The Ta-152.... The Best High Altitude Fighter?????

This will go know where...

Exactly Adler.

Jackson, you're clueless and I advice you to stop before you embarrase yourself any further.

well gents this whole page is OT and should be completely deleted and it just may. get back on the Ta 152H as nothing else from some other persons viewpoint even before the war and after war is going to help understand the subject matter. the point about H's not being in service or grounded by wars end has already been disproved as well as the result of manufacture believing the Ta was designed for B-29 hunting. this is all dark myths perpetuated by those that did not interview JG 301 personell nor even flew or had hands on experience with the Ta during the war, nor the Dora 9 nor the A-8, and A-9 nor the Bf 109G-6, on it goes

question still stands was the Ta 152H the best high alt job.

well it could of been had it been allowed to perform it's function it was designed for " to fly in combat with high alt. Allied a/c like the P-51 Mustang "

Erich said:

well gents this whole page is OT and should be completely deleted and it just may. get back on the Ta 152H as nothing else from some other persons viewpoint even before the war and after war is going to help understand the subject matter. the point about H's not being in service or grounded by wars end has already been disproved as well as the result of manufacture believing the Ta was designed for B-29 hunting. this is all dark myths perpetuated by those that did not interview JG 301 personell nor even flew or had hands on experience with the Ta during the war, nor the Dora 9 nor the A-8, and A-9 nor the Bf 109G-6, on it goes

question still stands was the Ta 152H the best high alt job.

well it could of been had it been allowed to perform it's function it was designed for " to fly in combat with high alt. Allied a/c like the P-51 Mustang "

Click to expand...

Simply stated and correct.

For Soren's benefit 'and as a high altitude interceptor, better than a P-51H OR F4U-5, (or Tempest, Spit, P-47, P-38 and maybe than a Meteor or P-80 or Me 262 at the extreme altitudes) - although what would it be intercepting above 45,000 feet?

Which was the intended altitude for the Ta 152H-1 to operate?

did the late war Luftwaffe know something that nobody seems to think or care about ............ opinion, because of the ceiling and as I already said, the P-51 so were they going to be ready for late marks like the H and even do another redesign of the wing, as there were other variants thought of including a night fighter version

Willi R got to almost 42,500 another pilot was covered at hitting well over 45,000' possibly up to 47-48,000'

Bill has a point about what would they attack at such a high ceiling, but as the P-51 escorts liked the idea of altitude supremacy and the typical drop, bump and fly back up it would suit Ta 152 pilots the same type of procedure. come on up for some action Mustang boys, or I should say "Komme sie hier, Indianer !" ~ Dora 9 pilots were hoping for the same type of treatment but ..........having the edge in altitude but it was a rarity

Embarassed, Hardly

lol

over

At any altitude but best vs 51 (or Tempest or Spit XIV) above 30,000 feet (I think). Let Erich or the delicate Cape Buffalo weigh in on this one

well you will be in the near future jackson as it will become clear in everyones mind

will say no more for the time being

Erich said:

did the late war Luftwaffe know something that nobody seems to think or care about ............ opinion, because of the ceiling and as I already said, the P-51 so were they going to be ready for late marks like the H and even do another redesign of the wing, as there were other variants thought of including a night fighter version

Willi R got to almost 42,500 another pilot was covered at hitting well over 45,000' possibly up to 47-48,000'

Bill has a point about what would they attack at such a high ceiling, but as the P-51 escorts liked the idea of altitude supremacy and the typical drop, bump and fly back up it would suit Ta 152 pilots the same type of procedure. come on up for some action Mustang boys, or I should say "Komme sie hier, Indianer !" ~ Dora 9 pilots were hoping for the same type of treatment but ..........having the edge in altitude but it was a rarity

Click to expand...

Erich that cant be true, the boys at NASM say that Reschke and the other 301 pilots are wrong...

damn you're right Adler.............sorry .........

but as the P-51 escorts liked the idea of altitude supremacy and the typical drop, bump and fly back up it would suit Ta 152 pilots the same type of procedure.

Click to expand...

Bill doesn't believe this fact to be true however..

Soren said:

Bill doesn't believe this fact to be true however..

Click to expand...

Correct with respect to attacking LW fighters attacking bombers. They (51's met them at same altitude and/or frequently climbing to meet LW formations which had successfully climbed ahead of the bomber stream to meet the attack.

For the LW formations which had not enough time to respond - and many examples exist for the Fall/Winter or when the 8th sent out a wing to Free Lance and run 50 miles out in front, then obviously it was Dive, kill and come back, if possible - otherwise in two's and four's come back on the deck and shoot hell out of airfields, trains barges, trucks, cows, troops and stray students plugging along w/o a clue.

Having said that, Soren, the standard tactic of 8th FC was to 'loose' a flight or a section of 8 to make an attack while the other remaining fighters (4 to 8 depending on aborts) in that squadron, would stay so that the bombers still had an escort.

When a very large formation of LW fighters was encountered (high or Low) it was frequently All Hands and not only would two or all three of the escorting squadrons attempt to attack (if all three could see and be in a position of attack) and call for help for another nearby group to help. This occurred multiple times in the war but not really all that frequently.

I am aware of two big airbattles in which the 355th was engaged in which another group joined in.

One was 24 April, 1944 when the 357FG and 355FG joined to repulse (unsuccessfully) many squadrons of JG3, JG27, ZG26, JG26 between Regensburg and Munich. Erich would have the numbers but the estimates were 200-250 fighters attacking the Munich area B-17s raid.

As I recall the two groups shot down 44 (awards, claims were nearly 50 (for total loss of 7 all causes), and as a result, one wing of B-17s was later caught unescorted and 7-10 (can't remember how many) were shot down by a force of 30 JG26 fighters between Munich and 40 miles west.

In this example the 358FS of the 355th did NOT engage, and only 5 flights of the combined 354 and 357 Squadrons were in the fight. The bombers lost at least 25 total from flak and fighters, probably more, but I don't have the source in front of me. This was a great example of the LW putting max force in a small area, overwhelming the fighter support.

The 355th were awarded 20 for the loss of three in the air and one to flak on the way home.

Erich is very aware of the other 355FG example in Frankfurt region of Novemner 26. In this fight the 339th FG was in that same area of strung out B-24 wings and the LW put nearly (what Erich? 150-200?) fighters into a two bomber wing volume. The 355th put 1 flights of 2SF, 3 Flights of 354FS, 3 flights of 357FS and 2 Flights of 358 FS - not quite 36 fMustangs to try to protect the bombers - I don't know how many effectives engaged from the 339th.

Combined the 355th and 2SF shot down 26 for no losses in the fight - but lost two to a mid air coming home asfter the fight was over. The 339th bagged 29. The LW bagged 20+ B-24s before either Group could intercept.

Let me give you a clue? Do you think either of these were a 'climbing attack with inferior numbers by the Luftwaffe?"

These two examples are about as good as it gets to describe what really happened in most defenses of LW attacks when they had a chance to form (always in Jan-May 1944), frequently in June-Jan 1945, rare Feb-April 1945.

In the latter period all the 8th and 9th AF plus RAF and RAF Tac had the legs to go all over Germany and simply disrupt everything - so the LW didn't get big gaggles up high and in front - in dramatic contrast to 12 months earlier.

Regards,

Bill

I dunno, if you read quotes from Fritz Bayerlein, according to him Panzer Lehr lost more tanks during Cobra (the Breakout) than the OKW says he lost June thru September 1944

I trust the German staff records better than his recollections. He makes for interesting reading, but he is totally incorrect in many of his comments.
He reminds me of Nixon writing his own biography in this regard.

If ya know what I mean.


.

Bill,

Why is it then that LW pilots were attacked from above by the P-51 when'ever attacking the bombers ? And why is it that the LW's dedicated fighters almost always had to climb to engage the Mustangs ?

The P-51's stayed high and above the B-17's for obvious reasons, the LW interceptors only had time enough to climb to altitude, form up, and attack the Allied bombers head on - head on attacks being std. procedure as the B-17's were extremely vulnerable to this. Meanwhile the grossly out-numbered dedicated fighters had to climb to intercept the Allied escort or attempt to follow as they zoomed up and down, which was a problem considering the large difference in energy in that state.

Jackson said:

I dunno, if you read quotes from Fritz Bayerlein, according to him Panzer Lehr lost more tanks during Cobra (the Breakout) than the OKW says he lost June thru September 1944.

Click to expand...

Jeez, now I know I missed something. How did this thread jump
onto tanks? Or is it somehow germane?

Bill yes you are probably right even if not more concerning the fate of the LW on 26 Nov. 44. JG 301 did face the 2nd SF and the 339th plus 355th attacking B-24's popping 21 and then over-rode two B-17 formations and scored 3-4 additional Forts. JG 301 on the other hand lost 50 Fw 190A-8's and A-9's from which they never fully recovered. it isn't called "Schwarze Tag für JG 301" for nothing. this is going to be covered in a future work........

my reference Soren was: had the Ta 152H been in full gruppen strength of 35 machines and not a dwindled down 12-15 for III. gruppe due to mechanics and pilot failures then yes they would of most likely replaced a I. or II./JG 301 high staffeln at some point trying their best to bring up the P-51D/K's to "their" altitude and for a chit chat but in the very real sense it was not going to happen due to the fact that Berlin was supposed to be defended at all costs and with all of the Luftw. might, JG 301 and the Ta 152H included - thus for the very reason the craft flew at medium to the deck alt.'s to combat the Soviets. there is still such a mix-up for JG 301 even Willi in his own personal bio and work does not include all the airfields listed for JG 301 as the movement was incredibly chaotic with the Soviet ground forces moving too fast to get any established field point, the stafflen of the gruppen were all split up and they flew off from where they could knowing well enough that upon retun from a mission their ground crew personell may have already moved to another location.

Soren your questions about head on attacks could almost fill a book. the head on attacks were nearly given up in July of 44 with the angriff von hinten being standard due to the prevalence of the SturmFw's of the 3 Sturmgruppen in July of 44. I cannot give any % as to how many ops the LW had to climb to the Mustangs or were on even keel during a defensive operation but there were the cases where the escorts could not be everywhere at once and the LW paid it to the bomber pulks and did get away, the escorts coming in right at the moment of the LW fleeing for the deck in all directions
back to the rear attacks; heavy Fw gruppen were covered a 1000 feet higher, the altitude of the P-51's by souped up Bf 109G-6 later AS version and then G-14/AS and finally G-10 with some K-4's before wars end. Expressly for the mixing up with P-51's and when the P-51's were not in the immediate area then the 109's were allowed to dive down and make a rear attack on the bombers

I am in 100% agreement with you.. my reference to Soren (and his to me) had nothing to do with this thread. His assertion is that Mustangs only won because the attacked from above in overwhelming numbers - which I tried to gently steer him through time based comparisons.

It was still a good tactic later in the war for the LW to attack from altitude advantage, carve em out and head for the deck to fight another day - and like you said hope to stay in contact with the moving vans.

Erich and all..... Just thought about the feeling of landing where you took off in your Bf 109, Fw 190 or Ta and finding that nobody is there, they've all moved on to the next field....PANIC!

twoeagles said:

Or is it somehow germane?

Click to expand...

It goes to "personal recollections" versus the historical record.


Neither can be absolutely correct 100 percent of the time.


Historians and individuals can and do often slant the facts to fit their world view, as is sometimes seen on Internet forums.

People will simply refuse to accept studies, analysis, photographs, detailed records, sworn testimony, impeccable sources and other evidence if they don't want to.


I might go down to the library of Congress tomorrow and pull a document, scan it and post it and still get dissent as to it's authenticity.

Even with an FBI handwriting expert and two witnesses some would not accept such a document.





I believe you knew what exactly I was referring to but you made your obviously disingenuous comment anyway. Where as if I had made such a comment here, your respose would be a threat to ban me.


go ahead