K4 is easy mode vs. K4 is a symbol of courage

[Karnak]

Don't think the Ki-84 uses an additive for WEP, FVW.  Nor did the Spitfire, Hurricane, Mosquito, Mustang, Airacobra, Warhawk or Lightning.  I don't think the Yaks or La-5/5FN/7 did either.  You also grossly misrepresent the need to overhaul a Merlin after WEP is used.  It doesn't need an overhaul, it just moves up the maintenance schedule.  That Spitfire Mk V that ran WEP for 30+ minutes didn't need its engine overhauled or replaced, and that WEP duration is something that the additive based Fw190 and Bf109 can't match.

Also, keep in mind that the Bf109s and Fw190s in AH shares that 1 second of cooldown equals 2 seconds of WEP.

[GScholz]

Karnak, the "WEP duration" for both the British and the Germans were both just maintenance regulations. There is nothing that leads me to believe that the Merlin could be run on WEP for longer than the DB or BMW. The MW-50 equipped 109s had 30 minutes worth of water-methanol, and that would be the only real limitation. The 190 used fuel as charge-coolant and could probably run on WEP until it ran out of fuel. What maintenance procedures each side had in cases of WEP overuse is of little interest.

[Karnak]

Karnak, the "WEP duration" for both the British and the Germans were both just maintenance regulations. There is nothing that leads me to believe that the Merlin could be run on WEP for longer than the DB or BMW. The MW-50 equipped 109s had 30 minutes worth of water-methanol, and that would be the only real limitation. The 190 used fuel as charge-coolant and could probably run on WEP until it ran out of fuel. What maintenance procedures each side had in cases of WEP overuse is of little interest.

Ah.  I recalled the MW50 tanks holding enough for 10 minutes (which in WWII air combat is plenty for an interceptor), not 30 minutes.  I don't think there is anything structural that would limit the DB or BMW engines any more than the Rolls Royce, Allison or Pratt & Whitney engines.

Mainly I was, futilely most likely, countering FVW's overhaul claim.

On a side note, the ability to design and manufacturer advanced and powerful engines seems to me to be what really set Germany, Japan, Britain, America and Russia apart from just about every other nation.  France is likely in there too, but they got knocked out too fast.  Italy had to rely on German engines for all of their most competitive aircraft.  Other nations could design and built terrific airframes, but they had to put an American, German, French or British engine in it if they wanted it to be competitive.  I am not aware of WWII era designs from other countries using Russian or Japanese engines, though had they been so inclined they had designs that would have been viable.  I think that American, German and British engines in particular stand out as the world leaders.

[Franz Von Werra]

There is a whole official chart, somewhere on this site, that has the wep times for all the planes. The times were put for a reason, mmk.
109s and 190s are listed as having 10 or 15minutes of wep, while most planes in the game have 5 to 10 minutes of wep. Some even less, like the Ki84 had 1.5mins.
In the predecessor of Aces High, the game Air Warrior, wep did NOT recharge. Needed to re-arm for more wep. 109s and 190s had long wep times in there too. Wep was precious.
Oh and its called 'War Emergency Power' for a reason... it wasn't to be used for most of the flight, like 30 minutes! But, there were many types of wep systems.

I'm guessing that if there was a wep system for a spit that lasted 30mins, it didn't produce the same extra power as the one in the charts.
... so I'm saying 'nay' to spits and 30mins of wep. Take this one up with Hitech!


The hearsay, but I heard that it was Hitech who said "p51's needed engine overhauls if used wep..."
Post the chart for the wep times please, anyone...

German planes had all the aces... lol... must have had better something! Luftwaffe's 'german engineering' goes at the top front! Precision is how close the tolerances or measurements are in an engine's components, besides the design - Germany had both. How about that yak reference on Wikipedia that says the landing gears weren't interchangeable because they were different lengths... lol.

[GScholz]

On a side note, the ability to design and manufacturer advanced and powerful engines seems to me to be what really set Germany, Japan, Britain, America and Russia apart from just about every other nation.  France is likely in there too, but they got knocked out too fast.  Italy had to rely on German engines for all of their most competitive aircraft.  Other nations could design and built terrific airframes, but they had to put an American, German, French or British engine in it if they wanted it to be competitive.  I am not aware of WWII era designs from other countries using Russian or Japanese engines, though had they been so inclined they had designs that would have been viable.  I think that American, German and British engines in particular stand out as the world leaders.

There were a number of other nations producing A/C engines before the war. Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, Sweden, Italy (yes they did make engines) and probably many more. However after the war started these nations were conquered, or allied themselves with a major player. Also many of the the more famous engines were related:

Hispano-Suiza 12Y, RR Merlin, Klimov VK-series, Allison V-series are all related to some extent. The Wright Cyclone series was the basis for the Ash-82. The Pratt & Whitney Hornet is the grandfather of the BMW 801. The Nakajima Sakae was basically a modified Gnome-Rhône 14K, which itself was a development of the Bristol Jupiter... etc, etc, etc. So we're not really talking about just few nations with some amazing domestically designed engines. It's much more fuzzy than that.

Franz Von Werra seems like a lost cause...

[Karnak]

Yes, there were others, but they didn't seem to really be competitive.  Or, perhaps, I am reading to much into Italy, which never seemed to be able to get a better domestic fighter engine than the 850hp Fiat the C.200 used.

As to the engines being related, yes, of course, but there are significant changes made too.  For the Japanese I would look at the 1900hp Nakajima Homare, 2200hp Mitsubishi Ha-43 and 1850hp Mitsubishi Kasei as better examples of what the Japanese were able to do despite being, self professed, three years behind the USA in engine technology.

[Tank-Ace]

German engines could use MW50, or GM-1 to with three rates of flow for various power outputs and durations. IIRC, the 10min limit was for maximum flow rate.

Also remember that they could probably just do the equivalent of red-lining the engine with the additives. As far as I'm aware, they didn't put RPM limiters on any of their engines.

[Franz Von Werra]

I had part of that backwards... eek
For pure rolling: (just tested) lol
Left: stick left and full throttle (plus wep)
Right: stick right, chop throttle.

109s have right rotating props blah blah

[bozon]

German planes had all the aces... lol... must have had better something! Luftwaffe's 'german engineering' goes at the top front! Precision is how close the tolerances or measurements are in an engine's components, besides the design - Germany had both. How about that yak reference on Wikipedia that says the landing gears weren't interchangeable because they were different lengths... lol.

The Germans did have a better something - better chance to meet an enemy and a better chance to fly again after getting shot down.

[Karnak]

The Germans did have a better something - better chance to meet an enemy and a better chance to fly again after getting shot down.

A "target rich environment" which is a euphemism for "losing".

Johnnie Johnson was once asked by a reporter why he didn't get as many kills as Hartman.  Johnson's response was that he didn't even see that many enemy aircraft.

[Franz Von Werra]

All the claims of being on every front of the war and beating their opponents without any help from USA or anything...
 
"England couldn't find targets?" 

[GScholz]

Yes, there were others, but they didn't seem to really be competitive.  Or, perhaps, I am reading to much into Italy, which never seemed to be able to get a better domestic fighter engine than the 850hp Fiat the C.200 used.

As to the engines being related, yes, of course, but there are significant changes made too.  For the Japanese I would look at the 1900hp Nakajima Homare, 2200hp Mitsubishi Ha-43 and 1850hp Mitsubishi Kasei as better examples of what the Japanese were able to do despite being, self professed, three years behind the USA in engine technology.

If we compare the engine development up till 1938 many nations were making pretty good engines in the 700-900 hp range. Fiat produced a very successful radial engine, the A.74 series, which was used on a number of WWII Italian aircraft and produced up to 1,400 hp in its later versions. The Czech produced their own versions of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y.

However, once the war broke out in 1939/40 these nations where either conquered by the Axis and forced to switch production to suit their new masters, or allied themselves with the axis and got access to the new German engines so any further domestic development was not needed; also Spain and Sweden started producing DB-600 series engines during the war, despite being only passive allies with Germany.

Even in America we see the same when the Allison V-engine proved unsuitable to power the new P-51; the Americans didn't design a new domestic engine for the P-51 because their ally Britain had one that did the job admirably. So the Americans started producing Merlins.

The Nakajima Homare was a development of the Sakae which was a development of the Gnome-Rhone 14K. The Mitsubishi Ha-43 and Kasei were both developments of the Pratt and Whitney Hornet.

[Karnak]

All the claims of being on every front of the war and beating their opponents without any help from USA or anything...
 
"England couldn't find targets?" 

Johnnie Johnson is England now?

Wow.  You're totally insane.

[Karnak]

The Nakajima Homare was a development of the Sakae which was a development of the Gnome-Rhone 14K. The Mitsubishi Ha-43 and Kasei were both developments of the Pratt and Whitney Hornet.

Yup.  But the Japanese engineers, who had pretty much just been copying American and European designs and innovations, were forced to come up with solutions on their own to the problems they encountered as higher power levels were reached.  Their solutions were often different, but still successful, as compared to the solutions found by American engineers.

These are interesting reads:
Mitsubishi:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/ATIG-Report-24.pdf
Nakajima:
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/ATIG-Report-45.pdf

[GScholz]

Indeed. I'm not arguing the fact that other nations started producing Axis or Allied engines after war broke out. I'm questioning your conclusion that the switch to Axis or Allied engines was because they couldn't develop domestic designs that were competitive. I'm arguing that because of the war the other nations were either forced to switch production, or were given the latest Axis or Allied engine designs, thus making further domestic development unnecessary.