Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: juzz on September 03, 2000, 12:23:00 AM
-
1. Spitfire F.IX is too fast. Compare to the Boscome Down figures(in brackets), achieved at the same load and power setting.
100% fuel, 2x20mm & 4x7.7mm, +15lbs boost
4k: 335mph(326mph) +9mph
8k: 355mph(344mph) +11mph
12k: 370mph(363mph) +7mph
16k: 390mph(383mph) +7mph
20k: 385mph(378mph) +7mph
24k: 400mph(390mph) +10mph
28k: 415mph(409mph) +6mph
32k: 398mph(395mph) +3mph
36k: 380mph(377mph) +3mph
I guess 10mph isn't that much, but you can bet you wouldn't hear the end of it if the P-51D did 447mph.
2. Fw 190A-5 climbs too well. At 100% fuel, 2xMG 17, 2xMG FF and 2xMG 151/20 it's climbrate is virtually identical to the USN tested Fw 190G-3 with only 2xMG 151/20.
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 09-03-2000).]
-
I thought the Boscombe Down figures were achieved at lower power settings, i.e 15lb boost instead of 18lb which became standard, and which we have in AH.
-
I didn't see charts for A-5, but still it climbs too fast?
-
Of course it does.
It's LW, and it's flown by many a dweeb.
A8 rules (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"If you died a stones throw from your wingie; you did no wrong". - Hangtime
-
Posted in A8 armor thread:
-------------------------------------------HEhhhhmmmm at the risk of sounding inept...
How much does 2x7.92mm MGs, 2x20mm MGFF, and their ammo weight?
300 lbs? that being generous I guess ( no idea on ammo weights sorry).
That means nothing. No, really. I think the performance (speed, acceleratio and climb) wont be very damaged by that extra weight. There should be a difference, for sure ,still I think that it wont be one to squeak and moan about Fw190A5 like the squeakes and moans we all hear daily.
The manouverability would suffer, of curse, but the maneouverability difference between 4x20mm and 2x20mm is ok isnt it?-
so...is SO serious problem? if it is true that the performance is taken as funked says, then it needs fix, of course...but it does THAT BIG difference?
I guess not.
(I am taking funked's affirmation as true, note that In no moment I say that A5 is overmodelled. True is, he knows way more than me about 190s so I give him credit).
-------------------------------------------
I dont think that 2 MGff and 2 Mg17 make a big difference. Please any hard data on it?
-
If the spits to fast change it.
If the FW is climbs to fast.
I'm sure if the FW's climb or the spit's speed was a bit worse than it should be i don't think people would be saying "it's not much difference HTC might as well leave it as it is"
[This message has been edited by jmccaul (edited 09-03-2000).]
-
These speed/accel/climb threads pop up all the time. Someone stumbles across some data and cites it in this manner. Of course, the assumption is that all data is identical to that wich is cited.
When it comes to these 3 things... I'll put my faith in Pyro's database over someone that doesn't collect that kind of data for a living.
AKDejaVu
-
I can see that LW has finally got it's uber plane to fit the hole against allies several uber planes
"Look them allies crying like they told us how we cry!" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Nashwan; read the power setting those speeds are reached at: +15lbs. If you look at all the Mk IX speed figures on the 4th FG Spitfire testing page (http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spit9.html)(F, LF and HF), I think you will find that the AH F.IX is faster than all of them at +18lbs. Somehow, that doesn't seem right at all. Maybe the different prop ratio on the M66 and M70 had a really big effect on top speeds? I would like to hear Pyro's explaination though.
Fishu; Look at this Fw 190G-3 climb chart (http://members.xoom.com/mikewaltz/p76.jpg) from funked's page (http://members.xoom.com/mikewaltz/F-TR-1102-ND.htm), and compare it to the Aces High Fw 190A-5 climb chart. (http://www.hitechcreations.com/190a5.html) But the G-3 only had 2xMG 151/20, while the A-5 chart is for 2xMG 17, 2xMG FF and 2xMG 151/20.
RAM; 2xMG 17 and ammo weighs 354lbs. 2xMG FF is about 120lbs(just the guns).
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 09-03-2000).]
-
Originally posted by juzz:
Fishu; Look at this Fw 190G-3 climb chart (http://members.xoom.com/mikewaltz/p76.jpg) from funked's page (http://members.xoom.com/mikewaltz/F-TR-1102-ND.htm), and compare it to the Aces High Fw 190A-5 climb chart. (http://www.hitechcreations.com/190a5.html) But the G-3 only had 2xMG 151/20, while the A-5 chart is for 2xMG 17, 2xMG FF and 2xMG 151/20.
Yes, but HOW do I know that Funkeds charts are correct?
Those can be wrong and its one source.. (more likely I would read charts from non AH player)
-
Yes, but HOW do I know that Funkeds charts are correct?
Those can be wrong and its one source.
Do you have any other sources that are as complete ??
Wasn't there weight added to that G3 as ballast???
-
Juzz, either I misread your post the first time or something changed when you edited it.
Are you saying the figures you got in AH were at 15 lb boost?
-
Nashwan: Yes, those speeds are at +15lbs in AH.
Fishu: Look at the speed charts - identical. Look at the climb charts - identical. This is almost certainly the SAME data that HTC used to model the Fw 190A-5.
Wells: This is the text from the intro page for funked's data: Information from Technical Report No. F-TR-1102-ND "Handbook for FW-190 Airplane" By. Lt. F. D. Van Wart, 1946.
Aircraft in question was a Fw 190G-3. Bomb racks were removed making the aircraft equivalent to a Fw 190A-5. The G-3 also had a directional autopilot and other equipment not found on the A-5, but the MG 17 in the cowl were deleted (354 lb with ammo). A-5 airframe differs from A-1 through A-4 in that the engine mounts were extended 15cm forward, increasing aircraft length by that amount. Aircraft weight was 6940 lb empty and 8538 with pilot, ballast (ammunition), and maximum fuel load. Stalling speeds were 110 mph clean, 105 mph dirty.
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 09-05-2000).]
-
CC Juzz, it's still not clear if there was 354 lbs of 'ballast' added to make up for the missing cowl guns.
-
..and therefore I can't be sure that it is reliable source to compare.
-
Yes! Once again we hear from the Aces High Aeronautical and Structural Geniuses.
Yes folks step right up and watch as a handful of Aero Einsteins discuss the same (but different) subject with as much purpose as beating a decomposed horse.
You people kill me! Just enjoy the sim. It's actually fun ya know??
Have a nice day!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Swager
GeschwaderKommodore I/JG2~Richthofen~[/i]
"Damn.....I can't believe I missed that shot!!!"
(http://saintaw.tripod.com/swager.jpg)
JG2 "Richthofen" (http://Ripsnort60.tripod.com/JG2inquirer.html)
[This message has been edited by Swager (edited 09-05-2000).]
-
Hey me too swag but we need this kinda debate to make sure AH is the leading edge.
-
Originally posted by Swager:
You people kill me! Just enjoy the sim. It's actually fun ya know??
It is a game, like HT has announced (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Swager, it was the "Aero Einsteins" that caused HTC to change the FM in 1.04...
-
That's great! Keeping HTC honest! My post was all in jest! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Juzz, I will die just as easily with the 1.04 FM as I do with the 1.03 FM!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
If the Spitfire Mk IX is too fast then I think that it should be slowed to its historical speeds.
Simple enough.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
There's an interesting photo envolving the topic on page 71 in a book called
"Warplanes of the Luftwaffe" (Aerospace Publishing Ltd. ,ISBN:1 874023 56 5).
Text accompanying the photo states: "Although not showing the elegance of the
Spitfire, few fighters looked more aggressively purposeful than the Fw 190.
This aircraft DEVOID of weapons, is an Fw 190G-3 captured by the Americans
before it could be devivered to a frontline unit. The G-series Fw 190 was
developed as an extended-range fighter-bomber and externally similar to the
Fw 190A-5/U-13 with ETC 501 fuselage bomb racks and no fuselage-mounted guns."
Could this be the exact same aircraft which was used for these tests ???
As the photo's text states...you can clearly see that this G-3 has all it's
guns and ETC 501 removed.
IF this was the aircraft used for these tests...
Was ALL of the armament removed BEFORE or AFTER those tests?? If before...how much did
the ballast really weigh?? Was the ballast there just make up for the cowl guns or was
it there to make up for MG151/20s also, PLUS MG FFs which most A-5s did have?
I know that this plane in question isn't the only G-3 Americans captured, but as
the text states this plane was brand new when it was captured, so it would be very well
suited for performance testing...
IF HTC modeled A-5 using this data I bet they know answers to these questions...
Wmaker