Replace 190a8 with a9!

[Guppy35]

Don't give me that crap Guppy... WMaker's taking a A8/R8 and claiming it's a stock A8 weight listing. The weight issue is a noticable issue. 100kg adds up. The outboard Mk108 weights are wrong (too heavy) and the outboard MG151 weights are wrong (too light), and overall the performance suffers.

Please don't mix me up with the luftwhiners asking for a super Fw190. I just want a representative one. Either give us the ARMOR that we have the weight for, or take the weight off.

We have a mixed breed with the worst of both worlds, and you yourself have decried HTC's frankenstein mixes in the past.

It's not a whine. It's a fact. We have the weight but not the added armor. You know better and you know me better. I'm not crusading for it. I simply interjected in the recent discussions what we already know. That you have to ask me is either rhetorical and you're trying to prove a point (which I surmise) or you never actually read any of the discussions since 1999.

The question remains.  What does the AH 190A8 not do that it should?

[Krusty]

The question is facetious. It's not a matter of what it does. It's a matter of how well it does it. Compare any plane flying in the MA to any plane flying with a bomb hanging underneath it in the MA, and they're still the same plane, but one is going to handle and react better, be more responsive. Look at how much an effect a couple hundred pounds had on the P-38G. It turned it from a surprisingly "light" fighter into just another P-38. It's still a P-38. It doesn't fly any faster, climb any better, for all intents and purposes it's the same plane. The weights are just more accurate.

Please recall that I also petitioned for and got HTC to add weight to the ETC rack (130lbs). I'm not rampaging like some do for a super fast A9 variant with MW50 or GM1 or some setup that didn't exist.

[Krusty]

One thing I noticed just a moment ago is that with a tiny bit of math you can deduce exactly where the 4400kg comes from.

Seen here (already posted):
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190-a8-level-speed-13nov43.jpg

It breaks down 5 different weights for different variants. Adding 30mm outboard instead of 20mm adds 50kg. This seems to be a common agreement no matter what the engine is.

There we see the difference between a stock A8 and an A8/R2 (with 30mm outboard) is 50kg. Then look down at the lowest weight listing you will see the A8/R8, which by definition was the sturmbock with extra armor that had 30mm outboard. It is 4450kg.

Remove the 50kg (by this I mean, turn it back to 4x20mm) and you have the up-armored R8 with 4400kg weight.

That's pretty definitive proof we have a mixed version modeled in-game.


Edit: Sorry if I seem to be harping on the subject, I did just now notice this and wanted to share.

[Guppy35]

The question is facetious. It's not a matter of what it does. It's a matter of how well it does it. Compare any plane flying in the MA to any plane flying with a bomb hanging underneath it in the MA, and they're still the same plane, but one is going to handle and react better, be more responsive. Look at how much an effect a couple hundred pounds had on the P-38G. It turned it from a surprisingly "light" fighter into just another P-38. It's still a P-38. It doesn't fly any faster, climb any better, for all intents and purposes it's the same plane. The weights are just more accurate.

Please recall that I also petitioned for and got HTC to add weight to the ETC rack (130lbs). I'm not rampaging like some do for a super fast A9 variant with MW50 or GM1 or some setup that didn't exist.

OK so in the end you don't believe the 190A8 is  as responsive as it should be.

As for the 38G, you don't know it very well if you think it's just another 38

[Charge]

What caused the weight creep from A5 to A8? The difference is 300kg but if the wing was lightened from A6 onwards the weight creep from equipment is probably at least 350kg+? Anybody seen calculations on this?

-C+

[33Vortex]

The wing was not lightened, it was strengthened. Meanin, made more weight efficient for its design purposes. If anything that would mean more well suited for combat loads/stresses and damage.

[Wmaker]

Remove the 50kg (by this I mean, turn it back to 4x20mm) and you have the up-armored R8 with 4400kg weight.

That's pretty definitive proof we have a mixed version modeled in-game.

...or they used a document they had on hand at the time (1999/2000) which listed a complete weight break down (the one I posted) for the aircraft and used it?

When there's a primary source which matches with the game there's no reason to make up myths about "mixed up-armored" versions. And that weight table clearly says that if the TU-engine is installed it adds 35kg on top of the weights listed in the table not that that weight is already included. Anyone who can speak German should be able conclude that but I'll let the native speakers decide.

According to that same document (can post later if needed) the difference in the weight of the armor between standard A-8 and A-8/R8 is 111kg.

[Charge]

"The wing was not lightened, it was strengthened."

Beats me but I recall it was said that one way of battling the weight creep was to redesign the outer portion of the wing and in the process to make it accommodate a wider range of Rüstsätze.

"According to that same document (can post later if needed) the difference in the weight of the armor between standard A-8 and A-8/R8 is 111kg."

I recall that there was a different armour for the ammo box for MK108. Was it only installed for R8 or also for R2?

-C+

[Wmaker]

I'm not rampaging like some do for a super fast A9 variant with MW50 or GM1 or some setup that didn't exist.

I don't see anyone asking A-9 with MW50 or GM-1. A-9 used C3 injection just like the A-8.

[Krusty]

"The wing was not lightened, it was strengthened."

This is a false urban legend that has been perpetuated ad nauseum. The wing remained unchanged. They simple rearranged the pattern of the ribs slightly to allow for new ammo storage boxes instead of the drums for MG/FF. It was neither strengthened, longer, shorter, heavier, lighter. Every one of these is one of those urban legends going around about the A-6 wings.


Wmaker, you can't spin it that way. If they have included a stock A8 with the weight of an A8 sturmbock, but NOT added the extra armor, that is by very definition a mixed up set of standards. It's very plausible this is the data they used, but that doesn't justify its use. We had many mixed flight models including the old Spit9, the old Typhie.

We know the armor isn't modeled by comparing damage modeling of the A8 to A5 and F8. We know the weight is there when it should not be. Therefore, this A8 flight model is wrong. Doesn't matter what different parts they took to compile it, it just matters that it's wrong and needs to be fixed. It's not making up a "myth" as you claim (more inflamatory diversion from the main discussion).


Do you ignore dozens upon dozens of primary source documents which state explicitly 4300kg, ranging from 1943 to 1945, all agreeing exactly the weight for a 801D-engined A-8?

If you do, then you are deluded and this conversation can end. If you don't, then you are forced to agree, and this conversation can end. As it stands you are either trolling or intentionally inciting argument for your own kicks and grins. The evidence is conclusive.

[Torquila]

Can we haz a9?...

[Charge]

"They simple rearranged the pattern of the ribs slightly to allow for new ammo storage boxes instead of the drums for MG/FF."

Counted some rivets on some profiles I have and it seems that the outer wing remainded externally unchanged if rib position is considered, but there are changes around gunbay and inwards from there.

-C+

[bustr]

Aces High FW190-A8 Weights

Fuel 100%, no Drop Tank, 3 gun loadouts.
----------------------------------------------
2-MG, 2 - MG151\20 : 4245kg

2-MG, 4 - MG151\20 : 4391kg
Same load  25% fuel : 4046kg

2-MG, 2 - MG151\20, 2 - MK108 : 4486kg

How is 91kg significant at 100% fuel when no one with experience in the game will fight with their A8 at 100% fuel?

[Krusty]

100kg will make a difference because whatever fuel load you fly with will remain the same.


P.S. I often take 100% internal on the A8 to burn plenty of it on climbing out, and for longer missions (gives you ~30 minutes), the better to use the guns package with. Most folks that know how to fly it don't have to worry about the fuel so much. Only folks that don't know how to fly it take 25% and try to pretend it's a spit.

[bustr]

I was just wondering where Hitech got the extra 200lbs stuffed in there......what are they, or is that 91kg the wiggle weight played with by sources.

Aifcraft performance web site shows an A8 tested with the outer 20mm deleted. Weight was 4224kg. Our A8 with the outer 20mm deleted is 4245kg.

Tested A8: 4300kg - 4224kg = 76kg...Engine 801 D-2/316248

AH A8: 4391kg - 4245kg = 146kg...Engine ???

I'm confused.