PDA

View Full Version : FW-190 for dummies?



TeufelHund84
09-09-2006, 10:09 PM
Just wondering about this excellent plane; does the a/c essentially get better and more desirable to pick with each new model?

For example, the 109F4 was widely considered by many to be the best all around performer versus many later variants.

But the same does not seem to apply to the FWs. To me it seems like if the latest model is available, take it. I'm strictly talking about the fighters here, not the high-alt interceptors including the Ta-152 or the Jabo version as well.

JG1_Pilot
09-09-2006, 10:46 PM
Almost all the models get an speed boost and better high altitude performance. The best model is the dora. Fw-190D-1945. I fly this plane online and its great. The best tactics for this palne are hit and run. Fly high 2000-4000 meters. Spot yuor prey and dive, destroy yuor prey, then fly back up. If u stay and fight yuor going to be prey for a spitfire or a la-7.

VW-IceFire
09-09-2006, 10:46 PM
For the most part yes...improvements with each model and picking the latest version is proably best.

There are a few exceptions.

In the choice between the FW190A-6 and the FW190A-8...it depends on what you want to do. The A-6 is a better fighter as its lighter and more agile. The A-8 is a better interceptor with more speed and potential for heavy cannon armament.

Also between the FW190D-9 1944 and 1945 models...the 1944 version is overall slightly lighter and faster than the 1945 version. The 1945 version adds the MW50 gear to make up for the lack of high quality fuel used in the 44 version. The MW50 is harder to use, offers reduced altitude performance, but slightly improved top speed on the deck.

fordfan25
09-09-2006, 11:50 PM
FW's are for n00bs. fly a plane that takes skill like a ..... spitfire http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

TeufelHund84
09-10-2006, 12:04 AM
Regarding the 44 and 45 Doras then Icefire...
Why not just stick with the 44? If the 45 only offers a slight boost on the deck, where the FW does not belong anyway, doesn't that essentially make the 44 superior hands down?

Also between the A6 and 8, you are saying that the A6 is better for, say, fighter vs. fighter as it is more agile? (This is relative of course because even with improved agility shouldn't it still be relegated to the gentle maneuvers of a BnZ plane?)
And the A8 for, say, taking out bombers? That's what I think when I think intercept but I know it can apply to enemy fighters too.

waffen-79
09-10-2006, 12:10 AM
Originally posted by fordfan25:
FW's are for n00bs. fly a plane that takes skill like a ..... spitfire http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

OMG, thanks for making me spill the coffe on my screen http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Jaws2002
09-10-2006, 12:33 AM
The boost in 45 Dora is useless over 6000m. All it does it overheats the engine. So if you don't plan in flying low alt the 44 version is lighter, more agile and faster.

For me is harder to chose between A6 and A8. A8 is much faster at low altitude, climbs better, rolls better at high speed, but turns worse and is slower up high. Another advantage for the A8 is the engine. The engine on the A8 can take more abuse. The A6 after the last patch burns the engine in a hard bit if you don't watch it, or you overrev it.

A8 feels more fun to fly for me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG53Frankyboy
09-10-2006, 02:41 AM
Originally posted by TeufelHund84:
Regarding the 44 and 45 Doras then Icefire...
Why not just stick with the 44? If the 45 only offers a slight boost on the deck, where the FW does not belong anyway, doesn't that essentially make the 44 superior hands down?

..............

the '44 needed higher octan fuel. that was very rare in germany.
sure, that isnt important in a game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

tigertalon
09-10-2006, 03:27 AM
Originally posted by TeufelHund84:
Just wondering about this excellent plane; does the a/c essentially get better and more desirable to pick with each new model?

For example, the 109F4 was widely considered by many to be the best all around performer versus many later variants.

But the same does not seem to apply to the FWs. To me it seems like if the latest model is available, take it. I'm strictly talking about the fighters here, not the high-alt interceptors including the Ta-152 or the Jabo version as well.

109s can succsessfuly turn fight with everything apart from spitfire (and even them in come cases), so they don't need speed so cruically as Fw does.

With Fw, every next variant gets more speed and looses some maneouverability. Still, speed is life in Fw190 (this is actually in every plane, but with Fw: no speed is guaranteed death), so yes, take latest possible version.

When you get really good with Fw190As, you might start to prefer A6 over A8, altough it does not offer that big exit window versus spits.

OldMan____
09-10-2006, 04:32 AM
Also the A4 is by far the bsthandling. It feels much much better at lower speed and under 300 kph is far superior to any other anton. If we had a4 with 1.42 ata (not a5, a5 sucks compared to a4 fm)... wow.. would be adream. Imagine then wihtout outer cqnnons and mg and also without the draggy bomb rack... another dream


Hope in a bob expansion we get this real bird.

Kettenhunde
09-10-2006, 06:08 AM
With Fw, every next variant gets more speed and looses some maneouverability.

Not to start a silly comparision thread but if you do some research, you will find both the P51 series and Spitfire series gained considerable weight.

Just as the FW190 though, these weight gains were accompanied by an appropriate increase in power.

All the best,

Crumpp

Brain32
09-10-2006, 06:53 AM
OK, let's make a quick tour http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
FW190A4
Pretty good but far from superiour against Spitfires, ofcourse I don't count DF server n00b Spits which constantly make left hand turns on the deck making a moving target practice for you. LA5(1942) is a total nightmare. Overall nice power, manouverbility believable for a fighter.
FW190A5
You feel the extra weight, but don't feel the extra power in terms of engine response, acceleration, you just notice you can run faster as running is all you will do, especially on Eastern front
FW190A6/A5 ata1.65
Last with manouverbility worth mentioning, 1.65Ata A5 really gives you the feel of extra power, but overheats quickly and hard. You are still running but it's getting very hard, on eastern front I recommend JABO misssions only, if you see LA5FN go over friendly territory and bail http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif
FW190A8 - A huge amount of extra weight, no feeling of extra power, congratulations you are flying a Missouri class battleship
FW190A9 - Aircraft carrier in terms of manouverbility, but runs like hell(although nearly all planes on WF and EF can catch you at all altitudes) and finally it seems you get acceleration, but that may be decievable because you just flew A8 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

OldMan____
09-10-2006, 07:20 AM
So, as i said.. an A4 at 1.42 ata would be by far the best of all.

Just make some climb tests and you will see a4 climbs as well as a5. Just proof that much of the perfornace seems to be tunned with drag and max power twisting ratter than decent whole system tune up.

JtD
09-10-2006, 08:29 AM
Basically with FW, the later the model, the safer the ride.

Yak_Ace
09-10-2006, 08:57 AM
As for 190A-9 with BMW-801TS/TH engine: What was maximum speed of this aircraft? I have met a bit of different values here.

TeufelHund84
09-10-2006, 09:02 AM
For all of the plane's good features though, it sounds like by the time you start nearing the end of the war, you become pretty disadvantaged no matter what because you're not flying in an LA5 or -7. I don't know if there is such a problem on the western front or not.

Also in the PTO, what would be a good cousin to equal experience of FW, i.e. BnZ plane? If I had to guess I'd say Corsair, P51, or P40? I've never really flown any of the Japanese planes so that's a mystery to me.

Viper2005_
09-10-2006, 09:05 AM
A4 = underpowered due to eastern front under-rated engine & therefore slow, MGFFs in the outer wing positions are not well matched with the MG151/20s inboard. A fun aeroplane to fly, but amongst the least effective of the 190s.

A5 = performs as the A4 should. The best performing Anton at high altitude. Suffers from the bomb-rack drag bug however, which makes it pointless to remove the outer guns, and also greatly reduces its effectiveness as a jabo IMO. Still suffers from poor ballistic matching. Extremely effective against Spitfire Vs, would also be very good against an early Mk IX if we had one.

A6 = A5 performance but with MG151/20s outboard, solving the ballistic matching problem. The BB guns over the cowling have a massive amount of ammunition, but do very little damage.

A8 = A bit of a lemon really. Lower performance than the A6 in almost every respect, though it's 10 km/h faster on the deck with WEP. Has a very unfortunate performance gap between about 1 km and 3 km. Slower than the A6 without WEP. OTOH, the cowling guns are now 13 mm, and since the bomb rack is fitted as standard there is no penalty for going jabo once the bomb is gone.

F8 = A8 with reduced performance due to extra armour (which does nothing in game) and no outer guns. Boost cannot be engaged above a certain height (2 km?) but if you turn it on you can keep it, which rather defeats the object. Double inferior to the P-47 on the deck(!). OTOH can carry a wider range of bombs such as SD500 and the not-very-useful AB500. Can also carry SC500 + 4xSC50, which allows for 3 passes against hard targets, though killing tanks with the SC50s required a direct hit. Reasonably effective jabo, but air combat capability is greatly reduced.

A9 = The best Anton overall. Faster than the A5/A6 at almost all altitudes with & without WEP. Roughly equal with WEP from 2km to 3km. Inferior above 6 km with WEP, but superior without. Superior ROC and sustained turn rate. Has the superior guns of the A8, along with its zero-penalty jabo capability. A real killer!

D9'44 = The best Dora. Essentially performs like an A9 with vastly superior WEP. Best above 2 km. Seems to carry more ammo than the Anton. No outer guns. Superior turning performance, with best sustained turn at 400 km/h rather than 350. Relatively poor climb rate without WEP below 2 km, then equal to Anton. With WEP climbs like a rocket.

D9'45 Very slight speed advantage over '44 model below 1 km, and again 2500 m to 4500 m. Otherwise inferior in all respects.

Ta-152H = Inferior to D9'44 in all respects below 8 km. Best sustained turn about 20 km/h slower. Climb rate inferior and speed considerably inferior until the magic 8 km mark is exceeded. MK108 in nose with next to no ammunition, annoyingly fires with weapon 1. MG151/20s in wing roots fire with weapon 2 - don't seem to carry as much ammunition as the Dora. Avoid unless you want to fight P-47s at obscene altitudes...

Jaws2002
09-10-2006, 09:52 AM
Ta-152 has 90 shells for the MK-108. That's a lot of ammo for that gun.

JtD
09-10-2006, 09:54 AM
A-4 is a killer against contemporaries. Can't see how it is the least effective of the 190ies.

VW-IceFire
09-10-2006, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by TeufelHund84:
Regarding the 44 and 45 Doras then Icefire...
Why not just stick with the 44? If the 45 only offers a slight boost on the deck, where the FW does not belong anyway, doesn't that essentially make the 44 superior hands down?

Also between the A6 and 8, you are saying that the A6 is better for, say, fighter vs. fighter as it is more agile? (This is relative of course because even with improved agility shouldn't it still be relegated to the gentle maneuvers of a BnZ plane?)
And the A8 for, say, taking out bombers? That's what I think when I think intercept but I know it can apply to enemy fighters too.
As far as the sim goes...yeah just stick with the 44 version of the D-9. Historically speaking the 1945 version represents Germanys deteriorating fuel situation. The higher octane fuel was in very short suppy in 1945 so they had to innovate to keep up. It was easy with the 109s as they had been using MW50 for a while in the front lines...with the FW190's they added it to the D-9. Its not a perfect solution but considering how close it gets to the 44 version and considering the fuel situation its pretty good.

If presented the option, the D-9, 44 is better but if flying historically the 45 is necessary.

I have to disagree with Viper on the A-4. It may be derated, it may have the MG-FF's which don't match to the inner MG 151/20s but the A-4 against its contemporaries is the best fighter in that time period. Historically speaking, if you have an A-4 on the east or west front during that 1942 period (Spitfire V or Yak-1) you are king.

TeufelHund84
09-10-2006, 11:04 AM
And can't the ballistics mistmatching be mitigated by well, just getting real close with an appropriate convergence?

Viper2005_
09-10-2006, 12:21 PM
The A4 we have in-game is very effective against the Spitfire V, but it can have real trouble against the P-39D in my limited experience.

The A5's extra power makes a big difference, and I much prefer it as a fighter to the A4.

As for the ballistics, the poor matching is especially important when deflection shooting under high g loads. Setting up a solution to hit with both the MGFFs and the 151/20s denies you the flexibility that normally makes the Fw-190 so effective.

90 rounds is perhaps a lot for the MK108, but if you're used to working with the MG151/20, it's still quite a shock. Plus the ammo counters in the Ta-152 are hard to read, and these days the MK108 isn't very accurate anyway. OTOH it has the best gunsight of any 190 in game. I much prefer the Dora under normal circumstances.

I forgot to mention the boosted A5...

1.65 Ata A5 - faster below 1.5 km, then slower until 3 km, from which point it is faster until 6 km. For practical purposes it's an A5 with slightly better speed performance than an A8. Overheating issues rather hurt it, and it does seem strange that it fails to retain the standard A5's altitude performance....

TX-Gunslinger
09-10-2006, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by TeufelHund84:
For all of the plane's good features though, it sounds like by the time you start nearing the end of the war, you become pretty disadvantaged no matter what because you're not flying in an LA5 or -7. I don't know if there is such a problem on the western front or not.

Also in the PTO, what would be a good cousin to equal experience of FW, i.e. BnZ plane? If I had to guess I'd say Corsair, P51, or P40? I've never really flown any of the Japanese planes so that's a mystery to me.

Maximum dive speeds
FW-190 A series (all) = 860 kmh

J2M3 = 850 kmh

Ki-84-1 series = 820 kmh

Both these work best when flown like FW-190, i.e. as an E fighter. They are both better climbers and turners to boot, so they add that dimension. Ki-84 has excellent 'E' retention during manuevers, much better than FW. Visibility, damage resistance and roll rate are worse however.

By the way, for my purposes:

1) A6 has same performance as A5 - difference is totally related to the extra outboard 151/20 mm. This is a very significant improvement. You have the potential to destroy or cripple more opponents in one pass than with MG/FF outboards - which are very poor mid-late war armament. A6 with 4 - 151/20 is almost second FW 190 fighter in cannon firepower. Good for dual purpose air-to-air against heavy fighters (P-47) and Medium bombers (B25) to Small bombers (A20-PE2). Convergence to 700 - 1000 against B-25 and 400 against all others.

2) For air to air missions the A5 1.65 is not my ride of choice. Most difficult FW to manage temperature in. If you want to fly a mission profile to start patrol at 5,000 meters or higher - You're going to have to stop and cool down. Judicious use of man prop pitch, cowl flaps and boost is necessary to even complete a sortie. I've gotten to the point of securing boost, opening cowl flaps fully and setting prop pitch to automatic after the first overheat. Allowing the temperature to drop until your first engagement is the secret to success with this aircraft, and all German fighters to a lesser extent, for that matter. Problem in execution is that you don't always control when the engagement occurs. In the A5 1.65, you may feel like you have a Dora, but it only lasts for a very short time, the engine takes quite a while to recover.

3) While the A8 provides Mk 108 for heavy bomber interception, it is a dog climbing, particularly between 1000 to 3000 meters. I only use this aircraft for heavies with patrols starting at 6500 meteres or higher. Acceleration is poor.
This aircraft is usable against proficient adversary only if you have a significant altitude advantage.

4) The A9 is my favorite heavy intercpter. Engine can take more abuse that all the others. Overheat will eventually kill you, but not anywhere near as rapidly as in A5/6. Acceleration is much better than A8, Zoom climbs feel like less of a struggle.

5) D9-44 is well, excellent. Might consider taking 45 model if La-7 is present. 45 Dora will out-extend La-7 on deck. La-7, particularly the three cannon model, does'nt have much ammo.

6) Ta-152H. Experts aircraft. If flown within it's tolerences. Reduced visiblity lowers SA, and aircraft control response is more sluggish than Dora's or Antons at medium to lower speeds. Works for best for me in situations where there are many contacts at low-medium altitudes. Eastern front scenarios with lots of ground action keeping the fights low.

Ta-152H turns well, but if you get carried away out-turning Yaks - you'll burn enough 'E' so you've dropped the speed regime low enough that the Yak's now in his best performance envelope.

Ta-152H does'nt accelerate well from 330 - 300 kmh.


7) A4 - Don't expect to take on B-25's in A4/A5 and get out with no damage. Close radiators fully prior to attack, and attempt head-on or beam attack at high speed (550 kmh plus). MG-FF's don't do enough damage at long range to make stern attack attractive.

8)F8 - Are you guys sure that the extra armor is'nt modeled in-game?

Just my thoughts.

S~

Gunny

Kettenhunde
09-10-2006, 05:29 PM
For air to air missions the A5 1.65 is not my ride of choice.

There is no such thing as fighter variant equipped with C-3 Einspritzung. The system was for bombenflugzeugen and Schlachtflugzeugen.

The C-3 Einspritzung equipped FW-190's cannot use the system over 1KM in altitude. The mechanics of the fuel pump did not allow it to provide the needed volume of fuel to maintain that pressure. Power production falls off rapidly after 1KM as that is the point power production equals normal ratings.

Now below 1KM in altitude, overheating was not near the issue fuel consumption was in the system. 70Liters/5 Min was the average rate.
The engine ran on a bench for about 35 hours IIRC using the system. It was initially cleared for "as long as the emergency last's" but this was later clarified to 3 10 minute uses with 10 minutes at Stieg u Kampfleistung.

All the best,

Crumpp

OldMan____
09-11-2006, 03:53 AM
Yes, but as far as all data posted back at time when we got this plane, later in war the FW190 was cleared for 1.65 ata without such system, so including non JABO.

BBB_Hyperion
09-11-2006, 07:45 AM
There are more than 1 boost systems.

Here the erhoehte Notleistung without c3 injection.
http://img146.imagevenue.com/loc521/th_82290_NotleistungFW190_122_521lo.jpg (http://img146.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=82290_NotleistungFW190_122_521lo.jpg )

TeufelHund84
09-11-2006, 08:56 AM
Ah screw it, give me a UFO Spit any day of the week! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Just kidding. About that Ta-152, if you're engaging at low-medium altitudes aren't you robbing yourself of performance? Obviously you can't lure an enemy up to your level who doesn't want to be there but by taking the fight to him I would think that you'd be doing yourself a disservice, in that aircraft at least.

But I'm not an expert by any means. Was just curious.

Xiolablu3
09-11-2006, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
A-4 is a killer against contemporaries. Can't see how it is the least effective of the 190ies.

Agreed.

190A4 is very good in 1942.

It all depends which year you are flying as to which 190 is hte best. Obviously they made improvements over time, and made it faster but heavier.

NONE of hte 190's are good for dogfighting, they are heavy, high wingloading fighters which dive well and go very fast. USe B&Z tactics and you will do good. Work in a team and you will do great.

DONT try and dogfight Spitfires/La5's, otherwise you will lose. In fact dont dogfight at all in my opinon.

SeaFireLIV
09-11-2006, 09:48 AM
Way I see it there are no `190s for dummies` instruction booklet.

JtD
09-11-2006, 10:03 AM
Wether or not you want to dogfight in a 190 totally depends on your definition of dogfight. From my definition, I dogfight a lot in 190ies. I just don't try to turn with a Spitfire.

TX-Gunslinger
09-11-2006, 03:14 PM
Originally posted by TeufelHund84:
Ah screw it, give me a UFO Spit any day of the week! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Just kidding. About that Ta-152, if you're engaging at low-medium altitudes aren't you robbing yourself of performance? Obviously you can't lure an enemy up to your level who doesn't want to be there but by taking the fight to him I would think that you'd be doing yourself a disservice, in that aircraft at least.

But I'm not an expert by any means. Was just curious.

Sometimes, you have to go where the targets are. Your maximum dive speed in Ta-152H is 900 Kmh - which means it's safe to pull out at 850 or so below 5K.

For me, one of the most sigificant features of a "BnZ" aircraft, is it's ability to gain altitude in the zoom climb after the attack. The Ta, if flown very carefully does'nt lose as much altitude in successive BnZ cycles as an A8/A9 and has more weapons punch than D9.

It's great against La-7 from 3K to 7K and dominates Yak 3P in many areas from the deck to the ozone.

The two biggest negatives of the Ta for me are:

1) If you bleed speed down to 300 kmh - it's gonna be a much longer time to regain 400 - 440 kmh than a Dora.

2) You're a big plane whose easily indentifiable - P-38 schism.


Yes it's best when flown up high, as long as there are targets up there or willing to come up there in pursuit. I think a better statement might be "It's best when flown higher than any of the enemy aircraft your can see".

BTW - my comments in this thread only concern the state of simulated aircraft within the Il2 game. I offer no comments on historical reality. My concerns are limited to suggestions and observations of interest to those whose intent is to make better use of simulated aircraft/weapons systems.

S~

Gunny

Fork-N-spoon
09-12-2006, 04:40 AM
Originally posted by Jaws2002:
The boost in 45 Dora is useless over 6000m. All it does it overheats the engine. So if you don't plan in flying low alt the 44 version is lighter, more agile and faster.

For me is harder to chose between A6 and A8. A8 is much faster at low altitude, climbs better, rolls better at high speed, but turns worse and is slower up high. Another advantage for the A8 is the engine. The engine on the A8 can take more abuse. The A6 after the last patch burns the engine in a hard bit if you don't watch it, or you overrev it.

A8 feels more fun to fly for me. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Noapte buna Jaws, bolillo here.

La7_brook
09-12-2006, 04:46 AM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
A-4 is a killer against contemporaries. Can't see how it is the least effective of the 190ies.

Agreed.

190A4 is very good in 1942.

It all depends which year you are flying as to which 190 is hte best. Obviously they made improvements over time, and made it faster but heavier.

NONE of hte 190's are good for dogfighting, they are heavy, high wingloading fighters which dive well and go very fast. USe B&Z tactics and you will do good. Work in a team and you will do great.

DONT try and dogfight Spitfires/La5's, otherwise you will lose. In fact dont dogfight at all in my opinon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> i allways dog fight in 190A ,http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif