Author Topic: Issues with the Ta152 (Read 7143 times)

33Vortex · « **Reply #90 on:** January 25, 2008, 04:09:15 PM »

I for one would love the Ta152C to be put in the game. I'm having wet dreams about that a/c, I mean... 1 x 30 mm + 4 x 20 mm...

But yeah, the 152H fm needs a fix! Its current state is redicilous, shame on HTC!

Sled · « **Reply #91 on:** January 25, 2008, 08:28:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by 33Vortex
But yeah, the 152H fm needs a fix! Its current state is redicilous, shame on HTC!

Well that presents an interesting question.

Do we want the AC in AH to fly like they did in real life? (for better or worse.)

Or do we want them to fly like we want them to fly?

If I was HTC I would want my AC to fly like the real planes, as best as I can present it. If the real 152 had the yaw issues it has in AH, then it is flying correctly. Right?

moot · « **Reply #92 on:** January 25, 2008, 08:47:22 PM »

Yes, if. The question is whether the 152's FM is as it's supposed to be, or just a stop-gap implementation like the Mossie was.

Vortex, I think a late 190D would be better. There wouldn't be any cog issues, and we'd get a better engine. Fielded numbers are relatively the same between the two variants.

Xasthur · « **Reply #93 on:** January 25, 2008, 10:02:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
Yes, if. The question is whether the 152's FM is as it's supposed to be, or just a stop-gap implementation like the Mossie was.

Vortex, I think a late 190D would be better. There wouldn't be any cog issues, and we'd get a better engine. Fielded numbers are relatively the same between the two variants.

A D-11 would be nice

33Vortex · « **Reply #94 on:** January 26, 2008, 01:34:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
Vortex, I think a late 190D would be better. There wouldn't be any cog issues, and we'd get a better engine. Fielded numbers are relatively the same between the two variants.

Check out the Ta152C, it would do nicely. It's pretty much a beefed up Dora but with the much improved Ta152 tail section. The stopgap a/c here is the D-9 using butchered A-7 fuselages but it was the one that got into service in any scale.

And to the people saying the Ta152 is fine like it is:

I'm sorry guys but you are just being stupid and I don't want to make any further comments on the subject. Just put your leg or arm out at 500 mph and you'll learn something about physics. You won't notice any yaw effects but your chosen bodypart will break or simply be torn off. Air moving at 500 mph is HARD. It has something to do with kinetic energy and basic physical principles. If you can't grasp it, stay out of it.

moot · « **Reply #95 on:** January 26, 2008, 02:57:47 AM »

Vortex I don't doubt there's something wrong with the present 152 FM, if the AH1 FM was representative of the plane's characteristics. That said, the F4Us have the same sort of tailslide that seems like the fuselage blanking some or all of the tail section control surfaces, so assuming the F4Us are fine, and considering that behavior (in the 152) already existed (to a lesser degree) on the AH1 FM, it's probably not that inaccurate.

I've been learning to adapt to this quirk, and the closer I ride the edge of it, the wilder the spins I get.. I had one that was nearly as bad as the mossie used to be, meaning I had red-out from the spin and couldn't even tell where the plane was going for a moment.
I got at least one of that type of spins on film, although it's less pronounced. I also have one where I catch the tailslide very near the point of no return. I don't know how it'll look on .ahf, with its slow sample rate, but I'll post it here for illustration.

I'm pretty sure the 190D11-13 (I forgot which ones exactly) were better than the 152C. The engine was more powerful and the plane was lighter. The 152C had cog issues like the 152H's, but how they compared to the 190D11-13s' in terms of overall agility, I don't know.
Unless one of these birds had a MK103 in the nose, I don't know if any of them would be the best one by any significant margin, for us in AH.

moot · « **Reply #96 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:02:24 AM »

Here's the film. The tail slides out of the way at 0:20. It's likely this sort of slide wouldn't show up if I looked out for it, but even then I couldn't really keep it perfectly under control without rudder pedals.
I've never had a spin at 500mph, Vortex. The really bad behavior in the 152 only happens around 200mph. I don't think I could ever get it to get out of line enough for the cog to spind out the plane above 300mph or so.

I can't find film of the really violent spinout yet... It doesn't just lose lift and spin flat, but really wipes out and then flies backwards for a while, before settling into the slow spin.

Sled · « **Reply #97 on:** January 26, 2008, 04:48:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by 33Vortex
And to the people saying the Ta152 is fine like it is:

I'm sorry guys but you are just being stupid and I don't want to make any further comments on the subject. Just put your leg or arm out at 500 mph and you'll learn something about physics. You won't notice any yaw effects but your chosen bodypart will break or simply be torn off. Air moving at 500 mph is HARD. It has something to do with kinetic energy and basic physical principles. If you can't grasp it, stay out of it.

Well I don't necessarily think the 152 is "fine like it is". So I guess I have vortex's permission to continue posting in this thread.

BUT, those of you that disagree with vortex can't post in this thread. He has decided that he doesn't want to hear you being "stupid" anymore.

So........ move along please.

33Vortex · « **Reply #98 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:10:20 AM »

That's right! But if you must, bring cookies!

33Vortex · « **Reply #99 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:27:35 AM »

The only D-13 I'm aware of was of the Stab/JG26 flown by Geschwaderkommodore Franz Götz. Indeed it had a further developed (engine using triple boosters!) than the Ta152C and perhaps a more well balanced armament of 3 MG151 20 mm cannons, one firing through the hub.

This plane is actually modeled in AH already, as a D-9 skin! I've meant to make a post about that but never gotten around to it. It's a great paint, I love it, but it's a D-13 not a D-9. I think that HTC should either remove the skin (because it's not a D-9) or consequently add the D-13 to the lineup. The D-13 would, no doubt, be a monster on a whole different level than the D-9. The engine is decisively more powerful at high altitudes, how much more I do not know since I don't have access to any performance charts. Perhaps someone could dig it out.

33Vortex · « **Reply #100 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:59:49 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
I've never had a spin at 500mph, Vortex. The really bad behavior in the 152 only happens around 200mph. I don't think I could ever get it to get out of line enough for the cog to spind out the plane above 300mph or so.

True, but at those speeds the controls should be rock solid unless perhaps under influence of the added weight of partially filled or full wing tanks. The Ta152H may have a large wing span, but the mass is concentrated to its fuselage. Reports seem to suggest there were some stability issues, but those were regarded as minor and not interfering with the a/c overall performance. I mean, these were pilots used to the nimble and exact aileron response of the FW190, of course the larger wing span of the Ta152H had consequenses. I'm just saying that the Ta152 ingame currently feel more like a Bergfalke than a high performance piston engined fighter. I don't have the exact figures and raw data, but I've flown enough powered and non-powered a/c to know that the handling doesn't make sense.

moot · « **Reply #101 on:** January 26, 2008, 10:50:00 AM »

Well, I think if we get a later 190D, it should be a low altitude variant. The 152H is made for high altitude, and so far none of the 190s, 152 included, are low-altitude oriented. A low alt 190D with a MK103 in the hub would be perfect

The reports on instabilities in the 152 were a bit contradictory.. Some of them, though, flat out said they were unacceptable. I'll have to find the exact text to be sure.

33Vortex · « **Reply #102 on:** January 26, 2008, 02:50:32 PM »

The D-12 had a 30 mm hub cannon, instead of the dual MG131 setup, together with the standard wingroot mounted MG151s. A small number were produced if I'm not mistaken, on the scale of 10-15 a/c, and saw action with front line units. One could argue though that all of Germany was at the front line in the air war at that point.

Xasthur · « **Reply #103 on:** January 26, 2008, 08:24:09 PM »

[/IMG]

Quote

The D-11 carried the formidable armament of 2 x 20mm and 2 x 30mm cannons. The D-11 was equipped with the more powerful Jumo J213F engine with Methanol/Water injection (the MW50 filler can be seen above the radio access). This was the same power plant used on the TA 152. The D-11 was a Versuch (test) aircraft. There were 7 - 13 D-11s built, most likely all from existing A-8 airframes (sources vary on exact number with 7 being most common). The D-11 never went into regular production.

moot · « **Reply #104 on:** January 27, 2008, 01:07:58 AM »

Where's that from? I remember reading one of the books about the 190/152s in which its author suggested that the 190Ds would have been a more practical alternative, given their airframe being proven (e.g. no cog problems) and the engine being more powerful.
I don't remember the specifics, but it was something not negligible like 200HP, maybe more. I think it was optimised for low altitude. I'll have to look it up.