Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on December 12, 2001, 08:19:00 AM
-
... still an expensive perk plane. Taking into consideration that our MA is not an WWII theater (like it should be our CT), I see no reason here to perk planes based on production numbers. IMO, having 10 Tas per 190A5 is, historically, as erroneous as dogfighting a Spit with another Spit.
IMO, the overal performance plus weapons are the correct factors to perk a plane (like 262).
Is the Ta152 a so terrible foe? Is Ta more dangerous than the much cheaper F4U1-C or our "beloved" and unperked La7/Yak9U? Is the Ta able to break the MA equilibrium? Would an unperked Ta see more action than our actual 109G10, for example? Is the Ta the ultimate buff killer? Are the Ta weapons more effective than the 4 hispanos of a tiffie? Is killing with a Ta a so easy task to justify its very low ENY value?
Ta should be a costly perk plane in our CT, but I cant find any reason to have it perked in our MA.
-
Mandoble, this would be taken a lot more seriously by me if you had not just advocated perking the Spitfire IX. As it is, I find it difficult to resolve that seeming contradiction.
-
Kieran, sincerelly, perking the Spit is a must if we want to have something near an equilibrated arena (what about 2 perk points). Go anywhere on the map and there they are, dozens of spits, some Las and nikkies and then a pair of anything else. First this was ACESHOG, now it is SPITHIGH ;)
IMO, in the other hand, unperking the Ta wont have any overabuse effect on MA.
-
The Ta152 is a monster, no matter what height. Its a Dora on steroids. It should stay perked, but at a lower price. Around 10 perks should be right for it.
-
The Ta-152 is only 30 perks. Also, as good as it is, you shouldn't get shot down it, in which case, the cost is inconsequential. :)
-
At the common fighting altitudes of MA:
1 - D9 is faster than Ta.
2 - D9 climbs better than Ta.
3 - D9 rolls much better than Ta.
4 - D9 accelerates better than Ta.
5 - D9 has more ammo than Ta.
6 - Ta turns better than D9.
7 - Ta has much greater range than D9.
8 - Ta wings break over'n over.
9 - Ta engine gets cold slower than D9.
10 - Ta stalls are much more common and dangerous than D9.
I cant see the steroids except for the 30mm gun and the diving hability of the Ta (until breaking the wings).
-
Yeah, 9.5% of the aircraft are Spit IXs, that sure sounds like going somewhere and seeing dozens of spits, some Las and nikkies and then a pair of anything else. 75% of the aircraft in the MA = "pair of anything else". :rolleyes:
Oh no!!!! Its a slow assed, TnB aircraft!!! Whatever shall I do? Oh, they're just so powerful that they can go a whole 321mph!!!
MANDOBLE, you see that many Spits because you hate Spits and don't want to see any, thus you remember the Spits you see and not the other stuff. Then you come here and post outrageous exagerations as fact.
-
IMO it should be perked, but not that much.
Maybe 8-10 perks. That thing can out dive just about anything. Its a great plane, for a luftweiner AC anyway :)
-
Well Said Mando, not a WW2 arena so why should the planes that were built in few numbers be perked just because of few numbers?
Allso, Animal :) The TA is definatly not a Dora on steroids except when it comes to Turn rate and range. The D9 is baout 25Mph faster at the deck (Ta speed at deck is about 355mph).
Ta152 should probarly not be perked, or atleast cheaper then 30. Almost noone flies it and almost no one would fly it if it was unperked.
Hell, it is my plane and I like the planes that few people fly, PERK IT MORE! :D
-
Congrats Karnak, you are as good psychoanalizer as Woodie Allen. And looking to your result of 9.5% of "USAGE", you are as good mathematician as Shakespeare.
In the other hand, do you have any constructive/destructive opinion about the perk cost of Ta?
-
I do. Until you desist with calls for Spit IX perking, there can be no validity given to your calls to de-perk the Ta.
1942 aircraft: PERK!
1945 aircraft: NO PERK!
Hey, if we see more Zeroes in the MA should those be perked too, seriously? It outperforms the Ta in every area you despise in the Spit, you know. Heck, it's even BETTER than the Spit.
-
Make the TA the same perk cost as the CHOG.
Besides, the Ta152 would make a great hi alt fighter for the germans, and at the cheap perk cost it would give the waffles a plane that can compete with the p51, p38 and p47 at 25k+ , not to mention intercepting the 32k bombers.
-
Originally posted by Kieran:
I do. Until you desist with calls for Spit IX perking, there can be no validity given to your calls to de-perk the Ta.
1942 aircraft: PERK!
1945 aircraft: NO PERK!
Hey, if we see more Zeroes in the MA should those be perked too, seriously? It outperforms the Ta in every area you despise in the Spit, you know. Heck, it's even BETTER than the Spit.
You cant be serious?
ZERO better than a spit?? ROFL.. you are mistaken. the only thing it does better is turn, period. The spit has more control at speed and rolls 10times as fast. the only time the Zero wins is when the spit is a dweeb and tries to out turn fight you.
-
Or, at least, give it a try with lower perk points. Now I can hardly see a single one.
(btw., nothing alone can intercept a 32k buff)
Cheers,
Pepe
-
AmOn-
I was being sardonic. Of course the Zero is worse than the Spit. Of course the Spit is worse than the Ta. That is what makes the call for un-perking the Ta but perking the Spit so ludicrous. ;)
But hey, un-perk the Ta- I think Urchin made a more eloquent argument (I didn't necessarily agree with it, but it had a better basis in logic) though. If you want to argue from a usage standpoint, that holds more water, but you still come down to the fact we have people who want the freedom to use ahistorically without penalty. Even THAT I don't have a problem with, but to in the next breath talk about limiting the only British fighter that is in any way competitive with this late war monster? Even the most ardent of LW fanatics must see this is a preposterous argument.
-
Above 25k, the Ta handles better than any plane in the MA. Its overall speed and armament combined with its high alt performance and low production numbers merit perking.
The cost can be reduced... I've said that many times in the past... but this thread reaks more of a biased agenda than anything else.
Is the Ta-152 the least used perk plane? Is there a perk plane that costs more and is used less?
The way this is presented comes off as "I really want to fly this plane more without the perk cost... but not because its uber... cause it isn't... if anyone says it is they are lieing." :rolleyes:
Too many people play one side of the fence so often that it takes away from the gist of the argument. This should not be "the LW pilots don't see a reason to perk this very good LW ride." It should be unbiased... and that just isn't happening.
AKDejaVu
-
It still needs to be perked, maybe cheaper, but still perked. No reason to perk the Spit9...yes, they are all over the place...but they are easy enough to kill or avoid.
-
Deja, you wouldn't be alluding to a certain late model of a blue plane would you?
Perk the Spit IX. You'll still see SPIT everywhere in the arena. The Spit V and Seafire aren't THAT much worse than a Spit IX, plus you get CV ops with the Seafire (sees more use in ndisles and Mindanao). You gonna tell me that after you perk the Spit IX, you'll want the Spit V and Seafire perked too, because you still see SPIT everywhere???
Toad, please start another round of singin'!!! :D
-
I agree the Ta152 lo numbers (even though MA is not WW2 Arena by any means) makes it being perked even if the Troposphere performance is lacking.
Now about the price yes I do consider it being too expensive and I agree with the value of 10perk points for. Take for example the F4U1C what the hell happened as soon as they gave it 8 measly perk point cost it ceased and deceased as being the frontline most used fighter in the MA with 8 measly perk cost I think a reduction is in order for the Ta152.
-
TA definately can kill a 32k buff.
we've been very successful with it at high alts. it's a bad-ass at alt.
It should be!.. it's a propeller driven U-2!
-
The Ta-152 is not, and should not be, a turn fighting furballer. I know that's why you want it unperked. Forget it, please.
Use this airplane as it is intended and you find it is well suited in that role. Basically, this aircraft is a cheaper Me-262. It is a buff slayer. Hell, it even kills the P51D at altitude!
Sorry you snap your wings (sound of lone violin playing).
-
Spit envy :)
-
Originally posted by Voss:
Use this airplane as it is intended and you find it is well suited in that role.
His role has no place in MA. Usual buff alt is 10k - 20k where almost any other unperked plane with long range weapons (hispanos/50s) has better chances to kill the buffs and survive. Being slower at most alts than 190D9, P51, 109G10 or 109G2 I cant understand how somebody compared it to cheap 262.
-
It has to be perked.
-
The Ta-152 is expensive, but the 4Hog is even more so. You can buy 2 Ta-152's for the price of 1 4Hog. Only 10 pts less than a Tempest.
Perks should be based on % of kills a plane gets in the MA, not arbitrarily assigned.
ra
-
Originally posted by ra:
Perks should be based on % of kills a plane gets in the MA, not arbitrarily assigned.
Ok, then all the ways lead to perk the Spit
:D
-
Perked or not; the Ta152 is just another LW plane wot needs killin.
Unperk it I say; lemme kill more of 'em. :)
-
The problem with assigning perk value according to the percentage of kills gained is that you would have to flood the arena with 262's, Ta's, Tempests, Ar234's, and whatever comes in the future before their proper ratio of kills stabilizes to the point you could take an accurate measure. Is this something you would want to see?
Ask how many WB vets what they thought of jet day in the MA. Ask them how many of them even bothered to log on. Then ask yourself, "Would people really want to see 262's unperked?" Undoubtedly some would, until they saw 262's in every low furball, in every nook and cranny of the game. It would be a one-plane show in a hurry. Still, in order to bring our jet up to the proper level of kills (to meet the kill percentage perk requirement) you have to allow that to happen.
I prefer to think there are several factors that make perking relevant. How exotic? How powerful? How much potential to dominate? How few produced? All of the factors need to be considered.
Kill percentage alone cannot be the measure of perk, because it would completely upend the game as it is now. Would it be bad? Dunno, but it is a bad idea to radically change anything that is successful without controlled testing first.
-
Originally posted by MANDOBLE:
His role has no place in MA. Usual buff alt is 10k - 20k where almost any other unperked plane with long range weapons (hispanos/50s) has better chances to kill the buffs and survive. Being slower at most alts than 190D9, P51, 109G10 or 109G2 I cant understand how somebody compared it to cheap 262.
Balderdash! Any buff stupid enough to go near a busy field (maybe you're talking about sneaky buffs at 0k), is a dead buff. I know what this plane can do, because I have used it where it is a killer!
I do not think that things will remain as they are now. When (and it is coming) HT introduces the larger cities and formation buffs, I do believe that buffs will go higher, and the 152 will be seen as more desirable.
Unperking this thing so you can furball with it would be... well,... childish. Oh wait, I forgot how popular cheese is in the arena.
-
His role has no place in MA. Usual buff alt is 10k - 20k where almost any other unperked plane with long range weapons (hispanos/50s) has better chances to kill the buffs and survive. Being slower at most alts than 190D9, P51, 109G10 or 109G2 I cant understand how somebody compared it to cheap 262.
You haven't engaged many buffs with a Tempest have you? Get one over 15k some day and give it a try. Maybe even try close to 20k and see how much fun that plane is.
No need to talk about buffs below 15k because they are fair game for anything in the arena.
But you get a buff over 20k and the number of planes that stand a chance goes down considerably. You get it over 25k and the number gets close to 2. Over 30k and there is only one plane that stands a chance.
My experience with a Ta152 is not super extensive. I usually upped with it to try and intercept buffs attempting to bomb HQ. One sortie I took off from a rear base and climbed to 30k to intercept a buff trying to bomb HQ. He was dispatched and I then flew 5 sectors and killed another strato buff that was lurking over a field. I then flew another 5 sectors south and engaged a P-51 Co-alt at 33k (totally dominating it) and then dove in on a B26 at 25k and wiped him out too.
Tell me of another plane in the arena that can do that? The P-51? No way.. guns are too anemic. The G-10 or Dora? Nope... nowhere near the range... nor e retention over 30k. What other plane? The Tempest with its 4 hispanos? Nope... not even going to make it over 30k before running out of fuel.
The Ta152 has its place in the arena. It merrits being perked. I'm sorry that it will not see the amount of use you seem to feel it should, but not all that sorry.
AKDejaVu
-
Well, I suppose I'll throw my 'eloquent' arguement in. I believe the 152's cost should be reduced to put in in line with the F4U-1C. The planes were produced in similar numbers (200 for the C-Hog, high 100's for the 152). Before the Niki was 'nuetered', it was the most common plane in the arena. That plane was also comparitively rare in real life, although I've forgotten the exact production numbers (I believe it was somewhat less than 400 produced, but I could be off here and I don't feel like looking it up).
So what it boils down to for me is the issue of HOW planes are perked. If you base it on production numbers, there is no basis for the Ta-152 being so much more expensive than the C-Hog. So for me at least, there is no real evidence supporting a policy of perking a plane because of its production numbers in real life.
That leaves only one thing that would be a realistic approach, and that is how the aircraft perform in the Main Arena. I believe this is probably how HTC decides the perk cost of a plane. Look at the Me-262. It is perked at 200 points for a very good reason. That plane is so superior to every other plane we have (at any altitude) that an unperked 262 would run rampant over the MA. People who think that 95% of people wouldn't be in a 262 if it was not perked are, frankly, delusional. So in this case, performance matches the perk cost (in my opinion). The Ta-152 is an awesome fighter at 30k and up. I'm not contesting that fact. The P-51B is the second fastest plane in the game (minus the jets). So why doesn't it see more use? Because it hits that 450+ mph at 40k, and nobody flies up there. Same thing with the Ta-152. It is probably the best prop fighter we have at 30k and up... except all you are doing is stargazing because there isn't anyone up there to fight. Yes, there are the stratobuff B-17 pilots that cruise around at 35k... but why in the name of God would you risk 30 perks going up after something that has an even money shot at killing you?
Under 25k, the Bf109-G10 and the Fw190-D9 are FAR superior to the 152. I'm not even convinced that the 152 turns better than the Dora does to be honest, but I don't fly the 152 very often. Under 10k, where 95% of the action is, there are so many planes that are better than the 152 it would be hard to list them. I'll try anyway though. 109G10, 109G2, 190D9, P51D, P51B, La7, La5, Yak9U, F4U (all versions), P47 (arguably),P38, Typhoon, Tempest. I'd even list the 190A5 and A8 as superior to the 152 under 10k, but I can get a lot out of those planes. I believe all but 2 of those planes can turn better than the 152. At least half of them are as fast as the 152. At least half of them have better acceleration. All but 1 can outclimb the 152 (to the best of my knowledge). The 109G10, 190D9, La7, yak9,P51,typhoon, and tempest are better than the 152 in all of the above- which makes fighting them a rather dicey proposition (especially considering all but the Tempest are free, while you are spending 30 points).
So, in my opinion at least, there really isn't enough evidence to support a perking of the Ta-152 based on its performance vis a vis other prominant late war planes. However, all that said, it IS Hitechs game, not ours. It is his decision on which planes see use and what planes don't. His motives may be unscrutable as a God's, but he does have the right to do whatever the hell he wants with his game.
As a side note, I'm also curious as to the over-expensive perking (in my opinion) of the F4U-4. Me-262 and Tempest seem pretty much spot on (although I wouldn't be surprised to see a drastic decrease in Tempest usage because of the introduction of the 262), but the Ta-152 and F4U-4 just seem out of whack if you try to use the other perk planes to compare them to.
-
Bring it down to the Chog level. I have shot down 2 this tour and by pure luck 1 in a G-10 he tried to run was cuaght easily, the other i was in a dora same alt i just turned and got behid him. The 152 is not that great of a plane, yes maybe at high alt , but how many dogfights happen at 25k +? Perk it to Chog level to try it out, what could it hurt?
-
I think you can find a lot of agreement on adjusting the value. Removing the perk? I'm not really for that. I believe there needs to be a few carrots out there if the perk system is going to function properly.
You need to realize too that no perk value is going to make that plane what it isn't- a dogfighter. Lowering the value only makes it disposable.
-
The TA-152 is awesome as a dogfighter.
Most people flying the TA fly it timidly like newly born kittens, rarely venturing below 20k.
Even below 10k, the TA is a remarkable plane. It's the turnfighter of the LW, but it cal also B&Z amazingly well. Acceleration in dives is phenomenal.
Granted, amongst perked planes, it's not fantastic. Low and mid altitude performance isn't exceptionally good, and some non perked planes beat it.
Still, first of all, it will get the enemy low, if you're low. With the big "shoot me!" sign, people are tempted into attacking it, which sets them up nicely for your friends. F4U's try to turn fight it - and the TA can handle its own.
Compared to a 190A5, it absolutely rocks. I think the current perk value is pretty good, all thins considered. Of course, I have little idea of what the F4u4 or Tempest cost, but I'd imagine they'd be more expensive because of their performance.
Low alt dogfights - the TA will serve well. Weakness is the huge wings which are a little weak at times, not stellar top speed at low alt, and some odd near stall flying characteristics.
I love the TA-152.
-
I'm not so convinced that the F4U-4/Tempesst are too expensive. I think most people are just saving up for a 262.
J_A_B
-
Any one have a production figure for the Tempest?
-
Tempest MkV Series 1 (armed with 4 20mm Hispano MkII cannon): 100 built
Tempest MkV Series 2 (armed with 4 20mm Hispano MkV cannon): 705 built
-
Thanks!
So roughly twince as many Temps as C hogs, and around a hundred times as many Temps as Ta's, right?
Bring the Tempest to Aces High!
-
Ta152H: 3 prototypes
Ta152H-0: 20 pre-production aircraft
Ta152H-1: 1 prototype and 12 production aircraft
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
Tell me of another plane in the arena that can do that? The P-51? No way.. guns are too anemic. The G-10 or Dora? Nope... nowhere near the range... nor e retention over 30k. What other plane? The Tempest with its 4 hispanos? Nope... not even going to make it over 30k before running out of fuel.
Easy p47-30.
I think for the most part these guys dont see the 152 because they dont fly over 10k.
It should be a perked ride, but not so many perks, same for a few others.
-
Deja, 51 guns are not anemic. And it has far more range than the dora. I think you bounced someone who didnt know how to fight up high.
As far as what other planes can,
P51
P47
P38 (range with dt's and if it stays above 25k).
-
Tac.. against a buff.. they are anemic. The time you have to spend in range of their .50's makes it a tough job above 30k.
And Amon... you can get a P47-D30 over 30k, but you sure as hell can't keep it there long enough to make repeated high speed passes on a B-17. Eventually, you'd have to be coming in from below.
And for both... I've always maintained the Ta-152 was too expensive... even started a couple of threads about it (and the F4u-4)... but the original post in this thread said "but I cant find any reason to have it perked in our MA"
AKDejaVu
-
AK is right, the 47 is good up high, but if the buff knows what it's doing you will wind up in low chase if you miss the first pass. A 35K B17 is a scary thing to a P-47.
-
I don't fly the Ta152 enough to comment on its perk value (though based on La-7 performance I suspect it should be handled the same: no perk cost). I don't think an overwhelming number of people would fly it, and the ones that did would not be so successful as to ruin the game for everyone else. HtH reveals what most people prefer and what dominates: 109G10, La7, Tempest, and 262 for BnZ, SpitIX for TnB (for some reason I hardly see the N1K anymore, the A6M5 is more common). Note: in the unrestricted environment of HtH where the Tempest and 262 are permitted to be flown, equal numbers of 109G10, La7, and SpitIX can be found.
More importantly, I am seriously questioning why production numbers have anything to do with arguments about perk points in a non-historical arena? If a plane in the set doesn't dominate the arena why should it be perked? If an airplane's qualities or history make it so much more popular than other planes that it statistically "dominates" the arena, should it be perked because it is popular? Like many people said before, if you always perk the most popular plane, pretty soon all of the planes will be perked ;)
I understand play-balance and fun since that is what the MA is all about. I don't understand any arguments based on history or realism since I am constantly reminded by other posts how many other more realistic considerations should be ignored in the "Main Arena" based on play-balance and fun. I reccommend posting any comments about production numbers and perks in the CT topic area :p
The Ta152 perk cost doesn't really bother me either way, but for the sake of others who would enjoy it more, please reduce the cost or unperk it until it proves to be more dominant than the other 3 to 5 unperked planes that already dominate the arena.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Ta152H: 3 prototypes
Ta152H-0: 20 pre-production aircraft
Ta152H-1: 1 prototype and 12 production aircraft
I'd like to have a source on that Karnak, if you don't mind. The only source I have readily available is from the internet, which states this.
Approximately 150 Ta 1252H-1 fighters were manufactured between January 1, 1945 and the final abandoning of production with the arrival of Soviet forces at the Cottbus assembly plant. No Jagdgruppen ever completely converted to the type, but several Jagdstaffeln operated the Ta 152H alongside the Fw 190D and other types.
Here is the link to the webpage:http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ta152.html#RTFToC1 (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ta152.html#RTFToC1)
-
I have to agree with Santa.. when I need to grab the elevator to the top.. intercepting HQ raids etc...it rules!
A tad expensive though...
-
TA`s perks are as good as they are.
I dont wanna see HOing then running TA152
like those ubbber LA7.51 lames
-
Urchin,
I have two books, which now that I look closer, do not seem in any agreement whatsoever. Yesterday they did.
I simply grabbed the book that had the numbers listed in the easiest to copy form and typed them in, I'm not insisting that they are correct though.
My sources:
Fighters of World War II
Editied by David Donald
MetroBooks
ISBN: 1-56799-684-1
Page 105 has a table titled "Focke-Wulf Fw 190 and Ta 152 variants"
The table includes these lines:
Ta 152H: high-altitude fighter; Jumo 213E; three modified Fw 190 prototypes (Fw 190V29, V30 and V32) completed
Ta 152H-0: 20 pre-production aircraft built at Cottbus in 1944; Jumo 213EB; R11, R21 and R31 variants with engine boost and radio variations
Ta 152H-1: one prototype (Ta 152V26) modified from Ta152E-2 and about a dozen production examples completed; Ta 152H-10 was a fighter reconnaissance version not completed at the end of the war
That is all the Ta152H versions listed in this book.
I got my Tempest numbers from from a table on page 124 of this book as well.
The History of German Aviation
KURT TANK:
FOCKE-WULF's DESIGNER AND TEST PILOT
By Wolfgang Wangner
Translated by Don Cox
Schiffer Military History
ISBN: 0-7643-0644-8
On page 183, paragraph 1 includes this sentence:
"Approximately 150 aircraft are reputed to have been manufactured at the Cottbus works before the Soviets occupied the city."
I did not see this line yesterday.
What I did see in my extemely quick glance at this book was the data in a table on page 187, which follows:
TA 152 Production Aircraft Built by Cottbus Focke-Wulft Works*
_____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ ___
Type | Werknummer | Engine | Notes
_____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ ___
Ta-152H- | 15001 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing **only 115 ltr long range tank, production from January 1945
Ta-152H-0 | 15002 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15003 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15004 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15005 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15006 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15007 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15008 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15009 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15010 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15011 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15012 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15013 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15014 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15015 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15016 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15017 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-0 | 15018 | Jumo 213E | 19.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15019 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing 6 soft-skinne fuel cells in wings, MG-1 and MW 50 systems, produced from 1/45 to 3/45
Ta-152H-1 | 15020 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15021 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15022 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15023 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15024 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15025 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
Ta-152H-1 | 15026 | Jumo 213E | 23.5 mē wing
V27 C-3 | 15027 | H-0 conversion to C-3 with DB 603L, planned for production from 6/45
V27 C-3 | 15030 | H-0 conversion to C-3 with DB 603L, planned for production from 6/45
_____________________________ _____________________________ _____________________________ ___
*Table is not complete
**Werknummer 150001 to 1500018 had the 19.5 mē wing (My note to this note, these numbers do not match those in the table, an zero was added here or omitted there)
Because this table was described as not complete, and showed fewer aircraft the the other book, I went with the other book's numbers.
I would like to see stronger evidence than "reputed" about the 150 production number.
EDIT: Edited the table for greater legibility.
[ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: Karnak ]
-
I don’t think that I have ever flown a TA before. Seeing one doesn’t make my hair stand like a Tempest does either. As a matter of fact, when Mandoble took my P51 out in a TA, my first reaction was “I can’t believe he got that POS turned around on me”. I ended up on the short end of a rope about 150 meters out of gun range, argggggg!
So what does this all mean you ask? THE F4U-4 IS EXTREMELY OVERPRICED!!! :p
Zippatuh
-
I'd like to see more reliable numbers too. It is odd, the Germans had such an anal reputation for maintaining their paperwork, I guess it sort of broke down towards the end of the war.
I'm getting some cool books for Christmas, I'll look around in there and see if I can dig anything up.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Urchin,
...
My sources:
Fighters of World War II
Editied by David Donald
MetroBooks
ISBN: 1-56799-684-1
...
Karnak,
I also have a couple of books edited by David Donald. I find that he makes glaring errors fairly often. In one book, he identifies one of the most famous squadron photos of WW2, the one of the "Blacksheep" standing in front of a Corsair with ballcaps on, as an "unidentified baseball team visiting a Marine Corsair unit". I've never been big on studying the performance or production statistics, but his identification of units, their markings, etc leaves much to be desired... I'd use the other source!
And just to keep this on subject, leave the Ta perked, but reduce the cost to the same as the Chog.
HaMmeR
netAces.org (http://www.netaces.org)
-
Also, about the 'high altitude' buff killing ability of the Ta-152.. I hate to break it to you guys, but the 152 isn't any better at it then any other fighter. The B17 is leaps and bounds above any fighter, performance-wise, at 30k+. I'd say it is probably the most potent high altitude fighter we have in Aces High, it deserves to be perked at least 30 points for that alone. <sarcasm...>.
Seriously though, it only takes about 20-25 rounds from a B-17 to bring down any of the LW planes (haven't tried it with any of the other planes), while it takes about 15 30mm rounds (unless you have excellent aim), or about 60-70 20mm rounds to bring down the bomber. I'd say at 30k, in a co-alt fight between a B-17 and the Ta-152, the B-17 has about a 75% chance of winning. The Ta-152 has about a 10% chance of both shooting down the B-17 and not sustaining heavy damage.