Tips for flying and fighting in Soviet planes

[AndyJWest]

DELETED SNIPPY LITTLE ZINGER.

 

P.S. regarding Harriman, note that it was a German industrialist (Fritz Thyssen)  moving his capital to the US that was the relevant issue. No evidence that "factories in Nazi Germany were... owned by Americans and the British". On the contrary, the ones in question were owned by a German who wished to get his loot out: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

Edited March 18, 2013 by FlatSpinMan

[FlatSpinMan]

Well, I'm glad we all got that little hiccup out of our systems. If anyone objects, I'm more than happy to just delete all the OT stuff. I have left it for now though as it may interest some.

 

 

So, what's this thread about anyway? "Tips for flying and fighting in Soviet planes", ye' say? What on earth could that possibly mean? Why must thread titles be so vague and non-descriptive? 

Am I to assume that this is in fact, NOT for discussion of WW2 industrialism and the benefits/ills that it accrues? 

[Bearcat]

OK gents.. Misha and AJW take it to another thread.. If you want to discuss the historical nature of big business in war as it pertained to the German war machine of the late 1930s  do so in another thread in the free subject forum but keep it civil ....  for the record Misha is partly correct in his initial hypothesis.. British and American business had a huge stake in Germany at the time and played a key role in Hitler's rise to power.

 

See [url=http://www.amazon.com/Trading-With-Enemy-Nazi-American-1933-1949/dp/0440090644]Trading With the Enemy: An Expos???

[JG13_opcode]

I fancy myself a pretty decent Yak pilot.

 

Back in the day, Spits v 109s used to run a couple of Eastern Front scenarios that I always loved.  In the later years there was a fun one with the Germans sandwiched between the USAAF on the West and the VVS on the East, pretty interesting, though usually I was the sole VVS pilot.

 

Flying VVS is actually a very different experience than flying USAAF or RAF.  Typically you would fear the Fw 190 guys, with their Mk-108's and their extreme agility at high speed.  Especially on Warclouds, Bf 109's would be a comparatively rare sight, even more so if there was a Dora in the plane set.

 

By contrast, when you fly VVS you really don't have to fear the 190's very much at all.  They can't climb worth a damn, and if you catch him anywhere below you his only recourse is to dive away because contemporary Yakovlev fighters typically hold a climb and maneuverability advantage at medium and low speeds.  Assuming comparable skill levels, if he tries to fight you without a substantial energy advantage he's going to have a bad time.  Really:  The Fw 190 is not such a formidable opponent unless you are at super high altitude or at a huge energy disadvantage.

 

The 109, on the other hand, is a real handful for our comrades in their Yaks.  The fascist will out-climb and out-dive you in just about any scenario, and attempting to turn-fight a 109 at low/medium speed is just asking to be made into a martyr for the Glorious Motherland!

 

So here are some tips I've gleaned from my time on the Eastern Front fighting against the fascist invader.

 

(Note that I'm always assuming you have numerical parity, whether that's 1v1 or 2v2 or whatever.  All bets are off if one side is outnumbered.  2x 190's doing a BnZ on you will get you eventually unless you are the Harlem Globetrotters of IL-2.)

 

Against 109s:  

 

-Don't fire you guns at the same time as your cannons.  This is especially true in the Yak-1b (as we've taken to calling it) and the -9, as they only have 1x UBS machine gun and 1x ShVAK.  Even that single UBS machine gun packs a lot of punch, and you can get engine or pilot kills from surprising distances if you aim well.  The ShVAK will readily saw a 190 in half; you don't need the added firepower from the UBS.

 

-Be a surgeon.  Wield your weapons like a scalpel.  Use the fact that it's nose-mounted to your advantage for making long-distance shots without convergence problems.  Practice practice practice your deflection and long-range shooting.  Never stop practising.  If you find yourself with 2x ShKAS then you'll find the amount of ammo borders on luxurious.

 

-Keep your altitude when you can.  His climb-rate advantage means you should treat altitude as a precious commodity, not to be frittered away unless you can be sure you will profit.

 

-You have really good acceleration, so keep the speed up.  First of all, his leading-edge slats give him a huge advantage at low speeds, and the Yak has a nasty tendency to snap-roll at low speed and high AoA (or at least it did in 1946).  Secondly, that infamous heavy elevator works against him at high speeds, and the ailerons don't work so great at speed either.  You can out-turn the 109 at high speed, and at high speed only.

 

Example:

 

You spot a single 109 closing behind you at roughly the same altitude, perhaps a little higher.  What should you do?

 

Well, I think you've probably got 2 options:

 

1)  If he's not closing very fast, enter a shallow dive, preferably towards friendly aircraft or AA.  Once you get the speed up, you'll be able to change directions much more easily than he can.  This will sometimes put you into a sort of very wide, very fast flat scissors.  Either way, you will be able to compete with him in turns at high speed, and the longer he follows you the closer you get to equal energy states.

 

2)  If he's coming in real fast, he won't be able to maneuver very well at all, so sometimes a small juke will be enough to spoil his shot.  Typically the 109 will go for altitude at this point since you won't be able to zoom after him.  That's fine.  When he comes back down, you can enter a corkscrewing dive or perhaps a series of Split-S's keeping the speed in the 500 km/h area.  At this speed his elevator turns into a brick and he will not be able to follow your maneuver.  At some point he will be in a high-speed dive and his canopy will be pointing away from you:  this is the best time to level out and run as fast as you can.  It will take him a long time to get out of that dive and re-acquire you visually, so use it to gain separation.  Use clouds if you can.

Edited March 19, 2013 by JG13Doggles

[6S.Manu]

If an experienced German crew shows up and flies with discipline and teamwork, it's going to be very difficult.

 

I like the Yak-9. It's a great balance of speed, maneuverabiltiy and most important - roll rate.

 

1. Don't buy into the "stay low" nonesense. Fly fast and fly high as you can. Even in Soviet fighters energy tactics will serve you well. Resort to TnB only in emergency.

2. Learn your best sustained climb speed and angle, learn how to use that to your advantage.

3. Learn how to push your aircraft to the very edge in a dive. Understand how fast you can dive before parts start to fly off. How fast can you dive and still fire your weapons?

4. Use teamwork when attacking. Attack in pairs if you can. Even better? Have top cover during your attack.

5. Conserve ammo as if it is precious, fire at close range and when you are sure of making hits.

6. Use the proper bait. Send Il2 and Laggs to attack bombers, transports and ground forces. Force the enemy to defend and attack fighters trying to defend.

7. Try to have fun, it's only a game.

+ 100

 

Above all the first point . The 5th point should be at the 2nd position: you can have the worst plane, but if you can ambush the enemy then you need to damage him badly at your first attack... or he will use his better plane against you.

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

+ 100

 

Above all the first point . The 5th point should be at the 2nd position: you can have the worst plane, but if you can ambush the enemy then you need to damage him badly at your first attack... or he will use his better plane against you.

 

Here is where we see the difference between having an MG armed fighter and a cannon armed fighter. That "going in for that one shot kill" type of thing will be much more comfortable if you are flying an IL2 or an I16 type 24.

[II./JG27_Rich]

Ok, most VVS fighter aircraft will need to be flown much like a P40 or P39, with the exception that in the Russian birds you will have to be much more careful about your dive speeds.

 

Also your Luftwaffe opposition will seriously out perform you in the climb and above 15,000ft. (4500 meters), and generally be faster at any altitude in this early part of the war.

 

The best you can hope for is to find a n00b and sucker him into a low altitude turn fight.  Of course there are so many very experienced sim pilots these days, so good luck with that.  We will have an advantage that the VVS at the time did not, lots of experience on our side as well.  And we all will have good "radios" (Teamspeak, etc...).  So team tactics will be very very important to those of us flying the lower performance Russian aircraft.  Because of this I expect "German" losses to be higher in the sim then they were in real life, as no one is just going to fly along in a Vic when they are attacked like so many novice VVS pilots did early on.

 

It's going to be very difficult for us VVS pilots, be sure.  The Germans will pretty much always outnumber us, as most online pilots play for the points and will pick the best machine, regardless of the national insignia on the side.  The Bf 109s will hold all the advantages that their superior speed and climb give them.  They will be able to disengage at will and simply fly away when really pressed.  So we will have to fly smart, fly to the strength of our aircraft, that is, our good maneuverability, and use strong team tactics.

 

Also we should have an advantage in that much of the ground we will be fighting over will be "ours".  So try to keep Jerry over our anti aircraft guns if possible.

 

Oh and make Stukas your prime target, they should be a much easier kill.

 

I realize this may sound bleak for us, and it is, but that is the historical fact of it.  We will need to hold out till some of the Lend Lease aircraft show up, and some of the better birds from the Glorious Motherland begin to arrive. 

 

Za Rodinu!!!

Ah don't worry. You'll always be able to shoot the stupid ones down....Who can't see worth beens because they're too cheap to buy some new glasses.

[=69.GIAP=MALYSH]

hehehe.

 

We've certainly got a tough fight up ahead, but both the yak and the La5 are competitive enough to handle most situations, if flown well. JtD made some good points. Firstly, if we're flying realistic scenarios (i.e. not just a dogfight arena) then the height and place of the action is mandated by our glorious Red Army or our poor, wretched mud-moving il2 friends and their penal-battalion gunners.

Within that context, fly high and fly fast.

 

If a 109 meets a yak or La5 at around 3k, the match is quite even, all else being equal. If one side has height then that side will have the initial advantage. Energy, to climb or run or turn, is king. That's always been true. Second only to a fistful of friends.

On the other hand, a speeding, diving 109 isn't that hard to evade. If he wants to keep his E, let him and go home. Come back with some friends. Force him down to the deck at similar speeds if he wants to stay engaged, then bring it into the phone booth. Tempt him with your six as you dive, then sucker him into 'second turn fever' with a shallow turn that can quickly be sharpened and reversed. Plenty of options. 

 

disadvantages of VVS fighters: no automatic control. To go from a cruise to max power, the VVS pilot needs to move four levers (mix, pitch, power, rads) where the Luftwaffe pilot needs to move only one.

 

Advantages: versatility. Our il2's can take care of themselves if flown well (crap T/W but instantaneous turn FTW), better than those stukas can. Our migs can cover upstairs while the rest cover mid and low.

 

above all, don't take advice (even well-meaning) to heart  especially mine. Air combat is not a dichotomy of what's right and wrong, different situations need a variety of responses. If the mission needs you high, go high. If the mission needs you low, go low. A good pilot can evade a BnZ enemy just as well as he can disengage from a turning enemy.

 

I, for one, and very much looking forward to the yak. Wouldn't be any fun if it was easy

(if flying the LaGG, disregard the above and just bail out)

[Furio]

Here is where we see the difference between having an MG armed fighter and a cannon armed fighter. That "going in for that one shot kill" type of thing will be much more comfortable if you are flying an IL2 or an I16 type 24.

 

 

Just a couple of thoughts. First: perhaps it???

[Furio]

Oh, well, I must apologize with FlatSpinMan. My previous post was completely off-topic, and this is a little off... But it can be useful to adopt a little broader perspective. Here we are talking of a flight sim, a playful activity with a little competition between pilots. To win while flying with inferior types (as were early war Soviet types) should be particularly satisfying, but is nonetheless understandable that many will prefer easier kills with German side. However, we should not consider technical superiority alone, but historical tactical situation. For example: the Mig3 was designed for high altitude combat, and fared particularly bad because was invariably used at low altitudes. This was not a tactical mistake, but a consequence of the real situation on Eastern front, for which the Mig3 was simply unsuited.

 

On the contrary, an obsolete type as the I153 proved effective in the ground attack role. At low level, the Chaika have little chance to shot down enemy fighters, but is really tough to be shot down, thanks to its agility. While it evade attacks from the air, it???

[FlatSpinMan]

Nope, all good.

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

Second: Bf109 has the advantage in speed, so it can disengage at will???

[sturmkraehe]

I think we should shift a little our focus from simple air to air, fighter versus fighter tactics, toward missions with a meaningful target and goal.

 

@ FlatSpinMan: if you think I???

[FTC_Karaya]

Are there any Mig-3 specialists on this thread? I am thinking about taking the Mig-3 to extremely high altitudes and using it as a high speed diving ambush machine. How difficut are extension maneuvers? It is my understanding that the Mig- 3 is not exceptionally fast  at low altitudes, but very fast when way up high. What do the Mig-3 buffs have to say about using the Mig-3? Do any of the Mig-3 specialists use it as a high altitude diving ambush machine? How do the Mig-3 specialists find using the Mig-3 in this manner?

 

 

LOL, so your basic RoF routine transferred to BoS? Have fun being eaten up by Gustavs as the G-1 to -4 are all faster, better climbing and better turning than any of the serial produced MiGs.

 

As for the original thread: The IL-2 will have a hard time defending itself as they are usually flying nap-of-the-earth and thus have no room to maneuver plus their vertical maneuvrability is severly lacking to say the least. I remember an IL-2 online war mission where a score of red pilots took on IL-2s that my squad intercepted flying Bf109E-4s. Needless to say they were slaughtered as we just dove on them, fired a burst, climbed back up (rinse, repeat). They just were sitting ducks even facing the venerable Emil...

[FTC_Karaya]

By contrast, when you fly VVS you really don't have to fear the 190's very much at all.  They can't climb worth a damn, and if you catch him anywhere below you his only recourse is to dive away because contemporary Yakovlev fighters typically hold a climb and maneuverability advantage at medium and low speeds.  Assuming comparable skill levels, if he tries to fight you without a substantial energy advantage he's going to have a bad time.  Really:  The Fw 190 is not such a formidable opponent unless you are at super high altitude or at a huge energy disadvantage.

 

I think I will have to disagree with your assessment of the 190 vs VVS planes. Any FW pilot who is competent and confident enough to fight it out with Spitfires is not going to be troubled by Yaks, LaGGs and Las. The contemporary Spitfires are usually every bit as good as the "bread-and-butter" Yaks and then some. Compare a 1942 Mk.V Spitfire @ 16lbs boost vs an early 1943 vanilla Yak-9 (the best performing variant actually) and you'll see that the former is better in about every single way, and we are not even talking Mk.IX yet...

 

The only fighters that might fight the A model 190s on even terms are the late FN model La-5s & 7s and the Yak-3, simply because their speed at low level puts them on par with the FW.

Edited March 28, 2013 by JG52Karaya

[FTC_Karaya]

Btw, here's a very interesting page covering the MiG-3

 

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/mig3/mig3.html#development

 

 

Aircrafts built during the spring were 30 km/h slower than the initial production aircrafts, this partly due to hurry in production leading to rough surfaces, partly to the presence of underwing gun pods, introduced in February.
Many defects were noted during operative use, alongside the already known weak armament, tendency to spin, longitudinal instability and high landing speed:

• sliding canopy difficult to open at speeds over 400 km/h, and this led pilots to usually fly with the canopy open, that reduced the speed by 30 km/h;
• landing gear often failing to extend, and easy to be damaged during landing;
• difficulty to repair damages to the carburettor duct after a belly landing; this could stop to the ground the aircraft for a long time for repair;
• difficulty to repair internal structures of the rear fuselage, because the stabilizator was solidal to them and limited their accessibility;
• unsatisfactory view, particularly during takeoff and landing, due to the long nose and strongly nose-up asset on the ground;
• some splashing of oil on the windscreen reduced the visibility;
• high cockpit temperature, due to the ventral cooler;
• fumes and, eventually fuel vapors in the cockpit;
• lack of a fuel flow indicator;
• low range, particularly with canopy opened, that reduced its utility as a reconaissance plane;
• the unsatisfactory engine acceleration that caused accidents;
• the fall of oil pressure while diving with a negative g load.

The MiG-3 was conceived as an high altitude fighter, but its fuel pump was not suited for it, starving the engine even at 5,000 m altitude.
An attempted interception of an high-altitude German reconaissance plane was made by three MiGs of 31th IAP, based at the Kaunas airport in Lithuania, on April 10, 1941, before the official beginning of the war. It was a failure, because all three interceptors entered into spin during the combat and were lost, killing one pilot.
Pilot engineer A.Kochetkov went to Kaunas to investigate; he found that the pilot's training was insufficient, particularly for high altitude operations, so he organized some tests, and discovered that, if well piloted, the aircraft was able to make combat turns without spinning up to an altitude of 10,500 m.
He recomanded retrofitting an automatic mixture control on the carburetor, modifying the oil and fuel pumps to avoid loss of pressure at high altitude, and to install reliable oxygen equipment.
These recomandations were soon implemented, and pilots of 4th IAP and 55th IAP, based near the Romanian border, shot down three hostile aircrafts.
Pilots of this unit were helped in training by test pilots.
At the beginning, these units had both old fighters (I-153s, I-16s) and MiG-3s. None wanted to fly the MiG, until the test pilot P. Stefanovsky made some demonstrations of flight that changed the mind of the pilots, who then started to train to the new machine.

Edited March 28, 2013 by JG52Karaya

[sturmkraehe]

The La7 was the uber plane of the whole IL2 series followed by the La5FN. That's how it felt when flying it against blue or being in a blue plane oneself The only west allied plane that came close imho in terms of overall performance was the tempest. When being in a tempest I feared no plane and only was careful when a dora was around.

[FTC_Karaya]

That is because in the old IL-2 series all La-5s & 7s were about 20kmh too fast at all altitudes or at the very least at altitude.

 

To me the best western allied fighter was the Mustang Mk.III simply because it left pretty much any other fighter standing and still had appreciable handling qualities. I never liked the Tempest much as it was just too nervous for my taste..

Edited March 28, 2013 by JG52Karaya

[JG13_opcode]

I think I will have to disagree with your assessment of the 190 vs VVS planes. Any FW pilot who is competent and confident enough to fight it out with Spitfires is not going to be troubled by Yaks, LaGGs and Las. The contemporary Spitfires are usually every bit as good as the "bread-and-butter" Yaks and then some. Compare a 1942 Mk.V Spitfire @ 16lbs boost vs an early 1943 vanilla Yak-9 (the best performing variant actually) and you'll see that the former is better in about every single way, and we are not even talking Mk.IX yet...

 

The only fighters that might fight the A model 190s on even terms are the late FN model La-5s & 7s and the Yak-3, simply because their speed at low level puts them on par with the FW.

 

I'm just relaying my experiences.  I never found it troublesome to shoot down the 190A's that I encountered unless they started with initial energy advantage.  By contrast a 109G at co-E is very very dangerous.

[BlitzPig_EL]

That has always been my thoughts too Doggles.

 

I've always found the 109, especially the G2, to be the most dangerous aircraft to face.

 

Unlike the 190, it's much more than a "one trick" pony.

Edited March 29, 2013 by ElAurens

[CUJO_1970]

A lot of what I'm reading seems to be based on the IL-2 flight models - that may not apply when BoS ships.

 

Compare the I-16 flight model in IL-2 with what we've learned about the real I-16 in the Friday updates. Was that flight model accurate in stall characteristics and ground handling? What about other areas compared to what we now know about the real ones flying today?

 

The initial release of BoS will be the closest TnB "horizontal" fighting planeset of the entire series. With a successful progression of the series, the planeset will naturally give way to the energy fighters. They are going to be faster, have a higher wingloading and be more heavily armed.

 

Better learn to fly in the vertical now or put your scarf and goggles on and shake your fist at the "cowardly" energy fighters as they stalk you from above.

[CUJO_1970]

The contemporary Spitfires are usually every bit as good as the "bread-and-butter" Yaks and then some. Compare a 1942 Mk.V Spitfire @ 16lbs boost vs an early 1943 vanilla Yak-9 (the best performing variant actually) and you'll see that the former is better in about every single way, and we are not even talking Mk.IX yet...

 

I'm not sure if an official planeset has been announced yet (?) but the Yak-9 should compete quite well with a contemporary Spitfire at low-medium altitudes(the Spit would hold quite an advantage at high-alt).

 

When the fine Yak-3 is introduced, the Spit driver is glad they are on the same team tbh.

 

With that being said, I would love to see some Lend-Lease Spitfires and Hurricanes in the planeset.

[JtD]

Interestingly, the Soviets historically thought pretty much the same.

 

I'm just relaying my experiences.  I never found it troublesome to shoot down the 190A's that I encountered unless they started with initial energy advantage.  By contrast a 109G at co-E is very very dangerous.

[303_Kwiatek]

That has always been my thoughts too Doggles.

 

I've always found the 109, especially the G2, to be the most dangerous aircraft to face.

 

Unlike the 190, it's much more than a "one trick" pony.

Beacuse your experience is based on wrong modeled Fw 190 in Il2. When i made some FM changes for Ultr@pack  into craped Fw 190 series these planes start to shine. 1C in orignal version (intentional or not)  just cut prop pitch charactersitic of Fw 190 A  ( Fw 190 D-9 was not affected these) so when i unblocked it ( fixed it) Fw 190 start to be real bucherd bird (better acceleration, better zoom climb). I remember that with new Fw 190 expecially A-3 version and A-4 at full 1.42 Ata i could sucesfully fight with Spitfire MKV, Spitfire MKIX even with overmodeled La5 familiy ( which was never corrected).  Pair of  such well flown Fw 190 could do the job.

[Furio]

I think talking of performance is a little misleading, and yet more misleading is making comparisons among planes designed for different environments. The RAF tried the P39 on western front with 601 Squadron. The ???

Edited March 29, 2013 by Furio

[JtD]

Guess the Russians in 1943 were also facing wrong flight models.

Because your experience is based on wrong modeled Fw 190 in Il2.

 

Furio, the differences in perception of the P-39 by the RAF and VVS not only had tactical reasons, but also technical and that includes performance. One thing is that the 1942 Spitfire was a harder standard to meet than say the 1942 Yak-1, and also did the Soviets receive later, much improved models. The tactical situation certainly was important, but not everything. The P-400 as delivered to the British wouldn't have been popular on the 1943 eastern front.

 

But I guess we're digressing.

Edited March 29, 2013 by JtD

[MiloMorai]

Btw, here's a very interesting page covering the MiG-3

 

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/mig3/mig3.html#development

 

Much of that list could be applied to many other airplanes.

 

quote: unsatisfactory view, particularly during takeoff and landing, due to the long nose and strongly nose-up asset on the ground

 

What tail dragger airplane had a good view over the nose.

[sturmkraehe]

Beacuse your experience is based on wrong modeled Fw 190 in Il2. When i made some FM changes for Ultr@pack  into craped Fw 190 series these planes start to shine. 1C in orignal version (intentional or not)  just cut prop pitch charactersitic of Fw 190 A  ( Fw 190 D-9 was not affected these) so when i unblocked it ( fixed it) Fw 190 start to be real bucherd bird (better acceleration, better zoom climb). I remember that with new Fw 190 expecially A-3 version and A-4 at full 1.42 Ata i could sucesfully fight with Spitfire MKV, Spitfire MKIX even with overmodeled La5 familiy ( which was never corrected).  Pair of  such well flown Fw 190 could do the job.

Interesting. Because I always thought the lack of acceleration of the FW190 its major weak point in the old IL2 series. It only was manoeuverable when diving steep down with a significant altitude advantage and then zooming up again carefully but this could not be repeated a lot because the kite lost too much energy during the climb and the acceleration from the engine was too low. Speed once lost could basically only regained through steep diving. Even the Corsair had better acceleration and I never had difficulties with the nimble Japanese planes when in a Corsair when applying some basic prudence.

[FlatSpinMan]

All interesting but probably more suited to a different thread, methinks.

[sturmkraehe]

I think the performance of the planes opposing the soviet planes are quite suitable methinks. Tactics for soviet planes are based on the capabilities of the soviet and blue planes alike. Also it is important to know how the modelling of old IL2 affects the tactics employed as we do not know how this will be for BoS.

[Furio]

Furio, the differences in perception of the P-39 by the RAF and VVS not only had tactical reasons, but also technical and that includes performance. One thing is that the 1942 Spitfire was a harder standard to meet than say the 1942 Yak-1, and also did the Soviets receive later, much improved models. The tactical situation certainly was important, but not everything. The P-400 as delivered to the British wouldn't have been popular on the 1943 eastern front.

 

But I guess we're digressing.

 

According to the sources I???

[sturmkraehe]

That quote is a probably exagerating the thing however. But I agree to what you say basically from what I know. The soviet fighters were probably better turners than the blue planes. 

[Furio]

That quote is a probably exagerating the thing however. But I agree to what you say basically from what I know. The soviet fighters were probably better turners than the blue planes. 

 

 

It could also contain some pepper talk and propaganda, but also more than a grain of truth.

What is certain is that different fighters lose energy at different rates, and this difference doesn???

[FTC_Karaya]

I'm not sure if an official planeset has been announced yet (?) but the Yak-9 should compete quite well with a contemporary Spitfire at low-medium altitudes(the Spit would hold quite an advantage at high-alt).

 

When the fine Yak-3 is introduced, the Spit driver is glad they are on the same team tbh.

 

With that being said, I would love to see some Lend-Lease Spitfires and Hurricanes in the planeset.

 

There is little to choose between a 1942 Mk.Vb and the 1943 vanilla Yak-9 speed wise but the Spitfire has the advantage in climbrate, turning performance and firepower. As said the Yaks never were too impressive (imho) up until the Yak-3 which improved quite a bit in terms of speed while turning performance only improved marginally - same wing loading as a fully loaded Yak-9D but better power loading - the initial Yak-9 probably was a better turner...

[JG13_opcode]

A lot of what I'm reading seems to be based on the IL-2 flight models - that may not apply when BoS ships.

I think that goes without saying. But I'm not sure anyone here is qualified to give specific advice on flying and fighting in a real Soviet fighter, beyond general tips like "maintain energy" or "bring a wingman".

 

Better learn to fly in the vertical now or put your scarf and goggles on and shake your fist at the "cowardly" energy fighters as they stalk you from above.

Yep. This plays into what I was saying. The 190A (as modeled in 1946) isn't great as far as energy fighters go. The Yak can defeat it in this arena if flown well, and can easily defeat it in an angles fight even if not flown super well.

 

Meanwhile the 109G is an excellent energy fighter for its time (probably better than the Yak-9), turns better at low speed, etc.

 

Yak-9 vs 109 G is, IMHO, quite akin to SpitII vs 109 E: aircraft performances are similar to within a small percentage of each other, and so it largely comes down to pilot skill or initial positional advantage.

Edited March 29, 2013 by JG13Doggles

[Furio]

Some of us are RL pilots, but I doubt there are many people with hand-on experience with propeller driven fighters of WWII era. The most powerful plane I???

[JG13_opcode]

I think talking of performance is a little misleading, and yet more misleading is making comparisons among planes designed for different environments. The RAF tried the P39 on western front with 601 Squadron. The ???

[FTC_Karaya]

Much of the popularity of the P-39 with the Soviet pilots probably has to do with its very generous equipment including

Radios which were a rarity early war with the VVS and even later on their own radios were not up to western standards, often times only the leader of a formation had a receiver/transmitter set while his wingmen had a receiver only sets

 

Proper gunsights which often times were quite rudimentary on soviet fighters early in the war. German pilots commented that early war you just had no reason to fear a soviet fighter on your six as they just could not aim their guns properly

 

Armoured glass that would not distort, age and yellow after a short time

 

Armament that was very hard hitting at the time (4x.303s + 2x.50s + 1x37mm) although it is said that in the field often times the LMGs were removed to safe weight and increase performance

[JG13_opcode]

I think we have to be careful how much we read into German pilot accounts, just like any pilot account.

 

1) Most of those LW pilots have no idea what the inside of a Soviet fighter was like

2) Many of the Soviet pilots were being put into frontline squadrons with almost no training at all

 

I know the legend of "gunsight painted onto the windscreen with wax crayon" is popular but I've never seen evidence that it was widespread. Bad Soviet gunnery can easily be explained by awful Soviet pilot training, given the extremely desperate situation the VVS found itself in during Barbarossa.

[AndyJWest]

 German pilots commented that early war you just had no reason to fear a soviet fighter on your six as they just could not aim their guns properly

 

That would be 'German pilots that hadn't been shot down by a Soviet fighter on their six'. Room for a sampling error here...