fw 190a5 flight model

[Gaston]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Try this one. It took a bit of looking but I found it again: http://books.google.ca/books?id=HofA...20turn&f=false

The action describes an early Typhoon Mark IB in a low level escort run with other Typhoons. In the battle a Typhoon and FW190 end up in a sea level turn fight and although descriptions of the battle is light... it illustrates that the FW190 and Typhoon had fairly similar turn rates. In this case the Typhoon pilot was still attempting to pull lead when the FW190 stalled with it's legendary wing drop and crashed in to the sea.

By all rights the RAF considers the Spitfire to be much more manoeuvrable in the horizontal than any model of Typhoon or Tempest. It's not a direct comparison (I'll have a look in some other books) but I remembered this story and I think it illustrates that the FW190s high wing loading, powerloading, and other aerodynamic features that make it such a great hunter do not provide for great turn rate at sea level. Particularly with an aircraft as heavy as the Typhoon was. So to lay it out. If a Spitfire is better in the horizontal than a Typhoon by a significant amount and the FW190 and Typhoon are roughly even (slight edge to the Typhoon?) then the Spitfire is going to be better in the horizontal. In my mind almost unquestioningly so given any number of battle accounts from either side on any front where the two clashed.

On a side note the FW190 is much more manoeuvrable than the Typhoon in all other regards. The Typhoon has a slight sea level edge in speed and a slightly better turn, however, it's roll response is one of the worst of the WWII fighters (note: The Tempest much improved on this with an excellent roll rate particularly in Series II models).

This is a very interesting account, and I appreciate that this kind of comparison is sought and brought to light rather than the usual arguments.

Note I never said anything about the Typhoon: The Typhoon was the final development of the ... Hurricane(!) in the words of its designer.

I would not 100% assume the Typhoon is by necessity inferior in sustained turns to a Spitfire, given the clear superiority of the Hurricane to the Spitfire.

However in this account I would note two things: The FW-190As dived away from 10 000 ft. to sea level, and the Typhoon dived down in pursuit: They are above sustained turn speed throughout the turning engagement, and this is evidenced by the Typhoon pilot having "to lay off" because he was blacking out: Maximum sustained turn speed Gs are about 3.2/3.4 Gs in WWII, too low for the pilot to require a "relief" of this kind.

Another thing is that Eric Brown and many others have noted a "change in trim" on the FW-190A as speed decreased and the turn went from 230 knots to below 220 knots (or just around the 250 mph "change" in turn performance of the P-47D comparison): The change in trim is felt in the stick and can surprise the pilot (making him suddenly pull up into a stall as the stick "lightens") if he becomes nervous: Eric Brown even mentions this effect, but maybe, being a high hours test pilot, he underestimates its effect during the tension of a turning battle, saying it should not cause an accident).

I have read several Allied accounts of FW-190A pilots holding their own in a turn after a steep dive (vs P-47Ds), and then, as speed decreases below the 250 MPH treshold, suddenly nosing up and dropping a wing as the stick no longer requires as much pull-back to keep the turn, something which can be confusing (as noted by E. Brown).

For this and better turn performance reasons, one FW-190A ace describes dropping the throttle long before the merge (popping flaps as well), as a preparation for battle with P-51s, and never throttling back up, preferring always horizontal turning to go head-to head if the P-51s would (wisely) not turn with him...

Gaston