Fw-190D9 Discussion

[NineLine]

Well, if they have factory blueprints better. I hope IA Dora is just a first approximation to the thing :smilewink:.

 

When I saw Dora the first thing that came to my mind was they used as a reference that Dora made by Flugwerk with an allison engine. She lacks the same than A-8/N, with a different engine the cowling shape isn't same as original, although of course if somebody gift me one of those I wouldn't say I don't want her :lol:.

 

S!

 

Its still in development, as I said before, I am sure thats why we dont have a template yet, there is no point till the model is finalized.

 

My only point on the drawings is that the four you showed under the screenshot of ED did well to show there is indeed a issue with wing thickness, or at least needs to be looked at, but all those 4 images overlayed on each other would not line up to each other, so then the question becomes, which is right. So we can say here is the problem, but it will be better to defer to the factory blueprints to try to adjust/fix.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Well I guess with a photograph it's very difficult to get the same angle and anyway we have parallax error. That's why it's better a blueprint. I know even the best blueprints from books can have mistakes and they are different each of them from another, but I can assure you if 3D model were done with one of those books blueprints the really slight differences with real thing weren't so apparent we all said at first sight :smilewink:.

 

S!

[NineLine]

Well I guess with a photograph it's very difficult to get the same angle and anyway we have parallax error. That's why it's better a blueprint. I know even the best blueprints from books can have mistakes and they are different each of them from another, but I can assure you if 3D model were done with one of those books blueprints the really slight differences with real thing weren't so apparent we all said at first sight :smilewink:.

 

S!

 

Nope you are right, I am only talking in order to correct problems, it will be better to adjust with factory drawings. I just hope they are complete enough to make the changes we are seeing. I can imagine trying to "eyeball" any changes :)

[Konrad Friedrich]

@Fox One:

 

you have an very good eye for details!

 

but... I wonder that you did not mentioned that our AI Focke Wulf pilot is simply opening the canopy when he's bailing out.

The canopy should be jettisoned just like the one of the P-51.

Check the image of the headrest that you attached:

Achtung! Haubenabwurf durch Sprengladung.

translation: Caution! Canopy jettisoned by explosive charges.

 

Ok. That's not a model detail.

But in the end it's something I can see when I shoot down the FW190 ;)

Whereas I can't see model details (or don't have time to check them) in a dogfight... :joystick: :D

 

Anyway, I like your sense for even smallest details! :thumbup:

[NineLine]

@Fox One:

 

you have an very good eye for details!

 

but... I wonder that you did not mentioned that our AI Focke Wulf pilot is simply opening the canopy when he's bailing out.

The canopy should be jettisoned just like the one of the P-51.

Check the image of the headrest that you attached:

Achtung! Haubenabwurf durch Sprengladung.

translation: Caution! Canopy jettisoned by explosive charges.

 

Ok. That's not a model detail.

But in the end it's something I can see when I shoot down the FW190 ;)

Whereas I can't see model details (or don't have time to check them) in a dogfight... :joystick: :D

 

Anyway, I like your sense for even smallest details! :thumbup:

 

Very good point, I wonder if there is any gun camera footage out there with the cockpit on a 190 being jettison... I will have to look and see about submitting that, I guess if I practiced more and shot down the AI more I would have noticed that too lol....

[Konrad Friedrich]

The only guncam footage I've seen where a FW was shot down the successful pilot banked and the camera lost sight of the 190.

[EDIT] Sorry, re-checked the video... it was the other way 'round... it was the guncam of a FW190 shooting down an american fighter... My memory fooled me. :cry:

 

Shot that poor AI buddy down for ca. 25 times by now...

So I've seen it quite often when he bails out. :smartass:

 

It may be that I noticed this detail, because I'm a native German speaker.

Edited May 8, 2013 by Konrad Friedrich

[Merlin-27]

Is that the canopy or the pilot? Not positive but it looks like the canopy to me. Middle top row.

[NineLine]

Is that the canopy or the pilot? Not positive but it looks like the canopy to me. Middle top row.

 

Looks like the canopy, sorta looks like the right shape.

[Merlin-27]

Found another. Quite convincing, though different.

[NineLine]

Found another. Quite convincing, though different.

 

Yup, that looks like the canopy in that one as well... good finds...

[Konrad Friedrich]

Yes, that's the canopy.

in the top middle pic it's flying off.

...and the picture in the lower right shows clearly the plane without canopy.

[Fox One]

@Fox One:

 

you have an very good eye for details!

 

but... I wonder that you did not mentioned that our AI Focke Wulf pilot is simply opening the canopy when he's bailing out.

The canopy should be jettisoned just like the one of the P-51.

Check the image of the headrest that you attached:

Achtung! Haubenabwurf durch Sprengladung.

translation: Caution! Canopy jettisoned by explosive charges.

 

Ok. That's not a model detail.

But in the end it's something I can see when I shoot down the FW190 ;)

Whereas I can't see model details (or don't have time to check them) in a dogfight... :joystick: :D

 

Anyway, I like your sense for even smallest details! :thumbup:

 

Yes, you are right, the pilot should jettison the canopy, not open it. I noticed it too, but I thought that the canopy jettison must be WIP and not implemented yet so I didn't mentioned it, I imagined that ED knows the canopy is jettisonable.

 

In reality the pilot would only open the canopy if the jettisoning system failed. I remember I read about that in one book, the pilot had to manually open it to bail out. Opening it would normally take considerably longer than jettisoning.

[NineLine]

Yes, you are right, the pilot should jettison the canopy, not open it. I noticed it too, but I thought that the canopy jettison must be WIP and not implemented yet so I didn't mentioned it, I imagined that ED knows the canopy is jettisonable.

 

In reality the pilot would only open the canopy if the jettisoning system failed. I remember I read about that in one book, the pilot had to manually open it to bail out. Opening it would normally take considerably longer than jettisoning.

 

 

I am sure its a WIP progress thing as well, but I will mention it in any case.

[Fox One]

The antenna wire - the plane in DCS is fitted with a late-type, so-called "blown canopy". On this type of canopy, there is no antenna pulley system like it was in earlier Fw 190 models. The wire is rigidly attached to the canopy, so after opening the canopy, the antenna shouldn't remain straight like in the Mustang.

[Fox One]

More about the windshield and canopy:

[Konrad Friedrich]

I imagined that ED knows the canopy is jettisonable.

Yes, I think they do. They do very good research.

But... if they did not know... at least they know it now that we talked about it :D

And as all those small details that you pointed out in your posts it's maybe a tiny detail that possibly can be overlooked :smilewink:

Edited May 8, 2013 by Konrad Friedrich

[sobek]

Yes, I think they do.

 

Yup.

[NineLine]

Yes, I think they do. They do very good research.

But... if they did not know... at least they know it now that we talked about it :D

And as all those small details that you pointed out in your posts it's maybe a tiny detail that possibly can be overlooked :smilewink:

 

Like I said, I'll mention it, but more than likely its just not complete yet. More need for it when you yourself are trying to bail out, ED isnt worried about the AI :)

[Konrad Friedrich]

Just a little bit of kidding, SiThSpAwN.

 

Well, I'm worried about that poor AI guy.

He never wins... :cry:

:D:D:D

[Konrad Friedrich]

and yes, I know. It's not complete. But I like it even in it's early state.

At least because it's flying very nice. It looks very close to the real thing.

I really like the FW190 AI.

[fantomk]

Landing gear doors:

 

Check out the length of the landing gear in these war time photographs

 

 

Looks like the DCS model is close but lack of some details. I guess the D-9 in the museum is not at it's original condition.

[NineLine]

Check out the length of the landing gear in these war time photographs

 

 

Looks like the DCS model is close but lack of some details. I guess the D-9 in the museum is not at it's original condition.

 

 

The picture on the left is different, unless the left hand gear looks slightly different... see how the wing piece has a flat edge but the other 2 pictures angle up slightly at the front...

[fantomk]

The picture on the left is different, unless the left hand gear looks slightly different... see how the wing piece has a flat edge but the other 2 pictures angle up slightly at the front...

 

Yes you are right. That's because that "wing" actually is in 2 pieces. The one in the left picture had it's lower piece missing. I quickly got through the books I have, and found it's pretty common in the photos from war time. I think they were either broken or removed by the ground crews.

 

I guess all of us here will eventually become Fw190 experts.:)

[Ala13_ManOWar]

It was removed for non prepared airfields, mud could easily fix to it preventing wheel to spin. As you know also middle piece was usually removed on ground attack versions operating from first line improvised aerodromes. But Dora wasn't the kind of Fw190 where you see that usually.

 

S!

[Fox One]

Check out the length of the landing gear in these war time photographs

 

 

Looks like the DCS model is close but lack of some details. I guess the D-9 in the museum is not at it's original condition.

 

 

Actually, when I posted that picture with the landing gear, my idea was rather to compare with the DCS model the lower part of the gear door, where the inaccuracy in DCS model is very obvious.

 

The gear door is not a single object, but actually 3 :)

 

Please look at the first drawing on the left. Part 2 is attached to the lower part of the shock absorber. Part 1 is attached to the gear leg itself. As you can see on the drawing in the middle, part numbered 3 in the first drawing on the left is also connected with part 2.

 

When the shock absorber is compressed, part 1 "slides" inside part 2, and part 3 slides up on the edge of part 1. On the drawing on the right, you can see how on the outer side of parts 1 and 3 there are check markings for various plane weighs. You can see the markings also on the picture of an F model.

 

I specify that all drawings are from manuals for Fw 190 D-9 and not earlier versions.

 

The difference in length that you noticed is because on the D-9 plane in US museum shock absorbers are very compressed, possibly fully compressed probably due to lack of servicing. Indeed, in the wartime pictures you posted it's visible the correct position of a serviced, airworthy Fw 190. Otherwise, there is nothing weird or wrong with the museum D-9, the gear doors are original, is just that the shock absorbers position is abnormal.