German Language article on BMW801D boost systems

[gripen]

Originally posted by Crumpp

3.  The "Filled and Polished" fiasco was with your insistance that this graph:
 

Well, the  document still says "Filled + Polished". It's not my fault if a source you continously use says so and you continously refused to post original document. Still, the Fw data for A-8 seem to be very optimistic even if we assume the 14 blade fan.

Originally posted by Crumpp
So let's not switch documents around just so you can convince yourself you were not in error.  You were wrong just as you are about the FW-190A5's speed now.

The situation here is very simple; all really flight tested data seen here support each other very well (Rechlin, RAE and US Navy), the speed of the Fw 190 near sealevel was around 520-540 km/h with 1,42 ata 2700 rpm  in all these tests and nothing supports claims by Fw or you, regardless the type of the cooling fan.

gripen

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Crumpp

What this article does say is that MW-50 use was much more common in FW-190A's than we think.  This is backed up by the documentation I have and pilots anecdotes.

Crumpp

Whoa there Crumpp. You have told us that the 115l MW tank was removed and now you are saying it was not.

Which story do we believe?

[MANDO]

What happened with the 1.42 ata when 801D2 was cleared for 1.58/1.65 ata? Currently we are jumping from 1.32 ata to 1.58 ata without any intermediate step.

[Crumpp]

Whoa there Crumpp. You have told us that the 115l MW tank was removed and now you are saying it was not.

It was removable Milo.  It was the Geschwader Technical officers call on the A/C set up for the mission and it only took a few minutes to take it out.

Additionally, and this should be common sense,  not all aircraft were equipped with MW 50, C3, or "Special emergency power for fighters".  Depended on the aircraft and how it was set up.

Well, the document still says "Filled + Polished". It's not my fault if a source you continously use says so and you continously refused to post original document. Still, the Fw data for A-8 seem to be very optimistic even if we assume the 14 blade fan.

You have a very short and selective memory, Gripen.  I posted the document in the last thread you showed up in and SEVERAL people confirmed the mistranslation for you.  Yet you still want to cover the same ground.

Crumpp

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by gripen

The situation here is very simple; all really flight tested data seen here support each other very well (Rechlin, RAE and US Navy), the speed of the Fw 190 near sealevel was around 520-540 km/h with 1,42 ata 2700 rpm  in all these tests and nothing supports claims by Fw or you, regardless the type of the cooling fan.

gripen

The RAE`s tested one was the slowest of ANY FW 190 ever tested, which is hardly a surprise for reasons noted a zillion times already (lack of proper fuel and knowladge maintaince).

Again, , the USN test report CLEARLY states the level speed runs were NOT run for any longer time than just 2 MINUTES, which as written in the USN`s report gripen is quoting out of context, was most likely to develop the maximal speed.

If gripen use that report, grabs one part out of context AGAIN, despite being remarked on that detail, then it`s just a clear case of outright lies and deception.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Crumpp
It was removable Milo.  It was the Geschwader Technical officers call on the A/C set up for the mission and it only took a few minutes to take it out.

 

The impression you gave was that the tank was removed in another thread. You said the fighter pilots did not like the extra weight of the tank.

What is a few minutes. It was just not the  connections for the 115l tank that had to be done.

[gripen]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
The RAE`s tested one was the slowest of ANY FW 190 ever tested,

Why don't you look above, in the RAE test Fw 190 did  about 520 km/h at sea level  with 1,42 ata 2700 rpm while in the Rechlin test couple planes did about same at 100 m.

Originally posted by Crumpp
I posted the document in the last thread you showed up in and SEVERAL people confirmed the mistranslation for you.

Well, there is no mistranslation in the case of the A-5 (Gespachtelt u.Poliert) and in the case of the A-8 I just quoted the source you tend to use and you refused to post original document. And some how you managed to post it to wrong thread when you finally posted it.

gripen

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by gripen
Why don't you look above, in the RAE test Fw 190 did  about 520 km/h at sea level  with 1,42 ata 2700 rpm while in the Rechlin test couple planes did about same at 100 m.

Yeah and in the navy test it did 545+ km/h at SL, even when it didn`t accelerate for more than 2 mins "during which the maximum speed was not developed"?

The RAE`s results are subpar compared to any other tests.

You are pushing an agenda, it`s clear to anyone.

[gripen]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
Yeah and in the navy test it did 545+ km/h at SL, even when it didn`t accelerate for more than 2 mins "during which the maximum speed was not developed"?

Again read the report: 537 km/h at 200 ft.

gripen

[Crumpp]

The impression you gave was that the tank was removed in another thread. You said the fighter pilots did not like the extra weight of the tank.

Milo,

Nothing has changed from the last 20 times we covered this subject:

The 115 liter tank was still an Optional piece of equipment, could be removed easily and was not necessary to use C3 "emergency power". It was held in place by quick release bands, plugs into the wiring harness, connected to the fuel system by a quick disconnect T-block valve, with the fuel pump and wiring contained in the lid of the tank. The filler plate was removed with 2 screws and the filler hose/vent line popped right out and remained attached to the filler plate. A blank plate would be inserted. The whole tank slide out the circular hatch in the bottom of the fuselage. It's presence is noted by the yellow triangular C3 sticker next to the fill port above the cargo hatch. This sticker's nomenclature when applied is the "Auxillery Tank Present" warning label. This alerted the ground crews the tank was in use and prevented them from filling it with the wrong liquid. It also alerted them to extra preventive procautions when filling the O2 tanks. Gas fumes and O2 don't mix.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/defaultframe.html

Not claiming your wrong in this case but you said the same baloney about the 115 liter "cruising tank" (as the pilots call it) in the FW-190A8. I am saying I would like to talk to the Museum and the guys who flew the FW-190A are crystal clear in the fact that they had and used MW.
To further clarify what has come out regarding the 115 liter tank are the JG Technical Officer put out whether it was to be used or not and was mounted and dismounted as needed. It took less than 5 minutes to install and remove it according too:

1. The men who worked on the FW-190
2. The men who flew the FW-190.

Looking at the instructions in the manual the most time consuming part of the job was undoing the half turn flush screws in the auxilery tank removal hatch.

It was not a very popular item (weight) but was used on occasion. Yes it was marked when installed and the sticker removed when the tank was taken out.

http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/defaultframe.html

A MW system is NOT an extra fuel tank.  You could not mount both at the same time.  Just to be crystal clear since you seem to lack both memory and common sense, Milo.  A MW50 system was not likely to be removed by the TO.  An extra fuel tank is a different story.

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

What ever Crumpp. You change your stories to what ever suits your agenda at the time.

Pull out your Bentley drawings and tell me how the tank got past the oxygen cylinders. There was not even enough clearance under the a/c for the height of the tank.

You can see how much trouble there was by looking at the photo on pg 72 of the book on the Smithsonian F-8 restoration.

You do have trouble with words. 'Optional',  like when ordering a car, is something done by the factory. The factory installed the tank as standard from 3rd quarter of 1944 onwards.

An example of your word problems.

quote "This is without any "boost" whatsoever. Purely an increased throttle setting allowing more manifold pressure."

Boost is an increase in manifold pressure.


Some quotes by you.

"The fuel tanks were pilot selectable."

So what is it TO or pilot?

This one I enjoy.

"Don't get me wrong. I am not pretending to be an expert on the History of the 190. I have quite a few books and own the pilots handbooks for the A series."


Where did I mention MW? You do have your problems.


Nice links to the AH Forums.

[MiloMorai]

From a BMW speed graph of 13.1.45, comes the following SL speeds, all at combat power:

Fw 190 A-8 with 801-F66, rpm: 2400, fan 039, prop 9-12153: ca. 507kph.

Fw 190 A-8 with 801-TH, rpm: 2500, fan 039, prop 9-12176: ca. 523 kph.

Fw 190 A-5 with 801-TH, rpm: 2500, fan 039, prop 9-12176: ca. 524 kph.

Not sure why the A-5 has a TH motor fitted.

[Crumpp]

Crumpp says:
To further clarifywhat has come out  regarding the 115 liter tank

Milo says:
What ever Crumpp. You change your stories to what ever suits your agenda at the time.

Milo.  I was being nice and passing off information I got from Luftwaffe pilots who flew the FW-190.  That is all.

Question - Was the "cruising tank" an optional item that was removed from the aircraft even after they were factory installed.

Answer - Yes......followed by more information on it's use.

Later interviews it comes out the TO dictated the set up by mission.

You do have trouble with words. 'Optional', like when ordering a car, is something done by the factory. The factory installed the tank as standard from 3rd quarter of 1944 onwards.

Optional as in "choice to use it or not".

Boost is an increase in manifold pressure.

Boost can also refer to a "boost system" like MW-50 or USAAF water injection.

"Don't get me wrong. I am not pretending to be an expert on the History of the 190. I have quite a few books and own the pilots handbooks for the A series."

That is correct.  Sounds really bad only when you take it out of context and attempt to attach a meaning that is not there.

You can see how much trouble there was by looking at the photo on pg 72 of the book on the Smithsonian F-8 restoration.

Why don't you call the Smithsonian (as I asked) or post a question on the White 1 Board about it. Since you don't want to believe what I told you on this BBS.

Pull out your Bentley drawings and tell me how the tank got past the oxygen cylinders. There was not even enough clearance under the a/c for the height of the tank.

Nice set of drawing Bentley does, the man is an artist, no doubt.  Why should I refer to them when I have access to the actual aircraft?

Crumpp

[Crumpp]

From a BMW speed graph of 13.1.45, comes the following SL speeds, all at combat power:

OMG.  Look at the prop RPM.  I have that report, Milo.

Those sea level speeds are spot on.  For 1.32ata.

Not sure why the A-5 has a TH motor fitted.

Because it is the flight testing of the BMW801TH motor....

Crumpp

[MANDO]

190A8 had a switch to turn On C3 injection, but throttle kept the same as with previous versions without C3 injection. So, it is my understanding that take off/emergency throttle position was still doing the original 1.42 ata with C3 switch turned Off.

If so, what was the time limit for 1.42 ata in engines cleared for 10-15 mins 1.58/1.65 ata?