Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Naudet on November 26, 2000, 05:53:00 PM
-
Is HTC planning to introduce this widely used planes in AH?? And if possible modeled right?
Atm i am still looking for a Sim were i can find a well modeled FW190. Both were real Hotrods in the air, but the D9 is a flying brick in the sims it is developed in, and the KI 84 would be nice to fly. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
If HTC needs info about the FW190 D9, i have a few .jpgs of 3 original FW documents, one showing D9 speed curves, the 2nd showing climbcurves and the 3rd showing performance of the whole FW190 series up to the TA152.
[This message has been edited by Naudet (edited 11-26-2000).]
-
Mail them to me, I'd love to see them (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
ebringas@airtel.net
-
Hey Naudet,
post them here!!! You can see how to do it on the left side saying *UBB Code is ON* If you have trouble just ask away...
BTW, what is your source?
-
HEY NAUDET, it's me PG_bradys, are u defecting???, hope so come fly for the Bishops (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif),AG told me all about the Dora 9 data, post it mate, also they have been talking about adding the D-9, and a Ta 152 as a perk plane, The frank has been mentioned to (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Brady
-
Don't listen to Brady, come to Knightlandia, the country for real pilots (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Good to see you again Naudet.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
Knightlandia...cough...gag... cough...the most vexing thing about the Knights (other than their #'s)is that have too many High Quality squads like LJK...Bishops are the WTG.
Brady
-
Here are the data sheets for climb and speed:
(http://people.freenet.de/Lutz_Naudet/D9climb2chart.jpg)
(http://people.freenet.de/Lutz_Naudet/D9speed2chart.jpg)
-
coole Info Naudet, danke (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
Komm rueber zu den Knights und halt nach dem jg54 Ausschau.
Maik
-
Awesome! Just watch out RAM doesn't try to kiss/hug you or something (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
WTF is No.3 in the speed chart? Is that 400mph at sea level?!
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 11-27-2000).]
-
CC Brady. AH is not pro-US as we only have one version of three fighters. Although they did have two US bombers added. Not rare ones by any means though. The USSR and Japanese are far and away the least represented.
Give em time. They'll get the ones we're all looking to have added, and more.
-Westy
-
Interesting...
Without MW 50, the D-9 in the charts is quite close to the AH P-51D in performance.
D-9 is about 10mph slower at all altitudes except between 15,000ft and 20,000ft, where they are about even.
P-51D climbs a bit(~100fpm) better below 12,000ft, but then the D-9 is slightly better from there up to 20,000ft, where they become equal.
With MW 50, the D-9 is everywhere superior. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Keep in mind that those speed values are with etc504, which is a mechanical system to carry cylindrical external loads
etc500 of 109F: (from www.unsere-luftwaffe.de) (http://www.unsere-luftwaffe.de))
(http://www.unsere-luftwaffe.de/archiv/bord/etc500.jpg)
so those very interesting charts are for Jabos. Without etc504 the 190 would be a bit faster.
MW50 WAS standard in 190D9. 190D9 turnrate was much improved over 190A series, 190D9 outturned Me109G btw.
Naudet, was steht in dem horizontalgeschwindigkeitsbil d genau oben in der Tabelle zu den einzelnen Punkten in "motorbeanspruchung"? Ich kann nicht alles genau entziffern.
niklas
-
Vielen, vielen Dank Niklas... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
always wondered if HTC modeled parasite drag and weight of the ETC... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)!!! Flying the A8 without droptank to save drag and weight (if it's modeled)
HTC, please enlighten us if letting DT behind helps the plane (a bit)... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
There is a good page on the FW190D9 that uses this chart and also a few more, there are translations and a table that also includes the info on the use of GM-1 in the D9, all speeds are translated into mph and ft.
the URL is http://jagdhund.freeyellow.com/FW190D-9/Dora.html (http://jagdhund.freeyellow.com/FW190D-9/Dora.html)
-
I also have another chart that shows all FW190 series aircraft.
(http://people.freenet.de/Lutz_Naudet/FW190-Serie-chart.jpg)
As u can see the time to 10 km is 16,8 with combat power (could be used for up to 30mins), this is the time u normally find in sources about the D9, the best time to 10km is only 12,5 min with MW50.
This is the reason why the D9 was (in my opinion) the best WW2 piston engined fighter, it could outclimb and outdive the allied fighter (yes even the Spit XIV, especially when using MW50.
And it turned better than the FW190A or the ME 109G, which would mean it could turn a stang and is not far behind a Spit.
-
WTG Naudet!
You might like these: http://www.raf303.org/funked/a-8manual/ (http://www.raf303.org/funked/a-8manual/)
http://members.xoom.com/mikewaltz/F-TR-1102-ND.htm (http://members.xoom.com/mikewaltz/F-TR-1102-ND.htm)
http://www.raf303.org/funked/usn190a5.htm (http://www.raf303.org/funked/usn190a5.htm)
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Good info ;=)
Also there is http://www.geocities.com/spades53.geo/prodocs.htm (http://www.geocities.com/spades53.geo/prodocs.htm)
danish
-
What makes you think the D would turn better than a Pony?
Guys, am I out to lunch here? If I remember right in WB the D9 was almost as big of a truck as the A8 when it came to turning. I'd expect it to be similar here.
------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs http://www.flyingpigs.com (http://www.flyingpigs.com)
(http://tuweb.ucis.dal.ca/~dconrad/ahf/lepht.gif)
"A pig is a jolly companion,
Boar, sow, barrow, or gilt --
A pig is a pal, who'll boost your morale,
Though mountains may topple and tilt.
When they've blackballed, bamboozled, and burned you,
When they've turned on you, Tory and Whig,
Though you may be thrown over by Tabby and Rover,
You'll never go wrong with a pig, a pig,
You'll never go wrong with a pig!"
-- Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"
[This message has been edited by Lephturn (edited 11-28-2000).]
-
Niklas,
Why would the D9 have a better turn rate than the A4? It was heavier with poorer wing loading. Not exactly ideal for maneuvering fights. I see the 190D9 having very good E-retention as well as good high speed handling. But nothing that tells me that it should be a good turning plane.
-
What makes you think the D would turn better than a Pony
If I remember right in WB the D9 was almost as big of a truck as the A8 when it came to turning. I'd expect it to be similar here
ROTFL
hey Lephturn, if you think the WB FM is a good reprentation how WW2 AC really performed than you´re really naive.
190D9 did outturn in low-med altitudes the P51.Clmax 1.59 (dora) compared to 1.28 of P-51. 2100Hp compared to 1600Hp. Naca230 airfoil compared to laminar airfoil. comparable wingloading. Elector-hydraulic autotrimm compared to manual. Single-lever engine control for optimum engine performance in every flight situatiation compared to manual control.
F4Udoa the Dora was much more powerful. Less drag, more power > faster and tighter turn. The missing cannons in the outer wing section> higher AoA usually possible. Much better aerodynamic in the nose section > better airflow around the fuselage and wing root section
Less frontal area, but longer fuselage can maybe also have an influence ("floor area"), you also need less elevator deflection with a longer tail which reduce your total lift less.
Bigger propeller > bigger propwash effect
These are explanations from me.
I heard this first that the 109D9 outturned the 109G from an german WW2 veteran who did fly 190D and me262. And also from other sources.
A 190D is more than a 190A with another engine.
Did i already mention that a fighter is more than only weight, power and wingarea?
Look at the wingloading of a Ta152-H. Smiliar to a 190D9. And a Ta152-H was famous for it´s abillity to turn.
And btw, a 190D in AH without 2100HP would be a joke. All efforts in german engine technology after ´43 had 2 aims: Better high altitude performance, and a 2000+ HP engine for fighters.
niklas
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 11-28-2000).]
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 11-28-2000).]
-
The idea why the D9 should turn as good as a Pony, is coming from the point that the 109 G and the P51 turned very close to each other, but with a little advantage for the P51.
And as GE pilots reported the D9 was able to fly tighter turn than the 109G, which means it must be as good as the P51, but more likely it was better. The JG26 pilots stated that the D9 was more than a match for P51, "more than a match" means, it was superior.
Last thing, as niklas said, the D9 had 2100 hp compared to only 1600 hp in the stang, both planes were similar in combat weight, with the D9 being a bit lighter. What this means for E retention in a turnfight is very clear. The D9 had better hp/lb. ratio, which means better acceleration, too. Another point that is very important in turnfights.
-
WTG Naudet
Brady
-
Geez Lephturn.... don't tell me you've been basing your comments on AH aircraft performance on the way those aircraft maneuver in Warbirds!
Fer goodness sake... look at the WB P47's. Do you really think they had such anaemic vertical performance in real life?
F4UDOA, I think you're confusing turn rate with turn radius. The Dora has a significantly better power loading than the A series, and should be able to maintain speed (and therefore turn rate) in a hard turn much better than its early-war cousins.
[This message has been edited by Jekyll (edited 11-29-2000).]
-
<RAM puts 5 12-beer packs on the fridge in prevision of the flames that will rage all across this board when:
A)-Fw190D9 with MW50 comes and its unperked (Allied flamewar)
B)-Fw190D9 without MW50 comes (kicking out all historical means to bring authentical late-1944 LW planes into AH)----->as you may see, Axis flamewar (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
C)-Fw190D9 With MW50 comes and it is perked at relative low cost----->mixed flamewar, LW flames because anything slightly better than P51 is perked while the P51 isnt, and Allied whines because the perk points needed aren't enough to make LW people fly another thing if they can.
Hey, I'd better get loads of pop-corn too (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
but i still havent really understood the meaning of perk, how u get perk points or whatever is needed to get to a better plane
[This message has been edited by Naudet (edited 11-29-2000).]
-
Guys, guys... I wasn't using Warbirds as a guide to how they really did perform. Woah up. All I'm saying is that the SAME GUY (Pyro) did the research and flight models for that game as this one. It follows then, that the planes should work compare relative to each other similar to how they did in WB. Unless new or different data has been uncovered, the basics like climb, speed, and turn should still be the same even though some things may be different. All I'm saying is that Pyro's data is Pyro's data, and unless that has changed, the relative performance should be comparable between the two games.
Now bear in mind, I'm talking old WB when Pyro was the man there, not whatever they have done to it now.
------------------
Lephturn - Chief Trainer
A member of The Flying Pigs http://www.flyingpigs.com (http://www.flyingpigs.com)
"A pig is a jolly companion,
Boar, sow, barrow, or gilt --
A pig is a pal, who'll boost your morale,
Though mountains may topple and tilt.
When they've blackballed, bamboozled, and burned you,
When they've turned on you, Tory and Whig,
Though you may be thrown over by Tabby and Rover,
You'll never go wrong with a pig, a pig,
You'll never go wrong with a pig!"
-- Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"
-
"the best time to 10km is only 12,5 min with MW50." "it could outclimb and outdive the allied fighter (yes even the Spit XIV, especially when using MW50."
From the chart, D-9 to 6100m with MW 50: 5.7min
Spitfire XIV to 20,000ft: 5.1min
Spitfire XIV to 34,000ft(10,365m): 10.25min
I don't know how the Spitfire XIV did when using 150 Octane fuel(British "equivalent" of MW 50, allowed higher boost pressure of +25lbs instead of normal +18lbs) - but a Merlin 66 engined Spitfire Mk VIII at +25lbs had an initial climbrate of about 5500fpm. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
MW 50 doesn't last forever.
-
MW 50 on the D9 was enough for 40minutes, with a maximun of 10mins of constant use, i think this lasts long enough.
And were u found 5.1 mins for Spit XIV to 20K, all my sources say 7 mins. And a chart Captain E. Brown made after comparing Spit XIV and D9 rated the Spit with 4K/min and the D9 with 6+K/min (with MW50) and 4.1K/min (without MW50).
Only prob is the URL with this table is no longer available, so i can post it here.
[This message has been edited by Naudet (edited 11-30-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Naudet:
And a chart Captain E. Brown made after comparing Spit XIV and D9 rated the Spit with 4K/min and the D9 with 6+K/min (with MW50) and 4.1K/min (without MW50).
Only prob is the URL with this table is no longer available, so i can post it here.
That means they have deleted the joke. Because if you read that, it was a joke.
Come on, take a look at the weights of the SpitXIV and the MW50 Fw190D9, ok? powerloading is much better in the spit than in the MW50 Fw190D9, go figure without MW50, so the climbrate will be way better in the Spitfire than in the Fw...so what you are saying is nonsense.
6 K/m LOL!!!! Lazs will suffer a collapse when he reads this (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)...and 4.1K /m without MW50 ROFL!!!!....1750HP make a plane only 300lbs ligher than a 1800hp Fw190A8 climb nearly 1500feet/minute more than it!!!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 11-30-2000).]
-
http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html)
7 minutes?! That's the time it took a Spitfire Mk II to get to 20,000ft.
-
Originally posted by juzz:
7 minutes?! That's the time it took a Spitfire Mk II to get to 20,000ft.
That's the second joke. The first one (the Fw190D9 making 6K/minute) is way better...
I am still LMAO (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Capt. Brown made most of his charts with data from other people's books.
-
"A Luftwaffles Guide to Über Planes of The Third Reich" ???