Firstly it seems that the Allies never captured an intack LW aircraft be it 109 or 190.
It always amazes me the lack of common sense, sense of cultural superiority, and lack of understanding of the importance of maintenance to aircraft performance exibited by those who want to see foreign testing of captured designs as the absolute word in performance of a type.
Angus, you keep popping in this thread making snide comments like I am trying to make the allies out to be idiots. They were not and niether were their opponents. Facts are each knew very well what they were doing when it came to aircraft design. Much more so than anyone on this board.
The "idiots" are are us on these boards who launch out silly theories from some simple calculations disregarding all the facts or basing assumptions on partial information.
They knew what they were doing. We don't.
Well Angus were where the allies getting their captured aircraft?
Three FW-190's landed by accident in England. Only one of these exhibit problems with with aileron adjustment. The other two tested do not.
All of them exhibit engine difficulties due to the use of allied avgas. However the British were able to compensate somewhat after bench testing one of the captured motors by changing plugs/mixture/timing settings. They got the motor to run smoothly on the bench.
Unfortunately they never tested it in flight on an aircraft.
The US recieved all of their FW-190's as recovered crashes or abandoned wrecks. You think they might have had some technical difficulties without a Luftwaffe or Focke Wulf trained mechanic?
Even the governments conducting these trials did not take them as absolute and only make general recommendations based on the conditions experienced. The detailed technical informatin they include does allow post war analysis of obvious mistakes in detailed maintenance.
You can take opposing technical/operational instructions and compare them with tested aircraft conditions/behaviors. Especially if these are "quirks" of the design and not common in other designs or common to the testing side. If specifics are mentioned like:
1. Focke Wulf aileron adjustment regulations which list specifc adjustment parameters and specific symptoms in flight.
2. Allied reports which include measurements of those specifics parameters and record specific symptoms.
3. Condition of the aircraft note specific repairs conducted by personnel not trained on the type.
4. Allied personnel point out that something appears
wrong when compared to other captured aircraft of the same type.
All these are clues. If it looks like duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck. Chances are it's a duck.
All the best,
Crumpp
