Author Topic: Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?  (Read 728 times)

Offline fscott

  • Banned
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 127
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« on: March 14, 2001, 01:03:00 PM »
I haven't had too many chances to turn fight the Ta152 down low, but the few times I have it seems that it was not too great a turner.

Max weight = 12100 lbs
Wing area = 252 square feet
Wing loading max = 47 lbs/sqft

Empty weight = 7900 lbs
Wing loading = 31 lbs/sqft

So it has a wing loading between 31 and 47 lbs/sqft.  It seems that this is a relatively low wing loading especially when it's low on fuel.  Anyone have good experiences turning this bird against another good pilot who actually knew what he was doing?

fscott

Sturm

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #1 on: March 14, 2001, 01:25:00 PM »
152 should not be perked the way it is now, slow climb rate, average acceleration great dive speed and level speed.  As far as turning I got my first crack at flying one just 3 days into my AH experience.  Lesson learned it doesn't turn that good.  Was out turned by a 109 G-10.  152 should be rather close to the Tempest going to pilot experience being the difference.  Willie Reschke dispatched 2 Tempests down low in a 152.  D-9 perked 152 not perked or either drop the value.    

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #2 on: March 14, 2001, 01:40:00 PM »
There is where pilot skill comes into the equation.

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #3 on: March 14, 2001, 01:51:00 PM »
One thing that is for sure, is that its missing 250rpm and 15-22mph from speed, between 29-41k.

So as it is currently, its missing alot.

Sturm

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #4 on: March 14, 2001, 01:55:00 PM »
Mind you he also had 4k alt on me, and I had no E.  Simple case of leaving the keyboard to go outside to have a smoke coming back and finding enemy con 6k away.

Offline F4UDOA

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1731
      • http://mywebpages.comcast.net/markw4/index.html
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #5 on: March 14, 2001, 03:53:00 PM »
Ahhh,

But why is it not turning well at low alt. and low speed??

Before you gents think I am going to bash the 152 let me tell you I agree with you. It should turn well, but the 109G10 will beat you in the virtical on the deck every time as will the NIK2, Tempest and LA7.

There are three things working for the TA-152 to give it good sustained turning ability.

1. Relatively low wing loading when near empty fuel. On par with most other late war fighters when at about 25% load.

2. Good, not great climber at Combat power. Ability to climb is roughly the same as acceleration. And that translates into being able to pull the nose around quickly at a near stall turn. Better known as sustained turn rate. Almost all A/C have there best sustained turn rate at there best climb speed. Find that speed and time it in 360 degree turn to test it against other birds.

3. High aspect ratio wing. Not good for rolling but very good for low induced drag which mean the ability to maintain a tight turn without bleeding to much E to fast. The P-38 also had this ability but had two large engine nacelles breaking up the wing ruining lift. The Ta-152 did not and should benifit from this.

It also had things three things working against it.

1. Poor wing loading when heavy. Worse than the P-47 not as bad as the P-38. Advice would be to take a drop tank and 50% fuel when taking off. Never go into combat when Low and with more than 50% fuel.

2. Really bad climber at mil power. Bad climber means bad acceleration and bad sustained turn rate. Run out of WEP on the deck and you got problems.

3. Slow getting into a turn because of wide wing span. Slow speed, slow roller. Not good for turn fighting on the deck.

The bottom line is when turn fighting LA7's, Tempest or 109G10's they will use the lag pursuit to kill you unless you can get your nose around very quickly. At least in an A8, D9 or A5 you can roll and sissor to avoid the nme until help arrives. Get a bogie on yer tail in the 152 and you better stay fast because unless the other guy makes a mistake you can't win.

BTW, if anyone wants to test in the TA just shout out. I am always up for that sort of thing.

Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #6 on: March 14, 2001, 04:15:00 PM »
the ta-152-h1 had also a modified airfoil, which had a higher Clmax compared to a Dora. Another reason why it should turn better.


niklas

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #7 on: March 14, 2001, 04:21:00 PM »
Turns very good for me, dunno what the rest of you are doing.

funked

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #8 on: March 14, 2001, 04:25:00 PM »
The wingloading is quite poor actually.  It should turn better than a Fw 190D-9 or Fw 190A or P-47 but that's about it.

Just because Reschke shot down a Tempest does NOT mean the planes were equal.  There is a large amount of engineering data which says otherwise.

Fishu, is this chart not correct?
 
Because in my (admittedly brief) test flights, the 152 is performing per the chart.

Offline brady

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7055
      • http://personal.jax.bellsouth.net/jax/t/y/tyr88/JG2main.html
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #9 on: March 14, 2001, 04:39:00 PM »
 
 I have had the opportunity to engage 2 Ta 152's. The first was with a La-7 we started at about 10k and I managed to get on his 6 and he dove for the deck when he could not lose me I followed him and at first he pulled away, he extended to about 3.2k then I started to close on him, when he realized I was catching him he decided to fight and as he pulled up to turn I got him in about 45 sec, it was easy in the la-7.

  The second  encounter was with a Dora 9. I spotted a solitary ta 152 in the middle of nowhere he was a little below me at about 15k I was at 17k I headed right for him and he turned in to me I led him and tagged him in the fuselage and the tail as he passed. he dove away and extended out he was running for home I followed and as he came up to his air field I broke off not wanting to follow him into the ACK, then he discoed...But he did not poses enough of an advantage in speed to lose me I was able to stay with him for 10miles about 3k behind him...

 Also the tempest is no turn fighter I would imagine it would be easy to out fight a tempest with a Ta 152, my experience has been that it seams to turn well for a FW.

------------------
 

[This message has been edited by brady (edited 03-14-2001).]

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #10 on: March 14, 2001, 05:05:00 PM »
I have 469 mph at 41k here:

   

From the Ta 152 book.

[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 03-14-2001).]

Offline Dinger

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1705
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #11 on: March 14, 2001, 06:14:00 PM »
-ok, ok, so I was reading the wrong column.  that still doesn't mean you can't be a moron.  

[This message has been edited by Dinger (edited 03-14-2001).]

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #12 on: March 14, 2001, 06:17:00 PM »
hehehehehehehhehehehehehehehe hehehheheh

handsomehunk.  

I know you aren't that dumb. I really hope yer joking...  

[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 03-14-2001).]

Nath-BDP

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #13 on: March 14, 2001, 06:22:00 PM »
Looks like GM1 isn't punching it at the right alt for our H-1, thus were getting the speed of a GM 1-less H-0.

funked

  • Guest
Shouldn't the Ta152 turn better at low altitude?
« Reply #14 on: March 14, 2001, 07:40:00 PM »
Yeah the altitudes don't match up.  Doesn't somebody have some speed vs. altitude charts for this thing?  The HTC chart sure has the look of real data, i.e. it's got a lot of "squigglies", but I wonder what the source is.

I'll do some more checking to make sure the in-game performance matches HTC's own chart, but I think that part is OK.  The question is what data they based the chart on.