Author Topic: 190A8 fueltank question (Read 1139 times)

Charge · « **Reply #15 on:** January 31, 2007, 06:57:37 AM »

"If the aux tank fuels were used for both flight and emergency power, then the aux tank should not be used for flight until both the fwd/aft fuels run dry"

Why? If its in the regular fuel system I bet it is drained first.

IF it's used to inject the fuel in the eye of the supercharger it is used only when EN is used to provide further enrichment and cooling for intake mixture.

Then it would easily be replaced by MW mixture.

So where do the pipes actually go from aux tank? Was there two optional routes or only one and that to the supercharger?

-C+

Sweet2th · « **Reply #16 on:** January 31, 2007, 07:54:21 AM »

I always burn the forward tank off first, it makes the difference in the 190-A-8's performance.

Apeking · « **Reply #17 on:** February 03, 2007, 08:42:41 AM »

"Injection of the C3 grade fuel mounted in the aux tanks, IIRC, ETC at great length"

Given your aggressive mistake in the eighth post, and your unimpressive and immediate backpedal in the tenth post, how on earth do you expect anybody to take you and your words seriously? You remind me of the third personality type here.

And no doubt you will leap in and argue that Erich von Manstein did not say those things (I have heard the same anecdote applied to the Soviet army). Well done.

Nilsen · « **Reply #18 on:** February 03, 2007, 08:56:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sweet2th
I always burn the forward tank off first, it makes the difference in the 190-A-8's performance.

A negative one i would say based on above mentioned facts.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #19 on:** February 03, 2007, 09:25:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Apeking
"Injection of the C3 grade fuel mounted in the aux tanks, IIRC, ETC at great length"

Given your aggressive mistake in the eighth post, and your unimpressive and immediate backpedal in the tenth post, how on earth do you expect anybody to take you and your words seriously? You remind me of the third personality type here.

And no doubt you will leap in and argue that Erich von Manstein did not say those things (I have heard the same anecdote applied to the Soviet army). Well done.

What are you babbling about for Kweassa has only posted once in this thread?

Sweet2th · « **Reply #20 on:** February 03, 2007, 08:08:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nilsen
A negative one i would say based on above mentioned facts.

Yea considering those guys are experten in the field right?You gonna go hop in thier Jules Vern Time Machine and go get the real deal on it too?

I have always burnt the forward tank first, and that is my choice, no one said you have to follow.

Krusty · « **Reply #21 on:** February 03, 2007, 08:33:10 PM »

Like I mentioned in my FW190 weights thread, the ONLY reason it "flies better" Is because you're some 350lbs lighter. That doesn't mean it's more stable, just lighter. It would be like taking 350lbs from the nose of a spitfire -- sure it'll turn a bit tighter because the weight's been reduced a lot, but it's going to stall out left and right if you pull any real Gs.

Same for the 190. The front and aft tanks are almost identical in size. Draining one will result in the same weight loss as draining the other. Only, if you drain the front you'll flop about, and if you drain the aft you won't flop as much.

Sure, it's your choice, but it's a matter of weight and center of gravity. You chose poorly.

Then again, not everybody bothers pulling many Gs in a 190. Maybe I'm one of the few?

Virage · « **Reply #22 on:** February 03, 2007, 10:47:14 PM »

In theory a cg to the rear of center of pressure will increase total lift (tailplane adds lift) ,decrease stall speed and increase turn performance. Spin recovery would be harder however. I don't know if this is modeled in AH.

Aside from decreasing total lift, a forward cg only 'helps' turning down. Turns with the lift vector above the horizon would be degraded.

Krusty · « **Reply #23 on:** February 04, 2007, 01:56:55 AM »

The CoG is best toward the front half of the wing, if memory serves. It should be near the thickest part of the wing (something to do with AoA and stall benefits). The 190A8 is dangerously unstable, too far to rear. So in other planes maybe shifting it aft might do something, but the default 190a8 is past that point already.

zorstorer · « **Reply #24 on:** February 04, 2007, 03:34:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sweet2th
I always burn the forward tank off first, it makes the difference in the 190-A-8's performance.

Take up a 190F8 (i know it's not EXACTLY the same, but close enough) 100% fuel with the 500kg egg and the rockets...

1st time up set it to burn the forward tank, let it burn at least half the tank....then climb to about 5 or 6k then dive as you would a dive-bombing run, about 45deg dive angle...keep the trottle wide open...drop the bomb about D1000 out, now pull out about D800 from the ground or so....work well????

2nd time do exactly the same thing with a new plane

but this time burn the aft first...then come back and tell me it does not matter which tank you burn first

Sweet2th · « **Reply #25 on:** February 04, 2007, 07:55:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by zorstorer
Take up a 190F8 (i know it's not EXACTLY the same, but close enough) 100% fuel with the 500kg egg and the rockets...

1st time up set it to burn the forward tank, let it burn at least half the tank....then climb to about 5 or 6k then dive as you would a dive-bombing run, about 45deg dive angle...keep the trottle wide open...drop the bomb about D1000 out, now pull out about D800 from the ground or so....work well????

2nd time do exactly the same thing with a new plane but this time burn the aft first...then come back and tell me it does not matter which tank you burn first

The F model fly's like a **** no matter what you do with the fuel tanks.

zorstorer · « **Reply #26 on:** February 04, 2007, 12:06:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sweet2th
The F model fly's like a **** no matter what you do with the fuel tanks.

So did you try it?