Russian planes are made out of ?

[Gunsmith86]

Technical drawings and description. The Yak-1 uses a box spar. The top and bottom of the spar are fairly massive, the sides however quite thin (for a spar, still thicker than the skin panels).

 

This construction is very typical for a wooden spar. The material distribution is in fact typical for any spar, as the material is concentrated top and bottom, where it is most urgently needed. You just don't use massive spars.

 

Edit: It's kind of visible in your picture, too. The outside layers (rear/front) are somewhat brighter than the rest. They go from top to bottom. The yellower ones don't.

 

 

http://okigihan.blogspot.de/p/wings-wing-configurations-wings-are.html

 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

This thread should have query about it:

A) stalinwood;

B) stalinium;

...

[Hutzlipuh]

Where do you get info that the spar, for example Yak-1 is a thin walled hollow piece of plywood?

 

from what i have seen in pics it is a pretty substantial laminated composite

 

pic of Yak spar during restoration

 

yak spar.jpg

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

from the same page you got your picture :

http://www.russianaeros.com/alone/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/7B-Main-Spar-and-Ribs.jpg

next time check before you post please... and not just try to devalue others by just posting half-truths

in the background you can clearly see the buildup of the main spar....

Edited April 6, 2017 by Hutzlipuh

[216th_Jordan]

from the same page you got your picture :

http://www.russianaeros.com/alone/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/7B-Main-Spar-and-Ribs.jpg

next time check before you post please... and not just try to devalue others by just posting half-truths

in the background you can clearly see the buildup of the main spar....

 

That thing looks quite strong to be honest. And its only one of the two spars.

Edited April 6, 2017 by 216th_Jordan

[Hutzlipuh]

That thing looks quite strong to be honest. And its only one of the two spars.

 that thing looks like its a kit from IKEA...probably the YAKKK-bed or something...

standard lightweight/hollow spar construction (in principle the same as the wing * 0.1 size)... nothing out of the ordinary , no delta-wood used there , that is used later for thin coating skin around the spar...

nothing thats super-strong or super-fragile...easily destroyed using a HE with 18 grams that hits it

Edited April 6, 2017 by Hutzlipuh

[=EXPEND=13SchwarzeHand]

 

 

that thing looks like its a kit from IKEA...probably the YAKKK-bed or something...

[216th_Jordan]

 that thing looks like its a kit from IKEA...probably the YAKKK-bed or something...

standard lightweight/hollow spar construction (in principle the same as the wing * 0.1 size)... nothing out of the ordinary , no delta-wood used there , that is used later for thin coating skin around the spar...

nothing thats super-strong or super-fragile...easily destroyed using a HE with 18 grams that hits it

 

Sure but it needs to hit and when it does the wing does snap off (even though hampered a little by bad HE performance right now).

2 years ago, before several increases to aircrafts strength the HE ammo was actually the ammo of choice. Due to all those changes in strength the effect has however changed significantly at times.

 

Even with a delayed fuze it is easily seeable that a direct hit from 6 oc is rather unlikely to severely damage the main spar as it would need to hit the wing almost at its 'highest' point.

 

Do we know so much about the coating of the main spar or can we assume that it is not hollow, as it does seem to be of one piece with several suppoting pieces inbetween the two sub spars.

 

 

Btw: Why would a stressed skin structure be able to take more damage? By what I learned in finite element analysis class that statement would be contradicted as the stress would combine and multiply at damaged parts, damaging those further and leading up to them rupturing.

 

 

Example: Stress at upper side of the wing....

 

 

...which would now be multiplied due to holes in the structure (although tensile stress in this picture instead of compression stress) deforming/failing at the red areas:

 

[Hutzlipuh]

blah blah blah

 

what most people seem to forget is we are talking about light fighter airplanes...build as lightweight as possible while still being as strong as possible...

 

no plane likes being shot at , be it damage to the skin by blowing holes or even complete sections (MINESHELL) out of it , which severely affects aerodynamics or be it being shot at components (control surfaces/cables/rods ->also a speciality of the MINESHELL , engine ,coolers , fuel tank)....NO part is basically non-vital on such a plane (maybe armament, radio , instruments)

 

 

the 109 could sustain more g then a yak , so which plane is stronger?

all the people who try to tell that the yak should be 10-15 % stronger then a 109 or even more are talking CRAP... the difference should be NONEXISTANT

both are light fighter planes and both are vulnerable to being shot at....

 

especially with purpose- designed ammo like the HEI(M)...this piece of ammo was especially designed to take out controls,create big holes and cracks...

 

EDIT: cannons were used on fighters because of the first-strike-kill-chance , meaning that a single attack with hits by a cannon-armed plane is likely to kill or ATLEAST incapacitate (affecting components/aerodynamics) the enemy plane ...

 

yet you see mostly russian planes flying around after taking cannon hits as if they were factory-fresh ,maybe spitting some fuel ,doing all sorts of crazy aerobatics and dont seem to loose speed through more drag by holes.....the german planes are done after a pass most time , either cooler down and engine out within 30 secs or controls out or atleast severly affected in performance by holes...

Edited April 6, 2017 by Hutzlipuh

[gnomechompsky]

This thread is pointless until someone can actually show some evidence that Russian fighters take more damage than German ones.

 

I see a lot of LW pilots complaining about Russian bias on WoL yet these guys NEVER seem to fly Russian.

 

Please don't bother replying to this unless you can provide anything more than anecdotal evidence.

[BubiHUN]

And... You... Are.... THE........ W(h)inner ! Your 2017 whinning price will be available at your office or at your home, depending on what adress you ask us to send it to. 

the whiner dont want german bias...but no russian nonsenses. Maybe if they could make the same types of custom ammo belts, it would be a fine start.

[Hutzlipuh]

This thread is pointless until someone can actually show some evidence that Russian fighters take more damage than German ones.

 

I see a lot of LW pilots complaining about Russian bias on WoL yet these guys NEVER seem to fly Russian.

 

Please don't bother replying to this unless you can provide anything more than anecdotal evidence.

this post is pointless , we are not talking WoL here and the difference in taking hits is CLEARLY visible for people with 2 eyes and a brain...

 

all i see is people coming here and trying to devalue others people findings (which many of them have gathered over playing a long time in this game)...

 

geramos posted his 20mm test-video how long ago ? still MANY people see issues (me included) and most of them have a pretty high number of flying hours in this game under their belt....watch vade , dersherrif...also they see problems with Guns/DM... are those all just whiners to you? or are they telling crap?

 

 

AND BTW: where is your evidence that the peeps perceiving problems are all liars? that everything is fine in this game?

Edited April 6, 2017 by Hutzlipuh

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

This thread is pointless until someone can actually show some evidence that Russian fighters take more damage than German ones.

 

I see a lot of LW pilots complaining about Russian bias on WoL yet these guys NEVER seem to fly Russian.

 

Please don't bother replying to this unless you can provide anything more than anecdotal evidence.

 

I've flown both sides extensively in SP and I do notice a difference. Can you cut a Yak's wing off pretty quick with a contained, accurate burst? Sure, done it a hundred times... Doesn't change the fact that 18g of Deutsche HE is egregiously undermodeled compared to AP ammunition especially.

 

Yeah, yeah, yeah - anecdotal evidence, blah, blah, blah.

 

At which point do the "no anecdotal evidence" guys constructively suggest how to quantify something that is nearly impossible to quantify past experience and feel?

Edited April 6, 2017 by Space_Ghost

[216th_Jordan]

what most people seem to forget is we are talking about light fighter airplanes...build as lightweight as possible while still being as strong as possible...

 

 

the 109 could sustain more g then a yak , so which plane is stronger?

 

The plane weight 2.5 tons still, it was not made of air.

Secondly how much G a structure can take does not say a lot about how much damage it can take.

 

So you had nothing to add to my argument but threw around commonplaces. If you could explain to me why my theory would be flawed exactly: that would help more.

 

 

And I am not talking about ammo discrepancy right now. (which I see)

[seafireliv]

Every time I see the thread title I want to post, "Cheese".

 

Guess I`ve done it.

[ShoeHash]

ITT (In this Thread): What we see are a majority of smart people arguing until their fingers bleed for absolutely nothing.

I want this game to be historically accurate as possible too. However, the salt you bring to each side was made in months or years of being shot down by the other side. Some of you have stupidly ridiculous ideas that fly in the face of what would make this game fun, and effectively make your chosen plane (mostly for the German side) nigh unbeatable. 

This is why forums posters don't design games. And as I reminded people on the MWO forums: You paid money for a game, like in a casino. You have absolutely no stake, no tangible investment in it, like say, stock in 777. So quit complaining. 

Edited April 6, 2017 by ShoeHash

[JaffaCake]

ITT (In this Thread): What we see are a majority of smart people arguing until their fingers bleed for absolutely nothing.

 

I want this game to be historically accurate as possible too. However, the salt you bring to each side was made in months or years of being shot down by the other side. Some of you have stupidly ridiculous ideas that fly in the face of what would make this game fun, and effectively make your chosen plane (mostly for the German side) nigh unbeatable. 

 

This is why forums posters don't design games. And as I reminded people on the MWO forums: You paid money for a game, like in a casino. You have absolutely no stake, no tangible investment in it, like say, stock in 777. So quit complaining. 

 

 

I think the problem is that a lot of people disregard the test videos some members of this community have made. These tests eliminate most of the anecdotal and airframe bias arguments. Unfortunately a lot of people arguing here are either blind to them, or do not think they are valid - or at least are as valid as their own anecdotal experience.

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

And then there is historical data that people seem to ignore that prove that german 20mm should be far better than russian 20mm HE and especially AP.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

And then there is historical data that people seem to ignore that prove that german 20mm should be far better than russian 20mm HE and especially AP.

 

This is the real takeaway.

 

"18g of shaped explosives..."

"yeah, but muzzle velocity, but wing spars, but, but..."

[Holtzauge]

One possible reason the Russian wooden fighters could take a lot of punishment could be that they were dimensioned for deflection not absolute strength: When you dimension an airplane it’s not just about strength but about how much deflection such as bending or torsion you can allow. My guess is that the Russian fighters were dimensioned for deflection in which case you would expect them to be pretty strong.

 

OTOH, aluminium structures are ductile and subjected to an explosive force the structure will deform and while some rivets will pop some will just stretch out a bit but still hold the structure together. A composite structure OTOH will splinter and you will probably see a lot of delamination and cracked glue joints ripped apart.

 

Which factor outweighs the other is anybody’s guess (unless there is some damage assessment/comparison data sitting in a drawer somewhere we don’t know about) but IMHO I would expect a shell with a large explosive content to be more of a problem for a composite structure which lacks ductile properties compared to an aluminium one.

 

In addition, I think an important part of this is the German belting recommendation (Schiessfibel) that for combating fighters suggests a mix containing more Mingeschoss than for heavies. Now why on earth would they do that if AP performs better like it does in BoX? I mean they IRL had access to both so why not load up with AP instead? I think this has to do with the BoX DM model which seems to have difficulties giving the Mingechoss enough Oompph.

 

Or maybe 10cc is doing the belting in BoX?

Edited April 7, 2017 by Holtzauge

[Hutzlipuh]

One possible reason the Russian wooden fighters could take a lot of punishment could be that they were dimensioned for deflection not absolute strength: When you dimension an airplane it’s not just about strength but about how much deflection such as bending or torsion you can allow. My guess is that the Russian fighters were dimensioned for deflection in which case you would expect them to be pretty strong.

 Pure speculation / guesswork... nothing to do with reality

 

wheres the proof from the people that say yak should take much more punishment? they want proof from us...wheres theirs?

 

...and that this thread got moved into the "suggestions" instead of "bugs/issues" or "fm disussion" just shows how this forum works....[Edited].

 

There is no propaganda machine at work here.. and you need to back off from that line of posting or stop posting here.. the choice is yours. 

Edited April 8, 2017 by Bearcat

[Holtzauge]

 Pure speculation / guesswork... nothing to do with reality

 

Well I have an MSc in aeronautical engineering and I've done structural dimensioning and engineering on both aluminium and composite aircraft structures so maybe we can call it an educated guess?

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

One possible reason the Russian wooden fighters could take a lot of punishment could be that they were dimensioned for deflection not absolute strength: When you dimension an airplane it’s not just about strength but about how much deflection such as bending or torsion you can allow. My guess is that the Russian fighters were dimensioned for deflection in which case you would expect them to be pretty strong.

 

OTOH, aluminium structures are ductile and subjected to an explosive force the structure will deform and while some rivets will pop some will just stretch out a bit but still hold the structure together. A composite structure OTOH will splinter and you will probably see a lot of delamination and cracked glue joints ripped apart.

 

 

So you are saying that in comparison a round with nearly double as much destructive energy (HE vs HE) is coming out short when the target is build the russian way? Sorry but this seems very unlikely. And i am not even considering AP rounds because they aren't overmodelled but straight out bugged. There is no way that an AP round is as effective at destroying aircrafts than a Minengeschoss with like 3 times the destructive energy.

[JtD]

I've set up a shooting range kind of mission and indeed found it much easier to shoot off a Yak wing with Soviet AP than with Soviet HE. Odd. It's like destroying a bridge more quickly by dropping duds instead of bombs.

 

I also found that HE isn't necessarily less powerful than AP overall. AP does more concentrated damage and the location of the hit will fail more quickly. HE does more damage to components away from the hit location. For instance, the wings took considerably more damage when firing HE at the engine than they did when doing the same with AP. However, in this scenario the engine was more quickly disabled using AP, so there was no reason to care about wing damage in the first place.

Edited April 8, 2017 by JtD

[Holtzauge]

So you are saying that in comparison a round with nearly double as much destructive energy (HE vs HE) is coming out short when the target is build the russian way? Sorry but this seems very unlikely. And i am not even considering AP rounds because they aren't overmodelled but straight out bugged. There is no way that an AP round is as effective at destroying aircrafts than a Minengeschoss with like 3 times the destructive energy.

 

I think you missed the last part of my post though? In it that's exactly what I'm saying: it looks like the BoX DM may have problems modeling the explosive effect of Minengeschoss as opposed to the effects of AP.

 

No question AP is better when you hit armour or the engine. OTOH, in many cases in-game you are firing from a deflection angle and from that angle about 80% of the area you can hit is structure where theoretically an explosion would be much better than punching a hole. In addition, IRL I would guess a lot of AP fired from behind would either ricochet off due to the shallow hit angle or upon penetrating start to tumble when hitting radio equipment and other stuff before reaching the back armour. At least that's what my very limited military serve taught me: Looks like a frikkin' garden hose if you shoot tracer into foilage and trees from an MG and I've seen rounds bounce like in a pinball machine between tree trunks. In addition, any hunter knows not to shoot at game through foilage since even twigs will change the trajectory substantially.

 

So as I said before: I think the smoking gun here is that many feel AP on average is better in-game while IRL the Germans recommended MinenGeschoss for disabling fighters. Why on earth would they do that if they got the same results as in BoX?

[BubiHUN]

 Pure speculation / guesswork... nothing to do with reality

 

wheres the proof from the people that say yak should take much more punishment? they want proof from us...wheres theirs?

 

...and that this thread got moved into the "suggestions" instead of "bugs/issues" or "fm disussion" just shows how this forum works....[Edited].

 

There is no propaganda machine at work here.. and you need to back off from that line of posting or stop posting here.. the choice is yours. 

Funny...

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

Funny...

 

Not really. Just a bunch of jazzed up people who are wholey incapable of accepting reality, quadruple flog the long dead horse and keep shouting about biases that aren't there.

 

TL;DR - all ammunition from the primary airforces (VVS, LW) are overmodeled or undermodeled in some ways. Remind me how overperforming German AP displays a VVS bias again..? 

Edited April 12, 2017 by Space_Ghost

[Hutzlipuh]

Remind me how overperforming German AP displays a VVS bias again..?

 

where did you get that from ?  never heard of overperforming german ap? only overprforming ap i know of of is the russian one... link to bug report / forum post please?

 

oh and for your "reality" and "jazzed up people" stab : the devs and mods here seem to have done a good pavlov´s dog training on you already....

Edited April 12, 2017 by Hutzlipuh

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

where did you get that from ?  never heard of overperforming german ap? only overprforming ap i know of of is the russian one... link to bug report / forum post please?

 

oh and for your "reality" and "jazzed up people" stab : the devs and mods here seem to have done a good pavlov´s dog training on you already....

 

I get it, you are completely clueless and biased against the developer, moderators and product. No need for further elaboration.

Edited April 12, 2017 by Space_Ghost

[Hutzlipuh]

I get it, you are completely clueless and biased against the developer, moderators and product. No need for further elaboration.

know the popular saying "hit dogs will bark?"

 

just because i post crticism doesnt mean i dislike the devs , mods or product....but it looks like you live in a world where everything is black or white....

 

 

and by the way : where is your proof that german ap is overmodeled , like you posted above? or was it just a "killer-phrase" to throw in to stop a discussion YOU dont like?

 

 EDIT: im fed up with people with some "gold bars" at their profile coming in disussions and telling other people they are just whiners or should stop complaining.those gold bars have only one meaning : youre a avid follower and white-knighting / defending your purchase...look up how such people have ruined other communities (star citizen anyone?)

Edited April 12, 2017 by Hutzlipuh

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

-snip-

 

and by the way : where is your proof that german ap is overmodeled , like you posted above? or was it just a "killer-phrase" to throw in to stop a discussion YOU dont like?

 

-snip-

 

Where is your proof that there is modeling bias?

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

Can we just stop the whole bias discussion? maybe make another thread for it. Here it only distracts from the issue at hand, which is very undermodelled Minengeschosse.

[Hutzlipuh]

Where is your proof that there is modeling bias?

where did i state that there is modeling bias please (link)? i think you need to get your eyes checked...

also your dragging the thread OT and will be the cause if it gets locked....

so please...stay with posting your facts/findings/links/videoproof and stop throwing [Edited] at people...

Edited April 15, 2017 by Bearcat

[Scojo]

So I've been flying strictly LW fighters the past few days to try and challenge my opinion on this topic.

 

I'm not really seeing a difference between aircraft.

 

I lightly pegged an IL2 on a wingtip and it went down. I set a PE-2s engine on fire without getting killed by it's gunner. Also, the HE is really good at removing control surfaces from the Russian planes. In particular, the elevator

 

I haven't had much of a chance to fight Yaks. Mostly La-5s, Migs, and I-16s. When I get some Yak kills, I'll be able to comment on that matchup. As of right now, I'm still so bad at gunnery and dogfighting that I can't comment.

 

What I can say is I can easily get more victories in a 109 that the Russian planes. Does that mean that Russian planes aren't "overmodelled" or that HE is "undermodeled"? I don't know, but for me it says that even if they are, it isn't by as much as people seem to think.

Edited April 13, 2017 by 71st_AH_Scojo

[Operatsiya_Ivy]

So I've been flying strictly LW fighters the past few days to try and challenge my opinion on this topic.

 

I'm not really seeing a difference between aircraft.

 

I lightly pegged an IL2 on a wingtip and it went down. I set a PE-2s engine on fire without getting killed by it's gunner. Also, the HE is really good at removing control surfaces from the Russian planes. In particular, the elevator

 

I haven't had much of a chance to fight Yaks. Mostly La-5s, Migs, and I-16s. When I get some Yak kills, I'll be able to comment on that matchup. As of right now, I'm still so bad at gunnery and dogfighting that I can't comment.

 

What I can say is I can easily get more victories in a 109 that the Russian planes. Does that mean that Russian planes aren't "overmodelled" or that HE is "undermodeled"? I don't know, but for me it says that even if they are, it isn't by as much as people seem to think.

 

 

Yes personal experience are the way to go to prove if something is balanced or not. Case closed guys, time to go home!

[BubiHUN]

Where is your proof that there is modeling bias?

just look at the yak 1 premium..

[BlitzPig_EL]

What about it?

 

If you are going to make claims like this, then you have to post verifiable numbers to prove your point, not just feelings.

 

You know that the F4 is over performing don't you?  Where is your indignation about that?

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

just look at the yak 1 premium..

 

As EL said, what about it..?

[Gambit21]

just look at the yak 1 premium..

Ok - looked at it.

[Scojo]

Ok - looked at it.

Well, what did you find!?

[BubiHUN]

As EL said, what about it..?

even under stall speed its pretty controllable, even above 5k its outclimbs a 109(even F4) magic flaps, and many many more...