Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

The Ta 152 WAS used in combat, both the C and H versions, and thus is a valid combat experienced fighter during the war.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

Avoid this book. Its crap...

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

It took Europe nearly 15 years to get their collective heads out of their butts and work together on a common fighter.

And the Eurofighter/Typhoon II was seriously delayed, plauged with cost overruns, software issues, and even today with its latest version cannot effectively do A2G (Phase I Enhancements have been having issues with some airframes). And look at the whole tranche 2 debacle...


The Harrier is old. Technology can only go so far. The Harrier is under powered and more importantly, dangerous (they have one of the highest accident ratings of any modern combat aircraft). Its loud, dirty, and easy to take out. Yes, it was a fantastic plane, but one that didn't come to full fruition until McDonnell Douglas got involved back with BAE.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

3 30mm cannons put out as much lead as 8 .50's.

LuftwaffeOberst

Well America voted for Obama, but It would be wrong for me to say every American is stupid... I know better than that. There were many Germans who didn't want Hitler to win the election.

I'm not sorry that Germany lost, I'm sorry that Germany destroyed itself resulting in needless death worldwide. I'm sorry that many Germans today are afraid to have pride in there old culture because of what happened. Today many Germans who survived the war don't like to talk about it... and it is sad.

Horst Schuck has told me his father gets called a Nazi and it makes him cry. He wasn't a Nazi... he was a Luftwaffe Fighter Pilot that did his duty well.

When I talk about the war with him it's always on a personal note, without other ears to hear. He spoke at a History Air show at Reading, PA two years back and it choked up the whole crowd. He's a good man and I'm glad I am a personal friend to him and his son.

If I was a Nazi, I wouldn't be insulting Hitler and "Fat Ball."

Ram-bro

My Feedback: (101)

I still believe inmy heart of hearts you wish that the Germans had won. I have nothing agins the gerrman soldier and I can sympathize with their loss but its their loss. Either them or us. Pretty black and white. The Germans to have pride in their old culture need to come to grips with all parts of their culture. hate, racism, imperialism and that chip on their shoulder. I lived in Germany and loved the German people I came across but if I were there20yrs earlier, I woulda been in one of those camps.... and why does Obama keep coming into this conversation. Heck i didn't vote for him but as an American in a free society, I know it is now time to support and make the best of it rather than fall ito this party politics which is truelly leading America down the wrong path. When people and politicians(they arent people) can learn to put others and their country 1st, we will all be better off. I apologize...sorta for the rant. I believe that the germans had the beter equipment but didnt know how to utilize it and truelly underestimated their enemy.

LuftwaffeOberst

I can't make anyone take my word for it... It's not, and shouldn't be a issue. The reality is Germany lost, so did Italy and Japan. The looser can always be bitter and not forget... because he or she is constantly reminded every time they turn on a TV etc. If you were in Germany then you would know quite a few are still bitter about the war. If you go to Japan, many are bitter that America droped the "A"bomb on them.

Now the Obama issue... I bring him up as a good example on how he got most of the votes. I didn't vote for him either... I voted McCain. ( The Lesser of two Evils again ) Did I think America made a bad mistake? In my HO my answer is yes. Germany was not free when Hitler just squeezed by on the election. There were over 30 attempts on Hitlers life to save Germany from destruction... so to say that all of Germany were Evil Nazi's is just wrong.

I too like many Germans are bitter to what Hitler did to Germany, and bitter to what happened to Germany after the war. I'm bitter what that "Chicken Farmer" did to his own people and what " Bug Eyes" did with his propaganda. I'm bitter that Germany no longer is Germany today. I'm bitter, but not angry. It's more under the lines of resentment to be exact.

Ohhhhh Well.

My personal beliefs have nothing to do with this Poll, and I believe that everyone has the right to express his or her beliefs EVEN if I or you think it is wrong. I wouldn't like myself very much if I was right all the time, no one likes a know it all... but I do like to read what other people think along with the opinions.

I picked German Aircraft because of all the info I have had in the years, and what I have now. As a full size and R/C pilot, I have a small understanding what makes a plane fly and why it handles the way it does.

deatonbt

paraphrase - The Ta 152H sacrificed guns for speed and height.
Hitler's Luftwaffe, by Tony Wood and Bill Gunston

I can't find the reference, but it is my understanding that dog fights quickly lost altitude and speed once started. Also, high altitude was not necessary since American bombers and fighters then in service did not fly at the heights that it was capable of achieving. I'll take the P-51. I didn't vote for Great Britain, but the Spitfire had a lot of maneuverability and firepower too. The Ta 152H doesn't stack up very well.

Again I can not find a reference for actual Ta 152H maneuverability in combat and I am not an engineer, so this is a speculation. The Ta 152H had a very high wing aspect ratio when compared to other fighters of the same period. A high aspect ratio wing has poor stall characteristics. That is not good for a tight turn.

spadulike

some comments.

1/ its not Great Britain. Its The United Kingdom. Great Britain is the name given to the land masses making up the British Isles.

2/ Hollywood did not win the war or any other war and its about time some folks realised that.

3/ If it was not for the BRITISH Hurricane and Spitfire then we would all be speaking German right now.Those 2 aircraft and their young but immensly brave pilots held off the might of the Luftwaffe and the German Navy . Out numbered and out gunned they fought like the heroes they should be remembered for and not the subject of some How the USA won everything debate.

4/ And let us not forget the Mosquito... much better than anything else the Yanks or anyone else had.

5/ The P51 was absolutely crap until the British got hold of it and fitted it with Merlin engine.

Lets face it the USA obtained the first Enigma machine, invented the first computer, invented the jet engine and even managed to put a commercial supersonic airliner in the sky..... oh ,sorry , they failed at that.... but i will not hold that against our old colony.

skull1971

#1 It wasn't called the U.K. in 1940, what was it called?

#2 I don't remember anyone on here saying anything about Hollywood, except you. Also be sure to read all the pages in this thread, several of us talk about what the Brit's did, and the BoB. They were brave, BRAVE men! I don't know if I have the "sand" to do what they did.

#3 Oh and you'd be speaking German not me, The English Channel, and Atlantic, two really different bodies of water. I'd have been a real mess to try and invade the U.S. The red coats tried it twice, and look what happen to them.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

The Ta 152H featured one MK 108 30mm cannon and two MG 151/20 20 mm cannons. That just a bit more lead as the 6 combined M-2 .50's did on the P-51, not to mention one MK 108 round (especially MinengeschoĂŸ rounds) would take down just about any Allied fighter in one shot.


The Ta 152 was faster, had longer legs, had better armament and better manuverability than the P-51D or the late war Spitties.

The B-17's typical combat altitude for bomb dropping was 20k-30k feet, putting it right where the Ta 152 performed best, meaning it was a SERIOUS probelem for Allied fighters. The Ta 152 had the OPTION to fight or run, something the P-51s escorting the B-17's didn't have.


ANYONE who claims it was the Brits or the Yanks or the Russians, or the French that won the war, best think again. It was the Allies that won the war. Each Allied nation provided too many young men that sacrificed everything to defent the world from a tyrannical madman. To say it was the US or the UK or the USSR that saved us all from the German war machine is very much mistaken. Every nation, allied and axis had its shining moments, from the BoB, to the Ardennes Forest, the inital German invasion of Russia, the initial successes of the Japanese forces... every country had its horrors as well. ANYONE taking the claim of "We won the war" is foolish and is simply not savy enough about the war to speak on it.


The Mossie, while a good plane, wasn't a fighter. It was a high speed, light bomber, recce aircraft and night fighter. In reality the Mossie was no faster than the Fw 190A or the Bf 109F/G... it was the altitude that the Mossie was flying that speed at that gave it the advantage. Lets not forget, without Canada, the Mossie wouldn't have done much of anything.

And Whittle didn't invent the Jet Engine on his own, you forget that the invention is shared with Hans von Ohain. The Brits didn't put the Concorde on the air on its own either, that was done in conjunction with the French.


The P-51A and A-36 were not crap. Even while Allison powered the P-51A was NOTABLY faster than the best Spitfire at the time, even though the Spitfire at the time was Merlin powered... oh and it had more than twice the combat radius too. Funny that the "crappy" version of the P-51 still got almost 700 orders from the Brits...

deatonbt

The MK 108 30 mm has a light weight. It could have carried more guns. The MK 108 30mm was good for shooting bombers not fighters. It used a heavy round with low velocity. It had a trajectory that was not good for a fast maneuvering target. Now the Ta 152H is down to two cannons.

I don't understand what you mean by longer legs. Is it range?

I cannot dispute that the Ta 152H had better maneuverability than the P-51D. What is your source?

Ram-bro

My Feedback: (101)

Those ugly Brit planes are climbiing up the poll. I think there is a conspiracy over there to invalidate this very scientific poll.

skull1971

Kinda like a fungus you can't wash off.

happyal

According to the Discovery Channel's Top Ten fighters (which was repeated for the 100th time at the weekend), the experts on the panel said that it was certain that Britain would of lost the Battle of Britain without the Spitfire. They placed the Spitfire 7th overall.

There top 3 (4th was joint F86 and Mig15) were all US planes, with number 1 being the Mustang. I wonder who they made this program for

The only German plane to make the Top Ten was the ME262, and none where mentioned on the best of the rest. Therefore Discovery Channels experts didn’t rate the Me109, the FW190 or the Ta 152, but the Hurricane didn’t get a mention either

I personally think that the program is so heavily biased towards the USA that it’s opinions are almost worthless, I guess that it where their main market is so you can’t blame them too much.

For my money top 10 fighters of WW2 were (in no order)

Spitfire
Hurricane
Tempest
ME109
FW190
ME262
P51D
P47
Hellcat
Zero

What stops the Corsair being on the list is the same thing that stops the P51D & ME262 from being the greatest, they all came too late in the war to alter the outcome. All great planes but they did not change the outcome of the war.

My Vote for the greatest fighter is the Spitfire, not only a truly great plane in it’s own time, but also a icon which represented peoples hopes. Also the most beautiful plane of all time.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

I have no clue how someone can make the claim that just because a plane was an "icon and represented peoples hopes" makes it an effective fighter in any way shape or form.

The OP didn't ask which plane was sexy, or an icon or anything else, he has what country had the best fighter planes of WW2. The Spitfire, while very good, had some very serious limitations, the biggest of all being range.

happyal

It’s an icon for a reason, the reason is that it helped to beat back the Germans at a time when it mattered the most.

I don’t see how range is too much of an issue in the early years, the British where fighting just over Britain so the Spitfire didn’t need massive range until later in the war, what happened then?

What other “very serious limitations� did it have?

Was it not Adolf Galland, who when asked what his pilots needed to win the battle, answered "I should like an outfit of Spitfires for my squadron."
It was a Spitfire who shot him down, it was also a Spitfire who attacked Rommel (not bad for a fighter with no range). Spitfires also battled the Japanese Zero’s over Australia, and beat them so badly they didn’t return with any force for the rest of the war.

I think that the Spitfire more than justifies it’s place in history as one of the greatest war planes ever.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

The Mk 108 was good at just about anything it fired at. It was feared by fighter and bomber crews alike. ONE hit of the 108 could bring down just about any fighter aircraft in the sky. That makes it VERY effective in my book. Yes, of course it had its limitations, but so does every other weapon. If I had to pick weapons I would pick a balance of Machine guns and cannons, M-2 .50's for the machine guns and the Mk 108's as the cannons (as much as I like the MG 151/20s), two MG 151/20's could fire 750 rpm each, for a total of 1500 RPM, and a 117 g projectile (on the AP round) vs the 700 RPM the M-2 could do with a 42g or so projectile (AP again), meaning it would take three+ M-2's to throw as much lead as one MG 151/20 could).


Yes, the Ta 152 without drop tanks had a longer range than the P-51 did WITH drop tanks (the Ta 152 range of 1240 miles, vs. 1650 if the Stang had drop tanks).


The Ta 152 was more manuverable than the Anton models at ALL altitudes (see the British and American papers on the ealier Anton models vs. Allied Aircraft at the time), and this came from the pilots that were first issued the Ta 152 and were still doing aircraft familiarization, using Fw 190 A8's as mock combat targets. As was mentioned before the last dogfight of the war was between a Typhoon and a Ta 152 and the 152 ened up toying with the Typhoon until the Typhoon stalled and crashed. Oh NO Ta 152s were lost to enemy fire

happyal

I always thought that the last dogfight of WW2 took place between a Fieseler "Storch" and a L-4 Cub, both un armed spotter aircraft. The Cub forced the Storch to crash land by firing a pistol at it, and its two occupants to be captured by an American troop convoy which had watched the action from below.

Duncan

lol spot on mate, although if you were to watch any film about the secind world war you would think that only the USA were fighting, it's a good job we teach history in schools so our nation isn't so illinformed

happyal

Fun Thread

There were only appox 150 made before the war finished, I wonder how many saw service. To be honest I could say the same about the Gloster Meteor, which did also see service in WW2. No Meteor's were lost to enemy fire and they claimed 46 enemy aircraft.

Evil_Merlin

My Feedback: (13)

At least 82 of them saw service.

Yes you can say the same thing about the Meteor, but it never saw A2A combat, unlike the Ta 152. All 46 kills were against ground targets. Lets not forget the RAF prohibited the Meteor from flying over German held territory which greatly impacted its impact. But historical testing of the Meteor vs. the Me 262 found the Me 262 to be faster, more manuverable and a much better gun platform than the Meteor.

Ram-bro

My Feedback: (101)

I believe that most true Historians know thetruth about the history channel, pure entertaiment. i only watch it to see how biased they are. I never figured it played overseas. I wonder why we dont see more axis planes or russian planes featured. If you were to watch the history channel only you would believe that there were only p40s , p51s me-109s , spits and p47s durin the war. I want to see some input from the German , British and japanese pilots and not toforget the Russian pilots. There is a source of information that is dieing out dailey. The history channel is entertainment only and we know that.

Augie11

Speaking of 'Top Tens', there have been quite a few on the Military Channel and they usually come up with different aircraft, depending on where the show was made. There were 2 all-time top ten shows on bombers ..... one obviously US and the other from the UK. Both picked the B-52 as #1. But the other 9 were completely different. The Brits listed the Swordfish, Caproni Ca1, Mosquito and Ju-87. We (predictably) had the B-17, P-47, B-2 etc. It depends on your perspective and experience to a large degree. As well as your yardstick.

I like USN planes. Hellcat, Corsair etc. But the best all around WWII fighter was the Mustang with the Brit engine. No contest. On the other hand, the Germans had the best in WWI overall.

crashproof

You guys mean to say that the History channel is Biased and what has went on in this thread has not been. Ok I was following the thread, I really don't know why, maybe it was all the folks trying to be impressive, I admit I get a kick out of that. To be honest now it has went very South IMO the UK guys bashing the US the US bashing the UK's it really has become a joke and I for one will move on to better things. Kevin.