Author Topic: Fw 190 A5 vs Spit V (Read 2957 times)

Shane · « **Reply #45 on:** September 27, 2002, 04:36:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Montezuma do you even play AH as I cannot find any score info under that name.... Troll?

what does noodle size have to do with anything here?

Wotan · « **Reply #46 on:** September 27, 2002, 04:40:34 PM »

He flies ah as a knight which is here nor there lotsa folks post here that dont currently fly ah.

Unfortunately, the only time I notice him post is to insult someone.

J_A_B · « **Reply #47 on:** September 27, 2002, 04:45:13 PM »

"can maintain a climb angle above 45 degrees, "

Not for me they can't. Not the Spit, not the N1K2, not the 109, none of them. At most they do maybe 25-30 degrees. MAYBE. FYI a 3K/min climb at 80 MPH is something like a 25-degree climb. A climb in AH will SEEM a lot steeper than it actually IS, same as reality.

J_A_B

bigUC · « **Reply #48 on:** September 27, 2002, 05:36:11 PM »

Thanks for the replies. I have no need to dwell on montezuemas posts.

What I seek is not advice on how to escape from Spit V's. What I'm looking for is opinions on spit V vs. fw 190 dive and zoom characteristics, and hopefully some tests in AH and comparisons with R/L flight tests. Ergo: Business as usual in the flight model whine o'rama.

[edit] Childish insults removed.[/edit]

Wotan · « **Reply #49 on:** September 27, 2002, 06:02:45 PM »

I dunno what want but describe you think a zoom is and when you do it

If spit v in chasing at co e in a 190a5 you arent going to out zoom.

If hes anywhere from d500 and further he can follow your climb with out pull as many gs as you but cutting your angle. Thus conserving more e.

If you just jerk your stick back to go straight up you are going to burn even more e.

So a co e spit chasin you at d700 and you pull over 2-3 gs to go vert you bleed some e. The spit can cut your angle and pull far less gs and conserve more e.

The spit can spray out to d800 and kill you.

Unless you have a greater e state then you are not going to create enough seperation by zooming.

Theres no opinion, in some instances a 190a5 will out zoom a spit 5, in some instances the spit 5 will catch a 190 in the verticle.

Are you asking us to confirm your belief that the 190a5 is porked or the spit 5 is uber? Then no you are wrong on both accounts. The 190a5 flown correctly will whup a spit 5.

Theres a very narrow envelope on how you can "out anything" in any plane.

See the attached image. The 190 pulls hard up the 47 pulls less and catches the 190. The key is your e state verse the attacker.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #50 on:** September 27, 2002, 06:07:10 PM »

So he actually is a HTC customer and AH player and isn't just here to post insults and be an ass... Ok good to know that!

Montezuma · « **Reply #51 on:** September 27, 2002, 08:23:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Wilbus
I don't, in any way, think or say that the german planes are the best nor do I run around the BB and say they are undermodelled.

That is about as true as when you say that you have me on your 'ignore' list.

But since you are reading my posts now, I thought I might share some news that you might find interesting. I heard that HTC is going to add MW-50 to the FW-190A5.

HAHA not really!

Montezuma · « **Reply #52 on:** September 27, 2002, 08:25:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
So he actually is a HTC customer and AH player and isn't just here to post insults and be an ass... Ok good to know that!

All this entertainment is a bargain at $15 a month.

DingHao2 · « **Reply #53 on:** September 27, 2002, 10:03:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Montezuma
If Spit Vs are giving you trouble in a FW-190, you need to start sucking less.

Spits are easy to get kills in. Focke-Wulfes are tough to get kills in. Thats why I always shoot the chute of a Spit pilot who cant fly anything else.

Urchin · « **Reply #54 on:** September 28, 2002, 12:21:36 AM »

Yes, but Spits are relatively tough to LAND your kills in, whereas the 190 is quite a bit easier.

The A5 and A8 are a little tougher to land your kills in than the Dora though.

Wilbus · « **Reply #55 on:** September 28, 2002, 03:49:57 AM »

Yup, you'e on my ignore list, have read what you've said in this thread though.

thrila · « **Reply #56 on:** September 28, 2002, 06:21:11 AM »

Ph33R the spit.

Clipped wings +bubble canopy spit XVI.....mmmmmmmm.

it's a red X at the moment...so ph33r the X until i get another pic.

RRAM · « **Reply #57 on:** September 29, 2002, 09:47:13 AM »

Leaving aside the usual crapping that starts each time that Montef**kma messes into a civil thread...

Quote

Originally posted by AKSWulfe

RAM- are you sure wingloading will figure into a plane's diving acceleration properties? I don't think it would, but that's why I'm asking.
-SW

Well, I'm not quite sure it does by itself, or if it is a side-effect of having a BIG wing creating great sustentation. PLanes with a big wing and a low weight have very high drag at high speeds, drag owed to the fact that at high speeds the wing creates a lot of sustentation and that creates a quite big ammount drag (Induced drag?...not sure how it is called in englihs).

Low wingloading planes have a lower induced drag, drag they don't have to beat at high speeds, thus they always dive better on the long run than big-winged planes.

Fw190's wing was made small on purpose just for that reason...to bless the plane (at the cost of slow-speed turning) with a very high top speed, a very low roll inertia...and because planes with small wings dive and zoom much better because the lower induced drag they create.

so, yes, high wingloading planes dive better than low wingloading ones

.

Quote

Originally posted by Imp
Well RRAM I dont recall saying the drag of the aircraft would not affect speed because it will all I was saying was that Gravity would not make the plane go faster because of its weight wich is should still be true right?.

Wrong. That is right in VACUUM. That is WRONG in a non-vacuum environment. Is the third time I repeat it to you...lets hope this one you get it at last.

Quote

P.S.: Not everyone has a degree in physics so stop insulting me

Insulting?...where did I insult you?. You answered my post with that "nice" paragraph:

Or am I still wrong RRAM or should I say mister know-it-all

I made a couple of ironical comments in my answer, but if anyone has insulted here ,is not me.

Anyway, if you feel insulted, is your problem, that wasn't my intention. Now follow this advice: next time don't talk so freely about something you don't know a toejam about, and much less poking jokes of the type of "hey this all-mighty-all-knowing guy" at people who DO know about the topic , because they are showing and explaning to you, why you are wrong.

First, is not smart ,and second, you get a sarcasting answer and then you cry like you did in that post

.

Wilbus · « **Reply #58 on:** September 29, 2002, 10:36:59 AM »

In the test report between the A4 and the Spitfire Mk 5 and Mk 9, the 190 outzoomed both when pulled up from level flight. It was even more superior when pulled out of a dive into a zoom.
Test report gives the reason for this that the 190 had much better acceleration, specially over the Spit 5. IN AH spit 5 has MUCH better acceleration then the A5 (and test were against an A3, A5 bigger strnger engine).

Ram, and all in here, check out my new thread. BigUC has seen it already.

Here is the new thread

Tests made in AH, between A5 and Spit 5. Spit 9 will be posted later.

Imp · « **Reply #59 on:** September 29, 2002, 05:55:58 PM »

II understand what your saying but I dont understand how Galileo tested it in Vacuum in the 16th century????????????

So how does gravity work in non vacuum?