Author Topic: Can we have the FW190A3 in 1.10? (Read 499 times)

GRUNHERZ · « **on:** May 13, 2002, 04:03:59 PM »

HTC can this be a new LW plane for 1.10, seeing it's focused on the early midwar 1942 timeframe. The Fw190A3 entered service in late 1941.

Please?

Wotan · « **Reply #1 on:** May 13, 2002, 04:26:24 PM »

i had thought of this my self

imho it would be a great idea. However i would also want an a6 or 7 then an a9. After that an a1 would be perfect.

Fariz · « **Reply #2 on:** May 13, 2002, 04:34:03 PM »

Now, when jpn got several planes, may be something need to be done with Soviet planeset? When I look at currect planeset, I doubt if USSR ever take part in a ww2.

Fariz

Sachs · « **Reply #3 on:** May 13, 2002, 04:35:51 PM »

190 A3 would be nice. BUt I would rather see more buffs then fighters in the next couple patches. OH and a Me-410 would be nice as well.

funkedup · « **Reply #4 on:** May 13, 2002, 04:37:26 PM »

A-3 would be kinda redundant. A-5 is pretty much indistinguishable from A-3 in terms of flight sim performance and effectiveness. I'd rather see an A-1.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #5 on:** May 13, 2002, 05:03:47 PM »

Not true funked... It would be an earlier lighter version, much like I suppose the F4U1 is to the 1D.

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #6 on:** May 13, 2002, 05:33:13 PM »

But first add an another version off the P38

Tac · « **Reply #7 on:** May 13, 2002, 05:37:55 PM »

pass me that bong dutchboy... we'll be puffing this thing for a long time more

funkedup · « **Reply #8 on:** May 13, 2002, 05:41:49 PM »

Weight difference between A-3 and A-5 was tiny, like 25 lb when they had same armament and fuel and stores rack. Performance difference in the sim would not be noticeable, in fact I doubt it would even be measurable.

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #9 on:** May 13, 2002, 05:46:05 PM »

It keeps the nerves a bit own in this unfair multy type plane world

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #10 on:** May 13, 2002, 06:05:14 PM »

My understanding is the A5 had a longer nose by 150mm vs. the A3 to offset weight of equipment, electronics of some sort I believe, added in the rear fuselage to meet new requirements. The A3 did not carry this equipment and did not have the 150mm front fuselage extension, so it was noticably lighter if the equipment was so heavy as to require a 150mm front fuselage extension to correct the CG. It was an important variant in late 1941 and early 1942, since 1.10 is focusing on this period it could be included.

Wotan · « **Reply #11 on:** May 13, 2002, 06:30:31 PM »

a1 would be better

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #12 on:** May 13, 2002, 06:45:10 PM »

It can't be that much more weight...

Here's the basic break down- the A-3 had a FuG 7a radio while the A-4 incorporated the FuG 16z... the A-5 differed from the A-4 by having lengthened engine mounts to provide increased strength and reduced vibration. The overall aircraft length increase was only 15.5cm (6.1inch) and the A-5 was indistinguishable from earlier models only by comparing the hinged upper deck machine-gun cover panel.

I don't think it weighs less by anything more than 100lbs.
-SW

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #13 on:** May 13, 2002, 07:01:58 PM »

Again my understanding is that A5 had the extension to relocate the CG after additional equipment in the rear moved it too far back.

Either way I want the FW190A3 as it was very important in the early period, just like the F4U1 is to the 1D.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #14 on:** May 13, 2002, 07:14:48 PM »

I've read that too. It appears to be a combination of both strengthening and CoG... but honestly, it can't be more than 100lbs lighter than the A-5... 6.1inches? You could take a dump in the rear of a plane and have to lengthen the nose by 6.1inches.

Besides that, I wouldn't look for any European air craft being modelled in 1.10... it's an early war pacific update as near as I can tell.

While the A-3 might be neat... probably just because of an updated look, the difference between it and the A-5 in terms of manuverability and visual differences is close to 0.0000005%...

in other words, substitute the A-5 with the A-3 and you've got yourself a 100lb heavier A-3. (if even that much)

Here, found weight for the A-3: Loaded 3,977 kg
A-5 loaded: 4,000kg...

How much is 33kg in pounds? EDIT: 72.6 pounds difference.
-SW