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.

@normvw4053

10 күн бұрын

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.

@AmericasChoice

9 күн бұрын

@@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.

@user-xd6dx3ws8h

8 күн бұрын

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

@AmericasChoice

8 күн бұрын

@@user-xd6dx3ws8h 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.

@hotlanta35

3 сағат бұрын

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).

@BlueMax109

10 күн бұрын

I've just ordered that book two days ago after flying this plane in the simulator. Can't wait to read it.

... sehr gutes Video ! Willi Reschke said: ...' the Ta 152 H was my life insurance... she was the best piston engine Fighter of WW 2...'

Wow. Great research, wonderful narration and amazing production values!! Awesome!!

Brilliant thank you very much enjoyed that

The narrator sounds like Richard Burton, which is great thing. Cymru am byth!

@Roverswelsh

11 күн бұрын

No one would believe that in the last years of the Second World War…………

@guaporeturns9472

10 күн бұрын

Wales

@Roverswelsh

10 күн бұрын

No one would believe in the last years of World War Two…….

@marekryszard

8 күн бұрын

The narrator is a bot.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

@@marekryszard AI voice. Quicker to produce and higher quality than my own.

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

Great video

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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

Milch also had personal vendettas with Willy Messerschmitt that hampered the development of the 262

@blank557

6 күн бұрын

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.

@BlueMax109

6 күн бұрын

@@blank557 Galland told Goering to stop producing the 109 and concentrate all fighter production on the 190 but he was ignored.

@user-bk6gc7sl9z

18 сағат бұрын

@@blank557 barn doors willy messerschmitt in a raid bunker sais.

I always heard of it called the FW long nose and that it covered the ME 262s airfields. Good video.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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.

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

@AmericasChoice

9 күн бұрын

The Tempest proved itself in combat.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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.

@AmericasChoice

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

@AmericasChoice

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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 Germans were always ein wunder waffe away from victory...

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

Just like the Ukrainians. Waiting on their Wunderwaffe F16's right now.

TY 🙏🙏

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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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.

@AmericasChoice

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

​@@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.

@AmericasChoice

8 күн бұрын

@@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

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

​@@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.

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

Kurt Tank = Ledgend

With the Ta 152 in the game, is there any excuse not to do the Comet next?

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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.

How come American carriers didn't have armored decks like the British carriers??

@TP-ie3hj

3 күн бұрын

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.

If grasshoppers carried 45s, birds wouldn't mess with them.

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.

@BlueMax109

6 күн бұрын

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.

@csjrogerson2377

6 күн бұрын

@@BlueMax109 On every Allied plane!!!!

@BlueMax109

5 күн бұрын

@@csjrogerson2377 Do you play the game? More than welcome to take the stick in coop if you feel you can do better

Ju88 engine

No doubt , a good fighter.. but not the best.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

Nobody agrees on what is the best fighter. Even amongst their own comrades.

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?

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

Ding ding ding. Most people don't know about Operation Paperclip. Or the fact that the CIA was born out of 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.

@BlueMax109

Күн бұрын

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.

dont you have a real voice?????

@BlueMax109

18 сағат бұрын

I have other videos with my voice. I'm using AI because it's easier and faster to produce and higher quality audio.

@kcstafford2784

16 сағат бұрын

@@BlueMax109 audio quality????sounds lame????you do good work but AI and background music will not please the older crowd..

@BlueMax109

15 сағат бұрын

@@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 KZread's algorithm.

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.

@BlueMax109

3 күн бұрын

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.

@TP-ie3hj

Күн бұрын

@@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 ..

@BlueMax109

Күн бұрын

@@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.

@TP-ie3hj

Күн бұрын

@@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.

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….

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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.

@tackle47

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

@tackle47

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

@@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.

What if ? 😂

@BlueMax109

8 күн бұрын

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.

@bunion8579

9 күн бұрын

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.

@scottw5315

9 күн бұрын

@@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.

@issigonis975

9 күн бұрын

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.

@bunion8579

9 күн бұрын

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.

@scottw5315

9 күн бұрын

@@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.

I’m only a woman taught in defeated countries over 40 years, But in evolution, what works is absorbed and adopted. Unconditional surrender was agreed to be a war crime after Geneva. Instead of the great Marshal plan, and thus coming from pacifist btw, should have allied with former enemies to help arm and fight the vastly longer more expensive Cold War. My husband was military intelligence (yes oxymoron I’ve heard) and published historian. If we’d supported their ‘counter’ movements, Hitler survived 13? military and civilian assassination attempts? ‘We’ (none of my 5 ancestries spoke English) would not have lost Eastern Europe and China to communism and new enemies. He’s agonizingly logical at times.😡😍♥️

@Ettrick8

8 күн бұрын

Or perhaps not started the war in the first place

U.S,A. is again letting Russia to have a half European countries. Ques whos driving that policy.

@SoloRenegade

10 күн бұрын

Communists (They call themselves the Democrat Party)

@gerarddelmonte8776

9 күн бұрын

You need to stop smoking crack.

@mikexf1647

5 күн бұрын

😂​@@gerarddelmonte8776

@TP-ie3hj

3 күн бұрын

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 ...