeed be very interesting! But as for wether it featured the best wing of them all, well I don't really think we can say that.
 
Soren. I have seen lots of different flying wings but all of them seemed to only want to fly straight and level or turn very gently.

I always assumed this was a consequence of the design, not that I would know anything at all about the subject I hasten to add, so forgive my questions. I suppose I am presuming a structural limitation rather than an aerodynamic one.

Wouldn't a flying wing flex excessively under violent manouver?

If so what would be the consequence when it sprang back? Also, if you try to turn tightly in such a design is there not a risk that it might flip right over and stall?

Sorry if these questions seem ignorant, I can see the sense in your previous explanation, are there any online videos that illustrate your point?

I say the best wing, regarding the P.1101, only in the sense that when NA fitted it to the Sabre it proved to be exactly that in terms of loading and behaviour by comparison with other fighters of the period (and many since)
 
Waynos,

No a flying wing wont flex anymore at all, infact it should be more rigid. But as it is with all a/c the bigger it is the higher the amount of flexing you must expect as it gets harder and harder to keep the structure rigid, so a bomber's wing will flex more than a fighter's wing at the same G loads. But the Ho/Go-229 was a small a/c, and it was in essence just a big rigid flying wing which no doubt could take a good deal higher G forces than the normal fighters as the load was spread over the entire body of the a/c = lifting body design = flying wing, and not just on two attached wings.

Now that you've only seen flying wings fly straight doesn't mean they can't turn well, that you must acknowledge right? I can actually tell you that B-2 bomber pilots brag a lot about their ability to outturn any fighter in US service. (Probably not a F22 though)
 
Last edited:
[QUOTE=Soren "I can actually tell you that B-2 bomber pilots brag a lot about their ability to outturn any fighter in US service. (Probably not a F22 though)"


Well, those Spirit jockeys can brag all they want, but before I'll believe that a B-2 can pull lead on an F-18 in a low-speed turning fight, I'm just gonna have to see it with my own eyes...

JL
 
Vulcan bomber pilots used to make similar claims back in the day and that was bollocks too. However I do accept that I may well have a bit of a knowledge gap regarding the agility of flying wings generally and wuill research it more.
 
A number of companies have tried to design a flying wing since WW2 and they all as far as I know, failed due to control problems. The B2 is of course a success but relies on electronics which couldn't have been dreamed of in the mid 40's.

I admit that I find it hard to believe that Germany would have cracked such a difficult subject and no one else could do it for another 50 years.
 
The Planes of Fame used to fly the Northrop N9M (a proof-of-concept test vehicle for their bomber project) and it seemed to handle fairly well, but I don't know of any flying wing design that has been put thru rigourous hi-G fighter manoeuver testing.

Most 4th generation fighters can perform sustained 7-G turns at 4-500 kts. I don't know the structural G-limits and T/W ratio of the B-2, but it seems unlikely that a long-range, hi-capacity stealth bomber would also be expected to perform like a close-in dogfighter...

Wayno's reference to the Vulcan reminds me an air display in the mid-70's. The sight of that huge cream and brown delta standing on its wingtip at low-level , trailing plumes of black smoke as it thundered thru a 180 turn was totally mind-boggling

They don't make airshows like that anymore...

JL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

  • Poll
AH-4 Apache vs black hawk
2 3 4
Replies
76
Views
6K
Thumpalumpacus
K
  • Poll
P-40F vs P-40M
Replies
1
Views
1K
mjfur
M
  • Poll
Yak3 vs Spitfire IX?
Replies
10
Views
4K
bravenest0
  • Poll
Gloster Gladiotor vs PZL P24
Replies
0
Views
2K
Supermarine-SpitfireMkXIV
  • Poll
Hurricane Mk1 vs 109E-6
Replies
2
Views
1K
Shortround6
S
Menu
Log in
Register