Questions regarding the FM of the Fw-190 A-8/9
 

In
the 4.11.1, I noticed some of the previous features on the Anton series
were taken away, especially the A-9.

1) the A-9 does no longer have the "ërhöhte Notleistung". I only have a
PDF from "classics hangar" which shows that it had been implemented to
the A-9, but even so, is this the case? The only explanation I can find
is that the auxiliary tank was used to add extra fuel. If given the
choice in-game between extra fuel or extra speed, I'd pick the latter
more frequently.

2) is the flight distance of the A-8 shown in the object viewer
representative to real-life and in-game? If so, isn't this pessimistic?
The only way, I think, to achieve such low numbers in the A-8 was that
it was running at maximum WEP power non-stop.

3) the radiators of the A-8/9 are no longer automatic. Is this the case
too? A video in YouTube showing an interview with Arthur Gartner hints
that it is automatic. He says that during dive-bombing, "it opens up".
This may indicate the radiator opening up to compensate for the
over-revving engine which auto-system was unable to compensate. Can
anyone confirm this?

***

4) a little bit off topic, I was testing out the Spitfire IXe 25 lbs the
other day at MTO on engine limits. It baffles be that the Spitfire,
although it overheats, never had its engine die. The only possible way
to kill it is if you "hang on your prop with 100% prop pitch" for ~5
minutes non-stop. Either the Spitfire is going super fast (which it
isn't) or the liquid-cooling system in it is very effective. Can someone
confirm this as it is IRL?

The A-9 is modelled to 1.65 ata boost. This is normal take off and emergency power, while this boost was special emergency on the A-8. Information in the data viewer is not always accurate, in this case too low. The 190 did not have automatic cooling flaps, the oil cooler in particular could not be adjusted at all in flight.

Do you mean that being able to change the radiator flap in game is wrong? Or is the radiator flap in game is for other stuff than cooling the oil?

The cooling flaps on the FW190 were used to manage the cylinder head temperatures, particularly the lower rear bank of cylinders, as these had a propensity to overheat badly in the prototype and early models.

The oil cooling system was more complicated. The oil cooler was a ring around the inside of the engine cowl opening, protected by a ring of armor plate on the outside of the opening (that separate ring you see on the cowl opening). The propeller assembly fan blades were primarily designed to function as part of the oil cooling system, with an added - and much needed - benefit of aiding the cooling of the cylinder heads as well.

In addition to what Treetop said, the oil cooling could be adjusted by changing the width of a gap in the oil cooling ring. This could only be done by the ground crew. The wider the gap, the better the cooling, but the slower the plane. A wide gap for instance for desert conditions cost about 20 km/h.

1) I found the same thing...but I feel ..I don´t have the correct sources
I'm sure DT has better data, Would be greatly appreciated if DT can show the source, There are many people who want to learn.
That's my case :-P
I do not like to discuss in the forums, but simply I want to learn more about FW 190, As I learned about the luftwaffe fuel types and MW50 in the Bf 109.

2) ????

3) I'm sure the radiators were not automatic in FW 190 A s, you could put the link to youtube ...I would like to see. :eek:


4) DT did a great job with the engines , DT fix many things,
They approached many things to the reality of flight manuals.
But I'm sure some planes missing the fix for the engine, I can name two or three aircraft as they should have some error in the engine performance/Overheat.. I think ...:(


Offtopic:
I fly RoF, Clod, but mainly IL2 ,is the best !

The IL2 take many changes along the years.
And I learned what Oleg wanted to do many times ..
"maintain some balance in online game" ,
His problem was not the sources, he wanted to maintain some Balance in online fights, or the number of players would fall quickly if the balance is lost. I Think...

and where is the C3 einspritz in this a9 fm?:rolleyes:..the same for the A8.

and about the ATA in the A8, there is some interesting info about it in the FW minutes (meetings reports), let's say 1.78 as standard boost on a D2 ,nobody? ;)

The A-9 used the BMW 801TS engine. It achieves the power output of the TH, but as it used the old prop reduction gear of the TU engine, erhöhte Notleistung was not permitted. It was permitted with the later TH engine, which was about to enter production when the war ended.

Stumbled
upon this at ww2aircraft by the user FLYBOYJ...

"The engine was controlled by an ingenious, advanced Kommandogerat-a
sort of electronic brain box that greatly relieved the pilot's
responsibility to control airscrew pitch (rpm), fuel mixture and engine
boost (throttle) in combat. In addition, the engine's two-speed
supercharger shifted automatically at about 21,000 feet, and •••control
of the important oil-cooler flaps was automatic•••, thus relieving the
pilot of two more major cockpit duties. The pilot needed only to keep
his hand on the throttle and his eye on his assailant. In the heat of
combat, it was very easy for an Allied fighter pilot to forget to move
one or both of the other two required controls if he needed immediate
full power to beat his opponent."

He never stated the variant though...

I'm starting to get confused now, and more so because now I want to do
an all-nighter about the Kommandogerat. :D

Here you go: http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_u...?v=D9ABV2tqbSs

"Documentary of the Fw 190 Pt1" by GEPPKAOS

Could be talking about the Bf109F or G as it also had the Kommandogerat, as well as thermostat controlled radiator and oil cooler flaps. Again, owing to unique design of the FW's oil cooling system, it did not have oil cooling flaps.

The FW-190A9 with the BMW801TS engine was cleared for a straight manifold pressure increase to 1.78ata @ 2700U/min in the 1st gear supercharger in January 1945 and 1.82ata @ 2700U/min in the second gear supercharger.

The War Technical Diary of the Luftwaffe K.T.B 15/1-21/1 January 1945 clarifies the manifold pressure increase is approved for all engines and does not require Alkohol-Einspritzung or C3-Einspritzung.

The instructions clarify earlier instructions for emergency power increases to the BMW801 series that caused confusion at an Engineering meeting at Bad Eilsen between Focke Wulf, GmbH and BMW.

The only thing the gear ratio would do is define the propeller. It would be like saying someone can't put a turbo on their car because they have a 2.73 ratio rear end. (Admittedly a poor analogy - car analogies always are - lol.)

Here is a chart with this ata.

http://www.degnans.com/markd/Fw190A9_Boost.jpg

Gears just like any other part have their mechanical limits. So the reason to not put a turbo into your car would be because the gear can only transmit 350Nm of torque.

Anyway, true that the TS was cleared for 1.82 ata later on, in fact the engine's been modelled with, but it was included without because the A-9 in game is a designated a 1944 aircraft.

Right.

I don't see the relevance and wonder what the point being made about the reduction gear happens to be.

Manifold pressure increased but rpm remained the same.

Increasing manifold pressure is the most efficient way of increasing an airplane engines power output.

In the power formula, rpm is divided by 2 so you have to double the rpm for each increase in output.

Of course, you can't realize a very large gain in power without reducing the propeller diameter due to mach losses.

A small increase in manifold pressure of .13 ata realized a 200PS gain in static BHP raising the engine output from 2000 static PS to 2200 static PS at sea level. The power rises slightly (50PS) on the static PS graphs to FTH.

That is static power.

The performance benefits are obvious as noted in the graph Faustnik posted.

One the cooling fins, the BMW 801 series was an air-cooled engine. It does not require oil cooler adjustment as such. Basically air cooled engines operate over a huge range of temperatures when compared to a liquid cooled engine. They are designed that way!!

Liquid cooled engines are much more temperature sensitive and operate over a very narrow range. Water has 25 times the heat absorption capability of air so the engines temperatures remain pretty stable as long as the coolant temperature is within limits. Thus, generally speaking, Liquid cooled engines tend to have longer TBO's than air-cooled engines.

In fact, air cooled engines with oil coolers can suffer from overcooling in the wintertime.

Overcooling is a condition where the oil is not heated up enough to evaporate water and other contaminants from the oil. Overcooling causes internal corrosion which leads to cam spalling and bearing failure.

Lots of air-cooled engines have cowl flaps. The cooling gills on the BMW are just that, cowling flaps. They have nothing in common with radiator inlet controls.

If you read the Flight Manual for the FW-190, except for some specific conditions of flight such as climb in high density altitude conditions, you just leave them closed once the engine is warmed up.

It is not something a pilot would be adjusting constantly like the radiator inlet on a liquid cooled engine.

In general, since water/glycol has a much higher heat capacity than Air, you need a lot of air flow to reduce the temperature a little in a liquid cooled engine.

Read the Operating Notes / Flight Manuals, they will tell you everything.

If you read the Flight Manual instructions for Erhöhte Notleistung as found in the FW-190A8 dated July 1944, you will see statement about the BMW801TU not being cleared for it is wrong.

Ok didnt take long did it before it got a bit too personal.

Cool it off guys or your posts will be removed regardless.

Please continue in a orderly fashion.

Thanks

:)



It don't matter really.

Just produce the aircraft with the correct FM/DM data,fuel type and let it fly.

Why does everyone throw a spanner in the works regarding the Fw's
I mean look at the damage model its still has after all these years, few mg hits in a wing and its totally crippled.

Put what ever engine type and fuel you like and call it whatever FW variant you like,
a couple of rounds from a Gladiator in the wing will reduce it the current fumbling crate we have at present.

:)

Dont mention the bar..........

Slaps self on the wrist !!

I liked your explanation about diferences in air cooled/water cooled engine differences. (always learning, thank you.)

But, clarify this for me: those inlet controls, or cooling gills that you mention, they work by controling the amount of air that passes through someting, correct? Either cooling the water, or passing by the engine surface, wright?
And if they have more diferences, please clarify.

(Just asking because i dont have sure, not trying to prove anything or argue)

So... drop a FW190A-9, 1944 and FW190A-9, 1945 into the game and this argument can at least partially end right?

Hi Bolelas,

Both do work by regulating the pressure, true. Radiator inlets are much more critical in their operation is what I mean by the similarity ending. It takes a lot if air to cool a liquid running thru a heat exchanger. If the coolant temperature rises outside of limits, it is not likely under standard conditions the pilot will be able to reduce the engine temperature before damage.

In general, liquid cooled engines are slow to heat up and slow to cool down. Operating temperatures are much more stable, too. They have thick blocks to absorb heat and passage for coolant to flow. They don't need as much surface area in contact with the liquid coolant because of enormous heat capacity of the liquid coolant. The choke point is dumping that transferring that heat to the air. Operating the radiator inlet is critical on a liquid cooled engine.

In an air cooled engine the only way cylinder head temperatures are going to exceed tolerances is if something fails. They warm up and cool off much faster than their liquid cooled brethren.
They are by design, very efficient at cooling. They have to work using the latent heat capacity of air even at idle without overheating. They have very thin cylinder walls, minimal cases, and most of their weight is cooling fins because they need a huge surface area in contact with the air. Flight conditions leave them with an excess of cooling capacity. Over cooling is thereby much more of a problem than overheating.

That is why 99% of the time, the cowl flaps remain closed in flight.

Try teaching multi-engine students. If you actually shut down instead of sim feather, you will spend much of your time flying around with the engine at idle awaiting it to warm enough to continue to train. By the time a student goes thru engine out procedures, your warm operating engine you just shut down, is cold enough you cannot apply full throttle.

No one's arguing that. Yes, it would be good to have, along with like a dozen other earlier/later variants of existing planes. There's no reason not to have them.

Oh there will still be arguing .............they just cant help themselves :)

Ok, thank you very much Mr Crumpp, next time i fly (il2 or other simulator), i will check if the plane i choose is water or air cooled. I gess i understood all things mentioned.


:)

I am surprised it made any sense, I sent it from my IPAD while waiting at the terminal.

:grin:

Alright, just checking my sanity :)

I have moved the debate regarding the numbers of Fw190A-8's and A-9's to another topic, here.

Put it your thread in the same place JTD. Go debate among yourselves, you can all come to a wonderful conclusion together