Author Topic: Performance figures of Fw 190A-9 ? (Read 1969 times)

Heinkel · « **Reply #15 on:** May 27, 2002, 03:45:43 PM »

For the info on the 190A-9 Pic, see this site:

190 A-9

and click on the 190A-9 picture.

The information on this site has been confirmed by MEMBERS of the Real JG300 squadran. All this information is correct on this site, including the picture of the 190 A-9.

SOME of the 190A-9's had 152 tails, not all. This is just one that didnt have the 152 tail.

I'll look for a pic of the 190A-9 w/ the 152 tail.

RRAM · « **Reply #16 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:00:41 PM »

ah's charts are unreliable when discussing this matter. 190A8's chart and in-game performance are pretty accurate, and Fw190A5's speed at altitude is quite correct in this game...

but AH's fw190A5's is slower than what it should be at low altitudes, so there is no point in using its charts as proof of anything...

if you want to use something solid, use this chart, not AH's one:

Or use some other of similar or higher reliability than this one.

Heinkel · « **Reply #17 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:06:48 PM »

Ok, Maeby your right, so look at this link:

Planes

go to that link, and click on the Fw190 A-5, and Fw190A-8 on the side tool bar. They both have the same exact speeds.

RRAM · « **Reply #18 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:29:32 PM »

That's a link to a page based in data from another game ...I see no performance charts with the logo of Focke-Wulf, dated in 1943 ,to back up those numbers.

Anyway the data in that page is copied from Il2's object viewer, wich, in turn, lists WRONG performances for planes (a problem admitted by oleg maddox himself). The Fw190A5 in Il2 performs WAY better than what is seen in that page

In fact, and at least up to 2500m, Il2's Fw190A5 performance matches almost milimetrically the performance seen in the chart I've pasted avobe.

BTW, I've run a short test of Fw190A5's performance in aces high. when I stopped the film,at 21.1K, the plane was making 407mph, and still was slowing down slightly...

I repeat once again, that in my humble opinion Fw190A5's speed in aces high needs to be looked at.

Now, this discussion has gone way off-topic. This thread is about Fw190A9's performance, not Fw190A5's. Still I insist that you need to base your arguments on a SOLID base.

Computer Game charts are,generally speaking (and with notable exceptions) NOT a solid base to use, that's all I wanted you to see. I hope you get the point.

Heinkel · « **Reply #19 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:41:29 PM »

I do see your point. But I have various books, and internet sources that confirm that the Fw190 A-5, A-6, A-7, and A-8 all have similar top speeds (around 408 MPH). Now, what this means, is that, that link i posted above contians valid information, and that there were 400 Fw190 A-9's made.

BTW, i am having trouble reading that diagram? Whats the top speed of the A-5?

RRAM · « **Reply #20 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:48:18 PM »

according to the chart I posted avobe, the Fw190A5 has the following speeds at the following altitudeS:

351mph@SL

373mph@4100feet

367mph@9850feet

407mph@20500feet

as you might note, AH's Fw190A5 is notably slower than what it should be at low altitudes according to that chart.

Other thing to note is that the reads I've given are all REAL speeds (taking instrumental error into account). I don't know if other planes in this simulator have performances based on charts which take in account instumental error or not.

Heinkel · « **Reply #21 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:53:36 PM »

Ok, well 20500feet is about 6200M, so the data on the original site I posted is correct, which means that is a valid site, and there were 400 190A-9's produced.

This is the site i am referning to:

Site

Once again, it was made using books (some of which I have), and I can confirm that the data is correct on that site, by my books.

And you were correct, that Il-2 Site is wrong on the speeds

Heinkel · « **Reply #22 on:** May 27, 2002, 04:57:30 PM »

BTW, where do you get the FW charts? I have some in a book, but i cant find it at the moment. Is there a website?

Thanks

funkedup · « **Reply #23 on:** May 28, 2002, 09:52:35 PM »

Just one thing to remember when talking about Fw 190s: The blocks of werknummers were alotted before the planes were actually built. And late in the war they didn't get around to building many of the planes for which numbers were alotted. Unfortunately many authors didn't realize this, and have published incorrect (overly large) production figures based on the werknummer blocks instead of factory production records or Luftwaffe delivery records.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #24 on:** May 28, 2002, 10:45:41 PM »

Just in the spirit of Funked's post...

Spitfires suck!

funkedup · « **Reply #25 on:** May 28, 2002, 11:25:59 PM »

LOL
Germans had NO planes in WW2!!!

funkedup · « **Reply #26 on:** May 28, 2002, 11:29:46 PM »

I'm serious about the werknummern though.

Furious · « **Reply #27 on:** May 29, 2002, 01:55:59 AM »

Would any of us truly give a sh*t if we didn't play these games?

All this arcane information and knowledge is wonderful.

F.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #28 on:** May 29, 2002, 02:15:02 AM »

I'm serious too!!

MANDOBLE · « **Reply #29 on:** May 29, 2002, 06:48:33 AM »

Werknumbers may be an unnaccurate way to determine real production of A9s. Perhaps looking for production of BMW801S and TS may give us a more clear idea about the usage level of this plane.