190A/F boosts

[GRUNHERZ]

I know for a fact that DB605D with MW50 makes 2000hp on the deck.  Thats a fact.

If you think that only gives Bf109 340mph on the deck then so be it. I think the chart is not showing the full picture.  I can give you charts showing  550km/h for 190D9 on the deck, would yiou accept that as the performance of stock doras just based on that graph??  Oh and BTW the same source says that the D9 was 28km'h faster than Fw190A8 on the deck..   So are we to extrapolate Fw190A8 speed from that 550km/h of the Dora?

Gee making gross generalizations based on a sinbgle graph is waay fun, eh crumpp?

So no your single graph showing 340mph for the 2000hp 109K4 with MW50 proves nothing...

And also its funny, you freely quote the same Gollob/Beauvais test where it suits you and ignore the fact that significantly less powerful Bf109F4 was   lots faster at alt and equally fast or only 10km/h slower than Fw190A2 at low alt...

[Crumpp]

If you think that only gives Bf109 340mph on the deck then so be it. I think the chart is not showing the full picture. I can give you charts showing 550km/h for 190D9 on the deck, would yiou accept that as the performance of stock doras just based on that graph??

I have several graphs of "stock" Doras as you put it.  The first batch of Doras were not equipped with MW50 nor did the Jumo 213 develop near it's promised power output.  That was fixed within a month.  I have plenty of the graphs with the fix too.

In fact if you copied the one I posted, you have one of them too.

I do have documentation showing the Bf-109K2/R2 photo recon varient as being able to attain 580Kph at sea level under MW-50 boost.  This version has the MG131's removed and is armed only with a Mk108.  The camera equippment is much lighter than the cowl guns and ammo.

This is compared to the FW-190D9 fighter version with a full complement of armament could attain 612Kph at sea level under MW-50 boost.


Crumpp

[GRUNHERZ]

Crump you continue beliveing that a 2000hp Bf109 only makes 340mph on the deck based on one graph.

BTW did you take that graph down?

[Crumpp]

BTW did you take that graph down?

Yeah I had to make room for the FW-190A2 documentation which you ignore.

Want me to put it back.  It can go right next to the documents you provided!:p

Seriously I will post it again for you to compare or I will email it to you.  Whichever you prefer.

Check the Bf-109G2 Flugzeug-Handbuch or the Bf-109G6's and post what it says for speeds.  

Maybe Izzy can come along and provide some better documentation to show what you are claiming.

I know you have Willy Radinger and Wolfgang Otto's Messerschmitt Bf 109F-K Development, Testing, Production.  Look on Page 38 second column.

Crumpp

[Angus]

Look at this again.
Izzy's 109G2 I think and a Spit VIII.
(The finest with the Merlin, not the fastest of all though)
Mk VIII 582 km/h
109G-2 : 530 km/h
Where is the 109K there and where is the 109A?

One has reports of Spit XII's outrunning 190's on the deck (Guppy is a very reliable source). The VIII was slower as far as I know.
I have also seen anecdotal data of Mossies outrunning 190's on these boards, now where was it again. Karnak?
That was also low alt as far as I remember.

Anway, back to Milch, Udet and those merry men:
What I found in Len Deighton's book, "Fighter"
(Note: there are some misconceptions in this book, but tons of interesting stuff as well)
P224:

"Milch immediately started an ambitious programme to expand the Luftwaffe to four times it's strenght..................... ............................. One of his most important decisions was to keep the Bf 109 in full production no matter how superior the Fw190 proved to be"

Looked like Milch overcame his dislike of Willy after all for rather Practical reasons, - the 109's production was rather simple and at the time could be increased very much.

From the same page:

"During the time he (Udet) was in hospital, Milch had Udet's unfortunate Chief of staff - a close friend of Udet - banished to the eastern front. And he replaced Udet's chief engineer with a man of his own choice. When Udet came out of Hospital he was upset. He clashed with Milch on the subject of fighter production. (Bf 109 versus FW 190).
Milch won the fight but diplomatically suggested that Uded go with him to Paris for a few days vacation " to straighten things out again"

Anyway, Udet commited suicide shortly after.
Some more fodder for you. Hugo Junkers, one of the most brilliant aircraft designers Germany ever had, really got destroyed by Milch as well.
Grunherz, you had some interesting thread on these boards before about the possibility of a super fast 190 (DB 603), this may perhaps shed some light on the outcome there?
Also, all, bear in mind that all the warring nations had similar "political" problems, although maybe not to the extent of Nazi Germany.
The Mosquito was for instance initally a Private venture...and the Hurricane even, was so quickly available to the British just because Sydney Camm started it's design before it was wanted....


Regards

Angus

[GRUNHERZ]

I will continue beliving that a 2000hp plane that does 452mph at 22k, not a high alititude by any means, does better than 340mph on the deck.  The 360 to 370+ range makes much more sense with that amount of power on the deck and that airframe.  One chart isnt enough to change that view..

Also why ask me about data about planes with 1/4 less power? We arent talking about 1475hp G6, we are talking about much cleaner 2000hp K4 with a much better propeller..

Oh yea just out of curiousity how fast do you think a best case Fw190A8 should be on the deck?

[Crumpp]

Oh yea just out of curiousity how fast do you think a best case Fw190A8 should be on the deck?

Grun I feel as though I have struck a nerve with you.  It is not my intention to belittle, downgrade, or take anything away from the Bf-109 as a fighter.  I have simply posted the flight test data for some of the varients of the FW-190 and the 109.  My FW-190 data is good.  I have multiple original sources which agree with one another (within about 4% to 6%) and can trace the varients performance from just about begining to end.

The claim was made that based on performance alone the Bf-109 was the better fighter and was superior throughout the war.  It was not and never was below around 6 Km.  
Again, both fighters complimented each others strengths.  The flight test data shows confirms this.

Don't know about best case.  Got some documents coming from BMW, Gmbh. Stuttgart which detail the use of BMW801 series motors on the FW-190.  Includes GM-1, MW and EW systems.  Should be interesting.  

All the FW-190A8 flight test's I have are within a few Kph of one another.



AS for the Mk XII's

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/dp845speed.gif

Mk VIII's

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/jf934level.jpg

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit8performance-n.jpg

http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit8.html

Crumpp

[GRUNHERZ]

No nerve at all, just like I said, I was curious what your resreach showed to be the best case Fw190A8 deck speed to be...

So what is it with the data you presently have?

[Crumpp]

Grun,

The very best data I have for the FW-190A8 says 585kph on the deck at 1.58ata @ 2700U/min.  It is a Rechlin test with no date on the graph.  I think it is late 43 early '44 timeframe and represents a FW-190A8 without the Aux tank installed due to the weight of 4272kg.

Crumpp

[GRUNHERZ]

So 585 km/h works out to 363mph for the best case 1944 Fw190A8 you have seen.

And IIRC that other chart you posted for an earlier model the Fw190A3, a 1942 model showed a speed of 354mph.

Only a 9mph difference for between a best case A8 and an A3.. That doesnt seem like much of an advance in 2 years, especially with you claiming so many modifications and so many power increses from the early models. What gives?

[Crumpp]

Only a 9mph difference for between a best case A8 and an A3.. That doesnt seem like much of an advance in 2 years, especially with you claiming so many modifications and so many power increses from the early models. What gives?

The FW-190A8 did not gain much performance as far as level speed goes, you are correct.  The FW 190 did gain several hundred pounds and added power to compensate maintaining a similar level speed throughout the design's life.  It gained less weight and just as much Horsepower over it's life cycle as the Spitfire did.
According to the pilots who flew it gained:

1.  A much better zoom climb (more mass = more energy)

2.  Much better manuverability and turning circle (better thrust and control surface changes) -  Only a 3lb sqft wingloading increase over the FW-190A5.  Look at the Spit IX/XIV.  The XIV gained 5 lbs sq ft over the Mk IX and little to no power.  The XIV had the same turning circle as the IX according to the RAF.

3.  Much better dive and better level accelleration. (about 200 hp power gain - might be as 500hp with MW and EW boost).  

All with a much better armament package over the FW-190A5.

Kurt Tanks design team actually flew the FW-190 in combat themselves as well as meeting with JG pilots on a regular basis to discuss needed design improvements.  I have the minutes from several of these meeting.

Again Grunhertz, I have provided actual flight tested data to back up everything I have said reference the Bf-109 and FW-190.  You have offered nothing but speculation and fandom.  Please show some flight data to back up your argument that the Bf-109 was faster below 6 Km.  Right now, ONLY the Bf-109K4/R2 photo recon varient matches the FW-190A speed.  And it barely does that.

Crumpp

[Meyer]

Originally posted by Crumpp
It's not a calculation.  Its a flight test.  Same with the FW-190 chart I posted.  It was part of several hundred comparision flights done during a 3 month period for the Ta-152 program.

 

It is a calculation, that charts comes from the 109_projekt.pdf file, you could dnl from here: http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/index2.html  (109G und K leistungsberechnungen/projekte-109G and K calculations/projects-)

[MiloMorai]

I have to question the 190 chart. Afaik, there was no D-15 made, conversion from a D-14 to begin in April 1945, so where does the graph line come from?

[gwshaw]

Some quick back of the envelope calculations.

At 9270 lbs (60% fuel from full load weight of 9660 lbs)

Using a Cd 0 of .0265 which pretty accurate for a ETC equipped A-8.

2075 hp (2100 ps)
363 mph

Using a Cd 0 of .0230, no ETC racks, no outer guns, 7.92 mm fuselage guns, ie a clean A-3 through A-6.

2075  hp (2100 ps)
382 mph

A bit better than a Bf 109K-4 could manage on 2000 ps, 375-380 mph according to my notes.

Greg Shaw

[Crumpp]

It is a calculation, that charts comes from the 109_projekt.pdf file, you could dnl from here: http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/index2.html (109G und K leistungsberechnungen/projekte-109G and K calculations/projects-)

You need to read the first sheet of the report.


According to the Focke Wulf facotry report one example of an FW-190D9 was fitted with the DB603E and brought up to D-15 standards.  It was subsequently test flown.

You can verify this in Dietmar Hermans FW-190 "Long Nose" under the D-15 chapter.

Crumpp