Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: funked on October 07, 1999, 02:22:00 PM
-
I hope we get all the air/ground loadouts on the Fw 190A.
An Fw 190F or G would be nice, but it's not really necessary. Pretty much all the bomb racks, gun pods, etc. that were used on the Fw 190F were available on the Fw 190A as field mods. This includes up to 2 bomb racks on each wing, a torpedo, centerline bomb racks with 2 x 250 kg bombs, and some more stuff.
Many of the F's were just A's that were modified at the factory. And many of the ground attack groups weren't equipped with F's - they used similarly-equipped A models.
Also I hope that we have the option of removing the outer wing cannon, with the correct weight and inertia bonus. This was quite common in the field.
-
...and the cowl MGs were removed sometimes as well.
//fats
-
you are definitly rigth
F1 were A4/U3 (renamed)
F2 were A5/u3 (remamed)
the outer wing guns were removed
the armour weigth was inceased to 790 Lbs (240 on normal A)
it could carry pay load on the ventral ETC501
1*250kb or 1 500 kg or 4*50 k (with ETC4 adapter.
as far as i know later F series were able to carry 1000 kg bomb.
the first deries of G1 were A4/U8.
the machines gun were removed.
it had 2* 300 liter extra tanks underthe wings
later g version were able to cary 1000, 1500 and even 1800 kg bombs
some versions of thos planes had extra 20 mil in the wing or in a gundola
some had a mk 103 (anti tank)
some had panzerblitz oe modified rm4 against tank
-
Weretiger I just sent the same information to WarBirds. We'll see who can get the 190 loadouts done first. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
BTW What information do you have on MW-50 or GM-1 on the Fw 190A?
My understanding:
Fw 190A-4 throught Fw 190A-7 had BMW 801 engine with provision for MW-50, but the full system was not installed at the factory until the Fw 190A-8 version. MW-50 was stored in fuselage tank of 118 liter capacity.
The only info I have on GM-1 is that it was used on an A-5 prototype and was available as Fw 190A-6/R4, Fw 190A-7/R4, Fw 190A-8/R4.
I have no good info on how it was stored, or if it was used at the same time as MW-50.
I also found info that GM-1 was stored in the 118 liter fuselage tank but this must be false: GM-1 is nitrous oxide - a pressurized gas that can not be stored in a tank for liquid fuel.
-
That’s THE topic....
GM1
I have the same information as you
The speed was tested (or estimated) by the REA at 430 mph @ 26 K.
Note that it did not influence the 416-420 of a normal FW.
The bm801D2 was designed to be able to use the mw50...
The Mw50 system itself was usable late 43 and early 44.
As far as i understand it was pretty difficult to install and had to be done at the factory or at a repair/visit centre.
I haven’t been able to find any (proof in the uk archive), other than it was used with the fw190 A and D. (for the D there is definite proofs)
I was able to find the following in the UK archive:
It has been tested on FW190 in late 43.
the uk expected it to be use in series.
the Strum version of the FW190 did not have Mw50 nor GM1
There is several test of the "bmw801D or E + S" with B4 petrol and mw50 having the same power curve that the Bm801D and C3 fuel.
To complicate everything there was a very similar dispositive using C3 fuel to the same intend that the methanol water melange (intercooler= more pressure and reduce heating). There was a belief that this could only be used with the low blower of the engine (hence under 3000 ft) but the REA said that it was usable at every altitude and have the same effect as the MW 50.
The most common information is that the Mw50 was installed in the A8 in a 115 litre behind the pilot.
that extra tank could be used for extra fuel or for some book to put the GM1.
I believe however that it was present on the TU and Ts or (F eventually) hence on the A9 or some A8-U11.
(the uk archive i found that those engine were using the MW50 but i need to see the power curve........we'll see, then)
to summarise:
it difficult to know but this is what i believe that up to A8 mw 50 was not used on the FW.
Technically there is no gain to use the MW50 above 20 k (for the BMW801 D2).
It can be argued that it can prolongate the use of the WEP (2700 rpm) normally 3 minutes to something around 10 minutes.(NB as far REA is concern petrol injection used like MW50 can just do that.)
Some recent book seems to point to the use of GM1 on Fw190. It's make "more sense" as GM1 raised the critical altitude to 26 k.
Up to March-April 44, it was very likely to have in a FW stafell/gruppe some aircrafts to engage the bomber and some aircrafts to protect from allied fighters.
The MW50 (or petrol) is more likely to be used with the TU/TS engine given the fact that the critical altitude of those engine higher than the 801 D and to compensate for the Hp loss du to the compressor.
The ground attack version were more likely to have used the "+S" versions...
-
Weretiger, thanks for the info.
How do you find this REA information?
I hope you don't mind, I posted a link to this discussion on the AGW (alt.games.warbirds) board. There has been a general discussion of WEP systems going on, and I thought this would fit in nicely.
<Salute>
funked
-
no problem funked, this is what those bord are for
If some on has info that seems contradict "mine" please let me know.
This is the only way we can shade some ligth on the subject.
I found the info in the Public Office Record
in the AIR40/99 /100 /101 files
(in short in the Uk archives)
they were the result of test done by the RAE in farenborough where the geman aicrafts were evaluated.
I guess that the smithonians have that somewhere.....
I have a more complete "file" on the german booster if you are interested....
thanks
At the moment i am copiling data on the fw190A/f/g.
I have a file on the D9 if you are interested as well.
-
Weretiger I am interested in anything you've got. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I have recently found some out-of-print but long books which are the sources of a writer I often quote (Joe Baugher) and I'm hoping to find some good info in there too.
Do you have the book America's Hundred Thousand? I sure wish a book like this existed for the Luftwaffe, RAF, IJAAF/IJNAF, VVS, etc. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
no problems
i will be sending that to you shortly.
good hunt
-
Weretiger, I'd be interested in seeing any info you are willing to send me.
------------------
Krod
nitro@nitro.co.za
Krod's WarBirds Pages, featuring Hatchlings
krod.warbirds.org/ (http://krod.warbirds.org/)
Editor: The WarBirds Book
www.nitro.co.za/wb-book/ (http://www.nitro.co.za/wb-book/)
-
No Krod it's mine... ALL MINE!!! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Funked
i need your adress
the d9 file is around 8 pages
i don't think i can post it here.....
-
Weretiger please include me (-were-@warbirds.org)
But guys asked German Museum not long ago and they told me it is possible to acess their archives and to copy the documents which are interesting.
I will visit a friend in Munich soon and I think I will use the opportunity to visit the museum and get all the info on Me 109K, FW 190-D, Ta 152 and Me 109G. They should have the technical manuals of these birds in posession.
There has been a website offering these too, but I tried to contact the owner and the email came back undeliverable.
Werewo
JG 301 "Heimatverteidigung"
-
Weretiger my address is mwaltz@attglobal.net
(Michael Waltz)
Thanks!
-
Well, however they do the boost system in the FW, I want a Y connector in the line so I can feed a little nitrous oxide into my oxygen mask (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-Bullethead <CAF>
-
ROFL Bullethead! Whip-hits in the cockpit eh?
-
Don't forget about me. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Seriously, for any of you archive diggers out there, I'm always looking for more info.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
(http://users.bigpond.com/afinlayson/personal/j190a8.jpg)
My old and tattered copy of 'Janes Fighting Aircraft of WW2' lists the performance difference using MW50 as follows:
Climb to 32,800ft without MW50 - 26.5 mins
Climb to 32,800ft with MW50 - 16.5 mins
Service ceiling without MW50 - 33,800 feet
Service ceiling with MW50 - 37,400 feet
Interestingly, MW 50 only added 8mph to the top speed.
As for armament, the A8 supposedly had the option of two 30mm Mk108 cannon in the outer wings, instead of the normal Mg151/20 cannon.
Are we going to see the 30mm's as an option Pyro???
------------------
C.O. Phoenix Squadron
www.users.bigpond.com/afinlayson/index.htm
'feel the heat .......'
-
Jekyll: MW50 was used as an antidetonant. It allowed higher boost to be used without fear of engine problems. But at high altitudes (where top speeds are reached), the supercharger is not capable of overboosting the engine much, it at all. So the MW 50 benefit was small up there.
-
pyro,werewolf, funked
did you recieve the file on the D9 ?
I hope it was usefull ....
I an still waiting for the US archive to arrive.
One small question
how do you calculte the roll rate, the instant turnig rate and the constant turning rate.
I know that normally they are mesured but tere is way to calculate them.
How can i have a good aproximation i would like to have an order of idea for the non explicitely described version of the FW190 ?
thanks
(i have few way of doing it but it is really complex)
I have the speed curve/climb curve for the A3 to A9 (D9 D12 and TA152 H1 so i can "easilly" get the darg coefficient for combat/climb WEP and with mw50 or gm1 .
If interested i can post those (it will take time (the photocopy are pretty crap.....)
-
Weretiger, how can you calculate the drag coefficent from the speed/climb charts?
I have been doing alot of reading on acceleration/drag lately, and I understand how to compute the parasitic drag given the drag coefficent, wing area, and the correction factor (which is different for each aircraft, I understand), but I am still trying to figure out how to calculate the induced drag.
I am also having problems finding drag coefficents and correction factors for each individual aircrafts.
Any help would be appreciated.
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
(http://web.mountain.net/~arringto/emote/Snoopy.gif)
-
You can't verm. You need more data than just climb/speed charts to calculate those co's.
HiTech
-
Weretiger, alas i haven't received the email until now. Would you be so kind to send it again to marc.butz@technet.net?
Thanks in advance
werewo
-
Weretiger thanks for the info!
I have asked my friend Wells to attempt to answer your questions about turn performance.
-
Weretiger: I haven't received it. As to your question, it would take quite a calculation to come up with something like max sustained turn.
Verm: Induced drag coefficient is:
LiftCo^2/Aspect Ratio * pi
The pi value is representative of an elliptical airfoil, other shapes will have a slightly smaller value.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
In order to figure out turn performance, you need a few numbers. You need an accurate stall speed at a given weight. Eric Brown gives the A4 a clean stall of 127 mph. Weight is probably around 8700 lbs for the version that he flew with the bomb racks removed. Using the lift equation, you can then figure out the maximum lift coefficient (which is used in a max rate turn). The lift equation looks like this
Lift = 1/2 density * cl * V^2 * area
Drag = 1/2 density * cd * V^2 * area
If you know the max cl, just plug in the V, area and density to get the lift in a turn.
Turn radius = V^2 * mass / Force
The turn rate depends on how fast the plane flies the circle. The sustained turning speed is hard to figure out, without knowing the maximum thrust values for any given speed. It's not constant. You can however, determine the induced drag coefficient by the following formula
Cdi = cl^2 / (pi * aspect ratio)
Induced drag will be highest at high angles of attack.
If you know the thrust value at the maximum level speed (where induced drag is minimal), you can figure out the zero-lift drag coefficient (cd0), but this is not an easy process. Putting the 2 drag coefficients together will give you a total drag coefficient. Where max thrust = drag at max angle of attack will be the sustained turning speed.
There's an article in the Jan 99 issue of Sport Aviation that gives the Dora a drag coefficient of 0.0063 for 761.6 sq ft of wetted area (or 0.024 for 197 sq ft of wing area) at cruise lift coefficient.
I've done some work on thrust values but they may not be totally accurate. Go here
http://www.iaw.com/~general6/flightmodels.htm (http://www.iaw.com/~general6/flightmodels.htm)
-
Wells:
Don't buy that 127mph stall speed figure. If that were the case the FW would have a cl around 1.07 and the A8 would have a stall speed around 134. You'd need almost 190 mph just to hold a 60 degree bank without stalling.
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
pyro
i resent it today you should have it by now.
On the value topic
There is a cool site.
It express, the drag in function of the drag with F plate equivalent number and e the oswald number.
http://web.usna.navy.mil/~dfr/technical_flying.html (http://web.usna.navy.mil/~dfr/technical_flying.html)
I am still strugling with the math.
One stupid question.
In the german test there is a collumn called
Roll-Strartstrecke in meters giving 350/650
any ideas ?
I suspect this is the distance to perform a full roll at combat speed/WEP ?
An other stupid one
How do you calculate the trust when you have the BHP and the efficiency coeff for the propeller?
[This message has been edited by weretiger (edited 10-28-1999).]
-
That link doesn't appear to be valid.
No idea, perhaps one of the German-spekkers can help.
First convert Brake Horsepower to Thrust Horsepower by multiplying BHP by prop efficiency.
Thrust = THP * 550 / Velocity feet per second
------------------
Doug "Pyro" Balmos
HiTech Creations
-
A4 perfs
For the A4
This was originally a A4 U8
The English removed the two extra 300 lt. External tank and their wing faring. They used the planes as a pure fighter FW190 A4 without the wing guns. Which is actually right
The weight of the plane was 8470 lbs.
1750 hp max in climb combat
1970 in wep
Those value are confirmed by the US testing of the A5
climb/combat WEP Climb (combat/climb)
ground 335 352
5000 360 371 1' 40''
10 000 359 365 2' 30''
15000 380 390 5'
20000 401 415 7'35''
25 000 390 410 10'30
30 000 345 395 15'
Max speed: sustainable for 3 minutes (rmp 2700 )
420 @ 20 800 feet
Max speed climb/combat sustainable for 30 minutes (rpm 2400)
401 @ 20 000 feet
Rate of climb
Initial rate of climb (0ft to 5000) 3600fr/min
Average (0 to 2000) 2700 ft / minutes
above 20000 to 30000 1316 ft/ min
nb 30 k seems to be the operating celling
Those info are coming from Air 40 150 and 151.
-
No!!! Roll-/Startstrecke means the runway it needs to takeoff. Therefore it has a minimum of 350 meters from 0 km/h to liftoff.
werewo
JG 301 "Heimatverteidigung"
-
Weretiger thanks for the info. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
The A-4 speed figures are very close to those in another sim...
-
Pyro that link has a period on the end of it. Delete that and it will work.
-
Pyro,
I figured that speed to be a bit high (although I didn't know the weight). Airfoil data suggests a max cl of around 1.3. However, if the cl is limited by the tip airfoil (very close to 1.07) where aileron control would be lost and a wing would drop, then the plane could very well stall at 127 mph. With the lower lift coefficient, induced drag is reduced and the plane would fly it's rather large circle at near 250 mph! That's about 18 deg/sec turn rate...not too bad, really.
[This message has been edited by wells (edited 10-26-1999).]
-
Roll rate:
All other things being equal, roll rate varies directly with wingspan and airspeed.
Ailerons usually span 40% of the wing and 25% of the chord (10% of the wing area). The planform of the wing and the area that is affected by ailerons is important in producing the roll torque. The greater the roll torque, the faster the max roll rate will be. 2 examples:
Spitfire: Elliptical planform - minimizes roll inertia but there is little area outboard where the ailerons are, so roll torque is low and so is the roll rate.
Corsair: Slightly tapered/almost straight wing - higher inertia but faster roll rate.
A general rule of thumb to estimate roll rates...
Take the aileron deflection, multiply by the % of wing area. That will give the angle of attack change of the whole wing (figured at the mean aerodynamic chord).
20 degrees * 10% = 2 degrees
On a straight wing, the MAC is 50% of the semi-span (or half way to the wingtip). On tapered or elliptical wings, it's closer to the fuse.
Example: Span = 40', semi-span = 20', MAC =10'
A point on the MAC carves a circle 31.4' in circumference.
Use trig to figure out the velocity around that circle, depending on forward speed.
V = tan(2 degrees) * forward velocity
If the plane is flying at 200 mph, a point on the MAC is travelling at 7 mph (10.3 ft/sec).
Therefore, it will take 3 seconds to complete a roll.
-
Pyro did you get the mail this time.
otherwise send me one
willaume@eti.com.
for those interested
here is the wing, tail and elevator data for the A3 from the good old REA.
CG (meanchord wing = Sgoss/span): 0.28 meancord.
wings:
area gros S: 203 sq.ft.
area net 177 ft
span 2s: 34.5 ft
meanchord: 5.88 ft
dihedral 5 deg
sweep back of 1/4 chordline 2.5 deg
aspect ratio: 5.87
chord root: 7.50 ft
chord tip: 4.05
Flaps:
type: split
maximum angle 60 deg
flap area /S 0.092
flap chord /local chord:
inner end: 0.16
outer end: 0.21
flap span /2s: 0.45
central cut away span /2s: 0.09
longitudinal control
Gross tailplane area S': 31.6 sq. ft.
total elevator area /S': 0.38
elevator up 31 deg
elevator down 26 deg
type of balabce shielded horn
percetage of balance 9.1
stick gearing : 4.1 deg per inch
tail volume coef 0.45.
S'/S: 1.56
l'/meanchord wing (l'= CG to 1/4 chord tailplane): 2.89
directional
type: shielded horn
fin and ruder area gross S": 24.3 sq. ft.
ruder area /s" : 0.315
l"/s (l"= scantroid of s") : 1.12
fin&rudder volume coef (s"l"/Ss):0.134
percentage balance : 4.6
pedal gearing :6.0 deg./in.
lateral control
type frise
aileron area (total):20.1 sq. ft.
aileron area /S: 0.099
aileron chord /local chord: 0.295
aileron span /2s: 0.43
percentage balance 28.8 %
aileron angles +/- 17 deg
stick gearing 3.2 deg./in.
thank to werewolf for my "roll rate".
-
Wells:
Eric Brown got 110 mph as a stall speed flying the same Fw190 A-4/U8 that weretiger quoted climb/speed figures for, at 8470 lb. The only difference between this and the "Brand W" A-4 is the removal of the outer MGFF + ammo.
-
Weretiger keep it coming!
Is there anyway to obtain paper copies of these documents?
-
1 x MG FF weighs 37.0kg
1 x 60 round drum weighs 19.8kg
---
total 113.6kg ( ~250lbs ), or < 3% of total mass removed
Interesting that MG FF ammo weights ~1.66 times as much as MG 151/20? Figures from Aircraft Monograph 6 - Fw 190D Ta 152. Anyone else got figures for guns and ammo?
//fats
-
Fats
Check out Emmanuel Gustin's
WWII Fighter Gun Debate Website (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html), it has most of the data you are looking for.
Of if the above link don't work: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html (http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-in.html)
------------------
Vermillion
WB's: (verm--), **MOL**, Men of Leisure,
(http://web.mountain.net/~arringto/emote/Snoopy.gif)
-
I forgot to mention that this is for an A3.
about the weigth
here is what the REA has to say:
weigh for all fixed equipement excluding guns: 6,544 lbs
pilot and chute 200 lbs (midget......)
fuel (115 gal.):860 ""
oil 10 gal : 96
2* mg 151/20:196
ammo for the above (2*200 rds): 200
2*mg FF: 126
ammo (2*55 + magazines): 90
2*MG 17: 56
ammo (2*1000) 142
radio equipment: 70
That's 8580 lbs with the pilot and the chute
the A4 8470 lbs with the pilot and the chute (i hope anyway).
It was flown with 250 rounds and 900 for each mg 17.
logically the weigth should have been 146
196-50 ligther.
so there is only 36 lbs unaccounted for this can be a mixture of the pilots,some interal fuel and pumps for the wings tanks not removed and sligtly heavier radio/radio nav equipement.
I hope it clarify things.
Nb: that was a good question, the info that you can gather (whatever the source) can be misleading.
Lost of people quote 390 for tha max speed of the fw 190. this is true for the A2 and the derated A3 and some of the A3/u3 and a4/u3 for the same raison.
this only by doubting and wondering why that we can figure out what happened.
[This message has been edited by weretiger (edited 10-28-1999).]