Dora-9 MW 50

[C_R_Caldwell]

This is an excerpt from a reply I gave in another thread ('Dora Charts').Since the thread was very long & I felt that what I wanted to say was important, I started this new thread :-

I have a couple of books devoted solely on the Dora, which have great photos as well colour views of the Doras in question.All the Doras in question were examples fielded during 1945.One of the books is Jerry Crandall's excellent work on the Doras of the "Galland Circus".That book looks at the Doras that flew top cover protection for JV 44's 'turbos' .

Of the 4 Doras depicted in that book, 1 is an early production Dora-9 using an A-8 canopy & central fuselage with the rear fuselage filler.The other 3 Doras are 2 later-model Dora-9s (standard bubble canopy & D-9 fuselage etc), and the 3rd is a D-11.

Of the 4 a/c involved, 3 use MW 50 (it's easy to tell - there is a triangle with MW 50 written within it next to the rear fuse tank filler hole) including the D-11, whilst the 4th example (a later-model D-9) strangely had no MW 50 marking, but had a small yellow circle on the port side of the upper cowl.On closer inspection, it turns out this D-9 did not in fact use MW 50, but was fitted with a 'Laderdrucksteigerungs-Rüstsatz' fiel-modification which was, in Crandall's words, a " 'Supercharger pressure' boosted engine for increased horsepower from the Jumo 213A1 ".

My other Dora stuff shows almost all the D-9's depicted as using MW-50 (some are only port views so I can't tell what fuel they are using).

The point is, if we are going to be historically accurate, we should be flying a boosted D-9.Just because it'll be very fast doesn't mean it should be perked.My God, the late model G-10 modelled in AH can clock at over 450mph TAS, but it's not perked! The boosted D-9 will have excellent performance, but it doesn't have the turn rate of a P-51 (or even a 190A-5).It will be similar to a G-10 in performance, with better roll, but poorer turn.

All this talk about putting restraints on the D-9 so that it can exist happily in AH is ridiculous IMHO.It will fit in nicely with a/c like the P-51 and G-10.Don't forget that whilst the D-9 will have excellent roll at low-med speeds, at hi-speed (>400 IAS) the pony will probably roll much better than the D-9, as well as being *easily* able to out-turn it.The D-9 will be a great match for the P-51, but that's all - a match.

There are issues in having a/c like the D-9, P-51, G-10 etc in AH unperked, but the only way to fix that is to either i9ntroduce an RPS, or make the late-war fighters that are currently unperked as "low perk" a/c.Why should the Dora-9 be treated differently than the P-51 & get its legs chooped off? We should be using the same rules of inclusion for all fighters, either that, or use different rules.

If a boosted D-9 deserves to be perked, I expect the P-51, G-10 as well as that 4 cannoned wank-machine, the Chog to be perked too.Some ppl would like to throw in the N1K2-J as well- leave the Dora-9 alone plz...

PS:-Btw, all the machines in Crandall's book are using 96-octane fuel...

[fscott]

I haven't really decided on whether I want the D9 perked or not, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Just comparing a plane to another plane which may be just a tad slower in most altitudes is not good enuff.

Imagine a speed chart where each plane is 5 mph faster then the previous plane for most altitudes.  At some point one of the planes will be perked, but then everyone will be saying, Hey! Look at the plane that's just 5 mph slower and it's not perked!

I dunno if the D9 with MW50 has crossed that line yet. That's for HT to decide, and there are many other variables such as climb, roll, maneuverability, combat turn, etc which will decide a plane's fate.

fscott

[C_R_Caldwell]

Whether you want the Dora perked or not is irrelevant because it's up to HTC to decide, & I understand it will *not* be perked.The only question is what sort of D-9 will be modelled, not whether it'll be perked.

My point was that some ppl have been bleating about the speed of a boosted D-9 (particularly one with MW 50 & C3 96-octane avgas), yet this machine has a max TAS slightly lower than a G-10 which is not perked.Its climb-rate is also lower (significantly so at some alts).Its turn rate does not compare to a P-51, and neither does its handling at >400mph IAS.It rolls almost as well as an A-8, which puts it as 1 of the best "rollers" in AH, though both the P-51 & F4U will outroll it easily >400mph IAS.

It's going to be a great a/c, sure - no doubt about it.But as Fscott said in his reply, it's the total package that counts.I believe a D-9 with MW 50 should give us an a/c roughly comparable to the P-51 & 109G-10, but it won't compete with the Tempest <20k or the Ta 152 >33k.

As the vast majority of Doras ended up using MW 50 -those earlier models that didn't were modified in the field to use water-methanol injection & new models were built from scratch with MW 50 from late '44 - it seems a little incongruous not to model a D-9 with MW 50.Unfortunately I expect AH's D-9 will probably use B4 + MW 50 (1,900HP) to mollify those who are complaining (even though I am to understand from early '45 the majority of D-9's used C3 + MW 50).

I love the Dora as much as most, but those who are painting it out to be an über über-fighter are doing it a grave misjustice.It appears some ppl are now beginning to think that nothing but an unboosted D-9 should be allowed unperked.That would result in an a/c which would still be very good, but nowhere near the true capacity of most of the operational D-9s that saw service during WW2.

Anyway, as always, this is all IMHO 8?D !!! As usual, most will probably disagree with me!

[This message has been edited by C_R_Caldwell (edited 03-05-2001).]

[This message has been edited by C_R_Caldwell (edited 03-06-2001).]

[R4M]

The planes you describe match pretty well the description given by niklas on the Fw190D9 with "special WEP" that allowed the Jumo to deliver 1900hp. That seems to be the plane doing 380mph on the deck and 448mph at 21000 feet

The "problem"   is that the Fw190D9 with MW50 will be a monster doing almost 400mph on the deck!!!!!.

I am possibly the most hardcore Fw190 fanatic in this board, and I've loved the D9 since I was a little kid. THe Fw190D9 with MW50, described as niklas did, is a perk monster. That plane seems that could outturn easily Me109G6s, so that means that the P51D should be easily outturned too, the tempest too...in fact it should outturn most of the planes here. It was a plane that rolled like in a dream, fast as hell,with good sustained turnrate (not turning radius), great acceleration, great climbrate...

It is a perk monster   .

   

Originally posted by C_R_Caldwell:
Whether you want the Dora perked or not is irrelevant because it's up to HTC to decide, & I understand it will *not* be perked.The only question is what sort of D-9 will be modelled, not whether it'll be perked.

90% sure it is a 1900hp, special WEP, Fw190D9. THAT is the plane that should NOT be perked, because it is just a match for the P51D. THe D9 wont turn, dive, nor have weapons as good as the P51 has, while the D9 will outroll, outaccelerate and outrun the P51D. Its almost a perfect match, both planes are in the same level.

I would like to see the MW50 as a "perk" option for the Fw190D9...but an expensive perk option. It should cost the same (in fact a bit more) to ride a D9 with MW50 as it costs to ride a Tempest.

That IMHO  



[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-06-2001).]

[StSanta]

 

I am possibly the most hardcore Fw190 fanatic in this board, and I've loved the D9 since I was a little kid. THe Fw190D9 with MW50, described as niklas did, is a perk monster. That plane seems that could outturn easily  Me109G6s, so that means that the P51D should be easily outturned too, the tempest too...in fact it should outturn  most of the planes here. It was a plane that rolled like in a dream, fast as hell,with good sustained turnrate (not turning radius), great acceleration, great climbrate...

Hm, all I've read regarding wing loading of D9 suggests that it will have an even worse turn performance than the A8, because it has very similar wing loading.

In other words, it won't be able to turn. And climb rate charts Nath provided showed it at 3.5k at sea level, nothing too impressive.

------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
"Live to pull, pull to live"

[Jochen]

Satan, D-9 weights only marginally more than A-8 (about 100 kg if I remember correctly) but it has more engine power. These things combined I think the turn performance will be very similar atleast. There have been quotes saying that D-9 turned better than A-8 but I don't know if scientific analysis support these claims.

One thing I'm quite sure... Dora was not the cement truck it is in Warbirds. I'm sure it will get fair treatment this time around.

------------------
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski

Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87D, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190A[/b, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.

Sieg oder bolsevismus!

[R4M]

 

Originally posted by StSanta:
Hm, all I've read regarding wing loading of D9 suggests that it will have an even worse turn performance than the A8, because it has very similar wing loading.

In other words, it won't be able to turn. And climb rate charts Nath provided showed it at 3.5k at sea level, nothing too impressive.

Santa, read the thread about Dora charts, by MANDOBLE. Naudet charts and Niklas posts tell a whole different story.

First of all, the Fw190D9 was 300lbs LIGHTER than Fw190A8, so the wingloading is less in D9 than in A8.

 Second, the Fw190D9 we are getting here most probably is the one making 380mph on the deck and 448mph at 21000feet, so, according to Naudet's charts it is a NON-MW50 Fw190D9 developing 1900hp, so having a better acceleration and climbrate than the Fw190A8, but not by much.


the Fw190D9 with MW50, according to those charts, make 395mph at SL,  with an engine delivering 2100hp, pulling from an airframe 300lbs lighter than the Fw190A8...you get the idea  

The Fw190D9 with MW50, if it is as naudet's charts describe, it is a perk plane. Without MW50, and with a 1900hp engine, it should be a non-perk plane.

MOre info on this thread  
 http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001721.html

[MANDOBLE]

What I expect from the Dora with MW50 (non MW50 Dora is a nonsense):
1 - A very fast plane, but slower than G10 at medium and hi alts.
2 - A plane with lower climb rate than any 109G at any alt.
3 - The second worst turner in the game (first is the 190A8).
4 - A plane with very good hi speed control, comparable to the P51D.
5 - A plane with pathetic armament (useful for less than 300 yards).

Are we really talking about a perk plane just because the extra speed? Our actual Typhoon will be almost as fast on the deck, and will outturn, outgun and even outclimb the Dora without problems (is our Typhoon correctly modeled?).

Oh! And I want the correct roll rates back for the 190s. Now it is extremely risky to scissor with a Thypoon...

[This message has been edited by MANDOBLE (edited 03-06-2001).]

[R4M]

 

Originally posted by MANDOBLE:
What I expect from the Dora with MW50 (non MW50 Dora is a nonsense)

According to Niklas, and matching Naudet's charts, MW50 Dora is a plane that outturns, outclimbs, outaccelerates, outruns, and outrolls a Hawker Tempest. Wich, BTW is a clear perk plane, an arena beater. Even worse than a SpitXIV if you ask me.

Also according to Niklas and Naudet's charts, Non-MW50, Special WEP Dora is a plane that outruns most of the planes of this planeset (the G10 and P51 are faster over 23K, and the Typhoon is a couple of mph faster at deck level), and outrolls all of them except a Fw190A.

It should accelerate better than the Fw190A8, and a bit worse than the A5. better initial climbrate than the A8, but worse than A5. And unlike both A8 and A5, over 10K the D9 holds its acceleration and climbrate   .

It has a bad turning, tho it should have better sustained turnrate than A8. Niklas assevered that it would have a worse initial turning (due increased yaw stability due the longer nose), but a better sustained turning (lower wingloading and better powerloading than A8).

It still wont turn with a P51D, wont dive with it (less still if the dive is a 0g one), and wont have the long range and awesome accurate weapons the P51D has.

And the P51D still will have better hispeed maneouverability.

A pretty even match between both planes   .


[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-06-2001).]

[niklas]

ehh R4M i said the Dora turns better than a 190A8 - unfortunatly this doesn´t mean that the Dora is a good turnfighter now, because the A8 is indeed one of the worst turnfighter.

An ex-doro pilot told me that the dora turned better than a 109G - this was different for the 190A. On the other hand, he didn´t say whether he speaks about a sustained turn or a initial turn, starting from 350mph.

He also said that his dora was almost equal to a P51 in turning, the first circle he was able to stay with the P51. According to him the P38 turned worse.

Another interesting point: He mentioned another modification kit (Rüstsatz): A third cannon between the gear where usually a bomb is carried.

niklas

[MANDOBLE]

 

Originally posted by R4M:
 According to Niklas, and matching Naudet's charts, MW50 Dora is a plane that outturns, outclimbs, outaccelerates, outruns, and outrolls a Hawker Tempest.

MW50 will not increase the Dora turning performance, but it will help to loose less E in a 360d turn. Also, IMO, MW50 Dora will be outclimbed by the Tempest at almost any altitude. Tempest will outaccelerate any MW50 Dora in a dive. So, IMO, the only advantages of the MW50 Dora will be the roll rate, the horizontal acceleration at low alt (perhaps also at medium alts), and, perhaps, the top speed at some altitudes.
We'll see, but I think the Dora will be a match for P51 and will be far behind the Tempst overal performance (remember, turning is also a vital key here).
And, a final note, Tempest performance is as is all the time, MW50 Dora performance is as is for less than 10 mins.

[Graywolf]

 

Originally posted by MANDOBLE:

Oh! And I want the correct roll rates back for the 190s. Now it is extremely risky to scissor with a Thypoon...

Are you sure? 190's seem to outroll the Yak by quite a margin (and the Yak in not exactly a slow roller)


------------------
Graywolfe <tim@flibble.org>

[MANDOBLE]

Yep Graywolf. Some studies were done and the results were posted in this board. Basically, the results show a 190A with slower roll rate than it should, and, for example, the Thypoon and the SpitIX with higher roll rates than they should. Dont remember the yak numbers.

[fscott]

Actually I think you all should be comapring the 190d9 to the 109g10 since it the perkiest non-perk plane we have so far.  And then decide does the d9 cross over that cutoff line.

Notice that the Tempest will be heavily perked, yet it begins to lose it's edge beyond 10k.  And why is it being perked? Because it is so fast on the deck?  Well just about any other current hot-rod plane like the P51, G10, will outperform it above 10k. So I think you should focus on low altitude performance since this is where most fights take plane and it seems HT is also focusing on that too.

In the case of the Ta152, it can do it all even down low.  It may not be the fastest down low, but it will be able to turn and climb well.


fscott

[Naudet]

1st i think the neither the D9 or the Tempest should be perked, they belong into the same power class like the P51, the G-10 or when they will give it to us sometime the Spit XIV.


Now to the D9 vs. tempest. From the info i have yet (Book sources and data posted in the FA NG durin the hot discussion about the D9 modeling there).
The D9 will, Outclimb, outspeed, outturn and outroll the Tempest (it will even outroll the P51 at high speed, cause up to the aileron control off the FW was exellent up to 400mph IAS and only got a little harder beyond that speed, but still it had a wonderful roll), the Tempest may only outdive the D9, and even this isnt sure.

Now all Tempest fans will cry no, but the D9 has a normal loaded weight of 9500 lbs. while the Tempest has 11500lbs., the D9 is driven by an engine with a max hp of 2240HP, and the strongest engine used for the Tempest in WW2 (that i found in my books) was a 2240HP Sabre. So the Tempest actually weights 2000 lbs. more. This gives the D9 better climb, and speed and it can also hold the E better in a turn which compensates for the higher wing loading. The D9 will also outaccelerate the Tempest.

In the post "Dora charts" i refered to a comparison flight between a Tempest and an A3. R4M stated that the A3 was nearly 1100 lbs. lighter than A8, this may be right, but my i refer to the D9 here and my data show 8900 lbs. for A3 normally loaded, and 9500 lbs for D9 (normally loaded) which is only 600 lbs. difference. And the test between the A3 and tempest had to be aboarded cause the engine of the A3 wore out. So i would say it never delivered its 1700HP for the trials, also the GB FW190 pilot was not allowed to bring the A3 to its absolute limit, cause the plane was to valueable to be lost in a crash after a stall.
And last but not least the D9 was able to deliver 2240HP which are 540HP more than the A3 and they for sure more than compensate for the 600 lbs. increase in weight.
This also lead me to the idea that the D9 will totaly outclass the Tempest in climb, the tempest was also beaten by the A3 above 1500 feet, and the D9 climb far better than the A3, especially at higher alt.

And Cpt. Brown of the RAF who flew all WW2 fighter planes, rated the D9 and Spit XIV as the 2 Top fighters in WW2. And he had to admit that the RAF had no MW-50 or GM-1 for the GE fighters, so all tests were flown with the normal 96 Octane fuel, while the Spits were tested with 150 Octane fuel. Now put MW-50 into the D9 and fly the XIC with lower rated fuel (what was usual at the frontline) and u can imagine what a good plane the D9 must have been. Actually the Spit XIV was a better fighter than the Tempest, cause of this i would like HTech to add the XIV as fast as possible.

One word to the TA152, this bird must be perked, cause like the P51H or the Spit MK 22, it was one of the fighters that showed the peak of the evolution of the piston engined planes. 472 mph Top Speed can only be toped by a jetfighter.