NeilStirling
Airman
- 24
- Oct 6, 2006
P-51D "Mustang" vs. Fw-190 "Dora"
- Thread starter pathchampion
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
My original posting to example that the Dora's performance was still comparable to the Mustang for most of a streetfight at the regular combat and climb settings for both aircraft, and was in response to this post. I had chosen to be illustrative comparing the start u-notleistung setting for ~1.72atm without MW50 as still competitive with the Mustang at 66" Hg at 2000 metres which is the preferred combat altitude in the low gear.
Your posts Milosh just happened to enter proceedings right there, addressing my comparative description of Jumo 213A performance versus the Merlin 68/70 which was for start u-notleistung with no MW50, the comparison you introduced 8th AF Mustangs using 150 octane.
I'm not sure if you're following me here. This is the reason for my stipulation that a comparative view with relation to your posts need be taken of the 1945 production Dora with high pressure MW50, which again has comparable performance to the Mustang, but at different best performance heights.
Altea was stating the Mustang was clearly superior to the Dora under service conditions. This was what I was challenging, that it was contemporary according to the data and the reports. No more, and I'm certainly not trying to say the Dora was superior or even equal in terms of overall refinement and finish quality. Just they're both good and I wouldn't like to be in either when jumped by a competent pilot in the other.
It sort of got all confused when you jumped in.
drgondog
Major
The P-51B-7 and above (including corresponding P-51C) were equipped at factory for the 1650-7). All P-51D and K models had the 1650-7. The P-51H had the -9 capable of 90" at WEP/WI.
The P-51B-7 and -15 IMHO were the best performing Mustangs until the P-51H but had issues with slanted guns jamming and wheel door uplocks until the modifications reached ETO in June 1944.
FW-190 was slow and unreliable, check out aircarft performance, test at wright patterson. read the test of the FW-190, time and time again they would have to replace the engines to get any numbers.
WWII Aircraft Performance
just a few lines, but read them yourself, over and over replacing engines, problems after problems, then read the other aircraft tested.
Flight Report FW 190 D-9/210001
Nr. 1 S.O.Archiv
Bad Eilsen
Condition:
Engine Jumo 213 A/1021521415 to 8.9
Engine Jumo 213 A/1021520539 to 28.9
Engine Jumo 213 C/1001580035
D-9 series condition, normal surface without special treatment.
Armament: 2 MG 131, 2 MG 151.
Propeller: 41276.16 V.
Main wheel doors.1
Long range fuselage tank.
Radiator flap in front of the air intake fixed in flush position.
Lenghtened air intake 20.9 to 28.9.
Radiator flap control governor attached to propeller pressure circuit. Rücköl vom VDM – Regler fliesst zum (Sauganschluss) des Luftschraubenreglers zurück.
Program:
1. Test flights.2
2. Level speeds.
3. Investigations for improvement in climb.
4. Checking the governing action of the radiator flaps.
Results:
1. The test flights determined the airspeed indicator error for an Eltron and a Bruhn pitot tube with equal dimensions. In contrast to the Bruhn pitot tube, the compressibility error of the Eltron tube, as deliverd with 3 d slot distance, is considered very large, particularly with level speeds.
A Bruhn tube is consequently more appropriate for test flights.
2. The airplane was measured for speed using combat and take-off power. The following speeds were obtained without ETC and with main (operable) wheel doors: 398 mph (641 km/h) at combat power with a full throttle height of 19,357 feet (5900 m) and 413 mph (665 km/h) at take-off power with a full throttle height of 20,177 feet (6150 m). The radiator flaps were set on flush postion (Strakstellung) during these flights. Only a small reduction in full throttle height (~100 m) occurs by completely opening all radiator flaps up to the non-powered flap, in front of the air intake in flush position setting, while the level speed is reduced by approximately 32 mph (50 km/h).
Speeds increase 9 to 10 mph (15 to 16 km/h) below and 17 to 18 mph (28 to 29 km/h) above full throttle height, with the change from combat to take-off power.
The first engine failed from supercharger damage after a short period of operation. The lattice filter built into the air intake broke and parts of it dropped into the supercharger.
The second engine also suffered supercharger damage. The cause here is unknown. The C-engine, Serial Nr. 1001580035, from the failed V-53 and measured on the Jumo altitude test bed, was inserted as a replacement.
3. Climb FTH (Abfallhöhe)3 could be increased over ~ 700 m with this machine by a fixed setting of the non-powered radiator flap in front of the air intake. Like the further trials, e.g. Durchsteigen of the full throttle height with completely closed flaps (bezw.), extension of the air intake up to the point of the radiator flap swivel axis position (according to photo NR. 20027) showed a further improvement is not possible and the above-mentioned change is sufficient for performance improvement.
Details of these trials are to be taken from a special report
4. Except for the first inexplicable difference of 5° in the lubricant temperature gradients, no change of the engine temperatures was found in combat power climb due to air intake flap setting.
For the condition "all radiator flaps up", the following values resulted at the height where temperatures peaked (Temperaturumkehrhöhe):
Coolant temp. Radiator entrance tKE = 104° (teina + 26°)
Lubricant temp. Engine entrance töME = 129° (teina + 21°)
In comparison, the values for the condition before air intake flap setting:
tKE = 104° (teina + 26°)
töME = 124° (teina + 21°)
These temperatures so far are large relative to 213 A.
5. On suggestion of the company Jumo, the back oil attached at the propeller pressure circuit of the radiator flap automatic controller was supplied like that to the suction connection propeller pressure circuit. No objections showed up in the propeller and radiator flap control during the last flights, which were led through this condition of the installation. One control is still pending, whether the flaps also remain in their end positions in the dive. (no mesh filter before VDM automatic controllers anschl.)
WWII Aircraft Performance
just a few lines, but read them yourself, over and over replacing engines, problems after problems, then read the other aircraft tested.
Flight Report FW 190 D-9/210001
Nr. 1 S.O.Archiv
Bad Eilsen
Condition:
Engine Jumo 213 A/1021521415 to 8.9
Engine Jumo 213 A/1021520539 to 28.9
Engine Jumo 213 C/1001580035
D-9 series condition, normal surface without special treatment.
Armament: 2 MG 131, 2 MG 151.
Propeller: 41276.16 V.
Main wheel doors.1
Long range fuselage tank.
Radiator flap in front of the air intake fixed in flush position.
Lenghtened air intake 20.9 to 28.9.
Radiator flap control governor attached to propeller pressure circuit. Rücköl vom VDM – Regler fliesst zum (Sauganschluss) des Luftschraubenreglers zurück.
Program:
1. Test flights.2
2. Level speeds.
3. Investigations for improvement in climb.
4. Checking the governing action of the radiator flaps.
Results:
1. The test flights determined the airspeed indicator error for an Eltron and a Bruhn pitot tube with equal dimensions. In contrast to the Bruhn pitot tube, the compressibility error of the Eltron tube, as deliverd with 3 d slot distance, is considered very large, particularly with level speeds.
A Bruhn tube is consequently more appropriate for test flights.
2. The airplane was measured for speed using combat and take-off power. The following speeds were obtained without ETC and with main (operable) wheel doors: 398 mph (641 km/h) at combat power with a full throttle height of 19,357 feet (5900 m) and 413 mph (665 km/h) at take-off power with a full throttle height of 20,177 feet (6150 m). The radiator flaps were set on flush postion (Strakstellung) during these flights. Only a small reduction in full throttle height (~100 m) occurs by completely opening all radiator flaps up to the non-powered flap, in front of the air intake in flush position setting, while the level speed is reduced by approximately 32 mph (50 km/h).
Speeds increase 9 to 10 mph (15 to 16 km/h) below and 17 to 18 mph (28 to 29 km/h) above full throttle height, with the change from combat to take-off power.
The first engine failed from supercharger damage after a short period of operation. The lattice filter built into the air intake broke and parts of it dropped into the supercharger.
The second engine also suffered supercharger damage. The cause here is unknown. The C-engine, Serial Nr. 1001580035, from the failed V-53 and measured on the Jumo altitude test bed, was inserted as a replacement.
3. Climb FTH (Abfallhöhe)3 could be increased over ~ 700 m with this machine by a fixed setting of the non-powered radiator flap in front of the air intake. Like the further trials, e.g. Durchsteigen of the full throttle height with completely closed flaps (bezw.), extension of the air intake up to the point of the radiator flap swivel axis position (according to photo NR. 20027) showed a further improvement is not possible and the above-mentioned change is sufficient for performance improvement.
Details of these trials are to be taken from a special report
4. Except for the first inexplicable difference of 5° in the lubricant temperature gradients, no change of the engine temperatures was found in combat power climb due to air intake flap setting.
For the condition "all radiator flaps up", the following values resulted at the height where temperatures peaked (Temperaturumkehrhöhe):
Coolant temp. Radiator entrance tKE = 104° (teina + 26°)
Lubricant temp. Engine entrance töME = 129° (teina + 21°)
In comparison, the values for the condition before air intake flap setting:
tKE = 104° (teina + 26°)
töME = 124° (teina + 21°)
These temperatures so far are large relative to 213 A.
5. On suggestion of the company Jumo, the back oil attached at the propeller pressure circuit of the radiator flap automatic controller was supplied like that to the suction connection propeller pressure circuit. No objections showed up in the propeller and radiator flap control during the last flights, which were led through this condition of the installation. One control is still pending, whether the flaps also remain in their end positions in the dive. (no mesh filter before VDM automatic controllers anschl.)
more to read from Fw 190 G-3 Performance Test
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM
REPORT SERIAL NO. ENG-47-1743-A
26 May 1944
PERFORMANCE AND HANDLING
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FW-190 AIRPLANE
AAF NO. EB-104
I. Introduction
Performance and handling tests have been conducted at Wright Field on the Focke-Wulf 190, German fighter type airplane, AAF No. EB-104. These tests were made to obtain a quick check on the high speed, maximum rate of climb, and handling characteristics of this airplane. From 25 March 1944 to 15 April 1944 approximately 15 hours were flown on this airplane by Major G. E. Lundquist. Handling tests were also made by several other Flight Section pilots.
II Summary
The German Focke-Wulf 190, EB-104 is a single place, low wing all metal monoplane, powered with a 1750 bhp BMW 801-D fourteen cylinder two row radial engine equipped with a two speed internal supercharger. Tests were conducted at a take-off gross weight of 8535 pounds. The airplane is well armed and has provision for carrying heavy armament. It compares favorably with standard AAF fighter types in maneuverability, speed and climb at low and medium altitudes, but is definitely weaker in performance at altitudes over 28,000 ft. Stability was satisfactory at the weight and c.g. at which the airplane was tested and the controls are excellent at all speeds up to 400 MPH indicated airspeed where the elevator tends to become quite heavy and noticeable buffeting and vibration of the airplane occurs.
The airplane is easy to taxi but vision is somewhat restricted. Brakes operate by toe pressure and are readily applied for all positions of the rudder. The tail wheel is freely pivoting but can be locked by holding the control column back as on the P-51B.
H. Maneuverability and Aerobatics
The outstanding maneuverability feature of this airplane is it extremely high rate of roll. The radius of turn, however, is poor and it is only slightly improved by using the maneuvering flap position of 15 degrees. If pulled fast, the airplane tends to stall out abruptly with little warning. Elevator control forces are very heavy in a tight turn, requiring constant use of the elevator trim control.
The airplane responds to the controls satisfactory in performing rolls, loops, Immelmanns and other aerobatics.
I. Change in Trim when Operating Landing Gear, Flaps, etc.
Changes in trim resulting from the operation of landing gear, flaps, etc., are slight and can be readily corrected by use of controls or elevator trim control.
J. Noise and Vibration
Engine operation appeared a little rough during the entire flight causing a slight vibration at all times in the entire airplane. The noise level in the cockpit is very low.
Vibration and buffeting of the airplane noticeably increases in high speed dives over 400 MPH indicated airspeed.
a. Power plant and Associated Equipment
The airplane is powered with a BMW 801-D engine, fourteen cylinder, twin row radial engine equipped with a two speed internal supercharger. Propeller pitch and fuel mixture are automatically controlled by the throttle setting and require no attention from the pilot. 140 grade fuel was used for all tests since this grade fuel corresponds to the fuel used by the Germans; 140 grade fuel is superior to standard 100 octane (130 grade) fuel.
VI Performance Tests
A. The airspeed calibration and location of the airspeed head is given in Figure 1.
B. High speed vs altitude curves are given in Figure 2. The maximum speed was 415 MPH at high blower critical altitude of 22,000 ft. at 2700 RPM and 41.1" Hg. manifold pressure (military power). High speed at rated pwer of 2400 RPM and 38" was 395 MPH at 20,000 ft. critical altitude in high blower.
C. Climb data is given in Figure 3. The maximum rate of climb is 4000 ft/min. at military power of 2700 RPM and 41.1" Hg. manifold pressure. Minimum time to climb to 20,000 ft. is 7.3 minutes.
D. Power data corresponding to speed and climb data given in Figure 2 and Figure 3 is given in Figure 4. BHP values given are estimated from curves obtained from the British and from the Power Plant Laboratory.
VIII Conclusions
1. The FW-190, AAF No. EB-104, is a well armored fighter airplane with provisions for carrying heavy armament and it compares favorably with standard AAF types of the same date in maneuverability, speed, and climb at low and medium altitudes. However, the performance is definitely weaker than standard AAF fighters at altitudes above 28,000 feet.
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM
REPORT SERIAL NO. ENG-47-1743-A
26 May 1944
PERFORMANCE AND HANDLING
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FW-190 AIRPLANE
AAF NO. EB-104
I. Introduction
Performance and handling tests have been conducted at Wright Field on the Focke-Wulf 190, German fighter type airplane, AAF No. EB-104. These tests were made to obtain a quick check on the high speed, maximum rate of climb, and handling characteristics of this airplane. From 25 March 1944 to 15 April 1944 approximately 15 hours were flown on this airplane by Major G. E. Lundquist. Handling tests were also made by several other Flight Section pilots.
II Summary
The German Focke-Wulf 190, EB-104 is a single place, low wing all metal monoplane, powered with a 1750 bhp BMW 801-D fourteen cylinder two row radial engine equipped with a two speed internal supercharger. Tests were conducted at a take-off gross weight of 8535 pounds. The airplane is well armed and has provision for carrying heavy armament. It compares favorably with standard AAF fighter types in maneuverability, speed and climb at low and medium altitudes, but is definitely weaker in performance at altitudes over 28,000 ft. Stability was satisfactory at the weight and c.g. at which the airplane was tested and the controls are excellent at all speeds up to 400 MPH indicated airspeed where the elevator tends to become quite heavy and noticeable buffeting and vibration of the airplane occurs.
The airplane is easy to taxi but vision is somewhat restricted. Brakes operate by toe pressure and are readily applied for all positions of the rudder. The tail wheel is freely pivoting but can be locked by holding the control column back as on the P-51B.
H. Maneuverability and Aerobatics
The outstanding maneuverability feature of this airplane is it extremely high rate of roll. The radius of turn, however, is poor and it is only slightly improved by using the maneuvering flap position of 15 degrees. If pulled fast, the airplane tends to stall out abruptly with little warning. Elevator control forces are very heavy in a tight turn, requiring constant use of the elevator trim control.
The airplane responds to the controls satisfactory in performing rolls, loops, Immelmanns and other aerobatics.
I. Change in Trim when Operating Landing Gear, Flaps, etc.
Changes in trim resulting from the operation of landing gear, flaps, etc., are slight and can be readily corrected by use of controls or elevator trim control.
J. Noise and Vibration
Engine operation appeared a little rough during the entire flight causing a slight vibration at all times in the entire airplane. The noise level in the cockpit is very low.
Vibration and buffeting of the airplane noticeably increases in high speed dives over 400 MPH indicated airspeed.
a. Power plant and Associated Equipment
The airplane is powered with a BMW 801-D engine, fourteen cylinder, twin row radial engine equipped with a two speed internal supercharger. Propeller pitch and fuel mixture are automatically controlled by the throttle setting and require no attention from the pilot. 140 grade fuel was used for all tests since this grade fuel corresponds to the fuel used by the Germans; 140 grade fuel is superior to standard 100 octane (130 grade) fuel.
VI Performance Tests
A. The airspeed calibration and location of the airspeed head is given in Figure 1.
B. High speed vs altitude curves are given in Figure 2. The maximum speed was 415 MPH at high blower critical altitude of 22,000 ft. at 2700 RPM and 41.1" Hg. manifold pressure (military power). High speed at rated pwer of 2400 RPM and 38" was 395 MPH at 20,000 ft. critical altitude in high blower.
C. Climb data is given in Figure 3. The maximum rate of climb is 4000 ft/min. at military power of 2700 RPM and 41.1" Hg. manifold pressure. Minimum time to climb to 20,000 ft. is 7.3 minutes.
D. Power data corresponding to speed and climb data given in Figure 2 and Figure 3 is given in Figure 4. BHP values given are estimated from curves obtained from the British and from the Power Plant Laboratory.
VIII Conclusions
1. The FW-190, AAF No. EB-104, is a well armored fighter airplane with provisions for carrying heavy armament and it compares favorably with standard AAF types of the same date in maneuverability, speed, and climb at low and medium altitudes. However, the performance is definitely weaker than standard AAF fighters at altitudes above 28,000 feet.
Not to repeat but here is the conclusions form tests at WPAFB in 1944
VIII Conclusions
1. The FW-190, AAF No. EB-104, is a well armored fighter airplane with provisions for carrying heavy armament and it compares favorably with standard AAF types of the same date in maneuverability, speed, and climb at low and medium altitudes. However, the performance is definitely weaker than standard AAF fighters at altitudes above 28,000 feet.
H. Maneuverability and Aerobatics
The outstanding maneuverability feature of this airplane is it extremely high rate of roll. The radius of turn, however, is poor and it is only slightly improved by using the maneuvering flap position of 15 degrees. If pulled fast, the airplane tends to stall out abruptly with little warning. Elevator control forces are very heavy in a tight turn, requiring constant use of the elevator trim control.
VIII Conclusions
1. The FW-190, AAF No. EB-104, is a well armored fighter airplane with provisions for carrying heavy armament and it compares favorably with standard AAF types of the same date in maneuverability, speed, and climb at low and medium altitudes. However, the performance is definitely weaker than standard AAF fighters at altitudes above 28,000 feet.
H. Maneuverability and Aerobatics
The outstanding maneuverability feature of this airplane is it extremely high rate of roll. The radius of turn, however, is poor and it is only slightly improved by using the maneuvering flap position of 15 degrees. If pulled fast, the airplane tends to stall out abruptly with little warning. Elevator control forces are very heavy in a tight turn, requiring constant use of the elevator trim control.
lesofprimus
Brigadier General
Captured equipment maintained by unqualified mechanics and test flown by the "winners" is not a solid base for conclusions....
Actually, its rather silly....
Actually, its rather silly....
yea right, the facts are the FW-190 in any shape or form, from test (on captured equipment that is very relevant), encounter reports show the FW-190 inferior to just about anything we had, and far less reliable. Not sure whether you think we are tramping on your ancestry or what your problem is, but get over it, it was inferior. The good old USA did a damn good job of producing military aircraft then and now.
The Fw 190 was like all of the other top aircraft of the war. At certain altitudes it was superior and at certain altitudes it was inferior. Do some more research...
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The only thing lacking here is your total understanding of axis aircraft and how some of the post war performance data was actually gathered. But with that said your comment about "tramping on your ancestry" is not welcomed nor will it be tolerated so I'd advise you to govern yourself accordingly or your stay here will be very short.
BTW I am American and agree that we could build "damn good aircraft." I am also open minded enough to know that there have been others who could produce something a little better at times.....
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
The funny thing is, his comment was made to two Americans as well...
Took the words right out of my mouth!
drgondog
Major
My father flew it for ~25 hours in some serious low to medium altitude rat races with three other aces in his group flying well maintained 51's when the 355th moved to Gablingen. Liked it, said he would have been ok with flying and fighting with it..his conclusion was the same as Fortier's, Hovde and Elder...
With a/c of this type and late model versions you pretty well had to say that pilots and tactical position were keys - as well as knowing the strengths and weaknesses of the a/c.
The D-9 was a tweener between the P-51D/K and the P-51H and a damned fine airplane.
Do you have any pics of your father with captured German aircraft? If so, I would love to see them.
drgondog
Major
Chris I have pics of the two seat 190 and 109 but the one 190D I have I can't vouch was the one he flew. It was in his collection but no notes or handwriting to 'personalize it'.
I have posted the 190 and 109 pics several times but will post them again if you wish.
Do you remember what thread they were in? I am sure I saw them, I just don't remember them...
