FW 190

[Crump]

 

 

Just another dig at DCS by the only aeronautics expert in the world.

 

Wow....silly statement that simply shows insecurity.

 

My peer group are considered aeronautics experts by virtue of education, certifications, and experience but I am far from the only one in the world!!

 

Instead of jealously and insecurity, how about going back to school yourself, investing the money/time/effort into the certificates, and trying to join that peer group?

 

 It is not a dig at DCS or anything..  It is a fact on a computer, you will only get as good a product as the man making the FM understands....

 

End of Story.

Everyone seems to have missed the report I posted and it's significance......

[Brano]

Everyone seems to have missed the report I posted and it's significance......

Maybe you should try to talk to us like you would to golden retriever.We are simple folks,you know...

[Guest deleted@50488]

 

Everyone seems to have missed the report I posted and it's significance......

 

The report is in German - will take me ages to translate...

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

It does not have anything to do with whatever the discussion is about. It's a german combat performence evaluation of the Mc.205 N, Mc.205V, G.55, Fw-190 A-5 and Bf-109 G-4. Still an interesting doc though out of context.

[Askania]

The report is in German - will take me ages to translate...

 

http://kurfurst.freeforums.org/guidonia-test-result-translation-t707.html#p4293

 

http://kurfurst.freeforums.org/guidonia-test-result-translation-t707.html#p4294

 

http://kurfurst.freeforums.org/guidonia-test-result-translation-t707.html#p4295

[Guest deleted@50488]

Thx Askania

[Crump]

 

 

It does not have anything to do with whatever the discussion is about. It's a german combat performence evaluation of the Mc.205 N, Mc.205V, G.55, Fw-190 A-5 and Bf-109 G-4. Still an interesting doc though out of context.

 

It most certainly does have everything to do with the conversation.  

 

 

 It's funny that virtually every Fw-190 ever modelled in any game/sim (except for the Fw-190D, always) is, according to these types, a flying coffin. Makes one wonder, is it really possible that every single quality FS developer got the aircraft wrong and Winger is somehow right?

 

 

 

Die climb performance of the Macchi 205 N was significantly deteriorated by the radiator being too small. Due to excessive collant temperature, 3 times the climb was interrupted for a period of horizontal flight. In the turn fight, the Fw 190 was superior. Here, the speed difference made itself felt. If the Macchi was flying in a good position, the Fw 190 could increase its distance. In a dive, the Macchi 205 could follow well initially, later the Fw 190's acceleration was superior.

 

 

 

 

During take-off, the Fiat G 55 lifted off better than the Fw 190. In the climb above 5000 m, the Fiat caught up somewhat again, so that to 8000 m, climb performance was approximately equal. In the turn fight, both aircraft were equal to each other. In horizontal flight at 6000 m the Fw 190 was faster than the Fiat G 55. - After about 4 min level flight, the distance was about 800 Meter.

 

 

 

Oberstleutnant Baylon with Reggiane 2005
Hptm. Behrens with Fw 190 W.-Nr. 1163

Comparison assignment: Take-off together, climb to 6000 m. At 6000 m horizontal flight, then turn fight, and in 2000 m turn fight.

In climb, the aircraft were equal. It has to be noted that during climb, according to Oberstleutnant Baylon full climb and combat power was not used. In horizontal flight at 6000 m altitude at maximum power, the Fw 190 is faster. In the turn fight, both aircraft have to be considered as equal.

 

 

Obviously, the FW-190 is a dogfighter by design.

 

The aerodynamic data backs this up.....

[LukeFF]

Do we really need to go through this yet again? 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Ah ok, though it was intendet for that prop efficiency DCS thing mentioned...

 

It's difficult to relate to such a report without having the opposing aircraft modeled ingame to compare how the relative performence matches up with the report. Still shwos that turning with the 190 was considered to be an option (the only aircraft I knwo of with a manual stated prohibition to turn with enemys is the Me 262).

[Crump]

 

 

It's difficult to relate to such a report without having the opposing aircraft modeled ingame to compare how the relative performence matches up with the report.

 

Yes it is unless you know the aerodynamic data which is included in the report and can do aircraft performance calculations.  That certainly helps to get a picture.

 

 

 

Still shwos that turning with the 190 was considered to be an option

 

 

Yes it was.  Real aircraft are flown by their design performance numbers.  These speeds are where best performance occurs.  The FW-190 flown by it's performance speeds is a very competitive dogfighter by design.

[72AG_terror]

....

Edi: A small excerp from the La-5 manual that mentions aileround characteristics - don't kknow how usefull it is (native russian speakers could prbably tell)

Вираж на самолете производится на скорости 330—340 км/час. Самолет на вираже устойчив. При перетягивании ручки на вираже появляется покачивание самолета с крыла на крыло. При резком перетягивании ручки возможен срыв в штопор. Перекладывание самолета из виража в вираж происходит быстро. На элероны самолет послушен. Несколько велика нагрузка на ручку управления от элеронов. В случае потери скорости на вираже и сваливания на крыло необходимо дать ручку от себя и вывести самолет в горизонтальный полет.

 

Not sure if it's still needed and also not sure what La-5 is doing in the "FW 190" thread, but here is the translation (I've tried to stick to the meaning of the original):

 

 

The banked turn on this plane should be made at the speed of 330-340km/h. The plane is stable in the turn. Over-pulling the stick in the turn causes wing rock. If the stick is abruptly over-pulled break away into tail-spin is possible. Changing turn direction is fast. The plane readily follows the aileron input. The aileron forces on the stick are however somewhat excessive. If the speed is lost during the turn and wing-snap follows the pilot should push the stick forward and even the plane into level-flight.

Edited March 20, 2016 by 72AG_terror

[3./JG15_Kampf]

Hello. It is my first post on the forum. I confess I am a little lost. I love the Fw190 and would like to know where I find the performace of the aircraft il2 BOS? sorry my english (google translator) lol

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Jager,

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/page-4?do=findComment&comment=340611

 

Go to DD123 for all of the AC performance data

[3./JG15_Kampf]

THX Murf

La5

Ground speed at sea level, engine mode - Take-off: 544 km/h

Maximum ground speed at 3000 m, engine mode - Nominal: 571 km/h

Maximum ground speed at 6500 m, engine mode - Nominal: 603 km/h

FW190

Ground speed at sea level, engine mode - Combat: 530 km/h

Maximum ground speed at 1200 m, engine mode - Combat: 557 km/h

Maximum ground speed at 6000 m, engine mode - Combat: 618 km/h

 

Fw190 is not faster than the La 5 on the deck

Edited March 21, 2016 by JAGER-Kampf

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

All of the speeds for the Fw are at combat power. Takeoff power, listed for the La5, is closer to WEP. So, the Fw is likely comparable or faster on the deck at WEP. The charts, unfortunately, are not 1:1. You have to extrapolate a little.

 

Also, some of those charts, IIRC, will not be implemented until the next update. There are FM tweaks still to come. I'm sure there will be lots of community testing to see what people can wring out of them.

Edited March 21, 2016 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

For La-5 its very theoretical performance, La-5 has those massive cowling flaps that resemble to me airbrakes. It also requires you to turn on the emergency boost. To get maximum of Lavochkin is not easy and depends if you've been already in combat or cruising, if you can maintain co-ordinated flight and manage the cowl flaps, prop pitch, throttle and others properly. 

 

On the other hand FW-190 is sort of ... self-service aircraft, everything is automated and only thing you control is throttle. Thus you can get maximum performance with lesser effort. 

 

I'm not a great FW-190 pilot, you should ask someone like Ze_Hairy, but generally speaking FW accelerates better and handles easier than La-5. I can't recall La-5 catching up to me, though I just might have never met opponent who perfected the controls on La-5.

[3./JG15_Kampf]

who are the major pilot of fw 190 currently here in the SIM?

I would like to learn more about fw190. I'm starting in il2 BOS

Edited March 21, 2016 by JAGER-Kampf

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

You have to be a little bit more specific in what you want to know about the 190. There're a bunch of knwoledgeable people on this forum that could help out if nessecary.

Ze_Hairy is a very capeable 190 pilot but banned atm. He has however made a bunch of IL-2 and War Thunder videos showing his flights. Might be usefull to watch as a start.

 

Tactical wise everything is already mentioned in this thread, so I'll take the liberty quoting myself:

 

In ideal air combat situations with the Fw 190 you make high speed passes on unaware enemies and take them down in one pass. If that does not appear to be the case it's highly depending on the situation what to do.

Theres no reason to for example try to outmanouvre a Yak or i-16 for instance while you have good chances against a La-5 or Lagg-3. Still you should only ever use your energy to manouvre if you can clearly judge the situation - SA is the key element in flying the 190.

Performence wise it's the fastest aircraft on deck while not being very competetive above 3000m. You should always seek for an altitude advanatage over your enemy even if hes clearly slower and can not catch up to you.

Another important thing is to know when to disengage and "run". There's low chances in winning a "fight to the death" with this plane due to it's habbits and bad low speed manouvrebility.

The best indication for knowing when it's time to run is when a fight develops to you fighting on the enemies terms. As a FW pilot you always want to stay ahead of the enemy and be the "decision maker".

[Dakpilot]

 

who are the major pilot of fw 190 currently here in the SIM?

I would like to learn more about fw190. I'm starting in il2 BOS

 

 

You could do a lot worse than watch and study some of MK.Mr.X's videos when he is using the FW190

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/61-videos/

 

pages 2,3,4,5 of his thread

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Lusekofte]

I read some books and seen many interviews from both 109 pilots and FW - 190 pilots. I do not say I know for sure . But my impression is that the FW 190 fell under the same historical place as the Corsair. 

Those flying the 190 did not really get passion about it in interviews until the Dora arrived. This is the fighter pilots view. In terms of multirole and landing / takeoff accidents . Defense of the reich against bombers. it was simply better. But I have not read about one pilot preferring the 190 when he could choose a 109 in eastern front. The 109 had cramped space in cockpit, a field of view that would made allied pilots dismissing it, lethal poor view some say. But still the pilots that flew them loved it.

This is my impression on what I read about this, like the corsair as fantastic as it was , and beautiful . Best multirole naval aircraft in the WW 2, it was still the Hellcat that was the best dogfighter and earned the most respect among the Japanese fighter pilots .

You could do a lot worse than watch and study some of MK.Mr.X's videos when he is using the FW190

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/forum/61-videos/

 

pages 2,3,4,5 of his thread

 

Cheers Dakpilot

My impression of MR MK X is his historical doktrine of choosing not to dogfight. He attack people not knowing he is there and is a great shot. This is 190 tactics 1 on 1 

[LittleJP]

I believe many of the pilots in I, II, and IV./JG. 54 would beg to differ :D

[Lusekofte]

Probably, but I just expressed my impression on  very thin bases. like interviews and 2 - 3 books and about 5 interviews I believe is available in youtube by now. I just have this idea that the 190 need to be fighting on its term only

[3./JG15_Kampf]

Publicado Hoje, 09:35 Você tem que ser um pouco mais específico no que você quer saber sobre o 190. Não é um monte de gente knwoledgeable sobre este fórum que poderia ajudar se nessecary. Ze_Hairy é muito capeable 190 piloto, mas atm banido. Ele tem, no entanto fez um monte de vídeos IL-2 e Guerra Trovão mostrando seus vôos. Pode ser útil para assistir como um começo.  

THX _5Stuka

 you are a very good Pilot or shares many information. I am using your very good sweetFx profile.

I understand fw 190;

-Keep speed

- surprise attack

-provide trajectory of the enemy

Ze_Hairy baned?

Edited March 22, 2016 by JAGER-Kampf

[Crump]

I read some books and seen many interviews from both 109 pilots and FW - 190 pilots. I do not say I know for sure . But my impression is that the FW 190 fell under the same historical place as the Corsair. 

Those flying the 190 did not really get passion about it in interviews until the Dora arrived. This is the fighter pilots view. In terms of multirole and landing / takeoff accidents . Defense of the reich against bombers. it was simply better. But I have not read about one pilot preferring the 190 when he could choose a 109 in eastern front. The 109 had cramped space in cockpit, a field of view that would made allied pilots dismissing it, lethal poor view some say. But still the pilots that flew them loved it.

This is my impression on what I read about this, like the corsair as fantastic as it was , and beautiful . Best multirole naval aircraft in the WW 2, it was still the Hellcat that was the best dogfighter and earned the most respect among the Japanese fighter pilots .

My impression of MR MK X is his historical doktrine of choosing not to dogfight. He attack people not knowing he is there and is a great shot. This is 190 tactics 1 on 1 

 

 

 

I would highly suggest reading some of the good histories out there already.  

 

JG26 War Diaries by Don Caldwell is a good start both volumes one and two:

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-JG26-War-Diary-Vol/dp/1898697868/ref=pd_sim_14_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0J30FX0V2J3TTG7DQHCD

 

Also

 

http://www.amazon.com/Luftwaffe-Fighter-Ace-Norbert-Hanning-ebook/dp/B004MYFJZQ

 

If you do the math, the P51d Mustang and the FW-190A8 turn almost exactly the same provided they remain at their design speeds.

 

In the vicinity of best rate of turn speed, the agility and acceleration of the FW-190 is much better than the Mustang just to give some perspective.  

[MasterBaiter]

I understand fw 190;

-Keep speed

- surprise attack

-provide trajectory of the enemy

 

 

That is pretty much it. Never follow the enemy in turns or you are already a dead man just cut your target's path when trying to shot them down.

Fly low to deck or very high and keep your speed up to be able to react and counter russians planes.

 

I made videos with somes of my guncams if you want there:

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21067-uf-winterzs-videos/?do=findComment&comment=341961

 

To be honest, the best is to start with the 109 since you can quite turn if in a bad position then when you are confortable with B&Z tactics move to the 190.

 

~S!

[3./JG15_Kampf]

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190a5.html

http://www.a2asimulations.com/store/fw190/tactical_trials.htm

 

 

That is pretty much it. Never follow the enemy in turns or you are already a dead man just cut your target's path when trying to shot them down. Fly low to deck or very high and keep your speed up to be able to react and counter russians planes.

THX UF_winterz  I saw his videos. I am writing on your channel on you tube. I'm coming from il2 1946 and have to lose a few quirks

[Crump]

Jager,

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/page-4?do=findComment&comment=340611

 

Go to DD123 for all of the AC performance data

 

 

The stall speed for your FW-190 in the game is too high.

 

That means the CLmax of the wing design is not available and will effect all maneuvering of the FM.

If you guys want I can run the math and post the documentation from both British, American, and Focke Wulf to prove it.

[Lusekofte]

 

I would highly suggest reading some of the good histories out there already.  

 

JG26 War Diaries by Don Caldwell is a good start both volumes one and two:

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-JG26-War-Diary-Vol/dp/1898697868/ref=pd_sim_14_1?ie=UTF8&refRID=0J30FX0V2J3TTG7DQHCD

 

Also

 

http://www.amazon.com/Luftwaffe-Fighter-Ace-Norbert-Hanning-ebook/dp/B004MYFJZQ

 

If you do the math, the P51d Mustang and the FW-190A8 turn almost exactly the same provided they remain at their design speeds.

 

In the vicinity of best rate of turn speed, the agility and acceleration of the FW-190 is much better than the Mustang just to give some perspective.  

 

you are talking about the A 8 with the performance almost identical to Dora? I am a bit confused by all the types. But  I know RAF struggled to keep phases with the FW 190 in western front. But this is further evolved 190´s . Please understand, I flown FW 190 as a ground attack role and I escape every time I get attacked , so I am very satisfied with the 190 we have in this regard. I have absolutely no idea if it ´s FM is correct or not. I just got this feeling that people expect too much of it

[Crump]

you are talking about the A 8 with the performance almost identical to Dora? I am a bit confused by all the types. But  I know RAF struggled to keep phases with the FW 190 in western front. But this is further evolved 190´s . Please understand, I flown FW 190 as a ground attack role and I escape every time I get attacked , so I am very satisfied with the 190 we have in this regard. I have absolutely no idea if it ´s FM is correct or not. I just got this feeling that people expect too much of it

 

 

If they are expecting the A/C to out-turn, outclimb, and outrun everything built...then they are wrong.  If they are expecting the FW-190 to be a one trick pony that can only menace unsuspecting targets, then they are wrong.

 

The problem is your FM designer is limited by the information he has available and the time available to research the aircraft.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

The A3 does quite well when flown within the envelope. You can dogfight with it when you know her well but she is no Bf 109.

 

The upcoming FM changes seem to indicate she will suffer in the 3000-5000m range. She will continue to be formidable above and below those altitudes.

 

While learning in her don't follow an enemy through more than 270 degrees, don't allow your speed to fall below 300 kph and don't climb at high angles - remember that 300 kph rule! She is best at BNZ and enjoys speeds in the 500 kph range where she handles better than any AC in game. Almost everything out turns her in the 300-350 kph range so you have to stay ahead, mentally, if you plan to use her as a turn fighter.

 

She is marginally better at several phases of maneuverability and speed but can be bested when flown outside of the LOW end of her performance envelope. If the stick is in your lap you are doing it wrong. Stay fast, turn and climb shallow while learning her quirks, extend often and stay ahead of the fight. Do that and she will take care of you. Fail to do so and you will complain endlessly about UFO Soviet AC.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I climb both German fighters, when extending, at 300kph but the ANGLE for the 190 is much shallower than in the Messerschmitt. A 300kph sustained climb is maintained by putting the horizon (visually with trakIR) about half way down the instrument hood. If you are using the vertical as a maneuver this is not important, do what you need to do to in a fight. But if you are climbing to EXTEND, the angle of your climb is more important than your initial indicated speed. Pitch for angle and the sustained climb while extending from the fight. I never feel like I quite explain this quite correct technically but it works.

[JG13_opcode]

If they are expecting the A/C to out-turn, outclimb, and outrun everything built...then they are wrong.  If they are expecting the FW-190 to be a one trick pony that can only menace unsuspecting targets, then they are wrong.

 

The problem is your FM designer is limited by the information he has available and the time available to research the aircraft.

 

I suspect it's more of a lack of time to fine-tune and then test the flight model since changing the physics would change all the aircraft.

 

I'd be willing to bet they do some serious conditioning of their equations to satisfy both the demand to run at a reasonable pace on consumer-grade hardware and to be within some tolerable % of their chosen reference data.  It's not like they're just feeding test data into a RANS solver; it's surely a generalized parametric flight model with specific inputs for each aircraft.

Edited March 23, 2016 by 13GIAP_opcode

[Dakpilot]

The A3 does quite well when flown within the envelope. You can dogfight with it when you know her well but she is no Bf 109.

 

The upcoming FM changes seem to indicate she will suffer in the 3000-5000m range. She will continue to be formidable above and below those altitudes.

 

While learning in her don't follow an enemy through more than 270 degrees, don't allow your speed to fall below 300 kph and don't climb at high angles - remember that 300 kph rule! She is best at BNZ and enjoys speeds in the 500 kph range where she handles better than any AC in game. Almost everything out turns her in the 300-350 kph range so you have to stay ahead, mentally, if you plan to use her as a turn fighter.

 

She is marginally better at several phases of maneuverability and speed but can be bested when flown outside of the LOW end of her performance envelope. If the stick is in your lap you are doing it wrong. Stay fast, turn and climb shallow while learning her quirks, extend often and stay ahead of the fight. Do that and she will take care of you. Fail to do so and you will complain endlessly about UFO Soviet AC.

 

I have read a number of articles/discussions about FW190/BMW 801 and the low to medium altitude performance drop off through that range seemed to be an acknowledged 'feature', these were engine/engineering/aeroplane forums and the like with no bearing on flight sims.

 

I wonder if this is why it appears that the (especially earlier) FW190 had such differing reputations on the Western Front compared to the East, considering the very different combat flight altitudes 

 

Of course my memories of reading anecdotes has no weight whatsoever, but I find it interesting nonetheless

 

Cheers Dakpilot 

[SR-F_Winger]

The stall speed for your FW-190 in the game is too high.

 

That means the CLmax of the wing design is not available and will effect all maneuvering of the FM.

If you guys want I can run the math and post the documentation from both British, American, and Focke Wulf to prove it.

Crump, as always i greatly apprechiate your effort and knowledge.

Everyone here that loves the FW would be grateful if you could file a bugreport the way the devs want it to be and provide all necessary evidence that back the claim of whats wrong with the FW FM in game. The past has shown that this can lead to changes in FM.

If you could do such a bugreport and send it to Han I would be very thankful.

 

If you could keep us updated on possible feedbakc by the devs and mirror the bugreport here that would be awesome!

Edited March 23, 2016 by StG2_Winger

[Dr_Molem]

I just got this feeling that people expect too much of it

 

People are waiting for this Fw 190A-3 to climb as it should (should be fixed in the next update after years of report/claim from the community...), and to be able to use its roll rate as a combat advantage (impossible since 109s, LaGG/La-5 all roll far too well and especially at high speed), nothing else, at least for the vast majority.

 

I wonder if this is why it appears that the (especially earlier) FW190 had such differing reputations on the Western Front compared to the East, considering the very different combat flight altitudes

 

lol

 

[Crump]

 

 

I suspect it's more of a lack of time to fine-tune and then test the flight model since changing the physics would change all the aircraft.

 

I agree.  To be clear, the physics does not change...the input variables for the math used to model the physical world will change.

 

 

Crump, as always i greatly apprechiate your effort and knowledge.

Everyone here that loves the FW would be grateful if you could file a bugreport the way the devs want it to be and provide all necessary evidence that back the claim of whats wrong with the FW FM in game. The past has shown that this can lead to changes in FM.

If you could do such a bugreport and send it to Han I would be very thankful.

 

If you could keep us updated on possible feedbakc by the devs and mirror the bugreport here that would be awesome!

 

I would be happy too.  Give me some time to complete another project and I will help the community out.  It is a hobby for me and does not pay the bills, LOL.  Working on an exhaust thrust estimate for another IL2 player.  When I get back from my next 4 day at the airlines, I will do it.  

[SR-F_Winger]

I agree.  To be clear, the physics does not change...the input variables for the math used to model the physical world will change.

 

 

 

I would be happy too.  Give me some time to complete another project and I will help the community out.  It is a hobby for me and does not pay the bills, LOL.  Working on an exhaust thrust estimate for another IL2 player.  When I get back from my next 4 day at the airlines, I will do it.  

In germany there is a saying: "Nem geschenkten Gaul schaut mer ned ins Maul" menaing as much as "If you get a horse for free, dont you complain about its broken teeth".

So take all the time you need. And thanks again!

 

EDIT: In english its"  Dont look a gift horse in the mouth":)

    Edited March 23, 2016 by StG2_Winger

[Matt]

Maybe wait until after the next update, because they announced changes to the FM.

[DD_Arthur]

Maybe wait until after the next update, because they announced changes to the FM.

 

 

Does Crump actually have the game?  I think not.

[Dakpilot]

People are waiting for this Fw 190A-3 to climb as it should (should be fixed in the next update after years of report/claim from the community...), and to be able to use its roll rate as a combat advantage (impossible since 109s, LaGG/La-5 all roll far too well and especially at high speed), nothing else, at least for the vast majority.

 

 

lol

 

 

You can LOL all you like,  but it is widely reported in numerous Pilot memoirs and interviews that, on the Russian front pilots did not give the same reputation to the FW190 compared to pilots in the Western European theater.

 

no-one is saying they had no respect and it is certainly a wonderful aircraft, but did not have the same impact on the Eastern front at the altitudes they fought at according to those who fought it

 

Think you also will find some good info on the climb rate in the 'lively' DD123 discussion, especially concerning climb times when compared to climb rates particularly page 7 post # 244-249

 

Cheers Dakpilot