« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 49   Go Down

Author Topic: Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design  (Read 29032 times)

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #90 on: November 25, 2004, 05:39:33 AM »
How is the lifespan of a BMW radial tuned up like that?
How was the normal performance of those planes in squadron strength?
That's what I'd be looking for in a historical setup.
I've never seen an account of a short nosed 190 outrunning a Mustang.

From a practical point of view, the Merlin could be juiced up to 3000 hp, but it would require expert maintenance, special juices, and be short lived none the less.

Imagine a mustang with that power, well, go to Reno....
Logged
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
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #91 on: November 25, 2004, 06:09:15 AM »
Quote
Will be hard to talk to Mike Lyons since he passed away in Nov 1984 from cancer.


Did not know that.  Unfortunate. Make the call.  The facts are the engine is an 801S.

Quote
I've never seen an account of a short nosed 190 outrunning a Mustang.


There is lots of anecdotal evidence Angus.  In fact that is what made me start digging into this.  When you see the BMW 801TS power curve and the Mustangs it is not only anecdotal evidence, it becomes scientific fact.  Without MW 50 the FW-190 is equal or around 1Km faster. Throw in the speed gain from MW 50 and the Mustang is left behind.

Quote
How is the lifespan of a BMW radial tuned up like that?


Quite good actually.  Chromed cylinder walls, heads, and valves help out tremendously.  

On a side note one interesting facuet is the metalurgy.  According to the Wright Engine company, who conducted an extensive metalurgical survey of the BMW801D2 the Germans were far ahead in some areas, equal in most, and slightly behind in some areas of metalurgy.  It would have taken the Allies much longer to catch up to the Germans than the Germans to catch up to Allies.

Happy Thanksgiving, BTW!

Crumpp
« Last Edit: November 25, 2004, 06:39:18 AM by Crumpp »
Logged

Offline wrag

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3499
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #92 on: November 25, 2004, 07:25:49 AM »
Logged
It's been said we have three brains, one cobbled on top of the next. The stem is first, the reptilian brain; then the mammalian cerebellum; finally the over developed cerebral cortex.  They don't work together in awfully good harmony - hence ax murders, mobs, and socialism.

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #93 on: November 25, 2004, 07:44:23 AM »
I was looking at that yesterday, Wrag.  Might have to grab a copy.  Thanks for Sharing.

Some fat to chew on over the Holidays.
For the P51B:


For the FW-190A9 or FW-190A8 with BMW-801TS motor:



With MW-50 add about 10-15kph for the speed of the FW-190.
Still owe the thread those comments from transitioning pilots.  Got to dig them out and scan them.  Going to go spend some time with the family and I will do it after the Holidays!

Crumpp
Logged

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #94 on: November 25, 2004, 09:38:50 AM »
One problem with your P-51 chart Crumpp it is for a -3 engine. By the time your 'improved' 801s were around, the P-51s were using the more powewrful -7 engines and more MP.
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #95 on: November 25, 2004, 09:53:06 AM »
Quote
One problem with your P-51 chart Crumpp it is for a -3 engine. By the time your 'improved' 801s were around, the P-51s were using the more powewrful -7 engines and more MP.


That is correct.  The data I have on the P51D Merlin-7 shows 581Kph at sea level on WEP.  It's still 9 kph slower on the deck without MW-50 boost.

If you have other data please post it.

Crumpp
Logged

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #96 on: November 25, 2004, 11:12:45 AM »
At what MP for the -7?
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #97 on: November 25, 2004, 12:15:17 PM »
From Crumpp:
"There is lots of anecdotal evidence Angus. In fact that is what made me start digging into this. When you see the BMW 801TS power curve and the Mustangs it is not only anecdotal evidence, it becomes scientific fact. Without MW 50 the FW-190 is equal or around 1Km faster. Throw in the speed gain from MW 50 and the Mustang is left behind. "

I'd love to see some anecdotes. You say it's equal or faster without MW50, - well that depends on altitude. So do you mean at best or at worst or what?
How does your 190 match up with a Mustang at the Mustang's best alt?

Anyway, got a bsy night ahead. But all anecdotal stuff is very very very welcome ;)
Logged
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 Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #98 on: November 26, 2004, 07:18:43 AM »
Oh, you all, looking for Spit-Messer related info.
I'm sure Crumpp has it.

LW losses on the 24th of June 1940, before eagle day, in the channel fights.

Apparently some 109 units were taking griveous losses, and I know of one Staffel of 109's that was drown from front line service because of severe losses and low morale.

And that was just in June.....before the actual BoB
Logged
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
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #99 on: November 26, 2004, 08:03:16 AM »
Quote
I'd love to see some anecdotes. You say it's equal or faster without MW50, - well that depends on altitude. So do you mean at best or at worst or what?


Only at low altitude does the FW-190A8/9 have a speed advantage.   You can see that all FW-190's had a speed advantage over their Mustang contemprary at sea level.  Quite different from Alfred Price's and RAE conclusions off a derated FW-190A.

The Bf-109 was slower than the Mustang in all models except for the Bf-109G10 and Bf-109K, AFAIK.


Quote
LW losses on the 24th of June 1940, before eagle day, in the channel fights.


Looking but so far have not found anything.

Crumpp
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #100 on: November 26, 2004, 01:02:44 PM »
So, report of no LW losses?

BTW, most of the LW pilots who fought in the BoB, i.e. who's comments I have read, all say it was a frigging nightmare.

I still sorely need Galland's book though.

Just got a hold of Rall's book in German, Mein Flugbuch. Yummy Yummy ;)
Logged
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 Neil Stirling1

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 105
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #101 on: November 26, 2004, 02:45:21 PM »
Mustang speed and climb at low altitude test results from Boscombe Down
All within AVIA 18/732 held at the National Archive.

Report. Level speed performance with and without RP installation.
Mk 1
AG. 357
F-3-R  55”hg.
July 1943
Without, 357mph at 2000ft/381mph at 7,300ft. .

Report. Climb and level speed performance.
Mk II
FR 893.
F-20-R  60”hg./57”hg on the climb.
Aug 43 to Feb 44.
374mph at 4000ft/409mph at 10,000ft.
3,800ft/min at 6,000ft.
Note aircraft also tested with F-4-R.

Report. Position error, climb and level speed performance trials.
Mk III.
FX.953.
V-1650-3  67”hg.
Feb to May 44.
369mph at 2,000ft/424mph at 15,500ft/450mph at 28,000ft.
3610ft/min at 10,600ft/2690ft/min at 23,400ft.

Report. Position error of static vent and brief level speed trials.
Mk IV.
TK.589.
V-1650-7  80”hg.
July 44.
379mph at 0ft/398mph at 4,300ft.
Aircraft fitted with wing racks.
RAF Mustangs fitted with V-1650-7 cleared for 80”hg with 100/150 grade fuel.

Just for interest.
Report. Brief performance trials and position error measurement.
Mk III
FX.858.
Merlin 100  +25lbs.
April 44.
404mph at 2,000ft/419mph at 5,200ft./455mph at 17,800ft.
4,500ft/min at 1,600ft/4000ft/min at 13,000ft.

Neil.
Logged

Offline Arlo

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24759
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #102 on: November 26, 2004, 03:06:49 PM »
Flugbuch sounds somewhat vulgar. Ahhh the titilation of not being fluent in German.
Logged

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #103 on: November 26, 2004, 09:17:14 PM »
Quote
Mustang speed and climb at low altitude test results from Boscombe Down


The FW-190A9 is just barely faster with MW-50 at sea level than the Mustang III using 80"hg.  Backs up Oscar's experience over the Ardennes forest in Dec. 44.  

Thanks Neil for the data.

Angus,

I can't find any action on 24 June 1940 except for 1 Blenhiem shot down over Norway.  It is the only entry on a supplemental claims list.



Crumpp
Logged

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Spit vs. Messer : Design vs. Design
« Reply #104 on: November 26, 2004, 11:25:54 PM »
Crummp, Fw190A9 does 380mph on the deck??
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 ... 49   Go Up
« previous next »