please adjust the 190A8

[Ardy123]

here is the lift chart for the root... NACA 23015...

http://www.worldofkrauss.com/foils/1701



anyone have a copy of winfoil? with it you can make charts for wing foil shapes.
 
I have xfoil but it is cumbersome, and I am struggling to figure out how to make the lift coefficient charts.

EDIT: does the FW 190A8 in game root stall at 8deg AoA?

[Guppy35]

If the A8 is, graphicly and weight wise, an up-armored late model, but is powered by a mid-model engine, and the spitfire IX is graphicly and weight wise a mid-model, but powered by a late-model engine (or even a mid-model engine), then the A8 is at a greater disadvantage in AH than it was in real life.

Do you see why thats a bit unfair? Incase you don't, I'll explain:

The A-8 could be representing a less common up-armored version (greater weight than normal), and is powered by a mid-model engine, with less power than the engines that were used with the up-armored versions. I'm trying to find out exactly what variant we have by weight right now, but I haven't nailed anything down, so its an open question.

However, the spitfire IX (I don't think) didn't go through any significant weight increases, as did the A-8. So powering a late model with a mid-model engine wouldn't make the power to weight ratio significantly far off of historical values, unlike with the A-8.

What is the 'significant' weight we're talking about.  I keep coming across 200 pounds in this thread.  Is that what the fuss is about?  In terms of the Spit IX, the weights changed upwards of 500 pounds depending on armament, fuel tankage, external hard points, etc.

What do you think the A8 should do that it doesn't?  It's a heavier bird the then the A5 which is going to be the better knife fighter.   It traded agility for better armament and brute force while performance wasn't much different in terms of speed.  The job it had was different then the A5.

Any of the WW2 fighters went through that.  Bigger engines and power to carry more fuel, armor and guns.  

[bustr]

Ardy,

The angle of incidence at the tip was different then at the root. I think it had about a 3 degree washout. You have a wing that changes from NACA 23015 at the root to NACA 23009 at the tip with a 3 degree washout. If you look around I think all of the data for this wing is on documentaion somewhere. It's a very well known entity.

Generic 190 numbers from wwiiaircraftperformance.org.
----------------------------------
1943  BMW 108 D 2700@1.42 ata.
FW190-A5 basic fighter 2MG17, 2 MG151\20, 2 MGFF\20 4000kg 352  mph at Sea Level 408 mph at 20,669

------------------------------------

1943  BMW 108 D 2700@1.42 ata.
FW190-A8 basic fighter 2MG131, 2 MG151\20, 2 MG151\20 4300kg 346 mph at Sea Level 400 mph at 20,669
FW190-A8 \U2............ 2MG131, 2 MG151\20, 2 MK103\30 4350kg Graph shows about 10mph slower at all settings

1944 Oct. BMW 108 D 2700@1.42 ata.
FW190-A8 basic fighter 2MG131, 2 MG151\20, 2 MG151\20 4300kg 352 mph at Sea Level 405 mph at 18,045

-------------------------------------------

How close are our 190-A's?

------------------------------------------

1944 Oct. Jumo 213a 3000 rpm
FW190-D9 basic fighter 2MG131, 2 MG151\20 4300kg 323 to 329 mph at Sea Level 388 to 395 mph at 21,325

1944 Oct. Jumo 213a 3250 rpm
FW190-D9 basic fighter 2MG131, 2 MG151\20 4300kg 335 to 342 mph at Sea Level 401 to 407 mph at 21,653
------------------------------------------

How close is our D9 on average to this info? You will notice at 4300kg, Sea Level and Alt speeds are not much more than the 190A serise using the same wing type from the A5-A8. How much is the wing design limiting the top speed possbile for the weight and output power of any given engine you mount to that design? The Jumo 213 could do 3250 rpm opposed to the A8 BMW 801D 2700 rpm. And the speeds are not as strikingly different as with the jump to the K4 from previous 109.
-----------------------------------------

Updated FW190-D9 flight trial information from wwiiaircraftperformance.org, german testing results translated to english.

Flight performance of the Fw. 190 D-9 (production version) is given. Speed at altitude was flown with Serial Nr. 006. Various aircraft were checked at 3,000 rpm during continuous testing. Speeds reached 323 to 329 mph (520 to 530 km/h) at sea level and 388 to 395 mph (625 and 635km/h) at 21,325 ft (6.5 km) (about full throttle height, depending on engine adjustment). With 3250 rpm, speeds reached 335 to 342 (540 and 550 km/h) at sea level and 401 to 407 mph (645 and 655 km/h) at 21,653 feet (6.6 km). With 3250 rpm and a take-off weight of 9,480 lbs (4,300 kg), rate of climb was 3,329 ft/min (17.0 m/s) at sea level and 392 ft/min (2.0 m/s) at 33,465 feet (10.2 km).

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190d9test.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So what do you guys really want? A mythical 4-20mm FW190-A8 that is as manuverable as a P51D and as fast as a K4 on WEP below 15K? Yet for the same weight, a narrower front profile and 550rpm faster engine, you only get about the same speed range maybe a littel faster with the D9. Think maybe that wing design has some limitations you will have to resign yourselves to?

[dhyran]

Bustr

please read this one:

 Actual combat on the Soviet-German front differed greatly from simlated combat at the Air Forces Scientific Research Institute. German pilots did not engage in maneuverable combat in either the vertical or the horizontal plane. Their fighters tried to shoot down a Soviet aircraft in a surprise attack and then went into clouds or towards friendly territory. Ground-attack aircraft also strafec our ground troops unexpectedly. They rarely were intercepted on these and other occasions. Special trials the Air Forces Scientific Research Institute conductec focused on development of procedures and tactics to counter Focke-Wul: ground-attack airplanes. Captured Fw 190A-8 No. 682011 and "lightened Fw 190A-8 No. 580967 took part in this testing. Yak-3, Yak-9u and La-7—the most modern Red Army Air Forces fighters—took off to intercept them.
   The "combat" showed that new tactical procedures were needed to counter German aircraft flying at low levels. After all, the Focke-Wulfs usually ingressed at low altitudes and regressed at treetop level at maximum speed. Under such conditions, it was hard to detect an attack in time. The pursuit became more complicated, because the gray matte paint concealed the German aircraft against the background of the landscape. In addition, German pilots employed engine reheat at low altitudes. It was determined here that the Focke-Wulf could deliver 582 km/h, i. e. neither the Yak-3 (the aircraft at the Air Forces Scientific Research Institute developed 567 km/h) nor the Yak-9U (575 km/h) could overtake them. Only the La-5 reached 612 km/h in augmented mode, but the speed margin was insufficient to reduce the range between the two aircraft to a distance permitting aimed fire.
   Based on test results, the institute leadership issued recommendations: it is necessary to echelon the fighters in patrols at different altitudes. In this case, the mission of the pilots on the higher tiers would be to disrupt the bombing and to attack the enemy fighter escort, while the lower patrol aircraft, having the capability to overtake in a shallow dive, probably would be able to intercept the ground-attack aircraft themselves

source: http://www.airpages.ru/eng/lw/fw190a7.shtml

and now try to run away from an Yak9 in Ah with a 190A8  

look at the chart below, and read the text twice! And just to mention, its a russian source

[bustr]

So from this article you want the 190A8 uprated along with the Yak9U down rated?

One of the testing 190 was a "lightened" model from the translated page. Nor is the page very enlightening if the 190 passed through the test area starting in a dive to achive maximum breakaway speed on boost which was a common german 190 tactic for tip and run attacks. All of the 190's from A5 to A8 will hit the 400 mark under those circumstances. The article references boost as "reheat".

From the article: German pilots employed engine reheat at low altitudes. It was determined here that the Focke-Wulf could deliver 582 km/h(360mph).

Our 190A5\8 in the game on boost in a shallow dive will hit 400 making an ord or radar porking pass. Should Hitech dial back the 190's then to match the results of this article? The article says 360mph employing reheat but no other specifics. The D9 at 3250 rpm at SL won't do 360 going level. Wonder if 360 was the pre A5 190's back in 1942? Lots of confusing contradictions here in such a tiny article.
 
At the top of the article it refrences the La7 but, by the end only speaks of the La5, not La5Fn. Also the Yak speeds given look like pre Yak9U/Yak3 speeds of the Yak9\9D. The La5 not 5Fn is the only aircraft given with an accurate speed for it's operational period. Possibly like in other russian documents the aircraft are miss named. Yak3=Mig3\Lagg3 and Yak3\9U = Yak9 and Yak9D which all were outclassed in breakaway speed by the 190.

The La5, Yak9, and Yak9D are 1943\44 contemporaries along with the 190A5\6\7\8. The article refrences two serial numbers for A8 aircraft. Possibly some of our Luft experts can run those serial by their sources since we are relying on the author of the web site and not any link to an outside Luftw serial number database. He only seems to use russian sources for his non russian aircraft on his web site. You will note a link at the bottom of the page to his Luftw serial numbers page but, no sources for the numbers.

190A-8 No. 580967 "Lightened"
190A-8 No. 682011

The page seems to be a collection of bits and peices from the 4 russian sources pasted together to achive an effect. Do you have access to any of the 4 russian sources given in the article to see if these two 190 are referenced for this test, and the test itself? Or which 190's only achived 360mph on reheat in a low level dive?

Are you saying the german Rechlin documents from wwiiperformance.org are garbage based on this cludged article? And so then are you infering Hitech's research and math is garbage since he does it as his living with more time and resources at his disposal than us.

[dhyran]

So from this article you want the 190A8 uprated along with the Yak9U down rated?

....

Are you saying the german Rechlin documents from wwiiperformance.org are garbage based on this cludged article? And so then are you infering Hitech's research and math is garbage since he does it as his living with more time and resources at his disposal than us.

those are your words, not even my suggestions, all i do is to point at different sources, because if you talked to real war Pilots flown the 190A8 and the 190A4 they told you a lot of diffrent things, which are not shown in speed charts. But if i would write down the german fighter Pilot story who told me alot about the 190 series, whats your next step then, what would you calling me then, because i believe him?
Just to make one thing clear, my beloved plane in AH2 is the F4U followed by the pony..... but when i am flying a 190A5, afterwards a A8 then next sortie a D9, you simply "feel" that there is something not correct! Don't you, if not, please fly a 190A8 for one month, then come back and discuss about the E bleed, missing acceleration etc

[Wmaker]

If the A8 is, graphicly and weight wise, an up-armored late model, but is powered by a mid-model engine, ....

Why do you keep insisting on speculating with this and not checking if that really is the case or not?

Here's a translated version of the weight table found from the last page of this technical description: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/td284.pdf ...



As you can see, it gives the weight which is the same as in AH in 4x20mm configuration for "FW190A-8". There's no Rustsatze on it, nothing. Then it gives a higher weight for A-8/R2 even that doesn't include any "up-armoring" as it only replaces the outer 20mms with 30mms. If the table would list the weight with R8-Rustsatze (Sturmbock/Rammjager -config) it would weigh even more. Also, nothing that I've read says the A-8/R8s had T-series engines as standard. T-series engines were rare in general and I think it's good that more representative A-8 is modeled.

A-9 with BMW801TS would be a lot of fun in the MA and I hope it gets added at some point.

[RTHolmes]

Here's a translated version of the weight table found from the last page of this technical description: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/td284.pdf ...

(Image removed from quote.)

look - real data!

[Wiley]

look - real data!

The gross performance seems to be pretty close from both sides when it comes to limits like speed, climb rate, things of that nature.

The somewhat reasonable point the guys that want it looked at seem to make is, in broad terms not that much is changed from the A5 to the A8, yet for whatever reason the A8 loses E horribly and doesn't accelerate.

I don't particularly like anecdotes when it comes to these discussions because they don't mean much.  There was an anecdote posted here a while ago from a P47 test pilot who said his P47-D40(25?) could outclimb a spitfire with the revised prop.  I have my doubts, but who are we to say he's wrong, right?

"How it feels" is pointless to base an argument for a flight model.  Computer programs aren't there to make us feel good, they're there to crunch numbers.  The only way to fix it is to show where the current model is wrong, with math.  Everything else is just noise.

Wiley.

[bustr]

those are your words, not even my suggestions, all i do is to point at different sources, because if you talked to real war Pilots flown the 190A8 and the 190A4 they told you a lot of diffrent things, which are not shown in speed charts. But if i would write down the german fighter Pilot story who told me alot about the 190 series, whats your next step then, what would you calling me then, because i believe him?
Just to make one thing clear, my beloved plane in AH2 is the F4U followed by the pony..... but when i am flying a 190A5, afterwards a A8 then next sortie a D9, you simply "feel" that there is something not correct! Don't you, if not, please fly a 190A8 for one month, then come back and discuss about the E bleed, missing acceleration etc

You have been around this game long enough to understand how not to insult Hitech by making direct assertions without real numbers and data against what he does for a living. But, your feelings are slipping on the bleeding edge of that fire.

I'm old enough to have ridden in Tiger Moths at Dunstable Downs southern Bedfordshire in 1960 that were used to tow my father's glider aloft at the Londen gliding club. And Taylorcraft Austors in Peshawar Pakistan 1962-64 when he first worked on his powered flight ticket. Thats 50 years ago. I only remember what the outside of both aircraft look like, how loud and windy Tiger Moth cockpits were and the funny wooden seat for the third passenger in the cargo area of the Austor that I sat on sometimes. That was a very long time ago, and yes the pilot in both cases let me take the stick.

I even got a ride in a Dragon Rapide out of Dunstable one afternoon. 50 years later looking at the inside of a restored one was not what I remembered. But, I still have my feelings from those days which favor fond positives over the realities of the past. Like the smell of sun warmed silver doped fabric on the Moth and Rapide wings. Or the dope smell in the glider repair hanger. Or how beutiful gliders looked working the escarpment along the Chiltern Hills. I even remember the Wildabeast herd at the animal park. but, I cannot remember if we flew nonstop Heathrow to Karchi or Heathrow, Paris to Karachi all these years later. I remember we rode in a Fokker F-27 from Karachi to Peshawar. I cannot remember what we rode from Heathrow. That was a long time ago and the brain filters how it uniquely wants to.

You cannot put "feelings" into Hitech's aerodynamic build program and witnesses universaly are not reliable even if they are the shooter. That's the point of after action debreifings or witness cross examination to separate you from your brain and get at the facts, not the uniquely personal filtered experience. To you the filtered experience is the truth not becasue you are trying to deceive. Memory is not reliable especialy layed down under stress or intense focus becasue of how the brain processes information during those situations. The recall becomes only exactly your truth and not the experience outside of the confines of your brain and how it chose to remember the experience.

The DoD and FBI have bodies of information on the unreliability of memory over time. As time passes only a general story is possible becasue of how the brain manages long term memories. 50 years later I cannot remember the instrament layout for the Tiger Moths or Austors I rode in. But, I fondly remember riding in them.

[Ardy123]

Ardy,

The angle of incidence at the tip was different then at the root. I think it had about a 3 degree washout. You have a wing that changes from NACA 23015 at the root to NACA 23009 at the tip with a 3 degree washout. If you look around I think all of the data for this wing is on documentaion somewhere. It's a very well known entity.

Bustr, The question I was trying to solve was that someone stated that the in game A8 can not handle very much AoA, without stalling. If I can get a graph that shows what AoA the wing can handle, then that could be compared to in game. Charts about its weight and climb rate are not relevant to answering the stated question, neither were the stats that you posted.

Yes, the wing was more complicated than one NACA airfoil shape, but with many programs such as winfoil one can make a 3d model of the wing and get a lift chart for the whole 3d wing shape. Hence why I asked if anyone had winfoil.

[Shuffler]

The DoD and FBI have bodies of information on the unreliability of memory over time. As time passes only a general story is possible becasue of how the brain manages long term memories. 50 years later I cannot remember the instrament layout for the Tiger Moths or Austors I rode in. But, I fondly remember riding in them.

Not me... I'm as sharp as a cantalope.

[Ardy123]

What is engine reheat on a prop engine?  isn't reheat afterburner?

[dhyran]

You have been around this game long enough to understand how not to insult Hitech by making direct assertions without real numbers and data against what he does for a living. But, your feelings are slipping on the bleeding edge of that fire.

I'm old enough to have ridden in Tiger Moths at Dunstable Downs southern Bedfordshire in 1960 that were used to tow my father's glider aloft at the Londen gliding club. And Taylorcraft Austors in Peshawar Pakistan 1962-64 when he first worked on his powered flight ticket. Thats 50 years ago. I only remember what the outside of both aircraft look like, how loud and windy Tiger Moth cockpits were and the funny wooden seat for the third passenger in the cargo area of the Austor that I sat on sometimes. That was a very long time ago, and yes the pilot in both cases let me take the stick.

I even got a ride in a Dragon Rapide out of Dunstable one afternoon. 50 years later looking at the inside of a restored one was not what I remembered. But, I still have my feelings from those days which favor fond positives over the realities of the past. Like the smell of sun warmed silver doped fabric on the Moth and Rapide wings. Or the dope smell in the glider repair hanger. Or how beutiful gliders looked working the escarpment along the Chiltern Hills. I even remember the Wildabeast herd at the animal park. but, I cannot remember if we flew nonstop Heathrow to Karchi or Heathrow, Paris to Karachi all these years later. I remember we rode in a Fokker F-27 from Karachi to Peshawar. I cannot remember what we rode from Heathrow. That was a long time ago and the brain filters how it uniquely wants to.

You cannot put "feelings" into Hitech's aerodynamic build program and witnesses universaly are not reliable even if they are the shooter. That's the point of after action debreifings or witness cross examination to separate you from your brain and get at the facts, not the uniquely personal filtered experience. To you the filtered experience is the truth not becasue you are trying to deceive. Memory is not reliable especialy layed down under stress or intense focus becasue of how the brain processes information during those situations. The recall becomes only exactly your truth and not the experience outside of the confines of your brain and how it chose to remember the experience.

The DoD and FBI have bodies of information on the unreliability of memory over time. As time passes only a general story is possible becasue of how the brain manages long term memories. 50 years later I cannot remember the instrament layout for the Tiger Moths or Austors I rode in. But, I fondly remember riding in them.

well, i got some real flight hours on a yak, some on my own in a trainer, sure they all act like we got it in ah!  if you fly a real plane, you as a pilot got a lot of impressions not only by looking at the gauges, you listen and feel when you fly a plane. going back to a simulator you simply got some impressions on the screen and little feedback from the stick movements, but the weight and things like  E bleed in turn gives also an impression back to you. At this point there is way too much difference from the 190A5 to the A8. same goes to the spit 14, but that another thread worth

[Babalonian]

Bustr, I think it varies form individual to individual in this thread, but I'm not looking for any mythical 190.  A duck is a duck, and a chicken is either a hen or rooster but never a mallard. 

I think, personal preference wise, our up-armored A8 should have the upped engined varient modeled (not making it super, but an improovement, especialy for the LWA crowd... it could be done, much like (and I hesitate to say it, as its also prob a horrible example ontop of a spontaneously combustable topic) the sole Brewster Buffalo in-game).  I think the dinky weight discepancy is a mute point, and something not unique within AH, and most of all it's near accurate in every other way for what it is.

How do you feel the arguement is for that, minding it is HT/HTCs ultimate decision (and why I think the sane should just walk away from the classic AH A8 arguement (and rally for the A9  ))?


And yowza at this thread over the last 24 hours.