The La-5 in 2.012

[Finkeren]

It's definitely in the "feelings" category for me. But the change is so significant that there is no chance of it all being placebo effect.

 

For me I've literally gone from not being able to use the La-5 successfully in MP at all to being my favourite VVS ride overnight.

 

Same with the P-40 and I think we can all agree that the changes there are definitely real, even if we can't quantify them.

[Gambit21]

For me I've literally gone from not being able to use the La-5 successfully in MP at all to being my favourite VVS ride overnight.

 

Which tells me things are going very well, because by all rights it should be.

[Finkeren]

Which tells me things are going very well, because by all rights it should be.

As I said before: It is now much more apparent, why the La-5 was considered enough of an improvement over the LaGG-3 to justify the continued development of the type.

[Gambit21]

As I said before: It is now much more apparent, why the La-5 was considered enough of an improvement over the LaGG-3 to justify the continued development of the type.

It was my favorite plane to fly when BoS was released, lack of efficacy in combat drove me to the Yak. Glad to hear it's been woken up finally.

[Finkeren]

It was my favorite plane to fly when BoS was released, lack of efficacy in combat drove me to the Yak. Glad to hear it's been woken up finally.

People who have been flying it effectively all the time seem to think, that apart from better energy retention, especially in turns, easier landings and ability to pull greater AoA without riding the stall, it's really not that different from what it has been the whole time.

 

This might indicate, that the change for me mostly lies in making the plane more forgiving and easier for a new pilot to get into.

[Gambit21]

The changes you describe are pretty much what I was felt lacking when I parked it.

[3./JG15_Kampf]

It's definitely in the "feelings" category for me. But the change is so significant that there is no chance of it all being placebo effect.

 I consider the feedback of the community very important and even being "feelings" served as a first step to the correction of many problems, (interminable post fw190). After the 2012 update, I see Bf 109 pilots saying that FM is more realistic. At the same time I see complaints about Lagg3 and La5

Edited September 5, 2017 by 3./JG15_Kampf

[Lusekofte]

 

 

At the same time I see complaints about Lagg3 and La5

By the 109 pilots like always 

[Max_Damage]

Actually, la5 is like 5 kmh faster then an f4 and like 5 kmh slower then a g2 at surface level. Thats taken straight from WOL.

 

The role this plane has is one and only. Patrol at ~1-1.5 km at full nominal mode and at full speed ~500 kmh. Wait for 109 to pounce on the shturmoviks. Engage emergency power and chase. Suddenly 109 cant escape in horizontal and have to give up their boom zoom stance and have to turn to evade fire. Yaks are supposed to do the dogfighting after that. If there are no la5, then 109 can just run horizontally from the yaks. This is the role that la5 can perform in BOS currently but it is there and it is quite pronounced.

 

Ofc it only works in Teamspeak.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Max_Damage

[silvergun]

Hi

 

Well the Kuban was a change, better trained and more expirienced pilots. Better tactics and better planes. The BF 109 showed signs of old age. Getting heavier for improved guns. Many things was in favor for the Russians in 1943, maybe numbers was the main cause 

 

True, but I only talk about airplanes, and the Bf 109 during the WW2 received new improvements that kept it competitive until the end of the War (more powerful engines, aerodynamics improvements, etc...), like the late G-6, G-14, G-10 or K-4.

[Finkeren]

True, but I only talk about airplanes, and the Bf 109 during the WW2 received new improvements that kept it competitive until the end of the War (more powerful engines, aerodynamics improvements, etc...), like the late G-6, G-14, G-10 or K-4.

 

Competitive, yes, but not near total dominance, as it had on the Eastern front in 1941- early '42. By the G6 in 1943 the 109 not longer had the luxury of being both more agile, better climbing and faster at all altitudes than its opponents. The La-5FN was faster at lower altitudes, climbed almost as well down there and was in many respects more maneuverable. The Yak-9 was much more agile, almost as fast at low level and had the added benefit compared to the La-5FN of being simple and relatively easy to fly.

 

It was not these technological advancements that changed the tide in the air on the Eastern Front, numbers tactics and attrition of the enemy did that, but technologically, it was much more of an even playing field in late 1943.

[Brano]

The differences in ailerons between LaGG-3/early La-5 and late La-5/La-5FN/La-7 are two major points - one, the in flight trimming device was replaced by Flettner tabs and - two, the maximum deflection of the ailerons was reduced from roughly 50° range to just 36° range. Both modifications resulted in reduced high speed control forces, significantly so, giving greatly improved high speed roll performance. The drawback would have been a lower low speed roll performance.

The Flettner tab also resulted in a (really) minor change in aileron size.

Additionally the La-5 wing was being redesigned as production went on, and this may have had an impact on wing twist resistance, which effects roll rate, in particular at high speeds, too.

 

All in all La-5FN roll performance has pretty much nothing in common with LaGG-3S29 or La-5S8 roll performance.

 

The I-301 prototype had smaller ailerons than the later LaGG-3 models and the La-5's, but I don't know if this is just a matter of different area calculation and if not, how early in the production the change was made. Sizes are 1.32 and 1.46m², respectively.

 

Attached a couple of pictures from LaGG and La-5FN manuals, showing early and late ailerons.

 

La-5 had improved ailerons with +/-18° deflection angle from very first 9.series .It was in fact a change implemented on LaGG-3 of 35.series (GKO order from 7.6.1942).From july 1942 Zavod no.21 in Gorkyi was fully occupied with implementation of La-5 serial production.Only cca 40 LaGG-3s were completed in july/august 42 and then production switched completly to La-5. From then on only Zavod no.31 in Tbilisi was producing LaGG-3s.

La-5 series 1.-8. (200pcs) had in fact fuselages from remaining LaGG-3 35.series. Flettner tabs were introduced from 9.series,first M-82F engines followed inbetween 9.- 10.series in Dec 1942.

So many times cited info about problems with ''banking from one side to other'' are taken out from letter nr.2823 written by trio Sachurin-Novikov-Repin to Stalin = test results of prototype LaGG-3 M-85 performed 3.- 6.5.1942. Two months before serial production of La-5 has started.

Edited October 16, 2017 by Brano

[Lusekofte]

 

 

late G-6

 

 

Well I hope there will be a Late G6 in Kuban, Good 109 never once ruined the gameplay for me, the planes I fly is dead meat meeting the oldest type anyway. I like it when people is satisfied and content with what they do. What I do not like that much is the consequent attitude against improved USSR planes and based on assumptions most of them.

 

How about some patience, bugreports and charts through the channals prefered by the developers, some faith that irregularities will be adjusted, god knows they deserve that faith after the last patch, fixing of the 190 and so on 

[silvergun]

Competitive, yes, but not near total dominance, as it had on the Eastern front in 1941- early '42. By the G6 in 1943 the 109 not longer had the luxury of being both more agile, better climbing and faster at all altitudes than its opponents. The La-5FN was faster at lower altitudes, climbed almost as well down there and was in many respects more maneuverable. The Yak-9 was much more agile, almost as fast at low level and had the added benefit compared to the La-5FN of being simple and relatively easy to fly.

 

It was not these technological advancements that changed the tide in the air on the Eastern Front, numbers tactics and attrition of the enemy did that, but technologically, it was much more of an even playing field in late 1943.

 

This is the reason why I said "...For me the La-5FN was the turning point of the Russian aircrafts, when they really began to be serious opponents"

 

The La-5FN and La-7 are my favorite Russian airplanes.

 

 

Beautiful machine 

Edited September 5, 2017 by silverguun

[JtD]

La-5 had improved ailerons with +/-18° deflection angle from very first series .It was in fact a change implemented on LaGG-3 of 35.series (GKO order from 7.6.1942).From july 1942 Zavod no.21 in Gorkyi was fully occupied with implementation of La-5 serial production.Only cca 40 LaGG-3s were completed in july/august 42 and then production switched completly to La-5. From then on only Zavod no.31 in Tbilisi was producing LaGG-3s.

La-5 series 1.-8. (200pcs) had in fact fuselages from remaining LaGG-3 35.series. Flettner tabs were introduced from 9.series,first M-82F engines followed inbetween 9.- 10.series in Dec 1942.

So many times cited info about problems with ''banking from one side to other'' are taken out from letter nr.2823 written by trio Sachurin-Novikov-Repin to Stalin = test results of prototype LaGG-3 M-85 performed 3.- 6.5.1942. Two months before serial production of La-5 has started.

a) I have a La-5 manual that gives +/-25°.

b) The La-5 in game is animated with +/-25°.

c) There's no visual change in the animation between LaGG-3S29 and La-5S8 in game.

d) There's no significant difference between LaGG-3S8 and La-5S8 force limit speed in game.

 

IF what you say is true, then the game is still wrong.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

La-5 had improved ailerons with +/-18° deflection angle from very first series .It was in fact a change implemented on LaGG-3 of 35.series (GKO order from 7.6.1942).From july 1942 Zavod no.21 in Gorkyi was fully occupied with implementation of La-5 serial production.Only cca 40 LaGG-3s were completed in july/august 42 and then production switched completly to La-5. From then on only Zavod no.31 in Tbilisi was producing LaGG-3s.

La-5 series 1.-8. (200pcs) had in fact fuselages from remaining LaGG-3 35.series. Flettner tabs were introduced from 9.series,first M-82F engines followed inbetween 9.- 10.series in Dec 1942.

So many times cited info about problems with ''banking from one side to other'' are taken out from letter nr.2823 written by trio Sachurin-Novikov-Repin to Stalin = test results of prototype LaGG-3 M-85 performed 3.- 6.5.1942. Two months before serial production of La-5 has started.

Nice info, didn't know

[303_Kwiatek]

a) I have a La-5 manual that gives +/-25°.

b) The La-5 in game is animated with +/-25°.

c) There's no visual change in the animation between LaGG-3S29 and La-5S8 in game.

d) There's no significant difference between LaGG-3S8 and La-5S8 force limit speed in game.

 

IF what you say is true, then the game is still wrong.

 

 

If i remember correctly there were also improved in controls linkage since LA5 F

Edited September 5, 2017 by 303_Kwiatek

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

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.

Where is the -5FN announcement? I definitely missed that.

[MrNoice]

if they have the money/time for it...

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Nevermind, found it. Serendipitous slip of the tongue.

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Brano, do you know if there were some production batches featuring La-5Fs with the same or very similar airframe and wings than La-5FN's in production around the same timeframe? Because I heard that sometimes La-5FNs couldn't be completed because of low supply of the FN engines, so they had to keep producing Fs.

Edited September 5, 2017 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[ShamrockOneFive]

Where is the -5FN announcement? I definitely missed that.

 

I've got a summary of what was said plus some commentary on it:

https://stormbirds.wordpress.com/2017/08/31/il-2-series-to-potentially-see-some-unexpected-aircraft/

 

The La-5FN and Bf109G-6 are essentially confirmed as being in the dev schedule between Battle of Kuban and the start of Battle of Midway. A third party is working on additional types but that is less certain at this point.

Brano, do you know if there were some production batches featuring La-5Fs with the same or very similar airframe and wings than La-5FN's in production around the same timeframe? Because I heard that sometimes La-5FNs couldn't be completed because of low supply of the FN engines, so they had to keep producing Fs.

 

From what I understand... late La-5F and early La-5FN aircraft built during 1943 are the same aircraft with a different engine and the slight changes to the cooling system that required. From what I understand the La-5FN of 1944 is still more improved.

[Brano]

a) I have a La-5 manual that gives +/-25°.

b) The La-5 in game is animated with +/-25°.

c) There's no visual change in the animation between LaGG-3S29 and La-5S8 in game.

d) There's no significant difference between LaGG-3S8 and La-5S8 force limit speed in game.

 

IF what you say is true, then the game is still wrong.

You are right JtD. Stupid me   .Shining example of posting bullshit without verification with primary source = correct technical description (Техническое описание самолета Ла-5. Часть 2. Описание конструкции,18.11.1942). It is on page 26.

I apologise 

[Brano]

Brano, do you know if there were some production batches featuring La-5Fs with the same or very similar airframe and wings than La-5FN's in production around the same timeframe? Because I heard that sometimes La-5FNs couldn't be completed because of low supply of the FN engines, so they had to keep producing Fs.

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27577-we-are-getting-what-essentially-la-5f-awesome-further-implic/?view=findpost&p=440863

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/27577-we-are-getting-what-essentially-la-5f-awesome-further-implic/?view=findpost&p=440859

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/26452-summery-special-teamspeak-event-saturday-dec-3rd/?view=findpost&p=418092

[303_Kwiatek]

You are right JtD. Stupid me   .Shining example of posting bullshit without verification with primary source = correct technical description (Техническое описание самолета Ла-5. Часть 2. Описание конструкции,18.11.1942). It is on page 26.

I apologise 

 

Not wonder at all

[LukeFF]

Not wonder at all

Knock it off already.

[JtD]

You are right JtD.

Really glad you agree, your statements about La's do carry weight.

 

And you're saying you're occasionally making mistakes like everybody else? No problem, just human.

Edited September 8, 2017 by JtD