PDA

View Full Version : FW190D-9Late vs 190D-9?



PullaSorsa
10-05-2008, 03:10 PM
What differences does these two fighters have? I heard that D-Late is a bit faster but the earlier model turns and climbs better, anyone know this for sure? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

PullaSorsa

PullaSorsa
10-05-2008, 03:10 PM
What differences does these two fighters have? I heard that D-Late is a bit faster but the earlier model turns and climbs better, anyone know this for sure? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

PullaSorsa

JG52Karaya-X
10-05-2008, 03:48 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v639/Karaya/190D.jpg

JSG72
10-05-2008, 03:58 PM
Oh no!!

Charts again.

I am pretty sure. That was the reason we lost half our posts. A year or so ago. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

DKoor
10-05-2008, 04:16 PM
That red, late version... is inferior. Be sure!

JG52Karaya-X
10-05-2008, 04:20 PM
IMHO the regular FW190D9 that we have in game is a bit questionable when put into historical context.

Judging from the charted performance it seems to sport a weird mix of properties, using a very very late Jumo 213 engine such as the E or F but running on C3 fuel (therefore lacking the weight penalty a MW50 tank would give).

An early FW190D from autumn 1944 with Jumo213A engine should register somewhere in the high 600km/h region (690-700), ours gets up to 'round 725km/h.

No wonder FW pilots are carrying their noses sky high given this hot rod.

The ingame late variant however seems to be very well represented, dont have any gripes with that one!

JSG72
10-05-2008, 04:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
IMHO the regular FW190D9 that we have in game is a bit questionable when put into historical context.

Judging from the charted performance it seems to sport a weird mix of properties, using a very very late Jumo 213 engine such as the E or F but running on C3 fuel (therefore lacking the weight penalty a MW50 tank would give).

An early FW190D from autumn 1944 with Jumo213A engine should register somewhere in the high 600km/h region (690-700), ours gets up to 'round 725km/h.

No wonder FW pilots are carrying their noses sky high given this hot rod.

The ingame late variant however seems to be very well represented, dont have any gripes with that one! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well! Thank F**k. You didn't post a chart again. 'caus now I agree with you. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Freiwillige
10-05-2008, 11:10 PM
Yea but whats the differance historicaly?
Same airframe, same engine?
I would undertand if the late had the ta-152 tail or something but from Olegs veiw why put the same plane twice, What is the differance between a D9 and a D9 Late?

Buzzsaw-
10-06-2008, 12:31 AM
Salute

The main difference is in the way maximum power is obtained.

The 1945 model is running on B fuel with MW-50 water/methanol injection to allow it to obtain high boost levels.

In the heat and pressure of the combustion chamber, the MW-50 water content atomizes into its constituent elements, ie. oxygen and Hydrogen, cooling the mixture and the cylinder head in the process. The extra oxygen improves combustion. The Hydrogen and methanol is just burnt up with the remainder of the mix.

The early model D-9 instead uses direct injection of higher octane C3 fuel into the supercharger venturi to allow its maximum boost.

The very rich mixture of fuel air, which normally wouldn't burn well, is instantly atomized in the high heat and pressure of the combustion chamber, also causing cooling of the cylinder head, and the result is a more powerful explosion.

Both techniques reduce overall cylinder head heat, therefore the chances of detonation are less, (knock or ping from the fuel/air mix exploding prematurely before the piston reaches top dead center) at the high boost levels.

By 1945, C3 fuel was in very short supply, so it was simpler to use B fuel and MW-50.

And yes, the top speed of the '44 version is a little overrated although I think the climb is correct. However, when you combine that with the fact that experienced players who know how to use manual prop pitch can get EVEN better performance, you can see why many think the '44 D-9 is the best overall aircraft in the standard game. The prop pitch exploit is a glitch, since the FW-190's Kommandogerat 'Brainbox', actually meant that best performance was obtained by leaving it in auto. Going manual was detrimental.

PullaSorsa
10-06-2008, 04:24 AM
Ok so I'm going with the earlier one, I guess.