FW190-A8

[Ardy123]

I have been flying both the A5 and the A8 recently, and I will say that you 'dogfight' in it to an extent. I have been able to be successful in it by getting someone to chase my 6 at high speeds, then I pull a reversal, using the fast roll rate I can easily reverse most of the time and get the shot as they overshoot. Its quick roll rate allows for sudden direction changes which are hard for others to react to. Once it gets slow, the A8 especially, becomes a wingtip stalling dump truck. It also doesn't help that its flaps don't come out until 160ish where I can get a 1 notch of flaps out at 190ish in a 109.

[MiloMorai]

They put protective armor plates over the engine. Then added 30mm to it...  That enough info?

BTW, 30mm is ~1.2".

Since you are spouting garbage, refer to this next time:

[TUK]

Exactly what are we arguing about again?

[Ruah]

Its tarted with a discussion on how great the A8 was for some people, I said I prefer the A5, most people agreed that they prefered tthe A5 because its a better dogfighter, then it was hgihlighted that the A8 puts out more lead and thats what makes it so great.  This prompted people to explain that the A8 is a bomber killer. . .which has lead to this.

[Ack-Ack]

Everything that I've read about the FW 190A-8 was that it wasn't specifically designed to the anti-bomber variant of the Focke Wulf and its increase in armor and armament was to give it a better chance of survivability and fire power against the US bomber raids.  I don't know if the A-9 was being designed as a specific bomber interceptor, don't know if the German term "assault aircraft" meant specifically as a dedicated bomber killer or meant to break up bomber formations but in any case, the idea of putting armor on leading edges of the wings on the A-9 never left the paper design stage.

If anything, I would think the Dora would be the one considered to be more of a bomber interceptor since it better performed at the altitudes the US bombers would regularly fly at then the A-8 or any of the other A models.

ack-ack

[Ack-Ack]

Nice pictures of a museum FW 190A-8.

http://www.ipmsstockholm.org/magazine/2004/10/detail_fw190a8.htm


ack-ack

[Krusty]

The Fw190A terrorized the RAF on a fighter-v-fighter level for over a year. The RAF struggled madly to get spits re-engined (producing the spit9 because the spit8 was taking too long) and the spit5s were being dominated.


P.S. The early armament of 4x MG17 was simply because the inboard guns were MG151/20 and there were problems getting the guns ready, or perhaps making enough, and the MG17 was put in as a stand-in. With only 2x MGFF guns, it was a rather weak armament, IMO. This was also the loadout for exports sent to Turkey (no MG151/20s).

It was no more designed for bomber interception than the Hurricane was in BOB. It simply shined in the role.

[Oldman731]

The Fw190A terrorized the RAF on a fighter-v-fighter level for over a year. The RAF struggled madly to get spits re-engined (producing the spit9 because the spit8 was taking too long) and the spit5s were being dominated.

Go try to dominate the Spit Vs with the 190A5 in AH.  Enjoy.

- oldman

[FLOTSOM]

Go try to dominate the Spit Vs with the 190A5 in AH.  Enjoy.

- oldman

 

reality is impossible to model........or so this is the excuse i have heard to explain things like lanstuka's, one shot pop tigers, m4's impervious to harm etc etc.....

it is what it is, but what it is, is not what it was!   


 

[BaldEagl]

it is what it is, but what it is, is not what it was! 

So you're joining Theorism or whatever his name was in his calims that the 190's are improperly modeled?  Good luck with that.

[Krusty]

Go try to dominate the Spit Vs with the 190A5 in AH.  Enjoy.

- oldman

If there are no spit9s, spit8s, spit16s, spit14s, p51ds, p47n/ms trying to pick you in the MA, the Fw190A5 would indeed dominate spit5s.

It's not the spit5 that's the problem in your average MA hop...

[Lusche]

Go try to dominate the Spit Vs with the 190A5 in AH.  Enjoy.

- oldman

Back then when there still was action in EW, I (and others) just did that. The A5 was (is) perked for a good reason. When using the A5's strengths (speed, climbrate  & roll), the Spit V did not have much chances. The nemesis for the Focke-Wulf was the (also perked) Spit IX, not V

[Ack-Ack]

Go try to dominate the Spit Vs with the 190A5 in AH.  Enjoy.

- oldman

It would not dominate the old Spitfire V, nor does it really dominate the current version of the Spitfire V but it does fair better with the current Spitfire V.

ack-ack

[Krusty]

That uber spitv was out of place. It was only here for a "short while" relative to the time before that when it was as it is now (except I think it always had 240 hizzo rds, maybe?)

Before the monster UFO (now known as spit16), the stackup against a Fw190 had the same results.

The Fw190 can dictate the fight. Run, stay, turn until you're out of E, regain E, zoom, climb, etc. In even small numbers v small numbers the Fw190 could win, and 1 v 1 the best the spitv could do is try to keep up with flat scissors, because as soon as it gave the FW an inch the FW could take off outside guns range and reposition for another attack.

[FLOTSOM]

So you're joining Theorism or whatever his name was in his calims that the 190's are improperly modeled?  Good luck with that.

actually I'm not joining anything. my point was this is a game and not rl so it cannot ever truly be the same.

do i feel that all German iron has been a touch neutered and the allied rides bumped at least a little? well personally yes i would agree with that statement. but in the end it is a game and i play it like i would any other game, with the pieces the game creator has provided.

i have started to give up thinking about WWII those who really fought it and the equipment the actually used when "playing" the game. there is not rational comparison between the two, there is no way to bring them both together mentally or to compare the truth of one with the reality of the other.

so it is what it is. but what it is is not what it was.

get it?