Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Fifi

Are you a LaGG pilot?

Recommended Posts

Anything but the ASh-82 / M-82 would be a very big surprise.

 

No F and no FN.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently it will be a Series 8 La-5. And yes, it has to be the ASh-82. What else?

Edited by =38=Tatarenko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone have info on the performance capabilities of the La-5 Series 8?  :salute: MJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently it will be a Series 8 La-5. And yes, it has to be the ASh-82. What else?

I guess we will have the Shvetsov ASh-82-111 engine or the Shvetsov ASh-82-112 engine.  :salute:  MJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeh I just figured that out as I was looking at the numbers which are way way faster than the Vanilla :lol:

 

Check before post next time


Some figures here not sure how accurate.

 

http://www.airpages.ru/eng/ru/la5.shtml


Khazanov's book says 582 @ 20,000 ft

Edited by JG5_Emil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone managed to go above 8000 meters in the Lagg-3 yet ?  what is the maximum ceiling for this plane ? Thanks for answer

Edited by Matagoro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it should be restricted and if you can keep flying with take-off power all the time (which is currently possible in the F-4), the G-2 will have no real advantage over the F-4.

 

I don't expect the La-5 or Yak-1 to be superior to either of the 109s. If you get altitude advantage, you should have a pretty good chance though.

 

If you fly the LaGG-3 with very low fuel load, it's actually not that bad. Not that it will help you, but it gives a good insight of what to expect from the Yak-1 atleast.

 

I would expect the G2 to be better over @6000m, than the F4, but ever so slightly worse below.

 

Yak 1 depending on the engine (not sure which one we're getting?) in outright speed at least to be fairly similar under 2000m, certainly 1500m, La5 similar to Yak, just a smidgen quicker, but performance drop off slightly higher than Yak, but with much worse rear vis than the Yak. Better loadout though.

 

No Russian fighter we are getting will be able to touch the 109 over 4-5000m in raw performance though.

 

Thats what i kinda expect anyway!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yak 1 depending on the engine (not sure which one we're getting?) 

 

 

When it comes to the Yak-1 Series 69, I think we are getting a Klimov M-105PF engine. :salute: MJ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda like the LaGG, it's moody and has big guns which doesn't fire very fast.. Will be very interesting to see how it can perform in multiplayer with a competent "seat of his pants" pilot. Or "seat of her skirt" to be politically correct if a woman should find her way to this fabulous community.

Edited by kimosabi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't wait for the Yak-1 !! :)

 

My favourite type , "clean" airframe , very nice power to weight , good ability to retain speed during sustained manoeuvres at low/medium speed  , good rollrate and ability to change direction quickly ,  very nice cockpit visibility ,   i'm so excited about the Yak series :) (and IL-2 and Focke Wulf too ! ) 

Edited by Matagoro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

 Emil, those are the TsAGI charts. NII VVS charts were a "bit different" ;) NII VVS got top speed of La-5 early series 508km/h with WEP, 520km/h for the La-5F and 546km/h for LA-5FN and 682km/h for La-7. All on WEP. Also interesting note is that WEP on the La-5 is limited to under 2km and it loses it's effectiveness above 2km as can be seen in the TsAGI chart as well. One thing to check is to see if the La-5 we get has the wing tanks left or not. This has quite an effect on the plane behaviour. Gordon-Khazanov book states that in over Stalingrad Yak's had to escort the La-5's due their inferior performance over Bf109F-4 and more so G-2. But still managed to get some kills.

 

Can't wait to test the new planes :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the three tank plane plane would be much better to have than the 5 tank.

 

When Kozhedub joined his unit the 5 tankers were given to the new boys who weren't expected to get kills.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone managed to go above 8000 meters in the Lagg-3 yet ?  what is the maximum ceiling for this plane ? Thanks for answer

 

I broke 10km a few weeks ago with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

La5 should have one of these early Shvecov radial engines:

 

ASh-82-111 (M-82-111)
First serial produced ASh-82, with carburator and single-stage two-speed centrifugal type turbocharger.Extreme cold weather caused problems with lubrication and turbocharger.

ASh-82-112 (M-82-112)
Improved variant of ASh-82-111 with longer resurs till repair and higher reliability.
Reconstructed carburators, oil pumps,transmissions, turbocharger.This engine worked much better uder conditions of russian harsh winter.

 

Btw these engines were based on M25 engine - license built Wright R-1820-F3 Cyclone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep at it and don't let yourself get discouraged. Its definitely not impossible to properly land the LaGG, just takes practice.

I am getting better, I find it helps to land with less fuel load and slooooooooow down to 180k also land with brakes on believe it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the three tank plane plane would be much better to have than the 5 tank.

 

When Kozhedub joined his unit the 5 tankers were given to the new boys who weren't expected to get kills.

 

I have a feeling that we will either get the three tank version as standard or as a modification for the La-5. If I have a choice, I will almost always use the three tank version.  :)

 

La5 should have one of these early Shvecov radial engines:

 

ASh-82-111 (M-82-111)

First serial produced ASh-82, with carburator and single-stage two-speed centrifugal type turbocharger.Extreme cold weather caused problems with lubrication and turbocharger.

 

ASh-82-112 (M-82-112)

Improved variant of ASh-82-111 with longer resurs till repair and higher reliability.

Reconstructed carburators, oil pumps,transmissions, turbocharger.This engine worked much better uder conditions of russian harsh winter.

 

Btw these engines were based on M25 engine - license built Wright R-1820-F3 Cyclone

 

Yes, I think it has to be one of those engines. I would want the Shvetsov ASh-82-112, for sure.  :happy:

 

 

:salute: MJ

Edited by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mind that those are carburator engines.There should be kind of cut-off when doing -G manouvers.Like spit had with early merlins.At least I would say.

Next in the line was ASh-82F or ''forsirovaniy'' which ment smtg like ''with improved output''.It was possible to fly almost endlessly with full take of power.But still carburator fed.

Only with ASh-82FN VVS will have whole muscle package with direct injection of fuel.Of course in La 5FN.

 

M105PF we have in LaGG3 s.29 was allready equipped with direct fuel injection.Previous M105P/PA were carburator fed. (PA was version with carburator w/o float)

Edited by Brano

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mind that those are carburator engines.

 

 

 Yep, bunting seems out of the question for our La-5.

 

 

 

M105PF we have in LaGG3 s.29 was allready equipped with direct fuel injection.Previous M105P/PA were carburator fed. (PA was version with carburator w/o float)

 

True, our LaGG-3 has a sweet engine, the same engine our Yak-1 Series 69 will have. This is one reason why I really love our LaGG-3, she has some muscle. A think our LaGG-3 is one heck of a fighter, just not when compared to the Friedrich or the Gustav. When the Axis plane set is filled out and we have a plane like the IAR 80 matched against our LaGG-3,  I bet the LaGG-3 will get a lot more respect from both sides of the sim battle. 

 

:salute: MJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda like the LaGG, it's moody and has big guns which doesn't fire very fast.. Will be very interesting to see how it can perform in multiplayer with a competent "seat of his pants" pilot. Or "seat of her skirt" to be politically correct if a woman should find her way to this fabulous community.

 

I fly only russian planes   :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fly only russian planes   :)

Is your nickname a tribute to Svetlana Kapanina? She is amazing. If you sim fly only Russian planes and you want to participate in multiplayer, you should consider joining the 69 Giap. We are always looking for VVS specialists.  :salute: MJ

Edited by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

good guess  :)

Was I right?  :happy: If so, Svetlana Kapanina is a real hero of mine. Either way, Svetlana is no doubt a great name for a pilot. Again, if you are ever in the market for a squad, check out the 69 Giap. Our female sim air ace, Valya, could probably use some female company. The 69 Giap welcomes everyone looking to sim fly VVS planes as part of a squad. Our squad is Transnational, so we have players from a variety of timezones.  :salute:  MJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fly only russian planes   :)

 

Somehow, russian planes are the only ones I never flew lol. Trying to understand them though but propeller is stuck in reverse!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reduce fuel to 50, makes a big difference.

This is the most enlightening post I have read. I was unable to dogfight in the Lagg, whereas the opposite was always a piece of cake. 

However, I tried your advise, reduced fuel quantity to 50% and I shot down 2 109s right away, rather easily.

I wonder only, if in reality the difference in handling with full or half-empty tanks was so impressive??

 

Thanks again :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max fuel load is given as 350kg in the free practice mission description.

Then we can consider that removing two M2 Brownings from an Airacobra was considered to give significant performance boost. A standard M2 .50 weighs 38kg, and 200 rounds in a belt should weigh around 30kg.

 

Removing two of them reduces your loaded weight by around 136kg. And reducing fuel by 50% will reduce your weight by 175kg. So, personally I think you could expect to notice a significant difference in sim combat.

 

I read about one Yak-1 unit that removed the Berezin and flew only with the 20mm. (You can find it in il2hsfx as Yak-1PF light)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I claimed my first victory in the LaGG. Fuel reduced to 80%, it was actually quite stable and manoeuvrable. After I managed to get an altitude advantage, it was pretty much a piece of cake. Would have bagged a second one, if I didn't run out of ammo. One thing that bothers me is that a damaged AI plane still tries to fight instead of running away. A common problem in all flight sims, you can shoot them full of holes and they will still try to get on you tail. Not that I mind it too much - it's and easy kill when they try so hard despite being full of holes. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that bothers me is that a damaged AI plane still tries to fight instead of running away. A common problem in all flight sims, you can shoot them full of holes and they will still try to get on you tail. 

 

Actually is see planes breaking fight when damaged in COD. Hope to see it as well in BOS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today I claimed my first victory in the LaGG. Fuel reduced to 80%, it was actually quite stable and manoeuvrable. After I managed to get an altitude advantage, it was pretty much a piece of cake. Would have bagged a second one, if I didn't run out of ammo. One thing that bothers me is that a damaged AI plane still tries to fight instead of running away. A common problem in all flight sims, you can shoot them full of holes and they will still try to get on you tail. Not that I mind it too much - it's and easy kill when they try so hard despite being full of holes. :rolleyes:

 

Heck I have had them practically on fine, smoke billowing out of their plane, follow me to my landing airport as I am out of ammo, and nail me before I make it to the runway. Rude!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is actually on the confirmed features list to have them break engagement and head home when damaged. I think we'll have to wait for the final release though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and while at it, i'd like to see AIs flying smoother than actually when we are behind. Meaning i think they are so afraid of us behind, they shake their stick quite violently and plane is woobling up/down in unrealistic way.

They could roll or make evasing manoeuvres a smoother and nicer way imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the LaGG is a great all rounder, good at ground attack and capable as a fighter in the right hands. I would imagine it will excel at bomber busting as well with that armament, we might even find a decent use for the rockets against bombers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mind that those are carburator engines.There should be kind of cut-off when doing -G manouvers.Like spit had with early merlins.At least I would say.

They shouldn't cut out, as they had floatless carburettors, like most of the WW2 aircraft engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only found info about Klimov M105.P version had float carburettor (like early Merlins),with PA version they switched to membrane carb. (there should be 6 of them,I suppose 1 per 2 cylinders) With this setup plane could fly for ~5min. up-side-down.

I can not get any info about Shvecov ASh82 111-112.Only that is built on M25 and that one was fit with float type carburettor (like Merlins till 1943)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll probably fly all the aircraft in BoS because I like the variety, but I do primarily fly fighters in MP. With there being so many long established German squads and so few Russian ones, I'll probably fly Russian mostly because they will be the team in need of pilots most of the time (is my guess). I usually try to fly on the team with inferior numbers and/or aircraft, it's more challenging.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...