Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: janneh on December 20, 1999, 11:42:00 AM

Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: janneh on December 20, 1999, 11:42:00 AM
Just thought what could happen, when 190A-4 arrives. Present 190A-8 has capability to do some turn fights too, even it's so heavily armed / armored (=heavy). You can see lots of 190 up there, but just think about when 190A-4 will be modelled. Because it's lighter than A-8 they got to model it a better turning. That will bring our arena full of 190's and then we have this "WB Main arena syndrome"; 190's, P-51's and of course spits.
In WB You just can't turn A-8, it'll stall immediatly (in average pilots hands).
IMO, AH A-8's near to WB A-4 in FM, now what could be AH A-4 FM !?!
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: v-twin on December 20, 1999, 11:50:00 AM
They finally will become what they were in RL: very very DANGEROUS opponents...

v-twin
4°Stormo Caccia
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: Kats on December 20, 1999, 03:50:00 PM
The reason is because WB's A8 is buggered and flys much to heavy. The FW series in WB does not add up when you crunch the numbers. Turn rates are off as well as turn radius' and Cv.

No real comment for AH's A8 since they have said up front that the FM's are very basic at this point.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: Fishu on December 21, 1999, 12:26:00 AM
It is 190A-5 what is the next version of fockewulf, not A-4  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
190A-8 turns nicely even in WB, if just handles it right (I've always liked how A-4 turns in WB)
You can't turn 190a8 too well in AH if you dont know how to fly it, also, turn rate isnt everything.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: -lynx- on December 21, 1999, 02:43:00 AM
v-twin:

What's missing in this case is the RL numbers/plane ratios, right? Somehow I doubt that every other plane was a 190, however good/dangerous the FW really was.

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: funked on December 21, 1999, 06:13:00 AM
Lynx:  You need to look at the Luftwaffe order of battle...
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: dolomite on December 21, 1999, 07:27:00 AM
With around 20,000 made, I'm sure you would see one or two up there...
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: -lynx- on December 21, 1999, 08:24:00 AM
funked - let's see it, start from September 1941 if you please...

(dolomite - I don't know actual numbers but 20,000+??? According to Meng's FW variants webpage the most mass produced version would be A5 - with the rest of 190s (including 152s) accounting for only ~4,700 A5 must have ruled the sky... All 15,300+ of them...)

(A5 is the only version with no production numbers on this webpage (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif))

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

[This message has been edited by -lynx- (edited 12-21-1999).]
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: fats on December 21, 1999, 11:46:00 AM
Aircraft Monograph 4
Fw 190A/F/G/S part I
ISBN 83-86208-35-X

Fw 190A-1 102
Fw 190A-2 420
Fw 190A-3 ?
Fw 190A-4 900+
Fw 190A-5 ?
Fw 190A-6 569
Fw 190A-7 80
Fw 190A-8 1,334(+)
Fw 190A-9 ?

Fw 190F-1 ?
Fw 190F-2 271
Fw 190F-3 247
Fw 190F-8 ? ( until feb '45 115 F-8/Pb 1 planes, after which Pb 2 replaced it? )
Fw 190F-9 ?
All in all ~7000 F-series

Fw 190G-1 ?
Fw 190G-2 ?
Fw 190G-3 ?
Fw 190G-8 ?
All in all ~800 G-series

All in all 17000+ radial engined Fw 190s


Aircraft Monograph 6
Fw 190D/Ta 152
ISBN 83-86208-54-6

Fw 190D-9 674 delivered
Fw 190D-12 ? apparently none saw action cause of no fuel

Ta 152 total of all versions 67

Squadron/Signal Publications
Focke Wulf Fw 190 in action
ISBN 0-89747-018-4

Fw 190A-1 100
Fw 190A-2 400+
Fw 190A-3 500+
Fw 190A-4 ?
Fw 190A-5 ?
Fw 190A-6 569
Fw 190A-7 ~80
Fw 190A-8 1300+
Fw 190A-9 ?

Fw 190F series ?

Fw 190G series ?


Various magazines:
Fw 190A-1 102
Fw 190A-2 426
Fw 190A-3 509
Fw 190A-4 894
Fw 190A-5 723
Fw 190A-6 569
Fw 190A-7 80
Fw 190A-8 1334
Fw 190A-9?

Fw 190F series until F-8 1133, F-9 unknown
Fw 190G not mentioned in any magazine I had

Dunno if those figures are in line with the web site mentioned earlier, and haven't bothered to add them up to see how they compare against the suggested 17000+ or even 20000+ figures. Thought I'd post them for anyone who's interested.

Even these figures contradict them selves, see Aircraft Monograph 4 total for F-series and compare it to what I got from some magazine article: ~7000 vs. 1133 ( F-8 or pre ). Which would mean there were 6000 or so F-9s with the BMW 801TS, TH or TU engine?


//fats

Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: dolomite on December 21, 1999, 11:58:00 AM
My apologies for any furor, the 20,000 figure was intended to be very rough... I'm at work and don't have the total production figures at my fingertips!  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) The gist was that numerically the 190 was the second most important fighter of the LW, and that one would most likely be able to see a variant in any theatre of the war, and in numbers.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: fats on December 21, 1999, 12:14:00 PM
Dolomite,

Look up how many Fw 190As in MTO vs Bf 109s. They weren't that numerous over there, cause most of the time there weren't any.


//fats

Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: -lynx- on December 21, 1999, 02:08:00 PM
Ok, looked up 190 in D Monday's Axis Aircraft - "no accurate production figures appear to exist but estimated ~19,500 aircraft were built" vs ~35,000 109s and taking into account that introduction was bugged by "teething problems" (engine overheating/inadequate armament) not resolved untill A4 (guns)/A5 (engine). This, in turn, means that until late 1942 (deliveries of A4 _started_ during Summer 1942) 190 was not a factor - 109 was.


------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: fats on December 21, 1999, 02:55:00 PM
I recall that A-3 solved last of the engine cooling problems with the new exhaust louvres (sp?), and its deliveries started some time spring ( no I am not nuts enough to remember dates ) 1942.

Also the guns were addequate for fighter-vs-fighter since A-2: 2xMG 17 and 2xMG 151/20. Many of A-4's had the 2xMG FF removed. Making it similarily armed to A-2.


//fats
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: dolomite on December 21, 1999, 03:04:00 PM
Did some checking myself... this is one source I found:

The Illustrated History of Fighters Finsbury Books-

Production:
A (all variants) 19,424;
D-9 650;
F (all variants) 550;

Total production 20,624

 
Quote
The Fw 190 was to see service on every front where the Luftwaffe fought...

Thought I'd seen that production number somewhere before...
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: Jochen on December 22, 1999, 03:29:00 AM
 
Quote
This, in turn, means that until late 1942 (deliveries of A4 _started_ during Summer 1942) 190 was not a factor - 109 was.

Guess you should ask was the early Fw 190 variants a factor from Spitfire V pilots in channel front?

------------------
jochen
Geschwaderkommodore
Jagdgeschwader 2 'Richthofen' (http://personal.inet.fi/cool/jan.nousiainen/JG2) (Warbirds)

If you ever get across the sea to England,
Then maybe at the closing of the day
The bars will all be serving German lager
Which means we won the war - hip hip hooray!

Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: BBGunn on December 23, 1999, 07:48:00 PM
Interesting how different texts list different numbers- mine says that 20,051 of all 190 models and variants were built.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: funked on December 24, 1999, 04:07:00 PM
Keep in mind that the BMW records show that only about 13000 801 engines were built.  That engine powered the Fw 190A, F, G, as well as some twin-engined bomber types.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: funked on December 24, 1999, 04:08:00 PM
P.S.  To compare Fw 190A-4 to the A-8 in AH, add 1000 fpm and 20mph.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: Fishu on December 25, 1999, 05:03:00 AM
Funked: I think that should be more, remember that 190a8 in AH flies only 390mph as maximum speed, when I've read from many sources that it did fly over 400mph (400-405mph)
and earlier planes like A-4 or was it A-5, flew like 420-425mph as maximum speed.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: juzz on December 28, 1999, 09:14:00 AM
The AFDU ran tests using a Fw190A-3(BMW 801 at 2700rpm and 1.42ata) vs Spitfire Mk IX (Merlin 61 at 3000rpm and 1.00ata(15lbs boost)) with the following results...

Speed:
2000ft: Fw190A 7-8mph faster
5000ft: Same speed
8000ft: Spitfire 8mph faster
15000ft: Spitfire 5mph faster
18000ft: Fw190A 3mph faster
21000ft: Same speed
25000ft: Spitfire 5-7mph faster

Climb:
Little difference in climb up to 23000ft, when the Spitfire becomes superior; the performance gap widening rapidly.

Acceleration, zoom climb, dive:
The Fw190A pulls away.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: funked on December 28, 1999, 12:23:00 PM
Juzz - That A-3 had a derated engine and a spark plug problem.
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: juzz on December 28, 1999, 12:45:00 PM
The story on how they got that FW190A-3 is fairly amusing. 4 Spitfires were scrambled to intercept it. 2 crashed on takeoff, 1 returned with a faulty radio and the last one was shot down by it! Then the FW later appears barrel-rolling over a RAF airfield, extends the landing gear while inverted and lands after a steep turn. A RAF officer grabbed a Very pistol and jumped on the wing of the FW190A-3 to "capture" it.

Where does this engine info come from? Are those performance figures "fudged" to compensate for that then?
Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: fd ski on December 28, 1999, 12:56:00 PM
... and the spitfire that 190A3 was pitted against was F model which was by far the worst prefermer of all Mk. 9's ever made.

Then again, F is what we have in WB and AH.
Otherwise some 109 or 190 drivers would have heart attacks...  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)


------------------
(http://www.raf303.org/banner.gif)

Bartlomiej Rajewski
S/L fd-ski Sq. 303 (Polish) "Kosciuszko" RAF
   www.raf303.org (http://www.raf303.org)  

Title: 190A-4, a nightmare ?
Post by: jmccaul on December 28, 1999, 03:46:00 PM
How come everyone keeps saying it is the a '44 version of the spitfire 9. Why don't we have a '44 version of the 9 (or even the 14  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) )

Ah well i suppose British engineering was just 2 years ahead of all that german and american junk  (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)