Jump to content

German fighter development, how to shoot yourself in the foot


Recommended Posts

There was no Yak3 with VK 107 in WW2. If the Germans would have kept developing new fighters - properly from 1944 onwards - they would have built completely different aircraft as well. There was no Russian fighter in WW2 to match the 109 K4 performancewise at low alt, or the Ta/Dora at high alt. It was pretty much the same story like in 1942. German aircraft faster and better climbing (well, the 109), Russian ones more nimble. Closest was the La7 with roughly the same top speed at sea level like the K4, but some 50kph slower at altitude.

Substitute the Yak-3 for the Yak-9U with VK-107, heck even just the normal Yak-3 with 105PF2. Both are faster than the Ta 152H on the deck, supposedly it did only 560km/h at sea level with MW50 engaged. And that was my point: The Ta 152H was a dedicated high-altitude fighter with nearly unmatched performance at very high altitudes (altitudes which few VVS fighters could even reach much less fight at) Remove it from the context it was designed for and you will find it far less impressive.

 

What ticked me off was the blanket statement that the Ta 152 "outclassed everything else in the air". That's the kind of generalizing BS that makes people have unrealistic expectations, especially when it comes to obscure late war aircraft.

Edited by Finkeren
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it wasn't me arguing about the Ta. My examples were Kurfürst and Dora, who both were (for German proportions) mass produced frontline fighters. My statement was indeed unclear, and not very good phrased.

To be 100% clear this time: There was no VK-107 Yak3 in frontline duty in WW2. Ta152 was, even if not really significant, but it entered official service already in 1944, quite a difference. 

 

Re Ta 152 entering service in 44 I am always interested in expanding knowledge 

 

If you consider 31 hours of testing pre production model H-0, entering official service in late 44 as "quite a difference" then you are correct

 

I had considered the first H-1 model to enter official service at end of January 45 after 50 hrs total testing of the pre production models had been completed

 

Willi Reschke relates in ‘JG 301/302 Wilde Sau’ ; 

 

“On 23 January 1945 on orders from the OKL (Oberkommando der Luftwaffe) Jagdgruppe III./JG 301 was temporarily taken off operations and designated an Einsatzerprobungsverband, a combat test unit, re-equipping with the legendary Ta 152 – something we’d long given up hoping for…” 

 

In the early hours of 27 January the Gruppe’s pilots were taken by truck to the Neuhausen aircraft plant near Cottbus with orders to ferry the new Höhenjäger to Alteno...... "

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Edited by Dakpilot
Link to post
Share on other sites

Substitute the Yak-3 for the Yak-9U with VK-107, heck even just the normal Yak-3 with 105PF2. Both are faster than the Ta 152H on the deck, supposedly it did only 560km/h at sea level with MW50 engaged. And that was my point: The Ta 152H was a dedicated high-altitude fighter with nearly unmatched performance at very high altitudes (altitudes which few VVS fighters could even reach much less fight at) Remove it from the context it was designed for and you will find it far less impressive.

 

What ticked me off was the blanket statement that the Ta 152 "outclassed everything else in the air". That's the kind of generalizing BS that makes people have unrealistic expectations, especially when it comes to obscure late war aircraft.

 

My point was just about the VK Yak, probably a bad example in this case, but i agree with your general sentiment. Ta was the best plane at it's built purpose, but not so much at others.

 

 

 

Re Ta 152 entering service in 44 I am always interested in expanding knowledge    If you consider 31 hours of testing pre production model H-0, entering official service in late 44 as "quite a difference" then you are correct   I had considered the first H-1 model to enter official service at end of January 45 after 50 hrs total testing of the pre production models had been completed

 

Entering service means normally, that a front unit gets equipped with a certain aircraft. October 44 they started serial production, December first frontline units got a few. Anyway, i am out of this senseless discussion. Below 6k the performance of the Ta and the Dora were pretty similar anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Remove it from the context it was designed for and you will find it much less impressive"

 

Indeed - and futher you can say that about anything from a screwdriver to a tank. I should have worded my post differently and been more clear about my actual point however. My fault - I know better around here. With that I'm out of the pointless discussion as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Remove it from the context it was designed for and you will find it much less impressive"

 

Indeed - and futher you can say that about anything from a screwdriver to a tank. I should have worded my post differently and been more clear about my actual point however. My fault - I know better around here. With that I'm out of the pointless discussion as well.

I think we all agree then :) And sorry for accusing you of spreading BS, when really you were just trying to write something in a hurry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit of correction

Avia S.99 (S for "stihaci" in czech "fighter") were standard G-10/14/K airframes with DB605 engines. 21pcs assembled.

Avia CS.99 (CS for "cvicny stihaci" in czech "training fighter") were G-12 two-seaters with DB605

Avia S.199 (450 assembled) and CS.199 were with Jumo 211F

 

The problem in Czechoslovakia after war was,that there were hundreds of airframes but DB605 were found dangerous to operate in peacetime conditions. Army test proved limited resurs of 25h and lots of quality related issues. Fire of the warehouse where engines were stored didnt help the situation either.

As a stop-gap solution it was decided to mount bomber engines Jumo 211 F with props into airframe which were readily available. This lead to creation of the worst performing messer "conversion" ever. Jumo engine with its large prop had different rotation then DB,huge torque and reaction moment,making each take-off a little adventure. Motor-canon could not be installed with Jumo,so there were 2 20mm cannons mounted in underwing gondolas. Jumo was also not set up for synchronisation fire,this had to be reengineered for MG131s. To some success but it was never reliable. Some Israeli pilots reported "shot off" of their props. Czechoslovakia smuggled 24 "Sachins" ("knife") into Israel (there was an embargo issued upon Israel). They did pretty well and got some air victories over spitfires of Egyptian airforces.

 

 

Its a shame the Avia S 199 turned out to be a bit of a pig because it's actually a really cool looking machine.  Way it sometimes goes I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a shame the Avia S 199 turned out to be a bit of a pig because it's actually a really cool looking machine. Way it sometimes goes I guess.

Unfortunately, that's the way it sometimes goes. I can hardly ever look at a MiG-3 without lamenting that it wasn't a better aircraft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On paper, the TA 152 was the fastest piston engine fighter, but since there are no surviving flight tests, it is difficult to determine what a production AC could achieve in RL.

 

since the TA 152 used basically the same design, powerplant as the FW 190 D-9, but was 1,000 lbs. heavier, it's doubtful it could even reach the performance of the D-9.

 

The fastest speed recorded by a D-9 in an actual flight test was 665 kmh at 6 km, many prototypes were slower. All specs showing higher speeds are calculated values. Even then, it seems the fastest speed a production D-9 could achieve was probably 690 kmh (430 mph) at 5.5 km:

 

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190d9test.html

 

so it seems that the D-9 and TA 152 were both slower than the P51 which regularly hit 440-450 mph (710-725 kmh) in flight tests.

Edited by Sgt_Joch
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

since the TA 152 used basically the same design, powerplant as the FW 190 D-9, but was 1,000 lbs. heavier, it's doubtful it could even reach the performance of the D-9.

 

Unfortunately those assumptions are just not factual. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

let's see, same engine (Jumo 213) and 1,000 lbs heavier, seems factual to me.

 

What the Ta 152 brought to the table was GM-1 "Nitrous Oxide" boost, that is how it gets to its theoretical max. speed of (755 kmh)472 mph @ 41, 000 feet (13.5 km). Of course no Ta 152 ever flew at that speed since there does not seem to have been any flight tests so we can never know if a production AC could get anywhere close to that speed. Now the max. speed seems to have been based on Ta152 + jumo 213 + c3 fuel + 2.02 ata + GM-1 = 472 mph.

 

However once you break it down, you can see problems with the theory. First, it seems the GM-1 boost could only be used at altitudes over 11 km (36, 000 feet) with a jumo 213. Below 11km, there was a high risk of over pressure, i.e blowing up the engine.

 

Second, it seems the Jumo 213 was reaching its limits at 9-10 km and the supercharger did not work reliably above that, so no garantee the engine would be working reliably once the GM-1 was engaged.

 

Third, it seems the Jumo 213 in the FW190 D-9 was restricted to a max. of 1.8 ata, so no garantee a Jumo 213 + 2.02 ata + GM-1 would function without a high risk of damaging the engine.

 

but of course we can never know since there was never a flight test to test the theory.

 

But in any event, it seems, although the evidence is not clear, that none of the "production" Ta 152s that flew in combat in 45 even had the GM-1 installed.

 

However, even if you assume the Ta152 would work as designed, you are still faced with the fact that at all altitudes below 11 km, where 99% of air combat takes place, the P51 would be faster than the Fw190 D-9/Ta 152.

 

Again that is not to say that the Ta 152 is a bad AC, any AC that could potentially reach 430 mph at normal combat altitudes was no slouch. However, once you get to 1944-45, there is a lot of wishful thinking involved in what the new German designs could do in RL.

Edited by Sgt_Joch
Link to post
Share on other sites
let's see, same engine (Jumo 213) and 1,000 lbs heavier, seems factual to me.

 

DB603 engine was in the Ta-152C.

 

Jumo 213A/E/DB603 for the Ta-152A

 

So not factual.  You are simply lumping many aircraft designs with different purposes into one general conclusion that becomes not factual.  The Ta-152A can be thought of as simply an even higher altitude version of the FW-190D9 with better armament.  The goal was being able to intercept the 1st general of pressurized high altitude bombers like the B-29.  Development was canceled.  The type had a new wing design of 19.5 m^2 and not the 18.3 m^2 of the Dora.

 

The B series was a heavy fighter with all weather capability and designed to fill the same niche as the Bf-110 and Me-410 destroyers. 

 

The Ta152C was built for long range incorporating wing tanks.  

 

Like the P-51, much of the weight is consumables in the form of fuel.

Edited by Crump
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ta 152C never entered production, right? So it'd be pretty difficult to say anything about it.

 

 

Why would you think that?  4 prototypes had completed all testing and approved to enter production.  Production began in in three factories sometime in March of 1944 but of course the war ended before they could be delivered or completed.

The Ta-152C did enter production.  It did not enter combat.  The performance was tested and verified as the type completed all requirements.  It was in production when the war ended.

Edited by Crump
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jumo 213E....

 

Not the same as a Jumo 213A.

irrelevant since both produced the same power. The E was designed for high altitude operation, but had issues with the supercharger as I discussed above.

 

the Ta 152 c/DB 603 is also irrelevant to this discussion since no production model ever flew in combat.

 

Everything I posted above about the performance of the Ta 152 is factual and derived from several sources. If you have any contrary factual info you think is pertinent, please post it. Nitpicking minor details or making general statements adds nothing to the discussion and frankly, I don't plan to waste any time indulging it.

Edited by Sgt_Joch
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

irrelevant since both produced the same power.

 

They did not produce the same power at all.  So it is hardly irrelevant.

 

Look, you are making some gross generalizations without details and facts.  That is bottom line.  If this was Ta-184 or some preliminary design that never got anywhere I would agree.

 

This was a fully tested production aircraft.  Granted, like the F8F Bearcat, Spiteful, Sea Fury, and several other very late war designs, it never saw combat.  That does not mean those aircraft did not exhibit performance on par with other aircraft that represent the pinnacle of piston engine fighter design or that their performance was not thoroughly tested and evaluated before entering production.


A good resource on the Ta-152 series for those interested in obtaining facts about the design:

 

http://www.midwaybook.com/pages/books/39129/dietmar-hermann/focke-wulf-ta-152-the-story-of-the-luftwaffes-late-war-high-altitude-fighter-schiffer-military

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 7 months later...

The Ta 152 was "probably" a good combat aircraft.  If the Allies had met superior opposition to it's bomber fleets, it would have changed tactics or just stopped heavy daylight raids altogether, by the end of 44 the heavies had done their job and half the reason to keep then going was increasingly to stop them getting board and to justify the expense.  The trouble for Germany, by that stage of the war, was that the Allies were so strong, in depth and flexibility, that even a superior weapon in one area, that couldn't be adapted more generally, like the 109 or vanilla 190 was wasted development and effort.  A year earlier the 152 might have had an impact on 8th Airforce but that's only to as long as the Yanks didn't change to night op's.

 

The biggest problem for Germany was German strategic thinking. Blitzkrieg war but also Blitzkrieg mentality.  The rapid fall of France in 1940 reinforced German military thinking and given the experiences of the German army on the Eastern front in 1917 lead to a massive under appreciation and complacency to the task ahead.  The USSR was a rotten barrel, just as Imperial Russia was, and given one big push it would all collapse in on itself, or so it was thought. They hadn't given sufficient consideration to the strength of a totalitarian state and how it differed from most Western democracies (Like that of France) although by the end of the war they would know all about the excesses that Dictatorship is capable even to the utter disregard of it's own people and potential destruction of itself.

 

Short term war and short term thinking meant that by the time Germany realized it needed to do more, it was to late and that's why it had no development in depth.  Blame Speer, or at least his predecessors, for that balls up, but then you might as well just blame Goering and Hitler, after all, they started it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ta 152 was "probably" a good combat aircraft.  If the Allies had met superior opposition to it's bomber fleets, it would have changed tactics or just stopped heavy daylight raids altogether, by the end of 44 the heavies had done their job and half the reason to keep then going was increasingly to stop them getting board and to justify the expense.  The trouble for Germany, by that stage of the war, was that the Allies were so strong, in depth and flexibility, that even a superior weapon in one area, that couldn't be adapted more generally, like the 109 or vanilla 190 was wasted development and effort.  A year earlier the 152 might have had an impact on 8th Airforce but that's only to as long as the Yanks didn't change to night op's.

 

The biggest problem for Germany was German strategic thinking. Blitzkrieg war but also Blitzkrieg mentality.  The rapid fall of France in 1940 reinforced German military thinking and given the experiences of the German army on the Eastern front in 1917 lead to a massive under appreciation and complacency to the task ahead.  The USSR was a rotten barrel, just as Imperial Russia was, and given one big push it would all collapse in on itself, or so it was thought. They hadn't given sufficient consideration to the strength of a totalitarian state and how it differed from most Western democracies (Like that of France) although by the end of the war they would know all about the excesses that Dictatorship is capable even to the utter disregard of it's own people and potential destruction of itself.

 

Short term war and short term thinking meant that by the time Germany realized it needed to do more, it was to late and that's why it had no development in depth.  Blame Speer, or at least his predecessors, for that balls up, but then you might as well just blame Goering and Hitler, after all, they started it. 

 

 

I suspect Hitler would have succeeded if 1) he hadn't allowed the Luftwaffe (which had already sustained significant losses during the campaigns in Poland/France and the Low Countries) to be consumed in a futile battle over Southern England and b) if he hadn't delayed the assault on the Soviet Union to assist his ally in Greece. 

 

If those two things hadn't happened, I suspect he would have completed his destruction of the Soviet military in relatively short order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect Hitler would have succeeded if 1) he hadn't allowed the Luftwaffe (which had already sustained significant losses during the campaigns in Poland/France and the Low Countries) to be consumed in a futile battle over Southern England and b) if he hadn't delayed the assault on the Soviet Union to assist his ally in Greece. 

 

If those two things hadn't happened, I suspect he would have completed his destruction of the Soviet military in relatively short order.

 

For Germany to have a chance they would:

 

- Not persecute the Jews

 

- after conquering France, form a new alliance with the current government (focusing on trade and co-operation), don't even talk to the Brits... yet

 

- after treaty signed with France withdraw their forces from France and naval units from the North Atlantic

 

- drop propaganda leaflets on Britain pointing out that France is Free and England is not under threat etc to sway public opinion

 

- help negotiate a peace in North Africa (though with Britain not too distracted by Germany, the Brits would probably use all their forces to fight in Africa) 

 

- try to convince other countries of the Communist threat, and try to do a joint action to take down the Soviets and install democracy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For Germany to have a chance they would:

 

- Not vote for Hitler *and*

- not let him be Chancelor

 

Like this, they would have been 50 years ago where they are now. (And we would have "N.11: Battle of Verdun" as follow up series to RoF.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

the Nazi regime was so arrogant and free of self-reflection, they just had only plan A! The plan to be the best and superior race (Arier), to have the best army, best weapons,

best engineering and so to be the sole eligible nation to rule the whole world.

 

But as so often proven in history, most of these regimes - even nowadays - are corrupt. And were corruption rules, common sense and positive criticism comes too short.

There were a lot of superior and innovative weapon systems, who didn't make it or like for the Me262 too late and wrongly used. All depended on Hitler's mood or sympathy.

And of course on all his paladins who all wanted to be part of the game!

 

Thanks god, this regime was too stupid to survive... and observing those neo-nazis makes me laugh - most of them bloody stupid for not to say brainless.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

the Nazi regime was so arrogant and free of self-reflection, they just had only plan A! The plan to be the best and superior race (Arier), to have the best army, best weapons,

best engineering and so to be the sole eligible nation to rule the whole world.

 

But as so often proven in history, most of these regimes - even nowadays - are corrupt. And were corruption rules, common sense and positive criticism comes too short.

There were a lot of superior and innovative weapon systems, who didn't make it or like for the Me262 too late and wrongly used. All depended on Hitler's mood or sympathy.

And of course on all his paladins who all wanted to be part of the game!

 

Thanks god, this regime was too stupid to survive... and observing those neo-nazis makes me laugh - most of them bloody stupid for not to say brainless.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Cheers

 

 

Actually, the Germans did have the best army.  What's more, their army remained first rate right throughout the war.  It probably wasn't as good as the army Germany sent to war in 1914 but it was still pretty good, relative to the opposition.  Their weaponry on the other hand was in a number of respects, second rate.  Their tanks in particular were for the most part worse or no better than the opposition, but typically worse.  Not only were they poorly armed and armoured, (with a few obvious exceptions) but they were not well suited to mass production and consequently always in short supply.  This was probably the greatest failing of the National Socialist state.

 

But that said, the Germans came very close to defeating the Soviets and, if time and resources hadn't been needlessly expended in several futile campaigns in '40-41 against British forces, I suspect they would have succeeded. 

Edited by Wulf
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would it lead to British surrender, even if they would have won the air battle? There was no realistic chance of actually getting troops on British isles, when Britain had way superior navy.

Another thing, there have been lots of boogie stories how nazis wanted to conquer the world. Hopefully people don't believe that for real.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.  Far better to simply accept the officially sanctioned version of events.  

 

If you want a happy life just go with the flow.  If the flow changes, change with it.  Very wise....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  This was probably the greatest failing of the National Socialist state.

 

Wasn't their greatest failing the genocide, the mass-murder, the aggresive wars of conquest, etc., etc......? :(

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't their greatest failing the genocide, the mass-murder, the aggresive wars of conquest, etc., etc......? :(

 

 

Yes, the two great socialist totalitarian dictatorships of the 20th century, the Marxist-Leninists in the Soviet Union and the National Socialists in Germany, certainly have much to answer for.  Millions and millions of dead people for one.  From the millions who died in concentration camps or Gulags to the millions who died through the forced collectivization of farming in the Ukraine.  Yes, absolutely.  And for the most part the victims of the two great socialist experiments of that century never received justice.  So yes, in that sense I agree with you. But that's not the type of failure I was referring too.  I was talking about the inability of National Socialism to keep its soldiers supplied with the equipment they needed to complete their assigned tasks.  In that the National Socialists failed completely, as did their Marxist counterparts in the Soviet Union.  Ultimately it was the western democracies that supplied the food and equipment that kept the Soviets in the war and allowed the Allies to prevail in the end.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, the 'Nazism was left wing' argument. Complete and utter nonsense, as anyone familiar with the work of actual historians would know. The Nazis weren't socialists. They were put into power by the conservative German establishment because they murdered socialists. Peddle your revisionist nonsense elsewhere, 'Wulf'...

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

.........and there was me thinking this thread was about German fighter development !!!

 

 

If I recall properly, Germany had two "verboten's". One was a war on two fronts, on which a great deal of time, energy and planning was devoted, and brilliantly successfully enacted, and yes, Wulf is correct, much of the equipment the Germans had at the start of the war was inferior, which says an awful lot, even in this day and age about purpose and clarity of objective. The second was a protracted war, Germany's domestic resources didn't allow for it and the German people suffered accordingly during the Great War. That's where the Blitzcrieg philosophy might be found to have it's roots. The problem was that it also defined a political philosophy, admitting otherwise ( don't look, don't ask) might have been political suicide or diluted the national resolve. Germany was therefore constrained by this political and mental philosophy, whether expressed or not, which meant that by the time they woke up to the need for longer term development, it was too late.

 

That's not to say German industry didn't achieve anything at all, they certainly were very inventive and clever ( to the eventual benefit of the Allies, isn't that right Herr Von Braun ) it's just that it was all a bit to catch up and too late. That's not to suggest that even good designers got it right all the time , they also produced well known turkeys, didn't you Willy !!!

Edited by HagarTheHorrible
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, the 'Nazism was left wing' argument. Complete and utter nonsense, as anyone familiar with the work of actual historians would know. The Nazis weren't socialists. They were put into power by the conservative German establishment because they murdered socialists. Peddle your revisionist nonsense elsewhere, 'Wulf'...

 

 

As previously noted, the liberal left's successful distancing of itself from it's fraternal links to European Fascism is one of the great smoke and mirror acts of the 20th century.

 

Whether you wish to open your eyes to the historical reality or simply remain blinded by your leftist ideological mindset is up to you.  Frankly, I couldn't give a monkey's either way.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably a good time to intone with a solemn and slightly mysterious note that hints of some secret and unknowable knowledge:

 

"History is written by the Victors..."

lol

 

Phew... Thanks Feathered....

 

Thank goodness, we have what if scenarios and data sheets that prove that reality is wrong and that according to calculations Germany should have won both WWs with class. Actually it was all the Soviet union and the Versailles Treaty's fault!  

 

History is rewritten by the defeated these times, so i guess they'll call it a draw :happy:

Edited by Caudron431Micha
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, were entering the non-trivial cathegories of hallucinations. Are you referring to such delusions?

 

If so, then it just has been demonstrated in a field experiment, that one not only can derail a train, but also trainwrecks.

 

As for the "weapon part" of the duiscussion, sometimes this one just takes a walk:

 

019.jpg

 

 

I don't much care for your tone so consequently I have no interest in trying to help you.  Just keep feeding random words into Google and maybe you'll eventually figure it out.   I'd be surprised but stranger things have happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...