Jump to content


Photo

Let's talk about the Yak-7B


  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#41 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 21 April 2017 - 12:10

Why has the yak 1 and lagg 3 in bos the WK-105PF engine? Did yak 1 and the lagg 3 not the Klimow WK-105P?

 

I know you amended it to say Yak-1 instead of LaGG-3 later but FYI sources say the LaGG-3 Series 29 has the M-105PF engine as well (one of many examples: http://wio.ru/tacftr/lag.htm).By mid 1942 its the standard engine going into the Yak and LaGG series fighters. Definitely not a balancing thing.

 

Yak7B was about 100-200kg heavier then Yak-1B or Yak-1 with the same engine. So climb rate and turn rate should be worse then Yak-1B. So Yak7B was much more close to Yak-1 with PF engine and Yak1B was better plane for sure

 

That's what I'm expecting too. That said, 100-200kg isn't a whole lot so its going to be a subtle difference that experienced Yak pilots will surely notice but many are not going to see too much of a difference there. For 200kg a slightly faster diving aircraft with an extra machine gun isn't too bad :)


  • 0

#42 Trooper117

Trooper117
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1983

Posted 21 April 2017 - 13:38

Yak, Yak, Yakety Yak!    :lol:


  • 0

IL2.jpg


#43 I./JG21-Radick

I./JG21-Radick
  • Founder
  • Posts: 61

Posted 21 April 2017 - 13:42

Ok then the fw 190 should also be able to dive well, the fw 190 is about 1000 kg heavier than 109 and yak but the 190 can't escape (dive acceleration)


Edited by I./JG21-Radick, 21 April 2017 - 13:42.

  • 0

#44 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8604
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 21 April 2017 - 14:14

Ok then the fw 190 should also be able to dive well, the fw 190 is about 1000 kg heavier than 109 and yak but the 190 can't escape (dive acceleration)


It doesn't quite work that way. Form drag also plays a huge role in dive performance. We can compare the Yak-7B and -1B and say that the heavier -7B will probably dive (very slightly) better, because the two planes have very similar form and therefore similar form drag.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#45 216th_Jordan

216th_Jordan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1853

Posted 21 April 2017 - 15:05

Btw: The russian planes seem to have been rather good at diving (just their top speed lacks sigificantly) as indicated by soviet testpilots when comparing for example the Lagg (I think) to the Spitfire. 
For me it will be an interesting plane, and I am somewhat sure that I will like it. It will probably be quite a bit faster than the s.69 Yak-1 due to improved aerodynamics (though I don't know how much in relation to the 1b), but it will likely not turn as well.


  • 0

Visit the 216th SAD: http://216th.proboards.com/
Hardware & Specs

Spoiler

#46 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 21 April 2017 - 21:44

It doesn't quite work that way. Form drag also plays a huge role in dive performance. We can compare the Yak-7B and -1B and say that the heavier -7B will probably dive (very slightly) better, because the two planes have very similar form and therefore similar form drag.

 

There's also expectations of just how much faster a plane can dive. A lot of the time people are already in dire straights and diving from 3000 meters with a bandit in gun range. There isn't enough difference in dive acceleration to make that different.


  • 1

#47 I./JG21-Radick

I./JG21-Radick
  • Founder
  • Posts: 61

Posted 21 April 2017 - 22:03

I think the 190 should have the best diving acceleration, unfortunately this is not so (in bos)


  • 0

#48 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 21 April 2017 - 22:17

I think the 190 should have the best diving acceleration, unfortunately this is not so (in bos)

 

Ideally you should take that to the FM forum and discuss it there with the requisite historical documentation and in-game testing.


Edited by ShamrockOneFive, 21 April 2017 - 22:18.

  • 0

#49 Y-29.Layin_Scunion

Y-29.Layin_Scunion
  • Founder
  • Posts: 195

Posted 21 April 2017 - 22:19

I think the 190 should have the best diving acceleration, unfortunately this is not so (in bos)

I find the 190 2nd only to the P-40 when it comes to diving but when accelerating into a dive, the 190 does this much faster than the P-40.

If you're diving away from a Yak that's been already shooting at you, don't expect to just pull away at the wave of your magic wand....

If you think something is wrong with the FM, test it and show what's wrong with it.  The 190 is one of the most capable aircraft in the game.  If not the best...


  • 3

#50 -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
  • Member
  • Posts: 448
  • Location:Buenos Aires, Argentina

Posted 24 April 2017 - 02:53

I noticed the Yak-7B model for Kuban has a retractable tail wheel, so it might be a bit faster than the regular Yak-1, if it compensates the slightly bulkier radiator.

 

CEbO6G8.jpg?1


  • 1

#51 CF-105

CF-105
  • Member
  • Posts: 179
  • Location:British Columbia, Canada

Posted 24 April 2017 - 06:46

I think the 190 should have the best diving acceleration, unfortunately this is not so (in bos)

 

I'm sort of half convinced you somehow missed the FW 190 FM update, because that aircraft is amazing now, yet you STILL want more.

 

At this point, it could have the FM of the Me 163, but if you were shot down more than five times in it, you'd still say it's under-performing.


  • 3

#52 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 24 April 2017 - 22:23

I noticed the Yak-7B model for Kuban has a retractable tail wheel, so it might be a bit faster than the regular Yak-1, if it compensates the slightly bulkier radiator.

 

CEbO6G8.jpg?1

 

Good spot! It does look like a retractable tailwheel. To the best of my knowledge the Yak-7 doesn't have this feature on all of the different models but I suppose this one might?

 

Interesting!


  • 0

#53 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 25 April 2017 - 03:23

I have a question about the Yak-7 I hadn't thought of until now. The radiator in the Yak-7 is considerably larger than on either Yak-1 model that we have and looking at photos I can see that while there were a few different designs... it is indeed a larger radiator system. So that makes me curious... did the Yak-7 for some reason have needs for a more significant radiator system or does it just mean that it will be more capable of keeping the engine cool in hotter regimes?


  • 0

#54 -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

-=PHX=-SuperEtendard
  • Member
  • Posts: 448
  • Location:Buenos Aires, Argentina

Posted 25 April 2017 - 04:41

Good spot! It does look like a retractable tailwheel. To the best of my knowledge the Yak-7 doesn't have this feature on all of the different models but I suppose this one might?

 

Interesting!

 

Yak-1B from similar timeframe does have a retractable tailwheel, so it could be possible that they adapted that and other aerodynamic improvements to the Yak-7 I guess.

 

Lucas From Hell posted this picture some months ago, showing a Yak-7 which appears to have the same retractable landing wheel the 3D model for BoK has

 

pic_61.jpg

 

I have a question about the Yak-7 I hadn't thought of until now. The radiator in the Yak-7 is considerably larger than on either Yak-1 model that we have and looking at photos I can see that while there were a few different designs... it is indeed a larger radiator system. So that makes me curious... did the Yak-7 for some reason have needs for a more significant radiator system or does it just mean that it will be more capable of keeping the engine cool in hotter regimes?

 

it's a more "square like" design (a bit less aerodynamic), and it's placed a bit more in the front of the plane. Most profiles you can find in google have the Yak-7 with open radiator and Yak-1 with closed radiator, so that also creates the sensation that it's a bit bigger than what it really is. I took a couple Yak-1 and Yak-7 profiles that look accurate from wings pallete and cropped the open position for the Yak-7 so it's comparable.

 

uHuWKt8.png

There is some difference but it doesn't appear to be that much... since the design came from a trainer couldn't it be that with the Yak-1 part of the radiator is inside the fuselage, while with the Yak-7 having the space for the second cockpit they had to move it downwards and forwards?

 

For example a big part of LaGG's water radiator sits inside the fuselage:

 

pic_10.jpg

Sadly I couldn't find a similar image showing Yak-1/Yak-7 interior to confirm this.

As a bonus, I made some months ago a picture with the profiles (from wings pallete) of some members of the Yak family at the same scale, good to see the progression in the development of these fighters:

 

Spoiler

Edited by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard, 26 April 2017 - 05:30.

  • 3

#55 BuzzU

BuzzU
  • Member
  • Posts: 93
  • Location:Colorado

Posted 25 April 2017 - 15:54

They moved the horizontal stab forward on the 7 too. What was that done for?

 

Wing dihedral too.


Edited by BuzzU, 25 April 2017 - 15:56.

  • 0

You have reached the pinnacle of success as soon as you become uninterested in money, compliments, or publicity.

 

 


#56 BlitzPig_EL

BlitzPig_EL
  • Member
  • Posts: 1693
  • Location:The Great Black Swamp of Ohio

Posted 25 April 2017 - 17:59

It may have to do with the fact that the 7 was originally designed as a trainer.


  • 0

8wxp.jpg

Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov


#57 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 25 April 2017 - 21:38

Super, you might be on to something with having to move it lower to make room for the second pilot in the trainer version and there it stayed for quite a while.

 

Buzz, that's interesting too. I hadn't noticed the stabilizer moved forward before but indeed it has. Perhaps contributing to slightly different handling characteristics... either to account for the revised CoG or maybe to make handling more benign? The Yak-7 was supposed to be a bit easier to handle than the Yak-1... not that the Yak-1 is difficult to handle IMHO.


  • 0

#58 BlitzPig_EL

BlitzPig_EL
  • Member
  • Posts: 1693
  • Location:The Great Black Swamp of Ohio

Posted 25 April 2017 - 21:59

Snot that the Yak-1 is difficult to handle IMHO.

 

But then, we are not "flying" real ones, are we?


  • 0

8wxp.jpg

Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov


#59 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 25 April 2017 - 22:02

But then, we are not "flying" real ones, are we?

 

No we aren't... but then I can still say relatively speaking I don't find it hard to fly. The I-16 is more difficult IMHO :)


  • 0

#60 BlitzPig_EL

BlitzPig_EL
  • Member
  • Posts: 1693
  • Location:The Great Black Swamp of Ohio

Posted 25 April 2017 - 22:17

I can't argue that.

 

I still find the I-16 more satisfying to fly than any other plane in the sim so far.

 

it's just so... elemental.  You, an engine, some guns, and barely enough structure and wings to tie it all together.

 

 

The motorcycle of the sky.


  • 3

8wxp.jpg

Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov


#61 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 25 April 2017 - 23:19

I can't argue that.

 

I still find the I-16 more satisfying to fly than any other plane in the sim so far.

 

it's just so... elemental.  You, an engine, some guns, and barely enough structure and wings to tie it all together.

 

 

The motorcycle of the sky.

 

The I-16 is insanely fun. I didn't think I'd enjoy it all that much... in the original IL-2 I didn't like flying it much. Here is an entirely different experience. I spent a lot of campaign time flying the I-16.


  • 0

#62 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8604
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 27 April 2017 - 09:12

They moved the horizontal stab forward on the 7 too. What was that done for?

 

Wing dihedral too.

 

The wing dihedral is simply because the Yak-7 had different wings than the Yak-1. It's not that apparent at first glance, but when you look at them side by side, you can tell, that the entire wing construction is different. Later the wings of the -7 would carry over to the Yak-9, while the wing design of the -1 would be used as basis for the wings on the Yak-3.

 

Presumably the new wing design was part of the reason, why the Yak-7 was found to handle so much better than the (early) Yak-1s. 


Edited by Finkeren, 27 April 2017 - 12:31.

  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#63 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2960

Posted 27 April 2017 - 11:56

It's continually amazing to me how similar the Yak-1/7 look and yet just how different they really are.


  • 0

#64 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8604
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 27 April 2017 - 12:37

The differences are substantial and it the same time subtle. The two aircraft look rather similar and on paper, there is really not much in their performance either to tell them apart, but apparently the Yak-7 caused such excitement when it was first presented, that it immediately spawned its own line of production, so something has to be very different.


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#65 =VOE=PangolinWranglin

=VOE=PangolinWranglin
  • Member
  • Posts: 294

Posted 27 April 2017 - 13:26

something has to be very different.

Guns. Guns make a world of difference.  
  • 0

Steam: Pangolin Wranglin'

For courage displayed in battles with various opponents in the 3300s or 1900s, for determination and discipline and excellent organization, for the heroism of its personnel, the Dragonflies Fighter Aviation Regiment is re-designated to the Varati Old Earth Flight Squadron.       ~Give us regular purchase COPPER badges!~


#66 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 8604
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 27 April 2017 - 13:36


Guns. Guns make a world of difference.


Yeah, but since the original Yak-7 design was unarmed (due to being a trainer) that was hardly what pleased the people who evaluated it so much.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#67 senseispcc

senseispcc
  • Founder
  • Posts: 916

Posted 27 April 2017 - 13:44

If I read correctly the table, I have before me (it is in Polish) all types off Yak-7 and the UTI-26 (the Yak-7 trainer) where between 50 and 80 km/h slower than the Yak-1's.

And also the celling from equal to 1000 meters less depending of type. The landing distance of the Yak-7 was longer depending of type. The Yak-7 was always slower to climb.

And last thing I could read on the table is that the Yak-7 any type and the UTI-26 where all heavier than their counterparts the Yak-1's.   :salute: 


  • 0

​I7 4790K 4.04Ghz 32Gb DDR3 1xSSD 500Gb (system) + 17TB HDD GTX 970 4GB WIN10 x64. Trackir 5 - Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog +  rudder pedals -...  :salute:

14slh1i4.cek.png


#68 Brano

Brano
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2782
  • Location:Slovakia

Posted 27 April 2017 - 15:55

Yeah, but since the original Yak-7 design was unarmed (due to being a trainer) that was hardly what pleased the people who evaluated it so much.

Original UTI-26-2 prototype had 2x7.62mm ShKAS. After all it was advanced 2-seater fighter trainer,so being able to practice shooting was kind of essential  ;)

Serial Yak-7UTI had it reduced to 1xShKAS on the left side with 500 rounds of ammo.


  • 0

#69 JtD

JtD
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2729

Posted 27 April 2017 - 17:04

Wing dihedral is 5.56° on the Yak-1, Yak-7 and Yak-9. The most relevant changes were:

- double cockpit, later different cockpit,
- wing moved backwards to correct for initially more rearward CoG and corresponding changes to airframe and installations (for instance, coolers),
- changed ratio between stabilizers and control surfaces to correct for overly sensitive elevator (owing to initially more rearward CoG),
- reworked and strengthened landing gear including larger wheels (650*200 instead of 600*180) and corresponding changes to the wing structure,
- different weapons.

Both the -1 and the -7 (plus the -9) were subject to ongoing changes and the same way an early Yak-1 had pretty much nothing in common with a late one, the separately evolved late Yak-7/9 had pretty much nothing in common with a late Yak-1. They simply were to far apart from their common origin.

That said, the wing structure only got very different when the -9 got the metal wing. It was nicer handling due to the different aerodynamic and mass balance and much preferred over the -1 because of the all around better landing gear. It's hardly relevant in game, but noticeably reducing take off and landing accidents is a rather important thing in real life. Additionally larger wheels permit take off and landing with higher loads from worse airfields, also not to be ignored.

Edited by JtD, 27 April 2017 - 17:07.

  • 2

Facts are the best defence against the experts.


#70 senseispcc

senseispcc
  • Founder
  • Posts: 916

Posted 29 April 2017 - 14:42

Wing dihedral is 5.56° on the Yak-1, Yak-7 and Yak-9. The most relevant changes were:

- double cockpit, later different cockpit,
- wing moved backwards to correct for initially more rearward CoG and corresponding changes to airframe and installations (for instance, coolers),
- changed ratio between stabilizers and control surfaces to correct for overly sensitive elevator (owing to initially more rearward CoG),
- reworked and strengthened landing gear including larger wheels (650*200 instead of 600*180) and corresponding changes to the wing structure,
- different weapons.

Both the -1 and the -7 (plus the -9) were subject to ongoing changes and the same way an early Yak-1 had pretty much nothing in common with a late one, the separately evolved late Yak-7/9 had pretty much nothing in common with a late Yak-1. They simply were to far apart from their common origin.

That said, the wing structure only got very different when the -9 got the metal wing. It was nicer handling due to the different aerodynamic and mass balance and much preferred over the -1 because of the all around better landing gear. It's hardly relevant in game, but noticeably reducing take off and landing accidents is a rather important thing in real life. Additionally larger wheels permit take off and landing with higher loads from worse airfields, also not to be ignored.

 

Yak-9 had also the cockpit move backward depending of model/armament and the only all metal WW2 Yak monoplane single place was the Yak-3 (source the Yakovlev memoirs).

Also the armament of the Yak-9 and Yak-3 did vary a lot to the 45mm gun.  :salute: 


  • 0

​I7 4790K 4.04Ghz 32Gb DDR3 1xSSD 500Gb (system) + 17TB HDD GTX 970 4GB WIN10 x64. Trackir 5 - Thrustmaster Hotas Warthog +  rudder pedals -...  :salute:

14slh1i4.cek.png





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users