Ta 152

[Krusty]

Adverse yaw is greater with a high aspect ratio wing. Not saying the Ta-152 is "right", just suggesting a possibility.

That's been mentioned before, but IMO doesn't fit. Note we didn't have that in AH1, and it was the same plane. (I know, I know, it's possible HTC did this on purpose based on new info available when AH2 came out but they haven't stepped forward on the matter yet to confirm/deny)

[Krusty]

For comparison, a P-38 has a 52 foot wingspan, a Ta152H has a 48.5 foot wingspan, and a F4u corsair has a 41 foot wingspan.

Ki-61: 40 feet
bf110: 53 feet
me410: 53.6 feet
Mosquito: 54 feet


It's not as if this is the longest wing in the game. It's not as if the airframe has any odd configuration that might make it horribly unstable. It's a very conventional design, with longer wingtips than its predecessor.

The physics doesn't seem right, IMO.

[BnZs]

Aspect Ratio

[Krusty]

Aspect Ratio

Yes I got that but it's tied to wingspan. I'm not talking pulling Gs or stall speeds.. I'm talking about going totally wonky with even minor inputs. You bank your wings to roll and your butt skids out in front of you before you're halfway through the turn, etc. General behavior, etc.

[kilo2]

Yes I got that but it's tied to wingspan. I'm not talking pulling Gs or stall speeds.. I'm talking about going totally wonky with even minor inputs. You bank your wings to roll and your butt skids out in front of you before you're halfway through the turn, etc. General behavior, etc.

Thats false. You have to be smooth.

[Krusty]

Kilo, I'm no stranger to the 152... Before moot made his little public interest enhancement plan, I was flying this thing for a long time. I may not be as "good" as some others in it, but I am VERY familiar with how it handles.

In general while I might not be the best "fighter" I am by many other people's suggestion a good "pilot" (virtual one, that is, and talking about this game specifically).

It's very unstable longitudinally. We had even the slightest hint of instability in the Brew and it got fixed instantly. However whenever discussion of the 152 instability comes up the same old answer is thrown out as if to stop all further discussion. It's got long thin wings.

Well so do a number of other planes. Perhaps not this bad, but those other planes have rock-steady gun platforms. If any of them acted like this folks would cry bloody murder.

Only other comparable situation is the spit14 instability. This is worse than the spit14, but for all intents and purposes is just a modified 190D. The 190D doesn't share ANY of these problems. Not even in the slightest. It has a similar engine with regards to horsepower. It has a nearly identical fuselage (slightly shorter nose, less v-stab area). It simply has shorter wingtips.

Logically speaking if the 152 is a direct modification from the 190D would not the 190 series show SOME signs of these problems, even if just minor signs? The 190 series is rock steady. The 152 is terrible. It does not follow (as the saying goes).

[kilo2]

Kilo, I'm no stranger to the 152... Before moot made his little public interest enhancement plan, I was flying this thing for a long time. I may not be as "good" as some others in it, but I am VERY familiar with how it handles.

In general while I might not be the best "fighter" I am by many other people's suggestion a good "pilot" (virtual one, that is, and talking about this game specifically).

It's very unstable longitudinally. We had even the slightest hint of instability in the Brew and it got fixed instantly. However whenever discussion of the 152 instability comes up the same old answer is thrown out as if to stop all further discussion. It's got long thin wings.

Well so do a number of other planes. Perhaps not this bad, but those other planes have rock-steady gun platforms. If any of them acted like this folks would cry bloody murder.

Only other comparable situation is the spit14 instability. This is worse than the spit14, but for all intents and purposes is just a modified 190D. The 190D doesn't share ANY of these problems. Not even in the slightest. It has a similar engine with regards to horsepower. It has a nearly identical fuselage (slightly shorter nose, less v-stab area). It simply has shorter wingtips.

Logically speaking if the 152 is a direct modification from the 190D would not the 190 series show SOME signs of these problems, even if just minor signs? The 190 series is rock steady. The 152 is terrible. It does not follow (as the saying goes).

The 152 as a gun platform is stable much more stable than a 190d. Will it turn? Yeah it can. Is it its strong suit? no but it can. There is differences from a 190d to a 152 that would make a big difference I assume in flight. One being the cockpit moved back further along the fuselage than a d9, the wing spars of the 152 being made from steel rather than aircraft aluminum, the tail assembly being totally different, engine being different with different cooling all that with the wings being longer and torqued and i am sure it wouldn't fly the same.

You may have experience flying it but you couldn't be more wrong in your assessment. The plane has quirks but flown to it strengths and you can be almost untouchable.

[Krusty]

The wings are no more "torqued" than the other 190s. You're mixing up your terms here. They had washout, same as half the other planes in WW2. Doesn't make all the others wander like lost hebrews in the desert for 40 years if you bank your wings.

The 152 is NOT a steady guns platform. It certainly isn't more stable than the 190d.

[Tupac]

Doesn't make all the others wander like lost hebrews in the desert for 40 years if you bank your wings.

[kilo2]

The wings are no more "torqued" than the other 190s. You're mixing up your terms here. They had washout, same as half the other planes in WW2. Doesn't make all the others wander like lost hebrews in the desert for 40 years if you bank your wings.

The 152 is NOT a steady guns platform. It certainly isn't more stable than the 190d.

You understood what was meant by the word usage there. It was more pronounced than other planes if i understand correctly. Thats not the only thing that is different from the d9 though. Ha it is much more steady than a d9 much more. You must be doing it wrong because I never have had such a big problem as you make it seem.

The wing had a negative twist of 2.3-3 degrees along the leading edge. The planes center of gravity was aft. Test pilots reported the plane being unstable in the yaw axis. This is from hitchcock  152 book.

[Stoney]

It's very unstable longitudinally. We had even the slightest hint of instability in the Brew and it got fixed instantly. However whenever discussion of the 152 instability comes up the same old answer is thrown out as if to stop all further discussion. It's got long thin wings.

You need to reflect on and appreciate how much of an aerodynamic impact that wing has on the performance of the 152.  This isn't a small modification like on the P-47N.  Its basically going to behave like a completely different aircraft.  A couple of points.  The Ta-152 aspect ratio is approximately 10--that puts it in a very select group of aircraft of the time--like almost by itself.  Also, with respect to the empenage and the stability issues, how do we know that the increased size and moment arm of the tail is sufficient? 

[Wmaker]

We had even the slightest hint of instability in the Brew and it got fixed instantly.

Complete nonsense.

I based my case regarding the Brewster on primary source material. Also, I suggest you look at the date of this thread: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,270213.0.html and compare it to the date the flight model was changed.

So far, I haven't seen anybody presenting any primary source material that support the fact that there's something wrong with the handling characteristics of the Ta152.

So it's utter nonsense to compare these issues.

[BnZs]

Okay Krust, factually the Ta 152 has the highest aspect ration of any fighter in the game, I'm pretty sure. Your example of the Corsair especially doesn't make sense. The Corsair wing is long, but its also very broad in relation to all that length. We are clear on what "aspect ratio" means right?

Once again, I won't go so far as to say for certain that this is THE reason the Ta yaws so bad when you bank, but it is something different about the aircraft.

[Debrody]

ehmm Maker, thats not fair.
There are much more sources about the brewster than the 152, therefor its easyer to find data about the Brew. The Ta is an almost experimental aircraft, served for a very short time in very low numbers.

[Wmaker]

ehmm Maker, thats not fair.
There are much more sources about the brewster than the 152, therefor its easyer to find data about the Brew. The Ta is an almost experimental aircraft, served for a very short time in very low numbers.

<sigh>

First of all, there are plenty of sources about Ta152. For example in the Dietmarr Harmann's book about the aircraft. Second, even if there weren't, one still can't compare a flight model issue that was fixed based on strong evidence to an "issue" which no one has presented any proof that it really *is* an issue to begin with!

Especially when it was done in the fashion Krusty did it...with hyperbole and exaggeration.