Pyro, can please this be solved?

[juzz]

Anyway, I think AH has it right. For them to stuff this up would require making the Fw 190A 3d model incorrect in a noticeable way. Eg: either the nose would have an incorrect profile, or the wings would be mounted with incorrect angle of incidence.

Yep - according to my measurement, from the default pilot head position the angle from the centre of the gunsight to the top of the reflector is 4.93º(assuming the default FOV in AH is 90º).  

[This message has been edited by juzz (edited 04-12-2001).]

[SageFIN]

 

Originally posted by juzz:
Yep - according to my measurement, from the default pilot head position the angle from the centre of the gunsight to the top of the reflector is 4.93º(assuming the default FOV in AH is 90º).  

Err... umm shouldn't you measure the AoA relative to the centre of the gunsight and the horizon? And if the planes were flying with a large enough nose down attitude, shouldn't it be visible in the artificial horizon? Of course I'm assuming here that the pilot's view through the gunsight is a straight line parallel to the plane's fuselage and I really don't know if it is so.

------------------
---
SageFIN

"I think I´ll believe in Gosh instead of God.  If you don´t
 believe in Gosh too, you´ll be darned to heck."
---

[juzz]

The angle I measured is the same angle detailed in the RAE report, and it matches their figure exactly.

As for nose down angles, I don't see how it could ever be 5º, unless the wing is mounted with about +4º incidence...