Author Topic: 190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question  (Read 6298 times)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #30 on: January 21, 2004, 07:01:27 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
Looking into the "canopy" of the F8 I can only find where it was widened to improve forward vision.  The bulged canopy was a late war addition to all FW-190's including the Dora's and the Ta-152.  

 


It was??? The only bulging was vertical. Check Aero Detail #2. On pg 19 there is a photo of yellow 10, a D-9 fitted with a "bulged canopy". The sides are 'flat'. Pg13 has other view angles. Even photos in the book about the NASM's restoration of the F-8 shows no side bulging.

The diagram and armour list comes from a Fw publication, technical description # 284, part of D.(Luft)T.2190 A-8.

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #31 on: January 21, 2004, 07:26:56 PM »
Look at the images above you clearly can tell which is the "bulged" or "blown" canopy.

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #32 on: January 21, 2004, 08:03:58 PM »




images from Fw 190 in Combat by Alfred Price

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #33 on: January 21, 2004, 08:34:35 PM »
To quote the most plagerized information on the web!  Just do a search for FW190 and you will come across several dozen sites which have simply cut and pasted the same info.

This is the standard armour package the ENTIRE F series was given:

"From the beginning, the most serious problem was large air plane weight increases. This came about not only as a result of the additional bombs load, but due to the need to introduce additional armor to protect the plane from ground fire. This armor consisted of plates protecting the fuel tanks, engine and undercarriage firings from below. Previously planned armor plates in the cockpit side walls were abandoned. This decision was made because the worsening overweight condition lead to a marked performance reduction."



And to quote the same information found on about 20 different websites dealing with the F8:

This deals with the canopy modifications:

"In the second half of 1944, a widened rear cockpit canopy was added with the F-8 plane. The purpose of this modification was to improve the pilot's side-forward visibility, important during fighterbomber missions. Armament consisted of two 13 mm MG 131 machine guns mounted in the fuselage and two 20 mm MG 151/20 E cannons in the wings. Most of the early production series F-8 planes had the additional armor used since the F-3 airframes. For weight reduction and improvement in flight characteristics it was not used in later F-8s. These planes had only the standard Fw 180 A-8 armor."

Read it and you will see...

Now as to the Sturmjager Rustsatz's.....

Sturmjager, Sturmbrock, and Ramminjager all refer to 3 different A/C configurations.  I knew the Ramminjager was a different varient however I always assummed the Sturmbrock and the Sturmjager were the R7/R8 Rustsatz's and were flown by select "Sturmgruppe" such as IV / JG3 which was the test unit.  

According to The Luftwaffe profile series #4 FW-190 on pg 29 under the FW-190A8 varients chapter:

"The Fw-190A8/R7, initially designated "Sturmjager" (assault fighter) later recieved the designation A-8/R8.  Fixed Armament for the A8/R8 consisted of two MG151's in the wing roots and two Mk 108's in the outer wings.  The armour of the A-8/R2 was added to the windscreen and triangular side panels of the R7.

     Many of the FW-190A8's flown in the assault fighter role featured welded, supplementary armour plates of 5 to 10 mm thickness on each side of the cockpit.  These are called "Sturmbrocken". "  Rougly translates to "battering rams".  

I know that Maj Dahl's FW-190A8/R7 had additional armour around the entire engine compartment and extra armoured glass.  Hope this clears up some of the confusion.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #34 on: January 21, 2004, 08:41:59 PM »
Nevermind...

Your diagram from Price's book shows exactly what I was saying about the R7/R8 armour and the F8 armour. Picture is worth 1000 words.



Thanks Batz

NOW  Why does the A8 air superiority version flown in a clean configuration stall quicker than the F8 version which even "clean" has the ETC 501 racks and ETC 50 wing hardpoints??

That is assuming HTC modeled a late war production F8 with NO additional armour over the A8.  My original hypothesis still stands about the alierons being out of adjustment and skewing the USAAF data.


Crumpp

Offline GODO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 555
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2004, 01:50:52 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
NOW  Why does the A8 air superiority version flown in a clean configuration stall quicker than the F8 version which even "clean" has the ETC 501 racks and ETC 50 wing hardpoints??


My 190F stalls quicker than 190A8 4x20mm.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2004, 05:10:35 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
And to quote the same information found on about 20 different websites dealing with the F8:

This deals with the canopy modifications:

"In the second half of 1944, a widened rear cockpit canopy was added with the F-8 plane. The purpose of this modification was to improve the pilot's side-forward visibility, important during fighterbomber missions.

Read it and you will see...

 


As they say, a pic is worth a 1000 words. Yellow 10 does not have a widened blown canopy.

A side bulged canopy is like what is seen on the Spit and P-51, known as the Malcolm Hood.

The real live F-8 (W.Nr. 931 884) in the NASM in Washington DC with a blown canopy does not have a widened rear cockpit canopy.

I have gone through the dozen or so of my Fw190/Ta152 books and can find no images with the blown canopy that shows a width increase. Even the specific drawing by A.L. Bentley comparing the non-blown to blown canopy, with sections, shows no widening.


As for the flight of the Fw190, look at the wing twist. In certain flight attitudes the outer wing would stall before the inner wing. Not good. This could happen at as low asin a 2G banking turn. The a/c's departure was always left, no matter if it was in a right or left turn.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2004, 06:51:56 AM »
OK Milo!

Think what you want and type what you think.  Facts are the info I'm putting out is there and in numerous references dealing with the FW-190F series stating specifically that the cockpit was widenend to improve forward and side visibility.

GODO your right, I misread your post.  

Either way the issue was never anything having to do with the F series or the R7/R8.  That has just become an interesting side discussion.  

The most complete flight test data to have survived the war on a late war FW-190A type is the USAAF flight data.  In this test the A8's turning characteristics are specifically mentioned as the SAME characteristics as a FW without properly adjusted alierons.  NONE of the other allied OR axis flight test's note this characteristic.  In fact the RAF flight says "The FW 190's stall is sudden and visicous giving the pilot little to no warning".  It makes no mention of difficulty turning or a nasty vibration combined with easy stalling.

The RAF test pilot even outturns a couple of P51B's.  Below 350 mph IAS he had to struggle to keep from overshooting them in a turn. Keep in mind though he was flying a FW-190A3.

Crumpp

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2004, 08:42:41 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
OK Milo!

Think what you want and type what you think.  Facts are the info I'm putting out is there and in numerous references dealing with the FW-190F series stating specifically that the cockpit was widenend to improve forward and side visibility.



Well all you have produced is some text, from questionable sources > the web(and no links provided), while mine are viewable and touchable. :) You have yet to produce a link or a source that has a viewable canopy that shows a horizontal widening of the canopy.

You have shown confusion on other 'points' of the Fw190.........

"The FW190F8 carried around 895 KG of extra armour and added drag from hardpoints"

The armour added to the F-8 did not weigh 1973lb(895kg). It was ~360kg(793lb).

"In fact 400 kg of weight was saved by removing the outer cannons and ammo."

The MG151/20 only weighed 42.3kg. The ammo DID NOT weigh ~360kg. The MG/FF weigh 36.7kg. In fact, the weight of 150 rds of 20mm MG151/20 ammo is 56kg.
 
Did the above statements come from your web sources?

Someone is having trouble with their Fw190 facts.:eek:

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2004, 09:38:26 AM »
Blown canopy



Standard canopy



The blown canopy is the same width (it has to be to fit in the rails) as the standard.

Neither the cockpit nor the the windscreen were widened in the F8 or in any of the 190s (including the Tanks) to accommodate the new blown (bulged, bubble canopy; which ever you want to call it).

You can clearly see the the Blown canopy in this image



Compared to this one



Later version of the a8, F8 The D9 and Ta152 all had the blown canopy.

Later versions of the F8 had the armor on the side of the cockpit removed. Same with the a8/R8. In fact individaul pilots made modifications to their own aircraft and removed armor and in some cases the mg131s.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2004, 11:06:21 AM »
Batz, nice plexiglass pics.:)

Where are they from, please?

Offline Batz

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
      • http://bellsouthpwp.net/w/o/wotans/4JG53/

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #42 on: January 22, 2004, 11:31:00 AM »
Crump, the data charts that HTC have published of their 190A8 matches exactly the data published in an english translation from the Luftwaffe's 1944 Flight Manual of the 190A8.  The table further up in the thread comes from that manual as well.

I'm pretty sure they used the German data for their plane.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2004, 03:14:37 PM »
Hey MiloMori...


Your right as I can't POST any attachments in this forum!  The BB won't let me.   lol

I thought you might have figured that out since I mentioned it before.


As to the weight of an MG 151...

400 KG for both weapon, fittings, and ammo is probably about right for a 20 mm.  The barrel on an M2 .50 cal alone weighs 50 pounds.  The whole weapon empty weighs around 85 lbs. The ammo is pretty hefty too. Yeah it makes perfect sense that a 20 mm gun, ammo, hopper, feed mechinism,  with firing system weighs 200 kg each.

Crumpp:aok

Offline GODO

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 555
      • http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm
190A8 Tip Stalls....Got a question
« Reply #44 on: January 22, 2004, 03:28:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Batz


It may turn bad, but it is definitively the most beautiful ride.