Re: Ta-183

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Pugo3

I would add that a distinction should be made between conceptual aircraft put forth by designers and those designs that had reached an advanced level of completion, especially having accomplished detailed manufacturing drawings

The problem is that the Ta-183 only made it to wind tunnel models. The level of design capability at the time was such that calculations or wind tunnel models were insufficient to determine a plane's real capabilities. Without at least a static, or better yet, a flying, prototype, we can never be sure what the Ta-183's performance actually would have been.

My opinion is swapping engines to get improved performance isn't unreasonable, but assuming some miracle in materials engineering to fix the tail problem is. So, +1 on uprated engine, -1 on lighter airframe.

Beyond that, what's the Ta-183's role in the game? The various "1946" swept wing Luftwaffe fighters are objectively better than any other fighters in the game. The Ta-183 has vastly superior diving speed, and holds its own in terms of maneuverability, straight line speed and firepower compared to any allied jet.

Making a plane that's already very impressive into one that utterly dominates its opposition makes for a boring game. Offline, it's fun to fly such planes when you "just want to kill something," but it gets old after a while. Online, you'll either have everyone flying the Ta-183 or else it will be banned in order to preserve balance.

As a mod, where an uprated Ta-183 can fly against the MiG-15 and the F-86, it would be a competitive design.

[Furio]

Sometimes we are real rivet-counters…

Don’t get me wrong: I agree with Pursuivant, but understand Pugo. The plane is available, and requires just tweaking weight (down) and thrust (up). Perhaps it’s not too complicated… If so, the solution could be to have both types: a Ta183A (as it is) and a Ta183B (uprated). Then players and servers will have an option… And “option” is a magic word!

[RPS69]

Except on the part of the wind tunnel argument, I agree on Pursuivant general comment.

I have seen these same wind tunnel argument against pilot tests with prototypes. German pilot tests could be biassed, and german wind tunnels were too bad to get good results...

It is a what if plane, and it could have been implemented with a less pricky orientation. Other what if's have been less pricky implemented, that is the real request. If it implies changing two parameters it is not that much work. Also... they could pork the other protoype and just scratch both planes, since nobody will care about them anyway.

Some people like to fly what if's, korean war, bi-planes, or whatever their tastes should be. There is no need to jump on any of them.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by RPS69

Except on the part of the wind tunnel argument...

[.]German wind tunnels were too bad to get good results...[.]

You're either from another timeline - or clueless beyond belief.

[RPS69]

Originally Posted by swiss

You're either from another timeline - or clueless beyond belief.

No, you just didn't get what I was talking about.