Author Topic: 190A5 deck speed (Read 4699 times)

Wotan · « **Reply #30 on:** June 14, 2004, 10:28:00 PM »

GM1 was not serialized on the a8.

Do you know how high 8000m is? Below that GM1 could not be run.

Who cares if the A8 can climb 500fpm above 26k with GM1 or gain an extra 27 mph?

Look at the AH1 A8 chart. Above 26k feet it climbs well under 1000fpm... Even with the 27 mph extra it still be below 350mph. Hell the a8 could not even make a flat turn at that alt with out losing altitude.

Who are going to fight at 30000ft? At that alt all ami planes will still perform better, even the AH spit reaches best alt at 26500ft abd would climb twice as good and be at least 50 mph faster...

"Hi alt cap" geesh.........

Even in events you dont fight that high.

Crumpp · « **Reply #31 on:** June 14, 2004, 10:48:31 PM »

Wotan,

I don't think anyone is disputing the usefullness of GM-1. What would be useful is the option to dump the 115 liter auxiliary tank and save the 100 kg of weight.

Facts are that GM-1 WAS serialized for production in the 190A8 and it WAS available for the Geschwader maintenance to install in place of the Auxiliary or vise versa.

Crumpp

Crumpp · « **Reply #32 on:** June 14, 2004, 11:14:32 PM »

Here are some sites about the FW-190A8's GM-1.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/1997/07/stuff_eng_detail_fw190a.htm

or

http://www.vectorsite.net/avfw190.html

==============================================

The next subvariant, the "FW-190A-8", turned out to be the most heavily produced of all FW-190 subvariants, with over 1,300 built. It was essentially an A-7 with the option for either GM-1 nitrous-oxide engine boost for high-altitude operation, or an additional internal fuel tank, as well as many detail improvements.

==============================================

Crumpp

GODO · « **Reply #33 on:** June 15, 2004, 03:42:32 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wotan
Look at the AH1 A8 chart. Above 26k feet it climbs well under 1000fpm... Even with the 27 mph extra it still be below 350mph.

190A8 GM-1 performance curve

I read 395 mph, 1800 fpm with GM-1 at 26k (1300 fpm, 380 mph without GM-1). May be this graph is also based on overoptimistic calculations ...

Vermillion · « **Reply #34 on:** June 15, 2004, 07:00:21 AM »

Wotan, does it ever change?

Its funny to see all these charts floated around in forums, that are just copies of the scan I made several years ago, for these very same types of discussions. LOL!

Crumpp · « **Reply #35 on:** June 15, 2004, 07:11:00 AM »

So your the originator of all this data?

Crumpp

Vermillion · « **Reply #36 on:** June 15, 2004, 07:20:54 AM »

I'm just the one that scanned it, and posted it here on the BBS many years ago. Its from an english translation of the original Focke-Wulf manual, purchased by Gatt and Funked who shared it with me. I keep it and many other interesting Fw-190 documents on my webspace, and every so often I post the address for people to have access to it.

The original scan in high detail is at http://www.vermin.net/fw190/190-2.jpg

Crumpp · « **Reply #37 on:** June 15, 2004, 07:48:51 AM »

Yeah I got a FW-190A8 Flight Manual. You can purchase them from:

http://www.luftfahrt-archiv-hafner.de/

Crumpp

MiloMorai · « **Reply #38 on:** June 15, 2004, 09:04:04 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vermillion
Wotan, does it ever change?

Its funny to see all these charts floated around in forums, that are just copies of the scan I made several years ago, for these very same types of discussions. LOL!

That data, in English, has been around since 1974(30 years ago), at least. First seen in the Fw190A-8 Handbook(D.(Luft)T.2190 A-8) ISBN 0-88992-000-1 published by Valkyrie Publications

Crumpp · « **Reply #39 on:** June 15, 2004, 09:43:02 AM »

Yeah I guess it's been around since 25-10-44.

Crumpp

MiloMorai · « **Reply #40 on:** June 15, 2004, 10:19:01 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Crumpp
Yeah I guess it's been around since 25-10-44.

Crumpp

Ah Crumpp, but not in English and readily available to the masses.

Crumpp · « **Reply #41 on:** June 15, 2004, 10:24:43 AM »

Yeah I know.... Just jerkin your spitdriver chain.

~~Crumpp~~

MiloMorai · « **Reply #42 on:** June 15, 2004, 10:39:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Crumpp

Yeah I know.... Just jerkin your spitdriver chain.

~~Crumpp~~

Since when does an Anton or a Dora look like a Spit? Kurt's a/c, no matter what WW2 sim, are my preferred rides. Tempest and F4U being the other rides. Definately NO Messicraps or the other Yank crud.

Wotan · « **Reply #43 on:** June 15, 2004, 10:49:13 AM »

See what you guys did, brought Verm out of the woodwork, you better quit now before Funked gets here....

niklas · « **Reply #44 on:** June 15, 2004, 10:53:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Pyro
But if I'm going to take the RLM data as the basis of the model, then I'm going to work with all of the RLM data and not just a single data point. Much of the RLM data, particularly in climbing, is inferior to the current AH model.

Actually this data sheet comes right out of the department of flightmechanics from Focke Wulf rather than the RLM. It´s data is somewhat based on flight tests, especially the drag influences of bombs etc (F-8 chart)

Those documents were used for combat plannings, thus the fuel consumption tables for example have 10-15% safety factor. The same probably with the climb rates, and maybe also speed tables. To calculale the range for a combat sortie you better go with conservative speed assumption if you want to get the plane back even under weired situation which could reduce range(wind, icing etc.). You better also take conservative climb rates and so on.

Pyro, pls send me a dummy mail to send you something back

niklas