Update#2 - Aircraft and Vehicle Service Dates

[Krusty]

The major player before the 190A5 is the A3. It was the earliest one out, and it came out before the spit9 (which was developed as a direct result of spitVs getting their tulips handed to them by 190a3's). However the performance was markedly different from the A-5, so I don't think you can really count it, unless you make a special note that the A5 is standing in for the A3 in any scenario etc.

[Bruno]

There were multiple 'WEPS' on the D-9...

C3 injection (Erhöhte Notleistung)

Low Pressure MW-50 (Oldenburg system)

High Pressure MW-50

Good luck assigning a date to each 'system'.

I don't have AH2 installed on this CPU so if some one could confirm 1,8ata from the in game E6B please do so. I don't fly that plane much but IIRC I thought max ata was 1,7 WEP /  1,50 mil.

I will take a quick look through Naudet's posts over on Butch's forum...

Of course if you think its something that should be changed please feel free to research it.

EDIT

A quick look turned up this:

Based on the documents i aquired from the german museum at munich, here the first article, an overview about the Special Emergency power settings available for the JUMO213A.


There were four different forms of SEP for the JUMO213A:

1. Increased Boost Pressure (Erhoehte Notleistung)
2. MW50 Injection
3. Special Take-off peak (Sonderstartspitze)
4. GM-1

Increased Boost Pressure was activated by using a switch when engine was running at take-off/emergency power, boost pressure raised by 0.2 ata and produced 1900PS@3250rpm@1,7ata. MW50 was also activated by a switch, when engine was at take-off/emergency power. Boost pressure increased by 0.28 ata and MW50 was injected at a rate of 150 l/h, resulting in 2100PS@3250rpm@1,78ata.

MW50 system came in two types, low and high pressure system. This pressure only refers to the pump pressure inside the MW50 system. In case of the low pressure system, MW50 was pumped to the injection valves at 0,6 atü using charged air from the engine. In case of the high pressure system, delivery pressure was 4 atü using a compressor.

Both forms of SEP were available up to 5000m, for both the change from Bodenlader to Höhenlader had to be readjusted to an altitude of around 1800-2000. Those two forms could not be used on one engine, it was either Increased Boost Pressure OR MW50. If an engine that had increased boost pressure kit installed was intended for MW50 retrofit, the boost pressure kit had to be entirely removed with the exception of the switch which was actually an MW50 switch. Increased boost pressure could be used for take-off, while MW50 was restricted to inflight usage. Both were limited to 10 minutes, but could be used multiple times during a flight.

The Special Take-off peak was only available for engines outfitted with the Motorbediengeräte MBG G-1 (that’s were the JUMO213AG designation comes from, it just indicates that this engine has the MBG G-1 and not the old F-5). By using the Notzugmechanism the engine would produce 1900PS@3250rpm@1,7ata, but only up to a max altitude of 500m. The Special Take-off Peak was available for engines with MW50 injection. But according to an experience report it was withdrawn from service soon after clearance, because the actual power produced varied widely and the system proved unreliable in service. With the prohibition to use the Special Take-Off Peak the designation JUMO213AG also was withdrawn and no differentiation between JUMO213A with MBG F-5 or MBG G-1 were made any longer.

GM-1 could be used above rated altitude (6km). GM-1 could be injected at three different rates 60g, 100g and 150g. This was achieved by using two injection valves, one 60g nozzle for the 60g injection rate, one 100g nozzle for the 100g rate and for the 150g rate both were opened.

Interestingly the GM-1 installation could be used to deliver MW50. The only necessary change were the injection valves. And MW50 was not to be filled into the GM-1 installation before atleast 24 hours passed since GM-1 was pumped out. After MW50 had been used in the system, it was not advised to use GM-1 again, because rests of MW50 could produce crystallisations when coming in contacted with GM-1 and block the lines and valves.
GM-1 and MW50 could have been used in one plane by installation of both systems, but for the JUMO213A GM-1 use was not intended and therefore only MW50 was used operational.

For the JUMO213E/F the MW50 system was also used to work as coolant for the charged air at climb & combat rating or above. Because of this, the MW50 system for the JUMO213E/F also used two injection valves, one for a rate of 90 l/h at climb & combat or take-off/emergency rating to cool down the charged air and the second valve for 150 l/h for Special Emergency power below rated altitude.

This was posted by Naudet on Butch's AAW2 forums...

[Bruno]

However the performance was markedly different from the A-5, so I don't think you can really count it, unless you make a special note that the A5 is standing in for the A3 in any scenario etc.

There was hardly any difference in the fully rate A-3 and A-5 or the A-4 for that matter. Some early A-3 had still had the BMW 801C and IIRC a some derated due to technical issues.

[Krusty]

The a5 was heavier, and more heavily armed. The speed and acceleration were better in the A3 if I recall, and the turn capabilities may have been as well, considering how well they spanked the spitVs they met. (that's speculation on my part)

[Squire]

And without it laboring into an endless debate about ATA/wep ratings (which is not what we are here for), does anybody have a suggestion with a date re the Dora-9 and a pre 1943 190A?

Personally I think the D-9 should be 9-44, its hardly uber vs all the late war allied rides. Spit XIV, P-51D, P-47D ect ect.

190A-3 date perhaps for the 190A.

We already know there were differences, we need a sound opinion now on dates, please.

[Bruno]

We already know there were differences, we need a sound opinion now on dates, please.

I think that just giving the correct date (as best we can establish them) for the correct / particular variant is 'good enough'.

We all know the limitations of the AH plane set. Whoever is designing the event, scenario, or CT set up will inevitably be faced with the question of substitutions. It's at this point when the discussion over what plane can be moved up or down on their service date to fill a hole should take place.

If this list is to be used as some sort of guide then just putting out a date range will only mean that that date range will get stretched even farther when looking for a good substitute.

If the A-5 entered service in 6-43, the list should reflect that. The debate over how much earlier the A-5 can substitute for an A-4 or A-3 or how late it can stand in for an A-6 or A-7 should take place then.

However, feel free to disagree...

[Krusty]

Very well Squire. I will list the date I have for the A3. If you would like it added is another matter: I present it for use or for discarding. I am, as they say, like Switzerland.

One source simply says "Spring '42" for the A-3. Warbirdresourcegroup says autumn '41 (I doubt this, personally).

I know in Feb '42 Galland led a group of 190s as escort for 2 battle cruisers sneaking out through the channel -- shooting 6 Swordfish and fighting with spitfires and hurricanes in the process. I *think* those were A-3s.

The thing with the 190a3 is that the RAF didn't think it was a new plane at first. Not til they got their butts handed to them. Then it took a while for them to learn more about this plane and even planned a raid for stealing one, but called the raid off when an A-3 accidentally landed in perfect condition at an RAF field (bet that pilot felt stupid!). After that the RAF put a new engine on the Spit V and in July '42 the spit9 went into service.

So Feb '42 sounds about right for the delayed reaction the RAF had with the 190, til July when they got a new spit version.

Spit9 went into service July '42

[Bruno]

Fw 190A-3 March 1942.
II./JG 26. German Aircraft of the Second World War. Smith and Kay.

[Widewing]

Originally posted by Squire
And without it laboring into an endless debate about ATA/wep ratings (which is not what we are here for), does anybody have a suggestion with a date re the Dora-9 and a pre 1943 190A?

Personally I think the D-9 should be 9-44, its hardly uber vs all the late war allied rides. Spit XIV, P-51D, P-47D ect ect.

190A-3 date perhaps for the 190A.

We already know there were differences, we need a sound opinion now on dates, please.

From what I have read, 190D-9 service began in October 1944 with III/JG-54. I think II/JG26 got their Doras in November.

I have read that the 190A-5 began deliveries in May of 1943. However, Caldwell states that I/JG26 received A-5s in January.  

It seems that the 190A-3 was reaching combat units in late May or early July, 1942. One was mistakenly flown to Britain on July 23, 1942. So, by then they were certainly flying in strength. Caldwell states that JG26 received 190A-3/U3s in June at Le Bourget.

My regards,

Widewing

[Bruno]

According to Axel Urbanke's 'Green Hearts, First in Combat with the Dora 9' he states that D-9s were deliveries to III./JG54 began in Sept '44 but did not fly combat missions until Nov '44. They were 'fully deployed' to the squadron by the end of Sept '44. D-9 production began in August '44.

Also see here:

Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen III./JG54

[Bruno]

oops A-5 I listed as Feb '43 (I./JG 26 Caldwell).

Also for confirmation:

Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen I./JG26

Shows 2.43 as well (20 serviceable)...

[Kev367th]

Not saying D9 wasn't Sep 44, but that was at 1.7ata.

I believe the D9 with 1.8 was Jan 45 earliest (big 'maybe' end Dec 44).
Yes ours is 1.8ata according to E6B.

Maybe revise the date?

Squire doesn't matter if its uber or not.

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/fw190/fw190d9test.html

Toward the end -
By the end of December 1944 there were 183 Fw 190's in operation with the increased performance modification, and 60 more had been delivered with the MW 50 system and were at the point of entering service. *

*  Dietmar Hermann, Focke-Wulf Fw 190 "Long Nose", (Schiffer, Atglen, PA, 2003)

Note - "at the point of entering service" so Jan 45 wouldn't be unreasonable.

[Karnak]

Ok, CBI Mossies.

PR operations using Mossies were initiated on 23 August, 1943.  Mosquito Mk VIs flew eight recon missions in September, one of which landed close behind enemy lines with bullet holes in both oil tanks.  It was repaired and flew off of a makeshift runway three weeks later however.

Buildup was very slow though. By October, 1943 there were the grand total Mossies of two Mosquito F.Mk IIs, three FB.Mk VIs and two PR.Mk IXs.

The first strike mission by a Mk VI was flown on November 1st, 1943.  The following day a Mk VI sent to survey Japanese airfields failed to return.  Japanese radio reported that the Mosquito shot down was "No match for Japanese fighters".  The fighter Mossies were used for low-level straffing operations as well as recon and one was forced down by a Zero over Allied territory.

By 22 January the strength had risen to twenty Mossies, mainly FB.Mk VIs and PR.Mk IXs.  Success was so great that they decided twenty two of the one hundred planned squadrons for the far east theater would be Mossies.

Operations continued to build in number and intensity until 25 October, 1944 when all Mossies were grounded after a Mossie's wing disintergrated in flight while making an attack run or PR run and it was subsequently found that glue used in the Mossie's structure had succumbed to the tropical heat and humidity, excepting those parts/Mossies glued with the experimental formaldehyde glue.   Limited operations were cleared for those aircraft on November 9, 1944.  Numbers built up again and by the end of December, 1944 a respectable number of Mk VIs were performing Rhubarbs again.  On January 15, 1945 four Oscars (Ki-43s) engaged three of 82 Squadron's Mosquito Mk VIs and shot down Flt. Lt. C.R. Goodwin's Mosquito.  Operations grew in intensity for the remainder of the war it seems.

As for what is reasonable for the Mossie's CBI intorduction date, that is up to you.  I wouldn't put it any earlier than 11-43 though and they were rare at that point.  1-44 might work as well.  Or pick a date in 1944 that feels right.

[1K3]

(this's same website that kev used)

Dietmar Hermann wrote of testing the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 "Long Nose"

(... the last paragraph)

In production aircraft it was planned that the MW 50 system could be used to draw fuel or methanol/water from the 115-liter tank. On account of delivery difficulties, however, it was decided to use the tank with methanol-water only, and this was dubbed the "Oldenburg System" (see III./JG 54). This system was installed in production aircraft beginning in November 1944.

[Kev367th]

"With methanol-water, maximum speed at ground level was 585 km/h at 3,300 rpm and 1.76 atm boost?. In production aircraft it was planned that the MW 50 system could be used to draw fuel or methanol/water from the 115-liter tank. On account of delivery difficulties, however, it was decided to use the tank with methanol-water only, and this was dubbed the "Oldenburg System" (see III./JG 54). This system was installed in production aircraft beginning in November 1944. "

1.76atm??????

Installed in production aircraft and entering service are two different things.
Title of thread is "Service Dates".

"and 60 more had been delivered with the MW 50 system and were at the point of entering service." - End Dec 1944

1.8ata was Jan 45.