MW 50 or GM-1

Since there are already a collection of threads on the subject of FW 190 engine settings/WEP, with the same several documents being posted over and over and the same arguments being made over and over, I figured Id make an attempt at summarizing what we've actually found so far in english so that everyone can understand:

Here is what we have:

https://bmw-grouparchiv.de/research/detail/index.xhtml?id=3053464 BMW 801 Handbook - May 1942

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/Fw_190_A-8_15-3-44.pdf Quickly realisable Options for increasing Performance in the FW190 with 801D through engine modifications - 15 Mar 1944

http://www.deutscheluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/f/FockeWulf/Fw%20190/284_Fw_190_A_8.pdf Production Specifications/Description of the Fighter Aircraft FW 190 A-8 - 30 Nov 1944

Additionally there is a Flugzeughandbuch (Aircraft Handbook) floating around but its a translated english version. The german version is in the internet somewhere (I found it a looong time ago but havent been able to find it again), but it doesnt say anything not mentioned in the documents above AFAIK.

So from the BMW 801 Handbook page 16 we know that the 801 D ran only on 95 Octane C3 fuel. This is without any sort of modifications or other performance increasing injection systems etc. Just the engine, by itself can only be run on C3.

The additional tank behind the pilot:

As birkenmoped posted above, it is stated in the Baubeschreibung (Production Specifications/Description) that this tank was included in order to satisfy a request to increase the range of the 190 without negatively affecting the aerodynamics.

Whilst the area occupied by this tank could be used for the addition of an unprotected MW-50 or GM-1 tank, currently for the main production series of the A-8 only the inclusion of the additional fuel tank is planned. As of 30 Nov 1944

This report also tells us that all A-8s delivered as of August-September will be delivered with the additional fuel tank.

WEP, Boost increase, fluid injection etc:

The document from Mar. 44 describes the possibilities of WEP modifications for the various types of 190.

For Jabo-Rei and Schlachtflugzeug variants a boost increase to 1,65 ata with C3 injection at 65 L/min was suggested.

For the Normal fighter variant (which is what we have currently) there were 2 options:

I: Increased Emergency Power (Erhöhte Notleistung) to 1,58 ata in the 1st supercharger gear, and 1,62 ata in the 2nd. Notably without C3 injection!!, and also noted that these ratings were not currently certified for use by Rechlin.

II: GM-1 injection

-> Back to the Baubeschreibung in Nov. 44:

This document mentions that as of July 1944 all aircraft of the production series Fw 190 A-8 will be outfitted with the Erhöhte Notleistung Boost increases.

It also mentions that the installation of a GM-1 tank instead of the additional fuselage tank is technically feasible/possible, however it is not required for the production series Fw 190 A-8.

So what does all this mean?

In my opinion this shows that any Fighter variant A-8 aircraft which is outfitted with the extra fuel tank, must also have the Erhöhte Notleistung ratings for the engine. If the engine rating is being modeled anyway, there should be an option for the increased engine ratings without the tank.

This would mean that we would have:

Base A-8

A-8 built before Aug/September 44, but operated after July 44 - No extra tank, but with Erhöhte Notleistung

A-8 built after Aug/September 44 - Extra tank and Erhöhte Notleistung

As for GM-1/MW-50 I think its rather clear that at least for the A-8 neither was incorporated on a large scale. In fact for the most part it is explicitly stated that it was not planned/required to do so. I would say this is further supported by this Flight test report from 1 Jan 45 where you can see that for the A-8 and A-9 no MW-50 is listed as being onboard.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/fw190-a8-3jan45.jpg Horizontal Flight Speed vs Altitude with Special Emergency Power

The only claims for it so far are Wikipedia and I guess some books. Maybe it was on the A-9, but that had different engines and while there is performance data for an A-9 with GM-1 (as there is for an A-8) the only document I found on it other than charts was relatively unreadable.

I agree with what DefaultFace stated.

The problem with stating if the A-8 had the Erhöhte Notleistung or not is that it was typical for 190s to get upgraded during it service to newer versions(plane could begin service as A-2, get upgraded to A-5 year later and end service as D-9).

Erhöhte Notleistung was a sort of "upgrade kit" and was being installed into planes as parts were available. The July 44 date marks the point when the system began to be installed into planes directly in factories on production lines.

All this results in what DefaultFace stated that you could have 190s in active service with the boost and no extra fuel tank or with both or even without either(simply due to shortage of parts).

Its strict NO from me on both MW-50 or GM-1 for A-8. I dont have any sources that state it left the testing phases and entered active service on the A-8.

Thank you very much for the summary, DefaultFace!

Nice summary DefaultFace,

i think this should be a sticky thread to clear up the myths around WEP for FW190 Antons.

Just my 2 cents:

The FW190A-8 introduced the additional fuel tank into series production, so there was no FW190A-8 without it.

Source: Focke Wulf Jagdflugzeug FW190A FW190D Ta152 (Peter Rodeike)

C3 Fuel was later allowed in the second Supercharger Gear, have to look for the Document again...

can only assume, that the worsen Fuel Economy by the hard pressed Luftwaffe, was a possible decision against the wide use of C3 Fuel Injection.

I can not see here 100% reliable logical transition, how the facts in these documents, for example, lead to the conclusion that 100% of 109A8 operated afer July 1944 had EN. I understand that the new factory batches could be provided with EN modifications started from the certain time, but field modification requires much more efforts to provide modifications for the planes in operation.

As MW-50 and additional fuel were planned even for earlier 190, the tank seems to be ready long before EN and C3 injection was implemented.

The reason I come to that conclusion is because.... thats what it says.

Erhöhte Notleistung: Ab Juli 1944 werden sämtliche Flugzeuge der Baureihe Fw 190 A-8 mit "erhöhter Notleistung" ausgerüstet. Durch Eingriff in den Ladedruckregler .....

As of July 1944 all aircraft of the series A-8 will be outfitted with Erhöhte notleistung. Via modification of the Manifold Pressure regulator .....

We know that at the very least the plan was to outfit all 190 A-8s with EN. My understanding is that this modification was relatively simple. In the Baubeschreibung from Nov 44 and this document from Dec. 43 describing a method of increasing MP on 801 D-2 engines in A-8s. http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/BMW_VB_126.pdf

The only modifications mentioned here are the use of "Blenden" in the air lines to the Mixture and MP regulator.

Blenden here is hard to translate but the only thing I found was a Durchflußblende (http://www.maschinenbau-wissen.de/skript3/fluidtechnik/hydraulik/200-blende) which is often translated as flow limiter in english, which is used to reduce pressure in hydraulic/pneumatic flows.

If thats all that needed to be done it doesnt seem like an extremely complicated change....

Was there more to these modifications? I dont have any other documentation about it so if you know more please feel free to enlighten me. :D

(the same document mentions the 801 TU (801Q-2) superseding the D-2 as of July 44. Obviously you cant field mod engine swaps to all aircraft in the field, but I guess the new engine would have the mods needed for EN too? If its supposed to start replacing the old engine then most likely aircraft built after July 44 would start getting these engines no?).

Same goes for the extra tank. The only thing Ive found mentioning it was the document in Nov 44 where it was mentioned that it would be fitted to A-8s on the production line as of Aug-Sep 44.

I know earlier variants (also only the Jabo ones) of the Anton used C3 injection, but nothing ive found about this mentions an additional fuel tank.

MW-50 all i know is it was tested at some point in 42 or 43 but I thought it was abandoned due to cracks in the cylinders or something. Either way it isnt mentioned again in any of the documents publically available.

And, by the way, it is very interesting why two types of planes had so contradictory WEP:

EN without additional injection was allowed even at the second speed of the blower giving much higher manifold temperatures and thus - worse detonation conditions, though C3 injection assisted was prohibited despite the richer and colder mixture

Ok.... Do you know why or are you just mentioning it? I would guess as MAD said that fuel shortages were an issue. You mentioned yourself at some point that C3 injection was mostly used to offset performance losses due to increased weight etc, not just to improve standard aircraft. Maybe it was decided that it was only worth using the extra fuel on the heavier Jabo/Schlacht 190s and the fighters would manage without.

I can not see here 100% reliable logical transition, how the facts in these documents, for example, lead to the conclusion that 100% of 109A8 operated afer July 1944 had EN. I understand that the new factory batches could be provided with EN modifications started from the certain time, but field modification requires much more efforts to provide modifications for the planes in operation.

As MW-50 and additional fuel were planned even for earlier 190, the tank seems to be ready long before EN and C3 injection was implemented.

 

And, by the way, it is very interesting why two types of planes had so contradictory WEP:

EN without additional injection was allowed even at the second speed of the blower giving much higher manifold temperatures and thus - worse detonation conditions, though C3 injection assisted was prohibited despite the richer and colder mixture.

Im not sure what you mean here?

Are you trying to play it here into the area of "Not EVERY SINGLE ONE A-8 had EN and thus we wont implement it."?

Ofcourse it wasnt 100% of all A-8. Units upgraded their planes as they received the EN upgrade kits and other parts. Shortages were ever present for LW.

July 1944 marks a point when all new A-8s that left the factory had EN already installed.

MAD & I found some more stuff:

Schematic for the EN modification: http://degnans.com/markd/190boost.jpg apparently from Jan 45

Performance Summary Fw 190 with BMW 801 D: http://www.avia-it.com/act/profili_daerei/libretti_velivolo/pa_altri_lib.velivoli/roberto_marzi/Fw-190_BMW-801D.pdf

Not sure of an exact date but this seems to be from late Jan 44. Mentions serial production of the Fighter A-8 will include either a GM-1 system or the additional fuselage tank. Seems from the other documents from earlier that this didnt come to fruition.

On 6/13/2019 at 11:53 AM, Yo-Yo said:

And, by the way, it is very interesting why two types of planes had so contradictory WEP:

EN without additional injection was allowed even at the second speed of the blower giving much higher manifold temperatures and thus - worse detonation conditions, though C3 injection assisted was prohibited despite the richer and colder mixture.

To me it seems the answer is the difference in use, hence two different systems for Jabo (C-3 injection, but only in the first stage) and Jager (no C-3 injection, simple manifold pressure increase, usable in both stages, but only in flight). Rechlin and various notes that with the Jager system (EN) the cylinder and oil temperatures are near the limit, but acceptable. Charge coolig and detonation is probably less an issue, since C-3 can more than take it, but temperatures can be. 

The real eye opener is IMO the limitation to use in in flight only on the EN system, i.e. it cannot be used for takeoff. Jabos in contrast to fighters may need to use the boost  for take off on short airfields and/or when heavily loaded, without proper air cooling for the cyliders, and possibly for prolonged periods at low altitude in the summer heat. They need the extra charge cooling from additional C-3 injection, and they probably do not use it at higher altitudes anyway.

On 6/13/2019 at 11:53 AM, Yo-Yo said:

I can not see here 100% reliable logical transition, how the facts in these documents, for example, lead to the conclusion that 100% of 109A8 operated afer July 1944 had EN. I understand that the new factory batches could be provided with EN modifications started from the certain time, but field modification requires much more efforts to provide modifications for the planes in operation.

As MW-50 and additional fuel were planned even for earlier 190, the tank seems to be ready long before EN and C3 injection was implemented.

It's not sure if all 190s were equipped with the higher boost settings, but one can be realtively sure that this was the course of action - at least on the western front.

You'll see that some aircraft have a 5cm diameter yellow ring on their aft left-hand gun cowlings, indicatingthe installation of EN.

Those rings disappeared again in later times, when there was no necessity anymore to distinguish between EN and non-EN airframes.

The boost-regulator could be replaced or reprogrammed on fwd maintenance bases, so a modification would be relatively easy and quick.

The 115l aux tank was built in, to give more range, as it was realized that in Reichsverteidigung with sometimes quite long flights to assemble enough aircraft to counter an allied bomber-attack, that additional range was a vital necessity.

On 6/13/2019 at 11:53 AM, Yo-Yo said:

And, by the way, it is very interesting why two types of planes had so contradictory WEP:

EN without additional injection was allowed even at the second speed of the blower giving much higher manifold temperatures and thus - worse detonation conditions, though C3 injection assisted was prohibited despite the richer and colder mixture.

The C3 injection came first and was just a stop-gap feature to allow Jabos and Schlachtflieger to escape from soviet fighters. This worked well enough.

The bost-increase was a better, simpler system, which was fielded later than C3-injection, after some extensive testing.

On 6/13/2019 at 4:47 PM, DefaultFace said:

Not sure of an exact date but this seems to be from late Jan 44. Mentions serial production of the Fighter A-8 will include either a GM-1 system or the additional fuselage tank. Seems from the other documents from earlier that this didnt come to fruition.

Seems to  me that GM-1 wasn't all that great to use in actual field-conditions, since it would gas-out when sitting at readiness for longer times at summer-temperatures.

That might be the reason why it was't ever used more widespread in the Fw 190. Of course, just mounting a better engine, sooner would have filled a lot of the high-altitude gaps, too.

When reading the development-history of both the Jumo 213 and the DB 603 for the Fw 190 project, it seems that a 3-year old would have made better decisions than the RLM.

I started to fly FW-19A8 on the daily basis. It's a flying brick. Powerful armament is enough for him to be worth something in team dogfight. With GM1 It would be a sensible, plane. Without it makes no sense to me. One can fly on ground lvl to hunt down kids in their Spits and P-51's, but hunting down B-17G -> main job of FW-190 is a real struggle. On 8 000m, there were P-47 rules FW-190A8 is worthless. 

Let's hope our A8 Gets some love with these new WWII updates . 

I love guns on guns hunting. But ED needs to keep up .