Author Topic: What happened to the 190s? (Read 2364 times)

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #30 on:** August 28, 2005, 11:58:48 AM »

Im not complaining Wilbus, i just do with what i have.
If other planes have a better view thats their luck.

But nothing to complain about the view in a FW.

btw the real p38 had a rearview mirror,
Im not even complaining about that but it would give a instant rear view. not totaly dough.

Wilbus · « **Reply #31 on:** August 28, 2005, 12:37:07 PM »

Rgr Bug I know you're not.

But can't really ignore the pics Falcon posted. Kind of weird, specielly since the Pony's are just remade.

All planes should be made acording to same standards and I doubt the planes with good 3D cockpits will have those removed (I hope they won't be removed). But I hope the ones with what seems to be 2D bars are remade (again).

Also, as stated above, buble canopy 190's head view can now only be raised as little as in the A versions.

MANDO · « **Reply #32 on:** August 28, 2005, 01:49:40 PM »

Wilbus, check also the bubble canopy of D9 and F8, it is also gone. Both has now the same canopy (internal size) as A5 and A8. So, any potential advantage for F8 to fire its new rockets with some over the nose extra view is gone

Wotan · « **Reply #33 on:** August 28, 2005, 02:32:30 PM »

In RL the 'blown canopy' didn't allow for more top head room so that you could see 'over the nose'.

The widened or 'blown' canopy was added for the purpose of improving the pilot's side-forward visibility, important during fighter-bomber missions. The pilot could lean left or right and see down forward. It had nothing to do with 'over the nose'.

http://www.white1foundation.org/parts/Canopy2.jpg

At most it added 3 or 4 inches of head room if that. After all the front over head frame didn't change.

http://www.white1foundation.org/parts/Canopy1.jpg

Here's a side view, what isn't apparent in these images is bulge in the sides.

Not every F-8 and D-9 had the blown canopy any way...

MANDO · « **Reply #34 on:** August 28, 2005, 06:15:07 PM »

Quite wrong Wotan.
It is quite apparent the noticeable gain in vertical space as is clearly shown in these pictures.

And our F8 and D9 have both blown canopy, so they should have more vertical space than A8/A5.

The difference between A8/A5 and F8/D9 was clear before the 190 art rework.

Waffle · « **Reply #35 on:** August 28, 2005, 07:50:56 PM »

Unstrap that harness to look over your nose

Don't make any quick moves though if someone is on your 6, or you'll knock yourself out.

Wotan · « **Reply #36 on:** August 28, 2005, 08:16:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MANDO
Quite wrong Wotan.
It is quite apparent the noticeable gain in vertical space as is clearly shown in these pictures.

And our F8 and D9 have both blown canopy, so they should have more vertical space than A8/A5.

The difference between A8/A5 and F8/D9 was clear before the 190 art rework.

No you are wrong...

What that image shows is only 3 inches max.

What the 'blown canopy' did was create a bulge in the sides that allowed pilots better vision down-front when looking to the sides. This allowed them to be able to locate and identify targets.

Part of their tatics (Steckrübenverfahren) were to fly low (about 1000m) in line abreast keeping the target low right. Then they turned to target in line astern and dropped the nose low for speed. They would then pop up to 1200 - 1500m and line up on target. They used a standard gunsite, they didn't need to 'see over the nose' to drop bombs or fire their rockets.

Post any pic of a pilot in a late war 190 with a blown canopy and compare the pilot's head position with any early canopy. The pilot didn't sit higher in his seat because of the blown canopy.

You 100% wrong. What you had in AH prior to to the 190 fix was just wrong as well. The pilots didn't jack their seat up nor could they slide out past the canopy glass when looking over the sides.

Not all D-9s and F-8s had a blown canopy anyway.

Waffle · « **Reply #37 on:** August 28, 2005, 08:42:47 PM »

Wotan -

You seem to have a lot of info on the GE planes. You wouldn't happen to have any VERY good pics of 109 cockpits, close up details, ect.....

Dimensional drawings, manual refererence, ect.... of a whole or individual components?

Wotan · « **Reply #38 on:** August 28, 2005, 11:22:49 PM »

Quote

You wouldn't happen to have any VERY good pics of 109 cockpits, close up details, ect.....

Dimensional drawings, manual refererence, ect.... of a whole or individual components?

No I sure don't, I am not much into modeling so I never made a point at keeping such stuff.

I would reccomend you ask on these forums though:

Air Warfare Forum

109 Lair Forum

LEMB

AAW2

AAW2 is Butch's forum and requires registration to view/post.

Good luck, I am looking forward to the updated 109s...

Wilbus · « **Reply #39 on:** August 29, 2005, 03:03:32 AM »

True enough Wotan that the blown canopy in the 190 didn't create much more space in the vertical, the 190 already had quite much frmo the beginning, however, 3 inches would make a clear difference.

I doubt all other planes in AH that can have head raised to the top of the canopy could have that possition in real life. Just hope they will all be remodelled for the best.

MANDO · « **Reply #40 on:** August 29, 2005, 03:26:21 AM »

Wotan, 3 inches is more than enough to aim and fire the PB rockets. They added that vertical space for a reason, else they would be adding only more drag for free and that would be quite stupid.

To raise my head 3 inches I dont need to raise my seat. Of course, unstrapping the harness is also not necessary.

Wilbus · « **Reply #41 on:** August 29, 2005, 04:46:43 AM »

Snip of the RAF report on the Fw 190 A3 normal hood.

"Low Flying
The good all-around view from the aircraft, particulary over the nose, makes the Fw 190 very suitable for low flying and ground strafing. ...

The armament is good and well positioned, and the ammunition capacity should be sufficient for any normal fighter operation. The sighting view is approximately half a ring (of deflection) better than that from the Spitfire.

The all-round search view is the best that has yet been seen from any aircraft flown by this unit."

It doesn't have a good over the nose view in AH.

Not whining here, just saying.

Like I said before, hopefully all planes will be updated the "right" way with 3D cockpit bars etc.

Wilbus · « **Reply #42 on:** August 29, 2005, 05:25:53 AM »

Urgh to hell with it, it is what it is.

I still love flying the 190. Just require even more skill then it did before.

Wotan · « **Reply #43 on:** August 29, 2005, 08:28:04 AM »

Quote

Wotan, 3 inches is more than enough to aim and fire the PB rockets. They added that vertical space for a reason, else they would be adding only more drag for free and that would be quite stupid.

To raise my head 3 inches I don't need to raise my seat. Of course, unstrapping the harness is also not necessary.

They didn't fire rockets by looking over the nose. The used the standard gun site.

Drag was insignificant.

Hauptman Erhard Jähnert Staffelkäpitan of 2./Schlachtgeschwader 3 flying the 190F-8 over the Kurland Bridgehead describes rocket attacks against soviet armor.

He states that the rockets had a trajectory similar to the Mk 108 in that the rockets arced and at a range of 600m would hit almost centered in his gun site. He never mentions rising up in his seat, or that the new 'blown canopy' allowed him to see 'over the nose'.

He destroyed 25 Soviet tanks while flying the FW 190F-8 over Kurland:

Quote

On 16 February 1945, I attacked enemy armor in my Focke Wolf 190. It had already gotten quite close to our main line of resistance in foggy weather about 10 kilometers southeast of Tukkum.

Three of my comrades closed up with me when I designated the target. We dove on the group of armor and fired our rockets. I was fortunate enough to knock out three enemy tanks in three passes. Three more were crippled by my comrades. Since I expended my rockets, I tried to destroy the remaining tanks, which had already turned back, with my on-board weapons...

Wilbus,

No game that I know of (AH2, WB3, IL2/FB) model the 190 with good 'over the nose view'. In the case of Il2/Fb and AH2 the canopy frames are thick and large and impair vision, especially forward vision dramatically.

The head positions in the AH1 190s were overly generous (and in a lot of other planes). You could move left or right and almost shift out through the glass. The same with seeing over the nose. You could rise up almost a foot then slide forward.

The only real issue with the AH2 190s are the thick canopy frames, not 'over the nose view' imho...

Wilbus · « **Reply #44 on:** August 29, 2005, 08:45:54 AM »

Like you said wotan, overly generous, like almost all other planes in AH, even the new remodelled ones.

They should all be modelled after one standard.

In my quote above it states that the over the nose view of the 190 was actually a bit better then in the Spit. Spit is far superior in AH as it is now (hopefully not after they have been remade).

And yes I agree, over the nose isn't that much of a problem, it's the bars that cause the problem. However wether the bars are realistic or not I can't say, will have to compare with pictures.

What I find odd is as posted above in the pics, the 190 has 3D bars which is nice, most other planes, even the ones just remodelled don't.