spit V climb vers 190A8 ?

[combat23]

Hey all,

was flying the spit V off line last nite and it seems like it climbs much faster than the 190A8. Did not do any time to climbs  or anything,  just watched the foot per mim gage.

Is the spit v supposed to out climb a 190A8?

I know that the 190A 3- 4 would climb away from the mark v spit with no problem and was comparable to the spit mk 9. the 190a8 is slower in top speed and climb than the A4 but I would think it should at least be comparable to the spit V. And not as good as the spit mark 9 (as is the case in AH)

Any input on this?   Got to keep the spit -190 pot stired

see ya on line

[Jochen]

Difficult question.

Differences between A-8 and A-4:

-outer wing guns are MG 151 instead of MG FF
-cowl guns are MG 131 instead of MG 17
-nose is about 25 cm longer
-additional armour

Engine power output should be quite similar (BMW801D-2?)

Aerodynamically those are almost identical, most significant difference is in weight and A-8 sure does weight more. This leads to an assumption that A-8 climbs worser than A-4.

I'm quite sure that A-4 should outclimb early war mk.V and be roughly in par with mk.IX, atleast RAE report said so. Late war mk.V's are quite different planes with more powerful engines, usually optimized to some alt band.

I can't find any evidence why A-8 should outclimb mk.V but I don't have much raw data on either plane. Maybe funked or Wells could help us out in this one?

------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (Warbirds)

jochen
JG 2 'Richthofen' (Aces High)

If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!

[Karkaha]

According Mike Spick, Luftwaffe Fighter Aces,
ISNB 1-85367-255-6.

Spit V:
Rate of Climb: 3,650 ft/min

Fw190-A8:
Rate of Climb: 3,600 ft/min

If you like modern mythology and myths, y'll love Lutftwaffe  

[This message has been edited by Karkaha (edited 03-02-2000).]

[funked]

They oughta climb about the same.

That 3,600 fpm figure for the A-8 is on the high end of the figures I have seen.

For A-5 and A-4 I have seen 3,800 to 4,000 fpm, for aircraft with only two cannons.  These have the same engine as a fully armed and armoured A-8 but weighed about 1000 pounds less.  I think 3200-3400 fpm is probably about right at S/L.

Note these are all maximum rates, near sea level.  As you go higher, engine power (and thus climb rate) decays.

The best figures I have seen for Spitfire V are about 3200 to 3300 fpm from S/L up to 15k, then dropping to 1170 fpm at 30k.  I've seen a 3500 fpm figure but that was an unarmed plane.

[juzz]

 

Note these are all maximum rates, near sea level. As you go higher, engine power (and thus climb rate) decays.

You're looking at the same info I am, yet you go and say that...  

Both the Spitfire and Fw190A's engine power goes up with altitude(at least, for a while  ). The Spitfire Mk V's maximum climbrate is reached at around 13-18k. The Fw190A at about 4k, then it drops until about 10k when the supercharger's second gear kicks in and it increases again up to 20k.  

[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 03-02-2000).]

[wells]

Juzz,

The M suffix had something to do with a mod to the supercharger, reducing it's effectiveness (and restoring some sea level power).  Planes with the M model engine were most likely clipped wing for max performance under 5k.  The only difference between the Merlin 45 and 61 being that second stage supercharger which draws some sea level power from the Mk IX.  Below 10k, MkV and IX should be about equal in both climb and speed...wouldn't surprise me if the MkV could even outclimb the Spit IX below 5k being lighter and all with as much power.

[juzz]

Ahh... Maybe it signifies cropped impellor blades? Which is possibly why it can go up to 18lbs boost.

I have read this...

...after flying IX's for a time, I wonder what is like to go back to a V. Oh Christmas! Dear oh dear, it was like getting from an MG back into a mini. The lack of climb, the lack of power - but I suppose it might have been a bit more manoeuvrable.

And this...

The blower didn't come in until about 12,000ft, so at low level it wasn't much better than the V, but most of the combat was above that.

The LF.Mk V with the Merlin 50 was more powerful/fast at low altitudes, but a normal Mk V would have less power/speed than the IX at all altitudes, I think.

Btw: The Spit IX had an intercooler added, which would improve engine performance at lower altitudes where the air is hotter I would imagine.

[funked]

Juzz, you are right, I should have been more specific.

[combat23]

Ok.....So it sounds like the general opinion is that the A8 should be at least comparaible to the spit V in climb rate.  At least up to 20-22-K? Don't know how the spit v was at high alt, but all 190A's fell short above those hights.

Well guess I won't squeak to much, Unless of course when we get an A4,5,6,7, it doesnot keep up with a spit 9 and blow away a V.

See ya on line