fw 190a5 flight model

[K_Freddie]

I am just pointing out the error in the 'document', which does not seem to come from a pilots POV. Pilots can be dimwits, but to get the prop-rotation wrong, is from a pongo/groundhog/political commissar.
And... yes I read that doc, and have highlighted this error elsewhere!

[K_Freddie]

I think what really is lacking is a serious counter-argument (with circumstantial evidence/docs) to gaston's story.
His 'evidence' is purely documentary and he is definitely well read on the topic, but he provides a really convincing argument that no one here can really refute (it's like religion)

What I can say, IL2 gamewise, is that Oleg's modelling does come close to what Gaston's hypothesis - In a FW190 I can outturn a spit in a right turn at stall speed - I have done it online many a time..

When I get my pedals working again.. you're all dead meat

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

I think what really is lacking is a serious counter-argument (with circumstantial evidence/docs) to gaston's story.
His 'evidence' is purely documentary and he is definitely well read on the topic, but he provides a really convincing argument that no one here can really refute (it's like religion)

What I can say, IL2 gamewise, is that Oleg's modelling does come close to what Gaston's hypothesis - In a FW190 I can outturn a spit in a right turn at stall speed - I have done it online many a time..

When I get my pedals working again.. you're all dead meat

Unless I'm missing something, Gaston is arguing against IL-2s modelling of the situation. Previously the FW190 was a much more difficult aircraft to turn. With 4.11 it's turn rate was increased and it's easier to extract a better turn at all speeds.

Gaston has provided as much argument as there has been counter argument IMHO. Choices have been made to accept some of the information and there is a degree of interpretation required but I think IL-2 is essentially right at this point (although it's never perfect) and I haven't seen anything damning that suggests otherwise.

What kind of pedals and whats wrong with them or just not plugged in yet?

[K_Freddie]

Originally Posted by IceFire

With 4.11 it's turn rate was increased and it's easier to extract a better turn at all speeds.

??? - I'm trying not to laugh

Originally Posted by IceFire

What kind of pedals and whats wrong with them or just not plugged in yet?

My pedals

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

??? - I'm trying not to laugh

Totally serious... load up IL-2 Compare from 4.07 and 4.11 and check.

FW190A-5 in 4.07:

Best turn speed: 370kph
Turn time at best turn speed: 24+ seconds

Turn time at 280kph: 33 seconds
Turn time at 420kph: 25+ seconds

In 4.11:

Best turn speed: 310kph
Turn time at best turn speed: 23 seconds

Turn time at 280kph: 26+ seconds
Turn time at 420kph: 27+ seconds

So you can see the turn parameters are different and largely better. There is a slightly slower turn rate at the higher speeds but it's a 2 second difference while at lower speeds there is a 7 second advantage. Overall the chart shows a wider spread in 4.11 meaning there is a better overall turn rate for the FW190 across the speed range than there was previously.

It also works seat of the pants... which is why I checked in the first place.

[Glider]

Originally Posted by K_Freddie

I think what really is lacking is a serious counter-argument (with circumstantial evidence/docs) to gaston's story.
His 'evidence' is purely documentary and he is definitely well read on the topic, but he provides a really convincing argument that no one here can really refute (it's like religion)

Are you seriously saying that there is no evidence that the Spit turns better than the Fw190?

[K_Freddie]

...at low speed, just above the stall. This is where Gaston is making his point.

Everyone is going 'No ways, it can out turn them as all the flight comparison tests have been done' - I'm also yet to see an official WW2 low speed turning comparison. That Russian report might be the closest that we'll ever get..


BTW .. online the one time I had a Spit, probably a IX, on my tail when I slowed down to full flaps and 50-100ft above the ground. I went into a gentle right bank and he followed, I then threw it into a full hard RH turn at full throttle and right rudder. The Spit couldn't follow - maybe the pilot or maybe the FMs might be correct.

[JtD]

The Spitfire stall speed is lower and therefore it turns better at low speed. In fact it can still turn at speeds at which the Fw 190 can't even fly straight any more.

[Mustang]

my 2 cents
About maneuverability and turn rate ..

PLEASE Do not think about "HISTORICAL DATA" and turn rate and dont think about the mathematics and measures..
Think about the pilot!
and think about what you do not know

In the stick P-51D, measures 48 lbs in a 3g pull. Up to 86 Lbs at
5g's.
The P-47D, OTOH, requires just 16 lbs at 3g and 27 lbs at 5g's.
The testers state that the Mustang was a true "two hander".


The turn rate is less important for a dogfight..

Look at other things ..

[K_Freddie]

You have a good point.. it probably made the difference which is not mentioned in combat reports

Radial-vs-Inline which can have a marked effect on turning ability.. ignored also (and mentioned in some report which I forget) is the FW190 ability to hang by it's prop... which looks like a Radial characteristic.