Engine settings in game are historical:
A-4: derated 1.42 ata by limited throttle, max. 1.35 ata 2450 rpm (basically combat setting)
A-4FR, A-5, A-6: 1.42 ata / 2700 rpm (=Notleistung setting)
A-5 1.65 ata: 1.65 ata/2700 rpm 1st gear, 1.42 ata/2700 rpm second gear (C3 Einspritzung)
A-8: 1.58 ata /2700 rpm 1st gear, 1.65 ata/2700rpm second gear (erhöhte Notleistung)
A-9: 1.65 ata/2700 rpm, (Notleistung for -TS engine, it's not a -D any more)

Notleistung isn't emergency power?
I'm a bit curious why TD removed the 110% power on the A-4 FR, ecc

I believe that's because you now get full MFP/RMP at 100%.

The 110% was a bit of nonsense anyway... As for the other changes and erhöhte Notleistung, it seems to be in good match with historical reality accorting to what JtD wrote.

I'm a pilot and it would surprise me very much if the power-computer-thingy would have the prop in any other position than fine (low pitch) below 50% throttle. Seriously. Hydraulic CSP governors lose control below 50% and their props drop to fine pitch (as do American electrics, can't say for other electrics but I would expect the same). One big reason for this, beside the mechanical limitations of the system, is if you need to suddenly tap full power the prop is right there waiting for it.

As for flaps, beside reducing stall speed and decreasing stall pitch angle probably the biggest thing they do for fighters of this era is create drag, and the highest drag flap there is is the split flap. It has always felt to me that split flaps perform no differently than other flaps in the game. Just my opinion.

Could I add +1 to this post from IceFire.

I have no intention of adding to the posts on whether the FM for the the 190's is more realistic or better in terms of RL as I just do not have the knowledge that some of you at TD have.

However, in terms of general handling and the drag curve especially in the landing configuration, the 190 does not in any way resemble a relatively high wing loading a/c.

I would hope that a future change in the drag curve could maintain what TD is trying to achieve in terms of fighting ability but also correct the now unrealistic drag with gear and flaps in the landing configuration.

Nicholaiovitch

The Kommandogerät reduced rpm to 400-500 at 0% power. Seems to be a good enough match in game.

I think I have to repeat myself - try landing another heavy, clean plane with 0% pitch (say P-47, P-51). The Fw 190 is nothing out of the ordinary.

When I am landing any aircraft in IL2 I figure a big part of it is slowing the aircraft down, so I drop landing flaps and gear as soon as my speed is low enough so they will not break off.

When flying online combat no one wants to spend a lot of time landing, they want to get down and get back up quickly. Once in a great while I will do a drawn-out text-book landing just to show myself how well I can still do it, but that is not too often. I would bet that in WWII there were many situations when pilots did not like dawdling around landing at low altitude and speed also?

I will line myself up with the strip as best I can, drop flaps and gear as soon as I can on the approach. Usually the gear will not break if your speed is below 400-350km/hr somewhere. If I do not think I will be able to touch down at 200km/hr then I will scrub off some speed with a hard S turn or some other E-burning slow maneuver. If I am going so fast when I drop the gear that it breaks then that too is the ground crew's problem to fix the pancake damage.

The FW190 was a hot plane with a high take-off and landing speed wasn't it?
I have never taken the time to see how fast I could touch it down without it disintegrating and blowing up, but it might be fun to try landing at 250, then 300km/hr etc. and find out what the limit is....

Addition: I never used much or any flaps taking off in the 190, it was always faster not to and it always seemed the aircraft was pretty easy to lift off the ground at 200km/hr. So it makes sense that if you try to land at over that speed the aircraft will try to stay in the air. I don't know why I always tried to take off and land at around 200km/hr no matter what I was flying, it just seemed to always work well. If I had a lot of time and enjoyed it more, I might land slower or use flaps on take off.

The jamming the flaps on landing was bad advice as it just makes it harder to land. If I am taking the time to actually land, of course you want to raise the flaps as soon as you touch the ground.

I will admit that often on dogfight servers where I want to spend the most time in the air with ammo and fuel to try and meet victory conditions before time runs out, I will skip landing altogether and either pancake the aircraft in, or just bail and get a new plane. Points-whores will not like that idea though.....

+1 Jumo. Also, personally, if I find I am too high or too fast I usually just go into a drastic sideslip until I am not. Not an answer to anyone's questions about the realism of the 4.11 FM but it certainly solves the problem. I haven't actually flown it yet in 4.11 so I can't really comment, but maybe people are just used to the 190 decelerating too quick? I dunno, probably time to try it out. :)

Side slip on final approach is the most effective maneuver to do if u want to drop speed faster than usual. Just try it and you'll see the effect. I've used it all the time for my landing and never had any kind of problem about slowing down to the right landing speed.

I finally got used to the new FM, no problems with landing (I can actually land better now). The trick is to begin your approach early to loose speed so when you level over the strip you are at 200-220kph. Still I think flaps should produce a bit more drag with this plane since compared to other aircraft, they have a minimal effect on speed.