FW190 FM Change

[JtD]

Wait - 270 km/h = 75m/s.
Bf 109 - 102 seconds to lose 1000m - 7650m distance / 1000m altitude = 7.7
Fw 190 - 116 seconds to lose 1000m - 8700m distance / 1000m altitude = 8.7

You had me scared there for a minute, 16.5 would be way too high. Even 12.8 sound like a very good figure for a plane like the 109.

[Nicholaiovitch]

Originally Posted by JtD

Wait - 270 km/h = 75m/s.
Bf 109 - 102 seconds to lose 1000m - 7650m distance / 1000m altitude = 7.7
Fw 190 - 116 seconds to lose 1000m - 8700m distance / 1000m altitude = 8.7

You had me scared there for a minute, 16.5 would be way too high. Even 12.8 sound like a very good figure for a plane like the 109.

Oops....sorry JtD...I was still calculating ROD and got my sums mixed up....however....have a look at this:-

http://www.adlerhorst-hangar.com/emil-91.html

Nicholaiovitch

[JtD]

Certainly an interesting account. Messerschmitt polars for the 109 E show a optimum L/D of about 10, at a Cl of around 0.5. I'm more inclined to stick with that figure than with Bob's. Focke Wulf gives L/D max of around 11 for the Fw 190A. Unfortunately I couldn't find polars for the flaps down configuration.

Both figures show a bit of a variance, so +- 1 is easily possible, but at any rate, I guess we can agree that the in game glide ratio as measured by you is (way) too low. I'll try to do my own test soon and will see if I can confirm your findings, it might help to reduce speed a bit.

[JtD]

Basically I can confirm your findings. I'm getting the 109 to about 1:8, the 190 to about 1:9. I think one difference between the real plane and the in game representation is the lack of a fully featherable propeller, this could improve glide ratio quite a bit.

Anyway, what does it tell us about the realism of the landing characteristics, or more specifically the glide characteristics with flaps and gear down? Personally I see no reason to consider the STOL characteristics of the 109 more realistic than the 4.11 190.

[Nicholaiovitch]

Originally Posted by JtD

Basically I can confirm your findings. I'm getting the 109 to about 1:8, the 190 to about 1:9. I think one difference between the real plane and the in game representation is the lack of a fully featherable propeller, this could improve glide ratio quite a bit.

Anyway, what does it tell us about the realism of the landing characteristics, or more specifically the glide characteristics with flaps and gear down? Personally I see no reason to consider the STOL characteristics of the 109 more realistic than the 4.11 190.

Your point about the fully featherable prop. not being available in game is a very worthy comment. (wish it was!)

There are other reports of glide ratios being as high as 1:12 for the Bf109, but thinking about it, all these reports were from BoB pilots attempting to glide across the Channel after engine problems. This would have meant heading SE and with the prevailing wind being from the west in UK, it is conceivable that a tail wind (especially from 4000m as quoted) would have given the impression of a superior glide performance.

It has been an interesting exercise flying these profiles and the conclusions are more or less what has been stated already:-

- The deceleration characteristics of the FW190 with the new FM from speeds above 400Kph to circuit speeds is heavily influenced by the prop behaviour in auto pitch.
- By ensuring radiator is fully open before decelerating and additionally selecting manual pitch (set 100%), the deceleration rate can be very considerably reduced.
- Descent rates (at idle and/or engine shut down)in the landing config. may/may not be truly realistic as no information seems available.

Nicholaiovitch

[ElAurens]

I enjoy threads like this, where level heads prevail, actual data, both in game and real world is discussed and valid conclusions are made in an adult manner.

Thanks gents.

[c4nuck]

I think everyone should check out my new thread regarding the 190. Well at least the A8. It comes with a 190A8 Handbook that has ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING you could imagine about the A8, where and how thick the armour was, HP with all settings and altitudes, fuel consumption, more than you could ever imagine. The complete package.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...193#post488193