Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hristo on July 06, 2000, 01:43:00 AM
-
Fw 190A-5 and Fw 190A-8 are so much different, they seem like two totally different planes.
In A-5 I feel as safe as in F-16, while in A-8 any co-E plane makes me look for the way out. For example, in A-8 I stand no chance against well flown Hog, but that same Hog can do nothing against my A-5.
My question is : What can we expect from the Dora ?
Compared to A-5 and A-8, what are:
speed
dive,
acceleration,
roll,
wingloading,
powerloading,
sustained turn,
zoom,
climb,
turning circle,
E retention ?
Yes, I want to know everything !
Funked ?
-
D-9 airframe is the same as the A-8 except forward of the firewall and the small insert between the rear fuselage and empennage. Weight is very close to A-8 if my books are right.
With MW 50 it has at (at sea level) something like 300 more hp than the A-8 (with boost override). So climb and acceleration performance should be signficantly better, probably similar to A-5. Top speed performance should be pretty close to the P-51 at most altitudes. But when the MW 50 runs out it is back to the same horsepower as the A-5, so climb and acceleration will be more sedate, and top speed will be not much better than A-8. It's still a single-stage supercharger, so the performance will drop off as you get near 20-25k.
About the same wingloading as A-8, but with more power and a longer fuselage. I would be out of my depth to predict what effect this will have on turn performance. Probably not much.
So you won't be winning many turning battles with this plane, but when the MW 50 injection is engaged it should be one of the fastest planes in the game, and a very good climber. Slightly less performance than the G-10 but the extra MG 151/20 and high-speed maneuverability will make it considerably more deadly.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-06-2000).]
-
The difference between A-8 and D-9 is 2 less cannon, and the Jumo 213 engine, which is better at high altitude and is installed in a smaller cowling, giving less drag. It weighs about the same.
So I guess:
Speed: Comparible to Mustang. Better than A series at all altitudes.
Dive: Better than A-8(less drag).
Acceleration: Better than A-8, probably less than A-5 at low speeds.
Roll: Same as A series.
Wingloading: Same as A-8.
Powerloading: Same as A-8 at low altitude, but better at high altitude due to Jumo engine.
Sustained turn: Better than A-8(less drag).
Zoom: Better than A-8(less drag).
Climb: At low alt equal to A-8, better at high altitude.
Turning circle: Probably slightly better than A-8.
E retention: better than A-5 and A-8.
The longer nose would make the forward view worse than the radial engined Fw 190.
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 07-06-2000).]
-
Currently A-5 is jack of all trades, capable of fighting any style (of course, not TnB with zekes at low speed).
Is it possible that A-5 will actually be better allround plane than D-9 ?
Sure D-9 can stay out of touch from most planes here, but caught slow on the deck, is it as helpless as A-8 ? In that case I might stay with A-5.
Juzz, should't powerloading be closer to A-5 than to A-8 ? Isn't D-9 actually lighter than A-8, with more HP ?
How would you rate the dive, compared to P-51D ?
How would longer fuselage affect the turn ability, generally, please ?
Can we expect sustained turn and circle near that of A-5 ?
Or we get the ack running WB Dora ? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
nevermind
[This message has been edited by Lioter (edited 07-06-2000).]
-
Speed: higher than in A series, near the mustang speed, but a bit lower
Dive: same as A series
Acceleration: Better than A series over 5K, between A5's and A8's under it, but near the A5.
Roll: Same as A series.
Wingloading: Bit lower than A8.
Powerloading: Better than A series over 10K, under it, again falls between A5 and A8, only slightly worse than A5, tho.
Sustained turn: Seems it will be comparable to that of A8. AKSwulfe and me were having a good discussion about this matter some time ago. Seems that the better powerloading and wingloading dont affect tunrning ability because the D9's aerodinamycs (tail farther to the wing than in A8). So I dunno this one.
Zoom: Better than A series as the sustained cimbrate is better.
Climb: over 4K should outclimb easyly A series.
Turning circle: as I said before, dunno...
E retention: same as A series.
All in all we have a plane that turns like an A8, but has a much better acceleration,climbrate and speed. The only thing that I'd miss in D9 would be outer cannons (I am already missing them in A5), and the engine vulnerability (inline instead of radial).
For me this means a much more formidable aircraft than A5. Less maneouverable but able to Boom and Zoom all day long.
Of course for many people D9 would be like a squeak...few people are used to handle a heavyweight like A8, and D9 is only slightly lighter.
BTW my estimation comes from taking a BMW801 as a 1750hp engine, with a 2000hp output at WEP in A8 and 1900 in A5.
Jumo engine rated at 1775hp and 2250 with MW50 WEP.
For me the 2100hp figure for the BMW801 in WEP is only applicable with MW50. and no 190 has MW50 in AH.
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 07-06-2000).]
-
The D9 weighs about 200 lb lighter than the A8 fully loaded.
The D9 is '4 longer and '1 shorter.
The 213A-1 has a max hp of 2,240 with MW 1 at 21k.
D9 climbs to 19k in 7 minutes 6 seconds.
A8 climbs to 19k in 9 minutes 6 seconds.
D9s max speed is 429 mph at 21,650 ft and 357 at SL.
------------------
Stab/Jagdgeschwader 26
'Abbeville Kids'
(http://www.mindspring.com/~nathownsj00/ww2/ag.jpg)
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 07-06-2000).]
-
What's all this talk about the missing outter cannons on the A-5?
Last time I flew one all I had to do was pick the cannon option in the hangar and take off...
-
No Fw190D-9 in AH.
Imagine trying to take one on in a Spitfire MkIX.
Its faster at all altitudes, particularly down low where most fights happen in AH.
It rolls MUCH better at all speeds than the Spit.
It accerates better.
It has more than twice the ammo load.
It holds its energy better.
Its WEP (MW50) lasts longer.
Its high speed handling is better.
So, if you want to see an arena of nothing but Fw190D-9s, go ahead. But in my opinion, the Fw190D-9 is too Ubėr and should only be added as a perk plane.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
If D9 is too uber then so is P51.
-
First of all, Dora was more of teh high alt plane - it was deisgned to fly better at altitudes that A seriers really suffered.
Looks at climb figures posted:
7 minutes+ to 19k ?
Does anyone thing that this is a GOOD climber ?
Spitfire 9 early mark ( f ) makes it to 20k in 6 flat.
LF or HF can do it in 5 minutes.
Yak 9 should get there in less then 5 too.
Dora is like a stang. Not too impresive down low - with exception of its speed - but it shines up high. 25k-30k area.
Would it be too uber ? Don't think so.
Give me well done spit 14 and it should be no problem whatsoever.
------------------
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/)
-
fd-ski, the Yak-9U as its modeled in AH climbs to 16k in 5.2 minutes, so a rough estimate of 6.2 to 6.5 minutes for a time to 19k.
Alternatively, it could have been modeled at a climb to 16k in 4.1 minutes, depending on VVS flight testing philosophy, but see the whole thread on prototype vs production in this forum, for a complete description of what I'm talking about.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Hahaha Karnak,
Time for your revenge had finally come I guess (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Now lets see how Lufwaffles will jump out of their pants acusing you of ignorance and etc.
As we Russians say: "Don't dig a hole for others, you might end up there yourself" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
mx22
-
I think you can expect about 700 "uses" and then she runs out. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
Originally posted by SnakeEyes:
I think you can expect about 700 "uses" and then she runs out. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
So we should have lost C-Hog ages ago ?
-
The maximum power the Fw 190A-5 gets from the BMW 801D is only around 1750hp@6k, and then lower(eg:1600hp@22k) above that altitude. I don't know how much power the Fw 190A-8 gains from its increased boost, but I think its around 1900hp maximum?
As for the Fw 190D-9:
It was powered by a Jumo 213A-1 engine rated at 1776hp for takeoff and 1600hp at 18,000 feet. However, with MW 50 (water/methanol) injection, it could give 2240hp at sea level and 2000hp at 11,150 feet.
Without MW 50, it would appear the Jumo 213A-1 has no better power than the BMW 801D.
In the end I think MW 50 is what really matters. Without it, the Dora is slightly inferior to the Mustang in performance. With MW 50, it is superior to the Mustang.
So: How many Fw 190D-9 had MW 50?
-
The Jumo had more power than the 801D at all altitudes, bar none.
-
Sure... D model's all ya need anyway. Plus you'd be givin the poor tank drivers a chance. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
SnakeEyes
o-o-o-
=4th Fighter Group=
-
How is the deck speed, compared to P 51D ?
Is it able to dive with P 51 ?
IMO, MW 50 is effective at low and medimum alt, while not helping much at high alitudes, right ?
In William Green's "Warplanes of the Third Reich" it is stated that D-9 could make faster turn than A series and also keep speed better in the turn due to powerloading.
Could this be true ?
-
"The Fw 190 D-9 although well armored and equipped to carry heavy armament, appears to be much less desirable from a hadling stand-point than other models of the Fw190 using he BMW radial engine. Any advantage that this airplane may have in performance over the other models of the fw190 is more then offset by its poor hanling characteristics"
USAF evaluation team.
It is easy to imagine that the gentlemen were comparing it to an A4 and that they never got it above 15k in thier tests. But it is worth considering if the plane would have near the nimbleness of the A5 especialy. (guess)It would handle at best like an A8.. It is worth noting that the US report makes special note of the armour and armement advantage of the D over the A while in the case of the A8 this was not true.
Same book(Monogram Close Up 10)
"However, as they(first operational pilots) became accoustomed to their new charges they began to revise their opinions. They discovered that the Dora 9 was faster, with better acceleration and maneuverability then the BMW-engined Focke-Wulf. Eventually they agreed that it would not only out turn the Fw190a8 but the Bf 109G as well."
Not sure how this translates to the game. I would doubt it would out turn the A5.
In comparison to the Spit IX it should out run it and out roll it. the Spit would out climb, out turn, out shoot and out dive the dora.
The spit XIV would out everything but roll the Dora.
The D14 would be a better match for the Spit XIV.
-
I doubt the USAAF were flying it with MW 50.
With MW 50 I don't think the climb will be a lot worse than the Spit 9, unless we get a Merlin 66 or 70.
I'm not so sure about the "outshoot" bit. Dora has more than twice the 20 mm ammo load than the Spit, and a 50% larger MG ammo load. The weak ammo of the German guns (especially the MG 131) is more than offset by the vast advantage in ammo load.
What the heck is a D14?
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-07-2000).]
-
Originally posted by funked:
I doubt the USAAF were flying it with MW 50.
With MW 50 I don't think the climb will be a lot worse than the Spit 9, unless we get a Merlin 66 or 70.
I'm not so sure about the "outshoot" bit. Dora has more than twice the 20 mm ammo load than the Spit, and a 50% larger MG ammo load. The weak ammo of the German guns (especially the MG 131) is more than offset by the vast advantage in ammo load.
What the heck is a D14?
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-07-2000).]
I am not sure how to factor the extra ammo for the wing root 20mm vs the lethatlity of the spit..but unless you plan on shooting down 6 planes..the guns on the spit are better.
I was using fdskis climb numbers. over a minute dif to 20k is signifigant.
The d14 has a db603 engine (441mph at 24k)
and a engine mount 151 with 220 rounds.
-
Fw 190D-14 was never produced. D-9 airframes (Werknummer 210040 and 210043) were tested with DB603 but these were just development mules. I know HTC has some perk planes in mind but I'm not sure if they will simulate planes that were never constructed.
Fw 190D-9 could do 435 mph at 18,700 feet with MW 50 anyways. The 425 mph figure that is tossed around is for an aircraft without MW 50.
I'm 99% sure Fd-ski's climb numbers are not for MW 50.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-07-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Hristo:
Fw 190A-5 and Fw 190A-8 are so much different, they seem like two totally different planes.
In A-5 I feel as safe as in F-16, while in A-8 any co-E plane makes me look for the way out. For example, in A-8 I stand no chance against well flown Hog, but that same Hog can do nothing against my A-5.
My question is : What can we expect from the Dora ?
Compared to A-5 and A-8, what are:
speed
dive,
acceleration,
roll,
wingloading,
powerloading,
sustained turn,
zoom,
climb,
turning circle,
E retention ?
Yes, I want to know everything !
Funked ?
I'd expect "lighter" plane compared to A-8 with more guts in the engine but with less powerful armament, lesser maneuverability but better vertical with slower dive.
I'd expect rolling to be also less than in A-5.
-
Originally posted by funked:
F
Fw 190D-9 could do 435 mph at 18,700 feet with MW 50 anyways. The 425 mph figure that is tossed around is for an aircraft without MW 50.
Funked, you are my hero (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Fishu, why would roll rate be affected ? I don't see any reason for that, roll inertia and ailerons are still the same.
Dive slower ? With less drag of an inline jumo ?
-
Well, no D-14 but I know the D-12 fully replaced the D-9 in production before the end of the war, and I believe a limited number of D-13's saw combat as well.
Although aside from the addition of a Motorkanon (sp?) I have no idea what the difference from a D-9 is.
An extra 30mm is always nice to have though (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by SpyHawk (edited 07-07-2000).]
-
The Fw 190D-10 was an experimental version of the D-9 with an engine-mounted MK 108 cannon and two MG 151 cannon in the wing roots. Only two of these were built.
The Fw 190D-11 was powered by the Jumo 213F with MW 50 boost. The fuselage-mounted guns were eliminated, and there were two MG 151s in the wing roots and two MK 108s in the outer wings. Only seven prototypes were built.
The Fw 190D-12 was a fighter-bomber variant, which differed from the D-9 by having a three-stage supercharged Jumo 213F-1 engine rated at 2060 hp for takeoff mounted in a new, more extensively armored cowling. Armanent was one engine-mounted 30-mm MK 108 cannon and two 20-mm MG 151s in the wing roots. Although primarily a ground-attack plane, the D-12 also made an effective fighter and could attain 453 mph at 37,000 feet when MW 50 boost was used. Production began in March 1945 at the Arado and Fieseler plants, but only a few were delivered.
The D-13 differed from the D-12 by having a Jumo 213EB engine and by having a 20-mm engine-mounted MG 151 cannon in place of the 30-mm MK 108 unit. However, only a couple of prototypes were built.
In the late autumn of 1944, the Technische Amt decided to switch to the Daimler-Benz DB 603 engine for future Fw-190D production. A couple of production Fw 190D-9s were re-engined with the DB 603AE, and during tests one of them clocked 435 mph at 32,800 feet. Plans were made to produce the fighter in series with the DB603E or DB 603LA as the Fw 190D-14 and with the DB 603EB or DB 603G as the Fw 190D-15, but the war ended before these plans could be brought to fruition.
-
Originally posted by juzz:
So: How many Fw 190D-9 had MW 50?
Houston calling Funked....
Houston calling Funked...Funked you you copy?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Now I am talking by memory, I remember reading somewhere that something less than 50% production run of D9s came out from the factories with MW50 included, and a great number of the non-fitted planes were retrofitted with it on the field.
So most D9 had Mw50 fitted. Dont ask me number as I dont know (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
So...back to the work (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Houston calling Funked...
Houston calling Funked...Funked you you copy?
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 07-07-2000).]
-
About D-12 and D-13:
Heinz Nowarra, who has got to be the leading Fw 190 scholar, says it is doubtful that series production of the D-12 ever began. The only planes that are known about for certain are three prototypes converted from A-8: V63 (Werknummer 350165), V64 (350166), and V65 (350167).
There were to be several prototypes of the D-13, but as Nowarra says, "this version and the D-13/R5 and R21 planned versions never got past the drawing board." Airframes V62 (732053) and V71 (732054) were designated for conversion but apparently not completed and test-flown.
-
RAM: The best information I have is that the MW 50 system was not installed at the factory at all. Some time after production started the MW 50 kits were ready and were retrofitted to many aircraft. I have no idea how many planes this was. BTW speed at sea level with MW 50 was 380 mph. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
(These speeds are from RLM documents, ask Vermillion if you want to see a copy)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-07-2000).]
-
Originally posted by funked:
RAM: The best information I have is that the MW 50 system was not installed at the factory at all.
As I said, I was talking by memory. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Some time after production started the MW 50 kits were ready and were retrofitted to many aircraft. I have no idea how many planes this was. BTW speed at sea level with MW 50 was 380 mph.
Many aircraft?...that is enough for wanting D9 with MW50 here!!!!!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Nahh i think we'll just leave the D-9 with no MW 50 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Popeye...
NO SPIT XIV FOR YOU!!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Maj. Franz Goetz, final Geschwadder Kommodore of JG26 flew a D-13 as his last crate of the war. He *may* have had other D-13's under his command, but that is unknown.
Just mailed off my JG26 book to Conan...now that I need it. The D-13 info on Goetz is from a copy of "JG26 Photographic History of the Luftwaffe's Top Guns". Autographed copy by Adolf Galland, Addi Glunz, and the author - Donald Caldwell.
-
Originally posted by funked:
Fw 190D-14 was never produced. D-9 airframes (Werknummer 210040 and 210043) were tested with DB603 but these were just development mules. I know HTC has some perk planes in mind but I'm not sure if they will simulate planes that were never constructed.
Fw 190D-9 could do 435 mph at 18,700 feet with MW 50 anyways. The 425 mph figure that is tossed around is for an aircraft without MW 50.
I'm 99% sure Fd-ski's climb numbers are not for MW 50.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-07-2000).]
Well all I really want is the 3 cannon load out...can I have that?
-
Pongo, to the best of my knowledge, the three-cannon 190's were prototypes only. There may have been a handful produced, but these may have just been prototypes that were sent to the front.
Just go with a Ta 152H. More performance AND three cannon AND a definite record of production.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 07-08-2000).]
-
The D9 vs P51 would be a joke. The D9 is faster, better climber, better roll, better dive, and equal if not faster turn rate.
The P51 advantage is turn radius and endurance.... woopie (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
So if we can have D-9 then the P-51 ain't the fastest plane anymore ?
Great ! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Kats:
The D9 vs P51 would be a joke. The D9 is faster, better climber, better roll, better dive, and equal if not faster turn rate.
The P51 advantage is turn radius and endurance.... woopie (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
FASTER?!?!?!? A D9!?!??!?!
lol
BETTER CLIMBER???? A D9?????
lol
BETTER DIVE!?!?!?!??! A D9 ????
lol
EQUAL OF BETTER TURNRATE!?!??!? A D9???
ROFLOL WITH TEARS IN MY EYES!
Nice troll...or go back to your books and learn something about WWII planes (J/K (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
Seriously d9 is slower and doesnt climb as good as a P51. Turnrate should be in P51's side as D9 has only a bit more powerloading than an A8...had you tried to outturn a P51 with a A8?...hehehhe
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
I would not be so sure about all those things, RAM.
D-9 should be faster on the deck.
Dive would be close, and considering the engine power, Dora might be able to outdive P 51 at some flight conditions.
Climb, acceleration and roll are unquestionable, Dora beats P 51.
Turning might be interesting though.
-
Originally posted by Nath-BDP:
If D9 is too uber then so is P51.
Crap. The 190 accelerates better, rolls better, better guns, practically as fast, dives almost as well, and the A5 turns WELL better, the D9 no worse than 51 in turn.
Bring on the 190-D9 along with the spit 14. Givin the choice between them i'd probably fly the D9 - so i doubt it will become 'spits high'. Truth be told i probably stick to my stang.
------------------
Overlord Spatula
if you adhere to all the rules you miss out on all the fun
(http://www.spatula.co.nz/aceshigh/spatula_sig1.jpg)
=357th Pony Express=
[This message has been edited by Spatula (edited 07-12-2000).]
-
Yeah, I'll stick to my F4U-1D (still can't hit anything with cannons).
Until they let me fly have my F4U-4 to fight the new uberbaddies!
------------------
(http://members.tripod.com/lone-wolf-squadron/05640400.gif)
[This message has been edited by SpyHawk (edited 07-12-2000).]
-
improve your gunnery, Spyhawk. Its worth it... http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum8/HTML/000625.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum8/HTML/000625.html)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 07-13-2000).]
-
Originally posted by SpyHawk:
Yeah, I'll stick to my F4U-1D (still can't hit anything with cannons).
Until they let me fly have my F4U-4 to fight the new uberbaddies!
Screw that, if a D9 is entered into the system, I want a F8 Bearcat.
-
Sorry is there a rule that the P-51 has to be the best plane in the set?
The truth is performance wise with fellow '44 planes the 51 won't have a clear speed advantage a lot of the time and most of these planes will outclimb/out accelerate it. (D9, spit 14, tempest V, La-7, Ki-84 etc.)
It will still be a great plane but it's biggest asset range won't be as important in the arena.
P.S. Bearcats bring Sea Fury's, jets etc.