PDA

View Full Version : Shooting 'vulnerable' Landing Me262's, in real life and the game...



Xiolablu3
09-12-2005, 01:59 AM
If I am going much to fast when I am coming in to land , I will violently bank and pull the stick back and forward to loose airspeed, maybe just use rudder a bit if I just need to slow down a little. Down to about 300k then on with landing flaps, gear down which creates enuff drag to land.

My question is, why couldnt Me262 pilots in the war do this? It is said that they were incredibly vulnerable when landing and had to have FW190's flying cover above the base to protect them on their descent.

I can loose speed quite easily in the game, can anyone tell me why this wasnt possible in a Me262 in 1944-45?

Xiolablu3
09-12-2005, 01:59 AM
If I am going much to fast when I am coming in to land , I will violently bank and pull the stick back and forward to loose airspeed, maybe just use rudder a bit if I just need to slow down a little. Down to about 300k then on with landing flaps, gear down which creates enuff drag to land.

My question is, why couldnt Me262 pilots in the war do this? It is said that they were incredibly vulnerable when landing and had to have FW190's flying cover above the base to protect them on their descent.

I can loose speed quite easily in the game, can anyone tell me why this wasnt possible in a Me262 in 1944-45?

alert_1
09-12-2005, 02:22 AM
It looks like (IMO of course) that momentum and mass isn't truly modelled in the game. For ex. Fw190 testing pilot were reporting that it's not easy to slow down Fw190. Try to touch your joystick flying Fw190 in the game and you lose a lot of energy with even slight move.

Kuna15
09-12-2005, 02:41 AM
Yes FW-190 in game has in fact quite long landing path, it is harder to slow down than many other aircraft.

Von_Rat
09-12-2005, 02:48 AM
incredibly vulnerable ,,, means just what it says.

try your landing procedure in game with a p38 or spit on you.

you'll feel incredibly vulnerable too, believe it.

also remember, in real life you just can't roll to a stop and hit refly, you had to get the plane under cover to.

ianboys
09-12-2005, 02:53 AM
It isn't just the landing, it's the slowing down from 750kmh to 250kmh that takes a while. Even with turning it takes a couple of turns normally. Now imagine you are at 300kmh and lining up when a Mustang comes, what do you do? You can't ram the throttle forward (fire), you can't out-turn or scissor him and while you slowly accelerate he will catch you and knock you out.

That is why the Germans used to provide a flak path towards the runway where the 262's could decelerate safely and,later, prop fighter cover.

g5r_88
09-12-2005, 03:06 AM
Where Ta-152`s were known of protecting the airfields, the Allies just didn`t go. Even if they knew they outnumbered it, they just didn`t go. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

ImpStarDuece
09-12-2005, 03:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by g5r_88:
Where Ta-152`s were known of protecting the airfields, the Allies just didn`t go. Even if they knew they outnumbered it, they just didn`t go. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I wonder what you would rather be in at 10,000-20,000 feet covering the airfields; A Tempest V Serise II or a Ta-152? Or perhaps a Spitfire XIV? Or a P-47M.

The Ta-152 was barely type identified during the war, let alone deliberately avoided when on both front the Allies had massive air superiority.

dadada1
09-12-2005, 04:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by g5r_88:
Where Ta-152`s were known of protecting the airfields, the Allies just didn`t go. Even if they knew they outnumbered it, they just didn`t go. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please lets have none of this myth repeated on these boards, Ta 152's where never, repeat never charged with Me 262 protection.Dietmarr Harmanns book on the Ta catergorically states that 262 protection was never a duty for the Ta. Also no account by pilots such as Resche, or Josef Keil of JG 301 ever mentions this during their combat experience, so lets kill this off right here.

g5r_88
09-12-2005, 04:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder what you would rather be in at 10,000-20,000 feet covering the airfields; A Tempest V Serise II or a Ta-152? Or perhaps a Spitfire XIV? Or a P-47M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Tank of cource. But I won`t even get involved in this stupid arguement, just look at the statistics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Ta-152 was barely type identified during the war, let alone deliberately avoided when on both front the Allies had massive air superiority. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of cource it was, because nobody would want to play around with almost certain death.

LStarosta
09-12-2005, 04:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by g5r_88:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder what you would rather be in at 10,000-20,000 feet covering the airfields; A Tempest V Serise II or a Ta-152? Or perhaps a Spitfire XIV? Or a P-47M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Tank of cource. But I won`t even get involved in this stupid arguement, just look at the statistics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Ta-152 was barely type identified during the war, let alone deliberately avoided when on both front the Allies had massive air superiority. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of cource it was, because nobody would want to play around with almost certain death. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, since you have 6 posts, I will let you off easy.


This is how it works around here: If you have proofs, you win. If you don't you are being a whiny n00bert.

He has proofs. You don't. He wins.

fabianfred
09-12-2005, 05:13 AM
it's easy to do things in the game that you wouldn't chance your life with IRL...

Xiolablu3
09-12-2005, 07:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
incredibly vulnerable ,,, means just what it says.

try your landing procedure in game with a p38 or spit on you.

you'll feel incredibly vulnerable too, believe it.

also remember, in real life you just can't roll to a stop and hit refly, you had to get the plane under cover to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I understand this, but ANY plane you could say this about. The Me262 was supposed to be PARTICULALY vulnerable when landing, more so than prop planes.


I'm afraid the TA2152 was a Hi-altitude plane (the wings are a clue), it wouldnt make sense to have them low covering airfields.

I never thought about the throttle problem, in a prop fighter you can just throttle up to full and try and get away, in a ME262 this is of course impossible.

Ianboys has provided the answer for me, thanks.

p1ngu666
09-12-2005, 07:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fabianfred:
it's easy to do things in the game that you wouldn't chance your life with IRL... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

cool sig pic http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

262 had no props, so without the brakin effect it took longer to slow down... plus it couldnt turn well..

flak is what the allied pilots feared, the jet airfields had TONS of the stuff

ta152, designed for high alt, used at low alt, its where history meets the dogfight servers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Jaws2002
09-12-2005, 07:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by fabianfred:
it's easy to do things in the game that you wouldn't chance your life with IRL... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There you go. I don't think someone with brains would have done that close to the ground, in a plane with such a high wing loading.

Friendly_flyer
09-12-2005, 09:09 AM
The Me 262 isn't all that manoeuvrable, in the first place, less so at low speed. Slowing down (as you noted) takes a bit of time, meaning that the poor pilot would have to spend several minutes in a highly sought after aircraft, known for it's flammable engines within the speed-range of Spitfires, Mustangs and P-51s. That is no place to be when you have very limited turning abilities. So yes, they where very vulnerable!

HeinzBar
09-12-2005, 09:50 AM
S!,
Primary responsibility of protecting the me262 fell upon the shoulders of the fw190d9. It is mentioned that 3 fw190d11 were used to protect JV44 and were part of Papageistaffel(sp) of platzshutz(?). IIRC, the highest scoring papagei member was Heinz Sachsenberg w/ over 100 victories...not 100% sure on this though.

The difference between the two was the removal of the 13mm MG and replaced w/ 2x mk108s in the outer wings while retaining the 151/20 in the wing-roots.

HB

g5r_88
09-12-2005, 10:30 AM
Papageistaffel! Didn`t Germans just make lovely names or what?

Hoarmurath
09-12-2005, 10:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by g5r_88:
Papageistaffel! Didn`t Germans just make lovely names or what? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red1_1.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red1_2.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red1_3.jpg

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red13_1.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red13_2.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red13_3.jpg

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red4_1.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red4_2.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red4_3.jpg

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red3_1.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red3_2.jpg
http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/jv44_red3_3.jpg

Airmail109
09-12-2005, 12:55 PM
^^^^^

Ugly POS! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

p1ngu666
09-12-2005, 01:10 PM
complete lies about red and white paint and dora, they never had dora, be sure.

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///323collective.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///redcondor.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///speed0r1.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///ju52-2.jpg

in truth, they where transport pilots, who flew to japan before the reich collapsed, and managed to convice the IJA they where combat pilots.

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///ki843.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///ki841.jpg

http://premium1.uploadit.org/pingu666///ki842.jpg

thus, they ended the war, and there claims where taken tobe true...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

WOLFMondo
09-12-2005, 01:13 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

zan_bzk
09-12-2005, 01:26 PM
look....if you want to try something....buy Combat flight simulator 3 and try to land a Me-262 with P-51 on your six....then you will understand why the Germans protected the Me-262 when it was in landing sequence

Xiolablu3
09-12-2005, 06:03 PM
Lmao@pingu http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Nice Dora skins!

fabianfred
09-12-2005, 06:10 PM
watch this .. [ENG] History Channel - Messerschmitt 262 - Race for the Jet.avi

the real 262 pilots explain it all...

JunkoIfurita
09-12-2005, 07:04 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Jesus Gawd Pingu, I've never EVER seen anyone put so much effort into trolling as you just did. I stand in awe: How long did it take you to make all those skins?

More importantly, where can I download them to put together my own 'Super Happy Time Papageistaffel Attack Squad Plus' campaign?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Originally posted by MattStoneAndTreyParker:
#Hirohito: You see, we Japanese have very small *****.
#Miho: Yes, very tiny.
#Hirohito: Whereas, you American have such huge *****. Really bulbous, most gargantuan *****.
#Miho: Giant *****.
#Hirohito: How could we possibly invade your country, when our *****es are so very, very small?
#Miho: My ***** is especially small.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

----

Stackhouse25th
09-12-2005, 07:28 PM
IMPORTANT:

Ive noticed the drag doesnt work as well as it should...i think when BOB has wind effect added, drag will be implemented as well.

HayateAce
09-12-2005, 07:37 PM
What's with the Santa Claus boxer shorts on the bottom of these things? The Dora is ugly enough without this humiliation.

FritzGryphon
09-12-2005, 08:13 PM
Anyway, on original topic...

Like any other plane, the Me-262 could theoretically just pull G to slow down. Even easier in this case, because Me-262 has high wingloading, and swept wings (less efficient in a turn than straight wings).

However, in real life, the engines were prone to flaming out at high angles of attack, and severe sideslips. It would cause a compressor stall and the engine would shut down. So you couldn't, for example, snap roll or do violent breakturns for fear of shutting down the engines. Re-starting the engines was a relatively lengthy process on the Me-262.

This necessitated a long, straight aproach, bleeding off speed gradually. Rather than the S-turns or barrel rolling the prop planes could do to slow down.

Xiolablu3
09-12-2005, 08:18 PM
Thanks Fritz, another genuine answer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FabianFred - can I download that on Bitorrent?

Pirschjaeger
09-12-2005, 08:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by g5r_88:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder what you would rather be in at 10,000-20,000 feet covering the airfields; A Tempest V Serise II or a Ta-152? Or perhaps a Spitfire XIV? Or a P-47M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Tank of cource. But I won`t even get involved in this stupid arguement, just look at the statistics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Ta-152 was barely type identified during the war, let alone deliberately avoided when on both front the Allies had massive air superiority. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of cource it was, because nobody would want to play around with almost certain death. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, since you have 6 posts, I will let you off easy.


This is how it works around here: If you have proofs, you win. If you don't you are being a whiny n00bert.

He has proofs. You don't. He wins. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I nominate L-Star as the leader of the "Welcoming Comedy". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz

Pirschjaeger
09-12-2005, 08:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
Anyway, on original topic...

Like any other plane, the Me-262 could theoretically just pull G to slow down. Even easier in this case, because Me-262 has high wingloading, and swept wings (less efficient in a turn than straight wings).

However, in real life, the engines were prone to flaming out at high angles of attack, and severe sideslips. It would cause a compressor stall and the engine would shut down. So you couldn't, for example, snap roll or do violent breakturns for fear of shutting down the engines. Re-starting the engines was a relatively lengthy process on the Me-262.

This necessitated a long, straight aproach, bleeding off speed gradually. Rather than the S-turns or barrel rolling the prop planes could do to slow down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To add, the Me262's didn't have "F2" or "m" keys. A world of difference. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Fritz

Hoarmurath
09-12-2005, 08:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
What's with the Santa Claus boxer shorts on the bottom of these things? The Dora is ugly enough without this humiliation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some day, you will learn the virtues of historical research.

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/biblio_1.jpg

Well, in your case, i'm maybe a bit optimistic.

p1ngu666
09-12-2005, 09:33 PM
painted red and white so that AA gunners didnt shoot at them. n00b aa gunners, probably from the hitler youth

junko pm me, i made a bunch of jv44 style skins ages ago. mostly unfinished cos thats what im like http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

VW-IceFire
09-12-2005, 09:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by g5r_88:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I wonder what you would rather be in at 10,000-20,000 feet covering the airfields; A Tempest V Serise II or a Ta-152? Or perhaps a Spitfire XIV? Or a P-47M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Tank of cource. But I won`t even get involved in this stupid arguement, just look at the statistics.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The Ta-152 was barely type identified during the war, let alone deliberately avoided when on both front the Allies had massive air superiority. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of cource it was, because nobody would want to play around with almost certain death. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mmmm statistics...an interesting thing. I don't have a speed chart for the Ta-152H but from what I understand, it was slower than the FW190D-9 at medium and lower altitudes.

It was designed as a high altitude interceptor for the B-29 bomber (that was one of the motivations anyways) and it performs darn well at high altitudes. Down low, its still fast...but its outpaced by its earlier cousin (from what I understand).

Seeing as how the D-9 is then outpaced by the Tempest Mark V's...particularly those running Sabre IIC engines (about 200 aircraft in this configuration reached the 2nd TAF) with Rotol Props and high levels of overboost. The end result is that I'd rather be in a Tempest V. Even a Sabre IIB (the most common) equipped with standard propeller would be faster...not as much...but quite a bit.

Superior firepower and speed. Key attributes of a late war fighter and the Tempest does it better than the Ta-152H does. The FW190D-9 is actually more of the threat at mid and low level ..and the Ta-152C, had any been made, would have been the real trouble.

In regards to shooting Me-262s on landing...in this regime the Tempest V has a higher overtake than pretty much any other conventional Allied fighter with possible exception of the P-47M.

Pirschjaeger
09-12-2005, 10:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hoarmurath:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by HayateAce:
What's with the Santa Claus boxer shorts on the bottom of these things? The Dora is ugly enough without this humiliation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some day, you will learn the virtues of historical research.

http://hoarmurath.free.fr/images/biblio_1.jpg

Well, in your case, i'm maybe a bit optimistic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

Fritz

TAGERT.
09-13-2005, 12:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
If I am going much to fast when I am coming in to land , I will violently bank and pull the stick back and forward to loose airspeed, maybe just use rudder a bit if I just need to slow down a little. Down to about 300k then on with landing flaps, gear down which creates enuff drag to land.

My question is, why couldnt Me262 pilots in the war do this? It is said that they were incredibly vulnerable when landing and had to have FW190's flying cover above the base to protect them on their descent.

I can loose speed quite easily in the game, can anyone tell me why this wasnt possible in a Me262 in 1944-45? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Oh I dont know, maybe the idea of banking *violently* just a few 100ft off the ground made real pilots nervos in that they could realy die should the stall it.. But, just a guess on my part.

stathem
09-13-2005, 04:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FritzGryphon:
Anyway, on original topic...

Like any other plane, the Me-262 could theoretically just pull G to slow down. Even easier in this case, because Me-262 has high wingloading, and swept wings (less efficient in a turn than straight wings).

However, in real life, the engines were prone to flaming out at high angles of attack, and severe sideslips. It would cause a compressor stall and the engine would shut down. So you couldn't, for example, snap roll or do violent breakturns for fear of shutting down the engines. Re-starting the engines was a relatively lengthy process on the Me-262.

This necessitated a long, straight aproach, bleeding off speed gradually. Rather than the S-turns or barrel rolling the prop planes could do to slow down. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I second that emotion...

Compressor Stall

From the article €œFlying the Sabre€ in Aeroplane, May 2005:

€œIf you ever wondered what keeps a jet engine€s flame coming out of the back instead of the front, the short answer is that the pressure at the front of the combustion chamber is higher than the pressure at the rear. When this is momentarily not so, the flame does indeed come out of the front. Slicing the nose round at high altitude and low speed can disturb the flow of air to the point that there is not enough to compress, reversing the thrust form the engine. Abrupt movement of the throttle at altitude will have the same result, owing to the fuel control€s inability to moderate the fuel flow, allowing either too much or too little fuel to disturb the flame pattern in the combustion chamber€

From Mike Spick€s LW Fighter Aces :

€œOnce the 262 was in the air€¦If the throttles were handled injudiciously, compressor stalls and flame-out followed€¦.In combat, hard manoeuvring with high angles of attack was avoided. Not only could this cause compressor stalling, but the increase in induced drag bled off speed at an alarming rate, which could only be slowly recovered€


The high AoA compressor stall isn't modelled in FB/PF

fabianfred
09-13-2005, 06:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
Thanks Fritz, another genuine answer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

FabianFred - can I download that on Bitorrent? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have emule and winmx... you can get it on those from me... fabianfred537

ImpStarDuece
09-13-2005, 07:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:

Mmmm statistics...an interesting thing. I don't have a speed chart for the Ta-152H but from what I understand, it was slower than the FW190D-9 at medium and lower altitudes.

It was designed as a high altitude interceptor for the B-29 bomber (that was one of the motivations anyways) and it performs darn well at high altitudes. Down low, its still fast...but its outpaced by its earlier cousin (from what I understand).

Seeing as how the D-9 is then outpaced by the Tempest Mark V's...particularly those running Sabre IIC engines (about 200 aircraft in this configuration reached the 2nd TAF) with Rotol Props and high levels of overboost. The end result is that I'd rather be in a Tempest V. Even a Sabre IIB (the most common) equipped with standard propeller would be faster...not as much...but quite a bit.

Superior firepower and speed. Key attributes of a late war fighter and the Tempest does it better than the Ta-152H does. The FW190D-9 is actually more of the threat at mid and low level ..and the Ta-152C, had any been made, would have been the real trouble.

In regards to shooting Me-262s on landing...in this regime the Tempest V has a higher overtake than pretty much any other conventional Allied fighter with possible exception of the P-47M. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Ice, do you have anything solid on the IIC Sabre making it into the late war Tempests? Most of my information points to a couple of facts

1) Tempest series II tended to get the Sabre IIB, the last two batches of Tempest Vs got the IIB to the best of my knowledge

2) Sabre IIC production was somewhat limited during the war, and engines tended to dribble out of the Napier factories. As a result, I understood that Sabre IICs were never originally fitted to Tempests or Typhoons, or at least were never ordered by Hawker factories, but were swapped at MTUs when aircraft underwent overhauls.

Any info would be great!