FW190 vs. BF109: Turn Radius (2011)

[Charge]

"AFAIK that chart is calculated from the flight test data, each plane has a test refered in the right side."

That makes sense. Does it also mean that from aerodynamic figures they figured out like: wetted area, profile drag, wing area, weight and estimated power available and estimate of propeller efficiency they made calculations what should be the approximate top speed of that airframe and if e.g. the power available from the engine was not what it was supposed to be it would reflect back down to aerodynamic figures which were used to determine the theoretical potential of the airframe?

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190a-chart-7oct43.jpg

-C+

[WING47]

Guys,

There is some evidence that the 190 could out turn the 109.

FW-190 vs BF-109 per Werner Seitz:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0YLLBvIBFk&feature=related

In AH the 190 can roll great but cannot turn inside a 109 under normal circumstances it seems.

Do you feel the 190's turn radius is modeled correctly in the current version of AH?


Thanks,

Slade  

Although I am not one to defend the 109, I do not think a 190 will beat it in a knife fight. The 190 has a much higher wing loading than the 109, much higher. Not only that but the 109 has a leading edge slat that at a high AoA will shoot air over the top of the wing, delaying the stall. The 190 has a rather unpredictable stall, almost like a mustang, and a much higher wing loading than it to. The only aircraft based evidence for the 190 being able to out turn a 109 is the center of gravity, and control surface characteristics and placement. I can imagine however the 190 being much more pilot friendly. The 109 had a cramped cockpit and a short control stick, as well as no rudder trim, so pilots were always trying to correct using the rudder pedals, tiring them. The stick on the 109 provided less leverage over the 190s most likely longer one. The pit was also larger and better arranged over the 109. So pilots most likely are saying the 190 can change heading easier through its speed range, where the 109 had a bit more trouble at medium to high speeds. On paper though, the 109 should win.

[33Vortex]

The 190 has a much higher wing loading than the 109, much higher.

The wing loading is something that vary greatly depending on which model you look at. The whole 190 turn radius debate I believe is rooted in the original testing of the 190 where it actually did turn inside the 109 (contemporary E and/or F model). No documentation remains of this testing to this day, so it is all hearsay. The 190 was developed far beyond its original specifications and came to be the heavy laden buff killer we know in AH and ultimately what it became known for.

So bottom line, the FW 190A-1 was a completely different animal than our earliest version, the A-5. In many regards, they do not compare. The first production model might have turned inside the 109 but the later A-5 and A-8 that we have, certainly did not.

[Slade]

Thanks all for the feedback and info on the 190.