ED Team Yo-Yo Posted January 19, 2013 ED Team Share Posted January 19, 2013 (edited) You're right about development list, hope it to be flyable. But simple? I understand the USA proud about Ponny, but I'm not from USA so I'm realistic and afaik a Butcherbird systems are way complex than 51. What systems are more complex??? P-51 has hydraulics FW does not have at all. P-51 has all automatics to handle its engine, radiators, etc. The only thing FW could be proud of is its Commandogerat that actually is not something extraordinary. Edited January 19, 2013 by Yo-Yo Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles. Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ala13_ManOWar Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Well, may I be mistaken but I think Fw190 is a completely electrical machine, isn't it? From gear, to trims (automatic trims afaik). And Komandogerat is a very complex system managing all that you say in P-51 engine and more, so it's more complex although probably easier to fly because all that systems are pilot aids. May be she's very complex from the aircraft construction point of view but it's very easy for you to code in sim, that's not my business so I don't know. But complex she's more complex as aircraft I think. S! "I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war." -- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox One Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 The only thing FW could be proud of is its Commandogerat that actually is not something extraordinary. Yo-Yo, should we understand that you have been working on modeling the system? :smilewink: My DCS videos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ala13_ManOWar Posted January 20, 2013 Share Posted January 20, 2013 Yo-Yo, should we understand that you have been working on modeling the system? :smilewink: Nice point, I was thinking the same when Yo-Yo said that so hoping he reveals something more :lol:. S! "I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war." -- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin-27 Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Yo-Yo, should we understand that you have been working on modeling the system? :smilewink: you read my mind. I was thinking... wow it's sounds like the voice of a person deep in the development process. We can only sit & hope for the chance to compare these aircraft hands-on in the near future. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] [Dogs of War] WWII COMBAT SERVER | P-51D - FW190-D9 - Me109-K4 Visit Our Website & Forum to Get More Info & Team Speak Access Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigereyes Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The FW-190 D would be the right challenger for Pony.:) Ciauzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted January 21, 2013 ED Team Share Posted January 21, 2013 What systems are more complex??? P-51 has hydraulics FW does not have at all. P-51 has all automatics to handle its engine, radiators, etc. The only thing FW could be proud of is its Commandogerat that actually is not something extraordinary. Yeah, but it is an angrier looking plane than the P-51D :) Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konrad Friedrich Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 P-51 has hydraulics FW does not have at all. To a certain degree you are right, because the Fw-190 was the first plane that had electric landing gear, flaps, trim tabs... They call it fly-by-wire nowadays... ;) Possibly because the constructor, Kurt Tank, was electrical engineer. Benefits were the reduced weight and space requirements, as well as less sensitivity to gun fire. I think both planes where ahead of their time. Too bad that the engineers seems to have their best ideas in war time... :cry: Actually, it's pointless to compare the "Pony" and the "Würger" technically. The engineers each arrived at different conclusions. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpe Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 The FW-190 D would be the right challenger for Pony.:) Ciauzz There were more fw190As build then Fw 190Ds. chances of it being a D are slim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ala13_ManOWar Posted January 21, 2013 Share Posted January 21, 2013 Well, if they look for wind tunnel info wings are exactly the same from A5 to D9, only changes are mass and balance. D9 probably is more different because the long nose. But I guess a P-51 quality 190 would need more than speculative data. If they are modelling her, whatever the version, they found what were looking for, in that case I hope her to be another piece of art :thumbup:. S! "I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war." -- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts