Flight data hog vs pony | hog vs 190

[MrSiD]

I hijacked this one from agw.. check these out:

Did any of you know about these pages? http://members.home.net/markw4/index2.html  
 http://members.home.net/markw4/FW190_F4U.html  

What I want to know is, is this a joke?

And where is the rest of it?

------------------
Skybax
328th FS ~ 352nd FG
Blue Nosed Bastards of Bodney

True or not, nevertheless interesting.
Note the 'no trim tabs' issue with 190!

[JG5_Jerry]

Note that the 190 that was used was pretty worn out.

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by JG5_Jerry:
Note that the 190 that was used was pretty worn out.

Worn out? each time they tried to climb the 190 to 33.000 feet the engine STOPPED!!

The BMW 801D on that A5 must have been a piece of crap in form of a radial engine.

Still the plane outclimbed its competitors in most of the situations, showed faster than both planes at most altitudes (clearly this is not what is seen in AH). And the report notes repeatedly the extreme simplicity of control of the Fw190, while the F4U and F6F were more complicated to work with. (In AH every plae is EXTREMELY simple to fly, with kommandogerat   )

I'd give that report partial credibility. Not full because the 190 was clearly in a poor state, and I really am surprised with the speed comparations.

Still,says something we all know. The Fw190 did everything better, or comparable, than the F6F and F4U except stallfighting or very close turning.

Still the americans preferred their rides? huhmmm   . Reminds me the 1940 tests by the RAF of a 109E4 and the Luftwaffe tests of a Spitfire...

The RAF testers concluded that the 109E was complicated to fly, and generally inferior to their Spitfire I

The LW testers (moelders included) concluded that the Spitfire I was notably inferior to the 109E4.

And we all know that both planes were equals   Morale?...depends on the tester, the final conclussion is subjective. I bet that if that comparisons had been done in Germany, the conclusion by the LW tester pilots would've been "they are good planes but the 190 is better   "

 

Note the 'no trim tabs' issue with 190!

No, no no...no "no trim tabs"...FIXED trim tabs. The groud crews fixed them for a determined speed, and there they remained. It was never a disadvantage,as you can read, because the stick forces were extremely light and so the need for trimming was almost none.

Note too that the whole tail stab section was MOVABLE, making the hole stabilizator actue as a trim tab.  


[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Yeager]

And the report notes repeatedly the extreme
simplicity of control of the Fw190, while the F4U and F6F were more complicated to work with.
====
Ram, better talk to your black cross buddies including StSanta! The LW crates are supposed to require more skill than any allied type.

LOL

Yeager

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Yeager:
Ram, better talk to your black cross buddies including StSanta! The LW crates are supposed to require more skill than any allied type.

LOL

Yeager

In this game?

Sure.

[F4UDOA]

Worn out?

How do you know if that was brand new or 2 years old? It was captured, not purchased at a used car lot. There is also a note that the F4U engine was running hot because it was running to lean. So it could have performed better as well.

Did you check the back page which tells you the horsepower and boost condition of the airplane? It matches spec 100%. Including the speed chart table. It was also slower than the F4U below 15K and was outclimbed
by the F4U at speeds below 140Knots. Best climbing speed for the F4U is 135knots. Also the F4U could out accelerate it below 15K. Not to mention that the 190 could not follow either A/C through any maneuver.

But really the question is was there combat between the two A/C? Well here is something you probably didn't know.
 

Fleet Air Arm units where created and equipped in the US, at Quonset Point or Brunswick, and then shipped to war theatres on board of escort carriers. The first Corsair unit of the FAA was No 1830 Sqdn, created on the first of June 1943, and soon operating from HMS Illustrious. At the end of the war, 19 FAA squadrons operated with the F4U. British Corsairs operated both in Europe and in the Pacific. The first, and also most important European operations were the series of attacks in April, July and August 1944 on the German battleship Tirpitz, for which Corsairs provided top cover. In the Pacific the FAA Corsair also began to operate in April 1944, participating in an attack on Sabang, and later in the attack on oil refineries at Pelambang.

Hellcat
 

The British used the F6F in significant numbers. The majority of these saw their only combat in the Pacific. However, Fleet Air Arm Hellcat I fighters achieved success against the Luftwaffe and Kriegsmarine. Royal Navy Hellcat I's (F6F-3) were involved in escorting attacks on Tirpitz from April through August 1944. One of these missions, on May 8, 1944, the Luftwaffe came up to protect the battleship. Some #800 squadron Hellcats from HMS Emperor took on the German fighters and shot down 1 Fw-190 and two Bf-109G fighters. The Hellcats suffered one loss to the Luftwaffe and another to anti-aircraft fire. RN Sub/Lt. B. Richie got the Focke-Wulf and went on to total 6 kills, becoming one of only a few Royal Navy Hellcat aces.

Looks like the Hellkitty was more than enough for the 190 or 109.

BTW, the web page those test reports comes from is mine.



[This message has been edited by F4UDOA (edited 01-12-2001).]

[jedi]

Two evenly-matched planes, performance-wise.  Given "equal" pilot skill, the victor should be the one who forces the other guy away from the areas where his plane has the advantage.

Always amazes me how some folks expect a VERY small advantage in one area or another to translate into TOTAL superiority every time in a fight, regardless of pilot skill.
And then when it DOESN'T work out that way, and the "dweeb" actually shoots you down, it's because "your" plane is undermodeled, and the other guy's is overmodeled.  Guys that think a 10 mph speed advantage or a 200 fpm climb advantage were "decisive" in combat are deluding themselves.  In a sim, ALL 190s perform exactly the same.  Guess how many of them performed identically in the real world?  

The only thing overmodeled around here is our ability to estimate our own skills  

[Jimdandy]

   

Originally posted by jedi:
Two evenly-matched planes, performance-wise.  Given "equal" pilot skill, the victor should be the one who forces the other guy away from the areas where his plane has the advantage.

Always amazes me how some folks expect a VERY small advantage in one area or another to translate into TOTAL superiority every time in a fight, regardless of pilot skill.
And then when it DOESN'T work out that way, and the "dweeb" actually shoots you down, it's because "your" plane is undermodeled, and the other guy's is overmodeled.  Guys that think a 10 mph speed advantage or a 200 fpm climb advantage were "decisive" in combat are deluding themselves.  In a sim, ALL 190s perform exactly the same.  Guess how many of them performed identically in the real world?      

The only thing overmodeled around here is our ability to estimate our own skills    

Your so very right. These planes were no different than the muscle cars of the 60's. You could grab 2 LS6 454 Chevelles off the same production run and they would both perform a little differently. Same thing with these planes. They never said the FW was worn out. They only stated there was no data on it's maintenance. There are many things that could cause the FW to have problems at 33,000ft and still be representative of it's type under that alt. They may have had a bad ignition wire or mixer adjustment that would still be working fine at lower alt. Also at approximately 35k the resistant in the insolation on standard wiring becomes insufficient to work. The engine will just shut off like you turned off the key. You can drop below that alt and you can start it back up again. They first encountered this in the P-47 I think. They had to make a special wiring insolation to prevent this from happening. The detergent factors in the German fuel might be different than the US fuel causing fouling problems under some conditions. The chemical make up of the fuel in an airplane running at those altitudes is critical. But it doesn't mean that it wouldn't run just fine at lower alts. If the engine was worn out and fouling plugs do to faulty rings or valve guides I think the would have noted the smoke. I don't think the engine was worn out. It had some minor problem like the F4. Also the fact that the engine may have been brand new wasn't thought of. Until the rings seat on a new engine you will get a little more oil consumption do to the incomplete seal cause in a plug to foul. It may not have been old at all. It may have been brand new and just needed some small adjustments in the fuel or ignition system to fix the high alt bug. Those are just a few things I can think of. I know there are some real aircraft mechanics on here that can suggest more. They may also dispute my argument but I still say that we can't say the 190 was worn out.

[This message has been edited by Jimdandy (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Vermillion]

Great observation Jedi  

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[Beurling]

Those ls6's Had too small fuel pumps on them.

Hurt there et's real bad. Replace those fuel pumps and they gained alot of power.


EYE

[funked]

Interesting that the "worn out" 190 had about the same performance as in German tests...

[lazs]

Yep funked the 190 was a very healthy example indeed.   If you look at other Navy docs you will see that the Hogs performed about how you would expect also and.... Other comparisson test put the F6 in the same light.   Unless you are of spanish extraction you should be able to see a somewhat clear pattern developing.

Oh, and jedi... quit flappin your gums and dancing around the edges and get over here.   Yer like a little kid with his nose pressed against the toy store window.... cum'on we know ya wanna...
lazs

[This message has been edited by lazs (edited 01-12-2001).]

[Hangtime]

 

Always amazes me how some folks expect a VERY small advantage in one area or another to translate into TOTAL superiority every time in a fight, regardless of pilot skill. --Jedi

Right on.  

I wonder if any of us give a damn what the hell those schmoes 50 years ago had to say about the F4U thats droppin on yer bellybutton at 400mph?? Yah gotta deal with the ones the folks here at AH are makin now, here in this sim!

The F4's I'M dealin with now in my pony can turn better than me and most of 'em can slice me to ribbons with one snapshot. THATS a fact.  

The 'worn out 190??' LOL!! dammo, even if the ones they made 50 years ago could warp roll (which I doubt) the ones the LW drivers get here in AH can...Truth?

I'm dealin with these planes here in AH.. and that test pilot 50 years ago flyin that test plane would get his butt blown outta the sky in 15 seconds in AH. Thats a fact too.  

Sheesh; "McFly!! McFly!!! Anybody home in there McFly???"

These FM's are pretty good imho.. ain't found anything better.. has anybody else?

 

Hang
 

[RAM]

 

Originally posted by Hangtime:
The 'worn out 190??' LOL!! dammo, even if the ones they made 50 years ago could warp roll (which I doubt) the ones the LW drivers get here in AH can...Truth?

All I know is that, according with NACA tests, the AH's 190 rolls 15-20 degrees/second slower than in real life.

while almost every other plane in AH rolls faster according to the same tests  

Be careful about what you wish for, hangtime  

[This message has been edited by RAM (edited 01-12-2001).]

[AKSeaWulfe]

I don't know.. the 190A5 is a very competent competitor in AH. Hard to fly? Hardly. It has some of the nicest flight characteristics of the planes within the game. I've been in 1:1 dogfights with F4Us on the deck and sure they turn quick but they can't keep the vertical fight going with the 190A5. It's all about how you use the strengths of your given plane vs the weaknesses/strenghts of the enemy's plane.

According to what guys here seem to think the F4F3 would be horribly outclassed and would be cannon fodder for just about every late war plane. You'd be surprised what a competent pilot with a good knowledge of how to fly can do with even the most obsolete or disadvantaged planes within any game.

Flight tests are worthless to me. They don't tell you the whole story, only how the plane performed in relation to another plane. You don't win a dogfight through running away, or climbing away.. you win it through using a combination of the plane's abilities and your brain to figure out the best manuevers to win the fight.

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but I'm a little more than unnerved when these flight tests come up and someone proclaims that x plane should beat y plane simply because of the flight tests.
-SW