PDA

View Full Version : FW190 question



VW-IceFire
01-26-2010, 10:38 PM
I have a question for some of the more knowledgeable folks out there.

I'm working on a Crimea 1944 campaign flying Yak fighters. It's been a long work in progress but things are starting to come together and I've begun working on missions again in my spare time.

So my question is... I know that there were II/SG2 FW190s present. My understanding is that they were F-3s and that the F-3 is basically the same as a A-5 with one of the U designations (the one that removes the outer cannons). So my question is... given the date of 1944 and the theater... should I be using the FW190A-5 or the A-5 1.65ATA? Which would be more historically accurate for the scenario?

Thanks!

JtD
01-26-2010, 11:31 PM
Eastern Front Fw 190 fighter bombers were equipped with an Erhöhte Notleistung system fairly early, in fact they were the first to make use of it. It allowed 1.65 ata manifold pressure in the first supercharger gear. It was later evolved to allow raised boost 1.58/1.65 ata for both gears.

I'd go with the 1.65 ata A-5.

csThor
01-26-2010, 11:36 PM
Agree with JtD. There's a very nice article on BKW 801 power settings and steps taken by BMW to enhance power output in the latest issue of the german aviation magazine "Jet & Prop" by Dietmar Herman (author of several books on the Fw 190 and Ta 152 series). BMW discovered pretty soon the advantages of C3 injection to attain higher boost pressure.

EDIT: But I have to disagree with the F-8. According to www.ww2.dk (http://www.ww2.dk) II./SG 2 did not receive its first F-8 before May 1944 and by then the unit had been evacuated to Romania.

M_Gunz
01-27-2010, 12:55 AM
Did the F series have more armor? IIRC the G series did.

Kettenhunde
01-27-2010, 04:43 AM
Eastern Front Fw 190 fighter bombers were equipped with an Erhöhte Notleistung system fairly early, in fact they were the first to make use of it. It allowed 1.65 ata manifold pressure in the first supercharger gear. It was later evolved to allow raised boost 1.58/1.65 ata for both gears.


It is not the same system nor are they related.

The 1.65ata was only used on Ground attack variants only. In that system, C3 fuel is used as an ADI like water and injected into the supercharger intake of the engine. It had an altitude restriction of 1KM or below. The C3 Einspritzung system was a primary driver in the development of the auxiliary fuselage tank as the system consumed ~222 gallons per hour.

The system for fighters was a pure manifold pressure increase and no additional ADI was required.

Both methods increase power but Erhöhte Notleistung für Jager has nothing to do with C3 Einspritzung.

Only the F series and the Sturmjagers variants had additional armor. The A, F, and G series all had different engine variations.

Sort of like a Lycoming O-360 ranges in power from 160 hp to 200hp in over 160 different types.

JtD
01-27-2010, 05:31 AM
Originally posted by csThor:
EDIT: But I have to disagree with the F-8. According to www.ww2.dk (http://www.ww2.dk) II./SG 2 did not receive its first F-8 before May 1944 and by then the unit had been evacuated to Romania.

They had 17 F-8's on May 1st, 1944. So they got them during April. You're right that it didn't matter much in the Crimea campaign. Since it was irrelevant for the question asked, I edited my comment out again before you edited your post. Sorry for that confusion.

csThor
01-27-2010, 08:59 AM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
The 1.65ata was only used on Ground attack variants only. In that system, C3 fuel is used as an ADI like water and injected into the supercharger intake of the engine. It had an altitude restriction of 1KM or below. The C3 Einspritzung system was a primary driver in the development of the auxiliary fuselage tank as the system consumed ~222 gallons per hour.


Not according to the article I mentioned. At first it was intended to boost the performance of the ground-pounders, but soon the pilots of EKdo 25 (testing various new weapons against the US heavies) discovered that C3 injection also stimulated performance in the second loader gear and so BMW allowed it for the normal fighters (according to report No. 16 of EKdo 25, dated Dec 16 1943, the effect was measurable up to 8000m!). It was officially allowed by January 20 1944 but limited to 10 minutes of use at a time. There are, however, no sources available to discern how often it was used on the front in the end.

What you mean (Erhöhte Notleistung) only appeared from July 1944 on. Here they simply upped boost to 1.42ata as Start- und Notleistung and 1.58ata (1st gear) or 1.65ata (2nd gear) as Sondernotleistung (a Focke Wulf term, first time I heard it outside of the MW-50 topic).

Source: "Jet & Prop" issue 1/2010, article by Dietmar Hermann, pg 24 - 30

Kettenhunde
01-27-2010, 09:50 AM
Not according to the article I mentioned.


The article is wrong then or you have misunderstood it.

In fact, Focke Wulf not only met with BMW engineers to clarify this, they published supplemental instructions.


soon the pilots of EKdo 25 (testing various new weapons against the US heavies) discovered that C3 injection also stimulated performance in the second loader gear and so BMW allowed it for the normal fighters (according to report No. 16 of EKdo 25, dated Dec 16 1943, the effect was measurable up to 8000m!).

I have that same document and that is not the impression I get from it all. It was tested and did not harm the engine. They took it up to altitude to see if it would harm the engine but it certainly did not increase the power at that altitude. They even ran flew it at 1.8 ata.

C3 Einspritzung greatly degrades the power available above altitudes of 1Km which is why BMW did not clear it.

There is nothing in common between the two systems.

http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/2375/cina.jpg (http://img691.imageshack.us/i/cina.jpg/)

Here is one of MANY instructions BMW had to issue to clarify this as it was a misconception even in the Luftwaffe.

http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/7016/enforfighters.jpg (http://img407.imageshack.us/i/enforfighters.jpg/)

Despite the fact it was clearly written in the Pilots Operating Instructions:

http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/9962/pohinstructionsforc3inj.jpg (http://img27.imageshack.us/i/pohinstructionsforc3inj.jpg/)

You cannot even mount the C3 Einstpritzung system on a fighter variant of the Focke Wulf FW190. The fittings and peripherals are different.

The BMW801D2 engines are set up differently between the variants.

That is not to say that the engine was not tested to manifold pressures far exceeding the allowed clearances for service units.

Jumoschwanz
01-27-2010, 10:23 AM
Just use the 190F that is in the sim.

csThor
01-27-2010, 11:09 AM
I didn't write the article, I just quoted it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif And the two systems are different. I never claimed the opposite (if that wasn't clear, I'm sorry http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif).

Tests with C3 injection on a normal fighter were made by EKdo 25 as reported in Report No. 9 (under 8.] Misc), Report No. 10 (under 11.] Increasing performace via C3 injection) and said Report No. 16 (I wish Hermann had posted it and not just quoted http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif - could you post it perhaps? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ).


8.) Erhöhte Notleistung des BMW 801 D

Nach Vermessung der ersten Fw 190 wurden weitere Flugzeuge umgebaut. Beanstandungen haben sich bisher nicht ergeben. Es wurde noch in 8000m Höhe eine erhöhte Leistung festgestellt.

Hermann states that Focke Wulf asked BMW for their opinion and BMW approved of it on January 20 1944 (again, says the article). <span class="ev_code_RED">Hermann does, however, also state that there are no sources to discern whether it saw use on the front or not.</span>

VW-IceFire
01-27-2010, 05:02 PM
So.... still go with the A-5 with 1.65 ATA boost... got it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kettenhunde
01-27-2010, 06:39 PM
still go with the A-5 with 1.65 ATA boost

Yes, it would need to include the ETC 50 wing racks and no outboard cannon.

With the wingracks, it would be a FW-190A5/U17 which became the FW-190F3.

Without the ETC 50 racks and no outboard weapons it is an FW-190F2 or FW-190A5/U3.


csthor,

I will dig it out for you. IIRC, this is the conclusion. EKdo 25 did both the endurance and the initial testing.

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/8578/endurancetest.jpg (http://img194.imageshack.us/i/endurancetest.jpg/)

Kettenhunde
01-27-2010, 07:00 PM
Hermann states that Focke Wulf asked BMW for their opinion and BMW approved of it on January 20 1944 (again, says the article). Hermann does, however, also state that there are no sources to discern whether it saw use on the front or not.

That timeline is off for C3 einsptritzung. I think he has confused the testing for the system for fighters with the one used for bombers.

TWO very different systems.....

Now, the fighter system was pure manifold pressure increase. That was something that cropped up from time to time.

Mysteriously, engines would appear and sometimes a whole staffle of aircraft would be "sabotaged" to run at 1.8ata.

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/8310/wrongjets.jpg (http://img41.imageshack.us/i/wrongjets.jpg/)

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/8485/overboosting2.jpg (http://img694.imageshack.us/i/overboosting2.jpg/)


BMW forbid such acts of sabotage.

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/7899/overboosting.jpg (http://img51.imageshack.us/i/overboosting.jpg/)

csThor
01-27-2010, 10:04 PM
Eh ... again two pairs of shoes. The Ladedruckerhöhung didn't appear until 1944, what I quoted was the C3 injection for Jabo/Jaborei that was tested on Fw 190 of EKdo 25 carrying special anti-bomber weaponry (such as WfGr 21 or gunpods) in the 2nd half of 1943. But we both have made our points ... I'm waiting if you can dig out the report. Thx! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kettenhunde
01-29-2010, 07:58 AM
I posted the page, left it up for 24 hours and got no response from you.

It is not my place to provide documents to your game.

csThor
01-29-2010, 08:13 AM
Sorry ... time zone differences. Don't see everything at work (stupid filters). http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Thx for looking it up and posting, though. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kettenhunde
01-29-2010, 08:32 AM
Well thank you for the quick response after I removed it!

csThor
01-29-2010, 08:36 AM
Hey I just got home from work and fitness studio. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Okay the case is closed. No need to beat the poor horse anymore, okay? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Kettenhunde
01-29-2010, 08:38 AM
Ok...out to pasture with it.