coconut Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 ... isn't it? I bought it on sale and played it for the first time yesterday. Normally I'm not the best of pilots, but this time I could fight two bf109 f4 at the same time. The plane is very maneuverable at low speed and low altitude, it regains speed very fast, appears to have a better roll rate than the bf109, and turns pretty well at 400kph. Not quite as fast in level flight, but almost. The speed difference can't be more than a few kph, I would say. All in all, a very good plane. I'm surprised I'm not seeing more Russians fly it or Germans complain about it. Other things I noticed is that it seems the bf109 is no longer doing so well at low speeds, and the Lagg-3 is no longer the flying brick it used to be. Personally, I think I like these changes.
II./JG77_Manu* Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 ... isn't it? I bought it on sale and played it for the first time yesterday. Normally I'm not the best of pilots, but this time I could fight two bf109 f4 at the same time. The plane is very maneuverable at low speed and low altitude, it regains speed very fast, appears to have a better roll rate than the bf109, and turns pretty well at 400kph. Not quite as fast in level flight, but almost. The speed difference can't be more than a few kph, I would say. All in all, a very good plane. I'm surprised I'm not seeing more Russians fly it or Germans complain about it. Other things I noticed is that it seems the bf109 is no longer doing so well at low speeds, and the Lagg-3 is no longer the flying brick it used to be. Personally, I think I like these changes. As far as i have tested the La5 seems by far the most accurate of the Russian fighters. Beside the overdone dive speed capabilities every fighter but the 190 has (compared to real life) only the roll rate seems a little bit dubious. In all honesty, it should be the best Russian fighter in game, which it clearly isn't. I am flying this fighter mostly the latest time (my favourite Russian fighter) , and i have a hard time. Not to even say, i am doing worse then with every other fighter including the Lagg. Don't know what it is, maybe i am just to worried to hit the fire button, because of the missing machine guns, and being afraid of wasting my cannon ammunition for nothing. If you are good at it i could really need some lesson
senseispcc Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 The La-5 should and must be a quite good plane/fighter but many of us are still victims of the propaganda of the pro German after the war western countries in particular the USA. It is true that the Soviet air force did loose a lot of planes in the beginning of the campaign, but this is more due to stupid tactics and less quality of pilots than to the intrinsic quality of the planes. And when the tactics and the quality of pilots did improve at the same time the planes did increase their quality and durability, little by little German pilots did gain respect for the Soviet counterparts. Never foget that the Luftwaffe did loos more than 62000 planes to the soviet in combat during the great patriotic war never did the allied get to this number even with their planes and only air offensives?! But this is only a game and I love the La-5 all versions even the La-7 and many of the best aces where flying La's there is maybe a reason why?! 4
Finkeren Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 The La-5 seems pretty accurate to me, and I agree to call it 'pretty good' but not much more than that. It's definately the plane I have most trouble succeeding with in both SP and MP. You have to fly it very conservative to get good performance out of it and it's engine is a handful to control compared to the Klimov-engined planes, which you can pretty much just use one combat setting for all the way up to 4000m. The strong points of the La-5 lies in its armament and high top speed on the deck. Other than that it's really still a LaGG at heart. It'll be interesting to see, what happens to it in 1.009. As far as I can tell, there are a number of factors which might really benefit the La-5: Increased durability of radial engines: This seems obvious, a clear advantage. Overall increase of structural strength in all aircraft: This will most likely give heavier cannon armament a real advantage, which it simply doesn't have now. If you can blow off the wing of a 109 with just a tap on the trigger in the Yak, there's really no need for the extra armament of the La-5. I hope, that we will see the La-5s 2xShVAKs and option to load all-HE or all-AP play a real role in the future. Redesigned cockpit for the La-5: This remains to be seen but might well give us lightly better view forward which, quite frankly, seems unnecessarilly obstructed now.
KaC_Furias Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) Edited February 20, 2015 by Furias 1
coconut Posted February 20, 2015 Author Posted February 20, 2015 As far as i have tested the La5 seems by far the most accurate of the Russian fighters. Beside the overdone dive speed capabilities every fighter but the 190 has (compared to real life) only the roll rate seems a little bit dubious. In all honesty, it should be the best Russian fighter in game, which it clearly isn't. I am flying this fighter mostly the latest time (my favourite Russian fighter) , and i have a hard time. Not to even say, i am doing worse then with every other fighter including the Lagg. Don't know what it is, maybe i am just to worried to hit the fire button, because of the missing machine guns, and being afraid of wasting my cannon ammunition for nothing. If you are good at it i could really need some lesson I only have about 60min of flight, against the same two guys, so any advice I give must be taken with a healthy serving of sea salt. I found that rolling would usually take me out of trouble. I don't mean constant rolling, rather initiate a turn with a 90 deg roll, then when you see that your pursuer is closing the angle and stabilising his aim, roll again for another 180deg or so, which will send you turning in the opposite direction. The Bf109 should have a hard time following you, and at this point he has a number of options: If he keeps his speed up and tries to keep his lead pursuit, he should overshoot you (or stall). There is a short window where he will be able to shoot at you and kill you. Prayer and eyes closed work best in this situation If he keeps his speed and goes straight, you might be able to keep rolling and get behind him. Probably with lower energy, but if you don't try to climb with him, you should get some time to breath and regain energy before he turns around for another attack. If he slows down to turn with you, but keeps his lead pursuit, you should be able to outturn him, and below 280kph his plane will have a hard time staying airborne. At least that's what I experienced, but maybe it was just my enemies being clumsy. If he slows down to turn with you, but goes into a lag pursuit, I don't know what will happen. There is one thing that the La-5 doesn't seem to like, which is pulling hard on the stick. Unexpected rolls work better than constant hard banking.
Caudron431 Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) I also like the La5 up till the La7 very much but you know that now other country then Germany had any real ace (100 kills) in war do you? Germany had over 100 of them. And that is definitely no propaganda. Don't wanna start a discussion about this in this topic, but the last two lines of your statement just can't stand in this way, sorry mate. Just don't bring up those patriotic propaganda stuff in the first place, as a Russian starting to talk about propaganda, you can only shoot yourself in the foot. No offence OK if i understand correctly German Experten are real aces, other countries only had unter-aces? And when the tactics and the quality of pilots did improve at the same time the planes did increase their quality and durability, little by little German pilots did gain respect for the Soviet counterparts. Not only respect but also fear and despair. Good post by the way. Edited February 20, 2015 by RegRag1977
Y-29.Silky Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 I've complained about it once when one chased my 109 down at 5000m, don't know how, but it did. It's more dangerous than the Yak for sure when it's in the right hands.
Dr_Molenbeek Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 My favorite Russian fighter, radial engine ftw ! I just hope they'll fix the roll rate one day... (I also hope to see a La-5FN in the future <3)
6./ZG26_5tuka Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 All in all, a very good plane. I'm surprised I'm not seeing more Russians fly it or Germans complain about it. Because it feels realitsic (well, apart from the roll rate) and matches real data quite accurately. Not all pilots enjoy flying for the favourably superior side but like historical accurancy. I like the La-5 too but find it's a closer match to the Fw 190 than the 109. Interetsting to me is your observation on turn performance since both bf 109s should be able to outturn it (as I've observed it fighting with and against La-5s ingame as well as real data). It's strengh lies in it's roughetness and low altitude performance combined with the (unrealistic and historically inaccurate) roll rate. It's demanding though and you need to be patient and tactically thinking to master it. Other things I noticed is that it seems the bf109 is no longer doing so well at low speeds, and the Lagg-3 is no longer the flying brick it used to be. That's wrong though. The lagg-3 was plagued by many design flaws due to increased weight and unoptiomised controll surface layout. Both, the La-5 as well as the Lagg-3 put high strain on their pilots if they wanted to keep up with their more manouvreable german oppoments. Furthermore their dive speed was fairly limited due to material insufficience, which is not that distinctive ingame.
Wulf Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) I don't have access to Soviet era archives but I do have the Yefim Gordon and Dmitri Khazanov book Soviet Combat Aircraft of the Second World War Vol. 1. In it the authors state that NII VVS testing of an La-5 Series 4 in Sept. and Oct. 1942 indicated a max speed at ground level, with boost, of 535 Km/h (and 509 Km/h without boost). At altitude 6250 m (20,000 feet) and with boost activated, the La-5 could do 580 Km/h. Time to 5000 m is given as 6 minutes. If these are the speeds and climb rates people are getting in the game then I guess the aircraft has been modeled accurately. If not, then maybe not so much. The interesting point the authors stress about the early series La-5 is that it wasn't really a fantastic performer - not in 1942-early '43. But, what the aircraft demonstrated was real development potential. Once the La-5 morphed into the La-5 FN, that potential was finally realized and the aircraft was actually a better performer than the 190 A series put up against it by the Lufwaffe. I'm not set up to fly the Soviet machines; I just deal with them on the receiving end, but to me at least, they still seem far too potent for the time period. The La-5 is in almost all respects a match for the 190 and I really wonder whether it should be - in 1942-early '43? Edited February 20, 2015 by Wulf
Dr_Molenbeek Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 At altitude 6250 m (20,000 feet) and with boost activated, the La-5 could do 580 Km/h. I thought the Lavochkins were not able to activate forza at the 2nd supercharger stage ? (or they could, but there was no power increase, don't remember exactly)
Finkeren Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 Hairy is right. There is absolutely nothing to be gained from using boost above 2500m.
Wulf Posted February 20, 2015 Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) Just checked again and it just shows you how careful you have to be when transcribing material. The book doesn't actually mention 'augmentation' when describing the aircraft's speed at 6250 m. Also, it actually states that climb to 5k, using 'augmentaion', is 5.7 minutes, not 6 as previously stated. The 6 minute figure is the non-augmented (normal power rating) climb time. Sorry, 'my bad' as old guys who want to sound hip tend to say..... Edited February 20, 2015 by Wulf
coconut Posted February 22, 2015 Author Posted February 22, 2015 I like the La-5 too but find it's a closer match to the Fw 190 than the 109. Interetsting to me is your observation on turn performance since both bf 109s should be able to outturn it (as I've observed it fighting with and against La-5s ingame as well as real data). I flew a few hours yesterday against a bunch of g2, and they had no problem following my turns and shooting me down. It must have been the two f4 pilots I flew against in my first session who were doing something wrong. No more dragging germans into turns with my La-5 from now on
OhhhhChihuahua Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 The La-5 should and must be a quite good plane/fighter but many of us are still victims of the propaganda of the pro German after the war western countries in particular the USA. It is true that the Soviet air force did loose a lot of planes in the beginning of the campaign, but this is more due to stupid tactics and less quality of pilots than to the intrinsic quality of the planes. And when the tactics and the quality of pilots did improve at the same time the planes did increase their quality and durability, little by little German pilots did gain respect for the Soviet counterparts. Never foget that the Luftwaffe did loos more than 62000 planes to the soviet in combat during the great patriotic war never did the allied get to this number even with their planes and only air offensives?! But this is only a game and I love the La-5 all versions even the La-7 and many of the best aces where flying La's there is maybe a reason why?! Talk about propaganda more, please.
312_Lazy Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 I flew a few hours yesterday against a bunch of g2, and they had no problem following my turns and shooting me down. It must have been the two f4 pilots I flew against in my first session who were doing something wrong. No more dragging germans into turns with my La-5 from now on Yes. La-5 is simply worse than Yak and German planes. Unless you stick with your friends on comms and exploit numerical superiority you're pretty much screwed.
SYN_Ricky Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) The La-5 should and must be a quite good plane/fighter but many of us are still victims of the propaganda of the pro German after the war western countries in particular the USA. It is true that the Soviet air force did loose a lot of planes in the beginning of the campaign, but this is more due to stupid tactics and less quality of pilots than to the intrinsic quality of the planes. And when the tactics and the quality of pilots did improve at the same time the planes did increase their quality and durability, little by little German pilots did gain respect for the Soviet counterparts. Never foget that the Luftwaffe did loos more than 62000 planes to the soviet in combat during the great patriotic war never did the allied get to this number even with their planes and only air offensives?! But this is only a game and I love the La-5 all versions even the La-7 and many of the best aces where flying La's there is maybe a reason why?! Sorry but early versions of the La-5 were not much better than the LaGG. At that time the Yak-1/7 were better and more capable fighters. Edited February 22, 2015 by SYN_Ricky 3
303_Kwiatek Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) Yep La5 was only faster then Yak-1 or LAgg-3 both at low alts and altitutde and got better climb rate then Lagg-3, similar to Yak-1. Generaly Yak-1 was more manoverable both in turns and rolls. Until La5F and expecially LA5FN these plane wasn't anything special. 109 was faster at altlttude, got better climb rate and even turn rate then La5. Also LA5 suffer overheating problems ( but Lagg-3 and Yak-1 with PF engine too). I think LA5 ( beside maximum dive speed and dubfull roll rate) got the most accurate and historical performacne and handling from all Russian planes in BOS. Edited February 22, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek
SR-F_Winger Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 OK if i understand correctly German Experten are real aces, other countries only had unter-aces? Not only respect but also fear and despair. Good post by the way. http://acesofww2.com/soviet/ vs http://acepilots.com/german/ger_aces.html "Fear and despair" And btw. could you leave this hidden nazi accusations aside? We are SIMMERS.
303_Kwiatek Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) Still i wonder that Soviets propaganda is still so much strong in Russia Even in XXI century when there is much free internet acces and free books I recomend for all Russian book : Soviets Combat Aircraft of the WW2. It should put some light into Soviets propaganda claims expecially about quality and real performacne of Soviets planes http://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Combat-Aircraft-Second-World/dp/0760306486/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1424613602&sr=1-2 Dunno if it is in Russian language, maby here is lack of reliable books in Russian language. Edited February 22, 2015 by 303_Kwiatek
ShamrockOneFive Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 I like the La-5 quite a bit for giving us some flavour to the fighter lineup. Both LaGG-3 and Yak-1 are superficially similar in design with their online engines while the La-5 with its radial adds some interest. I'm also interested to see the progression as I'm assuming one day we'll have a La-5F or La-5FN to fly with more power and less weight. Will really see how thundering comes together from the earlier example into the later one.
Finkeren Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 Both LaGG-3 and Yak-1 are superficially similar in design with their online engines while the La-5 with its radial adds some interest. I don't get why people think the Yak and LaGG look so similar. If anything it's the LaGG-3 and La-5 that are fundamentally similar.
ShamrockOneFive Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 I don't get why people think the Yak and LaGG look so similar. If anything it's the LaGG-3 and La-5 that are fundamentally similar. Obviously the LaGG-3 and La-5 are intensely related but at a base level they all look fairly similar and the LaGG-3 and Yak-1 have the profile of many inline engined types while the radial engine is a very different look.
bivalov Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) well, personally i can't said that La-5 are realised absolutely correctly here, but, man, this is interesting and GOOD plane...... and i can state that more and more players (from my russian friends, or just russians, at least) start to understand this........ and only really sad that BOM kill all? my hopes on some mods, and modernised type 37......... Talk about propaganda more, please. [Edited] Edited February 22, 2015 by Bearcat
Finkeren Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 [Edited] Please just leave this be, before it gets outta hand. Seriously.
Caudron431 Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) http://acesofww2.com/soviet/ vs http://acepilots.com/german/ger_aces.html "Fear and despair" And btw. could you leave this hidden nazi accusations aside? We are SIMMERS. Well let's just say that the value of a pilot does not necessarily show in stats...It's about what is a great feat, numbers olny don't say all. Example: German expert in the east would not be able to achieve much against western allies while Western front Experten always did very well in the East. Ritterkreuz attribution policy shows this IIRC. This is about heroic feats, what is heroic in having lots of kills against poor opposition? Luftwaffe pilots knew this. Given the technical advantage of Nazi Germany through the greatest part of the war, let just say that is was harder for a Soviet pilot to become an ace; to kill better trained pilots flying better machines: It is a greater feat to win against the odds, it is greater than to win against poorly trained pilots flying obsolete types. So my point is a great pilot is a great pilot no need to come to numbers: as Disraeli said: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." There is nothing like a "real ace"! In the context: "now (sic) other country then (sic) Germany had any real ace (100 kills) in war" (the important word is "real" what does this mean?) This does sound strange to me. "http://acesofww2.com/soviet/ vs http://acepilots.com/german/ger_aces.html "Fear and despair" :P" Read carefully sensei posts, he did not mention aces but pilots, or maybe there was something hidden in what he said, or maybe the Luftwaffe pilots were just happy to see themselves losing the war? But even the aces i'm sure (they had families) were scared about defeat, they just could not do nothing against the growing (in quality and quantity) VVS, and they knew what their armies did in the East and feared that defeat would mean their turn. "And btw. could you leave this hidden nazi accusations aside?" Yawn: could you leave your paranoïd accusation aside, are you a "hidden" moderator or else on these forums? "We are SIMMERS!" Edited February 22, 2015 by RegRag1977
Jaws2002 Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 One thing is suspect about both the lag and LA5. The roll rate....more like roll inertia. It reacts instantly. and this is exactly what the plane didn't do. Had the Lagg3 and La5 rolled like this, I don't think any sane person would have done the extensive changes in ailerons done to LA-5F. That one is definitely dodgy. The la-5 out scissors the FW-190 at all speeds. And this is wrong for the vanilla La-5. Otherwise the plane is ok. 1
Caudron431 Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 One thing is suspect about both the lag and LA5. The roll rate....more like roll inertia. It reacts instantly. and this is exactly what the plane didn't do. Had the Lagg3 and La5 rolled like this, I don't think any sane person would have done the extensive changes in ailerons done to LA-5F. That one is definitely dodgy. The la-5 out scissors the FW-190 at all speeds. And this is wrong for the vanilla La-5. Otherwise the plane is ok. I agree, i have the DCS Dora and it feels completely different. The Fw190A in BoS is like it is nothing special when you compare it to the Las (roll axis): it is not exciting to fly anymore
bivalov Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 my last? clear point about MAIN argument, in almost each local discussion about performance of BOS-aircrafts - ie about "soviet/russian propaganda"................ although, this is just "self-explained" behavior............. 1) Bf 109 F-4 1.42 ata - in all ENGLISH/GERMAN documents from internet, not faster than 537-540 kph at sl - and 558 kph at sl in GAME.......... (minus influence of stab, and this is will be absolutely normal speed = 525+20-25 kph) 2) Bf 109 G-2 1.3 ata - in all ENGLISH/GERMAN documents from internet, not faster than 537 kph at sl - and 537 kph at sl in GAME.......... (i know about description, but, anyway, i must to note that performance based on early CALCULATION) 3) Fw 190 A-3 1.42 ata - in all ENGLISH/GERMAN documents from internet, not faster than 537-540 kph at sl - and 555 kph at sl in GAME.......... (ie FASTER than best real plane with gills) so, WHO permanently said NONSENSE here, but almost without any serious reasons? and if NOBODY knows correct limit for 1.42 ata (DB 601 E), this is not means that 1 minute is ABSOLUTELY wrong decision (personally i think that is wrong decision, and i (we) have several concrete proofs, but devs still prefer their VERY strange decision, still ignore other facts, and yep, permanently said various nonsense). BMW 801 D-2 had 3 minutes in RL, and in game 3 minutes. and in end of all, let's see on performance of soviet-russian planes (but only at SL, because personally i dont have correct results for high altitude, and also i remind that main concept of this game is "NEW NORMAL planes for ALL sides").............. 1) La-5 type 37 s8 - about 515 kph at sl @ nominal power (this is result of one of first prototypes from original technical description'42) - about 545 kph st sl @ forsazh........... (ie just a bit faster than very early La-5 s4, AND if i not mistaken, instead of 10 min. limit for forsazh from RL, now in game only 5 minutes) 2) Yak-1 s69 - real №1569, ie one of first planes with PF instead of PA, showed 510 kph at sl - and in game also 522 kph, if radiators open at 30-35% in acc. with techno-chat............. (and anybody can to try 910 mm hg + 2600 (or 2700) rpm = M-105PA + 30-35 % of opening of flaps. and personally i got about 485-490 kph at sl, which are correct speed of plane №2029 with PA, for example) 3) LaGG-3 s29 - in acc. to words of one engineers of BOS, plus in according to several docs, s29 showed about 505 kph at sl - well, s29 in game also showed about 505 kph at sl, with flaps "по потоку"............. (btw, what about dive limits for soviet-russian planes - this is real mystery even for me....... BUT, for example, 1) common practice is SAFE-limits for pilots hanbooks, 2) official dive limits for Yak-1, La-5 and LaGG-3 is about 600-650/625/600-650 kph, 3) and personally i have LOT of not documental, plus several documental evidences where, for example, LaGG was successfully tested @ 700 kph IAS......... personally i think that real s29 had other 600 IAS limit, probably, but.......... well............. one of devs said that dive limit for Bf 109 is about 900 TAS, which anyway bigger than LaGG with his about 750 TAS. so.......? and about roll rate for LaGG and La - personally i simply dont have correct data about this (in fact, i dont research it seriously, but i doubt that ANYBODY have this, maybe, except of developers), so, personally i just DONT KNOW real behavior of LaGG-3 s29 and La-5 type 37 s1-8...... but WHO know?) well,,,,,,,, looks like that is ENOUGH? and WHAT personally i think about each ritter of truth and light with several old books in bag? 1
Jaws2002 Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 (edited) What do you think about the roll rate of the LaGG3 and La5 compared to the FW-190 A3 in game? " Soviet pilots reported that the Lavochkin ( La-5 ) could stay with – but not overtake – an Fw 190 in horizontal flight at low altitude and their performance was similar, when manoeuvring in the same plane. When chasing or evading an Fw 190 in a climb, the La-5 (which was half a ton lighter) enjoyed some advantage. However, its manoeuvrability at speeds in excess of 250mph left a lot to be desired in comparison with the Fw 190. Most pilots felt that the ailerons and elevators were particularly heavy when turning tightly at higher speeds and when exiting a dive. This in turn meant that only physically strong pilots could hope to get the best out of the early La-5s when engaging enemy fighters." With service testing and combat experience having revealed numerous defects with the La-5, Lavochkin set about rectifying these problems with the follow-on La-5F of early 1943. Incorporating aerodynamic improvements, reduced weight (achieved by losing two of the five fuel tanks), reshaped and larger flight controls and a more powerful (and reliable) M-82F engine, the new fighter started to reach frontline units in March 1943. Engine reliability had been of great concern with the original La-5, as the M-82 had a tendency to suffer from spark plug failure and exhaust pipe burnthrough. The fighter’s boost system had also proven difficult to operate, as had the cowling side flaps – the engine routinely overheated as a result. Although the improved La-5F allowed Soviet pilots to achieve parity with German fighters during the spring of 1943, Lavochkin was fully aware that more still needed to be done. For example, engine reliability was still not what it should have been, with the La-5 suffering a failure rate three times greater than its contemporaries in the VVS-KA at that time. Pilots were also finding the aircraft difficult to recover from inverted spins due to the heaviness of the controls. Indeed, frontline aviators continued to abandon La-5s in an inverted spin until they were shown how to recover the aircraft by Lavochkin test pilots. As previously mentioned, the fighter’s handling improved with the advent of the La-5F thanks to the fitment of larger flying surfaces. " The LaGG-3 tested by the agency in March and April 1942 at a flying weight of 6,8341b (3,1OOkg) ......In addition to high noise level, high control column forces and short range, it was claimed that manoeuvrability was poor and that radio communication range was insufficient.. (La5 with M-82)......The tests also revealed quite a number of problems. Controllability proved to be even more difficult than that of the LaGG-3 M-1 05P. Transition from a banked turn in one direction to a banked turn in the other caused stick forces requiring great physical efforts by the pilot. " Edited February 22, 2015 by Jaws2002
303_Kwiatek Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 You got wrong speed for all BOS planes Bivavlov. All planes in BOS are much faster at the deck. Example Yak-1 in BOS reach 555 kph with 25 % open radiator which is 45 kph aditional boost from cold BOS wheather conditions. Of course all planes are faster then in ISA but Yak-1 recived the higher boost speed.
Brano Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 Do you ever use outside atmosphere temperature for your calculations? Flying on Stalingrad map with -10 or -15°C at see level gives you density altitude of flying 1km under sea level = your TAS will be lower then your IAS.
senseispcc Posted February 22, 2015 Posted February 22, 2015 I like the La-5 quite a bit for giving us some flavour to the fighter lineup. Both LaGG-3 and Yak-1 are superficially similar in design with their online engines while the La-5 with its radial adds some interest. I'm also interested to see the progression as I'm assuming one day we'll have a La-5F or La-5FN to fly with more power and less weight. Will really see how thundering comes together from the earlier example into the later one. Sorry but early versions of the La-5 were not much better than the LaGG. At that time the Yak-1/7 were better and more capable fighters. Talk about propaganda more, please. Yes, the La-5 from the game is the first version of the plane and need the evolution to be a better plane but the seed is there. It evolve not only with new or modified engines but also with stronger structural modifications. Never forget that in war and even after war no nation or side was afraid to use propaganda the Soviets where great experts but others also and still are. Look at all lies that are told to begin wars?!
6./ZG26_5tuka Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 The only thing the first La-5 realy shined at was max speed. Everything else was inferiour to other sovviet fighters fo the time due to heaving the same heavy fuselage with unbalanced controll surfaces as the lagg-3...only a lot more heavier due to strenghting and a heavier radial engine. Turn time was about the of the Fw 190 and handling suffered great under the flaws of the initial construction. Only later Lavotchkins build with lighter materials (metal) and improved controll surfaces were able to turn the tide.
senseispcc Posted February 23, 2015 Posted February 23, 2015 (edited) The only thing the first La-5 realy shined at was max speed. Everything else was inferiour to other sovviet fighters fo the time due to heaving the same heavy fuselage with unbalanced controll surfaces as the lagg-3...only a lot more heavier due to strenghting and a heavier radial engine. Turn time was about the of the Fw 190 and handling suffered great under the flaws of the initial construction. Only later Lavotchkins build with lighter materials (metal) and improved controll surfaces were able to turn the tide. Correct. The seed was there. like many planes in WW2 example the P-51. Edited February 23, 2015 by senseispcc
bivalov Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 well, finally, i tried to create for myself, picture of improving of handling of La-5 type 37/type 39.......... and according to russian books, articles AND documents, looks like that handling was improved starting from s9/10 of type 37, and separately was improved on La-5FN, and besides of "normal ailerons" on <400-450 kph, plus just a bit hard handling....... type 37 s1-8 showed real problems with handling starting from 400-500 kph, and diving @ 500 kph was possible only with using of trimmer (this is about very early series).......... personally i just don't thought about possible "bugs", and now i really cant remember any problems with handling in game...... so, looks like that game shows real handling not fully. but this is only my personal opinion at this moment..... and i dont know real effectiveness of ailerons of Fw 190 (although, for example, all USSR reports which i check now, mentioned that roughly speaking "ailerons not easy to move, but is good", plus reports about captured Fw 190 A-4, F-8 and D-9 etc, mentioned that "in total, elevators are heavy")...... but i really doubt that in combat situation (75% of fuel etc), Fw 190 A-3 with 6xMG was really better, or even better than La-5 type 37 s8............ and a bit about LaGG-3 s29...... most likely, real s29 had old type of design (which was improved on s34, for example, and La-5 also got this type), and our LaGG-3 s29 could be a bit? better in handling, and a bit (50 kph)? faster in dive.............
ShamrockOneFive Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 The roll rate does feel fast but it's sluggish to enter a turn and then once there it's sluggish to actually stay there. I like flying the plane but it requires more planning to fly in combat than either the Yak-1 or LaGG-3.
Feathered_IV Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 I don't get why people think the Yak and LaGG look so similar. If anything it's the LaGG-3 and La-5 that are fundamentally similar. All Russian fighters tend to remind me of Maggie Simpson
Recommended Posts