All-Aircraft-Simulations
Which performance should have the new Fw-190A-4? - Printable Version

+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: IL2 MODS Download & Discussion (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=267)
+--- Forum: IL-2 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=348)
+---- Forum: IL2 MODS Discussion Section 4.09m (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=292)
+---- Thread: Which performance should have the new Fw-190A-4? (/showthread.php?tid=61587)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: Which performance should have the new Fw-190A-4? - Guest - 13.05.2009

Which performance?You have answered that question yourself Wink

I/JG27_Waggel Wrote:The A-4 is nothing else than an A-3 but with another radio system.

Make it historical.

- Aymar_Mauri - 13.05.2009

Stax Wrote:What would be the difference between a A-4 from 1943 and a A-5? I mean: If a A-4 from 1943 is essentially a A-5, why not skip the A-4 and make the A-5 instead?

IIRC the difference between a 1942 A-3 and A-4 are the loadout options, so why not make a A-4 with same performance as A-3 but increased loadouts (Jabo, Schlachtflugzeug).
Then make a A-5 with the performance of 1943.
Disagree entirelly. The A5 is also necessary due to physical differences in the chassis/fuselage. These differences were necessary to change the CoG to increase the variety and type of loadouts. Also the A4 was the first really widespread version in use. We can't compromisse if we want historical accuracy.

So:

A3 (no loadouts) > A4 (basic external loadouts) > A5 (more extensive external loadouts).

All of those existing made by Oleg need new slot versions. All are necessary including the ones we don't have like the F3, F9 and a couple more representative of the G series.

- I/JG27_Waggel - 13.05.2009

Like Aymar_Mauri says, the A-4 is different to the A-5 but with the release of the A-5 the A-4 got many updates that came from the A-5

The cockpit:
The slot A-4 has the same instruments like the A-5. This cockpit is a 1943 cockpit with electronical horizon and altimeter.

Cooling flaps:
The A-5 was the first 190 with cooling flaps. The A-4 got re-tooled with those flaps. At the moment the A-3 has cooling flaps in the UI1.1. Do not know why they are in. Perhaps a mistake with the button files.

Engine:
During the year 1942 the BMW 801 d2 was optimized. At the end of 1942 the A-4 made round about 550-555 km/h at SL instead of 540-545 like in the A-3. In early 1943 the A-4 and the A-5 had the same performance. In mid 1943 the BMW 801 d2 again got an update in the A-5 which increased the top speed on SL up to 570km/h.

I think the A-4 with setup 2 whould be a good connecting piece between the A-3 and the A-5.

- Flanker35M - 13.05.2009

S!

So if the Fw190A-3 would have no cooling flaps in IL-2..how would it affect the overheat and other values. I for sure want it to be historically accurate, just wondering how the game engine would interpret it. Really eager to see the new Fw190A-4 and onwards. I also wait for the G-models and the F-series Smile

- I/JG27_Waggel - 13.05.2009

You can open the cooling flaps in several gradations. You also can fix them to one gradiation in the FM.

The A-1 has not even cooling slots. She for example whould get fixed closed radiator flaps. You will see that this plane has massive cooling problems.

The A-2 had no radiator flaps but she had cooling slots. In german they are called "Kiemenspaltblech". A little bit different to explain in english :-D. There where still some overheating problems in the A-2 but not so substantially like in the A-1. So the slots of the A-2 are opened and fixed. Same with the A-3.

In the next UI1.1 update this will be fixed in the A-3. You have to take a little bit more care with overheating. The engine will overheat very quick wen you are using he emergency boost (110% throttle).
I do not use this emergency boost very often. Just for accerleration in combat situations.

In Il-2 these cooling flaps create a wind-resistation when they are opened. Without checking the data I whould say that this is round about 10 km/h minus in the top speed at SL. From what I Know the cooling flaps where mostly opened to keep up the air circulation in the cowling of the engine because the double radial engine created a lot of heat. The Slots were closed in high altitudes like in the 109, perhpas in winter and in combat.

F and G series will come but later. They are based on the main A-series and first of all we want to make those planes to have a good bas for special versions like the F series, the G series, The "Sturmb

- Aymar_Mauri - 13.05.2009

[quote="I/JG27_Waggel"]F and G series will come but later. They are based on the main A-series and first of all we want to make those planes to have a good bas for special versions like the F series, the G series, The "Sturmb

- Flanker35M - 14.05.2009

S!

So I guess you have to do some tweaking on the A-3 to achieve given specs if cooling slats are set permanently open? I recall reading from Helmut Lipfert's book that he could slow down the Bf109G up to 50km/h when opening the radiator flaps. Finns used them to help the rather weak landing flaps by opnening them manually for landing. But otherwise on automatic so the engine would not get overcooled.

- Stax - 14.05.2009

I/JG27_Waggel Wrote:Engine:
During the year 1942 the BMW 801 d2 was optimized. At the end of 1942 the A-4 made round about 550-555 km/h at SL instead of 540-545 like in the A-3. In early 1943 the A-4 and the A-5 had the same performance. In mid 1943 the BMW 801 d2 again got an update in the A-5 which increased the top speed on SL up to 570km/h.

I think the A-4 with setup 2 whould be a good connecting piece between the A-3 and the A-5.

This makes sense if you choose the upgraded version of the A-5, agreed.

- Stax - 14.05.2009

I/JG27_Waggel Wrote:In mid 1943 the BMW 801 d2 again got an update in the A-5 which increased the top speed on SL up to 570km/h.

Wasn't this the C3 injection used only by fighter bombers at low level?

- zorro1980 - 14.05.2009

IMHO , leave the A4 as it is ingame , we already have the A3 so ...

what would new A4 change except for some extra speed of 10 km/h ? IMHO , it's not a big deal except maybe for online guys who want extra advantage with their 190 in 42 ... ) . I'd rather see a new A8 with corrected DM (should be tougher than A5 , in game it is not ) , but ok if you make a new A4 then with option 2 it would probably be better

On the other hand i think it is a great news that you plan to make F and G series and thank you for that , these planes are missed at the moment for campaigns (we have the F8 , but with DM that could be improved as well )

- Monguse - 14.05.2009

All you should need to compare what we have in the game.

Main Page
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/


Focke-Wulf 190-A/4 Airplane PDF
http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/ ... r-1107.pdf

- Aymar_Mauri - 14.05.2009

zorro1980 Wrote:IMHO, leave the A4 as it is ingame, we already have the A3 so ...
So, what? In WW2 designs were always incrementally improved. Why not here? Or do you want the 1.32 ATA kommandogerat/acceleration-factor strangled tractor A4 we have in-game?

zorro1980 Wrote:what would new A4 change except for some extra speed of 10 km/h ? IMHO , it's not a big deal except maybe for online guys who want extra advantage with their 190 in 42 ... ) . I'd rather see a new A8 with corrected DM (should be tougher than A5 , in game it is not ) , but ok if you make a new A4 then with option 2 it would probably be better
We need a new A4 because Oleg's A4 isn't an FW190A at all. It's a 50ton anemic flying brick. And the A4 was actually one of the most widespread versions.

Besides, the modders (thank them for that), are making all new versions of the in-game Antons. And in dire need of them this game is.

zorro1980 Wrote:On the other hand i think it is a great news that you plan to make F and G series and thank you for that , these planes are missed at the moment for campaigns (we have the F8 , but with DM that could be improved as well )
I have to agree in here. The F8 seems to have the same DM as the A8, which is incorrect. On the other hand, it seems to have the same weight, which is also incorrect.

- zorro1980 - 15.05.2009

To be fair to Oleg , his A4 is a derated one that is representative of the majority of 190 A4 that fought in Eastern front in 1942 (mostly used as Jabo )

But he admitted himself a few years ago on former Ubi oleg's ready room that the real A4 fighter version that was used for instance against the British in 42-43 should be similar to the ingame A5 in term of performances , so i understand your point mate .

Yes , DM of A8 and F8 is wrong , i'm aware it's a very difficult thing to balance because the game engine simplifies damage models , but as you said , the weight is incorrect and these two planes should be tougher than they are currently IMHO .

Also it would be great if when we take load out " 2 MG-151 only " ( i think it's called "U1" ) we really get a lighter aircraft with different FM , cause it doesn't seem to be the case in game currently , cheers mate

- Uther - 15.05.2009

Aaaah would love a heavily armoured sturmbok!
As for the A4,I would say the second option.
A shame you can't make the A1 catch fire through overheating as I think happened (or can you? :wink: )

- Guest - 15.05.2009

Uther Wrote:A shame you can't make the A1 catch fire through overheating as I think happened (or can you? :wink: )


...someone told me that anything is possible with java in IL2 Wink......and stock A4 is not so bad if you use manual pitch....