JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 10, 2020 Share Posted October 10, 2020 I know this isn't a big deal to 99% of the folks here and at his point too late in the game to make the switch but I am not sure why the decision was made to go with the Fw 190A-6 for BoN where the Fw 190A-6 in the West was being pulled out of service? The Fw 190A-6 was a 1943 aircraft. I looked at Michael Holm's Luftwaffe History Page and other sources, you can count on two hands the number of A-6s in Luftwaffe units inventory in the west during the summer of 1944. Clearly the aircraft of choice for the period should have been the Fw 190A-7. Adding a 1943 aircraft to BoN wouldn't be incomplete without the P-47C (i.e. P-47C-5-RE)/early Ds (i.e. P-47D-5-RE), Spitfire IXs, B-17s and B-24s (However the B-26 is a great stand in for the latter two due to game limitations). Also, Brest and Lille should be included in the map. The then Fw 190A-7 can come another day. Either way, the BoN map was a very good choice! The team can tweak it a tad for a long time to come and just add collector planes (which we will be a suckers and buy them all). Then use the cash to work on your pet projects (My guess the PTO ). Just spit balling here but in all seriousness, your success is our gain too so we are all in the same boat. Link to post Share on other sites
LukeFF 6281 Posted October 10, 2020 Share Posted October 10, 2020 Two reasons I can think of: Production numbers: there were far fewer A-7s built than there were A-6s. (80 built for the A-7 versus 569 for the A-6, according this site). The differences between the A-6 and the A-8 are far more significant than the differences between the A-7 and the A-8 (kinda like the differences between the 109 G-2 and G-4). Beyond that, there is the simple fact that there are simply not that many more significant radial-engined 190s left to build, and the only other significant unbuilt one for 1944-45 (the A-9) didn't come into service until the autumn of 1944. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
-[HRAF]Roland_HUNter 240 Posted October 11, 2020 Share Posted October 11, 2020 4 hours ago, LukeFF said: Two reasons I can think of: Production numbers: there were far fewer A-7s built than there were A-6s. (80 built for the A-7 versus 569 for the A-6, according this site). The differences between the A-6 and the A-8 are far more significant than the differences between the A-7 and the A-8 (kinda like the differences between the 109 G-2 and G-4). Beyond that, there is the simple fact that there are simply not that many more significant radial-engined 190s left to build, and the only other significant unbuilt one for 1944-45 (the A-9) didn't come into service until the autumn of 1944. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focke-Wulf_Fw_190#Production Its says 701 A-7 built. And I think A-9 would be more "interesting" as a bodenplatte DLC plane Source:Focke-Wulf FW 190 Vol. 1 (Monografie 01) by Krzysztof Janowicz 1 Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 11, 2020 Author Share Posted October 11, 2020 (edited) @LukeFF Thanks for your response! Focke Wulf Jagdflugzeug Fw 190 A, Fw 190 "Dora", Ta 152 H by Peter Rodeike [German] - Can't find an English version to save my life! I'd pay $200 USD (FYI) It seems he listed all manufactured Fw 190A-7s with work number by plant. Maybe one of the JG4 guys (or anyone that can read German) can give us a brief synopsis in an English translation - my guess is that looks closer to 701 (but less than 1,192 A-6s, according to Peter Rodeike, p.g. 199). To your second point, 2 MG 131s are better than 2 MG 17s, then there are the Strum variants - yes like the A-8 (I admit). Also, I am not sure there was a Fw 190 A-6/R2, but there were Fw 190 A-7/R2 (R2 = 2 30mm outboard wing cannons for those that doesn't know) - A translation of the page above could help. We all like historic accuracy and flying with/against Fw 190A-7s in the summer of '44 in te ETO is more historically accurate than Fw 190 A-6s (but not to say it didn't happen, just not as common). Edited October 11, 2020 by JG7_X-Man 1 Link to post Share on other sites
LukeFF 6281 Posted October 11, 2020 Share Posted October 11, 2020 3 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said: It seems he listed all manufactured Fw 190A-7s with work number by plant. My guess is those were planned A-7s that were assigned production numbers but were never built. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
-[HRAF]Roland_HUNter 240 Posted October 11, 2020 Share Posted October 11, 2020 15 hours ago, LukeFF said: My guess is those were planned A-7s that were assigned production numbers but were never built. What? The books says which units used the A-7 after the production 😄 "Die FW-190 A-7 wurde im einsatz geflogen beim" -->was flown in action at 1 Link to post Share on other sites
-=PHX=-SuperEtendard 1380 Posted October 11, 2020 Share Posted October 11, 2020 I like the A-6 choice because it brings something new to the table, and it also can be used for earlier scenarios for the Channel and Eastern Front maps. The A-7 is very similar to the A-8 and would have been rather seen as a "filler plane". I feel like many people will like it's quad MG 151/20s with the slightly higher performance over the A-8 that's slowed down by the MG 131 bulges (and extra armor as well iirc). The A-6 also gives the chance to have the G-3 attacker variant via modifications, a possibility the A-7 doesn't give. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites
sevenless 2326 Posted October 11, 2020 Share Posted October 11, 2020 (edited) 22 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said: Maybe one of the JG4 guys (or anyone that can read German) can give us a brief synopsis in an English translation - my guess is that looks closer to 701 (but less than 1,192 A-6s, according to Peter Rodeike, p.g. 199). All 701 of them were produced and issued to the units mentioned between 12/43 and 3/44. From same book the A6 numbers, 1.192 produced and issued from 6/43 to 3/44: First known A7 was lost 12/43 with 1./JG1: To get that into perspective here are the A8 numbers. 6.655 were built and issued between 2/44 and 1/45. Source same book by Rodeike: 1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said: I like the A-6 choice because it brings something new to the table, and it also can be used for earlier scenarios for the Channel and Eastern Front maps. The A-7 is very similar to the A-8 and would have been rather seen as a "filler plane". I feel like many people will like it's quad MG 151/20s with the slightly higher performance over the A-8 that's slowed down by the MG 131 bulges (and extra armor as well iirc). The A-6 also gives the chance to have the G-3 attacker variant via modifications, a possibility the A-7 doesn't give. Yep. Way better choice over the A7. Brings more variety and has the G3 option. I hope they include the G3. Everyone who owns BoBP can fly the A7 (sort of) anyways. Edited October 12, 2020 by sevenless 1 Link to post Share on other sites
MiloMorai 712 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 Focke-Wulf delivered 150 A-7s in Feb and March 1944. Ago delivered 270 A-7s in Feb, March and April 1944. GFW delivered 200 A7s in Feb and March 1944. Don't know how many A-7s were delivered before Feb 1944. Link to post Share on other sites
sevenless 2326 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 (edited) 22 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said: Also, I am not sure there was a Fw 190 A-6/R2, but there were Fw 190 A-7/R2 (R2 = 2 30mm outboard wing cannons for those that doesn't know) - AFAIK only one digit experimental planes (A6/R2) issued to Sturmstaffel 1 in 01/44 and 02/44. A6 machines (4x20mm) of Sturmstaffel 1 in 01/44: Edited October 12, 2020 by sevenless Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 12, 2020 Author Share Posted October 12, 2020 Thanks @-[HRAF]Roland_HUNter and @sevenless for confirming I was correct (as I couldn't translate the book). I guess as long as mission developers don't leave out the A-8 in creating BoN mission, that's OK. I think I am hung up on the historic accuracy more than anything. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
SYN_Vander 1402 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 It has been mentioned that the Normandy map can be used for a wider time-span than just the D-Day landing, ie 1943 and 1942 scenarios would als be possible. I think the A6 then makes perfect sense, since we already have th A8. Link to post Share on other sites
41Sqn_Skipper 200 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 Something's wrong here: "430 460 - 430 510 = 60 Flugzeuge" ... but only 51 serial numbers in the range. Link to post Share on other sites
sevenless 2326 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 (edited) 38 minutes ago, 41Sqn_Skipper said: Something's wrong here: "430 460 - 430 510 = 60 Flugzeuge" ... but only 51 serial numbers in the range. Maybe, Peter Rodeicke eventually could answer that to you, maybe it is 430 460 - 430 519 = 60 planes. But who knows... Edited October 12, 2020 by sevenless Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 12, 2020 Author Share Posted October 12, 2020 41 minutes ago, sevenless said: Maybe, Peter Rodeicke eventually could answer that to you, maybe it is 430 460 - 430 519 = 60 planes. But who knows... Agreed. Looks like a typo (we are all human), the editor should have caught that. So maybe we need to count the serial numbers. Link to post Share on other sites
41Sqn_Skipper 200 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 1 minute ago, JG7_X-Man said: Agreed. Looks like a typo (we are all human), the editor should have caught that. So maybe we need to count the serial numbers. Counting the numbers will not help as the given numbers don't always equal the allocated serial numbers ranges, e.g. 340 210 - 340 360 isn't 110 430 310 - 430 360 isn't 30 Someone would need to check the primary source(s). Unfortunately it seems to be not given ('vorliegenden Unterlagen'). Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 12, 2020 Author Share Posted October 12, 2020 I am still trying to figure out where "80" is coming from? Someone just edited Wikipedia LOL http://fw190.hobbyvista.com/werkn.htm http://fw190.hobbyvista.com/manufacturers.htm It seems only the AGO, Oschersleben numbers have been confirmed: 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Barnacles 765 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 A7 collector plane when? 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Yogiflight 1154 Posted October 12, 2020 Share Posted October 12, 2020 On 10/12/2020 at 12:31 AM, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said: the A-8 that's slowed down by the MG 131 bulges (and extra armor as well iirc). And an additional 115 litres fuel tank behind the pilot. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 13, 2020 Author Share Posted October 13, 2020 2 hours ago, Yogiflight said: And an additional 115 litres fuel tank behind the pilot. Ahhhh! Thank you! I was looking at the min operational weight of the A-8 vs the A-3 and A-5 and noticed a 6% difference. I figured the A-8 must have had a bigger tank, but it's an additional tank instead. I see! Link to post Share on other sites
Yogiflight 1154 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 6 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said: Ahhhh! Thank you! I was looking at the min operational weight of the A-8 vs the A-3 and A-5 and noticed a 6% difference. I figured the A-8 must have had a bigger tank, but it's an additional tank instead. I see! You can notice it, when flying the A8. It needs quite some time until the fuel indicator for the rear fuel tank goes down, as the additional fuel tank gets empty first, then the rear main tank, and the front main tank is the last to get emptied. This is, btw. modelled wrong for the A3 and A5, in which both tanks get empty at the same time, in game. I hope they correct this, when introducing the complex fuel management. Link to post Share on other sites
=LG=Mad_Mikhael 198 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 About 80 FW A-7s. Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 13, 2020 Author Share Posted October 13, 2020 3 hours ago, =LG=Mad_Mikhael said: About 80 FW A-7s. The issue here is where did his data come from? Authors of non fiction tend to site their sources. This guy doesn't have the work numbers like Peter Rodeicke so he is just regurgitating "something" he read and calling it fact. Link to post Share on other sites
cardboard_killer 1118 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 18 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said: to site their sources Sorry to be a prig, but with have sight (to see), site (to be seen) and cit. for citation (go see). Link to post Share on other sites
41Sqn_Skipper 200 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 1 hour ago, JG7_X-Man said: The issue here is where did his data come from? Authors of non fiction tend to site their sources. This guy doesn't have the work numbers like Peter Rodeicke so he is just regurgitating "something" he read and calling it fact. It's not like Rodeike is giving any source for the block ranges or the derived numbers. It seems like the book doesn't even have a list or references. In the A-8 chapter Rodekei states: Most of the allocated blocks were not built completely and a great parts of the ranges were not used. The same applies to the previous variants. The actual number of produced and delivered machines can't be determined exactly ..." 80 or 701, both numbers are simply opinions given by authors. Link to post Share on other sites
sevenless 2326 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, 41Sqn_Skipper said: 80 or 701, both numbers are simply opinions given by authors. Nope. The 701 number is based on original data, the 80 number isn´t. Go ahead and ask Peter Rodeike if you are really serious about it. You can get into contact with him here: https://www.jagdgeschwader.net/impressum.php/osCsid/765166c8d8ffdb018c8daf7da6a2df26 You might also want to check with Smith & Creek, Look up book 2 of their Fw 190 series, there you find in Appendix 5 at page 661-668 all serial numbers of the 190 batches. You even find the assigned Stammkennzeichen there. Further bonus of that book is a loss list of various planes in Appendix 2, pages 646-657. Counting the lost A7s which are mentioned with Pilot, unit, W.Nr. marking, place and date of loss should tell that the 80 figure is dubious to say the least. So, it is up to you to follow that up if you are interested. Edited October 13, 2020 by sevenless 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
LukeFF 6281 Posted October 13, 2020 Share Posted October 13, 2020 On 10/12/2020 at 3:56 PM, 71st_AH_Barnacles said: A7 collector plane when? If I had to make a guess, I'd say after the 190 A-9 and the Ta 152. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 14, 2020 Author Share Posted October 14, 2020 2 hours ago, LukeFF said: If I had to make a guess, I'd say after the 190 A-9 and the Ta 152. Well that wasn't a no! Link to post Share on other sites
41Sqn_Skipper 200 Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 (edited) 5 hours ago, sevenless said: The 701 number is based on original data, ... What is the "original data" (= the primary source)? I don't see a source for the 80 and not for 701 and no explanation where the numbers are from or how they were estimated. Is it based on allied intel? Loss number? Squadron strength reports? Inteview of a former factory employee? Some delivery report? So far we have seen the numbers of 3 different books without any source. If there is another book that mentions the primary sources then please quote this instead. But you don't need to waste your time with it, I don't really care what the number is. Edited October 14, 2020 by 41Sqn_Skipper Link to post Share on other sites
=LG=Mad_Mikhael 198 Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 12 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said: The issue here is where did his data come from? Authors of non fiction tend to site their sources. This guy doesn't have the work numbers like Peter Rodeicke so he is just regurgitating "something" he read and calling it fact. Yes, I fully agree. I'm just pointing out where the number probably came from. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
sevenless 2326 Posted October 14, 2020 Share Posted October 14, 2020 7 hours ago, 41Sqn_Skipper said: I don't really care what the number is. I was expecting nothing else 1 Link to post Share on other sites
CUJO_1970 1726 Posted October 15, 2020 Share Posted October 15, 2020 The FW190A numbers are based on Focke-Wulf factory production and delivery report C-Amt Monatsmeldung which I think is or was available on the internet at one time. The confusion for A7 production seems to center around the fact that A7 and A8 production took place simultaneously for a short time - same thing that happened later with A8 and A9. So when you see something like “80 FW190A-7 were produced and then FW190A-8 production began” it simply means from that point on they were built together in factory as parts were available. Not that only 70 or 80 were built in total. Its similar reason that people wrongly think there were no FW190A-9 delivered before September 1944. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
JG7_X-Man 489 Posted October 24, 2020 Author Share Posted October 24, 2020 On 10/13/2020 at 3:59 PM, cardboard_killer said: Sorry to be a prig, but with have sight (to see), site (to be seen) and cit. for citation (go see). LOL Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites
Bremspropeller 2295 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 On 10/12/2020 at 8:21 PM, 41Sqn_Skipper said: "430 460 - 430 510 = 60 Flugzeuge" ... but only 51 serial numbers in the range. The is no "equals" sign, but a double-tilde, meaning "approximately equal". 1 Link to post Share on other sites
ZachariasX 2504 Posted December 11, 2020 Share Posted December 11, 2020 8 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said: The is no "equals" sign, but a double-tilde, meaning "approximately equal". Espacially as this list is followed by the sentence that "most of these assigned lot numbers were not completed and the serial numbers unused". Link to post Share on other sites
CUJO_1970 1726 Posted December 13, 2020 Share Posted December 13, 2020 FW factory production book monthly report ("monatsmeldung") has the following for A-7 production: Nov. 1943 - 27 Dec. 1943 - 72 Jan. 1944 - 199 Feb. 1944 - 137 Mar. 1944 - 182 Apr. 1944 - 8 No more A-7 listed after April. That's 625 machines. Unfortunately I don't have these original documents, but it is only copies from the internet and someone else's research so I can't speak on the accuracy of those numbers. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now