Replace 190a8 with a9!

[Citabria]

I would be more interested in the fw190a6 with an option to remove the cowl mgs.

[Denniss]

Granted, but the relevant bit, their muzzle velocity, is still the same.

No, the standard ammo of the FF/M actually had slightly lower muzzle velocity than the HE ammo of the FF (585 m/s to 600 m/s) but the mine ammo countered this with 700 m/s. RPM with mine ammo was a tad higher with 540 rpm vs 520rpm with other types and the FF.

[33Vortex]

Entertaining to read a debate over a aircraft few of the posters bother to fly at all.  Sure I'd like a set of gondolas for the Anton, but during testing the Mk103 proved to be too much for the airframe. 

[Denniss]

Fw 190A had a gondola gun option, at least from the A-6 on: a gun package of 2x2 MG 151/20, adding up to six MG 151/20 in total (outer wing MG FF/M had to be removed).

[33Vortex]

The A6 was the model that saw the strengthened wing introduced thus it had the outer MG FFs replaced with the MG151/20 (same as wingroot). It was also the type to introduce the rustsatzen with the R1 mod being the dual 20 mm pods mentioned. The MG131s were introduced with the A7 a model built in between the larger production batches of A6 and A8.

[Charge]

"The A6 was the model that saw the strengthened wing introduced thus it had the outer MG FFs replaced with the MG151/20 (same as wingroot)."

AFAIK it was just structurally altered to better accommodate different armaments and lightened to make the plane lighter as the weight was to be increased by adding weapons, armour and boost systems. So it was not necessarily "strengthened".

-C+

[33Vortex]

Now that's a matter of semantics. Feeling picky today?

[Bino]

I have variously seen the revised wing of the A-6 version described as "strengthened" or "lightened".  I guess it's even possible that both adjectives might be accurately applied, but that would be some pretty impressive engineering, even for good old Dr. Engr. Tank.  I don't suppose anyone out there has the actual builder's drawings for the A-5 and the A-6 versions, so we could compare...?

Just for the record, I enjoy flying the A-5 and wish we also had the A-2.  

[Babalonian]

So there I was, flat on my back, reading a book I've had since I was a kid, trying to regain some enthusiasm for AH.

And there it was!  Right from "Airwar Against Hitler's Germany".  Written for kids to understand

"The Luftwaffe interceptors were actually hampered by their heavy firepower.  Loaded down, with ammunition, bombs and rockets to use against the bombers, the Me109s and FW190s were sluggish and hard to fly in combat with the American escort fighters."

Upon reading this great revelation, my head went right to the latest 190A8 thread in AH

Hmmm.  190A5.  Air to air fighter, dealing with RAF fighters and medium bombers over France.....

190A8  Bomber interceptor up gunned and up armored to deal with 4 engined bombers over Germany.....Not as nimble, but more firepower to shoot lumbering bombers....Not so good against fighters.....

Who'da thunk it?

So best to come here and just kick us in the balls after pointing and hackleing at us like a 10-yo?....  Because, as standard as these 190A threads are becoming every week, so are the replys from the usual peanut gallery denisens in this forum?....  for shame Guppy.

Your head is still stuck/thinking like Germany had as effective a re-equiping/re-supplying effort as the allies did.  Reality is, especialy compared to the allies, that they wouldn't disgard old and completley re-equip anew.  About the time our 190A-8 was being produced with the uparmor and everything, nearly as many operational A-6/7s were getting conversions kits and "power-eggs" to update their existing a/c.  The allies had better supply and material management though, older production models would recieve some upgrades, but would regularly at points be completely roated out and newer production series rotated in.


It's just ugly, but I'm glad to see it hasn't dampened the growing 190 fanbase/community's spirits.  It's the peanut gallery here, it just never misses their cue to share an opinion or to make themselves look indivudaly more important than an online game ( ).  Truth is, nothing is modeled more/less on/off than anything else on the single A8 varient we have in AH and every other plane in the game.  But the truth is there were lots of - in AH terms - "Finnish 190s" in service with the German Luft during WWII, and also more stock 190s with far more capabilities and performances than what is represented in AH's current 190 lineup.


Your books quote has truth to it Guppy, but in comparison, about as much truth to the many books and quotes out there that P-38s were horrible/useless/outclassed/paper-weights/pilot-ice-boxes in the entire ETO, so they were by default then sent to where they could do something rather than nothing in the PTO....  go ahead, tell me that "the unsuccesful ETO P-38" hasn't been propegated by historians and authors to death in the past.

I have variously seen the revised wing of the A-6 version described as "strengthened" or "lightened".  I guess it's even possible that both adjectives might be accurately applied, but that would be some pretty impressive engineering, even for good old Dr. Engr. Tank.  I don't suppose anyone out there has the actual builder's drawings for the A-5 and the A-6 versions, so we could compare...?

Just for the record, I enjoy flying the A-5 and wish we also had the A-2. 

Personaly I'd like to see an A-3, but in general, something earlier than an A-5 would be interesting for knife fighting I think.

[alpini13]

  I say we add this in addition to the current models,WTG  a-9..............somebody on here says"the a-9 was rare"....not true...over 900 produced....and that means built and accepted by the luftwaffe...........and used in comabt...with kills.............a-9 faster than a-8 at low alt with better climb rate at low alt and better armour and can take more punishment....and slightly different canopy for better vision...........9000 produced  ....if this is rare,then maybe we should get rid of the p-47m,f4u-c,ta-152,me-162,ar234,brewster,seafire2......i think those all lower production numbers than the a-9

[33Vortex]

Personaly I'd like to see an A-3, but in general, something earlier than an A-5 would be interesting for knife fighting I think.

Anything earlier than the A-4 would mean a new 3D model because of the shorter nose. Engine overheating issues were not solved until the A-4 which introduced a slightly longer nose.

Bino, to strengthen a wing can be synonymous with lightening it. Making sure that the stressed parts of the wing are strong enough to take the required loads while lightening the structure wherever possible.


"A designer knows that he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

- Antoine de St-Exupery

[Wmaker]

About the time our 190A-8 was being produced with the uparmor and everything,

You keep mentioning this "uparmoring" over and over again while you aren't able to produce any proof that there is any on AH's 190A-8. There certainly is more proof available that the armor what the 190A-8 had in standard fighter config.

But the truth is there were lots of - in AH terms - "Finnish 190s" in service with the German Luft during WWII,

Could you explain what this particular "AH term" means?

[Charge]

"Your books quote has truth to it Guppy"

To me Guppy's book sounded like typical History Channel type pseudotechincal BS.

The FW190 was as much a "bomber interceptor" as P-38 was a "bomber". However, 190 was much better for the job than 109 and under overwhelming pressure from escort fighters it combined the best characteristics of weapon effect, speed and survivability to intercept bombers at that situation. Even the A8 got its fair share of fighter kills and from armament point of view carrying the extra outboard cannons, which were handy against bombers, did not hamper it in dogfight too much.

If we consider which fighter in US ordinance would have been best bomber interceptor in similar setting the answer is pretty clear: P-47. Radial engine, speed, armament. Although there would have been pressure to upgrade the armament to four 20mms if it faced such task.

Now would that meant that is was a "bomber interceptor" or merely a fighter that was best for the job at hand?

-C+

[save]

In Aces High difference between 4*20mm and 2*20mm is often the difference between be killed or not.

FW190s had more fighter kills per months than the 109s in the two ETO Jagdgeschwaders (JG2 and JG26) after its introduction-1945.

[33Vortex]

It wasn't called "butcher bird" for nothing.