Jump to content
Etherlight

La-5FN, anyone?

Recommended Posts

Hans, and Vessel, do you honestly feel like such a second-class citizen flying on the Luftwaffe side?  Really?

 

For most of my time in this game, I flew Russian, because the Germans almost always seemed to outnumber during the times my wingmen and I were playing.  Then we all got a little lax about that.

 

Taking the liberty of speaking for a few others when I say this, when we fly German we feel like Sky-Gods, and with a fraction of the experience we had in Russian planes.  I'm not claiming anything is "easy mode".  This is a tough game, and it puts everybody's skills to the test...my hats off to anybody who is raking in kill streaks and high stats with the 109 or 190...I'm just saying, when I've flown so much Russian, and then I get in a German plane that can outdive, outclimb, outrun, and in many cases, outmanuever their foes, it seems like a relief.   When I'm flying in a group of 109's or especially 190's it sometimes feels like we have come to visit hell upon the earth.   Some damned good VVS pilots that can put an end to that delusion pretty quickly , but the bottom line is that I simply don't see myself flying at the least bit of handicap when I'm flying German, and I don't get the impression that Russian planes are somehow overpowered.

I agree. I basically fear nothing when I'm in a Fw-190 or Bf-109. Unless of course the enemy I'm facing has an energy advantage. The ability to just climb away from you opponent in the Bf-109 is a great feeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also agree. The 109 gives me the feeling of wielding some surgical instrument. Razor sharp performance and as long as you don't make a fool of yourself it's absolutely murderous. when working as a pair the 190 is even better. Under no circumstances do I ever think "oh no, a mig, their so tough and over modeled and my armament is so weak"

 

I really wish some of you Jg role playing boys could pop your head out of it for a week or so and spend that time in laggs and migs fighting 109 F4's. Because that's every day on the other side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish some of you Jg role playing boys could pop your head out of it for a week or so and spend that time in laggs and migs fighting 109 F4's. Because that's every day on the other side.

 

B..but 90% of my Flighttime are on the LaGG 3 (LaGG 3 is bae). I only joined the clan because i have much fun with the Boys during War Thunder times.... i just can't bring it over me to delete the Clan Tag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that whenever we have a discussion about the performance of this or that Soviet fighter we get endless sob stories about how disadvantaged the VVS are or how much of an advantage LW pilots have with their f4s?  The 109 may be better than most/all Russian fighters of the period (I don't actually know because I don't fly it) but so what?  This is a game with pretensions to being a sim.  We fly what we fly with an expectation that whatever it is, it should be a faithful representation of the actual aircraft.  This isn't about balance or what's fair or what would have been cool, it's about what was.

 

I have no problem being out-performed by an aircraft that, historically, had superior performance to whatever it is that I'm flying.  What irritates the crap out of me is coming up against aircraft that exceed their historical capabilities.  That just turns a game like this into a joke.  And the simple fact is that where such discrepancies exist, they are for the most part on just one side of the ledger.

Edited by Wulf
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no problem being out-performed by an aircraft that, historically, had superior performance to whatever it is that I'm flying. What irritates the crap out of me is coming up against aircraft that exceed their historical capabilities. That just turns a game like this into a joke. And the simple fact is that where such discrepancies exist, they are for the most part on just one side of the ledger.

Like F4 high alt performance? :)) Oh wait that doesn't fit your Argumentation.

 

This game will not be perfect, not for 70 € for 10 planes. Some things could be better like gas pressure model or some performance figures, but there is no hidden agenda like the one that can be read of between your lines.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like F4 high alt performance? :)) Oh wait that doesn't fit your Argumentation.

 

This game will not be perfect, not for 70 € for 10 planes. Some things could be better like gas pressure model or some performance figures, but there is no hidden agenda like the one that can be read of between your lines.

 

 

[Edited]

 

Please check your PMs.

Edited by Bearcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it's good to have your personal assurance there are no "hidden agendas".    In fairness though I must just point out that I don't remember suggesting that there were, but it's still good to know. 

 

However, since you raised the subject, how exactly do you know there are no hidden agendas?   I mean have you subpoenaed documents, subjected witnesses to cross examination or do you have an impeccable source within the organisation?  What is it ,exactly, that makes you so sure?

 

Anybody who flies both sides can see that if they tried to sneakily give the Russians super planes, then they did a really lousy job at it.

 

That's pretty decent evidence to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we already out of things to talk about concerning the La-5FN? It appears we have another thread that has defaulted to the usual red vs. blue mudslinging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one remark. Please,usual suspects,refrain from words like "UFO" and such. It is disrespectful towards developers, annoying and not funny at all.

Rather grab a technical description and flight manual of the aircraft and learn something usefull.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What irritates the crap out of me is coming up against aircraft that exceed their historical capabilities. 

Yes, that must be very irritating. Not irritating enough to get you to find test data that supports your claims, or fly VVS occasionally, but still really irritating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what is also irritating? People who cry constantly about the OP VVS aircraft, but don’t provide any actual test data or ever fly them in MP.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what is also irritating? People who cry constantly about the OP VVS aircraft, but don’t provide any actual test data or ever fly them in MP.

I think the general Overperformance of all Klimov 105PF Powered Aircraft in 2nd Supercharger Gear was already proven by contrasting ingame and RL Curves. 

 

Additionally the Lavochkins appear to have overmodelled Rates of Roll at speeds exceeding 400 kph, according to a very old Russian Post. 

 

That the Yak-1-69 was OP was indirectly admitted when the 1b came out, and the 69 suddenly lost 20kph at SL. 

 

With the FN they'll be forced to actually create different Aileron Feels, due to the changed Aileron/Stick Ratio to allow for higher Rates of Roll at high Speeds, at the cost of low Speed RoR. 

So I suspect there will be a noticeable change post FN in both La-5 and LaGG-3. 

 

And my Bias is so strong that I often have 50/50 Split between Nations on DED-RE for example.

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus-Mann
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what is also irritating? People who cry constantly about the OP VVS aircraft, but don’t provide any actual test data or ever fly them in MP.

 

 

I would have gone with people complaining about the performance of a plane that doesn't yet exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not make the 190 a5 as fast as the a8 ? Since we are getting it on BoBP and its been a trend to overmodel aircrafts and derate it when a newer model comes.... 

 

When the A8 gets released you can tune down the speed, just like the yak case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the difficulty of managing the Allison engine will keep many from flying the P-39, but I could see it filling the gap for the VVS as a fighter that performs well at medium altitude (2000-5000m range)

 

The biggest drawback on the Russian fighters are engine management. I used to fly the La-5 a lot in IL2 1946, but having to manage three different cooling options in this sim made me shelf it. 

I doubt the P-39 can be that difficult  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest drawback on the Russian fighters are engine management. I used to fly the La-5 a lot in IL2 1946, but having to manage three different cooling options in this sim made me shelf it. 

I doubt the P-39 can be that difficult  ;)

You don't have to manage three Cowlings. You just open Oil and Inlet, and only really use the Outlet Shitters to regulate Temperature.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have to manage three Cowlings. You just open Oil and Inlet, and only really use the Outlet Shitters to regulate Temperature.

Thanks for the tip. Ill try it out and add it to my pilot notes :salute:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general Overperformance of all Klimov 105PF Powered Aircraft in 2nd Supercharger Gear was already proven by contrasting ingame and RL Curves. 

 

Additionally the Lavochkins appear to have overmodelled Rates of Roll at speeds exceeding 400 kph, according to a very old Russian Post. 

 

That the Yak-1-69 was OP was indirectly admitted when the 1b came out, and the 69 suddenly lost 20kph at SL.

So someone provided rl test data and changes were made?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That the Yak-1-69 was OP was indirectly admitted when the 1b came out, and the 69 suddenly lost 20kph at SL.

 

Are you sure it was 20 km/h faster? Because that would have make it not only faster than the Yak-1B, but faster than the G-2 and 109 F-4 at combat power, around the same speed as the F-4 at 1.38 ata, only above that the 109 F-4 would be faster.

 

I hope that we will get Bf 109 G2 not derated.  ;)

 

Well according to Kurfurst the derated G-2s had the fixed tailwheel as field modification by the same time so it would be more or less the same as the current G-4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So someone provided rl test data and changes were made?

I imagine it would've been similar to the 190A3 being worked on when the 190A5 was being worked on. They retuned old fm for new information while they are already working on fm for similar aircraft so as to be efficient in use of developer time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the general Overperformance of all Klimov 105PF Powered Aircraft in 2nd Supercharger Gear was already proven by contrasting ingame and RL Curves. 

 

where???

 

As I recall, the Devs said the game performance is within 5% of RL figures:

 

 

 

In real life max speed test performed with radiator flap set 'by airflow', that corresponds ingame 50%/35% for oil/water radiators.

IRL data for Yak-1 s127 - max speed at 4km altitude - 591 kph TAS, ingame - 490kph IAS / 599kph TAS.   8 kph or 1.3% TAS mistake.

IRL data for Yak-1 s127 - max speed at 6km altitude - 572 kph TAS, ingame - 436kph IAS / 594kph TAS. 22 kph or 3.8% TAS mistake.

Where is "50-40 kph mistake"?

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/26139-new-yak/?p=410889

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody who flies both sides can see that if they tried to sneakily give the Russians super planes, then they did a really lousy job at it.

 

That's pretty decent evidence to me.

Seriously.

 

Also, why does the VVs side always have half the players in MP?

Apparently everyone likes to be the underdog these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where???

 

As I recall, the Devs said the game performance is within 5% of RL figures:

 

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/26139-new-yak/?p=410889

5% are a lot. 

 

 

Are you sure it was 20 km/h faster? Because that would have make it not only faster than the Yak-1B, but faster than the G-2 and 109 F-4 at combat power, around the same speed as the F-4 at 1.38 ata, only above that the 109 F-4 would be faster.
 

Originally the 69 it did around 521 kph, now it only does 500. That's very similar to the 109s indeed. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally the 69 it did around 521 kph, now it only does 500. That's very similar to the 109s indeed.

Yak-1 69 currently does around 517 at sea level in Autumn (15°C)

 

Yak-1B does around 530

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yak-1 69 currently does around 517 at sea level in Autumn (15°C)

 

Yak-1B does around 530

All depends on your measurement, I do it with 50 Water, 100% Oil.

 

I get 504 with 2700, 509 with 2550. 

 

Realistically speaking the manual also limited time above 100°C on either water or oil for a certain amount of time. That should become a Factor for a "Combat Mode" on Yak-1. 

Edited by 6./ZG26_Klaus-Mann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next off topic post will be deleted without notice.

 

Keep it on topic, which its the La, also if you want to discuss FM you know where to do it.

 

Haash

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...