• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

fw190 airfile

NachtPiloten

NachtPiloten

Kurier auf Stube...pauke!
Staff member
Hello,

Just uploaded a new airfile. It is as accurate as the data available allows it to be....well I think anyway. :gossip: It corrects a few errors in the original and uses actual German operational data.

Have fun.
 
Well,

loverboy1 said:
not to appear , out of wack - dumb , but , which plane version , and where do i stick it

LB/ JOSHUA
Click to expand...

It is for the A5. Just open your fw_190A_5 folder, back up the original aircraft.cfg and *.air file and drop these in. I am not sure this is the best I can do but I'll keep on tinkering.
 
SIR NACH" where might one find the added on air file .. i searched and seem to have missed it or looked in wrong arena ...tks

LB/JOSHUA
 
Hey Nacht, which things did you correct? If you're talking torque and control repsonse I may have to buy you a case.

:friday:
 
Airfile

Squiffy - A couple of bottles of 101 proof Wild Turkey will do just fine. :friday::friday:

I found that the Microsoft airfile had several errors in it such as cog, roll rate, area of some control surfaces, and a few other minor issues.

I hope that she's a bit more manageble.

Oh, I send you my address ..... :wave::applause::jump:
 
I currently use the flight dynamics done by Jerry:

CFS3 Flight Dynamics for Focke-Wulf Fw190A5 Shrike (c) Jerry Beckwith
+ Empty Weight: 7800 lbs
+ Max Power: 1700 Hp
+ Maneuver speed: 308 mph @ 8.0 g
+ Max speed: 394 mph @ 18000 ft
+ Max speed at sea-level: 347 mph
+ Climb rate: 3500 ft/min @ 127 mph
Flight Dynamics By: Jerry Beckwith
Mudpond Virtual Aircraft
FD Build 41 - 12/5/04 08:25 PM
Flight Dynamics Workbook V2.84.252

I certainly welcome any improvements but I have to ask, are your dynamics better than the previous updates?
 
Well ...

Starspeeder_3000 said:
I currently use the flight dynamics done by Jerry:

CFS3 Flight Dynamics for Focke-Wulf Fw190A5 Shrike (c) Jerry Beckwith
+ Empty Weight: 7800 lbs
+ Max Power: 1700 Hp
+ Maneuver speed: 308 mph @ 8.0 g
+ Max speed: 394 mph @ 18000 ft
+ Max speed at sea-level: 347 mph
+ Climb rate: 3500 ft/min @ 127 mph
Flight Dynamics By: Jerry Beckwith
Mudpond Virtual Aircraft
FD Build 41 - 12/5/04 08:25 PM
Flight Dynamics Workbook V2.84.252

I certainly welcome any improvements but I have to ask, are your dynamics better than the previous updates?
Click to expand...

Since no one in this forum has ever flown a FW190 "better" is certainly subjective. Every modeler takes different approaches to get the feel they want. I strive to use 100% accurate data and placements of the pilot, fuel tanks, and control surface areas and movements. Some folks do not do this and they manipulate the file to get the plane to behave in ways they want which may or may not be accurate.

That is not to say Beckwith's file is bad it is just different. An airfile made in 2005 with the old software even with the SAME data will yield vastly different results.

So, back to my files. I use the data that is official German from handbooks and other documented sources. I also use flight reports from several evaluators to develop a balanced model. I do not adjust the COG to get the "feel" I want because I do not know what the feel is. I just try to put the numbers in, fly the plane and make some adjustments to rate of climb, speed, engine power and such to mimic the reports. Some guys do not use accurate defelection angles for the control surfaces which cause HUGE problems in the roll rate and elavator control etc.

Just remember the stock Spitfire files make the plane a virtual rocket ship compared to anything else. This is NOT accurate. We often critize IL2 as some feel that the allies are given better files then the axis (I don't know I am just repeating what I have read).

Use the files as you wish and you pick the file that you want to play with. As was said in a thread yesterday turning with the opponenet was not always the way to beat them (Zero vs Wildcat). You knew your plane and used it strengths.

Pauke Pauke! :friday:
 
Well, I'm not prepared to get into the "how accurate is it?" fight - Ted's explanation is a good, coherent argument which I find thoroughly convincing - but I will say that I find this version certainly flies more convincingly. Pilots of the Spit MkV were saying they were finding the FW difficult to come to terms with, yet many airfiles until now make the thing fly like an unstable brick. This one doesn't. So I for one am happy to accept Ted's claims at face value, and enjoy an FW I can actually fly with!

Great stuff, Ted! Are you thinking of one or two other subjects which need it??? :jump::jump::jump:
 
Good job Ted! COG is serious business. It was clear there was something wrong. I wonder how the AI will handle it now? Tee-hee! :173go1:
 
NachtPiloten said:
Since no one in this forum has ever flown a FW190 "better" is certainly subjective. Every modeler takes different approaches to get the feel they want. I strive to use 100% accurate data and placements of the pilot, fuel tanks, and control surface areas and movements. Some folks do not do this and they manipulate the file to get the plane to behave in ways they want which may or may not be accurate.

That is not to say Beckwith's file is bad it is just different. An airfile made in 2005 with the old software even with the SAME data will yield vastly different results.

So, back to my files. I use the data that is official German from handbooks and other documented sources. I also use flight reports from several evaluators to develop a balanced model. I do not adjust the COG to get the "feel" I want because I do not know what the feel is. I just try to put the numbers in, fly the plane and make some adjustments to rate of climb, speed, engine power and such to mimic the reports. Some guys do not use accurate defelection angles for the control surfaces which cause HUGE problems in the roll rate and elavator control etc.
Click to expand...

I certainly meant no disrespect to you or your efforts with my above comments. I think your explanation is valid and you make some very good points! I just wondered if your changes would be considered an "upgrade" to the previous versions. Since it's all subjective I guess it is a pointless question unless you are used to flying the real thing.

Thanks for all your time and effort!:ernae:
 
Fm

Starspeeder_3000 said:
I certainly meant no disrespect to you or your efforts with my above comments. I think your explanation is valid and you make some very good points! I just wondered if your changes would be considered an "upgrade" to the previous versions. Since it's all subjective I guess it is a pointless question unless you are used to flying the real thing.

Thanks for all your time and effort!:ernae:
Click to expand...

No offense taken.:welcome: If my response was too pointed please excuse my approach. I ALWAYS want feedback :gossip: it is the only way to improve.
 
I was checking on the progree of White 1 and came here after checking.I then saw this link and thought I add to it instead of just lerking.If you read your history about the 190 you'll see that the 190 wasn't a plane to turn fight with the Spit Mk-V's but rather "climbing and diving" or as we call BnZ fighting...here's a link.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200010/ai_n8925541

PS google search white 1...you'll like it...lol
 
Sounds great but, I have a few questions.

If I download this and install it will I still be able to connect to someone's IP games? Or will they have to have the same air file?

Also when/where can I download this? Is it up now?

My last question, is, how acurate do you think it is to the real thing? Because I have grown used to flying the "stock" version of Fw-190 does this make the plane "too easy"?
(do you know what I meen?)

Thanks,
Aceaviator91
 
ceechow said:
I was checking on the progree of White 1 and came here after checking.I then saw this link and thought I add to it instead of just lerking.If you read your history about the 190 you'll see that the 190 wasn't a plane to turn fight with the Spit Mk-V's but rather "climbing and diving" or as we call BnZ fighting...here's a link.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3897/is_200010/ai_n8925541

PS google search white 1...you'll like it...lol
Click to expand...

I think the article is a bit missleading as it uses the somwhat foggy term " turn combat"
It's true that the Spit had the smaller horizontal turn radius but the 190 was allover more agile, more responsive in the controls, more manouvreable and clearly better in the vertical.
If the Spit V tried to turn the Fw190 would make a jojo and get the Spit from there. Bottom line the Mk V would not win a "turn combat" against an Fw190.

EDIT: Oh, just notice that's Eric Brown's stuff there. :)
 
Mathias said:
I think the article is a bit missleading as it uses the somwhat foggy term " turn combat"
It's true that the Spit had the smaller horizontal turn radius but the 190 was allover more agile, more responsive in the controls, more manouvreable and clearly better in the vertical.
If the Spit V tried to turn the Fw190 would make a jojo and get the Spit from there. Bottom line the Mk V would not win a "turn combat" against an Fw190.
Click to expand...


That is a good point Mathias. I think something people glance over, or at least in CFS3 anyway, is that the German planes were quite good. In CFS3 at least it seems people just pick the same 2 planes, the Spitfire and the Tempest V, when in actual air combat these two planes might not be the "best".

I think one thing to remember is, You can have the best plane but the plane is only as good as the pilot who is flying it.
 
Well I officially love the changes you made NachtPiloten!!! The Fw-190A-5 is much more stable now and overall it out performs many of the other aircraft just as it should! I can now climb and dive on the enemy aircraft without any problems and the ground handling is much improved. Thanks for all the hard work! :faint::ernae::woot:

It's been asked before but any chance of working on the A-8 model or perhaps even the D-9?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top