Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Creamo on October 23, 2000, 11:32:00 AM
-
The next plane MUST be the Dora. If you think about it, it solves every Golly-geen problem in the game. Really-
1.The Luftwhiners can’t possibly whine anymore. They get a real good late war fighter. What’s wrong with that? They STILL will go to high ALT and dive past you, climb, and do it all over again. The DORA just blows by faster, who cares? Anyone patient enough to fly the German iron has my sympathy. Only thing that worries me about 190’s is if Im going to get caught off guard in a furball, or Ill miss the snap shot and they will extend away into oblivion.
2.It will take the focus off of the C hog which is a really mediocre plane, with super cannons. If you get caught (in a aircraft) by a C Hog and can’t beat him, he’s better than you by A LOT, or you made a huge error. They stink, and you cant see out of them either. I GO AFTER Chogs, not run away. Keep em ABOVE you, your in biznus.
3.The special events, dogfight challenges, and leagues wont sound like a bunch of kids in a sandbox fighting over a tonka toy. The LW’s wont try to change all the rules for ceilings, ALT, and loadouts to make any advantage the Allies had away, so everything is unrealistically equal. Give em the Dora, go at it. No excuses.
4.RAM will have no excuse to be sad for ANY reason. Even if he sees on CNN that 12 people in Moline, Iowa got food poisoning at a corn boil hog roast and are hospitalized, he’ll find the character to carry on.
5.HTC will get free pizza.
6. I hear they can catch a Runstang. Whooohooo!
Have a nice day.
[This message has been edited by Creamo (edited 10-23-2000).]
-
Lot of people will be VERY disappointed when 190d9 comes (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
mark my words...
------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF
Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998
Northolt Wing Headquarters (http://www.raf303.org/northolt/)
-
Whines calling for the Spit XIV will (rightly) increase.
-
Yep Fd-Ski your probably right, especially if they don't get MW50.
Then we will hear the cries of "Anti-Luftwaffe Conspiracy", and the moans of "We Want the Me262/Me163 NOW! or we can't be competitive", or "Our guns are less powerful.. WAAAAhhhhhhh".
Whiners will be whiners no matter if they get what they want or not. They thrive to complain.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
Yep Fd-Ski your probably right, especially if they don't get MW50.
Its my only concern. And it should have MW50. I dont have numbers (noone has them in this matter),but ALL the references I have read said that **MOST**, if not **nearly all** Fw190D9s available for it, were fitted with MW50, if not from factory, in retrofittings in fields.
So D9, to be realistic, must have MW50 boost.
On the dissapointed thing, I wont be dissapointed with it. I expect a decent climber, good accelerating ,very good rolling ,faster Fw190A8. I dont turnfight A8s. So I wont turnfight D9s.
I love Fw190A8, so I will love much more Fw190D9 (with MW50). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 10-23-2000).]
-
Originally posted by RAM:
Its my only concern. And it should have MW50. I dont have numbers (noone has them in this matter),but ALL the references I have read said that **MOST**, if not **nearly all** Fw190D9s available for it, were fitted with MW50, if not from factory, in retrofittings in fields.
So D9, to be realistic, must have MW50 boost.
On the dissapointed thing, I wont be dissapointed with it. I expect a decent climber, good accelerating ,very good rolling ,faster Fw190A8. I dont turnfight A8s. So I wont turnfight D9s.
I love Fw190A8, so I will love much more Fw190D9 (with MW50). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 10-23-2000).]
Sorry, unit production for making the MW50 system was switched over to make Ostwinds. You'll have to do without (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Most 190s and 109s didnt have MW50/GM1 either yet they have it in AH, why wouldn't D9 have it?
-
only one LW plane has MW50 in AH, and that is G10, a plane that had MW50 as standard factory equipment in WWII. I dont know of any plane in AH that was GM1 (A8 has the boost override, still it is no MW50)
Pyro in Wb modelled a non-MW50 D9...
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 10-23-2000).]
-
Dont argue already about a MW50 something or nother... Im not sure whats going on there with engine varients, but its a obvious LW real advanced thingy. It must make it faster, blah blah. Super, bolt it on.
Whatever, make sure though, that any other late war Dora feature is included to nullify any possible whines or future wants(read NEEDS)...errr, whatever.
Bring this sucka to the MA HTC. The thoughts of wasting these things and reducing the BBS to real issues is pretty enticing.
[This message has been edited by Creamo (edited 10-23-2000).]
-
I really don't see many D9 threads, compared to F4U-C, ostwind, gangbang threads.
LW needs a JABO 190 with lotsa egg more than the D9. But, if the D9 is just a bit better than the A8, it'll be good to have.
If ya think chog is mediocre creamo, ya should try flying the A5 or A8. A5 is quite good, but outperformed at all alts but very low by the F4UC.
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Originally posted by Creamo:
Dont argue already about a MW50 something or nother... Im not sure whats going on there with engine varients, but its a obvious LW real advanced thingy. It must make it faster, blah blah. Super, bolt it on.
Whatever, make sure though, that any other late war Dora feature is included to nullify any possible whines or future wants(read NEEDS)...errr, whatever.
[This message has been edited by Creamo (edited 10-23-2000).]
MW50 was a boost system of 4 10 minute charges of methanol-water injection to the engine. You were able to use them sequentially but it was not encouraged because it generally required an engine rebuild/change out once you returned to the field. I am unsure if you could stop the injection once it started since I have never found any reference to that in several attempts searching for it.
------------------
Maj. LJK_Reschke
Kommandeur Jagdbomber,
StaffelKapitaen I-31 LJK
www.luftjagerkorps.com
-
Whatever.
Pour Methonal into it, I dont care.
(We used to pre-charge MetroIII Garret TPE331 engines with a shot of it and watch the flames pour out at start up. Mean stuff actually.)
-
A whiner who did good in A-8 will rule in D-9.
-
RAMmel said:
Pyro in Wb modelled a non-MW50 D9...
Nope, it had MW 50 for sure. Wells did some really nice test charts and they showed the same performance as RLM MW 50 stats.
-
<slowly opening the door...>
screaming : GIVE US THE LA7 ! (or the YAK 9UT (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
<slaming the door and running out really fast...>
My first whine (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by funked:
Nope, it had MW 50 for sure. Wells did some really nice test charts and they showed the same performance as RLM MW 50 stats.
Well, the pages of Wb I have seen so far talk about a D9 with 426mph top speed.
And that speed is the one of a 190D9 with no MW50...
-
Those pages are wrong RAM, unless the flight model has been changed in the last 6 weeks.
-
Hey! I just d/l WarBirds 2.76(35Mb minimum with only low-res F6F cockpit art!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)), I can check that! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Yep - it certainly does do more than 357mph at S/L. I'd say, about 380mph. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 10-24-2000).]
-
I have some questions about MW50, Water injection and WEP.
To my understanding the MW50 system included a small tank tank that contained a mixture of methanol alcohol and water. To gain added engine performance this mixture was injected directly into the cylinders. The engine then had a noticeable Hp increase. This Hp increase was because the engine, in effect, operated some what like a steam engine.
Some US planes had a system that was similar, but only used water and a tank that was much larger. I had thought that this system was used by the big radial engines and that this water system was in use when ever the engine was running. I thought that this system operated by using a fine mist of water sprayed into the intake manifold. It basically had the same function as MW50. By giving the engine a steam engine effect.
Concerning AH, the issue of WEP comes to my mind. For AH, WEP is modeled as increased engine output for a period of 5 minutes for most planes and 10 minutes for German planes. The AH WEP can be used until a high engine temperature condition exists, then can not be used until the engine cools.
In this thread it is stated that the AH 109G-10 uses MW50. Is MW50 automatically engaged when the player selects WEP? If so then it seems that there should be only one 10 minute period of "maximum" WEP or however long the MW50 supply lasted. Then the following use of WEP would be at a reduced Hp as compared to the MW50 WEP.
More questions...
Does the water injection for US planes only have a 5 minute duration? Is it only applied when WEP is used or is it used all the time?. If it does should not the same rules apply as those for MW50 WEP. One use, and then reduced Hp for further WEP's?
I had thought that WEP was more like a bypass of the normal throttle setting. This being a bypass function to the normal throttle stop. So WEP simply allowed a higher manifold pressure and engine Hp output at the expense of temporarily allowing the engine to exceed the capacity of its cooling system. Basically trading higher engine Hp at the expense of higher engine temperature.
I could research this on my own and not seem such the dummy, but this seems much easier and quicker. I know that there is a vast pool of ready knowledge lurking.
Thanks in advance! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
"Anyway, more golf..."
Humble
-
AFAIK you are wrong. MW50 ijected methanol-water mixture into the cylinders not to make them work like a steam machine, but to cool them down and allow for a higher power output for a longer time without overheating the engine.
I think it has nothing to do with the water injection system...but I can be wrong (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
MW 50 and the US methanol-water injection systems are pretty much the same thing. They worked as anti-detonants. You could run higher boost pressures without running into detonation. There were other benefits as well but this was the main one.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-24-2000).]
-
Originally posted by funked:
MW 50 and the US methanol-water injection systems are pretty much the same thing. They worked as anti-detonants. You could run higher boost pressures without running into detonation. There were other benefits as well but this was the main one.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-24-2000).]
The injection also increases the compression ratio, increases the air density, and provides higher chamber pressure after detenation via the vaporizing water. (i.e. like a steam engine)
I have a 1942 John Deere H that had the optional water carb. affixed to it. It worked somewhat like it's aircraft counter parts, with the exception that it only worked on hot days or days with low humidity. It gave about a 3 HP boost on either kerosene or gasoline, and a little less on cheap distillites. While that don't sould like much, it only has an 8 HP engine. But, that 3 HP created another 250 foot/pounds of torque at the drawbar.
And when you get into 1,500 to 2,000 HP engines, the benefits are, well, much greater (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
- Jig
-
The RAF didn't use additives - instead, they used 150 Octane fuel to achieve much the same power gains. Eg: DB 605A from 1475HP->1800HP with MW 50, Merlin 66 from about 1700HP->2100HP with 150 Octane fuel.
-
My Father, when I was a "wee lad", was an automobile mechanic. One of his customers was developing a water mist injection system. This system was designed to be attached to the air filter. My Father did the assembly while the customer did the design.
The engine was naturally aspirated, used a carburetor and the ignition timing system was not modified. The test car was a VW Beetle, which has an air cooled engine and is generally a pretty under powered vehicle.
Although not used all the time, the system was turned on for climbing hills and passing. With the water system on, the engine exhibited a very noticeable Hp increase.
As I recall, a topic of discussion at the time was the caution to be used in adjusting the water injection rate. The fear was that too much water would place too much stress on engine components and lead to rapid failure.
I don't believe that they mixed any Methyl Alcohol with the water. I am not sure why.
Methanol to my knowledge is a poor fuel, considering energy released as compared to gasoline. The primary advantage to Methanol is that it burns with very cleanly and that it burns relatively at a low temperature. Additionally Methanol burns at a much slower rate than gasoline. When Methanol is mixed with gasoline it, in effect, acts like a combustion retardant.
Would this effect to retard the overall fuel combustion rate, preventing detonation (pinging), for the gasoline / methanol combination?
Thanks for the replies! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Mino
The Wrecking Crew
"Anyway, more golf..."
Humble
[This message has been edited by Minotaur (edited 10-25-2000).]
-
Originally posted by juzz:
The RAF didn't use additives - instead, they used 150 Octane fuel to achieve much the same power gains. Eg: DB 605A from 1475HP->1800HP with MW 50, Merlin 66 from about 1700HP->2100HP with 150 Octane fuel.
yeah, and odds of us getting that are.....
------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF
Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998
Northolt Wing Headquarters (http://www.raf303.org/northolt/)
-
Our 109 G6 should have GM-1, but I don't know the specs of a G6 to know for sure. Nearly every Bf-109 G6 aircraft were factory fitted with GM-1 boost [Goring's Mischung]. Every G model had the provision for installation of it. Squadron/Signal book "Bf-109 in action part 2" has this line in it refering to the GM-1 system:
"...not only allowing the G to operate above the rated altitude for the DB-605, but to literally leave a persuing Spitfire V standing still."
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
[This message has been edited by flakbait (edited 10-25-2000).]
-
Originally posted by flakbait:
Nearly every Bf-109 G6 aircraft were factory fitted with GM-1 boost [Goring's Mischung]. Every G model had the provision for installation of it.
You have got to be on crack...
Please find some more good sources to back this up.... last time this same kind of bs was being sprewed about MW50.
------------------
Bartlomiej Rajewski
aka. Wing Commander fd-ski
Northolt Wing
1st Polish Fighter Wing
303 (Polish) Squadron "Kosciuszko" RAF
308 (Polish) Squadron "City of Cracow" RAF
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF
Turning 109s and 190s into scrap metal since 1998
Northolt Wing Headquarters (http://www.raf303.org/northolt/)
-
Considering that the Me 109F-4 could leave the Spit V behind at 30k+, I think the "improved" Gustav bloody well ought to as well, GM-1 or not...
-
Creamo said:
The Luftwhiners can’t possibly whine anymore.
Wanna bet? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/tongue.gif)
-
Fd ski, every Bf-109 G model had the provision for installing GM-1. Note the bold; provision. This doesn't mean every G had it installed, but it was available for installation. I know the G6 had GM-1 installed from the start, along with the paddle prop from the F model's "Z" option (designated U-2). Pressurized variants (G-1, G-3, G-5) either had it standard, or the option of installing it. The latter being more common than the former.
I got this information from Squadron Signal Publications, Aircraft #57 "Messerschmitt Bf 109 in action, part 2". And from a few web sites which give somewhat conflicting info. They either say "I guaran-damn-tee you it was there" or "it was only an option, and was nearly never used". I simply said "screw it, split the difference". Oddly enough, the Luftwaffe Resource Group states all G6 models used the DB-605 AM engine.
If you've got a great source for 109 info, tell me. If I'm wrong then at least I'll be able to get better info in the future.
------------------
Flakbait
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
"My art is the wings of an aircraft through the skies, my music the deep hum of a prop as it slices the air, my thrill the thunder of guns tearing asunder an enemy plane."
Flakbait
19 September 2000
-
Anyone have figures for the numbers of Spits modified to use 150 octane fuel?
-
I'll be happy with Fw190 D-9, what comes to it's speed (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Can finally catch those running allies instead of being left on the starting line.
-
Bring on the Dora, if for no other reason than to shut them luftwaffe flunkies up
-
Yippee!
Say, does anyone have a gunsight for a Typhoon that is made specifically for no deflection shooting at high zoom for level aircraft approaching you straight head on at the same altitude?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Yes, Creamo. But I believe you already have this sight....it's the one with the parachute guy on it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Cobra
-
actually i dont want MW50 or anyother
wep that in RL had a limited supply till
HT has a way to limit it per flight.
right now we have unlimited wep time really, all u have to do is let the engine cool down
and u got wep again. in RL when u used ur MW50 or what ever supply up, u didnt have
use of it for the rest of the flight.
we need 2 Wep levels, 1st level is Over
standard manifold pressure which we have now, let engine cool down and u have it again in each flight. level 2 would be
your MW50 ...ect turn off/on as much as u want but when u run out, no more for the
rest of ur flight. and it should have
the same multiplier as fuel burn.
whels
Originally posted by RAM:
Its my only concern. And it should have MW50. I dont have numbers (noone has them in this matter),but ALL the references I have read said that **MOST**, if not **nearly all** Fw190D9s available for it, were fitted with MW50, if not from factory, in retrofittings in fields.
So D9, to be realistic, must have MW50 boost.
On the dissapointed thing, I wont be dissapointed with it. I expect a decent climber, good accelerating ,very good rolling ,faster Fw190A8. I dont turnfight A8s. So I wont turnfight D9s.
I love Fw190A8, so I will love much more Fw190D9 (with MW50). (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 10-23-2000).]