La-5F bubbletop

[Burdokva]

This has been mentioned in several posts across other threads, and as an owner of both La-5 CPs, it has irked me for a while now.

 

The majority of La-5s equipped with the M-82F engine were of the 'Type 39F' with lowered fuselage spine and bubbletop canopy rather than the older 'Type 37' razorback fuselage. The new, lightened fuselage was developed in late 1942 and with an order of the Soviet MoD from January 1943, La-5s with the M-82F engine were to be built using the new fuselage type. It also became the basis for the La-5FN, which in factory documents is listed as just 'Type-39', without the 'F' appendix.

 

The La-5F was produced between late January 1943 through to May 1944, in large part because of insufficient quantities of M-82FN engines.

 

Now, the problem with BoX is that we don't have one of the most widespread versions of the plane - we have the (rather limited in quantities) earlier La-5 with the M-82F engine that is heavier and slower and the later, more powerfull La-5FN. This leaves a huge gap, as the -5F bubbletop was the most widespread Lavochkin type in use throughout the Summer 1943 through to early 1944.

 

It doesn't look to be all that difficult to implement given that both the engine code and cowling and fuselage 3d models are present between both La-5 CPs. Some German planes such as the BoN Bf-109G6 'Late' and BoBP FW-190A8 already allow one to change modifications that result in changes to the 3d model.

 

Can we get the La-5F bubbletop as an optional mod to either one of the Collector Planes?

 

The La-5FN would probably be a more suitable base given that the 3d model change would just be the cowling top air intake scoop as compared to series 1 La-5FN, while the parameters would be increased ammo count (220 compared to 200 RPG) and the 24kg lighter but less powerful at 1700hp M-82F engine.

 

 

Edited July 8, 2021 by ACG_Burdokva
typos

[AEthelraedUnraed]

I would sure love it, but given how busy the Devs are with developing BoN, FCII and all the other announced improvements, I doubt they'll find the time to revisit their oldest collector plane

[Dakpilot]

I would hope if the 3rd party IAR 80 'collaboration' is successful, simpler projects like this could be easily implemented as well. 

Early/late Lagg 3 and Yak 1's as an example as well as La 5F.

 

There are many other options for (comparatively) small changes to bring new versions of A/C the A-20 being another candidate which could bring more diversity with minimal Dev input and distraction from their bigger fish

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

4 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

I would hope if the 3rd party IAR 80 'collaboration' is successful, simpler projects like this could be easily implemented as well. 

Early/late Lagg 3 and Yak 1's as an example as well as La 5F.

 

There are many other options for (comparatively) small changes to bring new versions of A/C the A-20 being another candidate which could bring more diversity with minimal Dev input and distraction from their bigger fish

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

Well, yes, but how would the business side of things compare for developing new aircraft vs. adding modifications to existing ones? Sure, the developing costs are less since you're likely able to re-use at least part of your 3d model/skins/flight model, but how many people would realistically be interested in buying a La-5F if they've already got the La-5 and La-5FN? Us hardcore simmers would, probably, but I don't think we're the majority.

 

I do know that the Yak-9T is the only collector aircraft I haven't got yet, purely because it's "just a Yak-9 with a larger gun", and I only bought the 109G-6 recently in a huge sale, purely because it's "just another 109".

[Burdokva]

24 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Well, yes, but how would the business side of things compare for developing new aircraft vs. adding modifications to existing ones? Sure, the developing costs are less since you're likely able to re-use at least part of your 3d model/skins/flight model, but how many people would realistically be interested in buying a La-5F if they've already got the La-5 and La-5FN? Us hardcore simmers would, probably, but I don't think we're the majority.

 

I do know that the Yak-9T is the only collector aircraft I haven't got yet, purely because it's "just a Yak-9 with a larger gun", and I only bought the 109G-6 recently in a huge sale, purely because it's "just another 109".

 

Adding a small amount of features necessitates a paid, full-fledged Collector's Plane, truly? I think the whole business of microtransactions in the past decade has finally managed to skew user (buyer) perspective...

 

It's one thing to request a massive development effort, be it 3d modelling or coding, or a new feature, but having minimal input costs that brings more options to users used to be considered regular patching.

 

The investment is already there for those who bought the La-5FN. At the moment its use is incredibly limited as it appeared in very small numbers over the Kuban in Autumn 1943. Having the La-5F would open more possibilities in both multiplayer and single player.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

34 minutes ago, ACG_Burdokva said:

Adding a small amount of features necessitates a paid, full-fledged Collector's Plane, truly?

Well no, but that's the only way the Devs would be able to make money out of it, and therefore the only way I think we would be likely to see any such thing at all.

 

34 minutes ago, ACG_Burdokva said:

It's one thing to request a massive development effort, be it 3d modelling or coding, or a new feature, but having minimal input costs that brings more options to users used to be considered regular patching.

I think you're underestimating the amount of work such an option would take. First, you have to do the research. Are the cockpit and engine really the only differences? Or are there additional ones? Are the cockpits the same? What is the exact performance of the engine?

 

Then you have to hire the 3d modelers and skinners to actually implement these changes. Basically, given a set budget, any time spent on a La-5F is time that cannot be spent on the BoN planes or the IAR.

 

Then the changes to the flight model. Does it behave as it should? Most likely not, which means that you need to do some additional tuning. These testing and tuning cycles could take weeks.

 

Of course, given that you can re-use much of your files, as I said, it won't be as expensive as creating a new aircraft from the ground up, such as the IAR. But the expenses associated with it are certainly not zero, and are not to be underestimated and should be put into a business perspective.

 

Would I like a La-5F? Absolutely. I'm just trying to put the chances of actually getting one into a realistic perspective.

Edited July 8, 2021 by AEthelraedUnraed

[oc2209]

6 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I do know that the Yak-9T is the only collector aircraft I haven't got yet, purely because it's "just a Yak-9 with a larger gun", and I only bought the 109G-6 recently in a huge sale, purely because it's "just another 109".

 

I have a lot of fun experimenting with the 9T's gun. My longest shot with it was during a quick mission, where I made my target a P-51 that was pulling away from me quickly. I had only AP rounds loaded. I managed to hit it from about 500m, and the one shot seized the engine instantly. There's pretty much no other planes in the sim that will allow you to perform such (impractical, unlikely to be repeated often) feats.

 

As for the 109G-6, it filled a necessary, if unexciting, gap in the 109 lineup until the Late's introduction. Now that I have the Late with the MW-50 mod and the better canopy, I see no reason to use the plain G-6 anymore.

 

6 hours ago, ACG_Burdokva said:

The investment is already there for those who bought the La-5FN. At the moment its use is incredibly limited as it appeared in very small numbers over the Kuban in Autumn 1943.

 

This is true.

 

Further compounding the problem is that the next Eastern Front DLC will likely be the last (in the East), and it will be late enough to include all the latest Yaks and Lavochkins. Meaning that the La-5FN will only serve as a filler until the La-7 is introduced in larger numbers in the career, the same way the 109G-6 Late can be used in the early phases of the Bodenplatte career. Or, you can probably choose to fly in a unit that uses the La-5FN until the end of the career; but with the allure of the La-7, I can't imagine why many people will want to do so.

 

The 109G-6 Late, by contrast, will get its own time to shine in '44 Normandy career once it's available; there won't be any competing 109s to choose from in that time period. 

Edited July 8, 2021 by oc2209

[Burdokva]

On 7/8/2021 at 10:47 PM, oc2209 said:

Further compounding the problem is that the next Eastern Front DLC will likely be the last (in the East), and it will be late enough to include all the latest Yaks and Lavochkins. Meaning that the La-5FN will only serve as a filler until the La-7 is introduced in larger numbers in the career, the same way the 109G-6 Late can be used in the early phases of the Bodenplatte career. Or, you can probably choose to fly in a unit that uses the La-5FN until the end of the career; but with the allure of the La-7, I can't imagine why many people will want to do so.

 

The 109G-6 Late, by contrast, will get its own time to shine in '44 Normandy career once it's available; there won't be any competing 109s to choose from in that time period. 

 

Sadly, that doesn't even work. The current La-5FN is a series 1, the earliest produced one from Spring 1943.

 

Assuming the next expansion is on the late Eastern Front with a similar timeframe to BoBP late 1944 through to spring 1945 (very probable), a series 1 machine would be very outdated - almost like flying the Bf 109G6 'early' CP in January 1945.

 

Later series La-5FNs had multiple improvements, such as better engine firewall and insulation, improved air scoops, and above all - a new, lightened and stronger wing design using metal instead of wooden spars. All of these resulted in a faster, sturdier and better performing plane than a series 1 La-5FN.

 

The problem is further compounded by the fact that owing to its quickly degrading wooden construction, it is highly unlikely a series 1 La-5FN produced in early 1943 would still be in use in a frontline unit by that time, even if by some miracle it survived that far. The VVS retired all wooden planes very fast after the war (within a year or two at most), even considering post war use was quite more 'gentle' than during wartime.

 

I hope I made my point as to why we're in such a pitfall with the La's - we don't have the -5F which is most relevant to the currently available maps and campaigns, there are no suitable maps for the La-5FN s. 1 (other than the last month or two over the Kuban), and a potential new Eastern Front expansion can't leverage the CP La-5FN as series 1 machines historically wouldn't have been used by that late point in the war...

Edited July 10, 2021 by ACG_Burdokva

[oc2209]

On 7/9/2021 at 9:23 AM, ACG_Burdokva said:

I hope I made my point as to why we're in such a pitfall with the La's - we don't have the -5F which is most relevant to the currently available maps and campaigns, there are no suitable maps for the La-5FN s. 1 (other than the last month or two over the Kuban), and a potential new Eastern Front expansion can't leverage the CP La-5FN as series 1 machines historically wouldn't have been used by that late point in the war...

 

Well, there are a few ways around the problem.

 

An La-5FN 'Late' version could be released. I mean, it'd be little different than having the 109G-6 and G-6 Late as separate entities. The flaw in this solution is that the lineup for the next Eastern DLC is already pretty packed. There must be a Yak-3 and La-7; there must be another Sturmovik series; there really should be a Yak-9U (probably the collector plane of the package). So that leaves only one free spot, assuming the typical 5/5 Axis/Allies balance is retained. Said free spot would more than likely be a two-engine plane.

 

The second solution would be to simply release the 'Late' La-5FN as an integrated mod available to owners of the La-5FN. Which seems very unlikely, given that there's no precedent for it to my knowledge. The same applies to the La-5F. I'm not saying that's perfectly fair, but I'm just going by the odds.

 

Unfortunately, the way Eastern Front DLCs have been released, I see the Lavochkins we have presently as casualties of having too few maps to be used in. That it hasn't yet been rectified implies to me that it won't be. The only real solution would be to have another late '43 to early '44 Eastern DLC to fully utilize La-5s; which almost certainly will never happen.

 

I mean, there's already plenty of pre-bitching on the board about Russians getting any other DLC at all, like the war for them should just end in the Kuban. You can well imagine the forum Armageddon that would occur if the Eastern Front got 2 more DLCs.

Edited July 10, 2021 by oc2209

[migmadmarine]

Didn't the base model La-5 receive it's engine option as part of the development of the FN? IIRC it wasn't there from launch.

[sevenless]

On 7/9/2021 at 9:47 PM, oc2209 said:

I mean, there's already plenty of pre-bitching on the board about Russians getting any other DLC at all, like the war for them should just end in the Kuban. You can well imagine the forum Armageddon that would occur if the Eastern Front got 2 more DLCs.

 

To each his own. I wouldn´t mind two more modules. I initially bought this game years ago because it mainly was about air war in the east. We still have a timegap to fill here between mid-1943 and VE-day 1945. The timeframe when the VVS really began to crush the Luftwaffles in numbers. I´m pretty certain we´ll see a 1944/45 module to get the fancy VSS stuff, however then there is still this late 43 - mid 44 timegap leading up to the destruction of army group center with Operation Bagration in 06/44. Maybe we get to that point in 2-3 years...

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, migmadmarine said:

Didn't the base model La-5 receive it's engine option as part of the development of the FN? IIRC it wasn't there from launch.

 

The La-5 received its engine mod sometime after its initial release and sometime before the La-5FN, as I recall.

[oc2209]

1 hour ago, sevenless said:

 

To each his own. I wouldn´t mind two more modules. I initially bought this game years ago because it mainly was about air war in the east. We still have a timegap to fill here between mid-1943 and VE-day 1945. The timeframe when the VVS really began to crush the Luftwaffles in numbers. I´m pretty certain we´ll see a 1944/45 module to get the fancy VSS stuff, however then there is still this late 43 - mid 44 timegap leading up to the destruction of army group center with Operation Bagration in 06/44. Maybe we get to that point in 2-3 years...

 

I also wouldn't mind 2 more Eastern Front DLCs; but not without a break.

 

After Normandy, there should be the predictable war-ending Eastern Front module. Then give the Western fans what they want with a Mediterranean package. Then go back to the Eastern Front.

 

But the problem there is that I cannot think of any way to fill out the rosters completely. I mean, in a satisfying way. They could add planes that no one really wants to fly, like Yak-9s with extra fuel or bomb bays behind the pilot, but...

 

Maybe they could just add an early '44 map with a few planes, like a mini-DLC. But I doubt that would make business sense.

[LukeFF]

2 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

But the problem there is that I cannot think of any way to fill out the rosters completely. I mean, in a satisfying way. They could add planes that no one really wants to fly, like Yak-9s with extra fuel or bomb bays behind the pilot, but...

 

What? There are plenty of Soviet planes left that are interesting and relevant for 1944-45.

Edited July 15, 2021 by LukeFF

[oc2209]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

What? There are plenty of Soviet planes left that are interesting and relevant for 1944-45.

 

Sorry, was distracted in another thread, or I'd have replied sooner.

 

To be clear, I want to say I can't think of any planes beyond the ones I expect for the end-of-war Russian DLC. Those being: the La-7, the Yak-3, the IL-10, etc.

 

What I can't think of is enough planes for both Russia and Germany to fill out an early '44 scenario.

[sevenless]

1 hour ago, oc2209 said:

What I can't think of is enough planes for both Russia and Germany to fill out an early '44 scenario.

 

Hmm lets see 01/44-06/44 timeframe:

 

Fw 190 A7 (JG 54 had some of those) or Fw 190 A4

Me 109 G6 (mid) with Erlahood

Ju 87 D5

Do 217 or He 177 or Ju 188

Fw 189 or Hs 123

 

La-5F late

Yak 9TD - with NS-37 cannon and provision for 4 × 50 kg bombs under the wings

Il-2M3

Il-4

Yak-4

 

 

 

[Redwo1f]

3 hours ago, oc2209 said:

 

I also wouldn't mind 2 more Eastern Front DLCs; but not without a break.

 

After Normandy, there should be the predictable war-ending Eastern Front module. Then give the Western fans what they want with a Mediterranean package. 

 

 

I don't think that is going to happen at all, for better or for worse. I doubt they tread over the other 1C's product line and CLOD is staying Mediterranean for it's next DLC (details still to come) - so that is going to leave a lot less wiggle room here (ultimately depending on what has already been schemed/agreed upon (eg. whether Italy was left open for the taking or whatever (?)). - guess we will soon see.

[oc2209]

52 minutes ago, sevenless said:

 

Hmm lets see 01/44-06/44 timeframe:

 

Fw 190 A7 (JG 54 had some of those) or Fw 190 A4

Me 109 G6 (mid) with Erlahood

Ju 87 D5

Do 217 or He 177 or Ju 188

Fw 189 or Hs 123

 

La-5F late

Yak 9TD - with NS-37 cannon and provision for 4 × 50 kg bombs under the wings

Il-2M3

Il-4

Yak-4

 

Another G6 would be pretty sad at this point. The rest of your German list isn't bad.

 

Another version of the La-5 is okay; another Sturm before the IL-10, eh. The Yak-9TD is a pretty tough sell, because its ground attack ability is hardly improved at all by such a small bombload. Extra fuel is a liability in most instances in this sim. I'm not saying it wouldn't have a place, but it would be a very narrow place that not many people would want to explore. I would almost argue more for the Yak-9K or 9M's inclusion.

 

Is there an improved version of the P-39 that would work?

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

Is there an improved version of the P-39 that would work?

 

N and Q

 

14 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

Another version of the La-5 is okay; another Sturm before the IL-10, eh.

 

The thing about the Il-10 is it's very, very late war, Spring 1945.

[sevenless]

25 minutes ago, oc2209 said:

 

Another G6 would be pretty sad at this point. The rest of your German list isn't bad.

 

Yeah I know. However it was there and I can´t think of another appropriate fighter for that timeframe. G6/AS (intro 4/44) wasn´t used in the east and only came with G14/AS in late 44 to this theatre.

 

As for Yak-9s. Every one 1944 model except M and U would do the trick, so K is possible. The M was introduced 5/44, if I´m not mistaken, so that is too late. Same for Il-10 which would fit better in the 44/45 module, combat intro was 02/45.

[oc2209]

26 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

N and Q

 

 

The thing about the Il-10 is it's very, very late war, Spring 1945.

 

I'd prefer an improved P-39 over a Yak with very marginal differences from Yaks we currently have. And I say this as someone who likes Yaks.

 

I also wouldn't mind a P-400.

 

And, of course, I think we all want a P-63. Anyone who likes the P-39 would love the 63. Do you suppose that's possible? I know that it 'officially' wasn't used, but...

 

As for the IL-10, yes, it'd get very little use in a career, but, I would still love to have it in the sim. The increased performance over the regular Sturm would make it quite an interesting ground attack plane in general.

 

8 minutes ago, sevenless said:

As for Yak-9s. Every one 1944 model except M and U would do the trick, so K is possible. The M was introduced 5/44, if I´m not mistaken, so that is too late. Same for Il-10 which would fit better in the 44/45 module, combat intro was 02/45.

 

Right, thanks for clearing that up. Too bad about the M, because it might be interesting.

[migmadmarine]

I don't know, ai'd be game for the Yak with the bomb tubes, just cause that is cool to me. When did the 109G-10 enter service? Might it be an option?

[sevenless]

4 hours ago, migmadmarine said:

When did the 109G-10 enter service? Might it be an option?

 

Very late in the east. According to Flugzeugbestand und Bewegungsmeldungen, II./JG52 (ww2.dk) not before 12/44 with JG 52.

[oc2209]

15 hours ago, migmadmarine said:

I don't know, ai'd be game for the Yak with the bomb tubes, just cause that is cool to me. When did the 109G-10 enter service? Might it be an option?

 

The G-10 needs to be saved for the end-of-war Russian DLC; used opposite the final versions of all the Russian fighters (Yak-3, La-7, etc).

 

What would be difficult is finding an interesting Axis fighter to use for an earlier Eastern Front DLC, sometime between Kuban and Berlin. Ideally a 109G-6-something-something should be avoided.

[migmadmarine]

How long/where were G5s in service? 

[Voyager]

On 7/15/2021 at 6:06 PM, Redwo1f said:

 

I don't think that is going to happen at all, for better or for worse. I doubt they tread over the other 1C's product line and CLOD is staying Mediterranean for it's next DLC (details still to come) - so that is going to leave a lot less wiggle room here (ultimately depending on what has already been schemed/agreed upon (eg. whether Italy was left open for the taking or whatever (?)). - guess we will soon see.

 

I'd expect CloD to be early war Mediterranean, while GB would be the Italian campaign. They've got the right plane sets to do their own, but not the other. 

 

In fact, looking at the two campaigns, they were largely fought by different air forces, with the British being the lead in the overall Mediterranean front, while the USAAF was the main Allied force set in the Italian campaign. 

 

I think they could coexist quite nicely. 

[CountZero]

On 7/16/2021 at 9:01 PM, oc2209 said:

 

The G-10 needs to be saved for the end-of-war Russian DLC; used opposite the final versions of all the Russian fighters (Yak-3, La-7, etc).

 

What would be difficult is finding an interesting Axis fighter to use for an earlier Eastern Front DLC, sometime between Kuban and Berlin. Ideally a 109G-6-something-something should be avoided.

Thats the thing, you cant fined 109 or 190 for mid war east DLC, so any soviet airlane missing from that part will have to come as separate collector airplane. 

Bubble La-5 i just see as waist of slot, when you cant just make 2-3 collector airplanes per year, that slot its better spend on other airplanes. La-5, 5F 5FN and 7 is more then enought for this game, even regarding lagg-3, earlyer version would be more usefule then later one.

[Guest deleted@171995]

16.07.2021 в 03:13, oc2209 сказал:

And, of course, I think we all want a P-63. Anyone who likes the P-39 would love the 63. Do you suppose that's possible? I know that it 'officially' wasn't used, but...

 

р-63 использовалась в боях против японии. она стояла на вооружении 190 иад. 245 иад. 128 сад и каких-то других частях. 15 августа 1945 г. р-63 из 190 иад провели единственный. но результативный воздушный бой - сбили ки-43.

The p-63 was used in battles against Japan. she was in service with 190 иад. 245 иад. 128 сад and some other parts. On August 15, 1945, p-63 out of 190 iad conducted the only one. but an effective air battle-the ki-43 was shot down.

ещё забывают про як-7. осенью 1942 г. под сталинградом в 42 иап были машины со срезанным гаргротом и каплевидным фонарём на испытаниях. весной 1943 г. это уже серийная модификация.

they also forget about the Yak-7. in the autumn of 1942, near Stalingrad, 42 iap had cars with a cut gargrot and a teardrop-shaped lantern on tests. in the spring of 1943, this is already a serial modification.

[oc2209]

32 minutes ago, Gimpel said:

 

The p-63 was used in battles against Japan. she was in service with 190 иад. 245 иад. 128 сад and some other parts. On August 15, 1945, p-63 out of 190 iad conducted the only one. but an effective air battle-the ki-43 was shot down.

 

 

Sorry, I meant that the P-63 wasn't officially used against the Germans. Unofficially, there's a good chance it was used in both Russia's Eastern and Western theaters. The question is if the devs want to go by anecdotal evidence (my guess is 'no').

 

Taken from Wikipedia:

 

"By a 1943 agreement, P-63s were disallowed for Soviet use against Germany and were supposed to be concentrated in the Soviet Far East for an eventual attack on Japan. However, there are many unconfirmed reports from both the Soviet and German side that P-63s did indeed see service against the Luftwaffe. Most notably, one of Pokryshkin's pilots reports in his memoirs published in the 1990s that the entire 4th Guards Fighter Aviation Regiment (4 GvIAP) was secretly converted to P-63s in 1944, while officially still flying P-39s. One account states they were in action at Königsberg, in Poland and in the final assault on Berlin. There are German reports of P-63s shot down by both fighters and flak."

 

Unsure just how reliable the above info is, but I would really like to fly a P-63 in this sim, regardless.

Edited July 26, 2021 by oc2209

[Alexmarine]

8 hours ago, oc2209 said:

Unsure just how reliable the above info is

 

Would say almost completely made up as there is no "4th GIAP" in any Russian document covering the VVS (the only 4th GIAP units in role was a Baltic Fleet unit equipped with La-5FN and La-7 also covered by photographic evidence) nor reported even in the book by Kommissarov and Gordon on the P-39/P-63 in soviet service given that they also only found/heard anecdotal evidence or at best online forum rumors

[Guest deleted@171995]

11 часов назад, oc2209 сказал:

 

Извините, я имел в виду, что Р-63 официально не использовался против немцев. Неофициально есть большая вероятность, что его использовали как в Восточном, так и в Западном театрах России. Вопрос в том, хотят ли разработчики руководствоваться анекдотическими доказательствами (я предполагаю «нет»).

 

Взято из Википедии:

 

«По соглашению 1943 года, P-63 были запрещены для использования Советским Союзом против Германии и должны были быть сосредоточены на советском Дальнем Востоке для возможного нападения на Японию. Однако есть много неподтвержденных сообщений как с советской, так и с немецкой стороны, что P-63 -63 действительно несли службу против Люфтваффе. В частности, один из пилотов Покрышкина сообщает в своих мемуарах, опубликованных в 1990-х годах, что весь 4-й гвардейский истребительный авиационный полк (4 ГвиАП) был тайно переоборудован в P-63 в 1944 году, хотя официально все еще летают на P-39. В одном сообщении говорится, что они действовали в Кенигсберге, в Польше, и при последнем штурме Берлина. Имеются немецкие сообщения о P-63, сбитых как истребителями, так и зенитной артиллерией ».

 

Не уверен, насколько достоверна приведенная выше информация, но я бы действительно хотел летать на P-63 в этом симуляторе, тем не менее.

это где же такое пишут? что за особенный пункт соглашения? ты можешь привести этот текст? я тебе перечислил части. которые принмали участие в боях против японцев. на западе все р-63 были в полках пво.

where do they write this? what is the special clause of the agreement? can you quote this text? I've listed the parts for you. who took part in the battles against the Japanese. in the west, all p-63s were in the air defense regiments.

не вводи в заблуждение

do not mislead

смотри свой 4гвиап. там нет р-63

see your 4gviap. There is no p-63 there

 

http://ava.org.ru/iap.html