Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: MANDOBLE on March 02, 2001, 08:41:00 AM
-
Can someone post climb/speed charts of Dora (with/without MW50)?
-
¡¡No hasta que vuelvas!!
Saludos,
Pepe
-
Dos semanas Pepe, dos semanas ...
Se me cuide.
-
Mandoble, here is a chart that has some good D9 data on it.
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-4.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-4.jpg)
It also has some good data on just about the entire 190 series on in, including the A5,A8, and the Ta152H1.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Thanks for the info Verm, but it is a bit unclear for me. I have no idea of german, but I suppose the following terms have these meanings, please, correct me if I'm wrong (100% probable):
Hötchsgeschwindigkeit -> wind speed
mit Notleistung om Boden (Km/h) -> with ???
in Volldruckhöhe -> altitude
mit Kampfleistung -> with field modifications?
-
Hötchsgeschwindigkeit -> wind speed
mit Notleistung om Boden (Km/h) -> with ???
in Volldruckhöhe -> altitude
mit Kampfleistung -> with field modifications?
[/B]
Höchstgeschwindigkeit = topspeed
mit Notleistung am Boden = with emgency power at sealevel
in Volldurckhöhe = in rated/critical altitude
mit Kampfleistung = with combat power
Note: emergency power is not special emergency power (usage of mw50)
niklas
-
The best charts for the dora were posted a long time ago by Naudet. You can find them here: http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001094.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001094.html)
When you look at the topspeed (635kmh or 395mph at sealevel), you can see that for this curve, the second stage of the supercharger was already used at sealevel (straight line from sealevel to 4000m)
Here is the corresponding engine performance chart:
(http://www.freenet.de/luftwaffeln/213A1_2.jpg)
(a higher resolution scan is: www.freenet.de/luftwaffeln/213A1.jpg (http://www.freenet.de/luftwaffeln/213A1.jpg)
and the Jumo213E1 engine: www.freenet.de/luftwaffeln/213E1.jpg (http://www.freenet.de/luftwaffeln/213E1.jpg) )
You can easily see that the curve for 395mph at sealevel is identical to the curve in the engine chart with 2100hp (2.Stage used already at sealevel).
That means the D9 you know so far from WB or other sims is very probable a 1900hp Dora, and not the true 2100hp Version.
niklas
[This message has been edited by niklas (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
Originally posted by niklas:
395mph at sealevel
Oh boy (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Looks like there's no "ram effect" on those engine power charts...?
Here's some dodgy "HTC style" Fw 190D-9 charts made from Naudet's chart data:
(http://www.geocities.com/qwejibo2000/fw190d9clm.gif)
(http://www.geocities.com/qwejibo2000/fw190d9spd.gif)
-
Originally posted by Vermillion:
Mandoble, here is a chart that has some good D9 data on it.
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-4.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-4.jpg)
It also has some good data on just about the entire 190 series on in, including the A5,A8, and the Ta152H1.
Ok, I emailed vermillion to post this but 12 hours have passed and he has done nothing.
Hötchsgeschwindigkeit mit Notleistung om Boden (Km/h)in Volldruckhöhe in german means "speed at sea level"
Fw190A8 in that chart shows 578 km/hour at deck level, wich is 360mph, not 350mph as the Fw190A8 has in Aces High.
Given that the Fw190F8 is bassically identical to the Fw190A8, I would be sure that the F8 has also around 360mph on the deck.
this is as fast as the Corsair is!!!!!!!! and matches pretty well the VVS page's info on the 190's speed that I posted some time ago, wich said that the 190A8 (F8) was only 10-15km/hour slower thank yak9u at sea level, making it very difficult to intercept on the very low, hispeed ,bomb runs they used to do at deck level.
I've seen a lot of times the 360mph figure for the Fw190A8 at deck level, but this is the first time I see it in an official document...maybe the Fw190A8 in aces high is too slow at deck level? 10mph is a BIG difference...
See the date of that information 1-10-1944, seems a quite official document if you ask me, and is a german document wich talks about german 190s, not captured ones (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
HTC,sorry for this post, but I asked verm to post this and he has done nothing. And seems he wasnt to do anything.
And BTW WTG on the dora (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
Look! Up in the sky!
Is it a bird?
Is it a plane?
NO!!!
It's R4M!
-
...
[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
performance data for Tempest V:
Speed
S/L 378mph
10K 409mph
16K 421mph
20K 431mph
Climb is also similar to the D9 with MW50.
Extracts from ADFU trial of Tempest:
41. There is very little difference in turning circles between the two aircraft. If anything a very slight advantage lies with the Tempest.
Rate of Roll
42. The Tempest V cannot compare with the FW 190.
As the 2 planes seem so well matched, can I assume the D( with MW 50 will be perked?
-
Hello RAM
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
performance data for Tempest V:
Speed
S/L 378mph
10K 409mph
16K 421mph
20K 431mph
From AH charts :
P51D's Speeds:
SL: 370mph
10k: around 410mph
16K: around 415mph
20K: aournd 427mph
Fw190D9's MW50 Speeds; according to Verm charts:
SL: 380mph
P51D turns markedly better than the Fw190A8, the D9 will turn worse than the A8.
P51D has markedly better firepower than the Fw190D9 (not just because punch only,wich could be arguable, but also because the way better accuracy, bullet speed,RoF, and range of the 50cals)
Rate of roll of the P51 is worse under 400IAS and better over it. But it is quite decent at any speed.
P51D range is way better than D9's. P51's A/G loadouts are way better than D9's (and than tempest's too IIRC)
While d9 is faster than P51D in most altitudes, P51D has better dive, high speed handling and E-retaining.
D9, on its side, has better acceleration, and better climbrate
Both aircraft are evenly matched in almost everything.
Conclussion in the lines of Nashwans' reasoning; P51D will be a perk plane (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Nashwan, the Tempest has four hispanos. The F4U1-C will be a blessing compared with it . The tempest will climb and accelerate better than the MW50 D9, although by a slight margin.
But the Tempest turned better than the Fw190D9 (either that or you are telling me that the Fw190A8 outturns a Typhoon??? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)), dives better and has a devastating weaponry.
Personally I think that both the P51D and Fw190D9 belong to the normal planeset of Aces High. Tempest V is too good, as it is SpitXIV.
Fw190D9 will be a faster Fw190A8, with 2 cannons less. Will need serious ACM in order to be succesfull in this plane, because BnZ tactics can't work well in a plane that has two 20mm cannons unable to hit beyond 400yards.D9 Will be an air superiority plane only, while both tempest and Mustang can play the A/G role quite succesfully (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
BTW I <punt> my previous post. 360mph for the 190A8/190F8 at Sea Level... In AH it is 350mph...
why?
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
I still say that nothing should be perked on intro. Let us all fly it and work on it so that if it is perked there is a solid understanding of why.
-
Fw190D9's MW50 Speeds; according to Verm charts:
SL: 380mph
yes with 1900hp
P51D turns markedly better than the Fw190A8, the D9 will turn worse than the A8.
not true, D9 turned better than A8. Way better
P51D has markedly better firepower than the Fw190D9 (not just because punch only,wich could be arguable, but also because the way better accuracy, bullet speed,RoF, and range of the 50cals)
Yes, dora has cannons close to the fuselage. No wing vibrations affect bullet dispersion there. Unfortunatly AH doesn´t simulate that guns or cannons far outside in the wing are affected by wing vibrations. What rests for the D9 in AH is the disadvantage of a lower ROF, because the weapon has to shoot through the propeller. THIS effect, of course, IS modelled!
While d9 is faster than P51D in most altitudes, P51D has better dive, high speed handling and E-retaining.
D9, on its side, has better acceleration, and better climbrate
i think Dora has a better E retention, because it has a more powerful engine.. High Speed handling of a Dora was excellent. A real Pilot didn´t need to care about trim i.e. . The electrical-hydraulical automatic trim system of the 190 made it unnecessary to trim even in fast dives.
BTW I <punt> my previous post. 360mph for the 190A8/190F8 at Sea Level... In AH it is 350mph...
why?
because the numbers in this table are calculated for faired surface condition, smooth painting, no influence of compressibillity ...(read the footnote)
niklas
-
Originally posted by niklas:
yes with 1900hp
Fw190A8 in aces high does almost 1900hp with petrol injection. Topspeed 350mph. I dont know the drag of the Fw190D9, but you wont convince me that it causes a loss of 30mph (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
not true, D9 turned better than A8. Way better
False. D9 was 300lbs lighter, but had a longer fuselage with tail more separate from the wing than A8. I recall reading here that only because that, 190D9 would be worse turner than A8. And I believed that. Anyway with 300lbs less, D9 would be slightly better turner than the Fw190A8 and A8 can't turn with P51D. I know it well,lol
Plus, Zigrat excell sheet also said it. Sorry, but the d9 will turn worse than P51 (I wish it didnt ), more if the P51 uses flaps.
Yes, dora has cannons close to the fuselage. No wing vibrations affect bullet dispersion there. Unfortunatly AH doesn´t simulate that guns or cannons far outside in the wing are affected by wing vibrations. What rests for the D9 in AH is the disadvantage of a lower ROF, because the weapon has to shoot through the propeller. THIS effect, of course, IS modelled!
Ok, that is all about RL, I say that in Aces High six 50 cals are better than the 2x20mm and 2x13mm on the D9. And they are (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
i think Dora has a better E retention, because it has a more powerful engine.. High Speed handling of a Dora was excellent. A real Pilot didn´t need to care about trim i.e. . The electrical-hydraulical automatic trim system of the 190 made it unnecessary to trim even in fast dives.
P51 was heavier, more inertia. P51 had way less drag, less e-losing. D9 will build E faster but P51 will be better zoomer at the same Speed start.
In aces high trim is manual, so that advantage is gone.
Again what you say may have sense in RL, not in AH.
because the numbers in this table are calculated for faired surface condition, smooth painting, no influence of compressibillity ...(read the footnote)
footnote is in german and I speak nothing of german (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Anyway then you are wrong too, SL speed listed for the Fw190D9 in that chart is 380mph, how come, if it is on a smooth painted D9?...shouldnt it be faster,then? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
360mph for Fw190A8 at SL is listed in many books...
This is a 1944 document showing 360mph at SL. 2 weeks ago I asked about this, because a VVS page said that the A8 SL speed was 360mph, and said too that the La7 was so welcome in the VVS because the Yak9u, while faster than the 190s doing slashing low level attacks, COULDT CATCH THEM UNLESS IN A LONG RUN.
Here Yak9u is 15mph faster than the 190A8 at Sea level. It should be 15 KM/HOUR faster.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
RAM, I accidently erased your email as I was reading it, and I don't have your email address.
I sent you the Fw190A8 Pilots Handbook on Tuesday by international air mail, and they said it would take about 2 weeks for it to arrive.
Did you miss the two threads here on this BBS where I posted most of the performance charts?
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001655.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001655.html)
AND
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001656.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/001656.html)
Why the discrepancy, to be honest I don't know. I was under the impression that the Sea Level Max Speed value from the Ta152 charts that inside of the parenthesis was the MW50 performance. Possibly a prototype since alot of the planes on that page are test aircraft. Otherwise I don't know.
But I do know that the AH charts match the 190 Pilots Handbook.
Check out the two threads I posted for some preliminary information for you, and the pilots handbook should be arriving soon.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Well, the pilot handbook is in english...this chart in german...dated 1/10/1944, and seems an official RLM document.
I must ask, the handbook is a translation of the 190A8's german official pilot handbook? or is done after testing a captured 190A8?
I've asked to a buddy who knows german, and the Fw190A8 of that test is NOT using MW50, is explicited in the down right side of the chart, that all the planes on the chart are using MW50 except the Fw190A8 wich is using the fuel injection with increased MAN, but NO the MW50.
360mph...from an official RLM document...makes one think...
remember that link I posted about 2 weeks ago? about the VVS studies of the Fw190A8?...that page said that the La7 was welcome between the VVS pilots because the Yak9U needed a lot of time to catch a 190A8 at SL topspeed. Here yak9U's speed is 15mph faster than A8's and that is A LOT...wont explain the VVS report, wouldnt it?
-
Can anyone who speaks/reads German please tell me what each of the five curves correspond too please?
I want to include the Dora in my La7 vs late war plane comparison, and I want to include the proper curve for it.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
R4M, my understanding is that whilst the Dora had a lower instantaneous turn than the A-8 and its nose was more difficult to point quickly (if that makes sense to you), the D-9 actually had a superior sustained turn.It had a slightly lower wing-loading (approx 48lb per sq. ft for the D-9 as opposed to roughly 49lb sq ft. for the A-8).
To say that the A-8 has a patently superior turn rate than the Dora is rubbish (no offense intended).I have , as have many ppl in this forum, plenty of anecdotal evidence from LW pilots who had converted over from the Anton-8 to the Dora-9.Superior abilities in the dive & far superior climb-rates are always mentioned,as are its superior acceleration, max TAS & altitude performance.It appears that the D-9 was more sluggish in the pitch axis (due in no small part to the extra length of the Dora's nose).
This apparent sluggishness affected the pilot's ability to make fast changes in pitch (his ability to quickly point the nose where he wanted it), hence the A-8's better instantaneous turn rate.Whilst the turn-radius of the Anton-8 & Dora-9 were very similar, the Dora could hold E much better in the turn (& in general) than the A-8, thus allowing for a superior sustained turn by the D-9.
One area where the A-8 had an edge was in rate of roll, but from just about everything I've read, the difference was relatively small.The Dora could still easily out-roll any of its Allied opponents at speeds up to 400mph.
So what we have is an a/c that has a far greater rate of climb, top speed at all alts, better acceleration & dive rate, and superior sustained turn than the A-8.In comparison to the Anton-8, the Dora does have a poorer instantaneous turn, & its rate of roll is slightly lower, & of course, it posesses a lighter armament.
All in all, I think it will prove an excellent foe for the P-51, especially under 27k - just as the Jagdlieger who flew the Dora believed her to be.
On a final note, what do you guys think if the Fw 190D-11, D-12 or D-13 were offered as a lower perk point alternative to the Ta-152H? Those who wish to save up points for the Ta 152 could do so, but those who want a less "enhanced" uber-190 could choose a D-11/-12 or -13.For less perk points you could receive a faster Dora with more firepower.It wouldn't have the same hi-alt performance of the Ta 152, but would be superior at lower alts.That of course might be a problem as many would choose a D-11/-12/-13 instead of the Ta 152 as most combat takes place <30k in AH (alt monkeys excepted, of course).
This could dilute the attraction of spending perk points on the Ta 152, but I'd be interested to know what some of you think.
[This message has been edited by C_R_Caldwell (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
I've been advocating a D-12 for a long time...
-
huhmm......nowhere I've said that the D9 should turn MUCH worse than A8. I remember someone saying that as the tail was moved farther aft, the plane turned worse. But I have not said that A8 had a markedly better turn than D9 in any moment.
I know it has a slightly lower wingloading, D9 is 300lbs lighter than A8, and has better powerloading too.
The plane dived better than A8, accelerated and climbed better, was faster and had better hi alt performance. But in the turning, it should be quite bad. Bad instantaneous turn, as you say (as I meant...he who turns more than 90º a Fw190A8 is not in his senses (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)), and bad sustained turnrate, you say than better than A8, ok...but VERY bad still.
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
In fact we can only hope that Hitechcreations, model the D9 right.
Which would mean we would have a "normal WEP", this is running the engine at max RPM and allowed pressure without MW50, with that the D9 should reach 426 mph@20K.
Than there must be a key to turn the MW50 on (Or special WEP) which will boost the Engine to 2240PS and will give the D) 440mph@20K.
All who refer to the charts i posted here long ago, curve #1 shows the speeds for the normal WEP (which is the translation of Not- und Reserveleistung) and curve #2 is for special WEP (Speciella Not- und Reserveleistung) or MW50.
Note to the charts i posted, the plane weighted about 4250 kg with ETC 504 under the fusalage.
To the turning ability of the D9, in every source i found it was stated that the D9 was able of turning tighter than the FW190 A-Series, and what is much more interesting even better than the Bf109 G-Series.
Also in the book "FW190 in Combat" from Alfred Price, is a statement of a german Pilot that said, he could turn with the D9 as tight as with the A8 without losing its Speed advantage over the Yaks, in the A8 he had to reduce speed to minimun turning speed, to stay behind a Yak, but with the D9 he could do the same turn at higher speed, and without losing the speed.
-
So the Dora is faster than the Tempest, climbs better, turns better, rolls better and probably dives better. Which one should be perked?
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
So the Dora is faster than the Tempest, climbs better, turns better, rolls better and probably dives better. Which one should be perked?
LOL! the tempest...it has four hispanos (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Now seriously ,stop it because you are completely wrong.
First of all, we have discussed that the D9 will be faster, better accelerator ,better turner and better climber than the Fw190A8. none of this things is hard to achieve (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) because the a8 is one of the slowest accelerators, worse turners and climbers on the game, only better than the P47 in that regard. The previous discussion says nothing about D9s compared with Tempest...so hold your breath and read a bit more (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Lets start from the acceleration thing. Please can you post some numbers on acceleration and climbrate of the tempest?...because all the things I've read quote this plane as one of the best acceleratonrs and climbers under 10k of the whole war, while the D9 even with MW50 was only on an average level (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
lets follow with this affirmation: "the 190D9 will turn better than the Tempest".
Whoah. No way, not by far. The Tempest will be able to outturn a La7, go figure a Fw190D9.
FYI, the wingloading of a FULL LOADED Tempest is:
13000lbs/302sq.feet=43lbs/sq. feet (aprox).
The wingloading of a FULL LOADED (10500lbs) FW190D9 is:
10500lbs/198sq. feet= 53lbs/sq. feet (aprox).
Go figure what will be the wingloading of an empty Tempest (I think it was some 9000lbs?...then the wingloading is a WOOPING 29.8lbs/sq.feet).
Far from being a bad turner, the tempest will be one of the BEST TURNERS in this game's latewar planesets. And of course it will turn all around the 190D9 (and in a lesser degree, around the P51) with no problem as you can see (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
About the dive thing...the Hawker Tempest is a plane 2000/3000 lbs heavier than the D9 in any configuration you choose (empty-lightly loaded-medium loaded-full loaded)...how in the earth do you want us to belief that the D9 is better diver than a plane 2500lbs heavier than it?!.
Far from it, the Tempest will be a VERY good diver, and with the low drag laminar flow wing it will be a WONDERFUL 0-g accelerator and E-retainer.
And finally, it can load more than 2000lbs of bombs and rockets, it has four hispanos, and it is as fast as the D9 on the deck. The D9 has two mausers and two 13mm MGs (the MGs would do better out of the plane, frankly),and the chance to load one 500kg bomb...and that's it.
The MW50 D9 can roll better than the Tempest and it is fastest at almost all altitudes. Ok, you are right on that (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Sorry buddy, the MW50 Fw190D9 is Mustang's equal...but this thing (tempest) is a MONSTER. (perk monster (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif))
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-03-2001).]
-
In the mock combat tests flown at farnborough between the old FW190A3 and the Tempest, about turning the following was stated:
"The Turnradius is nearly equal, when there is an advantage at all it is in favour to the Tempest."
According to the British sources the test had to be abondomed due to probs with the engine of the FW190.
Cause the FW190D9 could turn better than the A, it can also turn better than the Tempest.
Also this mock combat say about climbrate:
Above 1500m the FW190A has the better climbrate.
Now the D9 was a much better climber than the A, and so it beats the Tempest in this point even more than the A-Series FW.
Turning radius is not all about wingloading, there is no single factor that makes an exellent turner.
-
Originally posted by Naudet:
In the mock combat tests flown at farnborough between the old FW190A3 and the Tempest, about turning the following was stated:
"The Turnradius is nearly equal, when there is an advantage at all it is in favour to the Tempest."
my god. A3 was almost 1400lbs lighter than A8, so it was 1100lbs lighter than the dora. You WOULD expect a 1100lb lighter plane to turn "a bit" better, dont you?.
I challenge you to explain me how a plane with a wingloading of 42lb/hp at full load and 29.80lb/hp empty does turn worse than a plane with 53lb/hp at full load and 37lb/hp empty.
FYI the Fw190A3 had a empty weight of 2950kg (6490lbs) and a full load of 3950kg (8960 lbs). Empty and loaded wingloadings are 32.7lb/hp and 43.8lb/hp respectively. As you see, quite close to the Tempest's numbers, here is the reason why the A3 could almost turn with the Tempest (although as we see the 190 was still outturned).
But there is no way that the D9, a plane much heavier than the A3, could do the same.
Of course, I'm open to another theory. If you bring a good explanation, then I'll believe you, but as it is the facts are quite clear: the D9 couldnt outturn a Tempest, (nor a mustang, nor practically anything but 190A8 or a P47) BY FAR. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[edit][ironic mode ON]BTW I heard that the Bf109G2 could outturn Tempests, typhoons, P51Ds,etc...so that means that the 109G10 DOES turn better than the Tempest, Typhoon, P51D, etc, right?...no matter that it is a plane 900 lbs heavier, right? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)[/ironic mode off] (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-04-2001).]
-
Pro Tempest V: Dive, speed below 8k, turn, and four "Hispano Mk V Turbolaser Ultra" overclocked to fire at 12.5Hz (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Pro Fw 190D-9: Climb, speed above 20k, rollrate and paintjob (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I will concede on the trunrate, I didn't know the Dora was that much heavier than the A3.
The Tempest tests showed it climbing at 4380 ft/min initial, dropping to 3000ft/min at 10000ft.
Acceleration is closely tied to climbrate, so I would assume the D9 would out accelerate the Tempest.
Dive I would not be so sure about. The Tempest was described as easily out diving the Fw190A, but the D9 is a lot heavier than the A, so it will be a close thing.
So to refine my statement, the D9 will be faster than the Tempest, roll much faster, turn a bit worse, climb better, dive about the same, and be much better at high altitude. The only real advantage the Tempest has is it's guns and turn rate.
In fact, the only advantage the Spit IX has it's guns and turnrate, perhaps that should be perked as well (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
I will concede on the trunrate, I didn't know the Dora was that much heavier than the A3.
The Tempest tests showed it climbing at 4380 ft/min initial, dropping to 3000ft/min at 10000ft.
Fw190D9's time to reach to 6560feet is 2.1 minutes, that is some 3300ft/minute of initial climbrate. The tempest wins hands down.
Acceleration is closely tied to climbrate, so I would assume the D9 would out accelerate the Tempest.
all the way to the other side. The Tempest out accelerates the D9.
Dive I would not be so sure about. The Tempest was described as easily out diving the Fw190A, but the D9 is a lot heavier than the A, so it will be a close thing.
The Fw190D9 is 300lbs lighter then Fw190A8. Tempest was known to outdive Fw190A8s, so it should outdive D9 too.
D9 is a 10500lbs airplane at full load, 7300lbs empty. Tempest has 13000lbs at full load, 9000lbs empty, and with less drag. Tempest shoud out dive EASILY the Fw190D9
So to refine my statement, the D9 will be faster than the Tempest, roll much faster, turn a bit worse, climb better, dive about the same, and be much better at high altitude. The only real advantage the Tempest has is it's guns and turn rate.
In fact, the only advantage the Spit IX has it's guns and turnrate, perhaps that should be perked as well (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Wrong. Fw190D9 will be faster, better roller, and a better plane over 20K than tempest.
Tempest will outclimb, out accelerate, outgun, outturn, outdive the D9, and has better E-retention due its low wing drag and heavier airframe (more inertia). Tempest is distinctly better under 15K. And both planes' speed are almost equal under 5K feet.
Tempest wins the match hands down.
-
I was going on the climb figures for the D9 posted futher up, which show better figures than the Tempest.
R4M, according to your figures (and I don't know any different) the Tempest is heavier than the D9, with approx same HP (with MW50)
How then can you expect it to outclimb the Dora?
The TEmpest is heavier than the Dora with the same HP, the D9 should out accelerate it too.
-
Hawker Tempest Mk.V had a Napier Sabre IV engine, with an output of 2540hp at sea level.
Ju213A-1 with MW50 had an output of 2240hp at sea level.
I think that 300hp do quite a difference (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) maybe you disagree with me, tho...
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-04-2001).]
-
Sorry, the figures I saw were 2250hp for the Tempest. Just went through the climb figures etc again, and it seems that particular Tempest was running less boost than service models were capable of. I suppose the Tempest ws a much better plane than the Dora after all.
-
PS it was fun getting RAM to agree the Tempest is a much better plane than the Dora.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
Sorry, the figures I saw were 2250hp for the Tempest. Just went through the climb figures etc again, and it seems that particular Tempest was running less boost than service models were capable of
Not exactly. First Tempest Vs carried the Napier Sabre II 2250hp engine (bassicaly the same fitted to the last Typhoons), but most of the Tempest Vs carried the Napier Sabre IV with 2540hp. Is quite possible that the source you are reading is describing the Tempest V's performance with the Sabre II, and not the IV. That would explain the confussion.
Originally posted by Nashwan:
PS it was fun getting RAM to agree the Tempest is a much better plane than the Dora.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
In AH main arena yes, in WWII, the 190D9's better hi alt performance, and special handling pluses (the 190 was the most pilot-friendly fighter of all the war) made it a definitely better fighter than the Tempest (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Ok some words about the Jumo213 engine:
The first 213A-1 engine had 1750hp power for takeoff (startleistung). With a "rüstsatz" (modification set), 1900hp could be obtained with increased manifold pressure. Some sources / charts call this already "Sondernotleistung" (special emergency power), i.e the climb chart from Naudet. With an additional apparatus, the usage of mw50 was possible with increased boost- sources or charts which were calculated with mw50 call 2100hp now "sondernotleistung" and 1900hp "startleistung" (like my engine performance chart).
Be also careful and look at which RPM the engine was running! Combat power@3000rpm is a bit less power than combat power@3250rpm.
2240HP wasn´t realized during the war afaik. It´s a theoretical number for the future (dotted line).
The 213E-0 engine produced at the beginning "only" 1870HP with C3 fuel - So maybe some calculation for the 152 were done with 1870HP.
The E-1 engine produced 1750HP with B4 fuel for takeoff and emergeny, and 2050HP with MW50. So the 152H1 will be the first german single engine fighter in WB and AH with more than 2000HP, when Pyro models the D9 with 1900HP (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
To R4M
I dont know the drag of the Fw190D9, but you wont convince me that it causes a loss of 30mph
Drag area A8 (for fast flight, cw0*F): 0,485
Drag area D9: 0,444
thrust of propeller (i think for takeoff, but i´m not sure):
A8 (1800hp): 1836kg
D9 (1900hp): 2027kg (2100hp):2227kg
A8 (interpolated to 1900hp): 1938kg
ok?
not true, D9 turned better than A8. Way better
False. D9 was 300lbs lighter, but had a longer fuselage with tail more separate from the wing than A8. I recall reading here that only because that, 190D9 would be worse turner than A8. And I believed that. Anyway with 300lbs less, D9 would be slightly better turner than the Fw190A8 and A8 can't turn with P51D. I know it well,lol
Plus, Zigrat excell sheet also said it. Sorry, but the d9 will turn worse than P51 (I wish it didnt ), more if the P51 uses flaps.
better wingloading = smaller turnradius
more power = turning faster = again smaller turnradius
long fuselage is not so bad for turning - a good design can even increase your total lift (i.e. the F104 starfighter), and here you must leave the very simple formulas which are the base of calculation like Zigrat did. The theory about the influence of the fuselage is very complex (i don´t know it btw, i´m not an aeronautical engineer)
´50 are maybe better in AH. I say that an american figher with 6*´50 would have had
a lot of problems to shoot down one of their own heavy bomber in reality. ´50 were spray and pray weapons, HTC went the opposite way recently and decreased the dispersion (afaik) ...
P51 was heavier, yes, and not very much power for this weight. Very good topspeed due to excellent aerodynamic, but for E-retention/turning/climbing/zooming you also need a powerful engine.
In aces high trim is manual, so that advantage is gone
Yes the advantage is gone (again no advantage for 190) - but i´d say because everyone can use automatic trim with the combat trim feature now.
So again no advantage for the 190, but what rests again is the disadvantage of more weight, because the weight of the 190 in AH is of course WITH this features (kommandogerät (single lever control) + automatic trim system).
Anyway then you are wrong too, SL speed listed for the Fw190D9 in that chart is 380mph, how come, if it is on a smooth painted D9?...shouldnt it be faster,then?
curve4 in the chart from Naudet says 373mph@sealevel for ~1900hp. Or look at the critical altitude in the table, 5,7km - so this number from the table (380mph) is definitly for ~1900hp!
Here Yak9u is 15mph faster than the 190A8 at Sea level. It should be 15 KM/HOUR faster.
You better adress this to pyro, not to me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
The A8-handbook- from vermillion mention increased boost (~1,6ata). This is equal to 2000hp.
and seems an official RLM document
I´d say it´s an official company document from Focke Wulf, not from the RLM.
Let´s explain the 5 curves from the chart from Naudet:
Curve 1 (~565km/h@sealevel): takeoff and emergency power with B4 fuel >> 1750HP
Curve 2: special emergeny power with C3-fuel (without mw50) >> ~1900hp
Curve 3: special emergency power with charger in 2nd gear used already at sealevel >> 2100hp
Curve 4: Special emergency power with B4 fuel and increased boost (mw50 mentioned) >> ~1900hp
Curve 5: climb and combat power with B4 fuel and (!) 3250RPM. climb and combat power with 2900rpm was 1400hp, so this could mean approx. ~1570HP.
The Tempest and the Dora. I don´t know the source anymore, but i read from a test after the war between a D13 and Tempest. The D13 was flown by a german POW afaik. The fight began and after some minutes the german pilot was able to turn inside the Tempest. Maybe someone knows more about this?
Fw190D9's time to reach to 6560feet is 2.1 minutes, that is some 3300ft/minute of initial climbrate. The tempest wins hands down
Look again at the climb chart from Naudet: Initial climbrate @ sealevel 21m/s = 4100ft/min with 1900HP!
And you make the mistake again to compare turn radius, not turnrate! Often during WW2, only turnradius was compared ("...was able to turn INSIDE..."), and not always turn rate.
A plane with higher wingloading has a larger turn radius (assuming same Clmax), but a more powerful engine can allow it to fly a larger circle faster (what tightens the turn now), thus same or maybe even better turnrate.
niklas
-
This may help some of you who do not know german. this site translates german, spanish, french, and a few others. it is fairly good in spanish, but I have never tried it in other languages because I only know some english and spanish.
http://www.freetranslation.com/ (http://www.freetranslation.com/)
Ich hoffe, daß dieses Programm für Sie nicht-Deutsch Sprechen Amerikaner arbeiten wird.
-
Niklas...what can I say....I'm stunned.
The plane you describe is with no doubt the best propelled fighter of world war II and by a wide margin.
Personally I'd want to see the non-MW50, 1900hp Fw190D9 unperked and the Mw50 Fw190D9 perked in Aces High. Both of them...
Man, you really have surprised me... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) one doesnt wake up every morning to discover that his favorite fighter is the best that ever flew and fought in WWII (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
S!
For all those convinced of the wonders of the Dora versus the Tempest, have a read of the recently published history of JG26, called "Top Guns of the Luftwaffe". Towards the end there are a number of descriptions by German pilots of how the D9 equipped Squadron got its butt spanked when it ran up against the Tempest.
By the way, the top speed of the Tempest at S.L. is 392mph, not 380.
-
I went and raided a page on the Tempest for this info about the Sabre engine. URL is at the bottom.
Series number: IIB
Aircraft: Tempest V
Hp/RPM/Altitude:
2420/3850/sealevel
2045/3850/13,750 ft
1735/3700/17,000 ft
Comments:
Four barrel SU carburator two sided blower impeller. (1944)
Series Number: VA
Aircraft: Tempest VI
Hp/RPM/altitude
2600/3850/2,500 ft
1970/3650/17,000 ft
Comments: Hobson RAE single point injection. Single sided blower impeller.
Our Tempest is a Mk V, II series aircraft with short-barreled Hispano Mk V cannons.
Specs:
Wing span: 41 feet
Wing area: 302 sq/feet
Length: 33 ft 8 in
Weights: 9,000 empty; 11,400 loaded
Top speed: 435 mph @ 17,500 ft
Time to 15k: 5 minutes
Engine: Napier Sabre MkIIA/B/C
Max power: 2180 hp
Prop: 4-blade 14 foot diameter
I'm guessing that the engine info he gives is off, or was modified for production aircraft. Could it be that the HP ratings for the IIB series Sabre was absolute max?
Source: http://user.tninet.se/~ytm843e/tempest.htm (http://user.tninet.se/~ytm843e/tempest.htm)
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
The Boscombe down test gave max speed of 432mph at 18,400ft for a plane with Sabre IIA
The aircraft was running 8.7lb boost, not 9lb due to a fault. It was limited to 3700rpm. I think that means a max of 2090hp at 9lb, a bit less at 8.lb
It also had Hispano IIs, not Vs, and so greater drag.
As it's going to be a perk anyway, can we at least have the performance of a Sbare IIB engined version, without the drag of the Hispano II?
-
What is not said yet is which engine performance the actual Fw 190D-9's in service during WW2 had...?
-
Originally posted by juzz:
What is not said yet is which engine performance the actual Fw 190D-9's in service during WW2 had...?
Almost all the Fw190D9 not fitted with it from factory, and available for it (I.E. not destroyed) were fitted with MW50 system on the field.
So, the historical Fw190D9 would be the one with 2100hp Ju213A1 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
As I say ,though, I'll take the non-MW50, 1900hp one as non perk, and put the MW50 as perkie...man that would be a SWEET perk plane (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Regarding the Tempest...sheeesh, I messed up my source and read MKIV where it should be MK IIb (mixed up the Centaurus and Sabres Mks (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)).
Nashwan the Tempest we are getting is the one with Hispano V, so dont worry about drag (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-05-2001).]
-
R4M, what can I say...if you love your girlfirend as much as you love D-9, she is one happy woman (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
So, in WB we had 1900 hp Dora ? Bah (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
A 2240hp D-9 would be quite a plane, very interesting opponent for Allied planes.
Anyway, I prefer the A-8 looks, kind of sentimental thing
-
<g>"best propelled fighter" I think is a bit an overstatement. Wasn't it you who said that SpitXIV is too good for AH? Also, SpitXXII was produced and equiped with RAF squadron before the war's end, didn't flew any operational sorties though (pretty much the same story for Ta-152 though)
mx22
Originally posted by R4M:
Niklas...what can I say....I'm stunned.
The plane you describe is with no doubt the best propelled fighter of world war II and by a wide margin.
Personally I'd want to see the non-MW50, 1900hp Fw190D9 unperked and the Mw50 Fw190D9 perked in Aces High. Both of them...
Man, you really have surprised me... (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) one doesnt wake up every morning to discover that his favorite fighter is the best that ever flew and fought in WWII (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Nashwan check this image and tell me it's a Tempest Mk V series I:
www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/tempest.jpg (http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/tempest.jpg)
The Tempest V series I aircraft used the Hispano Mk II guns, while the II series had the Hispano Mk V guns. Our Tempest is a Tempest Mk V II series with a Sabre IIB series engine and uses Hispano Mk V short-barreled guns.
-----------------------
Flakbait [Delta6]
Delta 6's Flight School (http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6)
Put the P-61B in Aces High
"For yay did the sky darken, and split open and spew forth fire, and
through the smoke rode the Four Wurgers of the Apocalypse.
And on their canopies was tattooed the number of the Beast, and the
number was 190." Jedi, Verse Five, Capter Two, The Book of Dweeb
(http://www.worldaccessnet.com/~delta6/htbin/delta6.jpg)
-
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) glunz...single right now...so the D9 has all my inconditional love (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Originally posted by mx22:
<g>"best propelled fighter" I think is a bit an overstatement. Wasn't it you who said that SpitXIV is too good for AH? Also, SpitXXII was produced and equiped with RAF squadron before the war's end, didn't flew any operational sorties though (pretty much the same story for Ta-152 though)
mx22
As I said in the Tempest case, there is a difference between a MA environment and the historic one...but then I thought that the MW50 Fw190D9 was a plane that did 380mph@SL and 448mph@23000feet,and turned and accelerated only a bit better than Fw190A8...so, like toejam (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Turns out that the Fw190D9 with Mw50 seems to be a plane with a speed of 395mph@SL, and god-knows-what-much at 23000feet (But a lot <G> ), while turning better than the Me109G6 and rolling as usual. This plane would be much more dangerous for the arena than any SpitXIV, and by far.
That is the reason why I say that the non-Mw50, 1900hp Fw190D9 as non perk will be OK (it is a pretty even match for the P51D), the Spitfire XIV as moderately low-to-medium cost perk, the Tempest V as medium to high cost perk, and the MW50 190D9 as medium to high cost perk, but somewhat more expensive than the Tempest.
...and the Me262 will be a very high cost perk (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
About Spit XXI, quote my words "one doesnt wake up every morning to discover that his favorite fighter is the best that ever flew and fought in WWII"
The Spit XXI did see no combat...still I think that the MW50 D9 would be a better plane for the historical needs than the Spit XXI (but not for AH Main arena use (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif))
and BTW, as said 1000 times in this forums...the Ta152H-0 and Ta152H-1 DID see combat. Ask Willi Reschke, he was a Ta152 ace...
How many pilots achieved the ace status aboard a Spit XXI in WWII? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by R4M (edited 03-05-2001).]
-
The Spit 21 did see combat. They sank at least 1 German submarine, how many subs did the Dora sink? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
The screenshots are of a Tempest V series II, but that doesn't mean the perforamnce figures will be. The Tempest V series I, with extra drag, an engine producing around 370hp less, did 378mph at sea level. I just hope the Tempest AH is introducing will do quite a bit more.
-
Originally posted by Nashwan:
The Spit 21 did see combat. They sank at least 1 German submarine, how many subs did the Dora sink? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
LOL (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
Originally posted by R4M:
and BTW, as said 1000 times in this forums...the Ta152H-0 and Ta152H-1 DID see combat. Ask Willi Reschke, he was a Ta152 ace...
Every German test plane tested late in war and that had armoment, had a chance to get kills. Every German unit converting onto a new design had opportunity to fly operational sorties even before the end of training. Not so with Allied designs, which were tested and fitted into squadrons in "safe" environment. So let's not bring "kills" into the discussion. Btw, I might be wrong, but I think there was 1 operational squadron with F-8s in US before the end of war with Japan. I'm not saying SpitXXI or F-8 should be used in Special arena, but neither should you assume that Ta-152 belongs. How many of them acctually reached operational units and were flyable? I think number was less then 50...
P.S. You are right about "flew and fought", I didn't didn't notice it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
mx22
-
Jg301 was completely transformed into Ta152H, and was sent into battle as a Ta152 jagdgeschwader...was a plane that made operational aces. Was a plane that arrived very late to the fighting scene, that is true, but none the less arrived.
That qualifies the Ta152H as a fully operational, fighting fighter. Not a prototype, not by far.
He162, on the other side, was a plane that saw combat (killed and was killed by tempests), but was NOT operational. Some geschwaders were fully converted to He162 for V-day, but that doenst mean that it was an operational fighter in WWII.
IMHO same can be said about P51H, F8F, F7F, etc...
I dont say that fighters wich saw combat or not should be modelled or not...but to start doing it will open a big can of worms...you know, Do335,He162, Ta152C (THAT is a bad prettythang (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)), 109K14, Me262A with Mk103, even Go229...would be planes with as much right to own to this sim than a p51h, F8F, Spit XXI...bringing us to a WWII '46 scenario faster than giving us an early war planeset.
Somewhere we should mark a line of non-crossing for planes available to be modelled...and I think that it should the line should be marked allowing planes that saw OPERATIONAL combat (in regular units, as operational planes), but letting outside planes that never saw combat, or achieved kills in a prototype or pre-operational stage.
This is my humble opinion, of course (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) but this is getting out of topic, we dont need another flamewar about P51H, spits XXI and Ta152Cs (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Back on topic.......Still I want to know about the 360mph on the Fw190A8!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
-
A squadron of Spit 21s did see operational service. They were declared operational in early 45 and flew offensive patrols over German territory, carrying out ground attacks. They didn't ever see the Luftwaffe though.
-
Ram, goign back of topic (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
There was only 1 confirmed ace on Ta-152. Where did you found the rest?
Difference between F8F, Spit21 and other Allied planes you mentioned and Do335,He162, Ta152C, 109K14, Me262A with Mk103 and rest, is that Allied planes had acctually existed in more then 1 plane, more many of them were starting to go into service at the end of war. Not so with German counterparts.
P.S. Just to finish this off, I'm not syaing that every Allied prototype should be modeled just because it existed when Ta-152 came around. Only those that actually were developed to at least the same degree or even better then it.
mx22
-
Nashwan is correct.
The Spitfire F.Mk.21 entered squadron service in March 1945 and flew offensive sories over German territory. The Gloster Meteor F.MkIII also flew offensive sweeps over German territory.
Should we Allied fans be denied our end war toys just because the Luftwaffe didn't have enough aircraft to give our newest operational fighters something to shoot down and thus get that all important air-to-air kill?
I say no, we should not be denied!!!
The Spitfire 21 and Meteor III are just as valid as the Ta152H-1.
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!
Sisu
-Karnak
-
S!
The Dora without MW-50 provides the standard 357Mph at S.L., 426 mph at best alt. performance which you see in WB and most other Sims. This is the performance the Dora had from the time the squadrons went operational in the early fall of '44. The Luftwaffe had intended to equip the plane with MW-50 but there were just not enough of the kits to go around.
Starting in late December of '44, ALL the operational Doras were retro-fitted with MW-50 and the newly manufactured models came with the equipment installed. This gave a performance of 378mph at S.L. with the ETC 504 bombrack attached, (all Doras were expected to perform tactical support missions and therefore generally they flew with the racks) and 382mph with the rack not attached. Best speed at alt. was 440 with the rack, and 448 without it.
-
Originally posted by Buzzbait:
S!
The Dora without MW-50 provides the standard 357Mph at S.L., 426 mph at best alt. performance which you see in WB and most other Sims. This is the performance the Dora had from the time the squadrons went operational in the early fall of '44. The Luftwaffe had intended to equip the plane with MW-50 but there were just not enough of the kits to go around.
Starting in late December of '44, ALL the operational Doras were retro-fitted with MW-50 and the newly manufactured models came with the equipment installed. This gave a performance of 378mph at S.L. with the ETC 504 bombrack attached, (all Doras were expected to perform tactical support missions and therefore generally they flew with the racks) and 382mph with the rack not attached. Best speed at alt. was 440 with the rack, and 448 without it.
Yes that was the usual data......but look at naudet's charts...they tell a WHOLE different stories (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
357mph@SL , 426@21600feet are the figures for the 1750hp rated Ju213A1 190D9s.
According to that chart, and according to Niklas, the 378mph@SL, 448mph@21000feet belong to a 1900hp rated Ju213A1 190d9 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
MW50 figures seem to be 395mph@SL (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
RAM, don't forget that those different curves were also for 87 octane fuel and 100 octane fuel, which can significantly effect performance as well.
Realize that your quoting the 100 octane fuel curve as well.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
vermillion, look again at the engine performance chart in this thread and you´ll see that it say 2100hp with B4 fuel+mw50.
niklas
-
Buzz is right re: most D-9s that had already been built by late in '44 being retrofitted with MW 50 whilst those on the production line received it from the start.As far as JG 26's Doras getting their butts spanked by Tempests, at that stage in the war, Dora units were lucky to put up formations of 12 a/c at a time (and that's a whole Geschwader!), often fielding =<8 a/c at a time, whilst large formations of Tempests & Spit XIV's roamed Germany in Wing-size or greater (40+ a/c)at will.Even the ME 262 was often thoroughly spanked in those conditions!I'm not commenting on what a/c was better overall, though I think the Tempest was patently superior <20k (the alt at which most AH MA combat takes place in), but comparing the battles of the last few months of the war in Europe is VERY problematic.
I have a couple of books devoted solely on the Dora, which have great photos as well colour views of the Doras in question.All the Doras in question were examples fielded during 1945.One of the books is Jerry Crandall's excellent work on the Doras of the "Galland Circus".That book looks at the Doras that flew top cover protection for JV 44's 'turbos' .
Of the 4 Doras depicted in that book, 1 is an early production Dora-9 using an A-8 canopy & central fuselage with the rear fuselage filler.The other 3 Doras are 2 later-model Dora-9s (standard bubble canopy & D-9 fuselage etc), and the 3rd is a D-11.
Of the 4 a/c involved, 3 use MW 50 (it's easy to tell - there is a triangle with MW 50 written within it next to the rear fuse tank filler hole) including the D-11, whilst the 4th example (a later-model D-9) strangely had no MW 50 marking, but had a small yellow circle on the port side of the upper cowl.On closer inspection, it turns out this D-9 did not in fact use MW 50, but was fitted with a 'Laderdrucksteigerungs-Rüstsatz' fiel-modification which was, in Crandall's words, a " 'Supercharger pressure' boosted engine for increased horsepower from the Jumo 213A1 ".
My other Dora stuff shows almost all the D-9's depicted as using MW-50 (some are only port views so I can't tell what fuel they are using).
The point is, if we are going to be historically accurate, we should be flying a boosted D-9.Just because it'll be very fast doesn't mean it should be perked.My God, the late model G-10 modelled in AH can clock at over 450mph TAS, but it's not perked! The boosted D-9 will have excellent performance, but it doesn't have the turn rate of a P-51 (or even a 190A-5).It will be similar to a G-10 in performance, with better roll, but poorer turn.
All this talk about putting restraints on the D-9 so that it can exist happily in AH is ridiculous IMHO.It will fit in nicely with a/c like the P-51 and G-10.Don't forget that whilst the D-9 will have excellent roll at low-med speeds, at hi-speed (>400 IAS) the pony will probably roll much better than the D-9, as well as being *easily* able to out-turn it.The D-9 will be a great match for the P-51, but that's all - a match.
There are issues in having a/c like the D-9, P-51, G-10 etc in AH unperked, but the only way to fix that is to either i9ntroduce an RPS, or make the late-war fighters that are currently unperked as "low perk" a/c.Why should the Dora-9 be treated differently than the P-51 & get its legs chooped off? We should be using the same rules of inclusion for all fighters, either that, or use different rules.
If a boosted D-9 deserves to be perked, I expect the P-51, G-10 as well as that 4 cannoned wank-machine, the Chog to be perked too.Some ppl would like to throw in the N1K2-J as well- leave the Dora-9 alone plz...
PS:-Btw, all the machines in Crandall's book are using 96-octane fuel...
[This message has been edited by C_R_Caldwell (edited 03-05-2001).]
-
Originally posted by mx22:
Difference between F8F, Spit21 and other Allied planes you mentioned and Do335,He162, Ta152C, 109K14, Me262A with Mk103 and rest, is that Allied planes had acctually existed in more then 1 plane, more many of them were starting to go into service at the end of war. Not so with German counterparts.
mx22[/B]
The He 162 eventually equipped a whole Gruppe by the end of hostilities.More He 162's entered operational service than Spit Mk.21's .It turned out the jet-fuel supply was so scarce & conditions so chaotic that few Volksjagërs flew more than a handful of sorties & only 1 kill was recorded (a Typhoon) & even that wasn't properly confirmed.
I wish Allied-a/c loving users would stop bleating about the fact that we're getting more Axis fighters than Allied fighters this time around.Until the 190F-8 is released, the Axis-flying players in AH will not have a single dedicated jabo fighter in the planeset.The Allies have a/c like the P-47, F4U, P-38 & Typhoon which are all excellent fighter-bombers.
Let's not forget that most of the upcoming Axis a/c being added to the planeset are variants of existing a/c.Let's face it, if you want to fly Axis, u get the 109,190,Zeke,N1K2-J, & C.202/205 (the 205 essentially being a variant of the 202 in much the same way the Spit IX is a variant of the Mk V).What unperked Axis bombers do we get to fly? The Ju-88, period.We don't have an SM.79 Sparviero, G4M Betty or Do 217K (or many others).That will be made up for somewhat by having the Ar 234, but it will, rightly, be perked.We don't have any Axis heavy bombers at all.
Admittedly, the He 177 was the only Axis buff built in any significant numbers, & even then only about 1,000 were built (though no more than 150 Chogs were built, & that hasn't stopped it from being in the planeset).The Fw 200 could be considered a buff, but it was a recon/maritime heavy bomber, and not a conventional "heavy".
So now we're gonna have 4 x Fw 190 variants (5 if you include the Ta 152) & 4 x 109s - big deal! Those who are partial to Allied a/c are getting the Tempest, arguably the best fighter of WW2 < 20-23k, as well as the Yak-9T (another excellent Allied fighter), and the superb (and unperked) La-7 !!!
The Spit XIV will undoubtedly make its way to AH in the next few months.When it arrives, many will insist on it being unperked (with some justification I may add).With a/c like the P-51, Bf/Me 109G-10, D-9 & Spit XIV & La-7 unperked, HTC is going to have a serious look at introducing an RPS (which many will find objectionable - I mean, what's 'kbman' & 'creamo' gonna fly ;?D ?) or using some other system like making these late-war a/c low-point perk planes.As it is now,at least 50% of AH users fly 3 fighters - the Chog, Spit & N1K2-J...
[This message has been edited by C_R_Caldwell (edited 03-06-2001).]
-
Jg301 was completely transformed into Ta152H, and was sent into battle as a Ta152 jagdgeschwader...
Baloney. They had one Staffel. Not a Jagdgeschwader, not a Gruppe, a Staffel.
-
Baloney. They had one Staffel. Not a Jagdgeschwader, not a Gruppe, a Staffel.
Great Statement Funked (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif). But I am not quiet sure that is right. AFAIK the complete Stab and III./JG301 were equipped with Ta's and I: and II. Gruppe were partially equipped with them.
Will check sources on weekend.
Maik
-
Maik
No matter what you call the unit, there were very few aircraft that were operational at any one time.
The largest number of operational aircraft was when JG301 was delivered their initial batch of aircraft. From memory I believe it was around 12-13 aircraft (all Ta152H0's).
Typical operational unit strength was 7-8 aircraft at any one time that could actually make it into the air.
So by allied terms, there was never more than a single squadron of Ta152's available at any one time, and it was usually about a 1/2 a squadron.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
To the TA152 production numbers:
150 TA153 H-0 and H-1 were build, JG301 got them, ME262 i think more than 500 build.
The P51H reached about 600 productions plane, same with late F4Us or F8, so dont tell us there was only 1 GE plane of all that types, cause this is BS.
-
Naudet, your completely wrong on Ta152 production.
There were either 46 or 48 (I would have to go back and count) Ta152's ever complete built. This is compiled from both RLM and FockeWulf factory documents, which detail assinged werk #'s.
Of those around 15 were destroyed on the ground before they were ever delivered to any combat unit.
2 Ta152's built as unarmed recon E models were picked up by JG301 pilots who configured them in the field to C model armament standards.
3 Ta152H1's were built.
All of the rest were Ta152H0's.
All of this information comes from the Ta152 book that is quoted here quite frequently anymore. It is researched by a German Author, using German documents and archival data/information.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 03-06-2001).]
-
I think that the 500 me262 figure falls too short. I've read quite many times that 1500 me262s were built, although only some 600 reached the front, and even less were flown in combat.
-
Verm,
first of all, I didn't like the tone of the reply I quoted, that is the reason why I usually don't join those discussions here, or if I do i tend to get sarcastic. Sorry for that btw.
I agree that not all that were build, were not combat ready all the time. I read that JG301 even had to blow some of them up because they couldn't get transfered to another field.
Production - numbers are:
ta152-H0 - ca12 - Werknummer 150001 - 150012
ta152-H1 - ca35 - Werknummer 150001 - 150055
The thing is that the Ta152 saw prolly more combat than c-Hogs did, guess they saw more than they wanted to see.
Maik
[This message has been edited by maik (edited 03-06-2001).]
-
maik,
Verm has already stated his reference, so I think it's time for you to do the same. I bet many here will be interested from where you getting it.
Btw, unless my math is wrong, those Wr numbers cover only 65 airframes, of which 11 are overlapping numbers (I dont know that much about LW system of Wr, but it seems that it means that some of the planes from Wr.150001 to 150012 range were used to built both, H0 and H1 versions).
P.S. In regards of acctual combat; it was discussed above. Just because Allied planes were tested and new squadrons equiped with them in safe environment, it doesn't make them (planes and pilots) less capable, rather it's in reverse with German planes and pilots being on the bad end.
To C_R_Caldwell:
There are no confirmed kills in He-162. Period. Rest doens't count.
mx22
[This message has been edited by mx22 (edited 03-06-2001).]
-
Focke - Wulf, Fw190/Ta152 by Manfred Griehl/Joachim Dressel 2nd Edition from 1997.
Authors used Data fromArchivs of DASA, MBB, Deutsches Museum Munich, NASM. Also used Personal Data of Flugkapitän Hans Sander. Also stood in close contact with Eddie Creek and Richard Smith.
Production Data und Werknummern are based on original FockeWulf - and RLM Documents.
Hope this is enuff.
Oh , yes Ta152-H0 were 150001 to 150017
Ta152-H1 were # 150018 to 150051.
#150018 was Werksprototyp fuer Baureihe Ta152-H1
#150027 and 150030 were refitted as Prototype for Ta152-C3 (V27 and V28)
I am not discussing plane capabilities here, so far (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
Who's says that about the He162 kills you mx?
Verm, could you tell me more about the ta152 book you have?.
Maik
Geez some of you guys have an attitude, think i stay out here further on (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif).
[This message has been edited by maik (edited 03-06-2001).]
-
Sorry if my "tone" bothered somebody, it wasn't intended too.
And I'm not the only one to quote this reference, I know Nath-BDP has it and several other people have used it and quoted widely from it recently.
My reference:
------------------------
Focke-Wulf Ta152, The Story of the Luftwaffe's Late War, High Altitude Fighter, by Dietmar Hartmann, ISBN # 0-7643-0860-2
Originally published as: (In german)
Focke-Wulf Ta152: Der Weg zum Hohenjager, by Aviatic Verlag.
-----------------------
It is available from all the online bookstores, and is easily the best Ta152 book I have ever seen.
This book is the source of all those nice Focke Wulf factory Ta152 and Fw190 performance charts that have been shown on this BBS over and over lately.
Here are the ones that I scanned originally, and many have used in their discussions on Ta152's and Fw190's (both A & D series)
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-1.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-1.jpg)
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-2.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-2.jpg)
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-3.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-3.jpg)
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-4.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-4.jpg)
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-5.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-5.jpg)
If I get some time tomorrow, I will scan the pages that list the known werk #'s.
Basically it lists werk #'s 150 001 thru 150 040, and numbers 150 167, 150 168, and 150 169.
From what can be figured out, the werk numbers 167,168, and 169 were the H1's. Hence the break in assigned numbers.
Also according to this source werk #'s 150 027 and 150 028, were explicitly Ta152H0's that were used at Sorau as prototype aircraft in the DB603 Engine test program and the Ta-152C test program.
FYI No production aircraft were ever produced at Sorau, only the V prototypes.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 03-06-2001).]
-
Here are the scans I promised with the Werk#'s.
Cottbus Production Aircraft:
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-werk-1.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-werk-1.jpg)
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-werk-2.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-werk-2.jpg)
Sorau/Adelheide Prototype Aircraft:
http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-werk-proto.jpg (http://www.vermin.net/ta152/ta152-werk-proto.jpg)
I hope this helps.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Verm, wasn't you, that sounded, well , let me say different (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif), was the jerk who stated i.e. that the Ta152 didn't flew any operational sorties and stuff like that.
As for Numbers thanks for the scans, think i am gonna order that book next week (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
All I can say now is that the only difference I found in my source were on 2 or 3 certain numbers. AND that H1 production started with 150018.
Don't have the time to present some scans before sunday though.
ISBN 3-613-01681-8 (German), dunno if there have an english translated version yet.
Oh, and I won't argue who's book is right or not (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Maik
[This message has been edited by maik (edited 03-07-2001).]
-
Originally posted by maik:
Who's says that about the He162 kills you mx?
No comfirmation, no kill for all the "historical" purposes.
Going back to Ta-152, I don't think I ever said that Ta-152 didn't fly operational sorties. I just pointed out that Allied late war newcomers (planes) might not have reached frontline units, but that's only because tests and training was done far behind the front lines.
mx22