|
Re: Fw190 Me likes the Hawker Sea Fury. |
Re: Fw190 Quote:
|
Re: Fw190 Quote:
Tempest on steroids with that luverly Bristol Centaurus engine. |
Re: Fw190 Ta-152 PWNS you all! Armament: One 30mm, engine-mounted MK 108 cannon with 90 rounds of ammo, two 20mm, wing-mounted MG 151 cannon with 175 rounds per gun 3 Freaking cannons! Once of which is a 30mm!!! Speed: Maximum speed 332mph at sea level ( 350mph with MW 50 ), 465mph at 29,530ft. 472mph at 41,010ft. 311mph cruising speed at 22,965ft. Range 755 miles to 1,250 miles depending on speed and external tankage Climb 3,445ft. per minute with MW 50 injection Ceiling 48,550ft. with GM 1 injection A Boeing 747's service celing is 45,000 ft, almost 3000 feet less than the Ta-152!!! http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/TA152-H-3.jpg |
Re: Fw190 Quote:
"A specialist bomber destroyer variant of the FW190 nicknamed the 'Sturmbock' (Battering Ram; der Bock is a male goat or ram). This 'Sturm' version of the Fw 190 was specially modified to attack American heavy bomber formations from short range and from behind. Because it needed to be able to fly through heavy return fire from enemy bombers, the Sturmbock was fitted with additional armour plating around the cockpit and the ammunition boxes, and with extra panels of laminated glass ( Panzerscheiben ) on the sides of the cockpit canopy . These'Scheuklappen' or blinkers tended to restrict the pilots visibility. The armour plating just visible in the photo below had bevelled edges in an attempt to improve airflow but with its all up weight increased by some 400Ib, the Sturmbock had the flying characteristics of a brick . At least some measure of protection was provided for its pilot , hunkered down in his cockpit behind the massive BMW radial engine. Some pilots soon took to removing the upper cowling guns ( the gun troughs, Schusskanäle, being faired over ) and then the Panzerglas in an effort to offset some of the 400 lb weight increase and the corresponding reduction in performance . In place of two 2cm cannon usually carried in the outer wing positions, the Sturmbock was fitted with two MK 108 3cm cannon - low-velocity weapons but with a high rate of fire. The 3cm high-explosive shells were extremely destructive against aircraft at short range, and on average three hits were sufficient to bring down a bomber. Bacause the Sturmbock modifications had such a deleterious effect on the aircraft's performance, each Sturmgruppe was to be accompanied into action by two Gruppen of standard fighters to fend off the American escorts" |
Re: Fw190 Quote:
|
Re: Fw190 Thankfully the Ta-152 came in so late in the war that it had no effect. The first one in service was on the 27th of January 1945 and no more than a few hundred were built. You think 30mm is special for a plane mounted gun? The Yak 9K had a 45mm cannon (I guess this is an artillery piece lol) firing through the prop. |
Re: Fw190 fair enough mondogenerator. you win this time, i should have researched it better :type: but the typhoon did have a slightly better turning circle than the early tempests due to its larger, thicker wings :moon: but i spose that with all the other aspects the tempest is better :fistpunch: |
Re: Fw190 It's pretty nuts to think that a prop driven plane from 1945 (Ta-152) can fly a few thousand feet above commercial aircraft being developed today! Ta-152 Climb rate: 3,445 ft/min, Max Speed 445 mph P-51 D Climb Rate: 3,320 ft/min, Max Speed 472 mph Which essentially means that there is no reason why a Ta-152 should get shot down since it's climbing at a rate of 120ft/min faster, while increasing the distance by 27mph innitially, but the gap steadily increases in speed due to the mustang's performance drop above 25,000 feet. Also lets say for some reason that the P-51 was able to maintain the gap, it would hit it's service ceiling @ 42,000 ft while the Ta-152 could continue up to 48,500 ft. Is there another propellor driven aircraft that fought during the war that can even match the performance of this beast? What are the specs of the final versions of the Spitfires and Tempests that saw combat? |
Re: Fw190 Gotta remember the Ta 152 was to little to late in the war. There were not that many built and they were not invincible. Apart from at High altitude (we seriously high) the Tempest V was superior. it would come down to pilot skills most of all but on paper the Tempest V was a faster, especially on the deck where it was unmatched. The Spit XIV and F.24 would give it a run for its money all the way up to 42,000ft but again pilot skill was the key. Also remember flying at the service ceiling is difficult to maintian and not always a good thing since you burn up allot of fuel while on full power trying to get the height. The advantage of the Mustang and the later war spitfires is they didn't have to worry about fuel cause they were taking of in France and the South of England and had excellent ranges (the Mustang had a ridiculous range) and there engines were top quality made from the required materials. The late was German planes had engine lives of as little as 12 hours and burning there engines up at full power+MV50 would very likely kill the engine even quicker. Also flying at 40,000ft when the combats happening on the deck is also a problem. Losing 30,000ft to join the fight quickly is suicide because of compression. This is why we see virtually no high alt planes over the Eastern Front as most of the combat was at low and medium altitude. |
Re: Fw190 Im a big fan of the Mustang but theres no way in hell a P-51D could do 472mph. A late war P-51H yes because it had the better low drag section wing instead of the laminar flow wing and a V-1650-9 Packard-Merlin V12 combat rated at 2,238hp. and was clocked at 487mph at 25,000ft. So 472mph is very close to that spec. A P-51D clocked about 437mph. And I thought I saw where someone mentioned that combat took place at low altitude? Most combat in West was at 18,000-30,000ft. Unless it involved the 9th Air Force or the 1st Tactical Air Force. |
Re: Fw190 top speed figures should probably be taken with a grain of salt. there don't seem to be any real rules regarding load, condition and other "cheats"(boosters etc.) doubt an aicraft that could achieve X mph on paper would ever reach that in a real combat situation(unless in a dive). |
Re: Fw190 Quote:
|
Re: Fw190 Quote:
It wasn't just the US airforce that flew planes into Europe:p. The RAF had as many planes, if not more in the UK flying into France and then later from France to Germany (1 of my grandfathers was a triage nurse with the RAF close air support/ground attack squadrons moving through Europe after DDay) and most if not all the 8000 Typhoons were used as ground attack...i'll leave you to imagine what they did with the Tempests, Hurricanes, Beaufighters and the other RAF ground attack planes. |
Re: Fw190 True, I thought someone was referring to the bomber war, my bad. And those 22,000 Spitfire was distributed through several marks. |
Re: Fw190 Sorry, I chnaged my post a little right after I made it initally. It looked like I was implying the spit was used for ground attack lol. Oh yes, they were over several mk's. The most numerous was the IX although there were so many versions of that Mk and some are not even catalogued. |
Re: Fw190 Actually my data says the Mk16 was primarily used for ground support. And it was so good at ground support that it was used more in that role than as a fighter. So saying Spits were used for ground support isnt really wrong. |
Re: Fw190 No, its not wrong at all, they were adapted to carry 250Lbs bombs (It was never actually forseen that it would carry bombs and was a stop gap with the Hurricane 'Hurribomber' while the Typhoon was being developed). Many VB's were used like this on North Africa but Its like taking a Porsche 911 GT2 and putting a trailer on the back and giving it a roof rack. Doesn't quite fit. |
Re: Fw190 FROM: The Effect of the North American P-51 Mustang On the Air War in Europe by David Buckingham "...But most important was its superiority over the German fighters, the best of which were the FW-190 and the Me-109. The Mustang was 50 mph faster than the Germans up to 28,000 ft., beyond which it was much faster than the FW-190 and still substantially faster than the Me-109. The Mustang had between 3000 and 4000 lbs. more weight, and so was able to outdive either German plane. The tightness of its turns was much better than the Me-109 and slightly better than the FW-190. (Grant 31, Boyne 389-390, Bailey 153) The result of all of this was that the Allies now had a plane that could go with the bombers all the way to and from their targets, fight and defeat the bombers' German attackers, and not run out of fuel." http://www.combatsim.com/htm/aug99/p51-3.htm#cont The FW190A Was a great...the P51 was better. |
Re: Fw190 Quote:
Finally someone who shares my opinion of the P-51. There was a reason the Mustang is so highly regarded by the Pilots who flew it and there is a reason it was considered instrumental in helping gain air superiority over Western Europe. True it sucked at ground attack due to the vulnerable cooling system but air to air it rocked. |
Re: Fw190 I like the Mustang but I'd still pick a 190D-9 to win a fight, its just plain quicker and its guns far more damaging and im not sure how they worked out the P51 was quicker in a dive, the 190 was regarded as boom and zoom incarnate. The only planes that could outstrip the D9 were the 109k-4 and the P47D-27 in a dive. Leads to the question that is this writer generalising or comparing specific versions of each plane as they would have met in combat. BTW there were 6 different A models from originating from 1941;) |
Re: Fw190 I agree that the FW-190D-9 would have the edge over a P-51D, but I'd run a P-51H up against it. |
Re: Fw190 Were getting into the realms of planes that never made an impact here or were to few to late. What we really want is (to truly represent what happened) is fights like Me109 G's and FW190 A-6/8's vs Yak 9's and Lavoshkin 5's and 7's, Spit I's and II's vs 109 E's, P51D's Vs 109G's and K's and later Fw190's (A6 upwards), Spit IX's vs 109 f's g's and K's and 190A4-8's(IX's were upgraded throughout the war so...). Spit XIV's vs 190A-8's/D-9's. Tempests vs 109 g's and K's and 190 A8's and D9's and chasing V1's (Tempests took out 683 in there first months of service but I doubt the BF engine could cope with that). Realisic fights that actually happened, not flights of fancy that never took place or only did very rarely. Also what we need to remember is P51's scored many of there kills when German planes were taking off or landing. German fighters had little fuel because they were designed as dogfighters/intercpetors and could only remain in combat for a short time as they had to powerclimb to meet the bombers which burnt up lots of fuel. The P51D was an escort fighter which carried and efficent engine with allot of fuel (thats why many of the 'P51 was really fast' stuff is not very true as it was weighed down by 2000lbs of fuel, only when returning from misson could it truly stretch its legs as it was rapidly emptying of fuel). Its advantage was it was a good fighter but it had legs and it had the height already. Also there were thousands all in formation at any time so they could swamp incoming German planes. Not to mention the defensive fire from the B17's and the B24's would take its toll. Im suprised no one has brought up the P51D vs Ki-84 Franks yet. |
Re: Fw190 I do not agree at all that most Mustangs scores were made against German fighters taking off or landing. Germany had a well established air defense system and in combat report after combat report it is repeatedly stated that when the escort fighters and bombers arrived inland the Germans were already awaiting at a higher alititude. What really made the Mustangs successful was when they were given permission to free roam around the bombers and were able to break up German fighters asembling for their attacks on the bombers. It was not til later that the P-51's were released to attack ground targets to expend ammo on the way home. Besides the P-38's P-47's and Typhoons covered the lower altitudes. Also on further examination of the FW-190D-9. It was rated at 426mph. A P-51D was rated at 436mph. It would be hard for a FW-190D-9 to outrun or outdive a P-51. Since the D-9 is still based on the same FW-190 airframe with a fuselage plug in the rear to balance the aircraft Im going to guess the Mustang could still out turn it. The weight difference of a P-51D and a FW-190D-9 are minimal. Mustang combat weight was typically around 9000lbs and a FW-190D was typically around 9500lbs. This gives the P-51D a 5.3lbs per hp and the D-9 4.3lbs per hp. Mustang accelerates faster due to the more aerodynamic laminar flow wing and more aerodynamic shape. Climb rate was very similar wiht both planes climbing to 20,000ft in roughly 7min. Neither aircraft could survive long in the others gunsights. Both aircraft were well armed to take down the other with well placed shots. Me-109G vs P-51D? P-51 has the definate advantage but a experienced pilot in a Bf-109 could put up a hell of a fight against a Mustang. Same with a FW-109A if the FW pilot got the Mustang below 16,000ft. a experienced FW pilot could give a Mustang pilot one hell of a fight. I dont feel the G and K models were good dogfighters. By the G model the Me was getting overweight and the wing loading was going up. Best dogfighter was probably the F model. K model was a good boom and zoom fighter but had same problem as the G, overweight and high wing loading. La-5fn and Yak-2,9 versus Me-109G, K, and FW-190A-8 I would say definate advantage to the Russian fighters. The Russian fighters were lighter, had engines of similar output, were cannon armed, and the Russian and FW-190's had good all around vision. The La-5fn was considered better than a ME and as good as or better than a FW-190A. The Yak-3 was so dominant in low altitude combat over the German types that the Luftwaffe issued a order that their fighters were to avoid combat with the Yaks below 5000ft. Yak -9 I think was a good match for the Bf-109. I think FW-190A had advantage in speed and firepower over the Yaks. I am a big fan of the late war Japanese fighters, specifically the Ki-84 Frank, the Ki-100 Tony, and the N1K2 George. The Jap fighters were slower but gave a very good accounting of themselves. In combat after combat the George completely dominated the Hellcat and gave the other fighters a headache. The first combat I am aware of for the Ki-100 was over Okinawa when P-51's tangled with Ki-100's. The Ki-100's were able to hold their own and according to a P-51 pilot it was a pretty vicious fight. The Ki-100 also was a good match for the Corsairs, Thunderbolts, and Lightnings. I think the Ki-84 was probably the best IJAAF fighter of the war. It was the first IJAAF fighter that was built with the same standards as the west regarding armor and self sealing tanks. It handled well, was fairly fast, and had good armament. Alot of people think a slow fighter cant compete against a fast one. While not an expert my online gaming experience says that it is the pilots skill and tactics that determine the victor. I was playing CFS2 online one time and there were IIRC either 5 or 6 of us. I was in a George and two of the opponents were in Corsairs. Corsairs had definite sdpeed advantage and I had manuverability. As the Corsairs would come in on me to do a boom and zoom I would pull a split-s to get out of position for them to get a shot, before they went past I would break into them and get off a good deflection shot and would score hits as they went past. After shooting them down this way the Corsair pilots got frustrated and tried to dogfight where the Georges better manuverability had the advantage and I quickly shot them down. At this point I was accused of cheating. I wasnt it was just me flying my plane to its strengths that neutralized their strengths. On the few occasions when they did get on my tail I developed a little manuver of hard left turn and opposite rudder, plane stalls, throttle back, stick full down and to right, full right rudder and within 2 or 3 spins the George would recover form the spin and I was back to hunting. |
Re: Fw190 I just found info on a report that states that US Occupation troops in Japan after the wars end took possesion of a Ki-84 and shipped it home to Wright Patterson AFB, home of the USAF materials testing section. The mechanics at WPAFB got the Ki-84 in top working condition and topped it of with 100 octane avgas(Japanese typically could only get 84 octane) and quality lubricants and did a fly off with a P-51D and a P-47D. The Ki-84 suprised everyone by outrunning the Mustang by 5mph and the P-47 by 22mph. The Ki-84 was clocked at 427mph. It outclimbed, out turned and outran the two US fighters. It also had self sealing fuel tanks and pilot armor. From Japanese combat reports the Ki-84 also could absorb a good deal of battle damage as well. |
Re: Fw190 I have heard Japanese pilots claim that they could easily dogfight and win over two US fighters of any type in a Hayate(I really hate western designations). the best thing the enemy could do was to use his superior speed to get the hell out of there. |
Re: Fw190 Quote:
The Ki84 is nice but like the Fw190D9 it was to little to late although they were produced from 1944. Also there ability for the plane to survive damage was mixed. Like late war German plane and tanks, the Japanese suffered from mixed quality materials, workmanship and certainly poor fuel (as stated). I definatly think that for the later war Pacific maps the Zero's should be replaiced by Ki84's. They were also good at high altitude as a number of ki84 pilots had scores of B29 kills. |
| All times are GMT -7. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.