The La-5 in 2.012

[Irgendjemand]

Speed is 12 or 14 km/h higher for sure. (but only very close to sea level)

 

OK, thanks!

[BubiHUN]

Better. I'll test it. You should never judge aircraft performance based on personal experience in a fight.

thats exactly what you did

[Finkeren]

thats exactly what you did

No, I gave my initial impression, and I deliberately presented it as a question.

[Tag777]

I see many guys taking advantage of this bird to its full strength. But I never was able to do so. Last night I tested it in a server (Normal server, not Expert) and I wasn't able to outmaneuver a 109 at low altitude. I suppose I must tweak the curves or so, because I always read that the La-5 was a very maneuverable plane. So, for now, the Spit remains my favorite plane.

[CUJO_1970]

I see many guys taking advantage of this bird to its full strength. But I never was able to do so. Last night I tested it in a server (Normal server, not Expert) and I wasn't able to outmaneuver a 109 at low altitude. I suppose I must tweak the curves or so, because I always read that the La-5 was a very maneuverable plane. So, for now, the Spit remains my favorite plane.

 

I saw that, but you were flying against a very experienced 109 driver. The 109 through combat (dogfight) speeds is just as lethal as it ever was, probably even more because it has increased pitch stability now.

[Finkeren]

You can't outmaneuver a 109 except at high speeds.

 

It's pretty much the same situation as the Fw 190 vs Yak-1: Keep your speed up and you can dictate the fight.

 

The La-5 hasn't really become faster or much tighter turning, but it has become much easier to handle, has better energy retention (at least I think so) and can pull higher angles for just a bit longer than before.

[[CPT]Pike*HarryM]

Easier to land also in that not such a strong tendency to ground-loop, always an embarrassing way to end a flight...

[Finkeren]

Easier to land also in that not such a strong tendency to ground-loop, always an embarrassing way to end a flight...

Indeed. This is the only area, where I think it's perhaps gotten a little too easy. The La-5 was known to require short bursts of power during the rollout to remain controllable.

I have yet to screw up a landing in it since the update, and I'm not at all disciplined during landings.

[[CPT]Pike*HarryM]

I could land the old one without looping but it took alot of attention. I use pretty much same procedure on new, keep on 10 to 12 % throttle and stab the rudder to correct swinging. 

Edited August 31, 2017 by [CPT]Pike*HarryM

[216th_Jordan]

Indeed. This is the only area, where I think it's perhaps gotten a little too easy. The La-5 was known to require short bursts of power during the rollout to remain controllable.

I have yet to screw up a landing in it since the update, and I'm not at all disciplined during landings.

But don't you forget that you learned the hard way and have many hours flying Many young pilots with little experience had to fly this plane and they probably didnt see the warning sights of a ground loop before it was too late. (which we do)

 

Also windsetting is very important. At a windstill day almost all planes are easy to land.

[Venturi]

I saw that, but you were flying against a very experienced 109 driver. The 109 through combat (dogfight) speeds is just as lethal as it ever was, probably even more because it has increased pitch stability now.

 

This is also my impression.

The La-5 was known to require short bursts of power during the rollout to remain controllable.

 

 

The issue in general, is that engines in the sim do not respond quickly enough to throttle changes. This prevents quick "blips" of the throttle to give rudder authority while taxiing.

I have read several accounts of taxiing at 30-40mph, "but no faster as I didn't want to be reckless and ground loop". So I think that in general we are moving in the right direction re: ground loops. The real tricky aspect is landing in cross winds and with pitch/torque effects from throttling up. These aspects are still rather underdone in my opinion, but the ground handling is definitely improving by leaps and bounds since BOS came out in beta (yes, I flew it then).

[Finkeren]

Yeah, I'm not criticizing ground handling in general. This sim does it better than any other I've tried.

 

It's just the La-5 that seems more docile to me than I'd expect.

[A_radek]

Gave the La5 a go last night it and yes it does seem to conserve energy better through high g's. Also, while top speed is the same it's as if power to weight ratio increased. This could be placebo as my testing is highly unscientific, and not even considering wind/temp. But from full speed on the deck, I can reach out and "grab" a target at 1400 meters altitude now rather than the 1200 meters I had as a mental note before.

[303_Kwiatek]

What about controls heaviness at higher speeds? All other fighters got correction on these - more heavy controls ( 109, Yaks). What about La5 and Lagg3?  Still La5 and Lagg3 roll like crazy? If so something is not right here...

[Finkeren]

La-5 roll great at all speeds, not Fw 190 level but better than I-16 I think. LaGG-3 is much less agile at high speeds.

[Lusekofte]

We where 4 people testing it the other night and found it very improved, All though I liked it before, this time you feel you actually got a winner. The FM changes really made a difference concerning this plane and the P 40

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

What about controls heaviness at higher speeds? All other fighters got correction on these - more heavy controls ( 109, Yaks). What about La5 and Lagg3?  Still La5 and Lagg3 roll like crazy? If so something is not right here...

"Лучше всех советских истребителей крутил «бочки» «Ла-5». Немцы, испытав трофейный «Ла-5», были поражены эффективностью элеронов «лавочкина». («эффективность элеронов — выдающаяся. На скорости 450 км/ч полный оборот выполняется менее чем за 4 сек»)"

[FTC_Riksen]

So the load on the elevator did not change for the La5 and the LaGG3?

[ShamrockOneFive]

I see many guys taking advantage of this bird to its full strength. But I never was able to do so. Last night I tested it in a server (Normal server, not Expert) and I wasn't able to outmaneuver a 109 at low altitude. I suppose I must tweak the curves or so, because I always read that the La-5 was a very maneuverable plane. So, for now, the Spit remains my favorite plane.

 

Depends on the La-5 series. We have an early model Series 8 and then with the M-82F engine something a little bit later. In both cases the early series La-5s were more heavily wing loaded and not yet fully optimized. Jason has revealed that we'll be getting an La-5FN which should be a fair bit more agile than the La-5 that we currently have. Mostly by dropping weight but also in numerous other improvements to aerodynamics, control surfaces being cleaned up, etc.

[Lusekofte]

 

 

So the load on the elevator did not change for the La5 and the LaGG3?

 

As far as I experience it has the same deal as the new 109 FM for good and bad. Unfortunately I have been at low energy when attacked by hight energy 109 so I could not compare those .

[Finkeren]

So the load on the elevator did not change for the La5 and the LaGG3?

Hard to say, because they both feel quite different from their pre-2.012 incarnations. I would say, that I can now pull higher angles with the La-5 at high speeds than before, so maybe the elevator is slightly lighter now?

Edited September 2, 2017 by Finkeren

[Lusekofte]

Problem with LA 5 and P 40 was the instant bleed of energy that did not make sense , now these values is corrected and they actually flies more like a high powered fighter should do , not a cessna with low wing 

[Max_Damage]

A bunch of placebo victims ITT. The plane has not changed for the most part. Only universal stiffening applied.

[LLv24_Zami]

"Лучше всех советских истребителей крутил «бочки» «Ла-5». Немцы, испытав трофейный «Ла-5», были поражены эффективностью элеронов «лавочкина». («эффективность элеронов — выдающаяся. На скорости 450 км/ч полный оборот выполняется менее чем за 4 сек»)"

What`s that in english? I don`t trust google traslate 

[JtD]

It says the La-5 could roll as well as a Spitfire. 'Less than four seconds for a complete roll at 450 km/h'. The Germans were shocked to tears finding out these excellent characteristics, given that the Fw190 rolled only more than 1.5 times as fast at that speed.

 

Admittedly, 'less than four' could also be 'one', in which case the La-5 would indeed have been rolling shockingly fast. If 'less than four' was to mean something like 'closer to four than to three', it's just an partial statement with a lot of yadda-yadda added.

Edited September 2, 2017 by JtD

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

It says Swedish vodka is better than Finnish vodka, and that Moomin is actually Swedish according to secret documents! Just kidding, here you go :

 

The La-5 performed a roll better than all other Soviet fighters. The Germans were impressed by the aileron effectiveness of a captured La-5. "The aileron effectiveness is outstanding. At speeds of 450 km/h a full roll is performed in less than 4 seconds."

[Dr_Molem]

"Лучше всех советских истребителей крутил «бочки» «Ла-5». Немцы, испытав трофейный «Ла-5», были поражены эффективностью элеронов «лавочкина». («эффективность элеронов — выдающаяся. На скорости 450 км/ч полный оборот выполняется менее чем за 4 сек»)"

 

Isn't this concerning a La-5FN ?

[Finkeren]

I thought early Spits rolled pretty horribly.

Edited September 2, 2017 by Finkeren

[LLv24_Zami]

It says Swedish vodka is better than Finnish vodka, and that Moomin is actually Swedish according to secret documents! Just kidding, here you go  

That is just propaganda, not true 

 

Thanks!

[Matt]

The Rechlin test (which i'm assuming that Russian quote is based on) gives a time of "close to 4 seconds" (ger:"knapp 4 Sekunden") at 450 km/h for a La-5 FN. And the current roll rate in game is close to 4 seconds at that speed instantaneous. The test doesn't mention if it's sustained or instantaneous or wether or not that was actually highest rollrate (it also mentions that up to 600 km/h "high aileron input speeds" were still possible).

 

Question is, by how much the roll rate and/or stick forces of the La-5 FN actually differed from the La-5 series we have ingame.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

An evaluation of La-5 series 1 to 3 from Tbilisi (a rough batch to put it softly, we have series 4 from Gorkiy as far as I recall with far better quality and finish):

 

A) На элеронах на средних скоростях нагрузки нормальные. На скоростях выше 450 км/ч (по прибору) нагрузки значительно увеличиваются. На руль глубины при регулировке триммера на скорости 300-320 км/ч нейтрально (т.е. нагрузки сняты). На пикировании на скорости 500 км/ч (по прибору) возникают нагрузки, затрудняющие вывод самолета из пикирования. Необходимо пользоваться триммером. Управление рулем поворота на больших скоростях тяжелое. Управление самолета требует хорошей координации рулями. На правом вираже самолет стремиться опустить нос, приходится поддерживать левой ногой. Ручка управления самолета удобна, но управление тормозами расположено неудобно.

 

A) Aileron load in medium speeds is good. On speeds over 450 km/H on the meter [aileron] loads noticeably increase. Aircraft assumes neutral pitch attitude without trimming around 300-320 km/H. During dives at 500 km/H on the meter the stick load is notable, making edit from the dive harder. Flying the aircraft requires good rudder coordination. During right turns the aircraft tries to drop the nose, this is compensated by left rudder input. The stick on the aircraft is comfortable, but the engine quadrant is poorly arranged.

[Asgar]

The Rechlin test (which i'm assuming that Russian quote is based on) gives a time of "close to 4 seconds" (ger:"knapp 4 Sekunden") at 450 km/h for a La-5 FN. And the current roll rate in game is close to 4 seconds at that speed instantaneous. The test doesn't mention if it's sustained or instantaneous or wether or not that was actually highest rollrate (it also mentions that up to 600 km/h "high aileron input speeds" were still possible).

 

Question is, by how much the roll rate and/or stick forces of the La-5 FN actually differed from the La-5 series we have ingame.

was it the F or the FN where they started to remove the wing tanks? that should probably have the largest impact when it comes to instantaneous roll rate

[Lusekofte]

A bunch of placebo victims ITT. The plane has not changed for the most part. Only universal stiffening applied.

 

 

There is no placebo in LA 5 and P 40 performance, LA 5 is a total different plane that gives a bad fighter pilot (me) some kind of confidence, and the P 40 is like a new plane. I never said it would take much to change them, but whatever little that is change is of great importance for these two. I think the more stable 109 will have a positive impact as well for those using it

[Finkeren]

For the La-5 it's not so much performance that has improved, I think, but primarilly handling.

[Guest deleted@30725]

Hard to tell. Doesn't seem to feel such like a brick as it did.

[ShamrockOneFive]

For the La-5 it's not so much performance that has improved, I think, but primarilly handling.

 

I've flown it a bunch now and this is exactly what I think too. The raw performance is likely not that different but it has a different feel and this makes it easier to manage than before. Perhaps it retains energy a bit better in turns too... though its not going to out turn a Bf109 any time soon. Save that for the later model I suppose

[3./JG15_Kampf]

The plane that won the most with the 2.012 was the La5. It boasts an excellent elevator authority even at high speeds, a good roller and now seems to maintain better energy. I fw190 fought against La 5, used scissors and upward aspiring, and La5 could not keep up. Now La5 does much better. Fw190 is very unstable at low speed. La5 has current FM much like the FM of the Fw190 A3 before the update 2.012

sorry for the english (google translator)

Edited September 2, 2017 by 3./JG15_Kampf

[JtD]

The Rechlin test (which i'm assuming that Russian quote is based on) gives a time of "close to 4 seconds" (ger:"knapp 4 Sekunden") at 450 km/h for a La-5 FN. And the current roll rate in game is close to 4 seconds at that speed instantaneous.

Actually, it rolls at 160°/s at 450 TAS, 2000m altitude, to the right, throttle idle, rpm minimum. Right now, it outrolls the Fw190 at speeds below 500 and rolls as well as the Fw190 at speeds above. The reason for which eludes me.

 

Does anyone have access to test data that puts the La at least in the vicinity of above numbers?

[216th_Jordan]

Actually, it rolls at 160°/s at 450 TAS, 2000m altitude, to the right, throttle idle, rpm minimum. Right now, it outrolls the Fw190 at speeds below 500 and rolls as well as the Fw190 at speeds above. The reason for which eludes me.

 

Does anyone have access to test data that puts the La at least in the vicinity of above numbers?

I'm pretty sure that this can be one of the issues that sneaked in when adjusting almost 30 planes' fms.

[Willy__]

To me it seems they got info about the La5 FN and mistakenly tuned it to our La5.