fw 190a5 flight model

[gaunt1]

Hi!

Im asking this because Im not an expert of german planes: Is the acceleration of the Fw 190 ingame is realistic or not? The plane is fast, but its short term acceleration looks quite weak. I shot down quite a few 190s even in a LaGG-3S4, he couldnt get away in time, the LaGG accelerated faster, sometimes even in a dive. So it is a bit suspicious for me. LaGG-3, especially early versions accelerated sluggishly. The 190 was really that bad IRL? Correct me if Im wrong, but as far as I know high wing loading means less drag in level flight, so plane should accelerate better.

[MaxGunz]

The answer depends on the speed, same as when the US ran a test condition competition and found the P-47 they had accelerated poorly up to a certain speed where it did the smack the head on the rest thing. With that plane, you learn that speed and don't go slower in combat.

It's about efficient air speeds for each plane, high wing loaded planes are inefficient at lower speeds to gain efficiency at higher speeds.

It's about induced drag as a percent of total drag. Until you can get your nose down, just staying aloft has a high price while at top speed it is 1% to 2% of the total. So you got to get to efficient speed before you can get your best acceleration. When another plane is already in that speed zone for his plane and you are not for yours, he may leave you behind.

Nobody pwns everywhere. When short test conclusions say at all speeds; read it to say all the speeds and conditions they tested, the ones that made sense to the testers at the time. That was AFDU, the tests would set up current combat conditions, the speeds appropriate.

You still need tracks to talk about specific online events. Impressions are not always right.

[TBear]

Some things just never stop.

What are the problem trying to create "realism" in a simulator.

1. Numbers is only 90% of it, the last 10% are pilot experience. Numbers cant me made for individual pilot skill. Any pilot fly hes way and even a test pilot is stil something you cant calculate with hard numbers.

2. History. As a sim pilot you have a huge benefit. You can read and learn both sides tactics and perfect any manouver. In those day you couldnt.

3. You dont die for real of a pilot mistake. You stall and crash, you just hit re-fly. They couldnt. You can fly any plane in the game at 110% percent. They couldnt. They had to stay as close to 95% as posible to make sure they got out of the flying alone alive. Put in some combat and a bad mechanic and you have death.

Remember this is a simulation, and that gives some problems to hit a RL experience mark. Some 109`s turned better than some allied planes. In many situations it didnt come down to some math numbers, but to the individual skills.

I bet you could take a combat pilot and let him fly a 190 and then a test pilot and you would end up with something that is max 80% identical.....the last 20% is darn important...even 5 different pilots would give 5 different sets of data....what pilot have the best day must then be the most acurate...

[gaunt1]

Originally Posted by MaxGunz

The answer depends on the speed, same as when the US ran a test condition competition and found the P-47 they had accelerated poorly up to a certain speed where it did the smack the head on the rest thing. With that plane, you learn that speed and don't go slower in combat.

It's about efficient air speeds for each plane, high wing loaded planes are inefficient at lower speeds to gain efficiency at higher speeds.

It's about induced drag as a percent of total drag. Until you can get your nose down, just staying aloft has a high price while at top speed it is 1% to 2% of the total. So you got to get to efficient speed before you can get your best acceleration. When another plane is already in that speed zone for his plane and you are not for yours, he may leave you behind.

Nobody pwns everywhere. When short test conclusions say at all speeds; read it to say all the speeds and conditions they tested, the ones that made sense to the testers at the time. That was AFDU, the tests would set up current combat conditions, the speeds appropriate.

You still need tracks to talk about specific online events. Impressions are not always right.

Thanks for the explanation!

Now I understand why it was so easy to out-accelerate a 190 in a LaGG. It always occured between 250-350 km/h. So then the efficient air speed of the 190 is above 350 km/h.

[MaxGunz]

The 190 may be stepping the pace out before 350 even as the La 5 is farther along in his curve.

[badatflyski]

Originally Posted by JtD

It's important to note that the Fw 190A was noted to have very good acceleration and to for instance out accelerate a Spitfire IX (Merlin 61) under most conditions. Imo this can be attributed to the Kommandogerät, which allowed a quicker change of power settings, so the Fw 190 was already on it's way where the Spitfire was still getting the mixture right.

I would rather say it's related to a better prop efficiency, what is awfully modelled in il2 just like the kommanda gerrât that is much too slow in response and also not able to keep revs in climb (back to response time)

[JtD]

If it was related to prop efficiency, climb would suffer, too.

[MaxGunz]

Get someone who can fly a 190 at full throttle and hold it level from 240 kph to top speed and record an online track. Get a few of those for different alts.

If the ride isn't too bouncy like the autopilots tended to do years ago then change in speed second to second will give a good idea about acceleration. But the flights need to be smooth and as flat as possible or the result will be less, and yes the way the AI's kept level dragged, fly combat like that and see how you do.

[MaxGunz]

So nobody objects to FW acceleration enough to gather data?

Of course not. In a few months or a year the "issue" will be raised again as "fact".

[Robert932]

typhoon anybody?