190As

[save]

All A series 190 in AH depends on you flying in its best envelope ie fast.

The A5 does indeed do everything better than flying at max speed at the deck.

It lacks fire power by quite some compared with the A8. even with the 4*20mm

Also you get away with much more damage in the A8 as compared with the A5, owing to its thicker armour in rear seat, oil cooler and thicker canopy. Flying the A8 as a dog-fighter soon give you the wound badge, or worse.

You can, because of many pilots does not possess SA qualities, fight some, but only as long as you have altitude and or speed to get out of the fight.

[LCADolby]

On the Russian front JG5 had a number of A2s. If HTC increase the number of Russian aircraft the A2 would make for a good era match up.

[Karnak]

It lacks fire power by quite some compared with the A8. even with the 4*20mm

I never take the two MG/FF cannons as their ballistics are so different than the MG151/20s and their clip is smaller, so I prefer to save the weight.

[SmokinLoon]

All A series 190 in AH depends on you flying in its best envelope ie fast.

The A5 does indeed do everything better than flying at max speed at the deck.

It lacks fire power by quite some compared with the A8. even with the 4*20mm

Also you get away with much more damage in the A8 as compared with the A5, owing to its thicker armour in rear seat, oil cooler and thicker canopy. Flying the A8 as a dog-fighter soon give you the wound badge, or worse.

You can, because of many pilots does not possess SA qualities, fight some, but only as long as you have altitude and or speed to get out of the fight.

Comparing the dual 20mm of the A5 vs the quad 20mm or dual 20mm/dual 30mm of the A8 is like asking which handgun cartridge will kill a person if shot in the heart.  Sure, the .357 Mag is the winner without question, but the .38 Special works just fine.  Point being while it is nice to have that 18 lb sledgehammer to squish that bug, a rolled up newspaper will do.  The only time I see it worth while to take the quad 20mm of dual 20mm and dual 30mm is when bombers or ground structures are the target.  Otherwise, you're just hauling around weight not needed.  YMMV.

[Tank-Ace]

I feel like the ENTIRE point of the 190A8 (in AH) is to be overkill. Minus the guns, there's simply no way to justify taking it over the A-5.

[Ack-Ack]

Is there any 190A version that saw service in decent numbers that might add a notch or two of performance for radial-engine Butcher-birds in the LW arena?

Eric Brown in his book "Duels in the Sky:  World War II Naval Aircraft in Combat", he considered the FW-190A-4 to be one of the best fighters of the war and the best one Germany produced.  In his other book "Wings of the Luftwaffe", he heaped more praise on the FW-190A-4 and the entire line of Focke Wulfs.  In his flight evaluation report, he stated that the A-4 was the equal to the Spitfire Mk IX and the determining factor between both planes would fall to pilot skill and the ability of both pilots to squeeze out every thing their plane could give.


ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Excerpt from Wings of the Luftwaffe by Eric Brown.

"My first opportunity to fly the Focke-Wulf did not arise until 4 February 1944, the actual aircraft being the previously-mentioned Fw 190A-4/U8 PE882. This fighter had seen a lot of flying from the RAE and was destined, 10 weeks later, to be transferred to N° 1426 Flight at Collyweston with which it was to fly until 13 October 1944, when, after a fire in the air it was to crash on the road between Kettering and Stamford, demolishing there three walls before coming to rest in the garden of a house. On this cold February morning at Farnborough, however, the sad demise of this particular Focke-Wulf was still some way into the future, and despite the substantial number of hours that it had flown since reaching British hands, it gave every impression of youthfulness.

The BMW 802D engine was started by an inertia starter energized by a 24-volt external support or by the aircraft's own battery. The big radial was primed internally, both fuel tanks and pumps selected ON and the cooling gills (sic?) set to one-third aperture. We had found that the BMW almost invariably fired first time and emitted a smooth purr as it ran, such being the case on this particular morning, and once i had familiarized myself with the self-centering tailwheel – a feature that had been criticized by some AFDU pilots – I found taxying the essence of simplicity as the fighter could be swung freely from side to side on its broad-track undercarriage. Furthermore, the brakes were very good, although the view with the tail down left much to be desired.

I soon felt completely at home in the cockpit. After lining up for take-off, I moved the stick to an aft position in order to lock the tailwheel, applied 10 degrees of flap, set the elevator trimmer to neutral and the propeller pitch to AUTO and gently opened up the engine. I encountered some tendency to swing to port but easily held this on the rudder, and using 2,700 rpm and 23.5 lb (1.6 atas) boost, found the run to be much the same as that of the Spitfire Mk IX. Unstick speed was 112 mph (180 km/h) and after retracting the undercarriage by depressing the appropriate button, I reduced boost to 21.3 lb (1.45 atas) and at 143 mph (230 km/h) activated the pushbutton which raised the flaps. I then set up a climbing speed of 161 mph (260 km/h) using 2,500 rpm and this gave a climb rate of 3,150 ft/min (16m/sec).

A remarkable aspect of this fighter was the lack of retrimming required for the various stages of the flight. There was no aileron trimmer in the cockpit, but if the external adjustable trim tab had been inadvertently moved as a result, for example of a member of the groundcrew pushing against it, an out-of-trim force of considerable proportions could result at high speed. Decidedly the most impressive feature of the German fighter was its beautifully light ailerons and its extremely high rate of roll. Incredible aileron turns were possible that would have torn the wings from a Bf 109 and badly strained the arm muscles of any Spitfire pilot trying to follow. The aileron maintained their lightness from the stall up to 400 mph (644km/h), although they heavied up above that speed.

Part II next post.

ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

The elevators proved to be heavy at all speed and particularly so above 350 mph (563 km/h) when they became heavy enough to impose a tactical restriction on the fighter as regards pull-out from low-level dives. This heaviness was accentuated because of the nose-down pitch which occurred at high speeds when trimmed for low speeds. The critical speed at which this change in trim occurred was at around 220 mph (354 km/h) and could easily be gauged in turns. At lower speeds, the German fighter had a tendency to tighten up the turn and I found it necessary to apply slight forward pressure on the stick, but above the previously-mentioned critical figure, the changeover called for some backward pressure to hold the Focke-Wulf in the turn.

At low speeds rudder control proved positive and effective, and I found it satisfactory at high speeds, seldom needing to be used for any normal manoeuvre. It was when one took the three controls together rather than in isolation that one appreciated the fact that the Fw190's magic as a fighter lay in its superb control harmony. A good dogfighter and a good gun platform called for just the characteristics that this German fighter possessed in all important matters of stability and control. At the normal cruise of 330 mph (530 km/h) at 8000 ft (2400 m), the stability was very good directionally, unstable laterally, and neutral longitudinally.

Some penalty is, of course, always invoked by such handling attributes as those possessed by the Fw 190, and in the case of this fighter the penalty was to be found in the fact that it was not at all easy to fly on instruments. Of course, Kurt Tank's aircraft was originally conceived solely as a clear-weather day fighter. It is significant that all-weather versions were fitted with the Patin PKS 12 autopilot. I checked out the maximum level speed of my Fw190A-4/U8- which incidentally, had had its external stores carriers removed by this time- and clocked 394 mph (634 km/h) at 18,500 ft (5640 m), and I ascertained that the service ceiling was around 35,000 ft (10 670 m), so it matched the Spitfire Mk IX almost mile per hour and foot per foot of ceiling. Here were apparently two aircraft that were so evenly matched that the skill of the pilot became a vital factor in combat supremacy. Skill in aerial combat does, however, mean flying an aircraft to its limits, and when the performance of the enemy is equal to one's own, then the handling characteristics become vital in seeking an advantage. The Focke-Wulf had one big advantage over the Spitfire Mk IX in that it possessed an appreciably higher rate of roll, but the Achilles Heel that the AFDU had sought with Armin Faber's Focke-Wulf was its harsh stalling characteristics which limited its manoeuvre margins.

The AFDU comparisons between the Focke-Wulf and the Spitfire Mk IX - with the former's BMW 801 at 2,700 rpm and 20.8 lb (1.42 atas) boost and the latter's Merlin 61 at 3000 rpm and 15lb (1.00 ata)- has revealed that the German fighter was 7-8mph (11-13km/h) faster than its British counterpart at 2,000 ft (610 m) but that the speeds of the two fighters were virtually the same at 5,000 ft (1525 m). Above this altitude, the Spitfire began to display a marginal superiority, being about 8mph (13km/h) faster at 8,000 ft (2440 m) and 5 mph (8km/h) faster at 15,000 ft (4570 m). The pendulum then swung once more in favour of the Focke-Wulf which proved itself some 3 mph (5km/h) faster at 18,000 ft (5485m), the two fighters level pegging once more at 21,000 ft (6400 m) and the Spitfire then taking the lead until at 25,000 ft (7620 m) it showed a 5-7 mph (8-11 km/h) superiority.

In climbing little difference was found between the Fw 190 and the Spitfire MkIX up to 23,000 ft (7010 m), above which altitude the German fighter began to fall off and the difference between the two aircraft widened rapidly. From high-speed cruise, a pull-up into a climb gave the Fw190 an initial advantage owing to its superior acceleration and the superiority of the German fighter was even more noticeable when both aircraft were pulled up into a zoom climb from a dive. In the dive the Fw190 could leave the Spitfire Mk IX without difficulty and there was no gainsaying that in so far as manoeuvrablity was concerned, the German fighter was markedly superior in all save the tight turn – the Spitfire could not follow in aileron turns and reversals at high speed and the worst height for its pilots to engage the Fw 190 in combat were between 18,000 and 22,000 ft (5485 and 6705m), and at altitudes below 3,000 ft (915m).

The stalling speed of the Fw 190A-4 in clean configuration was 127 mph (204 km/h) and the stall came suddenly and virtually without warning, the port wing dropping so violently that the aircraft almost inverted itself. In fact, if the German fighter was pulled into a g stall in a right turn, it would flick out into the opposite bank and an incipient spin was the inevitable outcome if the pilot did not have its wits about him.

The stall in landing was quite different, there being intense pre-stall buffeting before the starboard wing dropped comparatively gently at 102 mph (164 km/h).  For landing on this and the numerous subsequent occasions that I was to fly an Fw 190, I extend the undercarriage at 186 mph (300km/h), lowering the flaps 10 deg at 168 mph (270km/h), although the pilot's notes recommend reducing speed below 155 mph (250 km/h) and the applying 10 deg of flap before lowering the undercarriage. My reason for departing from the recommended drill was that the electrical load for lowering the undercarriage was higher than that required for the flaps and German batteries were in rather short supply at Farnborough - that in the Fw190A-4/U8 was most definitely weary- so I considered it prudent to get the wheels down before taxing the remaining strength of the battery further!

The turn onto the final approach was made at 155mph (250km/h), and full flap was applied at 149 mph (240km/h), speed then being eased off to cross the boundary at 124 mph (200 km/h). The view on the approach was decidedly poor because the attitude with power on was rather flat and unlike most fighters of the period, it was not permissible to open the cockpit canopy, presumably owing the risk of engine exhaust fumes entering the cockpit. The actual touch-down was a little tricky as the prefect three-point attitude was difficult to attain and anything less than perfect resulted in a reaction from the very non-resilient undercarriage and a decidedly bouncy arrival. If a three-pointer could be achieved, the landing run was short and the brakes could be applied harshly without fear of nosing over.

I was to fly the Fw 190 many times and in several varieties -among the last of the radial-engined members of Kurt Tank's fighter family that I flew was an Fw 190 F-8 (AM111) on 28 July 1945- and each time I was to experience that sense of exhilaration that came from flying an aircraft that one instinctively knew to be a top-notcher, yet at the same time demanded handling skill if its high qualities were to be exploited. Just as the Spitfire Mk IX was probably the most outstanding British fighter to give service in WW II, its Teutonic counterpart is undoubtedly deserving of the same recognition for Germany. Both were supreme in their time and class; both were durable and technically superb, and if each had not been there to counter the other, then the balance of air power could have been dramatically altered at a crucial period in the fortunes of both combatants.

ack-ack

[LCADolby]

EB's account pretty much matches the A5 we have in game.

[save]

The A8 4*20mm in AH give you the snapshot capability up to 800 yards, using rudders to point the nose on a reversing plane, in that sense it not an overkill vs fighters.

Also a plane 90 degree crossing the A8 path that get a buckshot from 400 yards will probably be hurt enough to ensure a late kill.

[Tank-Ace]

The A8 4*20mm in AH give you the snapshot capability up to 800 yards, using rudders to point the nose on a reversing plane, in that sense it not an overkill vs fighters.

Also a plane 90 degree crossing the A8 path that get a buckshot from 400 yards will probably be hurt enough to ensure a late kill.

Lol..... no it doesn't.

[Ack-Ack]

You Focke Wulf fans will enjoy this book if you don't have it already.

FW-190 In Action

ack-ack

[SmokinLoon]

Lol..... no it doesn't.

I too LOL'd.

That is like trying to hold a steady stream while pee'in across the wind.

[Scherf]

Lol..... no it doesn't.

erm, save knows his 190s.

[alpini13]

the FW 190 A-9......not D-9.....A-9.   best performance. about 900 made, used in in combat, in squad strength, meets all criteria to be added to aces high....except one.....not allied late war. for instance.....we have the p-47m......only 130 made..........we have the f4u  C and -4....low numbers made of those....... we dont have the k-84 with 4 x 20mm(536 MADE) or the A-9,or ki-100,or late ki-61,or j2m,or any late german bombers...etc.