Dog-fighting in the Mig-3

[[TWB]Sauerkraut-]

I'm learning the Mig-3 and I have to say I'm having a tough time learning to fight in it.

 

It FEELS like it should be an amazing energy fighter, but I have a hard time fighting in that style due to the horrendous control lock up at higher speeds.

It dives quite well but the lack of authority over ailerons and elevators makes it quite difficult to get the guns on target after a dive, or when chasing a fast moving target in general.

 

I tend to fly it at higher altitudes b/c that is where it excels, but I tend find myself wanting to dive on targets something like 2 km below me and losing control surfaces in the process.

 

What fighting style does this aircraft do best in?

[Guest deleted@134347]

you can do a dive attack and you can maneuver enough to get the guns on the target using flaps and the rudder, essentially slowing yourself down quickly. However, after such a 'boom' don't expect to 'zoom' out, i.e. this is more of a "try to hit them from the top but if it fails try to stay on their 6". Risky, but hey, it's a computer game.

[56RAF_Roblex]

The simple answer is that it flies best at 350-450, not at its max speed.  As you know, the Mig was designed as a high alt fighter but the reality is that it is only fast at altitude For A Russian Fighter and in fact the only German fighter it is faster than is the 109 E7.  Its real advantage is that it is very nimble at 350-450 and it can do that down low as well as high up.  The downside is that it burns E fast in hard turns so the key is to keep it fast and use the roll rather than sustained turns eg scissors & YoYos.  Fly high by all means but when diving keep it shallow to stop it getting too fast.  If you *must* try slow turns then make sure you have pre-set the flaps limiter to 20-30 degrees first.

Edited February 19, 2018 by 56RAF_Roblex

[Feathered_IV]

I had the impression it was more of a point-defence fighter.  Designed to get altitude quickly and take on enemy bombers. 

[Brano]

Originally it was supposed to escort strategic bombers to Romanian oil fields from Odessa region.Thats why VVS insisted on 1000km radius. After 22.6.41 it was clear that this plan will not materialise.Point-defense was kind of afterthought. But germans never unleashed full strategic high altitude bombing campaign. It also kinda failed as high altitude interceptor. Without pressurised cockpit and working turbocharger it was not able to intercept properly german Ju-86s.

[CrazyDuck]

and in fact the only German fighter it is faster than is the 109 E7.

 

Hmm, really? This is kinda surprising - MiG-3 was historically faster (640 kph - at altitude ofcourse) compared to either 109F (615 kph) or SpitV (605 kph). Actually, it was the fastest fighter in the world in operational use until the arrival of Fw 190. 

[A_radek]

To the op,

It has a no-tracer 20mm option, great cockpit visibility, a nifty flaps limiter and it looks good. But that's it. I like it but it's not a very potent duellist against F 109's. Like mentioned above, range is spectacular so there's usually no need for a full tank.

Edited February 19, 2018 by a_radek

[A_radek]

Hmm, really? This is kinda surprising - MiG-3 was historically faster (640 kph - at altitude ofcourse) compared to either 109F (615 kph) or SpitV (605 kph). Actually, it was the fastest fighter in the world in operational use until the arrival of Fw 190. 

 

Where are these numbers from? I was under the impression earlier Migs were faster but what we had was some unusual hybrid between early version speed and late loadout features.

 

 

Edited February 19, 2018 by a_radek

[56RAF_Roblex]

Hmm, really? This is kinda surprising - MiG-3 was historically faster (640 kph - at altitude ofcourse) compared to either 109F (615 kph) or SpitV (605 kph). Actually, it was the fastest fighter in the world in operational use until the arrival of Fw 190. 

At very high alt it is quite fast but you will never be up there. At 6000m, about as high as any 109 alt-monkey operates,  it only does 615kph with boost while the 109F2 does 620 without WEP and 635 with WEP.   Without Boost you will only get 590 and both the MC202 and the La-5 (no Boost at that alt) will go a little faster.  

Edited February 19, 2018 by 56RAF_Roblex

[CrazyDuck]

Regarding armament I actually prefer the twin UBS over two ShVAKs on MiG-3. UBS are the most powerful HMG in the sim (and they should be). Of course they can't compare to ShVAKs in raw firepower, but they make up for it with deadly accuracy and large ammosupply. IMO you can cause more damage overall with two UBS with 350 rpg than two ShVAKs with 150 rpg.

[ATA_Vasilij]

Yes, Mig is tough plane to fly and fight. Not for everyone. You can maneuver with him at low speed and achieve a victory, but flaps fully extended. You can hit target after zoom on top speed but you must have throttle at zero and to do full movements with rudder and ailerons to hit the targer. Yes it is heavier than in other planes but you must count with it. 

 

Always take  BS12,7 and you will see enemy planes loosing their wings and other parts as often as never before.

 

Mig is not superior in high altitudes. thats mistake. Bf and Fw will be always faster. 

 

But in middle speeds is Mig very good. If you are using your all axis controls properly, than you are able get almost every enemy plane  in maneuvers. 

 

Be careful to your engine, one small hit and is done. Do not go into headons.

 

 

Once I got 6 planes in one flight. That was wild dogfight alt from 0 to 1000 and BS12,7 of course..... that is wonderful gun. Love it.

[JaffaCake]

At very high alt it is quite fast but you will never be up there. At 6000m, about as high as any 109 alt-monkey operates,  it only does 615kph with boost while the 109F2 does 620 without WEP and 635 with WEP.   Without Boost you will only get 590 and both the MC202 and the La-5 (no Boost at that alt) will go a little faster.  

 

 

You must not have flown on TAW much, where LW flies easily at 7-9km and some reds chase them up to the ceilings.

 

I climbed to 7km in a pe2 only to get jumped from above!

[Finkeren]

The MiG-3 is hands down my favourite fighter in the sim and I fly it a lot. Given a moderate starting advantage it is extremely potent and very hard to defend against for any German fighter. The trick is to always keep it in that 350-450km/h speed range, where it is most at home. There youhave almost Yak-like maneuverability, great handling, stable gunnery and a good chunk of energy to trade.

 

However, you don’t wanna stick around for too long. Once you are at a disadvantage, there is no easy escape.

 

But then again: It doesn’t matter if you win or lose the fight. Just flying the MiG makes you a winner right out of the gate. Live or die, you look great doing it in the most beautiful machine ever designed by man.

[Cybermat47]

Just flying the MiG makes you a winner right out of the gate. Live or die, you look great doing it in the most beautiful machine ever designed by man.

It’s not that beautiful, I mean, the Spitfire is a lot more -

 

 

... never mind, it is that beautiful.

[56RAF_Roblex]

 

Be careful to your engine, one small hit and is done. Do not go into headons.

 

 

Actually it is very resilient after coolant loss.   Open the rads fully and it will probably get you home.

[216th_Jordan]

The Mig can be fun to fly and even be successful. But regarding manouverability is lacks severely. Chances against skilled 109 pilots are very slim due to its bad climbrate and big turn radius. High instantaneous turns can be initiated with flaps, that will make you a sitting duck within seconds though.

 

Mig is a great fighter for ambushes. It has great all around visibility which allows for early spotting and setting up an unseen attack path. I usually take the Mig-3 for defense role with the UB-Gunpuds, it shreds things in one pass easily and thats what you want as the Mig hates turning.

 

At high alt this plane struggels too, it might be fast but has the turn radius of a whole city at best, and that combined with almost no climbing ability left. One thing the Mig does rather well is diving: close rads and go full boost into a shallow dive, that way I've dragged german fighters for 50 km back to my home base.

 

The best situation for the Mig vs a 109 is at speeds above 500 kph (as 109 locks up earlier that the Mig and you have higher overall manouverability), just make sure to not overshoot the 109 and you can stay glued to him until he gains his full manouverability at lower speeds again, it should give you enough time to down him.

[ATA_Vasilij]

But then again: It doesn’t matter if you win or lose the fight. Just flying the MiG makes you a winner right out of the gate. Live or die, you look great doing it in the most beautiful machine ever designed by man.

 

This is really nice what you said. I have a weakness for this plane as well.... And when taking off and Yaks are all around, is nice, when someone take Lagg, ok, but when someone takes a Mig, I say to myself, well, a good pilot, .... and when he manages shoot down enemy fighters I say, well, great pilot, and when I see Mig in longlasting battle with enemy fighter in sharp maneuvers, I say .... he is a King !

 

cheers

[Fidelity]

I really like the MiG too! I hate that TAW always takes it out of their later maps.

 

Don't try to dogfight with it. Get up over your enemy and fight in the vertical. Ideally by surprising him and killing him in your first dive.  Don't turn too much in the horizontal, you'll lose energy like crazy and the MiG's acceleration and climb rate is so poor you'll never get it back.

 

If you need to dive on someone 2KM below you set your throttle to idle and dive in a spiral. DO NOT exceed 600 km/h as she will start locking up. It can be a good idea to create more drag by opening your radiators. Just don't forget to close them once you are setup on the target so you aren't wasting too much of your energy.

[Wulf]

Originally it was supposed to escort strategic bombers to Romanian oil fields from Odessa region.Thats why VVS insisted on 1000km radius. After 22.6.41 it was clear that this plan will not materialise.Point-defense was kind of afterthought. But germans never unleashed full strategic high altitude bombing campaign. It also kinda failed as high altitude interceptor. Without pressurised cockpit and working turbocharger it was not able to intercept properly german Ju-86s.

 

 

Not that surprising given that the Germans didn't actually have an operational 'strategic bomber'

 

Hmm, really? This is kinda surprising - MiG-3 was historically faster (640 kph - at altitude ofcourse) compared to either 109F (615 kph) or SpitV (605 kph). Actually, it was the fastest fighter in the world in operational use until the arrival of Fw 190. 

 

In my experience the Mig-3 is decidedly faster than an A-3 at 4k.

.

[56RAF_Roblex]

If a 109 pilot is stupid enough to turn & burn with you,  the Mig is not actually that bad, especially with use of partial flaps, and can hold its own with a E7 or F2.  The one thing to look out for though is that it has quite an abrupt high-G stall if you are too rough.  It does recover quickly as well but by that time you have lost your shot and your E.  The same issue has caused me to crash twice while otherwise winning the fight because of trying a half roll and pull through at low alt to deliver the coup-de-grace.  Something that a Yak will handle with ease the Mig refuses to do and just mushes down into the ground with both wings struggling to produce any lift.

[Tag777]

The Mig is one of my favorite planes. I manage it pretty similar to a 109 (of course, is slower and heavier and has poor maneuverability at low speeds). In a dive I push the throttle back to zero and after the speed goes below 600 kmh I push  it forward again, aligning the target with the rudder and ailerons. Rarely I use the flaps.

[KatieLuna]

Originally it was supposed to escort strategic bombers to Romanian oil fields from Odessa region.Thats why VVS insisted on 1000km radius. After 22.6.41 it was clear that this plan will not materialise.Point-defense was kind of afterthought. But germans never unleashed full strategic high altitude bombing campaign. It also kinda failed as high altitude interceptor. Without pressurised cockpit and working turbocharger it was not able to intercept properly german Ju-86s.

typo? Although the 86 was a plane, I feel like you meant 88. I'm probably wrong.

[ST_ami7b5]

Just now I've been reading Pokryshkin's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Pokryshkin) book and few things surprised me about his MiG-3 career at the beginning of the war:
- many recon flights at very low level (sometimes up to 50! meters to avoid AA and to be able to see details of enemy units positions / movements)  

- many ground attack missions with bombs or rockets (interestingly he prefered rockets - due to low level attacks)
- using rockets against planes

Generally he adviced to fight vertical (boom & zoom) with MiG-3 as she was very good diver - better than 109.

 

Interesting reading, looking forward to read about his Airacobra period.

Edited February 19, 2018 by ST_ami7b5

[Finkeren]

- using rockets against planes.

Actually, that was the main reason RS-82 rails were installed on fighters. Some Soviet designers of the 1930s put great stock in the use of air-to-air rockets. The RS rockets were designed as a general purpose HE rocket for use against air- and ground targets alike.

 

Of course the unguided rockets proved to be much too inaccurate to justify their use against planes and during 1942, the rocket rails slowly disappeared from fighters.

[ST_ami7b5]

Actually, that was the main reason RS-82 rails were installed on fighters. Some Soviet designers of the 1930s put great stock in the use of air-to-air rockets. The RS rockets were designed as a general purpose HE rocket for use against air- and ground targets alike.

 

Of course the unguided rockets proved to be much too inaccurate to justify their use against planes and during 1942, the rocket rails slowly disappeared from fighters.

But he mentions an rocket attack against a group of M.C.202 planes after which several planes went down in flames...

Again, as I wrote it surprised me.

 

Also he wrote that improper (rough) handling of RSs (damaged stabilisers) by mechanics was the reason of their inaccuracy 

Edited February 19, 2018 by ST_ami7b5

[Finkeren]

But he mentions an rocket attack against a group of M.C.202 planes after which several planes went down in flames...

Again, as I wrote it surprised me.

 

Just because the rockets were too inaccurate on average, doesn't mean there weren't times when they performed as intended, whether by proper handling or sheer luck. 

 

A group of I-16s had great success using rockets against the Japanese at Khalkin Gol in 1939 as well. That initially promising result was part of the reason why so many of the new generation of fighters were fitted with rocket rails in 1940-41.

Also he wrote that improper (rough) handling of RSs (damaged stabilisers) by mechanics was the reason of their inaccuracy 

 

I'll have to admit, that sounds a bit like someone trying to pass the blame

[Pail]

Even though my last flyout with it was terrible....bad internet, etc. I find that if you use the roll rate to low yo-yo (if that is the right term) and cut across your enemies turn you can often work yourself behind them in a very short period.

[ST_ami7b5]

Just because the rockets were too inaccurate on average, doesn't mean there weren't times when they performed as intended, whether by proper handling or sheer luck. 

 

A group of I-16s had great success using rockets against the Japanese at Khalkin Gol in 1939 as well. That initially promising result was part of the reason why so many of the new generation of fighters were fitted with rocket rails in 1940-41.

 

I'll have to admit, that sounds a bit like someone trying to pass the blame

He wrote that after mechanics took better care, the rockets' accuracy improved. OK, enough of that. 

But before my graphics card died I managed to shot down Ju-88 with an RS in my MiG-3. First one missed, but the second one hit and Ju-88 went down in flames.  

But it was provoked by the book and I agree with you.

 

Again, I was surprised, Pokryshkin valued rockets better than bombs in ground attacks.

That's all    

 

[Finkeren]

Pokryshkin was a fighter pilot. He was probably most comfortable aiming at his target through his crosshairs. 

 

Without special training, it is really, really difficult to hit anythings with bombs dropped in level flight or a shallow dive at high speeds with no aid of a bomb sight. Even IL-2s were notoriously just as inaccurate with their bombs as they were with rockets. As armchair sim pilots, we can do this kind of attack with reasonable accuracy, but that comes from the experience of dropping hundreds and hundreds of bombs this way. A fighter pilot with no training in dropping bombs, little experience and most likely no desire to really press through his attack would very rarely have any luck using bombs.

 

I have had some success with rockets against planes as well. I can usually get one or two instant kills per sortie against bombers this way, but I find that to have any chance of a hit, you have to really press through with your attack and only fire when you're practically on top of him. Naturally this carries great risk and would not be how it was done IRL, where they probably just fired at 500m and hoped for the best, and if no hits were scored, the pilot got to return home knowing, that he had at least done something.

 

All things considered, for the MiG-3 I'd take the 2 x UB in underwing pods over rockets any day. Just tonight i bagged all 8 Ju 88s with my MiG in QMB using 2 x UBS and 2x UB. 4 of those bad boys will make any bomber fall with one well-aimed tap on the trigger.

[Brano]

Pokryshkin saw ground personel unloading rockets from trucks and piling them like potatoes. Which obviously led to bending of stabilizing fins.

[Brano]

typo? Although the 86 was a plane, I feel like you meant 88. I'm probably wrong.

Ju-86P high alt recce version

[[TWB]Sauerkraut-]

It’s not that beautiful, I mean, the Spitfire is a lot more -

 

 

... never mind, it is that beautiful.

 

 

 

I'd say the corsair gives it a run for its money

 

 

The MiG is a beautiful aircraft, but that inverted gull wing and big ass R2800 just get me every time.

 

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by itsthatguy

[Alexmarine]

But he mentions an rocket attack against a group of M.C.202 planes after which several planes went down in flames...

Again, as I wrote it surprised me.

 

 

 

Did he faced the italians planes on the norther sector of Stalingrad front? Was that in fall of 1942 when they were equipped with YaK?

[Wolfram-Harms]

It doesn’t matter if you win or lose the fight. Just flying the MiG makes you a winner right out of the gate. Live or die, you look great doing it in the most beautiful machine ever designed by man.

 

That must be love Finceren! Beyond any common sense! But I can understand you - from it's hot design, the MiG-3 would be my favourite Russian fighter.

It must be the rock star attitude: don't get old but die pretty!

I feel similar with my brandnew Bf 109 G-4; and I felt like that with my Albatros D.V in RoF.

 

German WIKI has these top speeds for the MiG-3, Bf 109s and Focke-Wulfs...

 

MiG-3 1st Series (1949):  640 km/h at 7800 meters altitude

MiG-3 2nd Series (1941): 640 km/h at 7000 meters altitude

MiG-3 3rd Series/MiG-9M-82: 565 km/h at 6000 meters alt

 

Bf 109 E-3: 570 km/h at 5000 meters altitude

Bf 109 F-4: 670 km/h at 6300 meters altitude

Bf 109 G-6: 650 km/h at 6600 meters altitude

 

Focke-Wulf 190 A-3: 635 km/h at 6500 meters altitude (665 km/h with Emergency Boost)

Focke-Wulf 190 A-5: 628 km/h at 5750 meters altitude (655 km/h with Emergency Boost)

Edited February 20, 2018 by Wolfram-Harms

[Tag777]

Just now I've been reading Pokryshkin's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Pokryshkin) book and few things surprised me about his MiG-3 career at the beginning of the war:

- many recon flights at very low level (sometimes up to 50! meters to avoid AA and to be able to see details of enemy units positions / movements)  

- many ground attack missions with bombs or rockets (interestingly he prefered rockets - due to low level attacks)

- using rockets against planes

 

Generally he adviced to fight vertical (boom & zoom) with MiG-3 as she was very good diver - better than 109.

 

Interesting reading, looking forward to read about his Airacobra period.

For those of you that can read Spanish here is a link to a website that contains the complete book of Aleksandr Pokryshkin combat memories.

 

http://www.rkka.es/Otros_articulos/16_Pokryshkin/000.htm

[ShamrockOneFive]

I wasn't a fan of the MiG-3 in the original IL-2 but I think the low poly model that was never updated probably had at least a bit to do with it. Its quirky hot rod looks and handling have grown on me over time and I really don't care if its the best or just ok but I really enjoy my time flying it.

 

Need to fly the MiG-3 more!

 

Edited February 21, 2018 by ShamrockOneFive

[ST_ami7b5]

Nice pic!

[LLv44_Mprhead]

But he mentions an rocket attack against a group of M.C.202 planes after which several planes went down in flames...

Again, as I wrote it surprised me.

 

Also he wrote that improper (rough) handling of RSs (damaged stabilisers) by mechanics was the reason of their inaccuracy 

 

I wonder if this can be verified from other sources. I personally would take anything in (fighter)pilot memoirs with pinch of salt. Or actually not a pinch but large spoonful. Especially if they were soviet or japanese, since greating their own version of reality was more accepted there. Of course I am not saying that it did not happen but I would like to see some other verification.

[FTC_DerSheriff]

 

 

As you know, the Mig was designed as a high alt fighter but the reality is that it is only fast at altitude For A Russian Fighter and in fact the only German fighter it is faster than is the 109 E7

The F-2 is slower as well. But only in a very straight line. Dont climb^^

[Finkeren]

Especially if they were soviet or japanese, since greating their own version of reality was more accepted there.

Say what? On what basis are you making that claim?

 

I agree that we should always read memoirs with a healthy does of skepticism, but why single out Japanese and Soviet ones?