« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Re: German vs. American  (Read 2058 times)

Offline Lumpy

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 547
Re: German vs. American
« on: May 13, 2008, 04:24:39 AM »
Serenity ... not wanting to rain you your parade or anything, but in real life the Allies had better performance late in the war than they do in AH. The performance of the P-51 and P-47 in AH is comparable to early 1944, so in AH the 109K-4 has an unhistorical advantage in engine power. In AH the P-51D is limited to +18 lbs of WEP boost producing ~1,700 hp, but in late 1944/early 1945 the Ponies had a maximum WEP of +22(point something) producing almost 2,000 hp.

Of course the 109K-4 is also limited to using B4 fuel giving it only ~1,800 hp, but most 109K's probably flew on B4  due to logistical reasons (would be fun to have C3 fuel available as a perk option though!).

So in AH I agree with you: I'd take a 109K-4 over the Pony any day. However in real life it was not as clear cut.
Logged
“I’m an angel. I kill first borns while their mommas watch. I turn cities into salt. I even – when I feel like it – rip the souls from little girls and now until kingdom come the only thing you can count on, in your existence, is never ever understanding why.”

-Archangel Gabriel, The P

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #1 on: June 05, 2008, 11:08:12 AM »
Is my memory getting flaky, - didn't the Mustang end up with 27 boost? Well, maybe I'm mixing it up with the other scale, - mm.hg?
In any case, we don't have the uber-mustang. And in RL, the DB (AFAIK) suffered from wear much sooner than a Merlin, - loss of power that is. So, AH does not exactly present the 1945 setup as it was in RL on a daily basis.
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 Stoney

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3482
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #2 on: June 10, 2008, 08:52:44 AM »
I think anyone attempting to duplicate the historical superiority of U.S. aircraft in WWII will find themselves dissapointed.  Given that range and altitude performance don't really matter in the 6,000 foot furball, IMO, U.S. aircraft are handicapped compared to Russian designs especially, and the late British aircraft.  In real life, I wouldn't have traded a P-47, P-51, F6F, F4U or P-38 for any other ride available.
Logged
"Can we be incorrect at times, absolutely, but I do believe 15 years of experience does deserve a little more credence and respect than you have given from your very first post."

HiTech

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #3 on: June 15, 2008, 06:07:00 AM »
Well, there are many little things in aircraft construction, handling and lifetime etc that do not stick out in AH.
As well as the fact as the US birds really shone at altitudes we rarely see in AH. In TOD this will however be the case.
And naming some birds for high alt....the Spittie, hehe.
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 HAMMERR

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #4 on: June 16, 2008, 09:53:17 AM »
to me 2 things stick out that make the US aircraft better in WWII than AH.  OR rather, make the german aircraft poorer.

1.  Altitudes of the fight in WWII were much higher than most furballs in AH (guarding bombers @ 30K).

2.  The quality of the fuel for the germans was fairly poor during the late war, handicapping performance gains of the later model german aircraft.
Logged

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #5 on: June 16, 2008, 11:20:36 AM »
Quote from: HAMMERR on June 16, 2008, 09:53:17 AM
2.  The quality of the fuel for the germans was fairly poor during the late war, handicapping performance gains of the later model german aircraft.
Explain please.
Logged

Offline HAMMERR

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #6 on: June 16, 2008, 11:45:49 AM »
As far as I've understood (and i'm no expert).  Refinery infrastructure was hit heavily in Mid War Europe and the germans had less availability of high quality avgas for their aircraft.  I know the 109 could operate on fairly poor fuel at the expense of reduced performance.  It is very possible that 109s operating on lower quality fuel would face a performance disadvantage. (now where I am more of an expert)  At the higher boost levels an engine is required to operate at high altitudes, high octane gas is a critical factor.  Reduced boost levels have a far more drastic effect up high as opposed to down low.
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #7 on: June 16, 2008, 06:07:07 PM »
Hmm, we had luftwobbles explaining the superior quality of the LW stock as well as quantity. but, that's...them.
They did get really low in quantity in the end, and AFAIK as well in quality, or availability of the right stuff.
They also had problems with engine durability, i.e. power loss due to wear and tear which has been claimed to occure within very few hours. LW aces as Rall have mentioned this after testing captured allied aircraft. Well, maybe this had something to do with boosting...MW and such, or lack of some material for engine building, - many opinions on that.
But the fact remains...the Western Allies took over the very high alt performance as soon as the Spit IX entered the game in 1942, and held it for the next couple of years, beyond the line when it was clear that the Axis would loose.
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 Serenity

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7313
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #8 on: June 16, 2008, 11:15:18 PM »
I think the real difference came in pilots. Germany had the equipment as far as aircraft goes, but they didn't have experienced pilots left to really take on the American air forces.
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #9 on: June 17, 2008, 12:03:52 PM »
1942+ to 1944 the Allies held the cards at really high alt. Such as high cover for bombers. So the German interceptors would have to go in for a slash, and make that count to one before going for the deck, if there was escorts.
However, the Allies had to fly for HOURS over axis held territory, so them slashes ended up counting....
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 Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #10 on: June 18, 2008, 05:01:10 AM »
"Hmm, we had luftwobbles explaining the superior quality of the LW stock as well as quantity. but, that's...them."

well, if you are talking about C3 fuel the point probably was that the pressure performance was better than the octane rating would indicate.

I found this, altough I'm not sure if it is 100% correct but it presents another view on the subject:

http://www.efdlk.com/Auto/gasoline.htm

-C+
Logged
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2008, 06:38:42 AM »
Not a bad over view Charge. Thanks.

But:
However, German aviation engines were of the direct-fuel-injection type, and could use methanol-water injection and nitrous oxide injection, which gave 50% more engine power for five minutes of dogfight.

The Allies used ADI, aka MW50, and NO2. Iirc some Mossies used NO2. The 50% increase in engine power is a bit of an exaggeration.
Logged

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #12 on: June 18, 2008, 03:37:31 PM »
Mossie on steroids? That would explain some of their performance legend!
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 Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #13 on: June 19, 2008, 02:58:24 AM »
"The 50% increase in engine power is a bit of an exaggeration.

Yeah, I don't know where people get this kind of figures and why they put them up as facts. To anybody who knows about engines the 50% figure should look a bit suspicious.

There is a document about allies analyzing German avgas properties but I could not find it. IIRC the rich mixture octane rating was considered too in that document but I don't recall it being as good as 130 octane fuel.

-C+
Logged
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6863
Re: German vs. American
« Reply #14 on: June 19, 2008, 08:40:36 AM »
A couple of links I have Charge

http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/Tom%20Reels/Linked/A5464/A5464-0638-0654%20Item%206A.pdf

http://www.fischer-tropsch.org/primary_documents/gvt_reports/USNAVY/tech_rpt_145_45/rpt_145_45_sec2.htm#Composition%20and%20Specifications

Got to thinking afterwards. What was the power output at altitude? If NO2 was used, I have seen a 2-300hp gain. Still not 50%, I would suspect.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up
« previous next »