PDA

View Full Version : Why does the Ta 183 suck?



CastleBravo
12-23-2006, 03:49 PM
Barely 300 km/h for a "high-speed jet" doesn't compute, as far as I'm concerned. Why is the Huckebein so slow? There doesn't seem to be that great advantage in speed reported by German pilots for jets in general in Il-2, but the 183 is by far the worst.

anarchy52
12-23-2006, 03:55 PM
No reason at all, 1C decided that it should suck.

For some strange reason, they decided that Lerche should pawn all.

Completely arbitrary decisions. Ofcourse, try to argue and you'll get a "You is wrong, be sure", and 1000 worshipers of the Church of Holy St. Maddox shouting Blasphemy!

ploughman
12-23-2006, 04:12 PM
? Doesn't suck to bad for me, I've no trouble getting it off the ground even with X-4s, it really doesn't like flaps, and you've got to make sure you trim it properly, and it's no YP-80, but it gets up and flaps around no worries.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y289/mctomney/clivesanta.png
Dum spiro, spero

anarchy52
12-23-2006, 04:17 PM
Originally posted by Ploughman:
? Doesn't suck to bad for me, I've no trouble getting it off the ground even with X-4s, it really doesn't like flaps, and you've got to make sure you trim it properly, and it's no YP-80, but it gets up and flaps around no worries.

It can (barely) take off, therefore it does not suck. I hope you have a bit higher criteria when choosing your date.

Akronnick
12-23-2006, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by anarchy52:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
? Doesn't suck to bad for me, I've no trouble getting it off the ground even with X-4s, it really doesn't like flaps, and you've got to make sure you trim it properly, and it's no YP-80, but it gets up and flaps around no worries.

It can (barely) take off, therefore it does not suck. I hope you have a bit higher criteria when choosing your date. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v644/akronnick/cheese.jpg

Enjoy.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---Loose nut removed from cockpit, ship OK

SeaFireLIV
12-23-2006, 04:38 PM
Originally posted by anarchy52:


It can (barely) take off, therefore it does not suck. I hope you have a bit higher criteria when choosing your date.

And your criteria does nothing either. Tell me, where`s your info that says that the Ta 183 is so good? It never actually flew.


And it`s no good comparing the Lerche as that plane is obvious joke fantasy.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

"If it burns, it is confirmed."

Ivan Lukich Zvyagin

ElAurens
12-23-2006, 04:52 PM
The Ta 183 "sucks" because if it would have been built in this configuration in would have sucked in real life. GET OVER IT or fly one of the uber German jets.

BTW, lots of other players are getting 740~750kph @ sea level.

So I can only surmise that you suck as a pilot.

Be sure.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

_____________________________

http://www.blitzpigs.com/photos/ELsKi.jpg

"To explain the lure of speed you would have to explain human nature" - T.E. Lawrence

PraetorHonoris
12-23-2006, 05:08 PM
As far as I can read A52???s post he did not say it should be ???so good??? (how good?). He just doubts the Ta183 would have been that bad. Implying there is no hard data is incorrect, the laws of aerodynamics were the same back then. Aero engineers could and did calculate performance figures.

Call me whatever you want, I am indeed willing to believe the FW-engineers could design a plane superior to the Me262 and calculate that design at least half correct. They noted the same mistakes in the design we have in game like the TsAGI scientists (bow wave, tail flutter) and changed the design accordingly (cf. Nowarra: Luftr??stung, Vol.2, pp.115-7.)
I would rather like to hear why the hell the FW-engineers were wrong by around 200 km/h concerning top-speed in their calculations. Currently it???s clearly inferior to the Me262 A in every aspect save the armament, if one believes Il2compare. What is so wrong with casting doubts on that? Yaeh??? it never flew.

Just as a sidenote, even optimistic calculations of German engineers concerning the Ar234 and He162 were reached by test flights or surpassed (in case of the 234) , in particular by the allies (Fleicher/Frys: Ar234 Blitz, p.72; Nowarra: Luftr??stung, Vol.1, p.69; cf. Creek/Smith: Volksj??ger, Monogramm Close up 11, pp.26-9).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/6061/untitled1copymd8.jpg

"Misconceptions about the Luftwaffe [...] are, in large part, simply caused by a lack of basic skills of many, who write about the Luftwaffe. For some inexplicable reason, many historians - especially Americans - believe they can write books about the German army or the German air force without knowing German"
Dr. J.S.Corum, LTC USAF, Strategic Studies Institute

Akronnick
12-23-2006, 05:26 PM
Ta-183 != MiG-15

GET OVER IT!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---Loose nut removed from cockpit, ship OK

PraetorHonoris
12-23-2006, 05:30 PM
The MiG is not a copy of the 183 - as you perfectly know, I guess. Does not matter for my concern anyway.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/6061/untitled1copymd8.jpg

"Misconceptions about the Luftwaffe [...] are, in large part, simply caused by a lack of basic skills of many, who write about the Luftwaffe. For some inexplicable reason, many historians - especially Americans - believe they can write books about the German army or the German air force without knowing German"
Dr. J.S.Corum, LTC USAF, Strategic Studies Institute

flox
12-23-2006, 05:32 PM
Why doesn't everybody just calm down? I think he brings up a valid point. I don't have any data on the ta-183 but I flew it for a few minutes online yesterday and I'm surprised with how slow it is too. I just wouldn't think any jet-powered aircraft would have been so slow. Do I think it's wrong? No, I'm just surprised.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

---------------
"Blacker than the blackest black times infinity"

anarchy52
12-23-2006, 05:33 PM
Afraid of the challenge, spit dweeb?

Imagine if blues had a competitive plane. Oh wait, they do - G2 the only one that fits the test data precisely. And called an UFO by spit dweebs.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif))

Go back to your Spits and La-7s, dweeb.

For the less intelectually challenged, my point was that Ta-183 just like Lerche has an arbitrary FM - pulled out of somebody's... hat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

The-Pizza-Man
12-23-2006, 05:42 PM
I've only flown the 183 for a few minutes, but it only seemed slow when it has the X-4s on it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://users.tpg.com.au/rowdie/evasig.jpg

Willey
12-23-2006, 05:53 PM
3 things:

No 950kph as it was calculated
X-4 drag like a chute (R4M also did for a long time, remember the 450kph max 262?!?!?)
Engine overheating all over. With 110% It can go like 820 on the deck, but only for some seconds... In a even shallow climb you have to throttle back to 90% or even more - that kills the whole performance of it.

But there're rumors that MG is working on this issue...

But one thing I'd like to know: Why the hell is it 5,1 tons? I keep getting shot up really badly by AAA guns (basically: 1 shot 1 kill), so it can't be a durable structure like the FWs or P-47... what is it, when a 162 can be under 3t?

CastleBravo
12-24-2006, 06:23 AM
Where does the whole overheating problem even originate? I have read all kinds of bad stuff about jet engines of that time, but nothing in the scale Il-2 depicts it.

HuninMunin
12-24-2006, 06:29 AM
Add the fact that the 183 overheats much quicker then the new Sparrows and Swallow, although it uses the same engine.
May be the fact that the others catch up speed faster and therefor the airflow does a job in cooling them better, but theres a feeling in my stomach that it is more then that.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------------------------------------
....I understand that you understand almost nothing in computer technology(regarding how to get all features working well in one great code and how to get it fully optimized for all aspects of the game and where developers must go for compromisses), because you are speaking bla-bla-bla about things that you don't know. Sorry I don't like to offend you. But it looks like it looks. - Oleg Maddox
------------------------------------------------------------

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/633/sigvp0.jpg

Simon "Hunin" Phoenix
Servant of Wotan and Tyr
True knight of the Endlich-Thread

cawimmer430
12-24-2006, 08:02 AM
Why does the Ta-183 suck?

Maybe because the pilot who flies it sucks. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

-Christian W.

http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/8240/il2sig018ll.jpg

ryankm
12-24-2006, 08:13 AM
The reason people say it should be good is because in the viewobjects they say it is the best plane in this whole expansion.

dogofwar50
12-24-2006, 08:13 AM
The TA-183 is not as bad as the lagg3 RD and once it is off the ground if you keep it level for a while the speed soon picks up even with the missles. Just don't try to turn it like a spit lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gif

anarchy52
12-24-2006, 08:15 AM
Originally posted by cawimmer430:
Why does the Ta-183 suck?

Maybe because the pilot who flies it sucks. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

In this particular case, no.