Bf109 vs. Yak 1 contrast

[TheHighwayman]

It's interesting to observe the contrast in construction quality of the 109 vs. the Yak 1. 

 

The 109 appears solidly designed and polished while the Yak 1 looks like it was pieced together in desperation. 

 

Perhaps that is historically true? 

 

I wish they had included a Yak 1B for starters. I'm sure it's coming after launch. I'm looking forward to buying one. 

 

I am pleased to see the incredible attention to detail. These aircraft look amazingly, even frighteningly real. Oh, I wonder what the actual pilots felt climbing into their respective machines...

 

Check this link out to see some of the differences up close. Ability to open the cockpit in flight? Yep. Awesome. Among many other things.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/1411-inception-bos-movie/

Edited September 26, 2013 by =69.GIAP=TOPYI

[Finkeren]

First off: We haven't even seen a screenshot of how the Yak-1 looks in BoS, so far the only VVS fighter we have seen is the LaGG-3.

 

As for the two aircraft looking different (I assume you're actually talking about the LaGG and not the Yak) there are a few points to be made:

 

1. The Bf 109 was an exceptionally well designed and well built aircraft, and the F model was the cleanest design of them all. Viewed up close almost nothing og that era compares to the 109. When I visited Duxford some years ago, I was amazed at how sloppy an otherwise elegant plane like the Spitfire looked in coparison with the 109.

 

2: The LaGG-3 was built of many different materials, and its externals were a mix of duralumin, steel, laminated plywood and fabric covering, where the 109 is an all-metal design except for the rudder I think. This may controbute to the sloppier look of the LaGG given that BoS renders different materials quite well.

 

3: The looks of the LaGG is not as much a result of desperation as a kind of "development hell" which was the result of the aircraft never really performing as expected. All three of the modern fighter designs of the VVS, Yak, LaGG and MiG underwent numerous modifications, when they failed to live up to their potential in 1941. Oddly enough, the most significant modification to the LaGG design, which WAS in fact made in a last minute desperation, led to the La-5/7, which IMHO is one of the most beautiful lines of fighters of WW2.

[Pupo]

3: The looks of the LaGG is not as much a result of desperation as a kind of "development hell" which was the result of the aircraft never really performing as expected. All three of the modern fighter designs of the VVS, Yak, LaGG and MiG underwent numerous modifications, when they failed to live up to their potential in 1941. Oddly enough, the most significant modification to the LaGG design, which WAS in fact made in a last minute desperation, led to the La-5/7, which IMHO is one of the most beautiful lines of fighters of WW2.

 

To enrich my knowledge, could you tell me what it was? i have no idea.

 

cheers

[Finkeren]

To enrich my knowledge, could you tell me what it was? i have no idea.

 

cheers

I'm talking about the fitting of the Ash-82 engine to the LaGG airframe. It was done by Lavochkin himself without official approval to try to save the design. The work was done in the Winter 1941-42 in a small hut besides a test airfield. In early 1942 the entire LaGG-3 project was close to being cancelled altogether, like the Mig was, but the early success of the LaG-5 helped Lavochkins design team regain favor.

 

The Ash-82 was originally developed for use in bombers, and was not meant to be fitted to such a relatively small airframe as the LaGG, but turned out to be a near perfect match, though it took some time to get the cooling system to function properly. The Ash-82 had a much better power/weight ratio than the mediocre Klimov engine, which would never truly fit the heavy Lavochkin design. For planes with Klimov engines, there was only really one solution: Save weight. That's what happened to both the Yak and the LaGG designs, during the war. A steady effort to dump as much unnecessary weight as posible. The pinaccle of this development was the tiny Yak-3, one of the lightest and smalles fighters of the late war. The La-5/7 with the Ash-82 could keep a heavier (somewhat sturdier but mostly cheaper) construction and still get great performance. 

 

Thus the best design move the Lavochkin team ever made was actually a last-ditch panic-solution to try and solve the problem of the LaGG being heavy and underpowered.

[Finkeren]

BTW: If you want to compare the Bf 109 with the actual Yak-1, I think you'll find, that the 109 still looks more well built and certainly sleeker than the "hunch backed" Yak-1. However, the difference in appearance propably won't be as pronounced, since the Yak-1 was of all-metal construction and was an overall cleaner design than the LaGG-3.  

 

As for the Yak-1B, that's really more of a 1943 plane. The right fighter to put in to supplement the ones that are going to be in sim at launch would be a late production Yak-7B or posibly an early Yak-9.

[ImPeRaToR]

 

Yak-1 was of all-metal construction

The rear fuselage was plywood and canvas covered, the wings were also plywood. Did not change much on the Yak3, just the canvas on the tail was replaced with plywood.

[Finkeren]

The rear fuselage was plywood and canvas covered, the wings were also plywood. Did not change much on the Yak3, just the canvas on the tail was replaced with plywood.

 

Yeah, sorry, got that mixed up. Never mind.

 

I don't know, what I was thinking of. Posibly the metal/bakelite Yak-9U.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

Didn't the Yak-3 introduce metal wing thus giving higher diving speed than previous models with wooden wings. Also read about the problems of the metal wing losing it's plating in early models. I've seen Russian planes up close and their finish is crude at best. No filled or even seams etc. They were tools produced in quantity. Still, the Yak is one of the best looking VVS planes.

[BMW801]

This is a great discussion! I love the power of the collective knowledge of the group of people on this forum! One of the primary reasons I started reading the posts on this forum was not only to learn more about upcoming features of this sim, but to learn from the collective knowledge of the group on threads like this one. Unfortunately, I don't think my wife is too interested in the differences between the Yak-1 and the Yak-7, etc.

[Volkoff]

TOPYI,

The LaGG-3 bomber interceptor is what we are going to have to train on and use as a fighter. The LaGG-3 should be a pretty fine bomber interceptor, but I consider the LaGG-3 less than optimal as a defensive fighter. The Yak-1, with Klimov M-105PF, will be one of our best fighter options for the foreseeable future. The Yak-1 is no Yak-3. We are going to be the underdogs. Our opponents will still have better offensive fighters, overall. We will just have to practice as a squad, learn to be highly effective as a collective.

 

 MJ 

 

P.S. I can't wait to buy the Yak-1b, too.   

Edited September 27, 2013 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

[TheHighwayman]

TOPYI,

The LaGG-3 bomber interceptor is what we are going to have to train on and use as a fighter. The LaGG-3 should be a pretty fine bomber interceptor, but I consider the LaGG-3 less than optimal as a defensive fighter. The Yak-1, with Klimov M-105PF, will be one of our best fighter options for the foreseeable future. The Yak-1 is no Yak-3. We are going to be the underdogs. Our opponents will still have better offensive fighters, overall. We will just have to practice as a squad, learn to be highly effective as a collective.

 

MJ

 

P.S. I can't wait to buy the Yak-1b, too.

Well, at least I know what to start practicing on. Lol

 

Yes, we will need to get some group practice in, train tactics.

Edited September 27, 2013 by =69.GIAP=TOPYI

[Finkeren]

Well to be fair, it's not all looking bad for the VVS. While the LaGG is going to have a tough time, especially since we get a version with no slats so handling is gonna suck, the Yak-1 isn't gonna be half bad.

 

At least I can see a bit of silver lining in these areas:

 

We get a late production Yak-1, which means that the structure has been lightened a bit, and some of the problems with plywood panels coming loose at high speeds has been solved.

 

The plane has a M-105PF engine, which should give the Yak higher top speed than at least the Bf 109F-4 up to 8000m and stay competitive above that.

 

The Yak should beat the 109 handily in roll rate as well as in overall maneuverability at high speeds. Keep it above 400 km/h, and there should be little trouble.

 

While it has less total ammunition the Yak is capable of delivering an awesome volume of fire (it's not at Fw 190 levels though) the ShVAK/ShKAS combination should mean that 109s will fall fast, if only the VVS pilot can actually hit.

 

The Yak-1 supposedly is a fairly tough nut, that won't easily burn or come apart unless hit by cannon shells.

 

While it's certainly no Yak-1B, the Yak-1 should have a better view from the cockpit than the 109, unless the devs decide to model the poor quality Soviet Perspex.

 

All other things being equal (which they weren't in real life) I would propably take my chances in a late production Yak-1 over a Bf 109F

[DB605]

 

At least I can see a bit of silver lining in these areas:

 

 

The plane has a M-105PF engine, which should give the Yak higher top speed than at least the Bf 109F-4 up to 8000m and stay competitive above that.

 

 

 

 

Really? Any sources for that? 590km/h is highest top speed i have found for yak 1 with PF engine while F4 top speed should be around 630 km/h.

[Finkeren]

Really? Any sources for that? 590km/h is highest top speed i have found for yak 1 with PF engine while F4 top speed should be around 630 km/h.

I'll try to find the source, but I remember quite distinctly several sources confirming somewhere around 530-540 km/h at ground level for the 105PF Yak-1 vs. where the Bf 109F only clears 520 km/h (it's not much, but it's something). The 109 gains substancially more speed with altitude than the Yak and starts to gain the edge around 3000m (sorry, I see now, that I wrote 8000m in my earlier post, that's a typo)

[DB605]

I'll try to find the source, but I remember quite distinctly several sources confirming somewhere around 530-540 km/h at ground level for the 105PF Yak-1 vs. where the Bf 109F only clears 520 km/h (it's not much, but it's something). The 109 gains substancially more speed with altitude than the Yak and starts to gain the edge around 3000m (sorry, I see now, that I wrote 8000m in my earlier post, that's a typo)

 

I'll try to find the source, but I remember quite distinctly several sources confirming somewhere around 530-540 km/h at ground level for the 105PF Yak-1 vs. where the Bf 109F only clears 520 km/h (it's not much, but it's something). The 109 gains substancially more speed with altitude than the Yak and starts to gain the edge around 3000m (sorry, I see now, that I wrote 8000m in my earlier post, that's a typo)

 

Ok, now your post makes more sense

 

This is from wikipedia, not the most reliable source i know, but anyways:

 

"The Yak-1 was better than Bf 109E but inferior to Bf 109F - its main opponent - in rate of climb at all altitudes. And although it could complete a circle at the same speed (20–21 seconds at 1,000 meters) as a Bf 109, its lack of agility made dogfights difficult, demanding high levels of concentration. In comparison, a Bf 109, with its automatic flaps, had a lower stall speed and was more stable in sharp turns and vertical aerobatic figures.A simulated combat between a Yak (with M-105PF engine) and a Bf 109F revealed that the Messerschmitt had only marginally superior manoeuvrability at 1,000 meters (3,300 ft), though the German fighter could gain substantial advantage over the Yak-1 within four or five nose-to-tail turns. At 3,000 meters (9,800 ft) the capabilities of the two fighters were nearly equal, combat essentially reduced to head-on attacks. At altitudes over 5,000 meters ( 16,400 ft) the Yak was more manoeuvrable. The engine’s nominal speed at low altitudes was lowered to 2,550 rpm and the superiority of the Bf 109F at these altitudes was reduced. "

Edited September 27, 2013 by DB605

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I think the Yak 1 might be faster below 3000m but the 109F should be much faster above and have a better climb rate from what I understand.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

If it really does have the M-105PF then isn't that a Yak-1b?

[III/JG53Frankyboy]

no, just a 'late 42' Yak-1

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Everything I've read said the 'b' part was an unofficial designation used after October 42 iirc. It had the M-105PF.

[ImPeRaToR]

Good luck protection ground targets at 3km and above though
 

Everything I've read said the 'b' part was an unofficial designation used after October 42 iirc. It had the M-105PF.

No, the "b" part never was official, it was just called along the lines of Yak 1 model 1943.
 

 

 

We get a late production Yak-1, which means that the structure has been lightened a bit,

has this been confirmed that we get the lightened airframe? Both the heavier and the lighter version were produced in mid 42

Edited September 27, 2013 by ImPeRaToR

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Yes I said 'unofficial designation'

 

:D

[Volkoff]

Everything I've read said the 'b' part was an unofficial designation used after October 42 iirc. It had the M-105PF.

I don't think we are getting the version with the bubble canopy, UBS gun and alterations to weight. I am pretty sure our ride will be a Yak 1 razorback, just with the Klimov M-105PF.  MJ

[ImPeRaToR]

Yes I said 'unofficial designation'

 

:D

Well, either way The b or 43 model only applies to Yak1 aircraft with the lowered rear fuselage and the bubble canopy.

 

The lightened 42 airframe actually had very similar performance to the 43 model, but of course the UB machine gun could penetrate pilot armor more reliably and visibility was much improved.

[Mac_Messer]

As for the Yak-1B, that's really more of a 1943 plane. The right fighter to put in to supplement the ones that are going to be in sim at launch would be a late production Yak-7B or posibly an early Yak-9.

Yup, especially the 7B type. A real game changer imo.

[Finkeren]

Yup, especially the 7B type. A real game changer imo.

In the later patches of IL2 I found the Yak-7B 1942 version with the M-105PF even better than the Yak-9 (except for cockpit view) which doesn't seem right.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I don't think we are getting the version with the bubble canopy, UBS gun and alterations to weight. I am pretty sure our ride will be a Yak 1 razorback, just with the Klimov M-105PF.  MJ

 

I get where you are coming from. I suppose I should have been clearer earlier on, I'm really looking at the Yak 1 in terms of performance or more importantly for someone who is going to fight them how they will perform against the 109s. I'm assuming the performance will be much closer to the Yak 1b data available (if not identical?) than the M-105P powered Yak 1 so it should be quite formidable. That's why I see the Yak we are getting as more of a 1b than a 1 even if it doesn't have the bubble canopy etc.

[ImPeRaToR]

It depends on the airframe Emil, if we get the "standard airframe it will still be inferior, if we get the lightened airframe (even without the bubble canopy and lower fuselage) it will be very good match for the F-4 and G-2.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Any idea the difference in weight of the airframes? I'm curious to know how much difference it would make.

 

Cheers

[ImPeRaToR]

Not sure how reliable this data is since the whole book is rather disputed on its main subject, camouflage colours and schemes.

 

from Classic Colours - Soviet Air Force Fighter Colours 1941-1945

 

This data would make the two late yak1 versions as fast as the 109F-4 and G-2 on the deck,  though.

 

 

edit: something odd on the obl. version, the difference between empty and loaded is less than on the other versions, 430kg vs ~500 on the others.

Edited September 27, 2013 by ImPeRaToR

[VeryOldMan]

Good luck protection ground targets at 3km and above though

 

No, the "b" part never was official, it was just called along the lines of Yak 1 model 1943.

 

 

has this been confirmed that we get the lightened airframe? Both the heavier and the lighter version were produced in mid 42

 

 

3 km is the  standard height I would patrol to  hunt for  mud movers.  Give ample vision and  can  bounce them at 700km/h  without chance of being  shot down.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Not sure how reliable this data is since the whole book is rather disputed on its main subject, camouflage colours and schemes.

 

 

 

from Classic Colours - Soviet Air Force Fighter Colours 1941-1945

 

This data would make the two late yak1 versions as fast as the 109F-4 and G-2 on the deck,  though.

 

 

edit: something odd on the obl. version, the difference between empty and loaded is less than on the other versions, 430kg vs ~500 on the others.

 

 

Thanks!

 

The figures look about right from what you can find else where on the internet.

[Matt]

Here is also some data for various Yak planes. It's from "Soviet Combat Aircraft of the Second World War Vol.1".

Edited September 27, 2013 by Matt

[ImPeRaToR]

Total speculation but this is my guestimation how those planes will perform:

on the deck the yak1 and the F-4 will be very closely matched in turn rate and climb, probably both slightly better for the F-4, while the Yak1 will be slightly faster and roll better.
Against the G-2 it will probably be very similar except the G-2 will have a noticable edge in climb but loses some turn rate.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Total speculation but this is my guestimation how those planes will perform:

 

on the deck the yak1 and the F-4 will be very closely matched in turn rate and climb, probably both slightly better for the F-4, while the Yak1 will be slightly faster and roll better.

Against the G-2 it will probably be very similar except the G-2 will have a noticable edge in climb but loses some turn rate.

 

Yep that's exactly what I think.

 

Above 4000m I would imagine things get bad for the Yak.

[ImPeRaToR]

Sure but the 109s will be alone up there

[DB605]

Nah, it's just great alt to start BnZ

[Finkeren]

Above 4000m I would imagine things get bad for the Yak.

That would be my guess as well, but curiously enough the VVS' analysts thought differently:

 

http://luthier.stormloader.com/SFTacticsI.htm

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Yeh I read that a while back but find it hard to believe. It also sounds very generic when talking about 'our latest fighter' etc.

[Volkoff]

Well, when the Yak-1 comes out, the Luftwaffe squads should study a captured Yak-1 and test her capabilities against the BF-109 machines. I intend to learn how to simfly the BF-109 rides, so I can do everything from high speed hit and run to using a horizontal bunt to get an opponent to overshoot my 109f, when my VVS opponent is in a turn with me and attempting to pull lead for a shot. This way I can study how to best deal with these tactics and what not. I need to know all the Luftwaffe tricks, so I can improve as a virtual VVS sim pilot. I recommend that the Luftwaffe guys simfly and learn all about the in game VVS rides and future VVS add-ons, just as VVS guys and gals should learn and simfly all the Luftwaffe planes and future Luftwaffe add-ons. At the end of the day, it will be the in game rides and future add-ons of the other side we will face. It is best to know thy enemy.  MJ 

Edited September 27, 2013 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

[6./ZG26_Emil]

If you would be interested in doing 4v4 or squad versus squad fights let me know. We used to do this with many VVS squads and it was great team work and tactics

 

I'll be treating the Yak 1 the same as the Yak 1b from IL2 but I don't do turning even it it might be possible in the F4

Edited September 27, 2013 by JG5_Emil