MiG-3 climb rate, what to expect?

[Finkeren]

It's no secret, that I'm pretty excited about the getting the chance to fly the MiG-3 in this sim. It's always been a favourite of mine ever since I first discovered its existence as a kid, when I found it as a scale model kit and thought it looked fantastic, wondering why I had never heard of this aircraft.

 

My love for the MiG is based mostly on its elegant aesthetics, underdog image and interesting development history (as well as being the last design by Polikarpov to see action) not so much its abilities as a fighter or tragic combat history. Still, the actual capabilities of the MiG-3 continues to stir controvercy. There is no doubt, that its historical combat record was far from impressive, but there seems to be something of a divide between the people who claim, that its failure as a fighter was due to inherent design flaws that just rendered it completely inferior, and those who claim, that the design itself was sound and the fighter actually performed great (once the teething problems were ironed out) and that its poor combat performance was mainly due to a lack of pilots trained to fly the aircraft and improper deployment in roles it wasn't really designed for.

 

Now that we're soon gonna get to fly it in a proper modern sim (yay!  ), the actual performance and flight charateristics of the MiG-3 will become a good deal more important for me (and all of us really), and there will be a lot to discuss.

 

There is of course the question of top speed at different altitudes, which would be the MiGs main selling point but also an area, where it could well disappoint (a top speed of 640km/h is often cited, but it seems production models often only did slightly above 600km/h) but what I'd like to discuss here is perhaps an even more important performance figure: Climb rate.

 

Even if the MiG-3 is modeled to be as fast as its prototype, a low climb rate could still be its achilles heel against the very well-climbing Bf 109s, and therefore it becomes extremely important to know, what we can expect the MiG to climb like.

 

Of course we can propably expect, that due to the AM-35s low performance at lower altitudes, the MiG will be inferior to the Bf 109 at lower altitudes, but what about up high, where it performs its best (let's say above 3000m)?

 

Two climb rate figures I see quoted a lot are 5:42 min to 5000m and 10:28 to 8000m. Which gives an average climb rate of 14.62 m/s and 12.74 m/s respectively. Given the altitude difference the two numbers seem to fit well with each other and would indicate a respectable climb rate sort of on par with the I-16 but inferior to the Yak-1 (the late model we have in BoS) as well as all Bf 109s and the MC. 202.

 

But then I stumbled across this site: http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=512

 

Which gives a maximum climb rate of 3935 feet per minute, which translates to a whooping 19.98m/s!!! Which would almost put it on par with the Bf 109F4 on emergency power. If our MiG-3 is capable of that combined with a top speed of 640 km/h, it should be a real threat to not only the Axis BoM fighters, but the BoS ones as well.

 

Does anyone know if the MiG-3 was capable of that kind of climb rate at any altitude? Or do any of you have better data for the MiGs climb performance?

 

I'm not looking for confirmation, that the MiG-3 was actually some kind of misunderstood wonder plane. I'm simply looking for an accurate idea about what to expect.

Edited November 8, 2015 by Finkeren

[ShamrockOneFive]

Doing some quick Google-fu this morning I've found the same numbers as you Finkeren. I'm pretty excited about the MiG-3 as well... for pretty much the same reasons. It's a good looking if slightly quirky fighter and its reputation is that of an underdog fighter with almost what it took but not the numbers, the pilot training, the situation, or the time to be properly developed.

[Marauder]

From ground up to 5000m about 12-13 m/s.

[Asgar]

hey Finkeren, just wondering...do you like the MiG-3? 

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I was wondering about that as well yesterday... No idea, but here they have an actual MiG-3 available (albeit with a different engine) which they can use to study its aerodynamic quirks. I would presume having access to that not only comes with a lot of expertise and knowledge and documents about the original MiG-3 but also some good contacts with the guys at Mikoyan since as far as I recall they assisted the restorations of all flying MiG-3s.

 

Whatever the outcome will be, we should see the most accurate depiction of this curious plane soon.

 

I'm on my phone so I won't extend myself on my feelings about the MiG-3. Once I get to the computer I will.

[Finkeren]

From ground up to 5000m about 12-13 m/s.

My sources suggest something a bit higher.

 

12 m/s would be the average up to 8000m.

 

What is your source for the lower number?

[unreasonable]

Would the maximum climb rate not be equal to the sea-level climb rate? And drop off with altitude? I am sure there must be some climb rate vs altitude curves for similar aircraft somewhere, which you could scale up or down to see if these various figures fit to a reasonable curve. (Myself being too lazy to do it just now....).

 

Edit: There are ...  Google and you can find some Spitfire, 109 etc climb rate - altitude graphs. Should be possible to see if your numbers are in ball park or not.

Edited November 8, 2015 by unreasonable

[Finkeren]

It's a good looking if slightly quirky fighter and its reputation is that of an underdog fighter with almost what it took but not the numbers, the pilot training, the situation, or the time to be properly developed.

Agreed, except for the point about numbers. The MiG-3 was produced in quite high numbers during its short production run and was likely the most common of the three "new line" fighters of the VVS during Operation Barbarossa.

 

The problem were not low numbers (for instance there were more MiG-3s produced in 1 1/2 years than there were ever built Hawker Typhoons) but the lack of trained pilots to fly them.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

462 Km/h at sealevel

559 km/h at 5000m

603 km/h at 7800m

 

Time to climb to 5000m 6.8 minutes

a turn at low alt took 23 seconds

 

From Soviet Combat aircraft of WW2

[Finkeren]

Would the maximum climb rate not be equal to the sea-level climb rate? And drop off with altitude?

That would be the conventional wisdom, yes. But in the case of the MiG which had such abysmal performance at SL I suspect the picture might be more complex than that.

462 Km/h at sealevel

559 km/h at 5000m

603 km/h at 7800m

 

Time to climb to 5000m 6.8 minutes

a turn at low alt took 23 seconds

 

From Soviet Combat aircraft of WW2

If they quote a turn rate of 23 seconds, that means they're talking about the early proction variant. We're getting the late production version which was lighter due to a deleted ventral fuel tank (as well as some other refinements) and it both turned and climbed significantly better.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

later variant after modifications

 

466 km/h at seallevel

569 km/h at 5000m

615 km/h at 7800m

 

7.1 minutes to climb to 5000m

22 seconds to complete a turn

 

I think you should take a look at IL2 compare, it probably gives you a rough idea of what to expect 

[Finkeren]

Thanks for that.

 

Curious, that the climb rate should drop as the aircraft got both faster and lighter with the modifications Maybe they tested an aircraft with wing mounted UBKs?

 

Not gonna argue with the numbers, just seems strange.

[Marauder]

My sources suggest something a bit higher.

 

12 m/s would be the average up to 8000m.

 

What is your source for the lower number?

Books. The same 6.8 min to 5000 m Emil is quoting. That's the high end of the range for a 3350kg aircraft. You can also use your common sense - the power output of the AM-35 at nominal power is similar to that of the M-105PF at nominal power at low altitude. The weight of a Yak-1 is about 15% less than that of a MiG-3. Excluding magic, this puts the MiG-3 climb rate in the region of 85% of the Yak-1's 15 m/s, at about 13 m/s, give or take.

 

Better climb results might be obtained by the use of WEP or in game with less fuel, but 20 m/s are impossible with the nominally loaded aircraft at nominal power.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I think the long and short of it will be that it is going to totally outclass the E7 above 4 or 5k and be a challenge for, and not inferior to the F2 at high altitude.

 

Without doubt it will be one of the most interesting aircraft in the series and possibly a game changer.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I can see a good bit of complaining about it, not even due to malice but because the aircraft got such an unfairly bad rep in the west that many aren't expecting it to be a challenge.

 

If the old Il-2 is of any reference it'll be a blast to fly. Its speed across all altitudes isn't particularly bad if compared to other Soviet aircraft at the time, you have excellent control and maneuverability at high speeds, and it's as stable as it gets for gunnery. You can really plant the bullets exactly where you want them, as if by hand. It's a great platform to come in fast, wreck someone's plane very nicely and dart up, rinse and repeat.

 

Now, good luck to the multitude of people who will want more firepower and will commit the sin of loading those HMG pods under the wings. Those supposedly ruined maneuverability in addition to weight and drag penalties.

[[CPT]Pike*HarryM]

"Soviet Combat Aircraft" gives the climb to 5K for the AM38 (same engine as Il-2) powered version as 7.9 minutes, so maybe that's what the 7.1 mentioned above is alluding to. The "regular" MiG-3 is 5.3 minutes, which is not bad. And of course it is a high-altitude fighter so it is better above 5K. As far as the flying replica, the Allison engine is quite a bit lighter. The AM-35 was a large and heavy engine (originally designed for bombers), hence the long nose on the MiG. So the performance might be quite different (in terms of climb, performance at different altitudes,etc.)

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Apparently most of the performance attributes quoted here are for the (BK) model with Gunpods (the ca.460 at SL and 615 at altitude), while the clean speeds were around 505kph at SL and 640 at altitude.

Everybody, check the Take off weights given. If they are around 3.5 tons it's for gunpods, while around 3.3 tons is for clean aircraft.

http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/mig-3.html

 

Edit: also check armament. If it quotes 3xUB-type and 2xShkas it's a gunpod model. a 1xUB+2xShkas is a clean model.

 

Post Edit Edit: Climb to 5000 according to this too is 5.7 min.

Edited November 8, 2015 by Klaus_Mann

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I thought these replicas used weights of some sort to keep the CoG and general flight characteristics as they were. Wouldn't that create room for possibly dangerous behaviour in take-offs and landings in particular?

 

Edit: Those were the figures I was familiar with as well Klaus, makes sense if they were measured with a clean aircraft. 500ASL is faster than the '41 Yak-1 ASL, no?

Edited November 8, 2015 by Lucas_From_Hell

[Finkeren]

Edit: Those were the figures I was familiar with as well Klaus, makes sense if they were measured with a clean aircraft. 500ASL is faster than the '41 Yak-1 ASL, no?

Yes, by a significant margin even. And more importantly: It's as fast as the Bf 109E7 at SL, meaning it's not gonna be a sitting duck against Emils even at SL, though the E7 will certainly be much more maneuverable at that altitude in all but the rolling plane.

 

That is ofc, if that number is accurate. 500 at SL seems high for the late MiG-3, considering that the earlier version did 30 - 35 km/h less on the deck.

Edited November 8, 2015 by Finkeren

[Marauder]

 

 

The "regular" MiG-3 is 5.3 minutes, which is not bad.

This is a figure from the I-200 manual at 3100kg, hopefully not representative for BoM.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Marauder, do you have a source for that manual?

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I found a MiG-3 manual, in Russian. I'm on my mobile but it looks like the real deal. Seems like this one is a high altitude operations manual. http://buser.clan.su/news/instrukcija_ljotchiku_po_ehkspluatacii_samoljota_mig_3_na_bolshikh_vysotakh/2014-03-26-4

[III/JG2Gustav05]

For me the most interesting thing is what's its max dive speed this time?

[bivalov]

http://rusarchives.ru/victory65/pages/13_42.jpg

 

i.e. about 12 mps at sl, and 13 mps at 6000, +/-.

[Finkeren]

http://rusarchives.ru/victory65/pages/13_42.jpg

 

i.e. about 12 mps at sl, and 13 mps at 6000, +/-.

 

Some of those numbers are the oft-cited, but the others raise an eyebrow:

 

The weight would indicate, that we're talking about an early production MiG, and therefore it's not necessarilly representative of the MiG we're getting.

 

The engine seems to be rated at only 1200 hp. The AM-35A was capable of producing 1350 hp.

 

When is this report dated? I can see the comparison with the Tomahawk, so clearly it must be after Barbarossa started or what?

 

Oh, wait a minute... The 7.1 to 5000 figure is the one Emil cited, and that should be a late production variant. Yet the weight doesn't match, it's too high. That would indicate, that they either tested a mongrel MiG put together from new and old parts (these were common) or the plane had UBK gun pods installed (even though they aren't listed under armaments) or maybe rocket rails (though I still think the weight is too high for that)

Edited November 8, 2015 by Finkeren

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Is it a sound idea to perhaps drop this issue on the Dev Question thread? Perhaps they can clarify what approach they are taking on it at least.

[Finkeren]

Is it a sound idea to perhaps drop this issue on the Dev Question thread? Perhaps they can clarify what approach they are taking on it at least.

 

Tbh. I think it's better to wait. There's no need to start a ****-storm ahead of time.

 

My hunch is, that the devs won't go for the lowest figure numbers. They seldom do for any aircraft (VVS or LW).

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Sounds reasonable. Either way, it looks promising so far. I can't wait for the first MiG-3 videos.

[Finkeren]

Sounds reasonable. Either way, it looks promising so far. I can't wait for the first MiG-3 videos.

 

I really wonder what its engine sound will be like. I don't think I've ever heard an actual Mikunin engine running. I sorta imagine that it's a beastly sound.

 

It'll propably sound similar to the IL-2 but they just might have beefed up the sound a bit for the new plane.

[bivalov]

it is not a big secret, or very hard puzzle - http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/2965-voprosy-razrabotchikam-2/page-13?do=findComment&comment=350370 - i.e. MiG-3 s24 will have AM-35A with 0.732 reduction and AV-5L-123 prop.
 

 

The weight would indicate, that we're talking about an early production MiG, and therefore it's not necessarilly representative of the MiG we're getting.
 
The engine seems to be rated at only 1200 hp. The AM-35A was capable of producing 1350 hp.

according to many sources, normal weight of late MiG-3 with 3 MGs - about 3300 kg (+/- depends on slats AFAIK) - and performance of this MiG-3 is almost identical to MiG-3 №3943.

1200 hp is nominal power of AM-35A at 6000 meters (1120 hp at sl) + 5 min. 1350 hp only as take-off power/forsazh.

Edited November 8, 2015 by bivalov

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

I really wonder what its engine sound will be like. I don't think I've ever heard an actual Mikunin engine running. I sorta imagine that it's a beastly sound.

 

It'll propably sound similar to the IL-2 but they just might have beefed up the sound a bit for the new plane.

It's a huge engine displacement-wise, low revs, low MAP. It's going to be the antithesis of a Merlin. I think it's going to sound like the V12 version of the BMW 801 with more whistle.

[II./JG77_Manu*]

I got a book about the Performance of most the world war 2 fighters. Those aircraft included in BoS right now all more or less match the performance given from my book, with the exception of the Yak. The Yak we have in the game has around the performance of the late Yak1B. But apart from that the fighters in my book match those in BoS, and also match most of the common sources in the internet.

Book says about late Mig3 without UBK following performance figures:

weight: 3299 kg

@nominal power (1130-1200hp):

sealevel topspeed:  470

absolute topspeed: 615

climb to 5k: around 7 minutes, depending on manifacturing quality

climb to 8k: 12 minutes, ""

turnrate: 22s (in comparison, La5 has 21)

 

I guess the link you provided talks about the initial climb rate at 0m with takeoff power (1350), which the engine can't maintain for more then a few minutes.

Should be a match for the F2 at high alts, i assume. 

Edited November 11, 2015 by II./JG77_Manu*Celestiale*

[II./JG77_Manu*]

making another post, because i can't edit the last one due to the like:

here is a direct comparison between Mig3 and 109F2, which should be the 2 most capable fighters of BoM:

Plane:-----------------Mig------------F2 (with combat rating, not takeoff power)

SL speed:------------470------------495

Speed 5km:----------580------------592

Speed 8km:----------612------------580

climb 5km:-----------7min-----------5,4min

climb 8km:-----------12min---------10,5min

climb 5km-8km:------5min-----------5,1min

turnrate:--------------22s-------------20s

 

so at above 5km the tide starts turning towards the Mig, at 8km the Mig is superior...but i highly doubt we will have fights at that altitude

Edited November 11, 2015 by II./JG77_Manu*Celestiale*

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

so at above 5km the tide starts turning towards the Mig, at 8km the Mig is superior...but i highly doubt we will have fights at that altitude

  Considering that the Mig-3 was designed as a high level fighter the figures are not at all surprising.

 

Are we going to see a change on the servers with massed air battles above 6K? Probably very doubtful but I'm sure this aircraft will cause a few surprises.  

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

It will surely be a close match in beauty thought at all altitudes

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I don't think we'll see the fighting itself happening that high all the time, but I'm sure many MiG pilots will go high then plunge down at the enemy with a lot of speed before disengaging and going back up.

 

It's an interesting scenario, because now the Luftwaffe will have technical dominance between 2-3000km and 5000km, but higher than that the MiG-3 gets more dangerous, while lower than that the Ishak is in its native range.

 

That being said, regardless of the performance data we look at one thing is sure: no side will ever have an enormous advantage over the other in any altitude, which makes me wonder about the stories of the MiG performing so poorly down low. The Battle of Moscow air combat should be wild.

[Trooper117]

Well we know that most of the air fighting on the eastern front was carried out below 5000m, and that's where a lot of Mig 3's were lost.

However, I have read quite a few accounts of high flying Migs killing recce aircraft at very high altitude... I wonder if that will be factored into the campaign in BoM?

[TX-Gunslinger]

For me the most interesting thing is what's its max dive speed this time?

FWIW -  Oleg's Il-2 4.07 VNE limit for Mig-3 was 670 km/h with the following aircraft parameters:

 

takeoff weight:  3382.36 kg

best turn time:        21.01

best turn speed:    344 km/h

best climb value:    15.97 m/s

best climb speed:   248 km/h

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

I was reading Sky Of War in Russian yesterday, and I think some of you may be interested in Pokryshkin's very first encounter with the MiG. I feel his first impression will be the same as many here once it's out

 

We were silent, not daring to rate the MiG after knowing it for such a short time.

 

“It's good-looking” I said cautiously. “And the engine, probably, is powerful. But the armament in my opinion is weak.”

 

“Obscenities” said the Major. Heavy UBS machine guns, two ShKAS. Is that really little?

 

“They should have put cannons on him, comrade commander. The Junkers are not so easy to shoot down.”

 

“Just don't wear a shirt – you must be able to” said Ivanov. “When we go on the MiGs to intercept, the Junkers can't compete. Or perhaps you'd prefer if we fly on the Ishak?” He smiled.

 

We all spoke approvingly of the MiGs.

 

[SvAF/F19_Klunk]

Wear a shirt???