The Lagg-3 Armaments

[SpookyRiddle]

Since buying and playing IL2 BoS I've taken a new interest in aviation history and recently I've been reading up on the numerous aircraft represented in the game. 

 

Something that keeps popping up is the armaments of the Lagg-3. From what I can tell the Lagg-3 was armed with 1x20mm Shvak cannon and 2x12.7mm machine guns, yet ingame we get a version of the Lagg-3 that only has 1 of these 12.7mm machine guns and not two.

 

Which brings me to my question: why is the Lagg-3 ingame fitted with only 1x12.7mm machine gun and not two as most sources seem to describe? Was it maybe a feature of later production models of the Lagg-3 or is it maybe something that the developers cut out for balance purposes?

Cheers!

[LukeFF]

 

 

or is it maybe something that the developers cut out for balance purposes?

 

 

LOL, no, not the reason at all. It was a feature of later production models.

[SpookyRiddle]

LOL, no, not the reason at all. It was a feature of later production models.

 

Ah ok, I was thinking that might be the case. How late were the dual MGs introduced? I LOVE the 12.7mm and would be delighted if ever we got the option to use it as an unlock.

[bivalov]

only lagg-3 of ~1-3 series was armed with 1 BK+2xBS+2xSHKAS, rumors about 2nd UBS for "66 series" are not confirmed, and all other series was armed with only 1 berezin...

[Finkeren]

IIRC there was a short period from series 4, where the armament consisted of 2xShKAS, 1xUBS and 1xShVAK, but one of the very first major revisions of the design was the redesign of the cowling with the reduced armament of 1xShVAK and 1xUBS which became standard for all later LaGGs.

By late 1942 almost all serviceable LaGGs would have carried that armament.

[SpookyRiddle]

IIRC there was a short period from series 4, where the armament consisted of 2xShKAS, 1xUBS and 1xShVAK, but one of the very first major revisions of the design was the redesign of the cowling with the reduced armament of 1xShVAK and 1xUBS which became standard for all later LaGGs.

By late 1942 almost all serviceable LaGGs would have carried that armament.

Dang, thats a real shame. I'll cling to hope that they might add a second MG as an unlock further down the line then.

[Finkeren]

That really wouldn't make much sense, because there is no evidence that any LaGG-3 ever carried that armament.

 

If you want more powerful armament for the Lavochkin fighters you'll have to either use some of the (rarely installed) big autocannon that are already in BoS, hope for a modelling of the (very poorly performing) early series LaGG-3s or simply switch to the La-5, which is just as interesting to fly but offers better performance and handling, very powerful armament (especially when loaded with all HE-shells) and a bigger ammo load than either guns on the LaGG.

[JtD]

The reason for the reduction of the armament was weight saving - the LaGG in the early version was notoriously overweight (or underpowered) and a lot of effort went into weight reduction. Cutting the armament in half did help a lot. According to Yefim Gordon all LaGG's starting with series 11 came with just two guns, 1 cannon plus one machine gun. However, given that early LaGG's came with various combinations of up to 5 guns, occasionally modified in the field, there's no reason to assume a 1x20+2x12.7 never existed in individual aircraft.

[Finkeren]

However, given that early LaGG's came with various combinations of up to 5 guns, occasionally modified in the field, there's no reason to assume a 1x20+2x12.7 never existed in individual aircraft.

Well, the change in armament in late 1941 meant a redesign of the cowling itself. I don't think it would have been easy at all to just slap another UBS with ammo supply in there.

 

Unless there is hard evidence for these supposed field conversions, I think we should assume that they didn't exist.

[Silverback]

I think even if you could mount another 12.7 the extra weight would ruin it's already limited maneuverability. That's at least 250lbs more up front.

[Finkeren]

I think even if you could mount another 12.7 the extra weight would ruin it's already limited maneuverability. That's at least 250lbs more up front.

It would hamper maneuverability and accelleration a bit no doubt but the installment wouldn't weigh nearly as much as you think. The UBS weighs only 43 lbs and 150 rounds of .50 ammo would weigh around 50 with links. Add in a bit of weight for the fittings and ammo box and you get to perhaps 100 lbs, which is relatively minor.

 

The real problem is the effect on the CG, and ofc whether there is even room under the redesigned cowling for such an installation.

 

It's all pointless speculation anyway. If there is no hard evidence for such an installation, it doesn't belong in BoS. Simple as that.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Dang, thats a real shame. I'll cling to hope that they might add a second MG as an unlock further down the line then.

After the initial series the whole cowling was redesigned so it would only fit the one UBS 12.7mm and nothing much else. You might see that they experimented with a variety of hub mounted cannon options and two of those modifications are in Battle of Stalingrad... the 23mm and 37mm cannon options add quite a bit more weight of fire than an additional 12.7mm would make up for.

 

Basically the only types of Russian fighters that featured two cowl mounted 12.7mm is the early LaGG-3, Yak-7B, tYak-9U and Yak-3. In most of the other cases they tried everything to reduce weight.