RG_Lunatic said:DerAdlerIstGelandet said:Well every source that I have found says that 674 Doras were built but something like 13000 A were built and I am not sure of the F or the G varients.
RG as for you post about the "extreme high alltitude" label. What makes you think I labeled it that. I never said that. As for the P-51H and the Ta-152H Im sorry but atleast the 152 saw service and as far as I am concerned with everything I have studdied on it and what pilots have said there was nothing finer in the sky then the 152H and nothing could match it. Unless the 51H saw service against it (which it did not) you can not convince me that it was the best thing ever built and that it would outfly a 152H. As for the 51D's and 47's beating the Luftwaffe you are wrong my friend. The Hitler, Goering, and the Luftwaffe beat the Luftwaffe.
More P-51H's were available for WWII than TA152's. The fact that Germany was so badly on the ropes that it threw its prototypes into the air as they came off the production line, rather than methodically introducing them into service should not exclude contemporary designs from consideration.
What the hell is your point really? Did the P-51H see any service that would prove it was the greatest thing since bread and butter like you make it out to be? Nope sure as hell was not. Again your objection is without any merit here! I dont give a flying *%@$ how many were available! What I care about is how it compared but you dont know anything about that because it did not ever get a chance to! I think the Ta-152H would have more then a match for you beloved P-51H had it been given a chance to prove itself. Can I prove it, No but neither can you prove your argument so give it up!
RG_Lunatic said:Besides, it was you who brought up the P-51H for comparison this time, so your objection is totally without merit on all grounds.
Who the hell are you to tell me what has merit and what does not, tell me how yours does. You have not proven shit to me or probably anybody else except that as KrazyKanuk posted that you are very onesided in your reading and dont learn to much about anything of relevence unless it is about the "GREATEST PLANE TO EVER FLY: THE ONE AND ONLY P-51!" or how GERMAN BRAINS WERE SMALLER AND THEY WERE INFERIOR IN EVERYTHING COMPARED TO THE USA
RG_Lunatic said:I agree the German high command hurt the Luftwaffe', but the P-47 and P-51 did their part too. It was the ability to put competitive fighters in the air, over Germany, more than anything else that beat the Luftwaffe'.
Sorry there you go again. P-51 this and P-47 that. Why do you completly and consistantly forget about the British and there Hurricanes and the Spitfires? Hey they were fighting the war longer and they did most of the damage. Sorry I understand taht the Hurricane and Spitfire are not US made but they did more of the share.
Again I am sorry but if Hitler and his government Goones had left the RG up to the developers and allowed more of Germanies more successfull and better designs to unfold much ealier and let them be used for there purposes as they were designed the Luftwaffe would have faired much better. Oh any by the way the fuel shortages of the Luftwaffe did more to hurt the Luftwaffe then your P-51 and P-47.
RG_Lunatic said:Read the Soviet Fighter Tactics manual concerning the 190 and 109 cooling problems. I've posted it before, and it's on RING's website (see my post of that source for data). I've seen comments about limited full speed performance from other sources too, I'll try to locate them and post them for you.
First of all Soviet Fighter Tactics Manual? Give me a break please. The Soeviets did not know tactics if you had implanted them in your brain. The Soviet Airforce was slaughtered up until the very end. Erich Hartmann happened to fly one of these inferior Me-109's that they supposadly talked about in there Tactics Manual. I dont think it did them any good. And dont give me any crap about they Soviet Planes were inferior and the aircraft shot down were Il-2's Why have a Tactics Manual if it is not going to save you? Lastly what a great source you posted since you always want to talk about "WHERE IS YOUR SOURCE" "THAT IS NOT AN AMERICAN SOURCE CANT BE TRUE!" This post of yours has no merit at all (sound familier)!
RG_Lunatic said:Hmmm... I see it the other way. You and a few others keep trying to tout about how great German technology was. It had its strong points and its weak points, but for the most part it was inferior to Allied technology. Some German technology was more advanced, but when looking at the big picture, in the most important technologies such as radar, industrial process technology, and of course nuclear physics, the Allies had the significant advantage. But more than that, the German's just didn't seem to understand that at some point you have to stop striving for the ultimate in quality and focus on quantity and servicability - two things that never sunk into Germany's WWII thinking.
Actually here again you are dead wrong. We just seem to think you know a hell of a lot less then you try to make us believe! Please stop! You are hurting my head with all this P-51 and P-47 crap! All this Germans were inferior crap along with the British and everyone else. The US technology was not as great as you make it out to be!
RG_Lunatic said:No, you are trying to elevate German aircraft to a stature they did not attain.
And you do the same to the US fighters. You are very one sighted and know a hell of lot less then you think you do! Yes I said it again because it is very true!
RG_Lunatic said:So where is this supposed superiority?
Theres more to just paper stats that you always come up with. If anyone ever writes an artical about how they flew against a Luftaffe aircraft and it gave them a hard time or was supierior to them, you call them a lyer! Sorry paper stats dont count, but again for someone who has never flown a combat aircraft you would not know this!
RG_Lunatic said:And visa versa. Didn't Yeager bag a few FW's on his seventh combat sortie?
And there were many FW pilots who did the same thing. Oh wait not in your picture perfect world!
RG_Lunatic said:The only way you can bolster your ego is to try to claim the German's were superior engineers and scientists. Well, I have two words to say to that - "ATOMIC BOMB"
I have 6 words to say to that - "ALBERT EINSTEIN AND OTHER GERMAN SCIENTISTS!"
And RG as for the Ta-152 being a prototype being put into the sky to "alter the war" it was not a protype or experimental aircraft it is called "Evolution" and making a better aircraft then before! You can argue this fact all you want and I know after what I post below you are going to say that it is all lies about outflying P-51's but you know what can you prove it did not happen? No you can not!
The Focke-Wulf Ta 152 name refers to the final developments of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 aircraft which was redesignated with the 'Ta' in honor of Kurt Tank who headed the design team. The name started with the last Ta 152 models although only 67 production aircraft were delivered. The Ta 152H models were among the fastest fighters of the war, capable of speeds up to 755 km/h (472 mph). It is reported that Kurt, who occasionally test flew his own designs, encountered some P-51 Mustangs towards the end of the war when he was flying a 152 and was able to out-run them by engaging the methanol-water injection system of the engine - but it is not clear if the Mustangs actually saw him and pursued.
The total number of Ta 152 production is not well known but it should be ~150 aircraft of all types including prototypes.