Author Topic: Uber Spits (Read 1013 times)

Wilbus · « **Reply #45 on:** June 11, 2002, 02:09:15 PM »

Also Funked, I do not in ANY WAY believe LW fighters are UBER or WERE UBER. I know a hell of alot more then that about airplanes.

The Dora, I consider, together with the P51 to be amongst the best, if not the 2 best piston engine fighter ever produced.

The 109 was FAR from Uber and already by 1942 outdated. The 190 A's kept being pretty good threwout the war but only bellow 20k, where most US fighters were or par with them.

Spitfire was a terrific airplane, as good as P51D and 190 D9 most likely although I don't consider it be be just as good.

So cut out your BS about some people (meaning me) think all LW planes were UBER, that's just another presumption (just as I presume you ment me) about something you know S*** about.

funkedup · « **Reply #46 on:** June 11, 2002, 02:19:28 PM »

OK I apologize for the remarks that offended you. The thread getting hijacked and you dismissing my knowledge made me grumpy and I didn't handle it as well as I could have.
We are both guilty of spending more time talking about knowledge than actually attempting to prove our point with facts. I'm sorry I didn't turn the discussion in a better direction sooner.

FYI before I was in Northolt Wing I was in JG 5 and did a lot of research on Fw 190, specifically MW 50. I was trying to establish that it was used so I could get iEN to add it to the game. Jochen and Naudet and some other guys were doing a similar search. I ended up with about 20 books on the 190 and I think Jochen did the same.

Also in this search I ended up going to the USAF museum archives and copying one of their reports on the Fw 190. I'm the guy who scanned and put on the web the "F-TR-1102-ND" report which pops up from time to time.

Back on topic (err at least back on hijacked topic

)

In all my searching I have never seen performance information for a Fw 190A with MW 50. Just vague claims of a 300 hp increase. No flight test data or mention of it in manuals for the airplane. German pilots never mention it being used. RAF And USAAF evaluated many Fw 190A and they never found any MW 50 system.

Here's what I've seen in books:
1. Some books say that all Fw 190A after the A-4 had MW 50.
2. Some other books say MW 50 was only on the Fw 190A-8 and was stored in the aft tank.
3. And a few other books say the tank on the A-8 had GM-1, not MW 50.

Which story to believe?

Gatt sent me a translated manual for the Fw 190A-8 and it says the tank was used for fuel or GM-1. And it includes information (and performance curves) for supplemental fuel injection, overboost, and GM-1, but nothing at all about MW 50. So that's how I formed my opinion.

(PS I know quite well about GM-1 testing on the Fw 190A-5 and I guessed that you might have confused it with MW 50.)

funkedup · « **Reply #47 on:** June 11, 2002, 02:20:18 PM »

Quote

So cut out your BS about some people (meaning me) think all LW planes were UBER, that's just another presumption (just as I presume you ment me) about something you know S*** about.

I didn't actually mean to infer that about you personally. Sorry.

Wilbus · « **Reply #48 on:** June 11, 2002, 02:38:34 PM »

Rgr funked, guess I'll go out and do even more research then, not sure I've seen the chart you're talking about nor do I have the luxury to go and visit any achives since I live in Sweden.

My applogize for my harsh language aswell, I got pretty pissed off when (it seemed directed to me) being called a nazi lover as so many other people have done just because you don't agree on a LW plane.

My Applogize! (however that is spelled) and thanks for (robarly) correcting me

!

funkedup · « **Reply #49 on:** June 11, 2002, 02:52:25 PM »

Well I could be wrong.
That's usually how I learn. I start out being wrong and making an bellybutton of myself, then somebody shows me the correct answer.

I don't know if those authors actually love Nazis but I think a lot of them know that some of the fantasy stuff sells books. Of course this is true of guys writing about Allied stuff too. Martin Caidin comes to mind.

Wilbus · « **Reply #50 on:** June 11, 2002, 03:16:21 PM »

Rgr that funked, there are some highly believable though (Alfred Price very very good, doens't mention MW50 much though).

I only try and go with books from respected publishers ("SHIFFER" EXELENT PUBLISHER).

And yeah, you notice (bought a 109 book a while ago) that many authors have the wrong things printed down in their books, sometimes VERY wrong, it's sad really.

Quote

That's usually how I learn. I start out being wrong and making an bellybutton of myself, then somebody shows me the correct answer.

I feel struck!

Anyway, any information you have about the 190 I'd love to have and know about

Btw, do you happen to know where I can write (in the US) to get the hold of war time reports and such, I was told in anotehr thread but forgot where.

OH!! PS. Bring the Spitfire Mk 8 to AH

funkedup · « **Reply #51 on:** June 11, 2002, 03:23:53 PM »

Quote

I feel struck!

I dunno, look what Butch posted in the other thread. I think I might be an bellybutton once again.

funkedup · « **Reply #52 on:** June 11, 2002, 03:29:02 PM »

I think Widewing is the guy to ask about US archives (National Archives and Smithsonian Archives).

MW knows well how to get stuff from the UK archives (PRO).

Post a thread asking those guys for info and I'm sure they can give you contact info.

I went to the USAF Museum archives but they have been closed since the archivist retired. It seems they haven't found a replacement for him or they can't afford one. Their web page is here: http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/mua.htm

Wilbus · « **Reply #53 on:** June 11, 2002, 04:33:32 PM »

I'll be their achivest for some bred and water, enough to keep me alive

whgates3 · « **Reply #54 on:** June 12, 2002, 01:07:38 AM »

...not sure calling a spit "uber" is appropriate...maybe "smashing" or "topping" would be more fitting.
Also, i think, as a perk, one should be able to fly as Dougls Bader, which would give you the ability to pull a few extra Gs before blackout (a definite PRO), but it would be harder to bail out (W/C Bader lost a leg - for the 3rd time - doing so. this could be considered a CON). Also, if you're Bader you should be able to score perks by frightening 109s.

laz · « **Reply #55 on:** June 12, 2002, 12:09:09 PM »

I clean my toilet with spits.. Especially 14's

mw · « **Reply #56 on:** June 12, 2002, 02:29:40 PM »

The whole MW-50 use on 190s seems clear as mud. Now on the other hand the use of 150 Octane fuel, designed also to increase boost limits at low altitudes, is quite alot clearer. It can be shown to have been used operationally on LFIXs and Spit XIVs and the performance data is available. The documentation for operational use and performance using 150 Octane fuel in Spit IXs can be found in this thread in fact. I don't see how anyone could argue for MW-50 in 190s and be against 150 Octane in the Spits. Is that a "gaming" thing? "Perk" high boost on Spits but not MW-50 equipped 190s? Huh?

Wilbus · « **Reply #57 on:** June 12, 2002, 02:38:44 PM »

The reason high boost spits may (and ONLY MAY) need to be perked is that they might be overused. A fast 190 will never be overused as you see with the Dora, it's fast but harder to fly and get kills in then most planes (not meaning harder to stay alive in).

But a spitfire with a 370mph speed at the deck would outclass most other things, it would be an LA7 with a turnrate of a Spitfire Mk9 (or near).

Only reason to perk one of those would be overuse, IMO the spit 14, nor the TA152 should be perked in the MA.

Angus · « **Reply #58 on:** June 12, 2002, 04:26:14 PM »

You are right Wilbus.
One thing about the Perks though. Remember how what used to be the over-usage of the CHOG dropped by putting a humble 5 perk points price tag on it? I think this should be used a bit more, and could prove useful to bring in the whole spectrum of Spits without filling the whole arena with uber-Spits.
And maybe the N1K2? La7? 5 Perks?