questions about the 190 a5 versus a8

[Zigrat]

i plotted their data on the same axis..

     
     
     
     

just doesnt seem to be that a 700 pound increase in take off weight (~8.5%) should cause a 25% reduction in climb speed.

1) Below 2k feet where the a8 gets the extra bootst, it appears to help with the top speed, but not climb rate.

2)In the 7-17k foot range under military power, the 190 a5's engine gains bhp, but the 190 a8s loses it.

3) The 190 a8's engine starts losing power at 1k feet lower than the 190 a5.

4) Under wep cclimb, the a8 starts losing climb rate at 2k, the 190 a5 at 4k. I thought the 190a8 had improved extreme low alt performance?

Using a 200 ft Reference area i calculated the CD,0 of the 190 a5 to be .048, seems pretty in line with my expectations. But the wierd gyrations in the power curve seem very strange for a airplane mounting close to the same engine... between 1942 and 1944 did the germans really decide to design up a worse revision of their engine?

[This message has been edited by Zigrat (edited 11-02-2000).]

[Nath-BDP]

Whats your question?

[RAM]

So?

Apart of a marked lack of top speed for the Fw190A5 (wich I think that everyone had noticed already) at 20K I dont see anything too serious...

BTW I dont mind about 20K topseed because I rarely go over 15K


 

[Hristo]

A-8 is still a better plane, IMO.

Guns, dive and deck speed make it better than the A-5.

[RAM]

But acceleration and maneouverability makes A5 be able to survive most dangerous situations while A8 can't  

[Fishu]

...and speed.

190a5 should be at 15mph faster than A-8  

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Fishu:
...and speed.

190a5 should be at 15mph faster than A-8  

At 20K more or less,yes...

But I dont mind...you'll rarely see me over 17K  

[Pongo]

"
BTW I dont mind about 20K topseed because I rarely go over 15K

At 20K more or less,yes...

But I dont mind...you'll rarely see me over 17K
"
One more post and you will be at 20k..
more or less

[RAM]

 

ein?...dont understand what you mean pongo...

anyway I did another post   so, I'll see it by first hand isnt it?  

[Fishu]

 

Originally posted by RAM:
At 20K more or less,yes...

But I dont mind...you'll rarely see me over 17K  

Chart clearly shows to me that 190A-5 leads by about 15mph in all altitudes  

Funny thing though.. I prefer A-8 over A-5

[fd ski]

I don't know if you guys realise that A5 was based on the very successful germna fighter Fw 190A4. The test pilot of Fw 190A4 said that he could make it even better and he did !!!

So, yet again it proves that all planes are direct desendends of Fw 190 !!!


------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF

Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998

Northolt Wing Headquarters

[funked]

 

...and speed.
190a5 should be at 15mph faster than A-8

Sorry Fishu, that's simply incorrect.  There is no data to support such a claim.

[Fishu]

 

Originally posted by funked:
Sorry Fishu, that's simply incorrect.  There is no data to support such a claim.

I have seen data of A-5 having about 15mph speed advantage over A-8.
(didn't we discuss about this couple months ago and you agreed?)

[Zigrat]

no one knows the answer? especially the second graph. Why is the a8's engine losing power when the a5s is gaining it? (between 8 and 17k)

why is the a8s climb not improved from 0-2k where it has quite a bit more power available than the a5?

why under WEP at 4000 feet is there a more than 1000 FPM difference in climbrate?When you look at the speed charts for this same point, the a5 and the a8 have (approx) teh same speed at this point.

The only curve that behaves like it should to me is the first. It shows that the a8 has a 3% higher CD,0 than the a5 (to be expected since of bumps for mg131 etcera).

Then taking this data for CD,0 and looking at power for max speed at sea level you can calculate that 6% more power is being generated by the a8's engine at sea level, military power (withouyt wep the a5 and the a8 have equal speeds on the deck)

so then look at the climb rate charts under military. a 600 FPM difference when both aircraft have the same bhp/(CD,0*A).

Doesn't make sense to me.

[-ammo-]

 

Originally posted by Zigrat:
no one knows the answer? especially the second graph. Why is the a8's engine losing power when the a5s is gaining it? (between 8 and 17k)

why is the a8s climb not improved from 0-2k where it has quite a bit more power available than the a5?

why under WEP at 4000 feet is there a more than 1000 FPM difference in climbrate?When you look at the speed charts for this same point, the a5 and the a8 have (approx) teh same speed at this point.

The only curve that behaves like it should to me is the first. It shows that the a8 has a 3% higher CD,0 than the a5 (to be expected since of bumps for mg131 etcera).

Then taking this data for CD,0 and looking at power for max speed at sea level you can calculate that 6% more power is being generated by the a8's engine at sea level, military power (withouyt wep the a5 and the a8 have equal speeds on the deck)

so then look at the climb rate charts under military. a 600 FPM difference when both aircraft have the same bhp/(CD,0*A).

Doesn't make sense to me.

who cares-- grab a USAAC aircraft and go