Author Topic: Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability  (Read 5215 times)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #45 on: July 22, 2004, 06:29:40 AM »
"Spitfire`s WEP time was restricted to one-half or one-third that of the WEP time of the 1944 German figters, try to live with that."

True,however not completely. Guaranteed 5 minutes without harming the engine, but nothing to stop you running the it at high WEP until it broke. There are reports of Merlins being run at WEP up to 30 minutes without any damage.
The MW would however gradually eat the engine with the side effect of power loss unless it would be overhauled frequently. That often was a hard task for the German engineers in the heat of war.
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #46 on: July 22, 2004, 06:52:22 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
"Spitfire`s WEP time was restricted to one-half or one-third that of the WEP time of the 1944 German figters, try to live with that."

True,however not completely. Guaranteed 5 minutes without harming the engine, but nothing to stop you running the it at high WEP until it broke. There are reports of Merlins being run at WEP up to 30 minutes without any damage.
The MW would however gradually eat the engine with the side effect of power loss unless it would be overhauled frequently. That often was a hard task for the German engineers in the heat of war.


What eats engines is the load, and ruining effects of the fuel/mixtures used. The first one is easy to get, ball bearings will give it up sooner or later, pistons crack, crankshafts broke etc.

The other is the additional wear within the pistons from the fuel and mixture. Allied 150 grade was high on aromatics, and so were the German C-3 fuel, which means increased fouling especially of the spark plugs etc. MW had both good and neg effects for maintaince. The good one : it helped to keep the engine internals clean from the leftovers of burning such highly blended fuels, thus reducing the problems associtated with these fuels. The neg one was corrosion - though not that much of a problem, as 99% of these engines were aluminium alloy, but the engines needed to be checked for signs of corrosion more often - every 50 hours as Jane`s says so. But it`s not acid or something that it would eat the engine.. the greatest killer of all these engines was the extreme loads of the parts under their maximum outputs. As for the 'low overhaul time' problem, I doubt German mechanics would change the powerplants any more often than their Allied counterparts of +25lbs etc. Spits. First, statistically, the plane was already written off by the time overhaul was neccesary (ie. loss rate vs. sorties required to reach overhaul time). Second, engine swap was very quick on those German birds, being 30mins or so on the 109, not sure how much it did take on the 190, probably a bit more, given the size and dimensions. Thirdly, by the time those birds with MW engine eating acid ;) arrived, there were so many replacement a/c produced, that they didn`t even bother repairing damaged fighters. 'You broke it? That`s tough, go grab another one.' Literally.

As for the Merlin/30min at WEP/no damage, I am highly sceptical about that. All these prescribed periods are with a safety margin of course, but nothing like 6 times than allowed. And, take note that nothing prevented you from using MW50 as long as you wanted, as long as there was fuel in the tank to burn. Though I bet funny noises would come from the engine after a while. Not something you ask for in the winter, over the Ardennes with no place to land on..

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #47 on: July 22, 2004, 07:05:09 AM »
QUOTE]The MW would however gradually eat the engine with the side effect of power loss unless it would be overhauled frequently. That often was a hard task for the German engineers in the heat of war.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely right MW30/50 was corrosive and reduced engine life.  C3 boost on the other hand was just C3 fuel injected into the supercharger to cool the heads.  It had no corrosive effects.

You're correct also on the Spitfire WEP.  The test A/C used ran on WEP for an hour and ten minutes straight.   Wonder why they returned a recommendation for no more than 5 minutes on WEP operationally.


Basically the pilot's manual lists several times for using boost on the FW-190A8.  I have to paraphrase since the manuals are still with my engineer friend.

Basically it goes like this:

Up to 40 minutes in high-speed flight.

10 minutes in a climb or low speed maneuvering

2 minutes or less when on the ground. (Pre-take off checks)

Watch your temperature gauge and don't exceed xxx temperature.

Watch your fuel consumption.

On this website is an allied document explaining C3 boost and it's operation.  Notice the time limits given from the captured document.

http://www.terra.es/personal2/matias.s/fw190.htm


Crumpp

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #48 on: July 22, 2004, 07:09:09 AM »
No anger on my part Crumpp, just total frustration in your lack of providing specifics. All we see from you is generalized 'statements and links'.

It would seem :rolleyes:, with all the documents you claim to have, that you don't have #284 for the A-8. Read it, and you will have your answer.:)

Crumpp, that nasty flick/stall ALWAYS had the a/c departing to port.

................

Wotan, generally agree with you on the time limit. The Germans had trouble gradually increasing the time limit to 10 minutes.

..........

LOL, knew Barbi would show up eventually.:)

As usual, he jumps straight in without reading ALL the posts, it would seem. Being sometimes lazy, I wrote MW, when I should have said 'injection'.:rolleyes: :)  Glad you concur that MW and C3 injection had a simular effect. (see a later post than what you quoted)

Being a wee bit melodramatic are we Barbi? 5ms (5 milli seconds).

Quote
....is actually in some odd way, a disadvantage of the BMW 801? What cretinic logic is that ?


Aaagh??? I said that. Thanks for the clarification.:)

Now lets see this doc that says 15 minutes was possible.

............

Thanks Angus, saves me some typing.;) The Luft luvers have a hard time distiquishing between theoretical and actual, at times.

Merlins in the Unlimited racers are putting out +3000hp and doing that for much longer than 5 minutes. Granted they are well maintained, but still over a 50% increase from the WW2 hp numbers. And some won't believe that a WW2 Merlin could run for 30 min. on WEP.

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #49 on: July 22, 2004, 07:22:05 AM »
Quote
C3 boost on the other hand was just C3 fuel injected into the supercharger to cool the heads.


Only indirectly, as the injection kept the temperature of the incoming fuel/air mixture down, first.

There you go again giving a link with multiple files/links. Can't you refer to a specific file/link?:rolleyes:

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #50 on: July 22, 2004, 07:26:55 AM »
There are only a few documents on the page Milo.

Try the one labeled "FW190 Fuel Injection".  It's the first one.

Crumpp

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #51 on: July 22, 2004, 07:45:03 AM »
From Isengrim on the effects of high octane fuel :
" increased fouling especially of the spark plugs etc. "

Spark plugs are easy. Piston corrosion not to mention bearing corrosion is BAD
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #52 on: July 22, 2004, 07:53:59 AM »
Quote
Thanks Angus, saves me some typing. The Luft luvers have a hard time distiquishing between theoretical and actual, at times.


Not at all Milo.  However I do have a problem with it when such logic is used for only ONE side.  As is the case of the Spit diving speed.

1.  There is NO high speed trial data on the FW-190. Heinrich Beauvais, Test pilot for Focke Wulf says they never conducted official trials. Only dive test's conducted were with 300 liter external tanks.  At 650 kph the tank would be ripped off.  It's mach number is from one recorded dive to mach .80 and the A/C flew with  "appreciably higher than normal" but still acceptable control forces AND recovered without damage to the plane.  No buffeting, no control reversals, the plane behaved beautifully. Obviously NOT the FW 190's limiting Mach number.

2.  Every test of the FW190 against a Merlin Spitfire has the 190 out diving the Spit. Fact and no way to get around it.

So what is the STANDARD?  Are we going to go with what is in the book when it is convienant for Spitfires but not make logical assumptions for anything else? You want everyone to make the assumption Spitfire WEP can go for longer than 5 minutes?  That is not what the RAF says! The boost for the 190 is in black and white.  

Crumpp

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #53 on: July 22, 2004, 08:14:41 AM »
Right Crumpp, an Allied document written during war.:rolleyes: Now where is a German doc?


:D:D Thanks for the good laughs this AM Crumpp.

Did you not say you would post the Fw A's dive speed limits??? Again just general statements from you - get more specific > ie. what height?  Was that 650kph at 1km or 10km or ???km ?

Anyways, always enjoy when the one kettle calls another kettle black.

.......


Angus, Issy has been told many times about fouling spark plugs - why they fouled and how they were cleaned (in flight). It was really no big deal, though he tries continually to make it a major defect/problem.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #54 on: July 22, 2004, 08:51:29 AM »
Man you are DENSE Milo.  How many times do I have to say my translations are being checked??

Obviously you have never translated a technical document.  It's not something you just look at and read if your not a native.  It's very easy to miss the nuisances of the language and misinterpret things especially German as they tend to link old words to describe new things which literally translated could have a completely different meaning.  I am fortunate to have a native German speaker who is both a pilot and an engineer to check my translations.  We met for Lunch yesterday but during the course of the conversation other questions came up so he is checking those out.  I'll see him for lunch today.

Additionally it's complicated by the fact I have over 1200 pages of Luftwaffe documents.  You can order them yourself from:

http://www.luftfahrt-archiv-hafner.de/

Crumpp

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #55 on: July 22, 2004, 09:26:41 AM »
Quote
19.........Comparitive dives between the two aircraft have shown that the Me.109 can leave the Spitfire without any difficulty.



http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/109gtac.html

Crumpp

Offline VO101_Isegrim

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 577
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #56 on: July 22, 2004, 10:07:00 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
From Isengrim on the effects of high octane fuel :
" increased fouling especially of the spark plugs etc. "

Spark plugs are easy. Piston corrosion not to mention bearing corrosion is BAD


Hmm, look at this way: replace spark plugs every 6-7 hours (=avarage Mustang sortie, in others words, after every sortie) because of fouling, or check for signs of corrosion after every 50 hours, roughly twice the life expancy of an avarage fighter on the front.?

And bearing can`t be corroded by MW injection, think a little bit. MW is injected into the supercharger eye/cumbustion chambers. And it keeps them cool and clean like a baby`s butt. ;)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #57 on: July 22, 2004, 10:30:45 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Crumpp
Man you are DENSE Milo.  How many times do I have to say my translations are being checked??

Tut, tut Crumpp. Such anger.

"I will check to see if it has the dive restrictions listed.

You need a translation for dive speeds? :rolleyes:

Additionally it's complicated by the fact I have over 1200 pages of Luftwaffe documents.  


 Again, whoopy do.


Stop with the posting of generalizations until you finally get your translations. Until then, you are only posting 'hot air'. NADA proof.

Now about being DENSE. The comment was made because both a/c started the dive at the same speed.:rolleyes: When did LW fighters acquire futuristic 'jump' technoligy?

Offline Wotan

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7201
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #58 on: July 22, 2004, 10:33:42 AM »
Angus wtf are talking about?

Mw50 = water and methanol

It was injected into the eye of the SC and evaporated cooling the charge.

C3 was injected the same way.

Corrode the cylinders and bearings...lol wtf...

Heres a clue US planes did the same with adi....

Offline GScholz

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8910
Any good explanation about "new" spit diving ability
« Reply #59 on: July 22, 2004, 10:36:09 AM »
This is not the first time Angus has mixed up MW-50 and GM-1.
"With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censored, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably."