The Fw 190A-5 fallout

[Kurfürst]

Hmm, from what I`ve seen from unit strenght reports in December 1944, A-9s were pretty rare compared to Doras and Kurfurst, not to say the more ordinary types.

[Crumpp]

Hmm, from what I`ve seen from unit strenght reports in December 1944, A-9s were pretty rare compared to Doras and Kurfurst, not to say the more ordinary types.

While the Dora was to replace the Anton, the distinction is that in December of 1944 a large number of the Antons in service were FW-190A9's.  This contradicts the generally held belief that the FW190A9 was a "rare bird".

Many of the FW-190A9's served until the end.

All the best,

Crumpp

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Kurfürst
Hmm, from what I`ve seen from unit strenght reports in December 1944, A-9s were pretty rare compared to Doras and Kurfurst, not to say the more ordinary types.

Not as rare as 1.98 K-4s.

[Knegel]

Hi,

Kurfürst, if you look to the 'Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen' in the links above, you will take notice that the A9 did appear more early and in greater numbers than the K4.

Crumpp, D9 wasnt made to replace the A´s, it was made to give the 190´s a better high alt and fighter vs fighter peformence, but in the east this wasnt needed and in 1945 the high alt bomberstreams also got rare.

The A9 had two 20mm´s more but was only 70kg more weight than the D9.  

Milo,

you realy think the german engine development did stuck from mid 1944 onward at the same stage??

Greetings,

[Crumpp]

Crumpp, D9 wasnt made to replace the A´s, it was made to give the 190´s a better high alt and fighter vs fighter peformence, but in the east this wasnt needed and in 1945 the high alt bomberstreams also got rare.

I don't think your correct on that.  It was a replacement for the FW190A.  While the early Dora's were not as good a performer as the Antons, the Dora quickly surpassed the Anton.

According to the OKL, Lw.-Führüngstab, Nr. 937/45 gKdos.(op) 20.03.45 all FW-190A's in fighter service were to be replaced by D9's.  Some D9's in service were to be replaced D12's.

The FW-190A series was going to continue to be produced but only as ground attack variants.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Bruno]

For sure there was more than 12 serving 152Hs. The disposition of 150 001 - 150 0040, 150 167 - 150 169 are known.

In Reschke's book he wrote they never had more than 16 Ta-152s at one time. The largest number flown in one sortie (staffel strength) was 12 took place on 2 Mar '45.

JG301 were  ordered where to fly top cover for FW 190A-8s and FW190A-9s. The mission ended when the 152s were attacked by Bf 109s. The Ta-152s could easily climb away from the attacking friendlies and the staffel did not suffer any losses.

Also see the strength report of 11.04.1945:



Easier to read and found on the web here:

Einsatzbereitschaft im Bereich Luftflotte Reich

Scroll to the bottom.

What this tells us is that of 11.4.45 there were a total of 6 serviceable Ta-152s. 3 assigned to Stab./JG 301 and 3 assigned to III./JG 301.

The translation of the chart is as follows:

Flgz = Aircraft
Besatzung = crew or pilots

Soll = number of aircraft (equipment) assigned

Ist = actual amount, usually this figure differs from the upper

eins = einsatzbereit = serviceable/ working. Can either be given in actual number or percentage. Here its clear the 3 is actual number.

So we can conclude as this date Stab./JG 301 had 7 Ta-152s but only 3 serviceable.

III./JG 301 had 6 Ta-152s and only 3 serviceable.(13/6)

Here is the production figures with work numbers  for the Ta152H´s:

Ta152H-0 Work Number: 150001 to 150020: production by Focke Wulf at Cottbus. (19)

Ta152H-1 Work Number: 150021 to 150040, 150167 to 15169: production by Focke Wulf at Cottbus. Many more Ta152 H-series planned but not build., although possible one Ta152H-2 build at Cottbus. (21/1)

Source: "Focke Wulf 190, Production Line To Frontline" by Malcolm V. Lowe

19 Ta152H-0´s,
21 Ta152H-1
1 Ta152H-2.

How many of each saw 'service'? Who knows but if we believe Reschke then JG 301 had no more then 16 (unsure whether they were H-0s or H-1s or a mix) and a max of 12 flew on one sortie. After that serviceability problems effected the majority as seen in the strength report I posted above.

[MiloMorai]

Originally posted by Knegel
Milo,

you realy think the german engine development did stuck from mid 1944 onward at the same stage??

Greetings,

Stuck no. But they did have QA/QC problems. You can read of the problems with the engines for 1.98, that is the comments in German documents, not censured out by Kurfie in his posts.

Yes Bruno only 16 at one time but that is not what I understood Krusty was saying. Thanks for documents.

[Knegel]

Hi,

Crumpp, the D9 was made as fighter with reduced weapons, while most A´s got used as heavy fighter. There was no D9 with the needed 4 x 20mm, therefor i doubt it was a replacement of the A´s, rather a replacement of the 109G´s which was the former topcover of the A´s, to fight fighters.
Iam unsure about the definition of fighter in that Luftwaffe order, but i guess they was talking about fighters to fight fighters, not about the 'Schwere Gruppen'.  I realy would like to know if the A9, with 2050-2200HP and with only 2 x 20mm(therfor less weight than the D9), wasnt the better fighter in low to medium alt. Even if the HQ was up to replace the A, they didnt stop the development and the production of the A´s, cause they was happy about every plane, therfor i doubt that the A´s got more rare in relation to the D´s in 1945. In the 'Verlustliste JG301 1945' (Reschkes book) this are the lost numbers:

18 x FW190A-8
74 x FW190A-9
19 x FW190D-9
  3 x Ta152H
16 x Me109G-10

The 1st lost of a FW190A-9 in the JG301 was, according to Reschkes list, the 09.October 1944, from Novermber onward the number of lost  A9´s already was greater than A8´s!
Nov-Dez 1944
52 x FW190A-8
67 x FW190A-9
  4 x FW190D-9

I dont know lostlists of other units in 1945, but the JG301 already show around 141 FW190A-9 losts
Dont looks like the A´s got replaced by the D9.



Milo, sure they had problems, but they was with the 'back to the wall', they did develop and brought the Me163 and the Me262 to service, althought they both was not nearly reliable.
I guess every german pilot in 1945 better took off with possible 1.98ata, maybe only as emergency, than without and i guess the HQ and mechianics saw it in the same way. Who did care about a possible damaged engine, if the pilot dont have any odds to survive without the extra power??
In BoB the british HQ did the same and allowed to use the 12lb boost under special circumstances, althought they did know it can damage the engine very fast, who care if there are no other odds?? In most books and on most pages we still can read that the Spit1a only had the 6lb boost while BoB.


Regards,

Knegel

[Crumpp]

I realy would like to know if the A9, with 2050-2200HP and with only 2 x 20mm(therfor less weight than the D9), wasnt the better fighter in low to medium alt.

When the Dora first appeared the FW190A equipped Jagdgruppen were skeptical and with good reason.

The initial Dora's were not equipped with any boost system and did not perform as well at lower altitudes.  When Dr. Lichte ordered the Junkers TAM to begin installing the "Oldenburg" system they outperformed the FW-190A series.

The lack of wing cannon was not a jagd-einsatz from the FW190A5 and later.  It was however locally done by some of the "Old Hares" in the JG's.  I imagine it would have made the FW-190A9 even more formidable at low altitudes but I do not think it would have outperformed the FW-190D9.

Even if the HQ was up to replace the A, they didnt stop the development and the production of the A´s, cause they was happy about every plane, therfor i doubt that the A´s got more rare in relation to the D´s in 1945. In the 'Verlustliste JG301 1945' (Reschkes book) this are the lost numbers:

You are correct in that production of the FW190A's did not stop at all.  The Anton’s were being built to fulfill other jobs such as ground attack or the R7/R8 Sturmjager variant.  The FW-190D9 was taking over the air superiority fighter role the Anton’s filled.  While the Anton was still a capable fighter, the Dora simply had better performance.

AH would need the FW-190A9 because it is the most representative mid to late 1944 FW-190A IMHO after reviewing the facts.  

All the best,

Crumpp

[Krusty]

Wait wait wait wait wait....

To quote Shrek, "Hold the phone!"

I just realized that while the A9 seems to have a 25mph speed boost over the A8, that's only because of the MW50 (or whatever boost it has). Aside from the boost the engine is the same, somebody said.

That means that unless you're running WEP all the time (which would run out, and you'd slow down every time you turned it off), you'd be performing exactly like an A-8 without WEP.

What good is a top speed boost of 20+mph if you lose it seconds after you turn WEP off? (*Note: 190As lose speed fast, it's one of their best forced-overshoot traits*)

I think it might boost acceleration, and sure it might have better top speed with WEP, but the underlying (non-WEP) engine is almost identical, right?

If that's the case I don't know if it's worth an entirely new flight model.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Krusty
Wait wait wait wait wait....

To quote Shrek, "Hold the phone!"

I just realized that while the A9 seems to have a 25mph speed boost over the A8, that's only because of the MW50 (or whatever boost it has). Aside from the boost the engine is the same, somebody said.

It depend of the block number.
Btw it won't be honest to ask for a A9 when the RAF fan still don't have any suitable spit to face it.
Plus the A8 is already survivable in the MA  exactly like the D40 and other "not very" late-war-wonder.

[Crumpp]

I just realized that while the A9 seems to have a 25mph speed boost over the A8, that's only because of the MW50 (or whatever boost it has). Aside from the boost the engine is the same, somebody said.

It does not have a boost system Krusty on that graph.

Adding in the simplified MW50 system will add an average of 15kph to that curve and raise the boost to 1.82ata.

Btw it won't be honest to ask for a A9 when the RAF fan still don't have any suitable spit to face it.

I think if HTC adds in the Spitfires under discussion then it would be needed.  This should be a mutually supporting request.  Bring on the new Spits and Focke's.  The FW-190A9 would fit nicely against the Spitfire Mk IVX now in the game as well.

All the best,

Crumpp

[Knegel]

Hi,

the A9 was a bit more heavy than the A8 with same weaponset  and the current A8 already is lost without WEP, who will fight without need much alt to escape.  Since the current 190A8 is only worth to make a bit more close combat with WEP, the more power of the A9 would help much.  +20mph is less important than the slowspeed acceleration and climb gain with WEP.

That the 190A lost speed that much while turning is a joke anyway.

Crupp, i only did read about comparisons A8 vs D9,  and here i only saw the quote that the early D9 just was better at high alt. Regarding the comparison between the A9 with MW50 vs D9, i never saw something. Most people still think that the A8 was the last 190A which saw service. I dont have any idea, why a 190A9 with 2000-2000HP, but only 2 x 20mm, which would be around 100kg more light than the D9, shouldnt be same good or better, specialy in low alt?  Same like the late D9, the A9 brought back the poweradvantage over most enemys planes, which the 190A4 had in 1943, at least in low alt.  Even the A9 w/o MW50 (graphic above) show much better results than the A8 w/o erhöhter Ladedruck.  Even the climb with combat power was better than that of the A8 with combat power, althought this A9 with 4 x 20mm was more heavy.

Of course, if i talk about A9 ( 2 x 20mm) same good or better than the D9, i talk about the game, where wingload seems to be a important factor. In reality speed was probably much more important.

Regards,

Knegel

[Kurfürst]

Originally posted by Crumpp
While the Dora was to replace the Anton, the distinction is that in December of 1944 a large number of the Antons in service were FW-190A9's.  This contradicts the generally held belief that the FW190A9 was a "rare bird".

Many of the FW-190A9's served until the end.

All the best,

Crumpp

That`s nice and all, Crumpp, but little more than wishful thinking, for I have just checked and the number of A-9s (inc. various Rustzustand variants) were less than a hundred in December 1944. Both Doras and Kurfurst amounted 200-200 each, other the other hand.

Makes arguing of such a rare bird a bit pointless IMHO.

Originally posted by Knegel
Kurfürst, if you look to the 'Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen' in the links above, you will take notice that the A9 did appear more early and in greater numbers than the K4.

Already did a many months ago, summerizing the list of all daylight fighters for my 109K project. In fact the 109K appeared at a steady 200 from the first month it entered service, raising to 300+ in January 1945, whereas the Dec 1944 'Flugzeugbestand' shows less than a hundred A-9s around. Will dig up the exact numbers tomorrow.

[Bruno]

Btw it won't be honest to ask for a A9 when the RAF fan still don't have any suitable spit to face it.

The Spit wasn't the plane an A-9 would 'face' as a common foe. A-9s (und F-9s) served from Kurland fighting the VVS to Bodenplatte and over Germany etc...

There's no need to suggest because there is an 'A-9' there must be a 'Spit XX' or vice versa.

Not even in the AH do 190s face 'Spits' as a common foe. In ToD at least with an 8th AF theater 190s won't be facing 'Spits' as a common opponent either.


Knegel no A series 190 used 'MW-50' as standard with the exception of a few odd ball A-4s for vengeance jabo raids against England. The A-9 like the the A-8 utilized C-3 injection.

The D-9 went through several boost types. From the Oldenburg low pressure MW-50 system and eventualyl a higher presure system (B4 fuel+ MW50) as well as C3 injection (C-3 fuel) etc...

The A-9 was a significant improvement over the A-8 as you point out out. Initially the D-9 wasn't much better then the A-8. However, even in its optimal form the Dora was never a 'high alt fighter' or substantially better at high altitude then the late series As.

It's true that the D-9 was designed to face Ami fighters and to provide cover for Sturmbocks etc... It was not designed as a replacement for the A series but was going to replace some A series in various gruppes. I have read where the D-9 was more or less an attempt at a stop gap while Kurt Tank developed the 152. A DB603 FW would have been the 'high altitude version'. But too bad they never pursued it.

Lutz (Naudet) has made numerous posts on various forums describing the development of the D-9. He posts on Butch's AAW2 forums but last I heard he was busy with RL and not much time for the Internet. He has done considerable research along with folks like BBury on the Dora.