Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: C_R_Caldwell on February 11, 2001, 07:15:00 PM
-
The HTC guys do great work, but why on earth does the rear fuselage tank in the A-8 hold fuel and not MW-50? Although it could be used for both, I was under the understanding that the vast majority of A-8's used MW-50 in the rear tank.As the A-8 was overweight & weight penalty was equal for fuel or MW-50, and most A-8's used drop-tanks it made sense for most units to emply MW-50 in the rear cylindrical tank.
The extra power afforded by MW-50 boost was usually much more important than the relatively small extra endurance afforded by the tank housing avgas since DT's on A-8's were very common.Looking at the A-8's AH performance charts, the max TAS values look consistent with that of an A-8 without MW-50 boost.If I'm wrong & MW-50 is being used, where is it being housed? I was under the impression that only 1 tank existed in the A-8's rear fuselage, and if that is being used for fuel, where is the MW-50 stored?
Guys, if the A-8 isn't using MW-50, it'd be nice if players had the Hangar option of choosing either fuel or MW-50 in the reat tank.I know which one I'd choose - the A-8 needs all the performance help it can get IMHO...
-
I agree, we should be able to choose MW 50, and also have option to remove the cowl MG 131.
Also, wheres the MW 50 for the G6? It has the buldge in the rear cockpit for it (yes I realize that the G10 cockpit was canibalised for the G6) and the camo scheme is that of Hartmann's Bf 109G-14/AM, which had MW 50 capability.
------------------
Nath_____
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://pobox2.zyan.com/~nath/haha.jpg)
A captured Bolshevik pilot once stated, "In battle, the fighters with the green hearts are generally in the minority. But when they're there, things realy heat up. They're all aces!"
[This message has been edited by Nath-BDP (edited 02-11-2001).]
-
How common was it for A8's to use MW50?
------------------
Baron Claus "StSanta" Von Ribbentroppen
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
"If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up space"
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
How common was it for A8's to use MW50?
Probably more common than seeing Chogs ten times more than Dhogs..
-
No one really knows how many MW50 systems have been mounted on 190A-8's. The only thing I know is that in the 190A-8 flight manual there is clearly written: "all 190A-8 after xx/xx/1944 (dont remember, I'm at work) mount the MW50 system" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
A-8 has only one tank in rear fuselage, in AH it is called EXT. In real life it could hold either fuel or MW 50 liquid but not GM 1 stuff which is gas under high pressure.
I dont think too many A-8's had MW 50 except late production planes. Just look at the A-8 pictures. If the plane has MW 50 it should have white/yellow triangle on left side just behind cocpit which tells plane is equipped with MW 50 and fill this tank with MW 50 liquid instead of fuel.
I have seen only one MW 50 triangle on A-8/R8. On the other hand I haven't seen that triangle on any D-9 which had MW 50 for sure.
------------------
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski
Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.
Sieg oder bolsevismus!
-
Originally posted by Jochen:
A-8 has only one tank in rear fuselage, in AH it is called EXT. In real life it could hold either fuel or MW 50 liquid but not GM 1 stuff which is gas under high pressure.
erm... in AH the EXT in the fuel guage means EXTernal tank, ie: droptank. FWD is forward and AFT is the aft tank.
Kites with main tanks have Main, left/right main tanks are LM/RM, wing tanks are LW/RW, and auxillary tanks are AUX. And there's a couple with NU, whatever that means
-
I guess Jochen meant the "AFT"-Tank (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif).
Maik
-
Gatt, not in the manual you sent me.
I've still never seen any documentation of MW 50 on A-series 190s.
-
"Probably more common than seeing Chogs ten times more than Dhogs.."
Good answer <eye roll>
-
Ouch Funked! I'm pretty sure it is there. I'll check later when back home. No, its not yesterday night's beer fault (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
For diddlys sake!
A-5 has FWD and AFT tanks. So does A-8 but it also has smaller tank behind AFT tank which I think is called EXT, not sure since I can't access AH right now.
A-5 has two/zwei/2 internal tanks. A-8 has thee/drei/3 internal tanks.
And yes, I know the the difference between drop tank and internal tank.
------------------
jochen Gefechtsverband Kowalewski
Units: I. and II./KG 51, II. and III./KG 76, NSGr 1, NSGr 2, NSGr 20.
Planes: Do 17Z, Ju 87, Ju 88A, He 111H, Ar 234A, Me 410A, Me 262A, Fw 190F, Fw 190G.
Sieg oder bolsevismus!
-
The A8 does indeed have three internal tanks, but none are called EXT. That is the external drop tank. The first two of course are the forward (FWD) and after (AFT) tanks, the third internal tank is the auxiliary tank (AUX).
-
So does A-8 but it also has smaller tank behind AFT tank which I think is called EXT, not sure since I can't access AH right now.
lol
-
chunder is right. In 190A8 we have the two normal tanks present also in 190A5: AFT and FWD. And we also have the smaller AUX tank, present also in any real 190A8. This is just the MW50 tank used here as a normal tank.
The defaul order of use is AUX->FWD->AFT. If MW50 is going to be implemented, AUX tank should be used only while WEP is enganged, and filled with a % independent of normal fuel tanks.
If we had MW50, the 190A8 should have about 2100 hp at takeoff, instead 1900 hp (normal takeoff power is 1730hp without WEP). Some documents rate 2005 hp also at 15000 feet with MW50 usage, but not sure about the rpm.
AFAIK MW50 is compatible and independent of GM1 system, both could be fitted in a single plane, enganging MW50 for medium and lo alts and GM1 for hi altitude. A lot of sources have information about the MW50 installations on 190A8, but I've found only one talking about the use of GM1 in a 190 (experimental plane). Several sources talk about the installation of both systems in 109s, Doras and, expecially, Ta152. And it seems that GM1 devices where installed in 109 squads as early as 1941.
-
). Several sources talk about the installation of both systems in 109s, Doras and, expecially, Ta152.
Actually not so on the Ta152. The prototype 152's had them, but most of the production aircraft, the H0's didn't have them. Only the last few production aircraft, the H1's had them.
What was it Nath that we all finally agreed on? 3 or 4 H1's made it thru production?
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Unless somebody can come up with a document showing that 1. the Fw 190A-8 ever had MW 50 and 2. that the power was greater than in the current Fw 190A-8 flight model, I believe it is unlikely you will get Pyro's attention on this issue.
-
Ok I'm sitting here looking at:
Cover page:
D(Luft) T. 2190 A-8
Fw190A-8 Aircraft Handbook (English Translation)
Part 0 General
(Effective July 1944)
Issued September 1944
First Page:
Luftwaffe High Command
Berlin, 5 September 1944
Chief of Technical Services
Nr. 280513/44 (E'ste. Re. E2V)
I hereby appove D.(Luft) T.2190A-8--"Fw190A-8 Aircraft Handbook (Effective July 1944) Issued September 1944."
It is in effect from the date of issue.
By Order
Wittmer
Now the good stuff:
page 02
4. Powerplant
c. Tanks
Fuel Tanks: Two self sealing fuselage tanks with a total capacity of 524 liters (115.5 gal). Forward tank 232 liters(51 gal), rear tank 292 liters (64.5 gal)
A drop tank of 300 liter(66.2 gal) capacity can be carried on an ETC 501 rack beneath the fuselage.
Behind bulkhead 8 there is also a provision for the installation of a GM-1 tank, 85 liters (18.7 gal) capacity, or an auxiliary fuel tank, 115 liter (25.3 gal) in capacity.
Notice it mentions GM1 but makes no mention of MW50.
On page 03, under "4.Weight Data " it again makes mention of the forward and rear standard fuel tanks, and also of the additional fuselage tank (115 liters), but nothing about MW50.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Some more info, this time from:
Focke-Wulf Aviation Corporation
Technical Description No. 284 Fw190-A8 Fighter
28.11.44
Page 4
Increased Emergency Power: Commencing in July 1944, all Fw190A-8 aircraft will be fitted with the 'emergency power unit'. By overriding the supercharger boost regulator, this system increases the boost pressure, on take-off and emergency power, at the low supercharger setting, from 1,42 ata to 1,58 ata; and at high supercharger setting, from 1,42 ata to 1,65 ata. The resulting increase in maximum horizontal speed is about 22km/h (13.6 mph) at the low setting, and about 25km/h (15.5 mph) at the high setting. Due to the danger of engine overheating, this system must not be used for more than 10 minutes at a time.
GM1 Installation: The fitting of a GM1 unit in place of additional fuselage fuel tank is basically feasible; but, in the Fw190 A-8 Series is normally not done. It can be used at altitudes above 8km (26,250ft) and gives a speed increase of about 58km/h (36.0 mph) at climb and combat power.
BTW, Thanks Funked for copies of all this great information !! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
i agree mw50 should not be fitted to the 190a8 since it didnt carry it BUT:
the current 190 a8 model is porked. At the same altitude, a 4 cannon 190a5 climbs at 3900 FPM, while the 190a8 (quad 20mm
) climbs at 3050 FPM. The weight difference (~1000 lb or 11%) does NOT justify this 23% reduction in climb speed and acceleration.
Just for an example, i believe the p51 and the 190a8 are about the same loaded weight (9500 lbs) .. the pony has more wing area (230 to 198) so it should turn better, and has less drag at low AOA (cruise speed) so max speed should be better BUT
at climb speeds they both have approximately the same power loading, so the climb and acceleration disparity between the a8 and the pony should not be as large as it is now.
btw the 190a5 model is fine, flies just as it should, my comments only reflect the 190a8.
-
Zigrat, I have max climb/speed charts versus altitude for the 190A8 under various loaded conditions, with a breakdown of weight for each test. Some are Focke-Wulf Factory testing and additionally some US Captured Aircraft data.
My scanner is somewhat porked right now or I would have already posted them. Once I get it up and running I will post them.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
Um since I haven't seen it mentioned here yet, wasn't the Aux tank a completely seperate system from the main aft/fwd fuel tanks, used strictly for the petrol injection? -- That is, while still feeding off the Aft/Fwd/ext (or otherwise, the fuel source for normal operation) the aux tank was used concurrently with the normal fuel flow when the injection was activated? I had always considered it the auxillary source for running higher boost as to not dimenish range.
- Bess
-
Yup I don't think we'll ever see this modeled also the LW aircraft had different gun seletor for 30 or 20mm cannons independent of each other to shoot one cannon at once but......
------------------
Glasses---I may have 4 eyes ,but you only have one wing.
Tis not important how one goes,but who goes with you.
-
Vermillion:
"Increased Emergency Power: Commencing in July 1944, all Fw190A-8 aircraft will be fitted with the 'emergency power unit' "
The increases in boost pressures stated in that report and the increases in performance tally in almost perfectly with the use of MW-50, though in the report it states that this is not the case & is done by over-riding the normal blower boost regulator.That a GM-1 unit was probably not used in not in question.No sim but AW tries 2 use GM-1 in a Fw 190 ;-).I'll try 2 find more info on the A-8/MW-50 subject.Vermillion's stuff looks good so far though.
Look, as far as I'm concerned, whether the A-8 (even if it's just models built in the last 7 or 8 months of the war) used MW-50 or a mechanically based WEP system is of great interest 2 history buffs (ie many of us), and I love 2 learn new stuff re: LW a/c whenever I can.But as far as the A-8 in AH is concerned, can we agree on this? The AH A-8 does not appear 2 use either MW-50 or the blower over-ride WEP system mentioned by Vermillion.The performance graphs of the AH A-8 seem 2 match stated figures for an "unboosted" A-8 (I'm being diplomatic & not stating which form of WEP was used).
If Vermillion is right, and later A-8's were boosted, why is it not available in AH? At the moment, the AH A-8 almost feels like what u would expect an A-8/R8 Sturmbock would fly like! Now i'm not complaining about the A-8's handling - it was by all accounts still great in the rolling plane but a pig in the turn thanks 2 its greatly increased wing loading.What I take issue with is its performance - especially when u consider the contentious handling (and even some areas of performance) of AH's N1K.
Zig: Agree with what u said.As u mentioned, there is a disparity in wing area between the P-51D and 190A-8.The difference in wing loadings I believe is this (I calculated this myself so its probably very rough):-
*P-51D :- 43 lb/sq ft.
*P-47D-30 :- 49 lb/sq ft.
*Spit IX F. :- 31.5 lb/sq ft.
*Tempest V :- 38 lb/sq ft.
*La-5FN :- 39 lb/sq ft.
*Yak-3 :- 37 lb/sq ft.
*Bf 109F-4 :- 35.5 lb/sq ft.
*Bf 109G-2 :- 39 lb/sq ft.
*Bf 109G-6 :- 40 lb/sq ft.
*Bf 109G-10 :- 40-41 lb/ sq ft. (rough)
*Fw 190A-5 :- 40.5-41 lb/sq ft. (approx)
*Fw 190A-8 :- 49 lb/sq ft.
*Fw 190D-9 :- 48 lb/sq ft.
*Me 262A-1 - 60 lb/sq ft.
The above wing loadings are only a very rough guide, so plz don't consider them as canon...
Glasses:- U r 100% right.Fw 190A-8s equipped with 30mm MK 108's in the outboard wing cannon mounts had seperate firing buttons for the inboard MG 151/20s and the MK 108s.Surely this is one feature that HTC could add to AH without any major code revision? Having 2 use the 20mm & 30mm guns at the same time is useless unless the target is not maneuvering and <300 yrds.At any greater range and/or if the target is maneuvering hard and a high deflection shot is required, the vastly differing ballistic properties of the MG 151/20 & MK 108 makes the possibility of landing shells from both cannons on2 the target *extremely* difficult.That's why u see old Fw 190A-8 heads like Nath always using quad 20mm's .
Btw, I believe that not all A-8's carrying outboard MK 108's were Sturmbocks as I've heard some people playing AH suggesting.I have several photos of JG 300 A-8's (JG 300 was one the main Sturmbock units) *without* extra panel armour & armour glass (definitely *not* simply 'unblinkered' Sturmbocks) with outboard MK 108s.Also, I have photos of JG 300 A-8s with only inboard MG 151/20's (as well as 'standard' quad 20mm's), so it appears JG 300 flew the complete gamut of Fw 190A-8 armaments.
[This message has been edited by C_R_Caldwell (edited 02-12-2001).]
-
Jig I have a few books and documents that show the fuel in the aux tank being used for extra range. The 109 and 190 had very limited range and they were always looking to increase this.
-
Originally posted by C_R_Caldwell:
Glasses:- U r 100% right.Fw 190A-8s equipped with 30mm MK 108's in the outboard wing cannon mounts had seperate firing buttons for the inboard MG 151/20s and the MK 108s.Surely this is one feature that HTC could add to AH without any major code revision? Having 2 use the 20mm & 30mm guns at the same time is useless unless the target is not maneuvering and <300 yrds.At any greater range and/or if the target is maneuvering hard and a high deflection shot is required, the vastly differing ballistic properties of the MG 151/20 & MK 108 makes the possibility of landing shells from both cannons on2 the target *extremely* difficult.That's why u see old Fw 190A-8 heads like Nath always using quad 20mm's .
THe Switch was also present in the four 20mm cannon Fw190, to allow to fire external only, internal only, or all four cannons linked, not only for the MK108 fitted 190s.
The Me109 also had this switch to be used when the wing gondolas were fitted. YOu could fire hub cannon only, wing cannon only or the 3 cannons linked.
regarding HTC adding this feature, I've been asking for it since a long long time ago.
HT's asnwer was simple:
"no"
-
RAM,
HiTech answered with a simple "no".
Pyro later explained however, that its a basic game programming issue. The game FE is designed and programmed to allow for a "primary" and "secondary" banks of weapons, period. And to go back and significanly alter a core portion of the code, would require more time and effort than you assume, and would not be worth the difference it would make in gameplay, even if the historic 190's had this ability.
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
-
--- Vermillion: ---
he game FE is designed and programmed to allow for a "primary" and "secondary" banks of weapons
--- end ---
The matter of gun selection was brought up during CK and WB... but hey why redesign and code anything twice once you got it working.
Well that's not fair really, this time around we got the gondolas and internal guns as load out options rather than as a separate plane. It's cool to be able to load the 30mm for Fw 190A-8, even though they are _useless_. Now wasn't that time used to redesign and code the load outs well spent.
Maybe next time we get the gun selection. Might make the Fw 190A-5 MG FFs usefull as well.
// fats
-
Hmm if they won't allow a seperate button then they should treat the 30 mm like ordnance and allow you to select between rockets/bombs/MG151/MK108 with the backspace key. Warbirds B-25H used this method and it worked fine.
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 02-13-2001).]
-
Fixed the PORKED MG 151s first!!
It seems as if 4 20mm in A8 isn't even enough, I'm getting solid hits on Spits, 109s Nikis with no damage. MG 151s on 190 need to be upped in lethality, this is BS.
-
first ord cycle = both banks
2nd cycle = outter
3rd cycle = inner
4th cycle = ord
5th cycle = mortars
6th cycle = all banks again
At first I'd think there might be a problem tracking shells from one mode to the other, but it's already been worked around in with the Buff guns.
You could add a primary toggle to switch between 13mm/inner 20mm and ord being the outter pair.
Or map a key like the "fire position" and "fire all" like in the buff guns, where fire position only fires the inner pair, and fire all (the normal fire secondary button) fires both banks. That way, if using only fire position, once the inner bank runs out, using the normal ord fire button to use the outter pair, while still having the ability to switch from one bank to another or fire all without much effort.
Surely there's some method of cycling that could be worked out with a little work...
- Bess