TA-154-A1 "interceptor" is useless?

[NURFER 98]

I really wish I hadn't bought this. I'm happy to support the War Thunder contributor/creator, but whats the point of an interceptor that cant really get higher than fighters? I have to climb to the side of map and use all the power this plane can muster to get to 4000m only to find enemy fighters all higher than that and bombers gone back to base. Has anyone had success with this plane?

Edited May 7, 2022 by NURFER

[NoodleCup31 8,824]

It has never been that good.

The armament is great, but the 154 has bad climbrate, is fragile and is pretty slow on top.

You have some decent manouverability for a few turns but that's it.

Edited May 7, 2022 by NoodleCup31

[Kanyiko 8,568]

1 hour ago, NURFER said:

I really wish I hadn't bought this. I'm happy to support the War Thunder contributor/creator, but whats the point of an interceptor that cant really get higher than fighters? I have to climb to the side of map and use all the power this plane can muster to get to 4000m only to find enemy fighters all higher than that and bombers gone back to base. Has anyone had success with this plane?

 

The main thing to remember is, that an interceptor is not the same as a fighter.  World War II interceptors were, classically, twin-engined, two-seater aircraft, specifically tasked with destroying bombers and reconnaissance aircraft.  While a fighter was typically a light, single-engined aircraft (although twin-engined fighters also existed), interceptors were specifically conceived as aircraft capable of operating in poor meteorological circumstances or under poor visibility, under which single-engined aircraft were not capable of operating.  As such, they carried a radar system capable of guiding them into their target at short range, which was complicated enough at this early stage that it required a second crewman tasked with operating it.

 

As interceptors typically operated under circumstances where fighters could not operate, they could sacrifice performance in favor of endurance.  As their targets would typically be slower, heavier bombers, they usually carried heavier and slower-firing guns with a much heavier impact - ideal for destroying larger bombers, but not for countering single-engined fighters.

 

Anyway, that said, the key to using the Ta 154 succesfully - and that counts for all twin-engined interceptors, such as the Bf 110, Me 410, Mosquito, Ki-45, Ki-83, Ki-102, Ki-108, P-61 et all - is to avoid using it in dogfights.  They are not able to keep their energy in turn fights, and will rapidly lose speed.  Use them primarily against slower and less nimble aircraft, such as bombers, attackers and other interceptors, but try to avoid fighters at any cost.  Usually, their heavy armament also makes them ideal as attackers - the 20- and 30-mms on the Ta-154 can easily rip light pillboxes, and light and medium tanks apart.

Edited May 7, 2022 by Kanyiko

[NoodleCup31 8,824]

15 minutes ago, Kanyiko said:

the 20- and 30-mms on the Ta-154 can easily rip light pillboxes, and light and medium tanks apart.

They can't.

The MK 108 has a glorious 5mm of pen and the MG 151 takes half its ammo for a single pillbox

[Kanyiko 8,568]

7 minutes ago, NoodleCup31 said:

They can't.

The MK 108 has a glorious 5mm of pen and the MG 151 takes half its ammo for a single pillbox

 

... somebody needs to tell my 108s and 151s then. >.>

[BlackberryAvar 774]

1 hour ago, Kanyiko said:

Anyway, that said, the key to using the Ta 154 succesfully - and that counts for all twin-engined interceptors, such as the Bf 110, Me 410, Mosquito, Ki-45, Ki-83, Ki-102, Ki-108, P-61 et all - is to avoid using it in dogfights.  They are not able to keep their energy in turn fights, and will rapidly lose speed.  Use them primarily against slower and less nimble aircraft, such as bombers, attackers and other interceptors, but try to avoid fighters at any cost.  Usually, their heavy armament also makes them ideal as attackers - the 20- and 30-mms on the Ta-154 can easily rip light pillboxes, and light and medium tanks apart.

 

You are missing the point with a lot of these aircraft. The P-61 is obnoxious for other fighters to counter because it's fast and has a good back gun. The Ki-45 and Ki-102 turn decently well at low speed, have decent energy retention, and good climbrates combined with an airspawn. 

 

You should at least attempt to deal with fighters in your interceptor. If nothing else, drag the fighters to your team, occupy them, force them down with your initial altitude advantage.

 

I am happy you bought the Ta 154 instead of that other premium. However, if you wanted a good premium interceptor you should've gotten the XP-50.

 

(can't believe I'm recommending that thing)

[NURFER 98]

1 hour ago, Kanyiko said:

World War II interceptors were, classically, twin-engined, two-seater aircraft, specifically tasked with destroying bombers and reconnaissance aircraft. 

sure... like a p-38? they seem 200% more effective at everything. Even comparing it other interceptors, the ta-154 sucks for an interceptor. I guess I can hit ground targets and ambush low flying strike aircraft.
(i also have the xp-50.. it intercepts!!!!)

Edited May 7, 2022 by NURFER

[BlackberryAvar 774]

Compared to the P-38J at 4.3 the Ta 154 has better roll rate, but not much else.

 

I play my weak airspawned planes by sideclimbing, avoiding any P-38s or XP-50s, and then turning in so I can attack in coordination with my team. Good players know these planes are bad and go after the more dangerous teammates first. Bad players go headon and these heavies are usually pretty good at dealing with that.

 

It's all about being as un-obvious as possible.

[Kanyiko 8,568]

1 hour ago, NoodleCup31 said:

They can't.

The MK 108 has a glorious 5mm of pen and the MG 151 takes half its ammo for a single pillbox

 

Tried it again in the test flight, the Ta 154 can punch through the T-34's roof.  It does take a bit of precision aiming though.

 

28 minutes ago, NURFER said:

sure... like a p-38? they seem 200% more effective at everything. Even comparing it other interceptors, the ta-154 sucks for an interceptor. I guess I can hit ground targets and ambush low flying strike aircraft.
(i also have the xp-50.. it intercepts!!!!)

 

The P-38 is a bit of an exception to the recipe, since from inception it was not intended as an all-weather interceptor (even though, eventually, one was made out of it - the P-38M Night Lightning); as a day fighter, it did not drag along all of the extra weight such as a second crewman, electronics, a drag-inducing radar, etc.  Early versions did suffer a poor roll rate, though the boosted ailerons of later versions somewhat rectified this issue.  However, it still carried fuel tanks in its wings, which meant that there was some momentum to overcome in rolling the aircraft - unlike the Ta 154, which carried all of its fuel in its fuselage and was easier to roll as a result.

 

Unlike the P-38 or most of its contempories, the Ta 154 had a fully pressurised cockpit, which added considerable weight to the design, and adversely impacted its handling in all other axis.  Luckily, though, the in-game Ta 154 does not suffer its real-life counterpart's main drawback, namely, the issues with its glued wooden airframe (the glue used was a replacement which was corrosive, and which actually weakened the aircraft structure after a while - this was the main reason development of the Ta 154 was ultimately abandoned.)

[Ghostmaxi 873]

21 hours ago, Kanyiko said:

 

Tried it again in the test flight, the Ta 154 can punch through the T-34's roof.  It does take a bit of precision aiming though

Not exactly true, it can indeet slip through the a little bit open cooling grill on the engine deck, but it cant penetrate the roof. But also they modeled the roof wrong anyway, the visible model shows the cooling grill over the transmition as wide open (as it should be) but the armor model is completly closed.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,603]

On 07/05/2022 at 17:08, NoodleCup31 said:

It has never been that good.

The armament is great, but the 154 has bad climbrate, is fragile and is pretty slow on top.

You have some decent manouverability for a few turns but that's it.

 

The Ta 154 is anything but fragile.

 

The flight performance isn't as bad as you make it sound, either.

 

 

[Grand_Prix 62]

Interesting heavy fighter duel between the Ta 154 and P-61:

 

 

 It seems like the Ta 154 was gaining as both aircraft increased speed, but as the fight got slower the P-61 eventually got behind the Ta 154.  So perhaps if the Ta 154 kept the fight at high speed, and took advantage of its roll rate, it could have ended differently.  I don't know for sure, for two reasons:  Firstly, I don't have a 154, still waiting for it to show up in the warbonds shop.     Secondly, heavy fighter dogfights are quite rare.

 

It would be fascinating if someone did an analysis of all of the twin engine fighters in the game to see how they stack up against each other.  Could see some interesting surprises.

Edited May 11, 2022 by Grand_Prix

[GTP_Paulie@psn 8]

A friend recommended I post this issue on the forums, and rather than create a whole new thread, this topic seems almost relevant. The Ta 154 has a major flight model bug that I know didn't exist in test flights probably a year ago. Now please note, if you use the mouse aim control system, you will never notice this bug as the game will automatically compensate by applying the elevator for you. I however, fly joystick. When the aircraft approaches 500km/hr IAS it will start nosing down quite severely all on its own. It basically makes it unplayable as lining up shots at high speeds becomes impossible when the plane is constantly pulling you way off target. I have linked below a YouTube video of the issue happening. I do have a support ticket open but so far haven't gotten anywhere with it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbG8oxKr0qI

[DocProfit 2,663]

Not useless.

 

It gets high enough to smack a bomber early, then dive on lower fighters.

 

Don't pick fights with single engine planes at/above your alt.

[GTP_Paulie@psn 8]

I have pasted a link below of the bug report relating to the flight model problem that nobody on mouse aim will experience. Any help in additional replies from people might help Gaijin to see it and consider fixing it.

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/tkk1iWX28acH

[Metrallaroja 1,326]

3 hours ago, GTP_Paulie@psn said:

I have pasted a link below of the bug report relating to the flight model problem that nobody on mouse aim will experience. Any help in additional replies from people might help Gaijin to see it and consider fixing it.

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/tkk1iWX28acH

In a dive you can increase your trim to around -3% to 3% and this will not happen.

[Metrallaroja 1,326]

I think it is an autotrim problem so I will check, I recommend you to use full in the meanwhile.

[Metrallaroja 1,326]

7 hours ago, GTP_Paulie@psn said:

I have pasted a link below of the bug report relating to the flight model problem that nobody on mouse aim will experience. Any help in additional replies from people might help Gaijin to see it and consider fixing it.

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/tkk1iWX28acH

Just forwarded it to developers 

[Grand_Prix 62]

9 hours ago, Metrallaroja said:

I think it is an autotrim problem so I will check, I recommend you to use full in the meanwhile.

 

I figured it was something like that.  I was able to replicate this issue by using Realistic Controls/mouse joystick in level flight at 500km/h.  Sure enough, it pitches down by itself at that speed.

[GTP_Paulie@psn 8]

11 hours ago, Metrallaroja said:

Just forwarded it to developers 

 

Thanks for your help, I really do appreciate it. I've never really toyed with using trim myself, is it possible to only have rudder and elevator trim on manual while everything else like engine control etc is still on auto? Ultimately it might be extra work load that still leaves the plane pretty hard to fly, us joystick pilots are already at a large accuracy disadvantage to mouse aim players in rb. I may just have to wait and see if the devs can fix it for us.

[Metrallaroja 1,326]

3 hours ago, GTP_Paulie@psn said:

 

Thanks for your help, I really do appreciate it. I've never really toyed with using trim myself, is it possible to only have rudder and elevator trim on manual while everything else like engine control etc is still on auto? Ultimately it might be extra work load that still leaves the plane pretty hard to fly, us joystick pilots are already at a large accuracy disadvantage to mouse aim players in rb. I may just have to wait and see if the devs can fix it for us.

Engine control is always automated unless you disable it.

Trimming isnt much of an extra load, you get used to it and it has some advantages like avoiding compression if you know how to use it. You can pull much harder in full than in mouse.

[GTP_Paulie@psn 8]

1 hour ago, Metrallaroja said:

Engine control is always automated unless you disable it.

Trimming isnt much of an extra load, you get used to it and it has some advantages like avoiding compression if you know how to use it. You can pull much harder in full than in mouse.

 

That comes from Instructor being turned off, but then you need to be careful not to wing stall.

[Metrallaroja 1,326]

3 hours ago, GTP_Paulie@psn said:

 

That comes from Instructor being turned off, but then you need to be careful not to wing stall.

Well what I say about trimming to pull more is with autotrim turned off.

With this at high speeds you can pull as much as you want until you break your wings.

You will break your wings before you stall at high speeds (+700kph).

[GTP_Paulie@psn 8]

11 hours ago, Metrallaroja said:

Well what I say about trimming to pull more is with autotrim turned off.

With this at high speeds you can pull as much as you want until you break your wings.

You will break your wings before you stall at high speeds (+700kph).

 

I will investigate the use of this at some point. Could also make climbing a bit easier if I can set trim to make the aircraft hold the angle I want.

[GTP_Paulie@psn 8]

On 25/03/2023 at 04:59, Metrallaroja said:

Just forwarded it to developers 

 

They just replied and labelled it Not a Bug. I'm guessing that means they are going to do nothing to fix it. Definitely never going to buy another premium when they sell faulty products and do nothing about it.