Question for Pyro

[funked]

Fd-Ski - Spitfire LF Mk. IX could not match 350+ mph of Fw 190A-4 on the deck.  Maybe one of those special 150 octane planes, but not a standard one.

[funked]

Sifter - WOW!  

Best information I have read yet on this issue!

[fd ski]

Fine funked - how about VIII ?
 http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit8.html

 

Is that 190A4 you are mentioning equipped with jado rocket in its bellybutton ?

If i remember correctly it wsa you who concluded that NO BOOST was standard or in widespread use on A4's ?  

Face it, 190 wasn't as sleek as you might like it to be  

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


Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
   www.raf303.org  

[F4UDOA]

Actually the Navy tested a FW-190A5-U8 VRS a F4U-1(no water injection) and F6F-3 and found that the FW-190 and F6F-3 were equal at sea level at a top speed of 334 at sea level and the F4U-1 was 29MPH faster 363mph at sea level. At 25,000ft top speeds attained were F6F-3 at 391mph, F4U-1 at 403Mph and the Fw-190A-5 at 410Mph.

Test were also performed between the P-51A and the Fw-190A(no further designation given)
in 1942. Speed results are the Fw-190 was 2mph faster from sea level to 5000ft. The P51A was between 5 and 15Mph faster up to 15,000ft. This test was performed by the RAF.
My source is "FW-190 Workhorse of the Luftwaffe" by the Smithsonian Institute Press. Take from this what you will but I don't think "nothing can outrun the FW-190 at low altitude" is an accurate statement.
I also don't think the AH F4U-1D can hit 363MPH at sea level either. Wine, Wine, Wine, Wine, Wine!

Thanx
F4UDOA

[combat23]

Yep, guess I forgot to add the later war planes like the spit14 tempest ect. And I was talking about the p51a. Stuff I have read about it say that it was faster then a P51 B or D at low level. It wasn't much good above 15k.

see ya on line

[Pyro]

Hiya Sifter,

I've read the same thing.  I currently am not using the higher emergency power.  I've been debating with myself over it for awhile though and have recently started leaning towards it.  

Reading the whole of the report lead me to believe that the increased emergency power came on the 801 TU and not the 801 D.  I know the TU didn't make it out in very substantial numbers.  

Unfortunately, they aren't very specific about it.  But like I said, I'm leaning towards going with the increased emergency power primarily becauses it bridges together some different performance figures that I have.



------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations

"The side with the fanciest uniforms loses."

[wells]

Fdski, that data for MkVIII, the +25 boost was used with 150 octane fuel.  Normally, +18 was combat setting.  I was referring to a Fw with either MW50 or fuel injection, where speed would be upwards of 370-380 mph at sea level.  Nothing could touch that *until* the Typhoon came along (which was before all those other planes you are talking about).

[funked]

Fd-Ski, Fw 190A-4 that did 350mph+ at s/l was the one tested by His Majesty's Own RAE.  

No MW 50 or anything, just Takeoff/Emergency power.

[fd ski]

Wasn't that the one with bad spark plugs ? Then we just clock it up to 400mph eh ?  


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


Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
   www.raf303.org  

[wells]

Pyro,

Even without the super-duper emergency power, the A8 still seems to climb 'heavy'.  An 8500 lbs A5 could climb at 3900 fpm with WEP.  The A8 in AH climbs at 3400 fpm with WEP, putting it at near 9750 lbs, but with only 2 151/20's and no drop tank?

The A8 (according to Jane's) weighed 9100 lbs with full internal fuel and 2 151/20's.  That's 600 lbs more than an A5 of similar armament, of which 180 lbs is extra fuel.

With a 300L drop tank, it weighed close to 9750 lbs.  

Can you share your data on this one?

[funked]

Wells:

The MK108's were part of the R2 Rüstatz set.

I have a takeoff weight for R2 aircraft (with detailed breakdown) of 4350 kg.  Take away the MK108 + ammo (241 kg) and we are down to 4109 kg or 9040 lb.  Pretty close to the figure you have.

However I believe most of the MK108-armed aircraft were using the R8 set which was a combination of R2 and R7.  R7 was additional armor for the pilot, fuel tank, and for the MK108 ammo containers.  I don't know the weight but it sure looks heavy!

Anyways, it seems possible that the AH empty unarmed weight is based on an R8 or R7 aircraft.  In that manner we could still get the proper weight deductions for using lighter armament, but we still carry the weight of the R7 armor.

I'll go look for a weight on the armor.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 01-20-2000).]

[wells]

Funked,

weretiger posted a bunch of stuff earlier in the thread.  I guess the r7 (sturm armour) is 111 kg with another 200kg optional armour that could be added to the r8 package for a total of 311 kg of armour.  That would make sense, but I just wanna know for sure, ya know?  If we have all these weapons options, why don't we have the option of not taking the r8 armour?  It looks like it was an option.  Heck, I'd dump the sturm armour as well...ground pounding is for the B-52's er...I mean B-26's!  

[weretiger]

hello
to put things in perspective
all the info i have posted are comming from original sources.
us archive (smithonians captured german documents), PRO air40 (mainly)
and a fw document technical description no 248. (the one that stiffer quotes.)

for the speed.
from the A3,A4 and A5 with 2 mg and 4 20mil guns
and a weight of from 8460 (3.8 T) without the pilot (200lb for the uk or  220 lb/100 kg german and US)
combat speed
399 mph @ 21 k (2400 rpm)
333 mph @ SL (2400 rpm)
can be sustained for 30 minutes.

The top speed was
418 @ 22k (2700 rpm)
350 @ Sl (2700 rpm)
with the engine at takeof or emmergency.
this is without any additive (ie no petrol injection, no mw50), can be sustained for 3 minutes.
and 428 mph @ 26 K with GM1 (if used)

you can add 2 mph if you remove the outer guns (mgff in that case.)
I really believe this is correct because, I have been able to cross reference it with  the REA, the US and geman documments.

for the A6 performance decreased a bit (1 to 2 mph)as weigth increased 8575 lbs. (without the pilot).
This is the weigth that puzzeld me the most as i do have several contracdicting value...

see post bellow for the A7/A8.

[juzz]

The A-6 changed the outer cannon to MG151/20(42kg), replacing the older MGFF(28kg). Plus they redesigned/strengthened the wing to be able to use the MK108 cannon.

[funked]

Weretiger - Your speeds are very close indeed to the USAAF figures I have obtained.

Wells - Don't know how I missed Weretiger's info.  Yeah I agree, 311 kg of armor would account perfectly for the weight discrepancy.