It sure would be nice if the only Ta152 left in existence at the Smithsonian Air and Space museum would finally be restored. It’s been in storage at the Paul Garber facility since the late 40’s. By the time it gets restored everyone who has any recollection of WWII will be gone. If the Smithsonian has no interest in restoring it,give it to a museum that does.
It would be nice if the original drawings and Blue prints could be found. I'm sure that if there were/are those who built this machine would swap a heart beat or two to assist in it's resurrection, or any others who built any of the fighters from this era.
@@normvw4053 The Air and Space Museum has blueprints and plans for the Ta 152, at least that is the rumor... Unfortunately, they will only restore is as a static display. I have been lobbying for the A&S museum to at least allow some other collection to take measurements of their Ta 152, but to no avail...what a waste.
In germany is a group of fans and investors who built the fw 190 A in 2004 again, 98% like the original, it is still flying (flugwerk fw 190 Google). The Ta 152 would be a perfect goal for this
@@BeniPress It is the ultimate Luftwaffe prop plane. I have been lobbying for decades to get one built. I have even offered $$$. the problem is with the National Air and Space Museum. They refuse to allow anyone to measure their Ta-152, or look at the plans and blueprints in their possession. I think it is as Blue Max has said, they are STILL jealous of the Germans for perfecting a high altitude design with pressurized cockpit and wings from heaven. The Junkers Jumo 213E engine is another issue. I know for a fact, that with today's digital 3D machines, a duplicate can be made. There may even be a few floating around, but I haven't heard of any lately...but there may be a couple under a pile of rubble somewhere.
Very good video. Willi Reschke also dedicates an entire chapter with several photographs to this fantastic fighter plane in his own book: Jagdgeschwader 301/302 "Wilde Sau" In Defense of the Reich with the Bf 109, Fw 190 and Ta 152 (2005).
@@BlueMax109 reschkes buch ist eine etwas langweilige aufzählung, aber net schlecht--- was ich besonders empfehlen kann ist..... Valentin Mikula; Stuka - Tatsachenbericht 4,25 euro - man wird firmlich in das buch gezogen, scho 4 o. 5 mal jelesen!!!
Good comment! There has been a tendency among post-war aircraft reviewers to criticize the Ta-152 as a failed design, a waste of development effort with too limited a skill set to be useful in the final stages of the war. But ask the man who actually flew one and relied on it to save his life, confronted with overwhelming odds. Reschke could not have been more emphatic about this plane's superiority. It did, however, suffer from serious quality problems, some of which plagued Reschke's plane. In one of the more puzzling incidents in Wilde Sau, in spring 1945 Reschke comes upon a number of Ta-152s whose tail wheels had been removed so they couldn't fly. No explanation.
My Uncle Walter Loos was also one of the Pilots of the Ta 152/ JG 301. But he didn't talked about his experiences during WW2. I assume it was a "terrible" time for him. Hope we won't get such times back.
Yes, it was a great achievement to produce such a good aircraft inspite of the lack of materials, but this very lack was the reason there were only 70 produced. An all out was is fought on many fronts, not just geographical theatres. Once production peaks in '44 fell (and other losing factors too), the whole war imploded for Germany at an incredible rate.
I spent imagining what it would be like if the Ta H1 was equipped with the Jumo 213EB, it produced 200 horsepower more than the E1, in addition to having a better cooling system, in testing on the D13, it reached around 475MH and on the H1 478MH
Well Reschke also claimed to shoot down two Yak-9s in quick succession, and one other Ta pilot claimed the same. With the battle between Reschke and a Tempest, he damaged its tail and then his guns jammed, so he stayed with it before it crashed. However another Ta-152 was also shot down in the battle by a Tempest. So they are 1:1. I still the the Spitfire XIV was probably better, especially since there was an engagement between two Spitfire XIV and two Ta-152s in which both Ta-152 were shot down without loss to the Spitfires. Of course it probably was at lower altitudes, and Ta-152 was designed to fight up high, with p-51s and B-17
The Spitfire XIV was designed as a medium/high altitude fighter. It would have done for the Ta 152 as it did the 190Ds. Anyway! There was no high-altitude combats ever undertaken by the TA 152 and performance wise, came up shorter in operations than what it did in development. It was also very unreliable. This aircraft, along with the Do 335 and the He 219 are all the most overhyped aircraft to come out of the war. The internet doesn't help. ua-cam.com/video/wqHYOgH1YXM/v-deo.html ua-cam.com/video/WL5JJInqTT8/v-deo.html
I think the Tempest and Ta 152 were completely different planes. The victory over the Tempest was only because the Tempest pilot was inexperienced. Let's remember that in the same fight another Tempest had shot down a Ta 152 a moment earlier. Of course, at a higher altitude the Tempest had no chance.
The Tempests were bounced during a ground attack sortie. A flight of 4 split into two pairs. 3 Ta-152s came across a pair and attacked. It's absolute tosh to brag about having a superior aircraft based on this experience. Also, I'm not convinced that a wing designed for high altitude flight would make the aircraft more agile at low levels. Even if the Ta-152 had been produced in greater numbers, pilots learn how to use their own strengths to exploit the weaknesses of their adversary.
@@AmericasChoice only after they figured out how to stop the Napier Sabre from engulfing its pilots in flames on start up! Tis one of my favourite Warbirds though. All Hawker stuff had a unquiely rugged look about it.
If I am flying online for the allies I favour the Tempest for sure. Only issue is its guns are thirsty. You've gotta be super accurate. Can't take sniper shots like you can with the axis fighters.
@@BlueMax109 LOL Yup, that Napier Sabre had some issues early on. I agree about the rugged look, the Tempest had it in spades. One of my favorite WWII photos is a flight of 4 Tempests flying in formation looking for prey.
@@BlueMax109 Yup, cannon shells are bigger so you could not carry as many as you could .50's. I tend toward the more rugged fighters, too. The P-47 would be my choice to fly in combat. I am new to your channel, but I have been interested in WWII aviation for almost 50 years. I am encouraged to see a whole new generation with the same interest. We only had books and an occasional documentary in the old days. You guys have so much more info available these days.
Both Goring and Milch prioritized Bf109 production above all other fighters because production lines could produce these in greater numbers. Their main goal was keeping Hitler happy. German engineers were hampered by short sighted leadership.
Agreed. The ME 109 was obsolete by 1944, regardless what its fans say. It should have been totally phased out by the FW 190 and its successors, to save limited resources.
@@blank557 die 109 hat mehr abschüsse als alle alleierten kampfflugzeuge zusammen!!! was soll daran veraltet sein? die 190 war nicht höhentauglich. die alleierten hatten einfaches spiel weil deutschland zuviele fronten und nur wenig ressourcen hatte.
I have met Willi Reschke about 20 years ago. He was very clear in his views about the capabilities of the Ta 152. It was a formidable aircraft, also against the protecting fighter aircraft.
@@BlueMax109Ukrainians actually managed to stop the soviet(russian) advance(invasion), unlike Nazi Germany, even before help arrived from other countries
Exactly. In their memories they always have best guns, best aeroplanes, best tanks, best ships, best tactics and only tiny mistakes (usually made by higher command or Hitler himself) caused them not to win. Reschke is not an exception. Credited with exactly _one_ victory over Tempest (that he suprised during attack) he claims it was "very easy to shot down Tempests". It's pretty tiresome reading this in virtually every book of German war memories and consequently hearing endless praises of German wunderwaffe...
Bla bla bla, as if there is any difference between any other nation. It's like we ignoring the American and British propaganda campaign they do for decades now.
The testing of Allied captured aircraft was hampered by not having the correct octane fuel available so any "comparisons" were skewed to the detriment of the Allied aircraft.
Actually they tested with captured allied fuel. And they also tested their own engines with allied fuel and found them to produce on average 20 percent more power. The allies could have gotten GM1 and MW50 to test. Especially as they'd already won the war. But chose to destroy the aircraft instead after having only tested it without it.
The Ta-152 was technically a Long Nose but generally speaking when you hear Long Nose it is referring to the Fw190-D (Dora) series. Both served the same role of airfield defense though.
This was mainly the responsibility of the D9s, the most famous unit was the "Platzschutzstaffel" which covered the landings and takeoffs of the Jagdverband 44.....after the war it was called "Papagei Staffel" (parrot squadron) due to the bright colours painted under the wing and fuselage, to warn the AA (red with white lines).
I've heard that replica spitfires can be bought, has any company offered to build a replica Ta 152? Would it be possible? Do the design docs exist? It seems very odd to us today that the British would scrap the only example they had after the war, presumably after studying it, but Britain was scrapping enormous quantities of war materiel, that we'd love to have today, to reuse the materials for rebuilding post war
There was a German company called "Flugwerk" who produced and sold "new" 190 A-8s back in the..err.. late 90s? early 2000s? I think their initial asking price was a million Euros per plane (though I'm not sure if that was in fly-away condition). IIRC, they also offered a D-9 but I'm not sure any of those were ordered/built. They did build some A-8s though and those were so close to the real thing that the company was allowed to simply continue with the serial numbers where wartime production had stopped. Meaning, technically/legally, those planes were considered as a continuation of series production that ended in 1944/45. They used some new old stock parts in at least some of their examples, but they had to use a slightly different engine for the Anton models. I think it was a Chinese copy of a Russian radial, which was slightly more powerful than the BMW 801. As for the 152: I think it would be much harder to build a faithful replica today. For one thing, I could imagine that surviving documentation is much harder to find for these, plus I would imagine it a bit of a nightmare to find a suitable engine for it, capable of being outfitted with a three speed supercharger plus MW-50 plus GM-1. Who'd want a Ta 152 without water methanol and nitrous-injection? :)
What a good looking aircraft. Imagine had these gone up to meet B-29 at 30,000 feet? The TA-152 might have dove on it from 40,000'. I will guess the B-29 would need to drop its 7,000 pounds of bombs to try to get away and at least gain maneuverability. and avoid violent stall.
@@hectorheathcote9495 Das ist interessant wo hat sie gewohnt und wo ist sie geboren ? Über die Familie meines Vaters weiß ich auf Grund des Sachverhalts das sie am Ende des Krieges vertrieben wurden fast nichts...! Woher weißt Du das das mein Vater ein Cousin deiner Großmutter war ?
The Komet was used against high altitude bombers though whereas the Ta152 despite being designed to take out bombers wasn't used for that purpose at all. At least that appears to be the logic behind the developers decision to include it but still no 4 engine bombers.
It should be asked why it was developed too late instead, not how it could have been developed. Germany had a fine aircraft industry before and during the war, no reason why they should no be able to build great potentially war winning aircraft. The important answer lies in why the TA152 only was delivered in January 1945. Because it was ordered and conceived too late. Why?
wrong video. But start with 30 kts speed... 10,000 tons lighter, add 90 to 100 aircraft instead of 70...add in built 23 in a couple of years and you get the idea. That all said Midway class had them, had the war continued armor would have been the standard.
Odd, how in this video all the Allied pilots are blind and only fly straight and level, even during the 2nd or subsequent cannon bursts! Must be deaf as well.
Plenty of gun camera footage that shows exactly this happening. No way of knowing if the pilot was wounded. Or if the control surfaces had become damaged during the exchange.
My favourite Piston engined fighter. Anyone says "The xxxx was the best"abcd fighter, just say the TA 152 was better, they always have a hard time trying to prove it.
at 1:12 Your Narrator MIS-STATES which ENGINE the TA-152 Used!! THIS WAS NOT a RADIAL ENGINE! It was a Jumo, V-12, Liquid-Cooled motor, later (with-in a few months) also Intergrated with the DB-603 Benz motor; Both LIQUID Cooled motors has Big Turbos to Allow them to GET UP to 40000+. Please, use FACTS, in History, as that's now, a 'Thing' where DAT has been Altered to steer our Past away from REALITY.
You have misunderstood what was said. I wondered if someone would pick this up. He's talking about the Fw190 and it's BMW radial there. Not the Ta152 which has the Jumo. Thanks for the comment though.
Great plane, no doubt. But comparisons are only really valuable under combat conditions, over an extended period of time. It did look amazing, though. Reminds me of the U-boat type XXI, again, too little too late.
If we follow that logic then the BF109 is the greatest fighter plane of all time. A claim I'm sure will be disputed heavily by many. Truth is nobody is ever going to agree on this.
@@BlueMax109 No, you miss my point. I was conjecturing about the Ta-152 against the other top late war prop planes under combat conditions over a period of time. In no way was I saying anything like you asserted.
@@AmericasChoiceAh my mistake then. In that case I agree with you then. But the allies clearly weren't interested in doing that even on an academic level because they destroyed the aircraft. Have to remember as well that early jets were so poor they were nearly out performed by the "super prop" late war fighters at the zenith of their development. This is why I don't blame Reschke for his opinion on why they destroyed his Ta.
@@BlueMax109 I think he was probably right. Winkle Brown said the Germans were at least 5 years ahead of the Allies in combat aircraft design in 1945. Yes, the late war prop planes were awesome, my favorites in fact. Yup, they were better performers than the early jets, but as you know, jets were the way to go in the long run. TThe Brits were the leaders to a great degree in prop plane technology and design. I agree with Brown when he says the De Havilland Hornet was probably the best twin prop plane even though it missed the war, and the late war Spitfires, too. I have read and seen interviews of Luftwaffe aces, and they said the late Spitfires were the best Allied dogfighters
@@AmericasChoiceThere are numerous RAF and Luftwaffe pilots who share the opinion that their aircraft were in fact equal for the entire war and that it came down to the man in the box. Luftwaffe pilots also considered RAF pilots to be the most naturally inclined to aerial warfare with an instinct for it that matched their own. Something they didn't find the Russians nor Americans shared. Which is very interesting. There's also examples of Luftwaffe pilots disagreeing which is better between the 109 and 190 and engaging in mock dogfights to settle the argument but having to land completely exhausted without having managed to best one and other. I like that Eric Brown tried to settle the debate with his writings on the matter. But it is indeed funny that when he spoke to Reschke personally about it, he contradicted his own published findings. I don't believe the debate will ever be settled personally. Whenever a plane achieves legendary status theirs also an accompanied set of myths or mythology that surrounds it.
The Allies late in the war were after numbers of machines, rather than quality, and preparing for the Cold War. P-51's were "good enough" and P-47's were becoming better, slowly. B-24's were so rushed that they still used magnesium in the construction - with predictable results. Operation Paperclip, anyone?
UH lots of IFSS if the Germans had better fuel 100 octane and pilots with so many kills way beyond anything the USA had the oppurtunity to use them then yhaaa the 152 and the d9 were every bit as good as the p51 or spitfire shoot the 163 with all probabilty broke the sound barrier long before the Usa did but we will never know ...
@@kcstafford2784 If there is one lesson life has repeatedly taught me it is that you cannot please everyone. The video's I have done with AI narration have done better than those with my real voice. So I guess the people have spoken? Or maybe it's just UA-cam's algorithm.
I think there's a certain amount of "the lost case" mentality in these German claims of supremacy in their aircraft over allied types. This is not at all to say the Ta-152 wasn't a great plane. The Japanese tend to claim that everything Japanese is best also. I find this kind of nationalism to be worrying.
@@robertmcmanus636 you mean like how all the NATO cheerleaders said the F16 is superior to anything in Russia and it will sweep all before it on the battlefield thanks to Western superiority but in reality they all got destroyed on the ground without having any effect whatsoever on the battlefield. Well except that one that got shot down by their own air defense, costing them their most experienced pilot. You mean like that?
Oh imagine that German pilot bragging that he flew the best piston engine fighter. Best in what? Reliability, could not chase down a Mosquito because his supercharger was not working right. Did it have the range of a Mustang or land on a carrier? Best is subjective it was a hell of a high altitude interceptor, nothing against the plane but this an old story from German vets. Our Tigers were better than T34/Shermans BUT they could not produce them (too complex). We’re not available because of reliability etc….
First off. He isn't "bragging" - he's sharing his experiences. Secondly. Every early model fighter everywhere ever has had early production and teething issues that require ironing out. Even in peace time let alone war time. There isn't a fighter in existence anywhere in the world whose replacement isn't already on the drawing board. This is especially true in times of war. You are right it's subjective. If you actually listened to the man speak instead of assuming he is bragging then you'd realise he completely recognises that every pilot will have his own opinion. And all he can do is speak from his experiences. Those German vets weren't lying. Their equipment was superior. It was also more complex. Difficult to produce and maintan. War is a game of attrition. Quantity trumps quality every time. We are seeing that right now with the war in Ukraine. Superior weaponry - much of it ironically of German origin, is failing on the battlefield because it's overly complex. Difficult to maintain. Not well suited to the conditions or terrain. And requires a long line of logistics. And, most importantly, It cannot be produced fast enough. Is it any wonder? NATO was formed with a backbone of former Nazi's. They kept the same doctrine. And failed to learn the lessons of the past.
@@BlueMax109 you make many good points especially about the bragging and opinions and personal preference. I do though believe we make a mistake with the quantity vs quality dynamic. Tanks for example we equate quality with more armor or better at gun. But when ergonomics, reliability and easy of maintenance are ignored. As well in tanks people only tend to want to compare in tank vs tank combat, which is much rarer than infantry support roles. I have no issue with the TA 152, I do though question it was the best piston driven fighter.
@@tackle47 Take the T34 or the Sherman for example vs the Tiger tank - a very common comparison and argument among tank enthusiasts. One side will argue that their tank was superior because of it's armor, firepower, engagement range. But it's detractors will point out it's reliability, fuel consumption, ease of maintenance and logistics. The other side will tout it's mass availability, ease of production and maintenance and then finally - the fact that their side won the war. This debate will never end and in fact it is still going right now. NATO so admired German tank's and tanker's that they used them to design their next generation MBT's. The Abrams and the Leopard, their two frontline tanks, are both based off of the Tiger. And have all the same problems in design philosophy as the tiger. They are heavy (too heavy for the Russian steppe, they frequently bog down because of it) complex to manufacture, difficult to maintain and require a long line of logistical support that can be easily disrupted by today's long range drones. And most importantly, they take far too long to produce. At current production rates, Russia can build or refurbish more "obsolete" T72's than all of NATO combined can produce ATGM's to destroy them. Quantity - trumps quality. Every, single time. Artillery systems are another one. They are proving as decisive and important in this conflict as they were during the first world war. Western systems are of superior rifling, barreling and technology (GPS guided shells etc) - but they were not built to fight a sustained, prolonged war in the horrible conditions of the Russian steppe. They laughed at Russian artillery systems for being "poorly finished' and it turned out they were deliberately designed that way to keep firing 24/7 under absolutely inhospitable conditions. When the western systems broke down and they had to ask for advise from the west to repair them in the field - their old soviet systems kept on firing. Again - quantity trumps quality. I could go on and on with examples of this. Because it's a pattern replete throughout history. The economics of warfare is a subject most people ignore because it's not as sexy as talking about weapons systems. But it's main attributing factor to either victory or defeat.
@@BlueMax109 good points for sure and do not disagree with any of them. Though I do not want to see it happen by any means, it would be interesting to see how US logistics would handle a situation if engages in Ukraine.
@@tackle47 they've already announced they are building supply corridors in Europe for a war with Russia www.newsweek.com/nato-land-corridors-war-russia-us-military-1908049 All the pieces are moving into place. Alliances being formed. Conflicts flaring up all over the place. It's escalating towards an eventual nuclear exchange unless cooler heads prevail but I don't see that occurring personally. We are at the turning point of a great economic cycle that started at the conclusion of the last world war with the signing of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944. The US came out on top as a result and their currency became the global reserve which gave rise to their enormous power and influence but it's now pivoting towards the east. The same kind of cataclysmic changes in the economic landscape occurred before the first and second world wars also.
Aww what a shame the Nazis couldn't get their shit together and prolong the inevitable. Not forgetting that the allies also had kit that was just too late to participate, but I'm forgetting the Nazis were always technically superior...apparently. "The Ta 152 score at the end of the war was probably seven victories and four losses in air combat, although a degree of uncertainty about those numbers exists. Four victories were achieved by Josef Keil, from 1 March 1945 to 21 April 1945, and at least three victories were achieved by Willi Reschke." 1. Shooting down 7 aircraft for the loss of 4 is not going to dent the allied bomber offensive, which was the primary purpose of the Ta-152 2. Tempests in late war were primarily involved in fighter reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines. That suggests that the Tempests were being bounced by the Ta-152 pilots, putting the latter at an advantage. Context is important, if not everything. Too little too late doesn't cut the mustard.
"but I'm forgetting the Nazi's were always technically superior apparently" - the allies certainly thought so. It's why they raced to compete with each other for their top scientists and engineers post war under Operation Paperclip. They also recruited the following former Nazi's to run NATO: Adolf Heusinger, Hitler's Chief of Staff, became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, 1961-1964 Hans Speidel, Rommel's Chief of Staff, became Commander in Chief of NATO Forces Central Europe, 1957-1963 Johannes Steinhoff, Luftwaffe fighter ace, became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, 1971-1974 Johan von Kielmansegg, General Staff Officer Wehrmacht High Command, became NATO Commander Allied Forces Central Europe, 1966-1968 Ernst Faber, Lt Col Wehrmacht General Staff, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1973-1975 Karl Schnell, First General Staff Officer 76th Panzer Corps, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1975-1977 Franz-Joseph Schulze, Senior Lieutenant Luftwaffe, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1977-1979 Ferdinand von Senger und Etterlin, Adjutant Wehrmacht High Command, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1979-1983 1. Shooting down 7 aircraft for the loss of 4 is not going to dent the allied bomber offensive, which was the primary purpose of the Ta-152 Of course it wasn't going to dent the allied bomber offensive. The aircraft was never even used in that role to begin with. Nor did I ever claim it was. 2. Tempests in late war were primarily involved in fighter reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines. That suggests that the Tempests were being bounced by the Ta-152 pilots, putting the latter at an advantage. Mere speculation on your part. Nearly 80 years after the fact. You weren't there. Willi was. End of story. "Context is important, if not everything. Too little too late doesn't cut the mustard." Yes context is important. You are the one misconstruing the context of the video. Making ad hominem attacks and irrelevant points that nobody at any point disagreed with.
@@BlueMax109 "Making ad hominem attacks and irrelevant points that nobody at any point disagreed with." It's not an ad hominin to call a fascist a fascist. It is not irrelevant to call out ahistorical pro fascist apologetics. And if the point is something that nobody disagreed with, why have you made a textwall disagreeing with my point? As America recruited Japanese war criminals, giving them university jobs and amnesty for their research into biological warfare, so they recruited Nazi scientists. Not forgetting that it would also deny the Soviets getting their hands on the shits. The Nazis got their arses kicked and I don't give a fig for ahistorical Wehraboo mythologising.
@@pencilpauli9442 I see your wee little panties are extremely knotted for some reason. Who exactly are you calling a fascist, loser? Are you fighting Nazi's in your head are you? You sound mentally ill. You made absolutely no point at all. I pointed that out with rebuttal. Which you have failed in turn to rebut. Yes that's right, America put war criminals to work for them. But you don't call them Nazi's or fascists for it. Instead you fight the Nazi's in your head because you are mentally deranged. That's the point - the Soviet's were the Allies of the Western powers. Their criminal bedfellows who they promised peace with then betrayed them and declared a new century of proxy war's against - in contravention to all their promises at the Tehran convention in 1943 and the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944. Absolutely nobody disagrees that Nazi Germany lost WW2 you mentally deranged fool. At no stage in the video was it ever claimed that Nazi Germany won the war, would have won the war or even could have won the war. You think you are such a fucking hero coming into my comments section and calling me a wehraboo. When really, you are just a fucking moron loser without an ounce of historical context to put your theories into perspective. Now kindly fuck off loser.
@@BlueMax109 "That suggests that the Tempests were being bounced by the Ta-152 pilots, putting the latter at an advantage. Mere speculation on your part. Nearly 80 years after the fact. You weren't there. Willi was. End of story. " "(On) the evening of (14th April 1945) Reschke was to demonstrate that the Ta 152H could be used as a low altitude fighter. A section of four Hawker Tempest Vs of 486 (NZ) Squadron were out on patrol. After attacking a train near Ludwigslust, the section split up into pairs; Wing Commander Brooker ordered the Tempests flown by Flying Officer S. J. Short and Warrant Officer Owen J. Mitchell to make their own way back to base. On the way back, this pair, which was strafing targets along the railway tracks near Ludwigslust, was spotted by lookouts posted at Neustadt-Glewe. Three Ta 152s - flown by Reschke, Oberstleutnant Aufhammer and Oberfeldwebel Sepp Sattler - were scrambled, catching the Tempests by surprise. " Didn't need to be there, it's called deductive reasoning. My "speculation" was spot on, wouldn't you say? As for the comment on bomber interception, I seem to recall that is how the video began, the Ta-152 being developed one of which was a high altitude interceptor, which the Nazis thought would be necessary to counter the B-29. Looks like the fear of technical superiority driving development runs both ways. Not my fault things didn't pan out as the Nazis though, but then, not a lot ever did. Poor darlings, what a shame. That really was specious argument, btw. Of course the Allies were always wanting a need for technological improvement. That's the nature of warfare. Otherwise humans would still be hitting each other with sticks. Perhaps that wouldn't have been such a bad thing. Make love not war, man! ✌☮☮✌
@@pencilpauli9442 Are you really so fucking dense? Seriously? The opening quote of the video is from the famed ALLIED TEST PILOT Erik Winkle Brown who ACTUALLY FLEW the type, and in his PROFESSIONAL OPINION said that it was as good or better than any of the late war allied Aircraft being fielded, which he also extensively tested and flew. Who the fuck are you? A random nobody on UA-cam. End of story. All official test reports of the Ta-152 concur with Brown's findings. That is an indisputable fact. If you actually knew a god damn thing about Reschke you would know that 1) He is personal friends with many allied pilots including those he fought directly against and 2) He is the first to agree that all fighter pilot's are bias about their machines - including allied pilots (whom he is friends with) But you go ahead with your ad hom drivel and insanely retarded baseless accusations of fighting the wehraboo's in your head when it's clear to anyone with a brain your head is so far up your ass you can't even get past the opening quote before running to the comments section to make your ignorance known to the whole world.
All these videos are the same. This tank or this wonder waffen, The Tiger was better, the TA152, better than what? Was it better than the 100 of whatever the allies built? One TA 152 or 97 Tempest? Which is better? It was never a one on one match and sounds like willie was a sore loser.
According to famed Allied test pilot Eric Brown, quoted at the very opening of the video, from his book wings of the Luftwaffe in which he discusses all the axis planes he tested for the allies, it was better than most allied planes. If that knots your panties then take it up with him. Both the allies and axis tested captured aircraft one on one. Except the Ta152. They destroyed it instead of pitting it against their planes. The man survived the hardest part of the war to survive. He is very much a winner. And he commands the respect of his foes for doing so. Only limp wristed pimple faced nerds who never served a day in their life and somehow think they personally won the war get upset over hearing veterans tell their stories.
@@BlueMax109 Not wearing panties but lets not get excited. There is no reason to take anything up. That was done. Germany sent its very best they had, in every single field and they came up short. Well short. They were stomped. Wonder weapons? Wonder where they are? Because they could only make five. Good luck with that! They made the best they could and lost. Thats the end of this story ..
@@TP-ie3hj it's not the end of the story at all. You are completely ignorant. Their top scientists and engineers all went to work for the Americans and Soviets postwar. It's Generals and Chiefs of staff all went to work with NATO and achieved high level positions. One former intelligence officer who oversaw the murder of Jews became the Secretary General of the UN. Can you name him? No. Because you are an ignorant clown doing an impression of intelligence. Suffering from dunning kruger syndrome and vastly over estimating your importance. Run along fool.
@@BlueMax109 Listen nazi lover, they lost. They went head to head with the Americans and Germany got its ass kicked. Its air force could not stop bombers ,its army could not stop the US and Germany could not make weapons that could win a war. I dont give a sh!t how many moved to America and worked for the Americans after the war was over. When they were employed by their Father Land they did everything they could to win and came up losers. They lost they were inferior in the greatest test of all... Also asking someone an off topic question will not do you any favors. You really think asking a dumb off topic question of someone thinking they could not answer would somehow prove you to be correct on the topic at hand? It would not. You were wrong just deal with it. Dont worry though fan boy you can always be the Germans in your video games.
@@BlueMax109 Read the above comments you have not made a single statement that contradicts what I said. Your grasping at straws about who went to work for whom after they lost has no relevance. None. You belief that you can name a former UN post holder has no relevance. So here it is again because I doubt you will catch it. Germany lost, wonder waffen were no good. Losers of war focus on how big the gun was or how fast it flew while adults focus on how many can be made and put into the hands of the fighters. The m4 Sherman and T34 were far superior tanks to any German tank... because they could be built fast in large numbers cheap and sent to war. There is no debate here as the Hawker Tempest was built 10-1 and thats the actual question, is the FW TA 152 better than 10 or 15 tempest. We know the answer already. Hey its ok to be wrong I wish you were right as you are passionate, but you are young, you will figure it out.
Up to the point when you put up your video with Meteor, P-51H and P-47N pilot perspectives I'll take your 'pointless' assessment with the grain of salt it deserves.
@@bunion8579 I don't need to do that. Greg, at Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles has done the engineering analysis. This is merely clickbait for Wehrmacht Fan Bois.
But they lost the war thankfully all this fascination for the worse regime in history is bizarre.We also get carried away with the German wonder weapons but the allies had theirs. They dropped one on Japan that the Germans were incapable of producing. Computer technology which was for humankind a massive leap forward. The Germans built a lot of crap as well some killed more Germans than the intended targets. Those who argue for German superiority maybe should get their black Hugo Boss clothes out and give in to it.
Yeah, yeah. I get it. The Axis were the bad guys in WWII and any information presented that sheds light on any of their technical achievements is in the small minds of some celebrating an evil ideology. Grow up. All aspects of history should be accessible to everybody if for no other reason than to learn lessons from it.
@@issigonis975 It's clear that they were ahead in many areas but the mad Corporal gave them unlimited funding beginning about 1934. So, it fits. Having said that their wunder waffe were rushed to the battle with many existing teething problems that they didn't have time to fix. I'm sure the TA 52H was formidable in its own right but we had what Greg termed superprops too. He did a really detailed analysis. Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles here on utube.
It isn't my opinion, it's the Opinion of two men on opposite sides who both flew the type. The real question is who give's a fuck about anything YOU have to say. Jog on loser.
It sure would be nice if the only Ta152 left in existence at the Smithsonian Air and Space museum would finally be restored. It’s been in storage at the Paul Garber facility since the late 40’s. By the time it gets restored everyone who has any recollection of WWII will be gone. If the Smithsonian has no interest in restoring it,give it to a museum that does.
It would be nice if the original drawings and Blue prints could be found. I'm sure that if there were/are those who built this machine would swap a heart beat or two to assist in it's resurrection, or any others who built any of the fighters from this era.
@@normvw4053 The Air and Space Museum has blueprints and plans for the Ta 152, at least that is the rumor... Unfortunately, they will only restore is as a static display. I have been lobbying for the A&S museum to at least allow some other collection to take measurements of their Ta 152, but to no avail...what a waste.
In germany is a group of fans and investors who built the fw 190 A in 2004 again, 98% like the original, it is still flying (flugwerk fw 190 Google). The Ta 152 would be a perfect goal for this
@@BeniPress It is the ultimate Luftwaffe prop plane. I have been lobbying for decades to get one built. I have even offered $$$. the problem is with the National Air and Space Museum. They refuse to allow anyone to measure their Ta-152, or look at the plans and blueprints in their possession. I think it is as Blue Max has said, they are STILL jealous of the Germans for perfecting a high altitude design with pressurized cockpit and wings from heaven. The Junkers Jumo 213E engine is another issue. I know for a fact, that with today's digital 3D machines, a duplicate can be made. There may even be a few floating around, but I haven't heard of any lately...but there may be a couple under a pile of rubble somewhere.
Problem is when fully restored then someone usually crashes the plane
Very good video. Willi Reschke also dedicates an entire chapter with several photographs to this fantastic fighter plane in his own book: Jagdgeschwader 301/302 "Wilde Sau" In Defense of the Reich with the Bf 109, Fw 190 and Ta 152 (2005).
I've just ordered that book two days ago after flying this plane in the simulator. Can't wait to read it.
@@BlueMax109 reschkes buch ist eine etwas langweilige aufzählung, aber net schlecht--- was ich besonders empfehlen kann ist..... Valentin Mikula; Stuka - Tatsachenbericht 4,25 euro - man wird firmlich in das buch gezogen, scho 4 o. 5 mal jelesen!!!
@@svensachse6507 I will grab that as well thanks for the recommendation
Good comment! There has been a tendency among post-war aircraft reviewers to criticize the Ta-152 as a failed design, a waste of development effort with too limited a skill set to be useful in the final stages of the war. But ask the man who actually flew one and relied on it to save his life, confronted with overwhelming odds. Reschke could not have been more emphatic about this plane's superiority. It did, however, suffer from serious quality problems, some of which plagued Reschke's plane. In one of the more puzzling incidents in Wilde Sau, in spring 1945 Reschke comes upon a number of Ta-152s whose tail wheels had been removed so they couldn't fly. No explanation.
... sehr gutes Video ! Willi Reschke said: ...' the Ta 152 H was my life insurance... she was the best piston engine Fighter of WW 2...'
Brilliant thank you very much enjoyed that
My Uncle Walter Loos was also one of the Pilots of the Ta 152/ JG 301. But he didn't talked about his experiences during WW2. I assume it was a "terrible" time for him. Hope we won't get such times back.
I believe that Walter Loos's aircraft, Black 4, is the only surviving Ta-152.
Er war ein guter Freund und Kammerad meines Vaters...
Yes, it was a great achievement to produce such a good aircraft inspite of the lack of materials, but this very lack was the reason there were only 70 produced. An all out was is fought on many fronts, not just geographical theatres. Once production peaks in '44 fell (and other losing factors too), the whole war imploded for Germany at an incredible rate.
Wow. Great research, wonderful narration and amazing production values!! Awesome!!
That video was excellent, really enjoyed the format and content, well done, subscribed 👍
I spent imagining what it would be like if the Ta H1 was equipped with the Jumo 213EB, it produced 200 horsepower more than the E1, in addition to having a better cooling system, in testing on the D13, it reached around 475MH and on the H1 478MH
Well Reschke also claimed to shoot down two Yak-9s in quick succession, and one other Ta pilot claimed the same. With the battle between Reschke and a Tempest, he damaged its tail and then his guns jammed, so he stayed with it before it crashed. However another Ta-152 was also shot down in the battle by a Tempest. So they are 1:1. I still the the Spitfire XIV was probably better, especially since there was an engagement between two Spitfire XIV and two Ta-152s in which both Ta-152 were shot down without loss to the Spitfires. Of course it probably was at lower altitudes, and Ta-152 was designed to fight up high, with p-51s and B-17
The Spitfire XIV was designed as a medium/high altitude fighter. It would have done for the Ta 152 as it did the 190Ds. Anyway! There was no high-altitude combats ever undertaken by the TA 152 and performance wise, came up shorter in operations than what it did in development. It was also very unreliable. This aircraft, along with the Do 335 and the He 219 are all the most overhyped aircraft to come out of the war. The internet doesn't help.
ua-cam.com/video/wqHYOgH1YXM/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/WL5JJInqTT8/v-deo.html
I think the Tempest and Ta 152 were completely different planes. The victory over the Tempest was only because the Tempest pilot was inexperienced. Let's remember that in the same fight another Tempest had shot down a Ta 152 a moment earlier. Of course, at a higher altitude the Tempest had no chance.
The Tempests were bounced during a ground attack sortie.
A flight of 4 split into two pairs. 3 Ta-152s came across a pair and attacked.
It's absolute tosh to brag about having a superior aircraft based on this experience.
Also, I'm not convinced that a wing designed for high altitude flight would make the aircraft more agile at low levels.
Even if the Ta-152 had been produced in greater numbers, pilots learn how to use their own strengths to exploit the weaknesses of their adversary.
The narrator sounds like Richard Burton, which is great thing. Cymru am byth!
No one would believe that in the last years of the Second World War…………
Wales
No one would believe in the last years of World War Two…….
The narrator is a bot.
@@marekryszard AI voice. Quicker to produce and higher quality than my own.
Wow! Amazing story. This design deserves better in the annals of aviation history. Thank you for setting the record straight! Much Respect!
No doubt about it, the TA-152 is lethal, but I still like the performance of the Tempest with it's 4 x 20mm cannon
The Tempest proved itself in combat.
@@AmericasChoice only after they figured out how to stop the Napier Sabre from engulfing its pilots in flames on start up!
Tis one of my favourite Warbirds though. All Hawker stuff had a unquiely rugged look about it.
If I am flying online for the allies I favour the Tempest for sure. Only issue is its guns are thirsty. You've gotta be super accurate. Can't take sniper shots like you can with the axis fighters.
@@BlueMax109 LOL Yup, that Napier Sabre had some issues early on. I agree about the rugged look, the Tempest had it in spades. One of my favorite WWII photos is a flight of 4 Tempests flying in formation looking for prey.
@@BlueMax109 Yup, cannon shells are bigger so you could not carry as many as you could .50's. I tend toward the more rugged fighters, too. The P-47 would be my choice to fly in combat. I am new to your channel, but I have been interested in WWII aviation for almost 50 years. I am encouraged to see a whole new generation with the same interest. We only had books and an occasional documentary in the old days. You guys have so much more info available these days.
Both Goring and Milch prioritized Bf109 production above all other fighters because production lines could produce these in greater numbers. Their main goal was keeping Hitler happy. German engineers were hampered by short sighted leadership.
Milch also had personal vendettas with Willy Messerschmitt that hampered the development of the 262
Agreed. The ME 109 was obsolete by 1944, regardless what its fans say. It should have been totally phased out by the FW 190 and its successors, to save limited resources.
@@blank557 Galland told Goering to stop producing the 109 and concentrate all fighter production on the 190 but he was ignored.
@@blank557 barn doors willy messerschmitt in a raid bunker sais.
@@blank557 die 109 hat mehr abschüsse als alle alleierten kampfflugzeuge zusammen!!! was soll daran veraltet sein? die 190 war nicht höhentauglich. die alleierten hatten einfaches spiel weil deutschland zuviele fronten und nur wenig ressourcen hatte.
Had no idea Il-2 1946 looks so good!
I have met Willi Reschke about 20 years ago. He was very clear in his views about the capabilities of the Ta 152. It was a formidable aircraft, also against the protecting fighter aircraft.
The Germans were always ein wunder waffe away from victory...
Just like the Ukrainians.
Waiting on their Wunderwaffe F16's right now.
@@BlueMax109Ukrainians actually managed to stop the soviet(russian) advance(invasion), unlike Nazi Germany, even before help arrived from other countries
Exactly. In their memories they always have best guns, best aeroplanes, best tanks, best ships, best tactics and only tiny mistakes (usually made by higher command or Hitler himself) caused them not to win.
Reschke is not an exception. Credited with exactly _one_ victory over Tempest (that he suprised during attack) he claims it was "very easy to shot down Tempests". It's pretty tiresome reading this in virtually every book of German war memories and consequently hearing endless praises of German wunderwaffe...
Bla bla bla, as if there is any difference between any other nation. It's like we ignoring the American and British propaganda campaign they do for decades now.
The testing of Allied captured aircraft was hampered by not having the correct octane fuel available so any "comparisons" were skewed to the detriment of the Allied aircraft.
Actually they tested with captured allied fuel. And they also tested their own engines with allied fuel and found them to produce on average 20 percent more power.
The allies could have gotten GM1 and MW50 to test. Especially as they'd already won the war. But chose to destroy the aircraft instead after having only tested it without it.
Kurt Tank = Ledgend
I always heard of it called the FW long nose and that it covered the ME 262s airfields. Good video.
The Ta-152 was technically a Long Nose but generally speaking when you hear Long Nose it is referring to the Fw190-D (Dora) series. Both served the same role of airfield defense though.
This was mainly the responsibility of the D9s, the most famous unit was the "Platzschutzstaffel" which covered the landings and takeoffs of the Jagdverband 44.....after the war it was called "Papagei Staffel" (parrot squadron) due to the bright colours painted under the wing and fuselage, to warn the AA (red with white lines).
I've heard that replica spitfires can be bought, has any company offered to build a replica Ta 152? Would it be possible? Do the design docs exist? It seems very odd to us today that the British would scrap the only example they had after the war, presumably after studying it, but Britain was scrapping enormous quantities of war materiel, that we'd love to have today, to reuse the materials for rebuilding post war
There was a German company called "Flugwerk" who produced and sold "new" 190 A-8s back in the..err.. late 90s? early 2000s? I think their initial asking price was a million Euros per plane (though I'm not sure if that was in fly-away condition). IIRC, they also offered a D-9 but I'm not sure any of those were ordered/built. They did build some A-8s though and those were so close to the real thing that the company was allowed to simply continue with the serial numbers where wartime production had stopped. Meaning, technically/legally, those planes were considered as a continuation of series production that ended in 1944/45. They used some new old stock parts in at least some of their examples, but they had to use a slightly different engine for the Anton models. I think it was a Chinese copy of a Russian radial, which was slightly more powerful than the BMW 801.
As for the 152: I think it would be much harder to build a faithful replica today. For one thing, I could imagine that surviving documentation is much harder to find for these, plus I would imagine it a bit of a nightmare to find a suitable engine for it, capable of being outfitted with a three speed supercharger plus MW-50 plus GM-1. Who'd want a Ta 152 without water methanol and nitrous-injection? :)
What a good looking aircraft. Imagine had these gone up to meet B-29 at 30,000 feet? The TA-152 might have dove on it from 40,000'. I will guess the B-29 would need to drop its 7,000 pounds of bombs to try to get away and at least gain maneuverability. and avoid violent stall.
Willie Reschke was my grandmother's first cousin.
Das würde mich als seinen Sohn schon interessieren...wie hieß deine Großmutter...?
@@jurgenreschke1589 Ilse Berthe Reschke.
@@hectorheathcote9495 Das ist interessant wo hat sie gewohnt und wo ist sie geboren ?
Über die Familie meines Vaters weiß ich auf Grund des Sachverhalts das sie am Ende des Krieges vertrieben wurden fast nichts...! Woher weißt Du das das mein Vater ein Cousin deiner Großmutter war ?
Great video
With the Ta 152 in the game, is there any excuse not to do the Comet next?
The Komet was used against high altitude bombers though whereas the Ta152 despite being designed to take out bombers wasn't used for that purpose at all. At least that appears to be the logic behind the developers decision to include it but still no 4 engine bombers.
The narrator sounds a bit like Christopher Hitchens.
It should be asked why it was developed too late instead, not how it could have been developed. Germany had a fine aircraft industry before and during the war, no reason why they should no be able to build great potentially war winning aircraft. The important answer lies in why the TA152 only was delivered in January 1945. Because it was ordered and conceived too late. Why?
How come American carriers didn't have armored decks like the British carriers??
wrong video. But start with 30 kts speed... 10,000 tons lighter, add 90 to 100 aircraft instead of 70...add in built 23 in a couple of years and you get the idea. That all said Midway class had them, had the war continued armor would have been the standard.
Weight,and American Carriers could carry twice the amount of Air Craft!
TY 🙏🙏
Odd, how in this video all the Allied pilots are blind and only fly straight and level, even during the 2nd or subsequent cannon bursts! Must be deaf as well.
Plenty of gun camera footage that shows exactly this happening. No way of knowing if the pilot was wounded. Or if the control surfaces had become damaged during the exchange.
@@BlueMax109 On every Allied plane!!!!
@@csjrogerson2377 Do you play the game? More than welcome to take the stick in coop if you feel you can do better
My favourite Piston engined fighter. Anyone says "The xxxx was the best"abcd fighter, just say the TA 152 was better, they always have a hard time trying to prove it.
at 1:12 Your Narrator MIS-STATES which ENGINE the TA-152 Used!! THIS WAS NOT a RADIAL ENGINE! It was a Jumo, V-12, Liquid-Cooled motor, later (with-in a few months) also Intergrated with the DB-603 Benz motor; Both LIQUID Cooled motors has Big Turbos to Allow them to GET UP to 40000+. Please, use FACTS, in History, as that's now, a 'Thing' where DAT has been Altered to steer our Past away from REALITY.
You have misunderstood what was said. I wondered if someone would pick this up.
He's talking about the Fw190 and it's BMW radial there. Not the Ta152 which has the Jumo.
Thanks for the comment though.
True,the gentleman missed he was referencing the FW 190 not the TA 152.
If grasshoppers carried 45s, birds wouldn't mess with them.
Great plane, no doubt. But comparisons are only really valuable under combat conditions, over an extended period of time. It did look amazing, though. Reminds me of the U-boat type XXI, again, too little too late.
If we follow that logic then the BF109 is the greatest fighter plane of all time. A claim I'm sure will be disputed heavily by many.
Truth is nobody is ever going to agree on this.
@@BlueMax109 No, you miss my point. I was conjecturing about the Ta-152 against the other top late war prop planes under combat conditions over a period of time. In no way was I saying anything like you asserted.
@@AmericasChoiceAh my mistake then. In that case I agree with you then. But the allies clearly weren't interested in doing that even on an academic level because they destroyed the aircraft.
Have to remember as well that early jets were so poor they were nearly out performed by the "super prop" late war fighters at the zenith of their development.
This is why I don't blame Reschke for his opinion on why they destroyed his Ta.
@@BlueMax109 I think he was probably right. Winkle Brown said the Germans were at least 5 years ahead of the Allies in combat aircraft design in 1945. Yes, the late war prop planes were awesome, my favorites in fact. Yup, they were better performers than the early jets, but as you know, jets were the way to go in the long run. TThe Brits were the leaders to a great degree in prop plane technology and design. I agree with Brown when he says the De Havilland Hornet was probably the best twin prop plane even though it missed the war, and the late war Spitfires, too. I have read and seen interviews of Luftwaffe aces, and they said the late Spitfires were the best Allied dogfighters
@@AmericasChoiceThere are numerous RAF and Luftwaffe pilots who share the opinion that their aircraft were in fact equal for the entire war and that it came down to the man in the box.
Luftwaffe pilots also considered RAF pilots to be the most naturally inclined to aerial warfare with an instinct for it that matched their own.
Something they didn't find the Russians nor Americans shared. Which is very interesting.
There's also examples of Luftwaffe pilots disagreeing which is better between the 109 and 190 and engaging in mock dogfights to settle the argument but having to land completely exhausted without having managed to best one and other.
I like that Eric Brown tried to settle the debate with his writings on the matter. But it is indeed funny that when he spoke to Reschke personally about it, he contradicted his own published findings.
I don't believe the debate will ever be settled personally. Whenever a plane achieves legendary status theirs also an accompanied set of myths or mythology that surrounds it.
Willi Reschke, not Reschka
The Allies late in the war were after numbers of machines, rather than quality, and preparing for the Cold War. P-51's were "good enough" and P-47's were becoming better, slowly. B-24's were so rushed that they still used magnesium in the construction - with predictable results. Operation Paperclip, anyone?
Ding ding ding. Most people don't know about Operation Paperclip. Or the fact that the CIA was born out of it.
No doubt , a good fighter..
but not the best.
Nobody agrees on what is the best fighter. Even amongst their own comrades.
To me it was one of the best
The Fw 190 D9 is considered the best, perhaps because there were more in action.
UH lots of IFSS if the Germans had better fuel 100 octane and pilots with so many kills way beyond anything the USA had the oppurtunity to use them then yhaaa the 152 and the d9 were every bit as good as the p51 or spitfire shoot the 163 with all probabilty broke the sound barrier long before the Usa did but we will never know ...
Ju88 engine
dont you have a real voice?????
I have other videos with my voice. I'm using AI because it's easier and faster to produce and higher quality audio.
@@BlueMax109 audio quality????sounds lame????you do good work but AI and background music will not please the older crowd..
@@kcstafford2784 If there is one lesson life has repeatedly taught me it is that you cannot please everyone.
The video's I have done with AI narration have done better than those with my real voice. So I guess the people have spoken? Or maybe it's just UA-cam's algorithm.
I think there's a certain amount of "the lost case" mentality in these German claims of supremacy in their aircraft over allied types. This is not at all to say the Ta-152 wasn't a great plane. The Japanese tend to claim that everything Japanese is best also. I find this kind of nationalism to be worrying.
@@robertmcmanus636 you mean like how all the NATO cheerleaders said the F16 is superior to anything in Russia and it will sweep all before it on the battlefield thanks to Western superiority but in reality they all got destroyed on the ground without having any effect whatsoever on the battlefield.
Well except that one that got shot down by their own air defense, costing them their most experienced pilot.
You mean like that?
@@BlueMax109 @Why, hello, Ivan!
Oh imagine that German pilot bragging that he flew the best piston engine fighter. Best in what? Reliability, could not chase down a Mosquito because his supercharger was not working right. Did it have the range of a Mustang or land on a carrier? Best is subjective it was a hell of a high altitude interceptor, nothing against the plane but this an old story from German vets. Our Tigers were better than T34/Shermans BUT they could not produce them (too complex). We’re not available because of reliability etc….
First off. He isn't "bragging" - he's sharing his experiences.
Secondly. Every early model fighter everywhere ever has had early production and teething issues that require ironing out. Even in peace time let alone war time. There isn't a fighter in existence anywhere in the world whose replacement isn't already on the drawing board. This is especially true in times of war.
You are right it's subjective. If you actually listened to the man speak instead of assuming he is bragging then you'd realise he completely recognises that every pilot will have his own opinion. And all he can do is speak from his experiences.
Those German vets weren't lying. Their equipment was superior. It was also more complex. Difficult to produce and maintan. War is a game of attrition. Quantity trumps quality every time.
We are seeing that right now with the war in Ukraine. Superior weaponry - much of it ironically of German origin, is failing on the battlefield because it's overly complex. Difficult to maintain. Not well suited to the conditions or terrain. And requires a long line of logistics. And, most importantly, It cannot be produced fast enough.
Is it any wonder? NATO was formed with a backbone of former Nazi's. They kept the same doctrine. And failed to learn the lessons of the past.
@@BlueMax109 you make many good points especially about the bragging and opinions and personal preference. I do though believe we make a mistake with the quantity vs quality dynamic. Tanks for example we equate quality with more armor or better at gun. But when ergonomics, reliability and easy of maintenance are ignored. As well in tanks people only tend to want to compare in tank vs tank combat, which is much rarer than infantry support roles. I have no issue with the TA 152, I do though question it was the best piston driven fighter.
@@tackle47 Take the T34 or the Sherman for example vs the Tiger tank - a very common comparison and argument among tank enthusiasts. One side will argue that their tank was superior because of it's armor, firepower, engagement range. But it's detractors will point out it's reliability, fuel consumption, ease of maintenance and logistics.
The other side will tout it's mass availability, ease of production and maintenance and then finally - the fact that their side won the war.
This debate will never end and in fact it is still going right now. NATO so admired German tank's and tanker's that they used them to design their next generation MBT's.
The Abrams and the Leopard, their two frontline tanks, are both based off of the Tiger. And have all the same problems in design philosophy as the tiger.
They are heavy (too heavy for the Russian steppe, they frequently bog down because of it) complex to manufacture, difficult to maintain and require a long line of logistical support that can be easily disrupted by today's long range drones. And most importantly, they take far too long to produce.
At current production rates, Russia can build or refurbish more "obsolete" T72's than all of NATO combined can produce ATGM's to destroy them.
Quantity - trumps quality. Every, single time.
Artillery systems are another one. They are proving as decisive and important in this conflict as they were during the first world war.
Western systems are of superior rifling, barreling and technology (GPS guided shells etc) - but they were not built to fight a sustained, prolonged war in the horrible conditions of the Russian steppe.
They laughed at Russian artillery systems for being "poorly finished' and it turned out they were deliberately designed that way to keep firing 24/7 under absolutely inhospitable conditions.
When the western systems broke down and they had to ask for advise from the west to repair them in the field - their old soviet systems kept on firing.
Again - quantity trumps quality. I could go on and on with examples of this. Because it's a pattern replete throughout history. The economics of warfare is a subject most people ignore because it's not as sexy as talking about weapons systems. But it's main attributing factor to either victory or defeat.
@@BlueMax109 good points for sure and do not disagree with any of them. Though I do not want to see it happen by any means, it would be interesting to see how US logistics would handle a situation if engages in Ukraine.
@@tackle47 they've already announced they are building supply corridors in Europe for a war with Russia
www.newsweek.com/nato-land-corridors-war-russia-us-military-1908049
All the pieces are moving into place. Alliances being formed. Conflicts flaring up all over the place.
It's escalating towards an eventual nuclear exchange unless cooler heads prevail but I don't see that occurring personally.
We are at the turning point of a great economic cycle that started at the conclusion of the last world war with the signing of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944.
The US came out on top as a result and their currency became the global reserve which gave rise to their enormous power and influence but it's now pivoting towards the east.
The same kind of cataclysmic changes in the economic landscape occurred before the first and second world wars also.
Aww what a shame the Nazis couldn't get their shit together and prolong the inevitable.
Not forgetting that the allies also had kit that was just too late to participate, but I'm forgetting the Nazis were always technically superior...apparently.
"The Ta 152 score at the end of the war was probably seven victories and four losses in air combat, although a degree of uncertainty about those numbers exists. Four victories were achieved by Josef Keil, from 1 March 1945 to 21 April 1945, and at least three victories were achieved by Willi Reschke."
1. Shooting down 7 aircraft for the loss of 4 is not going to dent the allied bomber offensive, which was the primary purpose of the Ta-152
2. Tempests in late war were primarily involved in fighter reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines.
That suggests that the Tempests were being bounced by the Ta-152 pilots, putting the latter at an advantage.
Context is important, if not everything.
Too little too late doesn't cut the mustard.
"but I'm forgetting the Nazi's were always technically superior apparently" - the allies certainly thought so. It's why they raced to compete with each other for their top scientists and engineers post war under Operation Paperclip. They also recruited the following former Nazi's to run NATO:
Adolf Heusinger, Hitler's Chief of Staff, became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, 1961-1964
Hans Speidel, Rommel's Chief of Staff, became Commander in Chief of NATO Forces Central Europe, 1957-1963
Johannes Steinhoff, Luftwaffe fighter ace, became Chairman of the NATO Military Committee, 1971-1974
Johan von Kielmansegg, General Staff Officer Wehrmacht High Command, became NATO Commander Allied Forces Central Europe, 1966-1968
Ernst Faber, Lt Col Wehrmacht General Staff, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1973-1975
Karl Schnell, First General Staff Officer 76th Panzer Corps, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1975-1977
Franz-Joseph Schulze, Senior Lieutenant Luftwaffe, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1977-1979
Ferdinand von Senger und Etterlin, Adjutant Wehrmacht High Command, became Commander in Chief NATO Forces Central Europe, 1979-1983
1. Shooting down 7 aircraft for the loss of 4 is not going to dent the allied bomber offensive, which was the primary purpose of the Ta-152
Of course it wasn't going to dent the allied bomber offensive. The aircraft was never even used in that role to begin with. Nor did I ever claim it was.
2. Tempests in late war were primarily involved in fighter reconnaissance missions behind enemy lines.
That suggests that the Tempests were being bounced by the Ta-152 pilots, putting the latter at an advantage.
Mere speculation on your part. Nearly 80 years after the fact. You weren't there. Willi was. End of story.
"Context is important, if not everything.
Too little too late doesn't cut the mustard."
Yes context is important. You are the one misconstruing the context of the video. Making ad hominem attacks and irrelevant points that nobody at any point disagreed with.
@@BlueMax109
"Making ad hominem attacks and irrelevant points that nobody at any point disagreed with."
It's not an ad hominin to call a fascist a fascist.
It is not irrelevant to call out ahistorical pro fascist apologetics.
And if the point is something that nobody disagreed with, why have you made a textwall disagreeing with my point?
As America recruited Japanese war criminals, giving them university jobs and amnesty for their research into biological warfare, so they recruited Nazi scientists.
Not forgetting that it would also deny the Soviets getting their hands on the shits.
The Nazis got their arses kicked and I don't give a fig for ahistorical Wehraboo mythologising.
@@pencilpauli9442 I see your wee little panties are extremely knotted for some reason.
Who exactly are you calling a fascist, loser? Are you fighting Nazi's in your head are you? You sound mentally ill.
You made absolutely no point at all. I pointed that out with rebuttal. Which you have failed in turn to rebut.
Yes that's right, America put war criminals to work for them. But you don't call them Nazi's or fascists for it. Instead you fight the Nazi's in your head because you are mentally deranged.
That's the point - the Soviet's were the Allies of the Western powers. Their criminal bedfellows who they promised peace with then betrayed them and declared a new century of proxy war's against - in contravention to all their promises at the Tehran convention in 1943 and the Bretton Woods agreement of 1944.
Absolutely nobody disagrees that Nazi Germany lost WW2 you mentally deranged fool. At no stage in the video was it ever claimed that Nazi Germany won the war, would have won the war or even could have won the war.
You think you are such a fucking hero coming into my comments section and calling me a wehraboo. When really, you are just a fucking moron loser without an ounce of historical context to put your theories into perspective.
Now kindly fuck off loser.
@@BlueMax109
"That suggests that the Tempests were being bounced by the Ta-152 pilots, putting the latter at an advantage.
Mere speculation on your part. Nearly 80 years after the fact. You weren't there. Willi was. End of story. "
"(On) the evening of (14th April 1945) Reschke was to demonstrate that the Ta 152H could be used as a low altitude fighter. A section of four Hawker Tempest Vs of 486 (NZ) Squadron were out on patrol. After attacking a train near Ludwigslust, the section split up into pairs; Wing Commander Brooker ordered the Tempests flown by Flying Officer S. J. Short and Warrant Officer Owen J. Mitchell to make their own way back to base. On the way back, this pair, which was strafing targets along the railway tracks near Ludwigslust, was spotted by lookouts posted at Neustadt-Glewe. Three Ta 152s - flown by Reschke, Oberstleutnant Aufhammer and Oberfeldwebel Sepp Sattler - were scrambled, catching the Tempests by surprise. "
Didn't need to be there, it's called deductive reasoning.
My "speculation" was spot on, wouldn't you say?
As for the comment on bomber interception, I seem to recall that is how the video began, the Ta-152 being developed one of which was a high altitude interceptor, which the Nazis thought would be necessary to counter the B-29.
Looks like the fear of technical superiority driving development runs both ways.
Not my fault things didn't pan out as the Nazis though, but then, not a lot ever did. Poor darlings, what a shame.
That really was specious argument, btw. Of course the Allies were always wanting a need for technological improvement. That's the nature of warfare.
Otherwise humans would still be hitting each other with sticks.
Perhaps that wouldn't have been such a bad thing.
Make love not war, man! ✌☮☮✌
@@pencilpauli9442 Are you really so fucking dense? Seriously? The opening quote of the video is from the famed ALLIED TEST PILOT Erik Winkle Brown who ACTUALLY FLEW the type, and in his PROFESSIONAL OPINION said that it was as good or better than any of the late war allied Aircraft being fielded, which he also extensively tested and flew.
Who the fuck are you? A random nobody on UA-cam. End of story. All official test reports of the Ta-152 concur with Brown's findings. That is an indisputable fact.
If you actually knew a god damn thing about Reschke you would know that 1) He is personal friends with many allied pilots including those he fought directly against and 2) He is the first to agree that all fighter pilot's are bias about their machines - including allied pilots (whom he is friends with)
But you go ahead with your ad hom drivel and insanely retarded baseless accusations of fighting the wehraboo's in your head when it's clear to anyone with a brain your head is so far up your ass you can't even get past the opening quote before running to the comments section to make your ignorance known to the whole world.
All these videos are the same. This tank or this wonder waffen, The Tiger was better, the TA152, better than what? Was it better than the 100 of whatever the allies built? One TA 152 or 97 Tempest? Which is better? It was never a one on one match and sounds like willie was a sore loser.
According to famed Allied test pilot Eric Brown, quoted at the very opening of the video, from his book wings of the Luftwaffe in which he discusses all the axis planes he tested for the allies, it was better than most allied planes.
If that knots your panties then take it up with him.
Both the allies and axis tested captured aircraft one on one. Except the Ta152. They destroyed it instead of pitting it against their planes.
The man survived the hardest part of the war to survive. He is very much a winner. And he commands the respect of his foes for doing so.
Only limp wristed pimple faced nerds who never served a day in their life and somehow think they personally won the war get upset over hearing veterans tell their stories.
@@BlueMax109 Not wearing panties but lets not get excited. There is no reason to take anything up. That was done. Germany sent its very best they had, in every single field and they came up short. Well short. They were stomped. Wonder weapons? Wonder where they are? Because they could only make five. Good luck with that! They made the best they could and lost. Thats the end of this story ..
@@TP-ie3hj it's not the end of the story at all. You are completely ignorant. Their top scientists and engineers all went to work for the Americans and Soviets postwar.
It's Generals and Chiefs of staff all went to work with NATO and achieved high level positions.
One former intelligence officer who oversaw the murder of Jews became the Secretary General of the UN.
Can you name him? No. Because you are an ignorant clown doing an impression of intelligence.
Suffering from dunning kruger syndrome and vastly over estimating your importance. Run along fool.
@@BlueMax109 Listen nazi lover, they lost. They went head to head with the Americans and Germany got its ass kicked. Its air force could not stop bombers ,its army could not stop the US and Germany could not make weapons that could win a war. I dont give a sh!t how many moved to America and worked for the Americans after the war was over. When they were employed by their Father Land they did everything they could to win and came up losers. They lost they were inferior in the greatest test of all...
Also asking someone an off topic question will not do you any favors. You really think asking a dumb off topic question of someone thinking they could not answer would somehow prove you to be correct on the topic at hand? It would not. You were wrong just deal with it. Dont worry though fan boy you can always be the Germans in your video games.
@@BlueMax109 Read the above comments you have not made a single statement that contradicts what I said. Your grasping at straws about who went to work for whom after they lost has no relevance. None. You belief that you can name a former UN post holder has no relevance. So here it is again because I doubt you will catch it. Germany lost, wonder waffen were no good. Losers of war focus on how big the gun was or how fast it flew while adults focus on how many can be made and put into the hands of the fighters. The m4 Sherman and T34 were far superior tanks to any German tank... because they could be built fast in large numbers cheap and sent to war. There is no debate here as the Hawker Tempest was built 10-1 and thats the actual question, is the FW TA 152 better than 10 or 15 tempest. We know the answer already.
Hey its ok to be wrong I wish you were right as you are passionate, but you are young, you will figure it out.
What if ? 😂
At no stage did this video posit a what if scenario
No one cared Villi because jets had already arrived. The P51H and P47N would have given you pause too. Pointless video.
Up to the point when you put up your video with Meteor, P-51H and P-47N pilot perspectives I'll take your 'pointless' assessment with the grain of salt it deserves.
@@bunion8579 I don't need to do that. Greg, at Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles has done the engineering analysis. This is merely clickbait for Wehrmacht Fan Bois.
But they lost the war thankfully all this fascination for the worse regime in history is bizarre.We also get carried away with the German wonder weapons but the allies had theirs. They dropped one on Japan that the Germans were incapable of producing. Computer technology which was for humankind a massive leap forward. The Germans built a lot of crap as well some killed more Germans than the intended targets. Those who argue for German superiority maybe should get their black Hugo Boss clothes out and give in to it.
Yeah, yeah. I get it. The Axis were the bad guys in WWII and any information presented that sheds light on any of their technical achievements is in the small minds of some celebrating an evil ideology. Grow up. All aspects of history should be accessible to everybody if for no other reason than to learn lessons from it.
@@issigonis975 It's clear that they were ahead in many areas but the mad Corporal gave them unlimited funding beginning about 1934. So, it fits. Having said that their wunder waffe were rushed to the battle with many existing teething problems that they didn't have time to fix. I'm sure the TA 52H was formidable in its own right but we had what Greg termed superprops too. He did a really detailed analysis. Gregs Airplanes and Automobiles here on utube.
Who cares about your opinion?
It isn't my opinion, it's the Opinion of two men on opposite sides who both flew the type.
The real question is who give's a fuck about anything YOU have to say. Jog on loser.
U.S,A. is again letting Russia to have a half European countries. Ques whos driving that policy.
Communists (They call themselves the Democrat Party)
You need to stop smoking crack.
😂@@gerarddelmonte8776
who gives a sh!t if you are so worried about it go fight, they will take you. Otherwise keep your mitts off my wallet ...
Germany, France and the UK should be able to handle it. The sugar daddy in the West is out of money chumps.