Author Topic: can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?  (Read 2648 times)

Offline Bruno

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1252
      • http://4jg53.org
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #75 on: October 27, 2005, 03:16:25 PM »
For the 190s they should scrap the A-5 designation (like they did the G-10) and it make is an A-6 (update gun options) and then add an A-4.

The A-4 - A-6 combo could cover everything but the A-2 period...

An A-2 would be nice just  because it pushes down the introduction date of the 190 in events, scenario and ToDs. Other then that it would be a hangar queen.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #76 on: October 27, 2005, 03:19:03 PM »
190s had major problems up until the A3, from what I read. The A3 was the first actually combat worthy one, and it was the first one that really got shipped out in decent numbers.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #77 on: October 27, 2005, 06:43:30 PM »
Quote
190s had major problems up until the A3, from what I read.


Actually the BMW801C2 motor became reliable.  The antiknock resistance of C3 was the next big hurdle for the 801 series and caused more problems than the motor.

An exerpt from an article I am writing:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When it first appeared the BMW801 14 cylinder radial engine was one the world’s most powerful radials.  It was the culmination of BMW’s limited experience in radial design.  Although some tradeoffs in weight were accepted for ease of design BMW produced a world-class engine.  From the beginning it produced almost 200PS more than BMW’s previous radial, the BMW139.  The prototype engine, BMW801V14, had completed its 100-hour bench test and was ready to replace the troublesome BMW139 used in the initial prototype FW190V1.

Like all new designs there were problems to be solved.  When it first appeared the motor was extremely unreliable when cowled and installed on the aircraft.  Its life expectancy was measured in a few short hours. On 01 August 1941 Oblt. Otto Behren’s Operational Test Squadron, Erprobungsstaffel 190, moved from Rechlin to Le Bourget outside of Paris to begin training the II Gruppe Jadgeschwader 26 on the FW-190A1.   Although many minor technical difficulties would be solved over the next few weeks it would not be until the 06 November 1941 that III Gruppes Technical Officer, Rolf Schröder would make the biggest leap forward in reliability for the engine.  At BMW’s repair shop in Albert during the investigation into engine failures Schröder noticed that a simple exhaust reroute would prevent the back bottom two cylinders from overheating.  The design change was immediately implemented and the aircraft modified both at the Geschwader and the Factory.  Within a short period of time, the 8th Stafflekaptain, Oblt. Karl Borris received a gold watch from BMW for having the first engine to reach 100 hours of operational flight time.  Borris’s luck would continue to hold as he later survived a fall from 22,000 feet with a collapsed canopy suffering numerous broken bones.  Average reliability would now be measured in triple figures for the BMW 801C series motor.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All the best,

Crumpp

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #78 on: October 27, 2005, 07:00:28 PM »
Good stuff. I think I read something similar about the back row's overheating tendencies. I think the A3 introduced the side slits in the exhaust panel, which helped a lot over the A2 (if I remember what I read properly)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #79 on: October 27, 2005, 07:33:49 PM »
Actually, Krusty, it was the FW-190A2 which introduced the fixed cooling gills.

Around 100 FW-190A1's were produced and half that number of FW-190A0's.

FW-190A2/3's were produced concurrently with the only difference being the motor begining in August 1941.  

I would like to see the FW-190A3 in the game but either early FW-190A would be fine.  I don't see much of a point though for the FW-190A2 as it's performance was just a little bit better in some areas than the Bf-109F4 and significantly worse in others.

All the best,

Crumpp
« Last Edit: October 27, 2005, 07:42:25 PM by Crumpp »

Offline Pongo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6701
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #80 on: October 27, 2005, 07:59:58 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Karnak
Dan,

That is what I was trying to explain to Pongo.  The highback LF.XVIe would be no more of a missed oportunity than a highback LF.IXe from his perspective.  His post seemed to separate the two and list the XVI as having more to do with the bubble tops.

No I know that the IX, XIV and XVI all had razor and bubble top versions.
I was mearly trying to point out that for icon purposes having the bubble top be the XVI instead of the IX might be clearer.

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #81 on: October 27, 2005, 08:45:32 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
Actually, Krusty, it was the FW-190A2 which introduced the fixed cooling gills.


Now I remember.. What I read was worded "the third version" -- but their counting started at 0 (190A-0), so I was +1 in my math :)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
can "we" have 1 more Spitfire/109 variant?
« Reply #82 on: October 27, 2005, 09:04:25 PM »
Quote
Now I remember.. What I read was worded "the third version" -- but their counting started at 0 (190A-0), so I was +1 in my math


Np at all.  You have a wealth of knowledge on the design, Krusty.

All the best,

Crumpp