[I/JG27_Waggel]

Hi Fucida!
I hope you had a good birthday

The "old" A-4 was not so bad like most virt. pilots say. Spit Vb and 4© are no problem when you have an altitude advantage because the acceleration was unsatisfactorily. Even when you had the energy, the A-4 bleeded even in gentle turns.

The A-3 now has a "toxic" acceleration caused by the new historical horsepower. The agility and the handling is a little bit better. Reduced bleedig effect in getle high speed turns. The limitation now is caused by the dark grey glow of the pilot. You have to be carefully sometimes. We had to go into this direction because the spitfires are overmodeled in their agility. The rollrate of the spits is too high for example.

The maximum dive speed is a little secret (but not unhistorical). It is a little bit higher than in the old A-4 but not much. At the moment the A-3 has the late A-4 cockpit. This will be fixed soon with a new cockpit ad instruments of the year 1941-1942 (We got some parts of the Emil in the new panels). Flying with max. divespeed will be a little problem caused by this new instrument:



You have to guess your speed after 800 km/h and the instrument could have deviations at high speed. We do not really know :-D So be carefully ;-)

When you take a look at the radiators (Kiemenspaltbleche), you can move them in the A-3 because the open radiators whould brake the energy too much. The holes are in the lee of the cowling. So this bleedig is a no go. We had to make a compromise. You later will see that the A-1 and the A-2 haveno cotrolled flaps :-D-

[Fucida]

Oleg's fw 190 lost theyr energy too quickly......and engine is 90% of cause

i tried an fw 190A4 with modified file bottons with correct engine parameters and it fly very similar than the new A3 about speed, climb rate, turn rate and acceleration

Agree.

about dive speed i think that the problem is the DM....or not?

I think so.

Oleg's A5 is fast....ok...but u can only go straight and not turn. penalty?: u lost more speed than other planes.....or they are all overmodelled (not only spits) or only Fw's need moore power

Loosing of speed in turns is very difficult question of many aspects. Wing loading, polar line of plane and power/weight ratio (+ prop. efficiency). Is difficult to clear it up..but is absolutely correct, that Fw 190 looses speed in turns much more, than most other planes. Simply: It wasn't turn fighter. Look for example at well known american test between Fw 190 A-5 and F4U + F6F LINK - section maneuverability (it seems not like maneuverability, maybe better is "turn ability").

Hi Fucida!
I hope you had a good birthday

Hi Waggel!
Yes, new A-3 is in many aspects good job. Geburtstag war SEHR gut

The "old" A-4 was not so bad like most virt. pilots say. Spit Vb and 4© are no problem when you have an altitude advantage because the acceleration was unsatisfactorily. Even when you had the energy, the A-4 bleeded even in gentle turns.
The A-3 now has a "toxic" acceleration caused by the new historical horsepower. The agility and the handling is a little bit better. Reduced bleedig effect in getle high speed turns. The limitation now is caused by the dark grey glow of the pilot. You have to be carefully sometimes. We had to go into this direction because the spitfires are overmodeled in their agility. The rollrate of the spits is too high for example.

New A-3 should be in most aspects like lighter A-5 I think. I think that E-bleeding of old A-5 is quite historical, it seems quite correct. It shloud bleed energy faster than other planes..maybe except class "Thunderbolt". On the other hand I'm hardly not able to recognize differences between FM of new A-3 and old A-5 (and I'm glad..) . But I must absolutely dissaprove with idea compensate overmodelled Spits with overmodelling 190s. That's way to hell . But It's maybe just my opinion..

When you take a look at the radiators (Kiemenspaltbleche), you can move them in the A-3 because the open radiators whould brake the energy too much. The holes are in the lee of the cowling. So this bleedig is a no go. We had to make a compromise. You later will see that the A-1 and the A-2 haveno cotrolled flaps

Uh.. I don't understand it's openable, but with now effect for drag? Why isn't fixed open without (or with low) penalty? I don't understand this

[Pirate]

Very Nice

Pirate

[Hunin]

For a man who studied this plane for nearly a decade your knowledge seems amazingly limited.
Besides your testing result concerning max. dive speed being wrong ( I know that because I made it ) I really don't see why I should even begin to explain to you, seeing your disrespectful and arrant attitude.

[Hot Space]

This is a great little plane to fly 8)

[Fucida]

For a man who studied this plane for nearly a decade your knowledge seems amazingly limited.

Agree. I have many "black holes" in my knowledge of Fw 190. I can just try to learn more and more..as everybody

Besides your testing result concerning max. dive speed being wrong ( I know that because I made it ) I really don't see why I should even begin to explain to you, seeing your disrespectful and arrant attitude.

What was wrong on testing of max dive speed? Results? I've tried to be accurate, so I've made about 10 tests of A-5 and 10 of A-3 (1.4) and I've compared "average". It was controlled only by my hands and not via devicelink. But difference was really about 50 km/h between new A-3 and old A-5.
My attitude is good I think, that A-3 is piece of good work, especially 3D model, skin and engine. Sorry, if I've made you angry. English language is my enemy.

[ArcticViper]

Photographic evidence :wink:

Destruction speed A-4



And A-3

There is one thing you do wrong in that test which is a blatent mistake.

You can't test any speeds in a turn, in one of the images your plane is banked, and that'll give you a wrong result.

If you did that IRL, your IAS would be wrong due to the airflow into the pitot tube not being paralell with the tube itself. I can't be bothered to explain it here, but look it up on google or something if you don't understand what I mean :wink:

I really don't want to break out my aerodynamics book, it stands so nicely on my shelf :roll:

Just remember to keep your wings level with the horizon for any tests involving airspeed, rate of climb/descent etc. and all will be grand :wink:

[heloguy]

He's also a checklist-across-the-face worth out of trim.

Would it not be more useful to use the speed bar in the case of testing? I would think it's more accurate than the gauge in the cockpit, though I never actually use the speedbar.

[WT_Horrido]

There is one thing you do wrong in that test which is a blatent mistake.

You can't test any speeds in a turn, in one of the images your plane is banked, and that'll give you a wrong result.

If you did that IRL, your IAS would be wrong due to the airflow into the pitot tube not being paralell with the tube itself. I can't be bothered to explain it here, but look it up on google or something if you don't understand what I mean :wink:

I really don't want to break out my aerodynamics book, it stands so nicely on my shelf :roll:

Just remember to keep your wings level with the horizon for any tests involving airspeed, rate of climb/descent etc. and all will be grand :wink:

The plane is not banked. It is in spin immediately after wing destruction.

[WT_Horrido]

I am not sure if I understand well what is the matter here, but A-3 was not equiped with adjustable cowl flaps. Neither the A-4 btw. Adjustable cowl flaps are established since A-5 (and some late A-4)
Some of the A-4 were equiped with it by return also.

[Dietz]

Its not showing up in QMB list...I'm up to date with ACinstall2.8 & AAA installer...so can't figure out my problem...do I need to add aline of text somewhere?It looks great with new cowl too!
Dietz

[Dietz]

Nevermind- My bad! :lol:

[xiotis_1]

I installed it and is great. Thank you!

[TCFsube]

Good job!

[Bremspropeller]

One short question:


Is it possible to introduce a "sliding canopy"?
It would be sufficient if the canopy only opened on the exterrior model.