PDA

View Full Version : high gloss polish of III./JG54 Fw 190



Hristos
05-14-2005, 02:02 AM
Currently I'm reading through "Greenhearts - first in combat wih Dora-9".

On couple of places the author states that III./JG54 Doras were polished to a high gloss. This is backed up with b/w photographs, evidently showing high polished Doras.

Now, does anyone know when this practice started ? Were Fw 190A-8s, flown through the spring/summer 1944, of the same Gruppe also polished ?

Thanks for any info

Hristos
05-14-2005, 02:02 AM
Currently I'm reading through "Greenhearts - first in combat wih Dora-9".

On couple of places the author states that III./JG54 Doras were polished to a high gloss. This is backed up with b/w photographs, evidently showing high polished Doras.

Now, does anyone know when this practice started ? Were Fw 190A-8s, flown through the spring/summer 1944, of the same Gruppe also polished ?

Thanks for any info

carts
05-14-2005, 04:24 AM
My understanding was that they put a high polish on the D-9s as they were a high altitude fighter,and the pilots and groundcrew felt it could increase speed,the A-8s were primarily ground pounders and therefore didnt get the "HighSheen" treatment

249th_Maico
05-14-2005, 04:50 AM
Some BoB 109 pilots started this. It was a quick way to pile on some speed.

Hristos
05-14-2005, 06:42 AM
The part of the book of which I'm reading now deals with airfield protection for Kommando Nowotny, performed by 9./JG54 and 12./JG54. So, it is actually deck dogfighting most of the time.

It also says that high gloss polish of plane surfaces was common in III./JG54 at the time.

At one point, a pilot writes a letter home, where he says he and a groundcrew member spent a lot of time polishing the plane, so he "doesn't come on a short end ina dogfight".

III./JG54 Fw 190A-8 were anything but groundpounders http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

3.JG51_BigBear
05-14-2005, 06:55 AM
It has to be for speed. I've read stories of P-51 crews doing the same thing. It was a long and tedious process but the polish would cut down on parasitic drag and increase the plane's speed enough to justify all the time spent on it.

Hristos
05-14-2005, 07:18 AM
Speed, in form of top speed but also combat and maneuvering speed.

Anyway, back to original question - anyone know if A-8s were also polished ?

tjaika1910
05-14-2005, 07:26 AM
But did it work?

Fast aeroplanes of today are anything but polished. They have small rills to stop the air, since it gives less drag and turbulence when air to air then a hard surface to air.

Think the idea came up from the skin of the sharks.

Jambock_Dolfo
05-14-2005, 07:30 AM
I'll jump in with my 2c.
A friend of mine says it was NOT recommended (by authoritees, RLM or whoever) to have an airplane polished. Visibility considerations were alleged. (He was a nightfighter, so it was a major concern). However, he stated that polishing his Bf110 he could gain up to 30km/h in speed, and that could be determinating in night combat, when closing speeds were not always too great. "There was no point in being less visible if I could not reach them" he states. So, his plane was always highly polished, even if against recomendations, or regulations. I believe it came to a more individual level (supposing, of course one had a personal plane), or to unit/group commander level wether the plane would be polished or not, or other kind of modifications.

Hope this helps in some way.

-dolfo

LStarosta
05-14-2005, 09:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by carts:
My understanding was that they put a high polish on the D-9s as they were a high altitude fighter,and the pilots and groundcrew felt it could increase speed,the A-8s were primarily ground pounders and therefore didnt get the "HighSheen" treatment </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That makes no sense. At low altitudes, parasitic drag caused by an unclean airframe is most pronounced.

ytareh
05-14-2005, 09:11 AM
Major coincidence !I was gonna start a thread on this topic!I remember reading somewhere that the USAAF (European)fighters were supposed to be 5mph faster in a dive due to waxing(which when you scale that back to car speeds hardly seems worth the trouble most guys go to on a Saturday afternoon!).Now its fairly common knowledge that a golf ball is more aerodynamic than a pool/snooker ball.So you would a matt plane would be faster than a gloss one.I was browsing a big encyclopaedia of WW2 planes today and under the Mosquito it said that a Matt/Dull/Flat Black finish tried out was quickly dropped when they found it too 23(yes twenty three)mph of the top speed!!!

BBB_Hyperion
05-14-2005, 12:45 PM
Hmm my granddad told they used shoepolish cause of the lack of replacement material did make the fw about 15/20 km/h faster.

lbhskier37
05-14-2005, 04:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ytareh:
Major coincidence !I was gonna start a thread on this topic!I remember reading somewhere that the USAAF (European)fighters were supposed to be 5mph faster in a dive due to waxing(which when you scale that back to car speeds hardly seems worth the trouble most guys go to on a Saturday afternoon!).Now its fairly common knowledge that a golf ball is more aerodynamic than a pool/snooker ball.So you would a matt plane would be faster than a gloss one.I was browsing a big encyclopaedia of WW2 planes today and under the Mosquito it said that a Matt/Dull/Flat Black finish tried out was quickly dropped when they found it too 23(yes twenty three)mph of the top speed!!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In pool balls, the skin friction drag is actually less than a dimpled golf ball, but the the reason golf balls have less overall drag is because the dimples lower the pressure drag. Something with a round cross-section develops a pretty strong low pressure area right behind the ball, and when dimpled this low pressure area is lessened. So dimples wouldn't help an aircraft or much else for that matter. The dimples are really only effective on something with a round cross-section. (there are a few other areas, but like highschool physics professors I am just going to wave my hands and not go into more detail)

Hristos
05-14-2005, 09:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
Hmm my granddad told they used shoepolish cause of the lack of replacement material did make the fw about 15/20 km/h faster. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly what the book says.

15-20 kph may mean life and death difference, especially in a Fw 190.

Anyway, I was looking for an answer, since I recently modeled a Fw 190A-8 of Hans Dortenmann, flown in mid 1944. So far I have no proof his aircraft was polished.

Also, I have an episode of "Flugzeuge in 2. Weltkrieg" which deals with Fw 190. At one point there is an Fw 190A-3 (no cowl bulges, MG FF in wings). It definitely shows highly polished airfraft surface, as reflections are clearly visible.

horseback
05-14-2005, 10:41 PM
LW aircraft were painted with a semi-matte paint that apparently combined a matte look at a distance and a glossier finish up close, as evidenced by a number of early-mid war photos of 109s and 190s. In other words, it didn't give off flashes of reflected light from any distance over about 100-150m; US and RAF memoirs from around the early-mid war period often comment on the surprisingly clean and shiny appearance of LW fighters viewed up close, but they rarely mention seeing more than the glints off the canopy/windscreen, confirming comments on captured LW a/c about this property.

This paint also managed to create measurably less drag than the flat paints used by the RAF and USAAF, according to some of the sources I've read over my years making models. This in turn led to studies of ways to lower drag; the emphasis on a clean airframe, ejector exhausts, waxing the aircraft, and finally, a natural metal finish.

Word trickled to the frontline units, and the more aggressive pilots and groundcrew (crewchiefs were sometimes more ambitious than their pilots) made maximum use of this information. Elite outfits like the 56th FG apparently made it a practice to replace 'dinged' components, sanding and waxing the whole airframe. Photos of 56th FG P-47s next to aircraft from other units make the difference clear.

What goes around comes around, though, and LW fighter jocks apparently started noticing the shiny finishes on the 'other guys', and started asking questions, which may have led to JG 54's pilots asking their crews to help them polish up their mounts...

cheers

horseback

Ugly_Kid
05-15-2005, 12:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbhskier37:
In pool balls, the skin friction drag is actually less than a dimpled golf ball, but the the reason golf balls have less overall drag is because the dimples lower the pressure drag. Something with a round cross-section develops a pretty strong low pressure area right behind the ball, and when dimpled this low pressure area is lessened. So dimples wouldn't help an aircraft or much else for that matter. The dimples are really only effective on something with a round cross-section. (there are a few other areas, but like highschool physics professors I am just going to wave my hands and not go into more detail) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mhm, the dimples works as turbulators, they cause the transition from laminar to turbulent flow earlier. The problem with the laminar flow is that it separates easily, it can't follow the contour of the golf ball on the "backside" of the ball or on the shadowed side, the flow separates causing a large area of separated flow, which is "draggy". The turbulent flow remains attached much longer and separates much later, thus in this respect having a lower drag.

It is also not uncommon to glue turbulators even on gliders (where the laminar flow is the primary aim), i.e at certain position of the chord in order to force the transition to turbulent flow, this way the prevent a partly separated laminar bubble and actually gain a better compromise "dragwise". So it is all relative. It is better to have a large laminar portion but it's not good to try to force it as long as possible in order to avoid easy separation. (if golf ball flew without rolling it would yet have a minimum gain if the "front" side was glossy up to about highest diameter, then getting dimpled http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

Now as for polishing. It improves the surface quality, which in turn allows a higher Reynold's number with laminar flow before inevitable transition to turbulent flow. This works because unlike in a golfball, aircraft has such a contour that even the laminar flow can follow it and remain attached. (Of course there is the exception of high AoA flight where laminarprofile becomes inferior since the flow starts separating more easily - so again there you should force the transition http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

So in straight flight you might gain something. I remember reading, Meimberg's autobiography?. They were keen on polishing and using filler on seams etc. on their Bfs in early war. They had their individual pet aircraft and they had sort of competition who's aircraft is the fastest one. Somewhere they started getting shot down more and more often and very soon the attitude changed the planes became tools and it wasn't worth the trouble anymore. Almost all leading aces or survivors from the German side have several parachute jumps behind them, so you'll learn very fast not to waste lot of your time on polishing an aircraft which you might loose already on next mission.

Ugly_Kid
05-15-2005, 12:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by horseback:
What goes around comes around, though, and LW fighter jocks apparently started noticing the shiny finishes on the 'other guys', and started asking questions, which may have led to JG 54's pilots asking their crews to help them polish up their mounts... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now this isn't actually true, at least how I read it from Meimberg. They polished and used filler when they still had time. After they started having increasing losses it wasn't worth the trouble anymore. So once the Americans started making appearance the whole process wasn't really practised anymore. They had problems in closing the ranks and keeping the amount of serviced aircraft up to the given unit strength without extra work.

Brotrob
05-15-2005, 01:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristos:
Also, I have an episode of "Flugzeuge in 2. Weltkrieg" which deals with Fw 190. At one point there is an Fw 190A-3 (no cowl bulges, MG FF in wings). It definitely shows highly polished airfraft surface, as reflections are clearly visible.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hello Hristos,

could you please post a scan of this particular Fw 190A-3 ? I would very much like to see that foto.

If not, was it only a prototype and changed at the Fw-Flugzeugwerke or was it modified while already in service at the front ?

Thank you very much,

Brotrob

csThor
05-15-2005, 01:58 AM
AFAIK at that point polishing was quite common as the different manufacturers of the early Fw 190s did have large quality problems with their paintjobs. For example AGO was notorious for very bad application of the colours which caused a rough surface and more drag.

Hristos
05-15-2005, 02:01 AM
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap001.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap003.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap004.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap005.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap006.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap007.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap008.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap009.jpg

The aircraft of Gruppen Adjudant, II. Gruppe. IMHO, JG2 or JG26.

lbhskier37
05-15-2005, 02:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ugly_Kid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lbhskier37:
In pool balls, the skin friction drag is actually less than a dimpled golf ball, but the the reason golf balls have less overall drag is because the dimples lower the pressure drag. Something with a round cross-section develops a pretty strong low pressure area right behind the ball, and when dimpled this low pressure area is lessened. So dimples wouldn't help an aircraft or much else for that matter. The dimples are really only effective on something with a round cross-section. (there are a few other areas, but like highschool physics professors I am just going to wave my hands and not go into more detail) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mhm, the dimples works as turbulators, they cause the transition from laminar to turbulent flow earlier. The problem with the laminar flow is that it separates easily, it can't follow the contour of the golf ball on the "backside" of the ball or on the shadowed side, the flow separates causing a large area of separated flow, which is "draggy". The turbulent flow remains attached much longer and separates much later, thus in this respect having a lower drag.

It is also not uncommon to glue turbulators even on gliders (where the laminar flow is the primary aim), i.e at certain position of the chord in order to force the transition to turbulent flow, this way the prevent a partly separated laminar bubble and actually gain a better compromise "dragwise". So it is all relative. It is better to have a large laminar portion but it's not good to try to force it as long as possible in order to avoid easy separation. (if golf ball flew without rolling it would yet have a minimum gain if the "front" side was glossy up to about highest diameter, then getting dimpled http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

Now as for polishing. It improves the surface quality, which in turn allows a higher Reynold's number with laminar flow before inevitable transition to turbulent flow. This works because unlike in a golfball, aircraft has such a contour that even the laminar flow can follow it and remain attached. (Of course there is the exception of high AoA flight where laminarprofile becomes inferior since the flow starts separating more easily - so again there you should force the transition http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

So in straight flight you might gain something. I remember reading, Meimberg's autobiography?. They were keen on polishing and using filler on seams etc. on their Bfs in early war. They had their individual pet aircraft and they had sort of competition who's aircraft is the fastest one. Somewhere they started getting shot down more and more often and very soon the attitude changed the planes became tools and it wasn't worth the trouble anymore. Almost all leading aces or survivors from the German side have several parachute jumps behind them, so you'll learn very fast not to waste lot of your time on polishing an aircraft which you might loose already on next mission. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't be talking of Reynolds number, I said hand waving http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
Ugly Kid did a better job of explaining, I just hope you kids didn't fall asleep, this will be on the final! Are you going to go into transonic flow, and how a nozzle isn't quite a nozzle in supersonic flow next? Good luck http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

Ugly_Kid
05-15-2005, 03:26 AM
Nope, actually wanted only to share that stuff from Meimberg and then I somehow started philosophing, sryhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. There was also a funny story on the book how he borrowed his commander's brand new, fresh from the factory, 109, which was freshly polished, washed and waxed, to run some errand - he promptly smashed it (IRC it got some technical defect and he bailed or he just botched the landing) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I think it was Meimberg's book, if not, never mind, excellent book nevertheless. Everyone should read...

robban75
05-15-2005, 03:41 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hristos:
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap001.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap003.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap004.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap005.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap006.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap007.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap008.jpg
http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap009.jpg

The aircraft of Gruppen Adjudant, II. Gruppe. IMHO, JG2 or JG26. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think the Fw 190 in those pics is polished. It would IMO shine alot more if it was. My guess is that because of the degraded surface quality of the late war LW birds it was probably a good way to overcome this by polishing the airframe. Looking at close up shots of early Fw 190's thery are put together very well. So it probably wasn't necessary to polish them. But I'm just speculating here.

Look at these pics to see the superb fitting of the joints and cowling of the early Few 190.

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A1-2s.jpg

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-7.jpg

And the rather poor fit on the late Fw 190.

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-D9-17.jpg

Hristos
05-15-2005, 03:59 AM
Look at your second photo, Robban. Amost exact angle as photos I posted.

http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/FW190-A3-7.jpg

Yet, there is no reflection.

http://free-kc.t-com.hr/nino/bscap006.jpg

Here, reflective surface is clearly visible.

robban75
05-15-2005, 04:19 AM
Yeah, same angle, but the sun is not in the same position. The big pic is probably taken at noon, while the second pic shows the sun being more head on and lower.

Just an example, this Gripen is painted in a matte grey colour, but when the sun strikes it at a certain angle it also looks a bit glossy.

http://www.airventure.de/payerne_air04/payerne04_gripen_1.jpg

Brotrob
05-15-2005, 04:24 AM
Thank you for posting the pics, Hristos.

After first reading your post, I thought "no cowl bulges" meant that they removed the MG 17 in the cowl and replaced the hood with a smooth one without bulges at all, just like in the Ta 152 H. Now I'm a bit disapointed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Anyway, that particular Fw 190 seems to have a very shiny skin to me to.

I wonder if there were any attemps to close the joints by some JGs, like it was done on the racing Me 209s or on prototypes (Spachteln or stopping).

I only remember a story of a Me 109 G pilot, who forced his anoyed groundcrew to remove all camouflage from his a/c, and then to paint it again with high-gloss black colour. He said the gaied speed could be felt.

Also there were attemps of the Focke Wulf company to redesign the engine-cowling of the Fw-190-D types. The normal ones were of a terrebly bad quality (just loo at old pics of the unrestored D-13 from the Champlin Fighter Museum --&gt; http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif) , and they wanted to build one from only 2 pieces, what proved to gain at least 15 km/h.

Best Regards,

Brotrob

robban75
05-15-2005, 04:34 AM
Rubber sealed cowling joints on the Fw 190D increased speed by 15-17km/h. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif It wasn't a problem on the Ta 152 series as they had a different cowling mounting.

Hristos
05-15-2005, 04:38 AM
Robban, not sun glare, but reflection.

Look at the pics again. In every picture there is a reflection where you expect it to be, as with the mirror. No matter of the sun angle or shadow. Again, look for reflections.

robban75
05-15-2005, 06:06 AM
I see now what you mean Hristos. But, from extreme angles even a matte finish can cause reflections.

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/draken-07.jpg

WereSnowleopard
05-15-2005, 10:13 AM
American Airline make their airline fly with less need power by leave it unpaint! Of course, it look so shiny that get unwanted attention in hositle sky! Paint weight more on plane! Maybe if apply polish mean more weight! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

BaronUnderpants
05-16-2005, 04:18 PM
My 2 cents.

Since im a carpainter and deal with paint and cars ( reasenebly large flat surfeses ) every day....i can tell u that even matt finish paint can look glossy from extreme angels ( like in the pics shown ) looking at the Fw 190 in the first pic it clearly shows its matt camoflage paint, its just the angel and the low standing sun on the other pics that makes it look like its high gloss.

As for the planes going faster from beeing polished ( i assume u all mean polished metal...as in no paint at all ) can be true since paint itselfe weigh more than u might think...F1 cars for example use a extreme minimum of paint for just that reason, polishing a previous matt paint into high gloss finish wouldnt mean squat in tearms of redused drag and higher speeds...as someone said earlier....airlines are trying to find ways of using the texture of shark skins on their planes to reduce drag to improve mainly fuel consumption...and shark skin is everything but smooth......elite swimmers use the technolegy allreddy in their swimsuits.

LStarosta
05-16-2005, 04:31 PM
OK, don't laugh but....

I am a runner. And my times used to be less than perfect. I trained and trained (mainly in the mile run) and I kept getting times no less than 8 minutes. This clearly pissed me off. In 3 months of rigorous training, I could not get one second off my time. NOT ONE SECOND!!!

I was playing FB with one of Leadspitters baremetal templates for the P51 and I noticed how much faster my Mustang was going compared to the usual. SOOOOOoooo, I got a brilliant idea.

I had my whole body waxed. My chest, my back, my legs, my arms, my buttocks, my crotch, and my head. Yes, I waxed my head. And not just the top, but my facial hair and eyebrows too. I showed up at the track naked.

I jest.

I was wearing my running shoes.

Anyway, what followed was nothing short of brilliance. In all of my aerodynamic beauty, I shaved (no pun intended) my time down to 3:52 for the mile. Granted, there were some things I could have improved upon. As I ran, I noticed my genitalia flying all over the place. This hindered my stride somewhat. I need to devise a way to immobilize my genitals. I'm sure that can take a few seconds off my time.

Anyway, I hope that my story has inspired some of you here today. I was very touched by my achievement, and I hope you can apply this inspiration to your lives.

Lucius_Esox
05-16-2005, 05:02 PM
Scissors! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Waldo.Pepper
05-16-2005, 05:52 PM
From the book Evidence in Camera. Don't know the page, not quoting exactly (read the book yourself).

PR Spitfire were often polished with wax, to improve their performance.

If I rember the book passage correctly it gave about 10 more mph in speed.

I would think that only units who had the luxury of time (Like PR Spitfires/or perhaps the Dora's of JV44/or some other elite unit) would do this. Can you imagine the hours of work necessary to apply it, let alone remove and reapply the stuff?

Not the practice of an everyday squadron IMHO.

JG7_Rall
05-16-2005, 06:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
OK, don't laugh but....

I am a runner. And my times used to be less than perfect. I trained and trained (mainly in the mile run) and I kept getting times no less than 8 minutes. This clearly pissed me off. In 3 months of rigorous training, I could not get one second off my time. NOT ONE SECOND!!!

I was playing FB with one of Leadspitters baremetal templates for the P51 and I noticed how much faster my Mustang was going compared to the usual. SOOOOOoooo, I got a brilliant idea.

I had my whole body waxed. My chest, my back, my legs, my arms, my buttocks, my crotch, and my head. Yes, I waxed my head. And not just the top, but my facial hair and eyebrows too. I showed up at the track naked.

I jest.

I was wearing my running shoes.

Anyway, what followed was nothing short of brilliance. In all of my aerodynamic beauty, I shaved (no pun intended) my time down to 3:52 for the mile. Granted, there were some things I could have improved upon. As I ran, I noticed my genitalia flying all over the place. This hindered my stride somewhat. I need to devise a way to immobilize my genitals. I'm sure that can take a few seconds off my time.

Anyway, I hope that my story has inspired some of you here today. I was very touched by my achievement, and I hope you can apply this inspiration to your lives. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

LMFAO

I'll be sure to run in my meet on Thursday buck naked, to improve my time, as well as in your honor.

LStarosta
05-16-2005, 06:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
From the book Evidence in Camera. Don't know the page, not quoting exactly (read the book yourself).

PR Spitfire were often polished with wax, to improve their performance.

If I rember the book passage correctly it gave about 10 more mph in speed.

I would think that only units who had the luxury of time (Like PR Spitfires/or perhaps the Dora's of JV44/or some other elite unit) would do this. Can you imagine the hours of work necessary to apply it, let alone remove and reapply the stuff?

Not the practice of an everyday squadron IMHO. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


It was commonplace for many RAF units to clean and polish their aircraft to a brilliant shine. This is especially true of squadrons that did V1 chasing towards the end of the war.

woofiedog
05-16-2005, 07:39 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Hristos... Great Photo's!
I'm surprized that the Canopy is closed while the pilot is taxing for take off.

OldMan____
05-16-2005, 07:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BaronUnderpants:
My 2 cents.

Since im a carpainter and deal with paint and cars ( reasenebly large flat surfeses ) every day....i can tell u that even matt finish paint can look glossy from extreme angels ( like in the pics shown ) looking at the Fw 190 in the first pic it clearly shows its matt camoflage paint, its just the angel and the low standing sun on the other pics that makes it look like its high gloss.

As for the planes going faster from beeing polished ( i assume u all mean polished metal...as in no paint at all ) can be true since paint itselfe weigh more than u might think...F1 cars for example use a extreme minimum of paint for just that reason, polishing a previous matt paint into high gloss finish wouldnt mean squat in tearms of redused drag and higher speeds...as someone said earlier....airlines are trying to find ways of using the texture of shark skins on their planes to reduce drag to improve mainly fuel consumption...and shark skin is everything but smooth......elite swimmers use the technolegy allreddy in their swimsuits. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is because these aerodynamics efefct are not because of direct attrition from smooth or rough surfaces. The attrition added by these is irrelevant when comapred to the main effect that surface quality may haveon air flow.

The idea is to keep air flow " laminar " to the surface as long as possible, and avoid it to become turbulent. Laminar flow increases drag at a linear rate with speed while turbulent flow rises at square of speed.

Any material or even a piece of brick have laminar flow.. bu only up to a speed limit, this limit changin by different surfaces and shapes.


A very smooth surfaces avoids some level of turbulence made by irregular distortions on surface. But regular microbumps on the correct size and spacing IMPROVE the capability of air flow keeping glued o surface. This is speacilly true in the BACK of the object going trough the air.. when the airflow have to come together with the air from the other side. If the surface has these microbumps this rejoin is more fluid... and offsets all loss due to drag caused directly by the bumps.

VW-IceFire
05-16-2005, 10:20 PM
Anyone have good links on the JG54? Where they served (specifically), when they transitioned to the FW190D-9.

I smell a campaign coming on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hristos
05-16-2005, 10:53 PM
For that you better read "Greenhearts - first in combat with Dora-9". Excellent day to day description of III./JG54 from September 1944 to May 1945.

III./JG54 served in the West 1943 onwards. They were the first unit in whole Luftwaffe to recieve Fw 190D-9, in September 1944. After a month they became combat ready.

At first they used them to cover Me 262s of Kommando Nowotny.

From mid November they performed anti Jabo and fighter sweeps in Northwestern Germany, Netherlands and Belgium. They participated in Bodenplatte. At times they used to cover Ar 234 take off and landing, especially during Ardennes offensive.

Airfields they used - Achmer, Varrelsbusch and other I don't remember, I'm at work now.

One of main opponents was British 2nd TAS, flying Spitfires and Tempests, as well as various American units with P-47s and P-51s.

I have the mentioned book, so if anyone is interested in dates, places and missions, I can provide info.

GR142_Astro
05-16-2005, 11:32 PM
It's late and I don't have the book around, but Robert S. Johnson clearly describes the Fw190 that tried to down him as "a beautiful gleaming gloss blue" ship. He had quite a bit of time to study it. I believe it was 1943 and I do not recall if he ever said what model it was. I believe that offers some support in the use of glossy or polished paint schemes. I know that Johnson got a number of kills in a P47 named "Lucky" that had every joint sanded and polished for speed. I cannot imagine that at least a few of the German ground crews didn't do the same.



http://www.aviationartgallery.co.uk/Images/Military%20Gallery%20Images/Thunderbolt%20strike.jpg

Hristos
05-16-2005, 11:45 PM
The photos of the Fw 190 I posted are from an original footage. It is a 50 minutes show, of which at least half is footage of Fw 190. Nowhere else there are reflections as with that particular plane.

No glare, no reflections whatsoever. Except in the screenshots I posted.

tigertalon
05-17-2005, 05:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by woofiedog:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Hristos... Great Photo's!
I'm surprized that the Canopy is closed while the pilot is taxing for take off. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fw190s couldn't open cockpit during flight or taxi. It had 20mm charge(s) to blow it away in case of emergency.

ImpStarDuece
05-17-2005, 07:38 AM
Taken from OSprey Aircraft of the Aces 'Spitfire Mk V Aces'

p 16


Effects of Minor Modifications

In 1943 Mk VB EN946 was employed at Farnborough in a serise of tests to determine the effects of minor modifications to improve aircraft performance. The effects of the changes were as follows:

Maximum speed of fighter initially 357 mph

Fitting multi-injector exhausts instead of 'fish tail' type 7 mph
Removal of carburettor ice guard 8 mph
Fitting rearview mirror with improved fairing 3 mph
Whip aerial in place of mask type 1/2 mph
Cutting cartridge case and link ejector chutes flush with wing 1 mph
Sealing cracks, rubbing down, painting and polishing wing leading edge 6 mph
Wax polishing the remainder of the aircraft 3 mph

Maximum speed of fighter with all changes incorporated 386 1/2 mph

Blutarski2004
05-17-2005, 08:16 AM
In his book, FUNDAMENTALS OF FIGHTER DESIGN, Ray Whitford quotes the results of a wartime test performed to determine the influence of surface finish on cruise speed performance of the P51B. I do not have the book in front of me, so the values here are approx.

Using the performance of an a/c in a "typical condition of finish" as a benchmark, the report credited a difference of approx plus 20 mph or so for an a/c with carefully painted, filled, and polished surface, and a difference of minus 20 mph or so for an a/c with a hastily applied finish.

Another reason why establishing real speed performance under combat conditions is such an elusive goal .....

Brotrob
05-17-2005, 10:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:
Fw190s couldn't open cockpit during flight or taxi. It had 20mm charge(s) to blow it away in case of emergency.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hello,

in an aircraft-magazine I read the report of a german flight-instructor, who flew in an Fw 190 with open canopy. I remember that couse he dipped his prop in a lake while flying to low, and became wet inside the cockpit couse of his open canopy. So although there were those 20mm charges for emergency-blow-of, the canopy was able to be opened in flight. It simply was opened by the little wheel in the right of the cockpit.

Greetings,

Brotrob

tigertalon
05-17-2005, 12:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brotrob:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:
Fw190s couldn't open cockpit during flight or taxi. It had 20mm charge(s) to blow it away in case of emergency.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hello,

in an aircraft-magazine I read the report of a german flight-instructor, who flew in an Fw 190 with open canopy. I remember that couse he dipped his prop in a lake while flying to low, and became wet inside the cockpit couse of his open canopy. So although there were those 20mm charges for emergency-blow-of, the canopy was able to be opened in flight. It simply was opened by the little wheel in the right of the cockpit.

Greetings,

Brotrob </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi

Interesting, never saw a source claiming this is possible, and more important, I never saw a picture of a FW190 with opened hood during flight.

Peter Caygill "Combat legend Focke-Wulf Fw 190" page 58:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The view for search from the Fw 190 is the best that has yet been seen by this Unit. The cockpit hood is of moulded Plexiglas and offers an unrestricted view all round. No rear view mirror is fitted and it is considered unnecessary as the backward view is so good. The hood must not be opened in flight as it is understood that tail buffeting may occur and there is a chance of the hood being blown off. This, however, is not a disadvantage for day search as quality of the Plexiglas is exellent. During conditions of bad visibility and rain, or in the event of oil being thrown on the windscreen, the fact that the hood must not be opened is obviously a disadvantage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Brotrob
05-17-2005, 01:05 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:

Interesting, never saw a source claiming this is possible, and more important, I never saw a picture of a FW190 with opened hood during flight.

Peter Caygill "Combat legend Focke-Wulf Fw 190" page 58:

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hello tigertalon,

perhaps that tail-buffeting only occurs when the canopy is opened really far. The flight instructor said something like he did open it only a chink, but unfortunatly I cant recall why. I'm not sure, bur IMHO he opened it becouse of heat. That flight-scool was in France at this time.

Perhaps he just didn't read the warning sign which forbids opening of the hood http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Best Greetings,

Brotrob

Bremspropeller
05-17-2005, 01:24 PM
@ Woofiedog/ Tiger:

The Fw190 actually could open it's canopy during flight - well at least once. It would be blown away instantly (which is the reason why pilots weren't allowed to open it while flying).
Reading through "III./JG54 - First in Combat with the Fw190D-9" I found at least one report of a pilot who had to open the canopy in flight (the explosive charges to blow away the canopy were not installed due to production shortcomings at the end of the war...).

I don't know why the canopy is shut while rolling on the ground but Eric Brown supposed that it prevents toxic gasses from entering the cabin - which would enter the cabin if the pilot didn't close the canopy.

@ Topic:
AFAIK Josef Priller's Fw190A-5 "Jutta" was polished.

@ Ugly Kid:
The a/c Meimberg flew was the Bf109G-14 (as I recall) of a Alfred "Martello" Hammer. Hammer (being a Staffelkapit√¬§n) told his crewchief not to allow anybody else than him fly his kite - he took special care of his bird.
Meimberg at first spent a thought on sending Hammer (or his crew-chief) to a court-martial. But he was glad that one of his Staffelkapit√¬§ne was careing so much about his a/c.
Later he smashed the bird.


@ IceFire:

The first D-9 (four in total) were deliverd on 20th september 1944.

Airfields:

Oldenburg
Varrelbusch
Bissel (12./JG54)
Hespe
Achmer (H. and Achmer in order to protect Me262s)
F√ľrstenau (together with I./JG26)
Babenhausen (short period - unly 13 a/c)

----------III./JG54 gets transformed into IV./JG26 (25th february '45)-----------

Bissel
.
.
.

woofiedog
05-18-2005, 06:03 AM
tigertalon & Bremspropeller... Thank's for the info. It must have been a little tricky getting ready for take off with the Fw-190... you wouldn't be able to stick your head out of the cockpit to see around the plane.
The P-47's had a grounds crew ride on the wing to help out to taxi the plane of take off.
I didn't see anyone helping out in the Fw-190's photo clips.

Bremspropeller
05-18-2005, 09:26 AM
Normally the pilots would try to taxi in "s-turns" in order to get enough sight of the things going on in front of their a/c.

But the following picture shows that the procedure of placing a marshaller on the bird's wing was also known by some Fw 190 units (this particular a/c seems to be a G-5 (based on the A-8 and F-8 but without the cowling-mounted MGs) - a long-ranged fighter-bomber):

http://img290.echo.cx/img290/2117/focke18tg.jpg


The next picture shows a Fw 190 (probably an A-7/R6 - note the WGr.21 launchers below it's wings and the 300l. fuel-tank below the fuselage) while taxiing with an opened canopy:

http://img281.echo.cx/img281/6362/focke26mb.jpg


Both pictures are scanned from a book and had to be resized - I apaologize for their bad quality.