MW 50 or GM-1 - Page 6 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-12-2019, 02:26 PM   #51
DefaultFace
Member
 
DefaultFace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 627
Default

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/...tml?id=3053464 BMW 801 Handbook - May 1942

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...-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/arc...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.o...-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- the only document I found on it other than charts was relatively unreadable.
__________________
9./JG27

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin
DefaultFace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 03:08 PM   #52
Marduk879
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 72
Default

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!
Marduk879 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 03:09 PM   #53
Flying-Kane
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany, Saxony
Posts: 233
Default

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)
__________________
Core i7-6700K mit Scythe Mugen | 32GB DDR4 RAM | GeForce GTX1080Ti | MSI Z170-A Pro | Creative X-Fi Titanium | Win 7 64 bit | Track IR4 Pro | Thrustmaster Warthog | Saitek Rudder Pedals | Oculus Rift

Last edited by Flying-Kane; 06-12-2019 at 03:19 PM.
Flying-Kane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 09:53 AM   #54
Yo-Yo
ED Team
 
Yo-Yo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 14,056
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DefaultFace View Post
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.o...-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- the only document I found on it other than charts was relatively unreadable.
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.
__________________
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

Last edited by Yo-Yo; 06-13-2019 at 09:56 AM.
Yo-Yo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 10:08 AM   #55
MAD-MM
Senior Member
 
MAD-MM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,026
Default

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.
__________________
Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward.


9./JG27
MAD-MM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 02:13 PM   #56
DefaultFace
Member
 
DefaultFace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yo-Yo View Post
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.o...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/sk...lik/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.

(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.


Quote:
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.
__________________
9./JG27

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin
DefaultFace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 02:18 PM   #57
Marduk879
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 72
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yo-Yo View Post
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.
Marduk879 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 02:47 PM   #58
DefaultFace
Member
 
DefaultFace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 627
Default

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_d...0_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.
__________________
9./JG27

"If you can't hit anything, it's because you suck. If you get shot down, it's because you suck. You and me, we know we suck, and that makes it ok." - Worst person in all of DCS

"In the end, which will never come, we will all be satisifed... we must fight them on forum, we will fight them on reddit..." - Dunravin
DefaultFace is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:33 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.