PDA

View Full Version : You May find this interesting.... Spitfire VB Verses FW 190A Series fly off comparison results.



Taylortony
03-08-2004, 11:19 AM
I found it on the web copied it to read and promptly lost the web link when my pc crashed http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif But this is the article. If anyone knows the link let me know so i can credit it, but a lot of you seem to like this stuff so i have posted it here for you http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


In early 1942 RAF fighters first encountered the Focke-Wulf 190 in numbers, and it became evident that the formidable German fighter was overwhelmingly superior in performance to the then current variant of Spitfire, the Mk VB. The Mark IX Spitfire was developed as an emergency response to this crisis.

SPITFIRE VB VERSUS FW 190A
Theaccount below is taken from the comparative trial of the Spitfire VB with the [captured] Focke-Wulf 190, flown by the Air Fighting Development Unit at Duxford in July 1942.
TheFW190 was compared with a Spitfire VB from an operational squadron, for speed and all-round manoeuvrability at heights up to 25,000 feet.
The FW 190 is superior in speed at all heights, and the approximate differences are as follows -

At 1,000 ft the FW 190 is 25-30 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 3,000 ft the FW 190 is 30-35 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 5,000 ft the FW 190 is 25 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 9,000 ft the FW 190 is 25-30 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 15,000 ft the FW 190 is 20 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 18,000 ft the FW 190 is 20 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 21,000 ft the FW 190 is 20-25 mph faster than the Spitfire VB

Climb:The climb of the FW 190 is superior to that of the Spitfire VB at all heights.

The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper. Under maximum continuous climbing conditions the climb of the FW 190 is about 450 ft/min better up to 25,000'. With both aircraft flying at high cruising speed and then pulling up into a climb, the superior climb of the FW 190 is even more marked. When both aircraft are pulled up into a climb from a dive, the FW 190 draws away very rapidly and the pilot of the Spitfire has no hope of catching it.

Dive: Comparative dives between the two aircraft have shown that the FW 190 can leave the Spitfire with ease, particularly during the initial stages.

Manoeuvrability. The manoeuvrability of the FW 190 is better than that of the Spitfire VB except in turning circles, when the Spitfire can quite easily out-turn it. The FW 190 has better acceleration under all conditions
of flight and this must obviously be most useful during combat.

When the FW 190 was in a turn and was attacked by the Spitfire, the superior rate of roll enabled it to flick into a diving turn in the opposite direction. The pilot of the Spitfire found great difficulty in following this manoeuvre and even when prepared for it, was seldom able to allow the correct deflection. A dive from this manoeuvre enabled the FW 190 to draw away from the Spitfire which was then forced to break off the attack.
Several flights were carried out to ascertain the best evasive manoeuvres to adopt if 'bounced'. It was found that if the Spitfire was cruising at low speed and was 'bounced' by the FW 190, it was easily caught even if the FW 190 was sighted when well out of range, and the Spitfire was then forced to take avoiding action by using its superiority in turning circles. If on the other hand the Spitfire was flying at maximum continuous cruising and was 'bounced' under the same conditions, it had a reasonable chance of avoiding being caught by opening the throttle and going into a shallow dive, providing the FW 190 was seen in time. This forced the FW 190 into a stern chase, and although it eventually caught the Spitfire, it took some time and as a result was drawn a considerable distance away from its base. This is a particularly useful method of evasion for the Spitfire if it is 'bounced' when returning from a sweep. This manoeuvre has been carried out during recent operations and has been successful on several occasions.
Ifthe Spitfire VB is 'bounced' it is thought unwise to evade by diving steeply, as the FW 190 will have little difficulty in catching up owing to its superiority in the dive.

The above trials have shown that the Spitfire VB must cruise at high speed when in an area where enemy fighters can be expected. It will then, in addition to lessening the chances of being successfully 'bounced', have a better chance of catching the FW 190, particularly if it has the advantage of surprise.

InJuly 1942 a Spitfire IX was flown in a comparative trial against a Focke-Wulf 190A which had fallen into British hands when its pilot landed by mistake at Pembrey RAF base at in Wales. The trial showed that there was a remarkable similarity in performance. The following are extracts from the official report.

SPITFIRE IX VERSUS FW 190A
TheFW190 was compared with a fully operational Spitfire IX for speed and manoeuvrability at heights up to 25,000 feet [7620 metres].

At most heights the Spitfire IX is slightly superior in speed to the FW190 -
the approximate differences in speed are as follows:

At 2,000 ft [610 m] the FW 190 is 7-8 mph [11-13 km/hr] faster than the Spitfire
At 5,000 ft [1524 m] the FW 190 and the Spitfire are approximately the same
At 8,000 ft [2440 m] the Spitfire IX is 8 mph [13 km/hr] faster than the FW 190
At 15,000 ft [4573 m] the Spitfire IX is 5 mph [8 km/hr] faster than the FW 190
At 18,000 ft [5488 m] the FW 190 is 3 mph [5 km/hr] faster than the Spitfire IX
At 21,000 ft [6400 m] the FW 190 and the Spitfire are approximately the same
At 25,000 ft [7622 m] the Spitfire IX is 5-7 mph [8-11 km/hr] faster than the FW 190


Climb: During comparative climbs at various heights up to 23,000 feet [7012 metres], with both aircraft flying under maximum continuous climbing conditions, little difference was found between the two aircraft although on the whole the Spitfire was slightly better.

Above 22,000 feet [6707 m] the climb of the FW 190 is falling off rapidly, whereas the climb of the Spitfire IX is increasing.

Dive: The FW 190 is faster than the Spitfire IX in a dive, particularly during the initial stage. This superiority is not as marked as with the Spitfire VB.

Manoeuvrability: The FW 190 is more manoeuvrable than the Spitfire IX except in turning circles.
The superior rate of roll of the FW 190 enabled it to avoid the Spitfire IX by turning over into a diving turn in the opposite direction.

The Spitfire IX's worst heights for fighting the FW 190 were between 18,000 and 22,000 feet [5486-6707m] and also below 3,000 feet [914m].

The initial acceleration of the FW 190 is better than that of the Spitfire IX under all conditions of flight, except in level flight at altitudes where the Spitfire has a speed advantage.

The general impression of the pilots involved in the trials is that the Spitfire Mark IX compares well with the FW 190. Providing the Spitfire IX has the initiative, it undoubtedly stands a good chance of shooting down the FW 190.

[This message was edited by Taylortony on Mon March 08 2004 at 10:30 AM.]

Taylortony
03-08-2004, 11:19 AM
I found it on the web copied it to read and promptly lost the web link when my pc crashed http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif But this is the article. If anyone knows the link let me know so i can credit it, but a lot of you seem to like this stuff so i have posted it here for you http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


In early 1942 RAF fighters first encountered the Focke-Wulf 190 in numbers, and it became evident that the formidable German fighter was overwhelmingly superior in performance to the then current variant of Spitfire, the Mk VB. The Mark IX Spitfire was developed as an emergency response to this crisis.

SPITFIRE VB VERSUS FW 190A
Theaccount below is taken from the comparative trial of the Spitfire VB with the [captured] Focke-Wulf 190, flown by the Air Fighting Development Unit at Duxford in July 1942.
TheFW190 was compared with a Spitfire VB from an operational squadron, for speed and all-round manoeuvrability at heights up to 25,000 feet.
The FW 190 is superior in speed at all heights, and the approximate differences are as follows -

At 1,000 ft the FW 190 is 25-30 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 3,000 ft the FW 190 is 30-35 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 5,000 ft the FW 190 is 25 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 9,000 ft the FW 190 is 25-30 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 15,000 ft the FW 190 is 20 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 18,000 ft the FW 190 is 20 mph faster than the Spitfire VB
At 21,000 ft the FW 190 is 20-25 mph faster than the Spitfire VB

Climb:The climb of the FW 190 is superior to that of the Spitfire VB at all heights.

The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper. Under maximum continuous climbing conditions the climb of the FW 190 is about 450 ft/min better up to 25,000'. With both aircraft flying at high cruising speed and then pulling up into a climb, the superior climb of the FW 190 is even more marked. When both aircraft are pulled up into a climb from a dive, the FW 190 draws away very rapidly and the pilot of the Spitfire has no hope of catching it.

Dive: Comparative dives between the two aircraft have shown that the FW 190 can leave the Spitfire with ease, particularly during the initial stages.

Manoeuvrability. The manoeuvrability of the FW 190 is better than that of the Spitfire VB except in turning circles, when the Spitfire can quite easily out-turn it. The FW 190 has better acceleration under all conditions
of flight and this must obviously be most useful during combat.

When the FW 190 was in a turn and was attacked by the Spitfire, the superior rate of roll enabled it to flick into a diving turn in the opposite direction. The pilot of the Spitfire found great difficulty in following this manoeuvre and even when prepared for it, was seldom able to allow the correct deflection. A dive from this manoeuvre enabled the FW 190 to draw away from the Spitfire which was then forced to break off the attack.
Several flights were carried out to ascertain the best evasive manoeuvres to adopt if 'bounced'. It was found that if the Spitfire was cruising at low speed and was 'bounced' by the FW 190, it was easily caught even if the FW 190 was sighted when well out of range, and the Spitfire was then forced to take avoiding action by using its superiority in turning circles. If on the other hand the Spitfire was flying at maximum continuous cruising and was 'bounced' under the same conditions, it had a reasonable chance of avoiding being caught by opening the throttle and going into a shallow dive, providing the FW 190 was seen in time. This forced the FW 190 into a stern chase, and although it eventually caught the Spitfire, it took some time and as a result was drawn a considerable distance away from its base. This is a particularly useful method of evasion for the Spitfire if it is 'bounced' when returning from a sweep. This manoeuvre has been carried out during recent operations and has been successful on several occasions.
Ifthe Spitfire VB is 'bounced' it is thought unwise to evade by diving steeply, as the FW 190 will have little difficulty in catching up owing to its superiority in the dive.

The above trials have shown that the Spitfire VB must cruise at high speed when in an area where enemy fighters can be expected. It will then, in addition to lessening the chances of being successfully 'bounced', have a better chance of catching the FW 190, particularly if it has the advantage of surprise.

InJuly 1942 a Spitfire IX was flown in a comparative trial against a Focke-Wulf 190A which had fallen into British hands when its pilot landed by mistake at Pembrey RAF base at in Wales. The trial showed that there was a remarkable similarity in performance. The following are extracts from the official report.

SPITFIRE IX VERSUS FW 190A
TheFW190 was compared with a fully operational Spitfire IX for speed and manoeuvrability at heights up to 25,000 feet [7620 metres].

At most heights the Spitfire IX is slightly superior in speed to the FW190 -
the approximate differences in speed are as follows:

At 2,000 ft [610 m] the FW 190 is 7-8 mph [11-13 km/hr] faster than the Spitfire
At 5,000 ft [1524 m] the FW 190 and the Spitfire are approximately the same
At 8,000 ft [2440 m] the Spitfire IX is 8 mph [13 km/hr] faster than the FW 190
At 15,000 ft [4573 m] the Spitfire IX is 5 mph [8 km/hr] faster than the FW 190
At 18,000 ft [5488 m] the FW 190 is 3 mph [5 km/hr] faster than the Spitfire IX
At 21,000 ft [6400 m] the FW 190 and the Spitfire are approximately the same
At 25,000 ft [7622 m] the Spitfire IX is 5-7 mph [8-11 km/hr] faster than the FW 190


Climb: During comparative climbs at various heights up to 23,000 feet [7012 metres], with both aircraft flying under maximum continuous climbing conditions, little difference was found between the two aircraft although on the whole the Spitfire was slightly better.

Above 22,000 feet [6707 m] the climb of the FW 190 is falling off rapidly, whereas the climb of the Spitfire IX is increasing.

Dive: The FW 190 is faster than the Spitfire IX in a dive, particularly during the initial stage. This superiority is not as marked as with the Spitfire VB.

Manoeuvrability: The FW 190 is more manoeuvrable than the Spitfire IX except in turning circles.
The superior rate of roll of the FW 190 enabled it to avoid the Spitfire IX by turning over into a diving turn in the opposite direction.

The Spitfire IX's worst heights for fighting the FW 190 were between 18,000 and 22,000 feet [5486-6707m] and also below 3,000 feet [914m].

The initial acceleration of the FW 190 is better than that of the Spitfire IX under all conditions of flight, except in level flight at altitudes where the Spitfire has a speed advantage.

The general impression of the pilots involved in the trials is that the Spitfire Mark IX compares well with the FW 190. Providing the Spitfire IX has the initiative, it undoubtedly stands a good chance of shooting down the FW 190.

[This message was edited by Taylortony on Mon March 08 2004 at 10:30 AM.]

WUAF_Boxer
03-08-2004, 01:01 PM
Thanks for the info. I wonder what A model was used in the tests.

HARD_Sarge
03-08-2004, 01:44 PM
hehe
I love this part

This is a particularly useful method of evasion for the Spitfire if it is 'bounced' when returning from a sweep. This manoeuvre has been carried out during recent operations and has been successful on several occasions.

yea, run away

Ihave seen that report before, but I forget were, I thought it was a A4 or A5 ?

also, it got to be taken with a grain of salt, the plane was flown over and over again, and the spark plugs got very bad on it(I think the rest of the story tells about the trouble they had with this plane and later tests)

but it shows why the standard move by the GE was a split S

HARD_Sarge

sfbaytf
03-08-2004, 01:53 PM
The Above mentioned stuff was taken from a book I mentioned yesterday called "fighter Aircraft-Combat Development in World War 2" By Alfred Price. There are more sections on the P-51, Zero, Lightning, FW-190 and Vampire and how they stacked up to potential opponents.

UncleVanya2001
03-08-2004, 01:56 PM
Cripes, no wonder I been getting my *** kicked in the Spit. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif

Fillmore
03-08-2004, 02:46 PM
"The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper."

This struck me as very strange. What do they mean "approximately"? Il-2 compare shows 275 as best climb speed for A-4 (pretty close to the 280 that everyone seems to agree on), while for the spit it show 225.

Could it be this comparison was done at a higher than optimal speed for the Spitfire? This would make sense in terms of comparisons of combat performance (where you wouldn't want to climb at such a low airspeed).

p1ngu666
03-08-2004, 05:27 PM
some say the 190 was overboosted

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

hop2002
03-08-2004, 05:36 PM
The Fw 190 in these tests was Arnim Faber's 190 A3.

It had been derated, like all A3s, from 1.42 ata to 1.35 ata, but the British ignored that and ran it at 1.42 ata for short periods, and 1.35 for 30 mins.

The climbing tests were done at 1.35 ata, which is wep for an A3 or some A4s, and climb and combat for late A4s and A5 onwards.

The Spit climbing tests were done at 9 lbs boost, 2850 rpm, which is a 1 hour rating in the Spit.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>This struck me as very strange. What do they mean "approximately"? Il-2 compare shows 275 as best climb speed for A-4 (pretty close to the 280 that everyone seems to agree on), while for the spit it show 225.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Best climb speed for the Spit V was 270 km/h at sea level, rising with altitude (ie 270 km/h IAS)

See http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/w3134.html

The main page for the site is http://www.fourthfightergroup.com/eagles/spittest.html and it's well worth checkingout if you haven't already.

EPP-Gibbs
03-08-2004, 05:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fillmore:
"The best speeds for climbing are approximately the same, but the angle of the FW 190 is considerably steeper."

This struck me as very strange. What do they mean "approximately"? Il-2 compare shows 275 as best climb speed for A-4 (pretty close to the 280 that everyone seems to agree on), while for the spit it show 225.

Could it be this comparison was done at a higher than optimal speed for the Spitfire? This would make sense in terms of comparisons of combat performance (where you wouldn't want to climb at such a low airspeed).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

what they mean is that when the real, experienced, capable test pilots flew the real actual planes, they found that the speeds were approximately the same....The Spitfire, being an aircraft the RAE were extremely familiar with was rather unlikey to have been flown incorrectly for the test in question, don't you think.

Or is the computer programmed sim some 60 years later, written by people who've never flown said aircraft right, and the test pilots, somehow, wrong?

I know where I'd put my money...

If I had all the money I'd spent on drink..I'd spend it on drink!

horseback
03-08-2004, 05:47 PM
If the FW was the one landed in Wales in June 1942, by Oblt Arnim Faber, then it was an A-3. I don't think it was a regular rest stop for JG 2, but I could be mistaken.

Faber apparently got 'turned around' during a dogfight and landed at Pembrey thinking he was in France. One report had him just buttoning his pants back up from relieving himself by the tail of the aircraft as the RAF Officer of the Day drove up waving an enormous Webley. His mortification could only have been more complete if he'd been caught in mid-stream...

cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

WOLFMondo
03-08-2004, 05:53 PM
Well the VB was outclassed by the A series and we all new that but I'd like to see a comparison between later version of both planes as thats from 1942.

Maybe a late war IX, XIV or F.24 vs A8/9 or D9 comparison would be interesting. Who knows, we might see a couple of them in the next patch.

Wolfgaming.net. Where the Gameplay is teamplay (http://www.wolfgaming.net)

EPP-Gibbs
03-08-2004, 06:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WOLFMondo:
Well the VB was outclassed by the A series and we all new that but I'd like to see a comparison between later version of both planes as thats from 1942.

Maybe a late war IX, XIV or F.24 vs A8/9 or D9 comparison would be interesting. Who knows, we might see a couple of them in the next patch.

http://www.wolfgaming.net<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There were many variants of both FW190, and Spitfire, but the general consensus is that the pure fighter variants of the Spitfire had the measure of the corresponding FW190's after 1942 (MkXI onwards).

If I had all the money I'd spent on drink..I'd spend it on drink!