OK, the Yanks got theirs, the LWs got theirs, now how about an RAF bird?

[mx22]

 

Originally posted by Pongo:
I disagree.
The Spit IX with a 50cal load out is a 1944 plane. It did not exist before that.
It is a true contempory of the G10 and the A8.
The XIV is a contemporary of the 262 and the D9.
But good luck.

HAHAHAHA,

I just keep on getting more and more surprised with you Pongo. You are indeed a "character"  

To all others, recently I already proved Pongo that SpitXIV is far from uber. Look for a long threat in Aircraft forum for it.
SpitXIV is nothign more then a beefed up SpitIX. It runs faster and can turn as well as SpitIX. On a negative side it has a huge torque and I doubt it's low speed handling will be nowhere near as then one in SpitIX.
That's all I say about SpitXIV for now, and you, all the LW boys, give me a prove that SpitXIV is uber, because the only one I heard so far from Pongo was somehting like "it's just uber"

mx22

[This message has been edited by mx22 (edited 06-24-2000).]

[Nath-BDP]

     

-UBER-

[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 06-24-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 06-27-2000).]

[RAM]

Mx22----->DANNNNNNG !!! DANNNNNG!!! you hear the bell? take a look to he up study      

AKS...Lets see...
Fw190A8's rollrate (well and A5's too) has nothing to do with radial engine or inline engine. It has to do with electrically controled surfaces joint with a reduced wingspan and wing surface. You say it should roll better to one side? well that happens in ALL planes...try to roll at 150mph to the right in a Corsair and then try to do it to the left. Any difference?      
In Fw190 I can roll both sides with no problem at nearly any speed. Nothing to do with engine but with airframe and electric controls.

About BMW801 rated at 2100hp...ahem...not. At least not without MW50, and A8 has no MW50 fitted in AH (and its doubtful it had in RL). But okay I give you the 2100hp figure...at deck level.
What about 15K?
What about 20K?
what about 25K?


Jumo inline engine in D9 retains its power up to 30K while BMW engine gasps for air over 15K. What means that on the deck D9 has a slight better powerloading than A8 (it is a only bit faster because the added drag of the supercharger scoop), and that powerloading is much better on D9 the higher we go. So, as I said, D9 has better powerloading most of the time, especially over 15K.

So low in the deck we have a plane (D9)slightly lighter than A8, with a slight power advantage. That with the 2100hp figure, that is not quite accurate from what I know. What does this means?----------->better powerloading.

And the higher we go, the better powerloading D9 gets related to A8 and A5.

And we have a plane with same wing as A8 except for the outboard cannon. Same wing area in a lighter plane-------------->lower wingloading. Not by much, but that makes D9 a tad better turner than A8...and with the better powerloading of the D9 we have a plane that should have a better turnrate than A8, joint with a better acceleration. That makes D9 a deadly aircraft by any standards.Much deadlier than A8 ,for sure.

As a side note I'll tell you that many D9's came out from factory without MW50, but they got it on the field. So there were MUCH more D9s with MW50 than without it. So IMHO 190D9 should be modelled with Methanol-Water injection.

TO end, AKS I'll tell you that I never said that D9 should turn as A5 does (Where did you read that???), but that it should tunr a TAD better than A8...wich is more than enough for me. My references, as you see, are all taken from Fw190A8, not A5. And D9 SHOULD be better turner than A8...not by much? agree. but still noticeable, and still enought to be the Mustang's nightmare   .

I think you understood me bad somewhere.
------------------
Ram, out

Fw190D9? Ta152H1? The truth is out there
JG2 "Richthofen"

   

[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 06-24-2000).]

[Pongo]

Nash, MX. I have said I wont drag this out in Karnaks thread again and I wont.
We can all trust Pyro in this.
Good luck guys

[Karnak]

Well said Pongo.  Lets let HTC do these things in their own time.  When they judge the planeset ready, they'll do it.  Until then lets focus on having fun with what we've got.

Sisu
-Karnak

[AKDejaVu]

What do you mean?  The Brits have a late-war plane modeled:

British Late War Plane

[AKSeaWulfe]

 

Originally posted by RAM:

About BMW801 rated at 2100hp...ahem...not. At least not without MW50, and A8 has no MW50 fitted in AH (and its doubtful it had in RL). But okay I give you the 2100hp figure...at deck level.

***DID NOT READ ALERT***
"while the A8 was 1,700HP(2,100hp emergency boost)" The A8 has 1700HP, 2100 WITH emergency boost. I'm at work, so I can't read my books(which I gave you as sources.. I want to see the BOOKS you are getting this data from on your end). However, the Fw-190A8 had some form of boost, and I'm almost positive it's MW50. "doubtful"? Do you have more than ONE book on planes? Do you have ANY books with hard data other than say books about a squadron?

 

Jumo inline engine in D9 retains its power up to 30K while BMW engine gasps for air over 15K. What means that on the deck D9 has a slight better powerloading than A8 (it is a only bit faster because the added drag of the supercharger scoop), and that powerloading is much better on D9 the higher we go. So, as I said, D9 has better powerloading most of the time, especially over 15K.

Well there is isn't that much more drag on this "supercharger scoop" you are talking about. The scoop is more of a small force feed air intake about the size of a cup. The drag from this is negligable at best. The 2MPH difference is from the fact the 190 D9 was built with one purpose: to fly at very high altitudes to intercept bomber formations. It was meant for high-speed slashing attacks on bombers, not for turning.

 

So low in the deck we have a plane (D9)slightly lighter than A8, with a slight power advantage. That with the 2100hp figure, that is not quite accurate from what I know. What does this means?----------->better powerloading.

Like I said, 1700HP in my original post. 2100HP with emergency boost aka WEP. At low altitudes it has none to little power advantage because the D9's jumo engine is working very hard to turn that paddle bladed prop in very thick atmosphere.

 

And the higher we go, the better powerloading D9 gets related to A8 and A5.

[/b]

No, the higher you get, the atmosphere is a lot thinner. The engine doesn't strain as hard to turn that HUGE prop in that thin air. Therefore, prop turns faster, plane goes faster.

 

And we have a plane with same wing as A8 except for the outboard cannon. Same wing area in a lighter plane-------------->lower wingloading. Not by much, but that makes D9 a tad better turner than A8...and with the better powerloading of the D9 we have a plane that should have a better turnrate than A8, joint with a better acceleration. That makes D9 a deadly aircraft by any standards.Much deadlier than A8 ,for sure.

[/b]

Yes, well the problem we run into again is it's not just weight, power and wing loading(it's wing area, again as I said before) that determine turning. It's also the plane's aerodynamic properties. If you extend the tail of the Spitfire MkV and then lighten it up a little. The stock spitfire MkV will STILL turn tighter circles than the modified MkV. Reason for this is that there's more air loss and it's a longer body turning through the same amount of air that the stock Mk V is. Aviation is more than "well it's more powerful and is lighter and has same wing area as that one.. must turn better", that's just an assumption.

 

As a side note I'll tell you that many D9's came out from factory without MW50, but they got it on the field. So there were MUCH more D9s with MW50 than without it. So IMHO 190D9 should be modelled with Methanol-Water injection.

[/b]

I know this. However field modified D9s don't have as much fuel for the MW50 as the D9s built at the factory with MW50.

 

TO end, AKS I'll tell you that I never said that D9 should turn as A5 does (Where did you read that???), but that it should tunr a TAD better than A8...wich is more than enough for me. My references, as you see, are all taken from Fw190A8, not A5. And D9 SHOULD be better turner than A8...not by much? agree. but still noticeable, and still enought to be the Mustang's nightmare.

[/b]

The references you are taking should be coming from books... and I haven't seen you produce ANY book names and the authors that wrote these books that you are pulling this information from? I made a mistake, but I know you are talking about the A8 the whole time. I meant to say A8 but it was a simple typo. Nevertheless, the A8 may not be as light as the D9 or as powerful, but it will still turn inside it.

-SW

[Fluf]

I agree with Hangtime - give us the Mustang III (p51b with bubble hood), even though it will only give Hang another weapon to trounce me with.  It would be nice to have a 'stang with a bit of camo.

The Spitfire mkIX was the most numerous model right to the end of the war. I find the IX modeled in AH to be quite formidible. Checking stats shows that it is the aircraft with the best k/d ratio against me.  Anyone
chased a 190A5 with a spit 9? In RL the spit
was faster by a little. Will be interesting to see how it shakes out in AH.
Fluf

[RAM]

Sources: jane's fighting aircraft of WWII,Aircraft ot WWII (by David Donald),Focke wulf FW190, Aces of the western front (John weal).

And all the links provided by Funked in this BBS.

Fw190A8 had no MW50 booster, at least no references demostrate that. In AH Fw190A8 has no MW50 but a manual override that makes engine output better for a long time. But for sure not 2100hp! (I wish it was 2100hp my god)

Agree on the low level problems of the D9 due to its engine tuned for higher altitudes. I dont agree with the propeller issue. Spit XIV had 5 more or less broad proppellers and had no problem low in the deck. So the "jumo engine is working very hard to turn that paddle bladed prop in very thick atmosphere" is not that serious matter isnt it?.

No, the higher you get, the atmosphere is a lot thinner. The engine doesn't strain as hard to turn that HUGE prop in that thin air. Therefore, prop turns faster, plane goes faster.

Sorry, but no. BMW801 GASPED for air at hi altitudes due the lack of a proper supercharger. 801 was a problematic engine when tried to be provided with a turbosupercharger, thats why the engine change was done. Jumo engine retained its power until much higher due the excellen supercharger it had. Again, no matter with the propeller.

Yes, well the problem we run into again is it's not just weight, power and wing loading(it's wing area, again as I said before) that determine turning. It's also the plane's aerodynamic properties.

Ok this one is a thing I dont know much about. I'll gave that as true as you seem to know what are you talking about (something I sure don't when related to aerodynamics  )

field modified D9s don't have as much fuel for the MW50 as the D9s built at the factory with MW50.

I dont think so, AKS, as D9, as you said properly, was an A8 airframe in all aspects but in the lenght and engine. The Auxiliar tank is still there, and that was the tank used for GM1 and MW50 booster's fuel.

So the fuel load should be the same. anyway I talk by assumption here so I may be wrong.

 

[fats]

One of you RAF weenies, pick your LW plane from the current AH plane set. I'll take Spitfire Mk.IX. We fly for say 2 ( ? ) nights and compare stats.

What good would it be for? Perhaps it might display that the Spitfire Mk.IX can rack comparable number of kills and survive with LW planes. Or maybe it would reveal something different altogether?


//fats

[funked]

Spitfire Mk. XIV would be a great matchup for Fw 190D-9.  To minimize whining on either side, HTC should introduce these two together, along with the P-47M.  

[funked]

About Dora vs. A-8:

1.  I don't know if Dora was lighter.  Almost identical weights are shown in the books I have.

2.  The sea level engine power is about the same unless the Dora is using MW 50.  In that case the Dora has about 500 more hp than the A-8.  AFAIK MW 50 was not used on A-8 at all, but was retrofitted to some D-9.

[mx22]

fats,

Are you trying to imply that we, RAF pilots, are not as good as you are?

mx22

[fats]

Mx22,

I just don't think RAF weenies are satisfied with what you got while you should/could be. The Spitfire Mk.IX might be from '42 but that doesn't tell the full story. If I didn't fly LW planes only I'd be flying Spitfire Mk.IX all the time like I did before we got Fw 190A-8 in the game.

If I was implying that I was better than you ( as a whole ), I would've made the challenge with similar planes preferably such that was most comfortable for you. Idea of changing the planes would be for both to see that perhaps the grass isn't as green on the enemy's airfield?


//fats

[minus]

historical match up si D9 vs tempest
and not yankie iron yes it hapaned
1 k of yank figter masacred lone scout :-)))))
check out the pilot lose in last 5 month of the war and u aderstund what the true is

D9 for the LW and the best piston eng plane of the time Tempest  to  Raf
 ps  Jg 2 will be hapy also with Ta 152
just a problem , everibody gona fly it .so i prefer to not hav it :-))))))))))))))