Fw 190 - numbers for A-8 and A-9

The limiting factor of R11 production was either the radio or (more likely) the autopilot (I doubt it was the windscreen) and, like the A9 with it's engines, there likely would have been more made if more components were available. And there is no reason at all that the R11 wouldn't have been used on normal daylight missions with other "normal" fighters. All we're talking about (physical difference) is a larger radio and an autopilot. This opinion (and that's all it is, frankly) is based on my research on all-weather 109 numbers and use.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Quick infos from me:

JG1 'Oesau' losses of Fw 190 A-8 in only 1945: 52 (Jan: 39 | Feb: 10 | Mart: 3)
JG1 'Oesau' losses of Fw 190 A-9 in only 1945: 15 (Jan: 10 | Feb: 4 | Mart: 1)
JG1 'Oesau' losses of Fw 190 D-9 in only 1945: 2 (Jan: 2 | Feb: 0 | Mart: 0)

19x A-8 and NO Fw 190 A-9 of JG1 were shot down during operation 'Bodenplatte', the majority of all other went down during combat with fighters.

In 1944 its even much more evident, that Fw 190 A-8 was the mainly used type in JG1.
I can count the numbers, if anyone needs it, but its much more than in 1945, naturally.

EDIT: In 1945, JG1 flew also mainly Bf 109 G-14 (14 lost), very rarly Bf 109 G-6 (2 lost), K-4 (2 lost) ... and He162 (11 lost).

[MiloMorai]

Thanks Caspar, good info.

Would it be possible to post the monthly losses for the A-8s and A-9s?

[MiloMorai]

Originally Posted by zipper

The limiting factor of R11 production was either the radio or (more likely) the autopilot (I doubt it was the windscreen) and, like the A9 with it's engines, there likely would have been more made if more components were available. And there is no reason at all that the R11 wouldn't have been used on normal daylight missions with other "normal" fighters. All we're talking about (physical difference) is a larger radio and an autopilot. This opinion (and that's all it is, frankly) is based on my research on all-weather 109 numbers and use.

So right zipper, especially considering the weather conditions over Europe at that time of year.

[1984]

here little about bodenplatte on russian, but, if i'm not mistaken, from not-russian books - personally i counted 27 a-9 from 1446 planes in total...

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by MiloMorai

Would it be possible to post the monthly losses for the A-8s and A-9s?

I edited my post and added monthly losses (and took Bf 109 G-10 type out, that was a misreading).

[MiloMorai]

Thanks Caspar.

Would it be safe to assume that the A-8s were the more numerous Fw190 in JG1?

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by MiloMorai

Thanks Caspar.

Would it be safe to assume that the A-8s were the more numerous Fw190 in JG1?

Over view

http://www.ww2.dk/air/jagd/jg1.htm


JGI
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/bijg1.html

JGII
http://www.ww2.dk/oob/bestand/jagd/biijg1.html

[MiloMorai]

Unfortunately Alpha the first link does not give the model number. The other 2 links end in Dec 1944.

It does not help prove or disprove this quote from Post #1:

The FW-190A9 was most common of the Antons in 1945.

Also, the WNr in Post #1 add up to 930 Fw190A-9s. During this same time period (beginning IX 1944), some 2980 Fw190A-8s were produced. A ratio of 3.2:1 (A-8 : A-9)

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by MiloMorai

Thanks Caspar.

Would it be safe to assume that the A-8s were the more numerous Fw190 in JG1?

Originally Posted by MiloMorai

Unfortunately Alpha the first link does not give the model number. The other 2 links end in Dec 1944.

It does not help prove or disprove this quote from Post #1:


Also, the WNr in Post #1 add up to 930 Fw190A-9s. During this same time period (beginning IX 1944), some 2980 Fw190A-8s were produced. A ratio of 3.2:1 (A-8 : A-9)

Who's referring to the first post in the thread, I was replying to your assumption about JG1 FW's in the first quote.

Personally i don't see what the problem is, if it flew historically add in in to the game......

The quibble over exact production dates and A8 or A9 quantities is neither here nor there,
I'm sure that late 44-45 putting bums on seats was more the priority than what the seat was attached to and the job it had to do.