Author Topic: 190 superior to 109?  (Read 1274 times)

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #30 on: July 26, 2002, 05:31:03 AM »
FWIW

As General der Jagdflieger Galland wanted to discontinue all Bf109 production in early 1944 and focus only on Fw190 and Me262.  

Nonetheless Bf109G6 Rules!!!!  :D

Offline Pooh21

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3145
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #31 on: July 26, 2002, 06:10:49 AM »
I think it depend on whos flying them, When Im in 109s I see 190s as easy meat unless they run. When Im in 190s I see 109s as easy. I can use the snapshot in a 109 to good effect,95% of my g6 kills this tour are only the 20mm and the mgs. All are a2a.
Bis endlich der Fiend am Boden liegt.
Bis Bishland bis Bishland bis Bishland wird besiegt!

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #32 on: July 27, 2002, 07:36:21 AM »
Hi Kweassa,

>I believe the Fw190 was actually the only fighter that had the "Kommandogerat"(a primitive computer which was incorporated for automatic adjustment of fuel mixture, propeller pitch, and supercharger shifting all in one touch of the throttle lever) style of automatic controls during the time of its introduction.

As an aside, I'd not really call the Kommandogerät primitive :-) It was a mechanical/hydraulical analogue computer with multiple sensors that took account of an amazing numbers of a parameters and control functions.

Since the Kommandogerät was specific to the BMW801, the Focke-Wulf series actually had two different engine control computers as Junkers had developed the Motorbediengerät for the Jumo 213. The Motorbediengerät was an advance over the earlier system (and the common simple regulators) in that it didn't limit the boost pressure at low altitude, but the mass of the charge, i. e. the amount of the oxygen provided to the engine.

This was significant since at low alittudes, the higher air temperatures meant that the charge density was lower, so that power fell off at constant pressure. That's why engines curves usually show that power at ground level is lower than power at low gear critical altitude. For the Jumo, this characteristic low-altitude power drop was absent, and it gained about 10% power by that.

It's interesting to note that the Germans weren't the only ones to implement single-lever engine controls in WW2 - the Dewoitine D.520 seems to have been one of the early examples: "It was powered by a 910 hp Hispano-Suiza 12Y liquid-cooled engine driving a three-bladed Ratier popeller with automatic rpm control for a given power setting, a sluggish system that led to overspeeding in dives" (from Eric Brown's "Testing for Combat").

By the way, the diving problem was solved for the BMW801 with a second control, the dive lever :-) So the Kommandogerät wasn't actually a single-lever control system! ;-)

Later-production Spitfire XIVs with their Griffon engines were also equipped with single-lever control systems, referred to as "interconnected throttle". The way I understand the Pilot's Notes, this gave a certain rpm setting for each boost setting and could only be overridden towards higher rpm by moving the (former) propeller speed lever (now called "override lever") forward. In the fully-back position, rpm were selected entirely automatically. Mixture control was automatic too, as was supercharger gear selection, but the latter was not coupled to the throttle lever. The gear changes were always performed as if the plane was under full combat power, so for economical flying the pilot had to go into override mode and select gears manually.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #33 on: July 27, 2002, 09:33:38 AM »
HoHun,
IIRC the power curve characters of the Jumo 213 were caused  by throttle system which was pretty much copied from the AM-35/AM38. See this

gripen

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #34 on: July 27, 2002, 10:48:25 AM »
Hi Gripen,

>IIRC the power curve characters of the Jumo 213 were caused  by throttle system which was pretty much copied from the AM-35/AM38. See this

Highly interesting report, thanks for  pointing it out! :-)

However, I don't have any direct evidence that the AM38-style swirl throttle is used on the Jumo 213 (it might well be, though), and there are some differences in its characteristics compared to those pointed out in that report:

- The Jumo 213 did not eliminate the low-altitude supercharger gear. In fact, the Jumo 213E actually got a third stage for high-altitude operation. (On the other hand, the 640 km/h sea level speed curve did not use the low-alitude gear.)

- While the AM38's power still drops below critical altitude, for the Jumo 213 it actually rises to a maximum at sea level.

So I'd speculate that the swirl throttle (if it was used) could not have been responsible for the full power gain the Jumo experienced, and that charge mass control was the factor giving it its advantage. On the other hand, the swirl throttle might have been beneficial for charge mass control due to keeping the charge temperature low - perhaps charge mass control actually depended on the swirl throttle.

Do you know for sure what kind of throttle the Jumo 213 used? (Or what the German name for the "swirl throttle" was? :-)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #35 on: July 27, 2002, 04:34:39 PM »
HoHun,
Get a book called "Flugmotoren och Strahltriebwerke" by von Gersdorff and Grasman (page 176). It is called "dralldrossel", it is not exactly similar but you can see that the idea is same. The Jumo version is just more complicated and advanced .

gripen

Offline illo

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #36 on: July 28, 2002, 01:25:28 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Packy
The 190 may be superior to the 109 on paper.    Perhaps you guys should read some material by German WW2 pilots on the performance of the 109 and the 190.  I recall reading that many German pilots (hartmann, galland, et al) regarded the 109 as being superior to the 190 b/c they could fly it at the razor's edge of the flight envelope...apparently, to these pilots, the 190 was not as 'predictable.'


You seem to forget 190 pilots of JG54, Nowotny and gang.

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #37 on: July 28, 2002, 02:05:10 AM »
Hi Gripen,

>It is called "dralldrossel", it is not exactly similar but you can see that the idea is same. The Jumo version is just more complicated and advanced .

Thanks, I found it! Apparently the swirl throttle (accurately translated "spin throttle" as "Drall" is the same as the technical term "spin") is indeed a prerequisite for the charge mass control, but you can see that it doesn't effect charge mass control by itself but requires the rather complicated "Füllungsregler" mechanism that operates it.

On the bottom of the page, there is a power diagram for the Jumo 213 that illustrates the effect by comparison to the Jumo 211. The AM38 is right between these curves, with less of a sea level drop than the Jumo 211 but still short of the (slight) rise of the Jumo 213.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline Naudet

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 729
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #38 on: July 28, 2002, 06:36:44 AM »
Gripen or Henning, can one of you give me the full title and ISBN number of that book?

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #39 on: July 28, 2002, 11:19:42 AM »
Hi Naudet,

>Gripen or Henning, can one of you give me the full title and ISBN number of that book?

"Deutsche Luftfahrt Band 2 - Flugmotoren und Strahltriebwerke" by Kyrill von Gersdorff, Kurt Grasmann, Helmut Schubert, ISBN 3-7637-6107-1.

(I got it from amazon.de)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #40 on: July 28, 2002, 03:53:11 PM »
HoHun,
Well, we don't know what part of the power curve characters of the Jumo below full throttle height is caused by the swirl throttle or by constant airflow mass. In the case of the AM-35/AM-38 we can see the from the curves that the swirl throttle certainly have a more effect than constant air flow mass at sea level.

Anyway, the swirl throttle increased the efficiency of the engine by reducing supercharge driving power and temperature rise in the charger while the constant airflow mass system was just a different way to adjust MAP. Certainly the Jumo utilized characters of the swirl throttle better than the AM-35/38 because it could benefit from lower air temperature after charger.

gripen

Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #41 on: July 29, 2002, 07:05:18 AM »
The AM-35 is based on the BMW IV engine btw

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #42 on: July 29, 2002, 09:46:47 AM »
I heard that the 190 was a pig on the ground, not at all better than the 109. Without the wide undercarriage, it would have been unable to taxi at all.
But apart from that, the 190 was a newer design than the 109.
It was as fast or even faster, rolled fast, had better high speed control authority, mounted a formidable armament, and was more rugged. Control advances and layout made the flights easier as well. A pilot with less training was much more deadly in a 190 than a 109.
The first 190's were significally faster than the Spitfire II's and V's they faces, but after the arrival of the Spit IX, and later the fast American aircraft, it had a hard time. But  however, it could be modified into a very good bomber killer, way better than the 109.
So, this may not shine so well through in AH, but that's just life.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline gripen

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1914
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #43 on: July 29, 2002, 10:02:40 AM »
Niklas,
Yes, the AM-35 had roots in Germany but actually it's based on the BMW VI (M-17).

gripen

Offline niklas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
190 superior to 109?
« Reply #44 on: July 29, 2002, 10:49:16 AM »
You´re right gripen, BMW VI. I was not at home at had the wrong order of letters in my brain:)

If someone is interested in AM-35 38 charts and table check

http://members.tripod.de/luftwaffe1/sonstiges/AM-35-38.gif
http://members.tripod.de/luftwaffe1/sonstiges/AM-35-38_Beschreibung.gif

niklas
« Last Edit: July 29, 2002, 10:51:41 AM by niklas »