Author Topic: Question regarding Fw190A-5 and A-8. (Read 487 times)

Squire · « **on:** October 18, 2004, 08:35:30 PM »

Simple query, for info. I have some books on the Fw190A that are unclear about the Methanol Water injection system for the BMW.

Which version of the Fw190A first had MW50 in production combat types?

There was a comment on subbing the 190A-8 for the 190A-6 for some CT setups, also I design Sqaud Ops, and I want to know if the two are somewhat similar, other than the armament.

Thanks.

Wotan · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2004, 08:46:52 PM »

MW-50 was never serailized on the A/F series 190s.

There were some early 'tests' with the A-4 (A-4's came factory ready with the 'plumbing' for MW50 but very few actually had the full 'kit' installed) but its hard to find good info on these. Apparently they were used in Jabo raids against england.

In '43 C3 injection was tested on the A-5. C-3 is just fuel.

Quote

From Janes:

"The pilot had a small push-pull control which operated two c o c k s. The first c o c k opened an air bleed in the boost pressure regulator chamber, causing the regulator to open the butterfly throttle to provide +8.8 lb. boost instead of +5.5 lb. boost at sea level. The second c o c k opened a pipe line from the fuel pump to a spray nozzle fitted in the port air intake.

The principle was the same as MW-50 (except that with MW-50 it was water) in that Fuel was injected into the eye of the supercharger cooling the charge.

C3 wasn't serailized until '44 with the A-8. It was only really usefull below FTH (5500m IIRC). It still cooled the charge but above this height the SC was loosing power anyway.

When thinking of MW50 or C3 remember they arent the same as say GM1. Nothing is 'burnt' all they do is cool the charge and allow for higher pressure with-out detonation.

Wotan · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2004, 08:55:27 PM »

The only real issue you will have with using the A-8 as a sub for the A-6 and A-7 is that the 2 x 3cm cannons. They are really just too much gun to represent those planes. I am sure you can give instructions to the players not to use them.

I am not sure that the loadout will show up in the logs howewer.

The A-5 is a reasonable sub for the A-6 as well. The problem is the direct opposite then with the A-8. It only has 2 x MG151/20mm instead of 4,

The way MGFF is modelled in AH its completely pointless. I will say that even with 2 x 20mm the A-5 is plenty lethal.

Squire · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2004, 10:54:40 PM »

Ok, interesting, as usual research gets me more questions than answers sometimes. I also have many sources that talk about trials for the MW50 but no clear answer on deployment.

So the 115 litre aft tank in th A-8 was seldom used for MW50 or never used for that?

Also, in AH2, the speed difference between the A-5 and the A-8, what does that represent if not the A-8 on MW50? Better fuel?

"C3 wasn't serailized until '44 with the A-8. It was only really usefull below FTH (5500m IIRC)." < That ?

Wotan · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2004, 11:14:38 PM »

No the A-5 has a max boost of 1.42 ata and the A-8 has 1.58 / 1.65 ata. (low/high sc gear).

The A-5 was eventually cleared for the same boost but in AH 1.42 is max.

115ltr tank held C3 fuel (no MW50) and just fed the engine like the other tanks. It could be removed or replaced with GM1 (GM1 was never serialized on the A8).

Some pilots removed the tank to lighten the aircraft. In fact they did all sorts of things to reduce weight. I believe there was an A8 captured in the Baltics that was considerably lighter then most. (IIRC just 2 wing cannon no mg131's etc..) But C3 injection and max power settings used a lot of fuel.

Squire · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2004, 11:32:49 PM »

Ok, so its a case of C3 fuel in 1944 with accompanying higher boost ability for the A-8 and F-8 and has nothing to do with MW50.

Thx for the info. I need a better book on the Fw series.

Wotan · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2004, 11:36:07 PM »

Quote

"C3 wasn't serailized until '44 with the A-8. It was only really usefull below FTH (5500m IIRC)." < That ?

Oops, C3 injection wasnt serialized (standard production) unitl 1944.

Its anti-detonation (fuel pre-maturely detonates in the cylinder; causes damage) effect is only there below Full Throttle Height. Above that the pressure in the cylinders is falling off as the SC can no longer keep that boost due to the thinner atmosphere. So detonation is not a concern. C3 injection will still help cool the cylinder but at the expense of added fuel consumption.

Sorry for the jumble but its been a night of drinking and football so I will review what I wrote tomorrow and try to fix all the typos...

Wotan · « **Reply #7 on:** October 18, 2004, 11:45:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
Ok, so its a case of C3 fuel in 1944 with accompanying higher boost ability for the A-8 and F-8 and has nothing to do with MW50.

Thx for the info. I need a better book on the Fw series.

Yup exactly...

Originally C3 injection was only used in the low SC gear (below 1000m). When the A-5 was tested it was restricted as well. Used by jabo a/c.

It took some time before it was cleared in both gears.

One thing the BMW eng required C3 fuel.

C3 injection is where they bled the fuel line to spray into the SC eye and cool the charge.

So the A4, A5 etc.. used C fuel as their avgas. It wasnt until '44 that C3 injection was serialized.

I am probrably just confusing you at this point I will try again tomorrow...

Squire · « **Reply #8 on:** October 19, 2004, 12:17:05 AM »

Ok I follow what your saying. Bottom line its a 1944 "benefit" in any case for the A and F models.