Yak-9 First Impressions?

[Eisenfaustus]

I didn't mean that the a/c skin deflects the projectile - you are right it wouldn't. Look at what happens when a bullet hits a body. It doesn't pass through in a straight path. 

 

Yes an a/c isn't filled with flesh and blood - nevertheless the projectile after entering the a/c through the tail still has to travel ca 5m before hitting the pilot. That's a rather long way for tumbling and deviation to take effect. 

 

Of course it is likely that a single hit from dead six results in a pilot kill. But it's far from being a naccessary outcome. 

 

After penetrating a tank once everything's fine - not enough energy to leave the tank again so that the bullet and armour splinters can cause destruction. 

 

Planes and cars are different though.

[FTC_Kongoo]

2 hours ago, CountZero said:

Dont plan to get it so i just look at numbers from ai folder:

 

Yak-9:

   ////// MaxAltTAS = <float ALTITUDE>, <float TAS> // Водорадиатор по потоку (1/2), маслорадиатор открыт на 2/3, RPM = 2700, заправка 70%, БК полный
    MaxAltTAS =  0,529
    MaxAltTAS =  1000,552
    MaxAltTAS =  1700,563
    MaxAltTAS =  2000,562
    MaxAltTAS =  3000,574
    MaxAltTAS =  3800,594
    MaxAltTAS =  4000,594
    MaxAltTAS =  5000,590
    MaxAltTAS =  6000,583
    MaxAltTAS =  7000,574
    MaxAltTAS =  8000,561
    MaxAltTAS =  9000,544
    MaxAltTAS = 10000,513

 

And numbers for Yak-1B with 100% fuel:

    ////// MaxAltTAS = <float ALTITUDE>, <float TAS> // Створки по потоку, 100% топлива, RPM = 2700
    MaxAltTAS = 0,526
    MaxAltTAS = 1000,548
    MaxAltTAS = 2000,567
    MaxAltTAS = 3000,573
    MaxAltTAS = 4000,599
    MaxAltTAS = 5000,598
    MaxAltTAS = 6000,594
    MaxAltTAS = 7000,587
    MaxAltTAS = 8000,577

 

And on Yak-1b closing water rad to 0 gives you more speed (was going up to ~540 on deck last time i checked), on Yak-9 thats all what you can get as 50% is best you close it more you lose speed, same rad like on 7b, you can close oil from 33% and get 1-2kmh at best.

 

So for speed i would not get it, it can last more in dive and climb at low alts and thats it from what i see not mutch to make me buy it when i have Yak-1B, i got Yak-9T on the other hand as its big upgrade compared to lagg23 in 1943-44 maps on wol.

 

Regarding early 109s they can match his low alt speed even at combat powers and mid high leve it miles away, nothing new Yak-1B could not do same, but that boost in dive max speed is maybe worth it as they cant easy run away like that.

 

After reading your first post, I also thought the YAK 9 s1 would be faster at altitude (4k) and slower on the deck in comparison with the Yak 1b. . The source is from Stepanets "Yakovlev GPW fighters".

To me it seems the yak 9 in game follows the top speeds of the Yak 9D but not sure. I´ll see if I can find anything online.

[E69_geramos109]

1 hour ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

@E69_geramos109 max throttle, 2550 RPM, 50% water rad , 15% oil rad , 80% mixture. With that it gets 537 kmh.

Is nice speed against 109Gs. A G6 will never scape and for G4s will be very difficult

[216th_Jordan]

2 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

In my opinion, a 37mm AP shell, hitting a fighter from dead six, should be a 90% kill, either by pilot kill, or catastrophic damage in the rear fuselage,....or both.

 

Have you ever stood beside a WWII plane? Its huge compared to 3.7cm. Certainly don't see a 90% chance, no offense intended.

[Jaws2002]

109 and 190's were not that big. They are heavy for their size, but not big. The seat armor on this couldn't stop the 12.7mm AP ammo. The 37mm could penetrate tanks. There's nothing in a ww2 fighter, behind the pilot, that could stop the AP shells this gun could shoot. Sure a lot of stuff could deflect it, but not without taking catastrophic damage. 

[LukeFF]

41 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

109 and 190's were not that big. They are heavy for their size, but not big. The seat armor on this couldn't stop the 12.7mm AP ammo.

 

But yet, I just posted an account from a 190 D-9 pilot who landed his plane with 2 .50 cal bullet holes in the back of his seat. So, no, the seat armor on at least the 190s could stop a 12.7 mm bullet, based on the range and angle. 

[Jaws2002]

There are a lot of variables in shooting. The Russian considered the back seat armor of the 190 a joke. In their tests it only stopped 7.62mm ammo, not their 12.7mm. But it depends on the range, angle and what else the bullet had to go through.

But...

The Russian 12.7x108mm shoots a 48g AP bullet at around 820m/s for an average energy at the muzzle of  around     16335 Joules 

The 37x198mm cartridge, used in the NS-37, shoots a 760g AP round at 880m/s, with a muzzle energy of  around 294272 Joules!

 

 

The 37mm AP shot from the NS-37 is an entirely different animal.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Jaws2002

[Bilbo_Baggins]

How does the HE explosive effect of the 37mm compare to the MK108 30mm?

[SAS_Storebror]

7 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

That 37mm AP shell has a lot of mass and momentum and would tear the tail off the plane, if some of it's structure managed to deflect it. A tumbling, nearly two pounds shell, 200mm long would tear everything in it's path.

 

In my opinion, a 37mm AP shell, hitting a fighter from dead six, should be a 90% kill, either by pilot kill, or catastrophic damage in the rear fuselage,....or both.

 

This.

 

It's exactly what I thought when I read the excuse of straight-six shot deflection for the very first time.

Yes, maybe your two pound AP round is not running straight anymore, but from the receiver's perspective this doesn't make things any better.

You'd get a tumbling thing with a kinetic energy of almost 300kJ running through your tail.

That would be something the same plane could probably not witness twice.

 

Mike

Edited May 21, 2020 by SAS_Storebror

[SR-F_Winger]

Yes i vote for one shot kills too. 

Sorry but thats nonsense!
No single hit should ever just because it hits anywhere be a kill.
It could or could not do catastrophic damage. Demanding a flatrate kill with 90% if hit if just ridiculous. No matter the gun or plane the shot has been fired from. Maybe read what you write before you send. Thats just a riddiculous warthunder style demand.

[SAS_Storebror]

1 hour ago, Winger said:

Maybe read what you write before you send.

 

Maybe watch your words a bit.

 

Nobody said that every single 37mm hit would automatically be a straight kill.

For instance, a 37mm AP round travelling through a wing at 90° angle, without hitting any spars or other critical structures, will surely you punch two nice holes and that's it.

Same if you hit the fuselage at 90° deflection and don't hit any critical components: Two holes, nothing much to suffer from.

 

However, when you throw two pounds at Mach 2.something with a kinetic energy of almost 300kJ at "something" and let it travel through this "something" for a prolonged time, then this will have catastrophic results for that "something".

 

The current case/question was "what is supposed to happen when a 37mm AP shell hits a 109 from dead six".

The starting post for this question suggested that the bullet will probably reach the pilot and kill him. And that's one possibility.

Then others said that the AP round hits other stuff before and might not reach the pilot, as from the initial impact to the pilot's seat it's about 5 meters to go.

That's right, but either the bullet travels trough more or less empty space for these 5 meters, or it will hit lots of critical components (spars etc.) on it's way through.

Either case would be lethal with that amount of energy having to be absorbed by critical components.

 

Mike

Edited May 21, 2020 by SAS_Storebror

[Lusekofte]

9 hours ago, Halon said:

that actually registered on the board, but no name poped up so I guess they managed to bail?)

Finnish server do not have mission kill chat

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

9 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

This is not how ballistics work. Passing through matter changes the flightpath of the projectile. Snipers hate shooting through glass - and there they usually shoot at nearly 90deg. Passing through the oblique aluminium of a plane tail will have serious impact on the projectile path and also the projectile will be deformed and start to turn around several of its axis - all of which seriously affects penetration. 

 

Well now, a person who finally understands external ballistics. 

 

It's funny how physics works.

 

I've fired a 45gr Varmint Grenade from an AR15 at a coyote and had it deflect enough off of a small twig of a bush to cause a miss. Had slow motion video of it but lost it long ago.

[Lusekofte]

Well I highly doubt aluminum du anything with a 37 mm. I penetrated the side of a crashed JU 88 from 20 meters with a shotgun. 30 years ago

[SAS_Storebror]

It's also a huge difference:

In the @II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson situation you need to hit one specific thing and your bullet gets distracted by some tiny little something way before, "misses" the target and anything else that happens to or with the bullet simply doesn't matter.

In the "dead six 109 tailshot" situation, the bullet hits the plane's skin, and whether it's path gets disturbed by doing so or not, on it's further way the bullet will still go through vital parts of the plane and therefore cause catastrophic damage either way.

 

In other words, you may have aimed for a birthmark on the pilot's neck and "miss" that, but you'd still ruin the 109's day.

 

Mike

[II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson]

2 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

It's also a huge difference:

In the @II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson situation you need to hit one specific thing and your bullet gets distracted by some tiny little something way before, "misses" the target and anything else that happens to or with the bullet simply doesn't matter.

In the "dead six 109 tailshot" situation, the bullet hits the plane's skin, and whether it's path gets disturbed by doing so or not, on it's further way the bullet will still go through vital parts of the plane and therefore cause catastrophic damage either way.

 

In other words, you may have aimed for a birthmark on the pilot's neck and "miss" that, but you'd still ruin the 109's day.

 

Mike

 

Of course it is a seriously different situation; I'm simply trying to illustrate the fact that many folks think that just because a projectile has AP in the name that it should go straight through everything without consequence. Modern AP projectiles like APFSDS projectiles can almost do this, but this is very technically advanced stuff that was not in existence back then. When contemplating penetrating armour or multiple layers of a substrate, pretty much the only only way to not get deflection is by having an Explosively Formed Shaped Charge which basically melts a hole in the armour before it is penetrated by a sabot.  

[Pict]

There's a little bit of Yak-9T and it's cannon in ground testing in this doco, starts at 32:32, which I set the link to.

 

 

[SAS_Storebror]

True that and totally agree.

That's why a dead six 37mm AP round will not necessarily kill the pilot - in order to achieve that with a reasonable probability, you'd need pretty advanced ammunition indeed.

It's just that it won't just vanish from being deflected either, that's all.

 

Mike

[Danziger]

30 minutes ago, SAS_Storebror said:

It's also a huge difference:

In the @II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson situation you need to hit one specific thing and your bullet gets distracted by some tiny little something way before, "misses" the target and anything else that happens to or with the bullet simply doesn't matter.

In the "dead six 109 tailshot" situation, the bullet hits the plane's skin, and whether it's path gets disturbed by doing so or not, on it's further way the bullet will still go through vital parts of the plane and therefore cause catastrophic damage either way.

 

In other words, you may have aimed for a birthmark on the pilot's neck and "miss" that, but you'd still ruin the 109's day.

 

Mike

This. Even if it starts tumbling after it gets through the skin that would just make the damage to the aircraft worse. Even if it got knocked off of its path toward the pilot, it would be tumbling through making larger holes in internal structure, cutting cables and hoses. 

 

I want to see the debate over what the 37mm should do to the P-47. 

[306_Eugenio]

Hello,

Someone asked how it was MK-108 vs NS-37. Quite a difference I would say, because different priorities of engineering. NS-37 was designed with attacking ground targets in mind. So it had higher (c.a. twice) projectile mass, much higher muzzle velocity and lower explosive load. NS-37 projectile have better ballistics and range and kinetic energy of AP round absolutely unstoppable by any air-frame. From point of view of kinetic energy russian 37mm is an overkill. Only problem with AP shell and modeling the damage in a game is a trajectory vs plane model hit boxes.

While MK-108 was low range anti-bomber weapon. So higher rate of fire, lower muzzle velocity, lower kinetic energy, but higher explosive load (bombers are not armored so high penetration was not needed). 

I think we do not have to discuss if NS-37 projectile was able to penetrate a seat of a light fighter plane. The plane with armor capable to withstand a hit of NS-37 round would be unable to fly ?.

[Aurora_Stealth]

Just out of curiosity.. there were some discussions on other threads before the update about how robust the Soviet fighters were that use the composite wood construction including Yak-7 and Yak-1, does the Yak 9 seem perceptibly better in this category? can it take a little more damage or is it mainly just an improvement with the 37mm cannon would you say

[Diggun]

18 minutes ago, Aurora_Stealth said:

perceptibly better in this category?

Yes. I was hitting 700kph without any bits falling off. 

[Livai]

Another Yak-1B......... a waste of money ?

 

-> I wanted the Yak-7B "Late" Series because the "Late Series" from the Yak-7B still has the 2x UB 12.7 MGs and has the nice Bubble Cancopy.

 

 

[CountZero]

11 hours ago, ACG_Vietkong said:

 

After reading your first post, I also thought the YAK 9 s1 would be faster at altitude (4k) and slower on the deck in comparison with the Yak 1b. . The source is from Stepanets "Yakovlev GPW fighters".

To me it seems the yak 9 in game follows the top speeds of the Yak 9D but not sure. I´ll see if I can find anything online.

 

From datas i could see on net i expected Yak-9 to be faster abow ~4km, slower below,  in game i see almost oposite ( what i think is happening is maybe Yak-1s FM in speed department is off as they are early game dys development airplanes and they probably have higher high alt speeds), With 9s i expected better turn, better climb, better durability, better max dive speed, from files for 9 i see turn is slightly better, climb data also show beter climb on low mid alt and almost same up high, and max dive speed in game was 820-830km (started to lose elevators alerons rudder) on Yak-9T so thats also as expected higher then early yaks. When/if they make Yak-1s slower ill probably get Yak-9 on sale or something, but having Yak-1B and Yak-9T and on top finaly good working Yak-7b i see no need now to get Yak-9 at high price.

I check Yak-7b and it got boost in top speed it was missing up to 5km, now its not that slow (or even prone to fast overheatings) as it was before patch so he benefited from this Yak-9 development.

[306_Eugenio]

Technically there was some updates in structural construction of Yak-9. We have to go back to a historical and economical context. In 1941-1942 Russian airplane industry was affected by insufficient amount of light alloys. So that's why they tired to substitute them with wood/plywood composites. It's also obvious that quality and durability problems of those materials are not only  connected with materials itself but with also production conditions and quality. I would say that form perspective of Russian pilot non-educated Russian worker was at least as dangerous as German fighter pilot. We all know that it's possible to build high performance reliable plane from wood composites i.e. Mosquito and potentially Ta-154 may be a good example. Going back to Yak-9. Due to higher deliveries of light alloys from US it was possible to use them for construction of aircraft and Yak-9 is a good example with metal construction of fuselage, wings and control surfaces and mixed material coverage of construction (metal, plywood and fabric).

B.T.W.

I've anyhow doubts if one of the primary Russian planes should be sold as "premium". The Yak-9 is as elementary for red star air-force in 1940's as T-34 for army. There is nothing special in Yak-9 series1.

Anyhow I've bought it because eastern front sim is a little bit incomplete without it.

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, Livai said:

Another Yak-1B......... a waste of money ?

 

-> I wanted the Yak-7B "Late" Series because the "Late Series" from the Yak-7B still has the 2x UB 12.7 MGs and has the nice Bubble Cancopy.

 

 

Do not agree at all. I have not flown 1B much. But Yak 9 was referred to as best among Yak’s when it came by its pilots. 
If not propaganda and state authority has influenced the docu’s and books I put my trust in that. I like it , well worth the money. 
yak 1 cannot blow a JU 52 to pieces in two shells

[FTC_Kongoo]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

 

From datas i could see on net i expected Yak-9 to be faster abow ~4km, slower below,  in game i see almost oposite ( what i think is happening is maybe Yak-1s FM in speed department is off as they are early game dys development airplanes and they probably have higher high alt speeds), With 9s i expected better turn, better climb, better durability, better max dive speed, from files for 9 i see turn is slightly better, climb data also show beter climb on low mid alt and almost same up high, and max dive speed in game was 820-830km (started to lose elevators alerons rudder) on Yak-9T so thats also as expected higher then early yaks. When/if they make Yak-1s slower ill probably get Yak-9 on sale or something, but having Yak-1B and Yak-9T and on top finaly good working Yak-7b i see no need now to get Yak-9 at high price.

I check Yak-7b and it got boost in top speed it was missing up to 5km, now its not that slow (or even prone to fast overheatings) as it was before patch so he benefited from this Yak-9 development.

Max Dive speed 820km????? That can´t be right for yak 9. Or is that only the yak 9T??. The specification page in game says max is 750 km If I recall correctly.

 

To me the YAK 9 S1 ingame follows the max speeds of what the yak 9D is from data Online. Then again this is not from oficial documents so not sure.

[CountZero]

32 minutes ago, ACG_Vietkong said:

Max Dive speed 820km????? That can´t be right for yak 9. Or is that only the yak 9T??. The specification page in game says max is 750 km If I recall correctly.

 

To me the YAK 9 S1 ingame follows the max speeds of what the yak 9D is from data Online. Then again this is not from oficial documents so not sure.

Specs say 750, and at 750 speed go in red, but with every airplane in game you have +-up to betwen 50-100kmh from safe dive speed to point you lose parts. 109 spec say 850 but it can go 900-920 depending on model.

 

I finish testing Yak-9T i have and this is what i get in game speed:

left line is 2700rpm (exept at 0m its 2550) 33% oil rads, 50% water rads, default trim and 50% fuel.

right line is 0% oil rad 50% water rad and 2550rpm where ever it helps.

Edited May 21, 2020 by CountZero

[Pict]

12 hours ago, 216th_Jordan said:

 

Have you ever stood beside a WWII plane? Its huge compared to 3.7cm. Certainly don't see a 90% chance, no offense intended.

 

Why not? The Yak-9K with it's 45mm cannon, (just a larger bore version of the Yak-9T's 37mm) was regarded as a guaranteed 1 shot 1 kill weapon in air to air, so 100%.

 

If we simply use size as a comparison, a child's balloon is way bigger than the pin that will destroy it  

Edited May 21, 2020 by Pict

[216th_Jordan]

22 minutes ago, Pict said:

 

Why not? The Yak-9K with it's 45mm cannon, (just a larger bore version of the Yak-9T's 37mm) was regarded as a guaranteed 1 shot 1 kill weapon in air to air, so 100%.

 

If we simply use size as a comparison, a child's balloon is way bigger than the pin that will destroy it  

 

There is not 100% guarantee. Likelyness goes up, especialy for HE but with AP it is a different issue, surely an AP round of that energy class will deal a lot of damage to the parts in its way, but there are many variables for outcomes.

 

Apart of that it would be nice if the sim would model tumbling of projectiles, AFAIK it does not.

[Talon_]

15 minutes ago, 216th_Jordan said:

surely an AP round of that energy class will deal a lot of damage to the parts in its way, but there are many variables for outcomes.

 

Well they were used to destroy ships...

[=621=Samikatz]

Just now, Talon_ said:

 

Well they were used to destroy ships...

 

You should probably picture a river barge instead of like, a Destroyer when you think "ship"

[Talon_]

4 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

You should probably picture a river barge instead of like, a Destroyer when you think "ship"

 

River barges on the Black Sea? There is no doubt that the NS-37 is a small anti-tank weapon. It could penetrate 30mm of armour from 500m.

[216th_Jordan]

7 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Well they were used to destroy ships...

 

Sometimes multiple torpedos would not sink ships and german U-boat 8.8cm was not super effective against ships either. 

[Ribbon]

8 hours ago, Bilbo_Baggins said:

How does the HE explosive effect of the 37mm compare to the MK108 30mm?

Haven't tried mk108 after new DM but i did some tests on HE 37mm and recived some in MP.

Single hit in outer half of the wing of 109g will dewing it, while hitting closer to the wing root or in fuselage it takes 2-3 hits to bring it down.

I was shot down online last night, single hit in wing made my fw190a3 barely flyable while second hit in tail darted me to the ground!

Against he111, it turns them into flames with single pass, so for areal war pure HE 37mm is good formula!

[Talon_]

 

 

The gun was later developed into the less powerful N-37:

 

Edited May 21, 2020 by Talon_

[sevenless]

4 hours ago, Livai said:

-> I wanted the Yak-7B "Late" Series because the "Late Series" from the Yak-7B still has the 2x UB 12.7 MGs and has the nice Bubble Cancopy.

 

From the external view they looked like siamese twins. Except for the 2nd UB gun on the 7B, what were the differences between Yak 9s1 and late Yak 7B ?

 

 

[SAS_Storebror]

6 minutes ago, sevenless said:

what were the differences between Yak 9s1 and late Yak 7B ?

 

Different wing with new internal structure (metal H-section spars with Bakelite-impregnated wood skinning) and potentially more fuel (but Yak 9 S.1 and Yak-9T used only 4 out of 8 possible wing tanks), one 12.7mm gun removed to save weight.

That's it probably. Note that the Yak 9 initially was called "Як-7ДИ" (дальний истребитель) ==> "Yak 7 DI" (Dal'ny Istrebitel = Long Range Fighter).

 

Mike

[GarandM1]

I'm a bit disappointed with the 37mm's performance, and my lousy gunnery skills with it, but I'm still really enjoying it.

 

Side note: did the Soviets copy the German fighter stick for the Yak-9? I was really surprised when I looked down and saw what looked like a German stick!

[Lusekofte]

27 minutes ago, GarandM1 said:

I'm a bit disappointed with the 37mm's performance, and my lousy gunnery skills with it, but I'm still really enjoying it.

 

Side note: did the Soviets copy the German fighter stick for the Yak-9? I was really surprised when I looked down and saw what looked like a German stick!

They copied a KG 13 stick from a captured FW 190 and used it up to mig 15 and on trainers up to modern time. 
Fly a JU 52 and get attacked by a 9 T and then tell me it has no effect