Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: funkedup on June 11, 2002, 12:27:01 PM
-
I thought we had closed this matter a long time ago, but I guess I don't "know my 190s". Please share with me any information you have regarding MW 50 on the Fw 190A, especially anything from primary sources? Thanks and
-
Just a question about any Fw plane. AFAIK, while most technical data was destroyed by germans, some was captured by soviet troops from the main FW factories (Cottbus?). Is that right? If so, we better look into these documents captured by the soviets. I know there were some technical FW charts in the hads of western allies since, at least, 1943. Spies? Real info? Falsified info? Who knows.
-
Yes indeed the Russian captured a lot of document pertaining to the 190 production along with many FW engineers.
As far as i know the 190s captured by the Soviet had MW50 and not the GM1, which is not very surprising. The GM1 was only useful at very high altitude, and the combat in the Eastern front were mostly far below the engine critical altitude so under the altitude minimum altitude required for use of GM1 so MW50 was much more useful.
Moreover GM1 injection had a deleterious effect on piping and other metal part involved, oxygen being a very strong corrodant. Another point in the availability of the GM1 which seems to have been very scarce by mid 44, and it required special handling which made it not very practical.
The GM1 was possibly used by the units engaged against US bombers, but even then availibility and handling makes me doubt it.
-
Thanks Butch! Can you elaborate on that?
Which variants (A-#) are we talking about?
Did the USSR actually capture information describing the system, or just aircraft?
Did they find methanol barrels at 190A bases?
What about the supplemental petrol injection system? Is it possible that they confused the plumbing for this system with MW 50 plumbing?
Did they find documentation of engine power curves using MW 50?
Did they test the engines on a dynamometer with MW 50?
Did they find flight test data for Fw 190A using MW 50?
Did they flight test them with MW 50?
I wonder, if the MW 50 system on Fw 190A existed, why is there a total absence of information about it in USAAF and RAF archives? They captured and tested and dissected many Fw 190A, but not one word about water injection.
-
Originally posted by butch2k
As far as i know the 190s captured by the Soviet had MW50
Are you able to prove it?
In any case there are two very different scenaries:
1 - Western Europe, where 190s were fighting hi alt bomber formations, and where MW50 had little or no effect at all and perhaps some extra fuel was desirable to increase the CAP time a bit.
2 - Eastern front with lo level fights, where MW50 had had a noticeable effect.
That may explain why our western "version/vision" of 190 is not the same as the eastern one.
-
Yes it appears in Soviet tests, i'm not sure i'll be able to share the data due to my NDA.
I will have to verify the piping and the way the GM-1/MW-50/Fuel system works on the 190 but it's probably working the same way as the K-4 one. There should be a way to select before startup whether the tank you have is using MW50 or fuel.
-
Very cool Butch. I understand about NDAs. :)
I hope some day you can share the whole document, or at least the performance curves.
Maybe you can give one bit of info. What was the maximum permitted manifold pressure while using MW 50?
-
I remember some emails I crossed with Oleg, back when Il-2 was still in beta
from what I read on his emails, he had definite proof of the usage of MW50 in the Fw190A8s in the eastern front. ;)
Hehehe maybe we can tell Pyro to put MW50 in the A8? ;)
-
Funked, I'd have to go back and check my library at home to be absolutely sure (I'm sitting in a Kinko's in Philadelphia) but all my sources say A8 used the GM1, but nothing on MW50.
Now I've seen stuff to say that the BMW engine "could" use MW50, but no where have I seen actual info on production aircraft using it.
I'd like to see any good hard data on 190A's that used it.
-
All 190s starting from the A4 on towards the A8 used the bmw 801-D2 (supercharged, 1730 hp with MW50 2100 hp) except for a few exceptions. The 801-D2 was the first variant of the 801 with provisions for water methanol injection (MW50) although MW50 was not readily available until the A8 appeared. Only A8s or at least in time frame 190's with 801-D2s still flying after the release date of the A8 ever carried MW50 into combat. Im sure there was a little bit of MW50 stashed somewhere prior to the A8.
The exceptions within the 801-D2 equiped 190s were the fw-190A6R4 which was equiped with an 801TS (turbocharged, 2000 hp with MW50 (estimated) 2428 hp ) engine. Its claimed max speed was 424mph at 34,000 ft.
The A9 used the 801F (supercharged, 1765 hp wth MW50 2400 hp) engine. The A9R11 used the 801TS turbocharged engine. According to some sources, the 801Fs were not available so the 801TS was installed instead. Most if not all A9 models were then actually the A9R11 variant.
No comment at this point on GM-1.
-
Excelent Senna, can you post your information sources?
-
Warplanes of the Lufftwaffe
Editor: David Donald
Aerospace Publishing London, AIRtime Publishing USA
Page [72-75], 84
and this link:
http://www.arrakis-ttm.com/fw190.html
-
"The 801-D2 was the first variant of the 801 with provisions for water methanol injection (MW50) although MW50 was not readily available until the A8 appeared."
MW50 is distilled water and methyl alcohol (wood alcohol) - not hard to come by. The BMW801 did not like MW50 and it took until the A-8 for BMW engineers to solve the problem. The DB engines did not suffer like the BMW801 from the use of MW50. MW equipment was readily available for DB engined a/c (I believe).
-
I am not an expert for the A-Series, more for the D-Series, but that's what i so far know:
With the A4 they introduced MW-50 injection with the BMW801.
This was keeped till the latest A-Series planes.
But additional boost methods were introduced like GM-1.
As MW50 is a low-alt boost system and GM-1 is a high alt-system, it might have given both variants in service.
On the western front were the B17+B24 flew at 7000 meters+ the GM-1 should have been logicaly used, too boost the FW190As speed above critical alt.
While on the eastern front most fight took place below 6000 meters and so MW50 as a low-alt boost would make sense.
-
Guys, unless you have primary source data, I wouldn't trust it much. MW50 on A4's, and to a certain extent A8's, is most likely the same kind of myth as MG151/15s on 109K4's.
The primary source (original documents and drawings) doesn't support that it actually was there. At least in the information I have seen.
The compendium books are good general references, but contain many errors, and are not usually definitive answers.
-
With the A4 they introduced MW-50 injection with the BMW801.
This was keeped till the latest A-Series planes.
But additional boost methods were introduced like GM-1.
Guys, unless you have primary source data, I wouldn't trust it much. MW50 on A4's, and to a certain extent A8's, is most likely the same kind of myth as MG151/15s on 109K4's.
Now, non of us has a primary source that is says it had MW50, nor does anyone have a source that says "MW50 didn't exists on that and that plane but arived FIRST on THAT plane".
As Naudet said, the MW50 was introduced on the A4 (same as the sources i have say), it was somewhat troublesome and wasn't made to work really well untill the A8 arived. The GM1 was even more troublesome and arived at about the same time.
Obviously, the MW50 wasn't used on very many 190's before the A8 thus it shouldn't be modelled for the A5 in AH.
As for the GM1, I see no reason why it should be on an A8. The GM1 didn't kick in untill ABOVE the maximum boost altitude of the engine (this being somewhere around 33-35k for the BWM801D engine if I remember correct). Which means the GM1 is only usefull above that altitude, where, the A8 sucked anyway and didn't fly, nor were there any bombers up that high.
As it is now, I see no proof why it shouldn't have existed in versions prior to the A8, nor do I see any proof that it should. until someone finds a primary source we're stuck where we are. Nor do I think it's a myth like the one Verm is talking about.
-
Didn't Graff have GM1 in his 190A-(4, 5 or 6, not sure) ?
-
Didn't say they didn't have GM1, just that I don't see the reason :)
He may have had it although afaik they had problems with GM1 in the 190 A's before the A8.
-
Looking at a power graph in the manual mentioned previously, the BMW801's power drops off radically at ~5500m. Would this not be its critical altitude?
-
Did the 190D-9 have any of these different boosts?
-
anyone consider they had loads of shot up 190s of all varients. alot of them were probly mishmashes of several different models . and if i were a pilot whith the option of having the mw 50 pulled out of the wrecked a8 and put in my favorite a5 ( all seem to agree it would bolt on). to be used carefully. the order would be given and a a5 with mw50 would be born . probly what happend .
ps 109 k some early models did have 151/15s sorry but its true . the k4 production didnt but the k1 shure as hell did.
-
Well in the end, we know the A8 had mw50. That we have proof of for sure. While Im at it, we also know the A8 had Gm-1 because thats what the books say. Doesnt say much about Gm-1 but it says it was release within the 190s with the A8.
-
From: http://www.nasm.si.edu/nasm/aero/aircraft/focke_190f.htm\
A BMW 801D-2 engine, capable of producing 2,100 hp for brief periods by using a methanol-water injection system called MW-50, powered the next production variant, the Fw 190A-4.
I have requested their sources.
With regards to GM1 see the following:
(http://www.vermin.net/fw190/190-2.jpg)
compliments of Vermin.
F.
-
lord dolf vader,
the K-1 to K-3 were paper projects only, NO PRODUCTION. Next, if the MG151/15 would not fit in the K-4, what makes you think it would it fit in your imaginary K-1? Take a moment and compare the size of the MG151/15 and the MG131 please.
-
hum, this shows that runing the gm-1 system created alot of heat problems thus the need to run at a lower RPM (but you get more power). Its interesting that jochen pointed out that the 109s did better with gm-1 since they are "glycol" cooled whereas the 190s are air cooled. At higher altitudes, if you needed speed, you could just dive unless diving wasnt part of the plan. Then you would need to run gm-1 and since gm-1 creates alot of heat, perhaps the 109s were less prone to this than the 190s.
-
Nope it produced the same problem, and as the DB605AS and other engine with higher performance at altitude were introduced the GM-1 system was converted for use with MW50.
-
Well, I only want gm-1 to escape prowling hi alt p-51s so I still want it in 109 or a 190. Honestly, I doubt HT will ever give us a gm-1 since thats like having an escape button or a get out of jail card. Thats way too trick .)
-
The best method to check were and when which boost system was used, we should take a close look on FW190A photos.
I don't have many "picture" books on the FW190, but anyone who has, should look at the rear leftside fuel intake (it is short behind the canopy). Most times there should be a yellow or red fuel triangle.
Just read what is written in it and you know what type of boost the plane used.
Most times i must admit it's a bit troublesome to get high qualitiy pictures to verify such things.
-
Not to say big enough pictures Naudet :)
Off to the book store again to find picture books of it.
MiloMorai WHAT MANUAL?! Everybody seem to have it but me! :D
If that is the case, that may be the maximum boost altitude, not sure. If it is, GM1 makes sence.