- At somepoint (i think it was beween A2 / A3 variant) they moved the cockpit backwards some15cm (6") this resolved the extreme cockpit temperatures (together with t other things like t 10 blade spinner etc, but that’s allready mentioned)
wikipedia is where i’ve found this btw.- And for the Ta152 (i love that one), there’s one survivor of it in t u.s.a. (texas?, i think) greetings stano666
Only one example of any of the Ta 152 aircraft is known to exist, a long-winged Ta 152 H-1 of the former Luftwaffe Wilde Sau fighter wing, JG 301, at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C., which is awaiting restoration. This aircraft is in reality a Ta 152H-0, and its Werknummer is open to debate, but it could either be 150020 or 150003 which is sometimes cited.
Ah, yes … the NASM Ta152. This aircraft, though awaiting complete restoration, has a wooden tail which was restored back in about 1999. There are only two 152s documented to have had the experimental wooden tails and they were 150003 (also tested a steel wing) and 150010. Delivery codes were CW+CC and CW+CJ respectively (150020 was most likely CW+CT). Careful examination of the left side in post war pics of the surviving 152 at Wright Field (with the British fin flash, incorrectly applied swastica and FE-112 on the fin) will show a green 4 (either original or refreshed but not likely post war originated - its not an American font - lol) right behind an overpainted J* as in CW+CJ (am I really the only one who can see this?). So, with the wooden tail that clinches it for me as the aircraft tag is long gone. I’d like to know who was behind the 150020 ID, I’d like to find out what pushes their conclusion that direction.
*Sometime after these shots were taken at Wright Field the metal portion of the airframe was stripped and repainted with the awful light gray/dark gray paint scheme we have today so we have no markings left to find.
PS. After posting the above my head started hurting … I wound up going through some archived email stuff from NASM (Tom Dietz - great guy) from around 2001 in which he was adamant a tag on a “radio” rack in the aft fuselage conclusively ID’d the plane as 020 and the delivery code (consequently) as CW+CT despite what might appear in photos. I cannot believe I forgot that. I’d like to see both the tag and the structure it’s mounted on. I recall there was equal skepticism on both sides about each other’s “evidence”. (The “radio rack” would only have a tag if it was removable -like all other removable parts- as it would otherwise be covered by the -lost- aircraft tag.)
Now, concerning the moon landings …
lol
Tanks for this 
Nasm has a wicked collection -just to name some: FW Ta152, FW 190D, BV 155, AR 234, the Shinden (push-pull), i wonder if they have Do335 too? i’ll look straight away And the Ta152 they have, is a FW Ta152 h-1 began as a pre-production h-0 model right? I don’t care that much btw (well not yet), it’s just nice to know that (allmost) original examples of rare luftwaffe planes still exists, it’s not an easy task to keep planes in good order especially when things like blueprints, toolings etc. is virtually non-existent.
- I’ll have to practice my walk on water skills some more (the first step goes well so far, but from there on i sink) Groningen - Washington is only some 1000 KM’s apart. Greetings stano666
The cockpit was moved rearwards when the BMW 801 replaced the BMW 139.
Doing so achieved two things: it answered the center of gravity issue occasioned by the use of the heavier BMW801 motor. It also solved the issue of engine heat and exhaust gasses penetrating the cockpit via the firewall inlet points for the gauge and engine controls.
As a result, the FW190 V 4 prototype was scrapped uncompleted, and both the V5k and V5g
prototypes were completed using the BMW801 engine, with the “k” -“kleiner” distinguishing the smaller wing, and the “g” -“grosser” distinguishing the larger wing. The “k” wing granted much more manoeuverability and speed, at the cost of higher landing speed and a more vicious stall characteristic, whereas the “g” wing cost only 6 mph in top speed, was far more benign in the stall, and gave a much easier to manage landing. Hence the “g” wing became that adopted for mass production. The “g” wing does not change much until the A6 model of FW190, wherein several ribs were removed as being unnecessary.
Much later, the “g” wing as employed in the A6 becomes the basis for both the wing of the Ta152 C and the Ta153, via various developments through the FW190B and other rebuilt A1 and A2 series factory prototypes. William Green “Warplanes of the Third Reich” is the source for this. The section on the FW190 family is, to say the least, extensive and damned-near exhaustive.
The surviving Ta152 is at the Paul Garber Facility of NASM at Silver Hills, Maryland, USA.
I do not know if the Ta152H1 once possessed by the USSR still exists.
The one example of Ta152H-ao that remained in Europe, allegedly in the care of the RAF via RAE Farnborough disappeared from sight years ago, as far as I am aware.
Respectful Regards, Uyraell.
Nice thread! Fw-190 was a great plane!
Tanks for the “heads up” on FW 190 & Ta152, I’m not a anceclopedia on the subjects(or ANY, except forgetting i’m good in that, and getting better each year:mrgreen:) And i just started pickung up on a old hobby: biulding modelplanes of t luftwaffe. p.s. Ta 153 ? didn’t know it excisted, lol, another variant of wich i’m going to have to built a model of (in 1:72), love to know more bout it, i’ll wiki that one in a minute
Greetings stano666
Greetings, stano666.
The Ta153 was, in essence, an out growth/fusion of both the FW190 B and FW190C series protoypes. In fact iIrc, the first and second airframes designated as Ta153 were rebuilt from both B & C series prototype airframes. The third Ta153 airframe was a melange of components from both an A2 series factory prototype and a D-Ao frame.
No “true” Ta153 was ever constructed, and all three airframes that carried the Ta153 designation were rebuilds.
However: as the Ta153 was a yet further departure from commonality with the FW190 series in terms of its’ components (it was, iIrc, only 42% component-common as opposed to the D series being 72% and the Ta152 family being 65%+) the RLM forbade Tank to do any further developmental work on the Ta153, although elements of the Ta153 program were retroactively applied to both the Ta152C and Ta152E as “incremental developmental improvements” to quote FW documents of the time, as cited by Wm Green.
Edit: There is a surviving Do335 at NASM Paul Garber Facility Silver Hills Maryland, USA. From memory, it is the Do335 V13, aka Do335 B2 Ao. This aircraft is unique for several reasons, the most obvious being the 30mm cannon installation in the leading edge of each wing. This airframe is the ONLY known survivor so fitted.
The British, in their usual fashion, scrapped the remains of their two Do 335’s, one of which had been crashed by a French “test-pilot” (memory says his name was Degallier) newly arrived from France, having, with the usual French suavity and aplombe in these matters, freshly crashed the last remaining of 3 Do335s in French possession. An (circa) early 1980’s television interview featuring Captain Eric “Winkle” Brown, who flew most if not all German aircraft in British possession post-war is the source for this information.
Respectful Regards, Uyraell.
Actually, the NASM 335 is Do335A-0 W.Nr. 240102 VG+PH (it’s the second A-0) . It has the wings from an A-1 W.Nr. 140161
Trivia: The rear propeller has a 3 inch smaller diameter than the front’s because it is spinning in air accelerated by the front prop and therefore has higher tip speeds for the same rpm. Also, the maximum single engine speed on the front engine is about 300mph, on the rear engine it’s about 348mph.
A bit of a shame realy, France & G.B. both had lots of luftwaffe planes (warprices) too (just as U.S., -and ofcourse USSR but they’ve done things “different” more on that later-) t U.S. still have lots of luftwaffe planes in (allmost) flying condition, they have some nice prototypes in museums (Sack AS for instance or Go 229, both not in flying condition but both fairly original as i know it) They like to show 'm too, some in permanent,or some in museum “basements” waiting to come out (if the web is truthfull, wich i think it is -in this case atleast, lol-) France and U.K. on the other hand seem to have “lost” most/much of their warprices (the most interesting for my that is -sob,sob i cry’s softly-) for some reason. Maybe the need to use theirs, because (especially in France and mainland Europe) there wasn’t much left after t war, so they used all flying material they could get there hands on. That accident story kinda suggests this. Maybe France & G.B. where so fat up with the war that they destroyed (or neglected) much of it…, -this seems highly unlikely btw-, could be coincidence too, i don’t know?
Fact is: that Europe hasn’t got as much luftwaffe planes as the U.S.A., atleast not the ones mentioned, more normal models like Bf109’s, Fi stork, Ju52 are still around here -some in flying condition- Germany’s museums have much interesting bits & pieces, probably tons of bleu prints etc. too. But the more rare planes (He219, Fw ta152 for example) aren’t around, prototype’s get some exposure occasionally but these are remade, non originals (still great to watch btw) Even the stuka of wich 6500 where made isn’t been shown in German museum (not that i know of), they are rebuilding one (not sure when it’s ready) from various downed a.c. and loose material -i hope it’ll fly again-
What the Soviets did whit their warprices? I haven’t got a clue, the “old” USSR did everything out of site, they should have got some wicked material, i’ve seen some stuff from USSR archives (on t.v.) but complete planes? The Rusian tank museum (Kublinka ?) has a lot (tanks that is) but taking pictures isn’t allowed 
I hope they’ve got some luftwaffe (flying) material somewhere, and that they dare to show them.
In the end i’m very glad the U.S. has original luftwaffe stuff (if i must believe television, americans do horrifying things with their oldtimers, -no offence meanthere!!!- but discoverychannel shows a lot of “improvement” of old cars, wich -i would!!!- classify as rape, but i’m a bit of an “oddy”) I’ll certainly look at them when they come to Europe again. In the eighty’s i missed the chance, a few planes where restored and put in “showcases” in Germany back then. I think it’s time to restore them once more -LOL-.
In a few days capt. Browns book (wings of the luftwaffe) wil arive, i’ll be stilling my hunger for luftwaffe planes with that for sometime :), Green’s book probably will follow later.
I tank & greet y’all stano666 ps i hope i’m not being to vaguely, i ment to be infotaining.
btw i stumbled upon a nice tschegic site : Detail Scale Aircraft Drawings
Sadly i can’t give a link, but it had (see trough) drawings of the ta153, FW190 a&d, avia 99’s, (a.o) The guy looked for people willing to sale his booklets of the drawings (wich i found good-looking) in the U.S, i couldn’t find prices tho. There seems to be more sites called: Detail Scale Aircraft Drawings , i’ll TRY to “refind” the site to give more detail.
Greetings stano6 6
Nice thread,thanks for all the info and pictures. Regarding “NOS”, NOS comes from the US company named Nitrous Oxide Systems. Nitrous oxide does not cause any corrosion,all it does is release more oxygen into the fuel air mix,since this alters the air fuel ratio failure can happen due to detonation. Water methanol injection can cause steam erosion of internal engine parts if used a lot. Regarding what the Soviets did with captured equipment,they had a policy of keeping all weapons ready to be used in case of war and that includes all captured equipment. So those tanks in the Russian museums are ready to run. I would guess they did the same with aircraft although much of what they captured was then later sold or given to other countries they wished to help.