Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 1CGS
Posted

Hello comrades!

 

You've already seen the cockpit of this beauty in the 23rd issue of Developer Diaries, and now it's time to look at it from the outside! This is the La-11!

 

The full dev blog can be read here: https://il2-korea.com/news/dd_29

 

La11_00_ENG.thumb.png.c7dff680ec99c52c21e281dc4d78486c.png

  • Like 21
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Jackfraser24
Posted
6 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Hello comrades!

 

You've already seen the cockpit of this beauty in the 23rd issue of Developer Diaries, and now it's time to look at it from the outside! This is the La-11!

 

The full dev blog can be read here: https://il2-korea.com/news/dd_29

 

La11_00_ENG.thumb.png.c7dff680ec99c52c21e281dc4d78486c.png

Absolutely beautiful! Looking forwards to flying it against the Mustang and Corsair. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Beautiful! It looks like flying easier and comfortable than La-9/La-7, looking forwards flying it in game.

MDzmitry
Posted
2 часа назад, zyss сказал:

It looks like flying easier and comfortable than La-9/La-7

Not sure about that one chief, La-11 is basically a heavier longer-range La-9. Less punch, more things that are only useful on extremely long-range flights and likely won't matter much in the majority of sorties. 

In terms of pure flying La-7 and La-9 are uncontested among Lavochkin piston-engined designs. 

  • Upvote 1
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

There's always low fuel shenanigans to keep the hope alive, but yeah this isn't the ideal variant. Any historical basis for removing dead-weight gear? With weight being such a critical performance value, it seems really weird to me that ground crews wouldn't strip dead weight across all the wars/planes when possible, not just the La-11. Maybe it wasn't something in the manual or something that would get recorded, but it seems odd that it wouldn't happen at least off the books.

MDzmitry
Posted
56 минут назад, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie сказал:

With weight being such a critical performance value, it seems really weird to me that ground crews wouldn't strip dead weight across all the wars/planes when possible, not just the La-11.

Eh, it has been practiced quite a lot all over the world: from the commonly known Soviet P-39 stuff (taking off underwing mgs, removing part of armour plating) to P-40s with 4 or even 2 Brownings installed (again, mostly practiced in the USSR) to high-altitude Spitfires only having cannons installed to gain a bit of performance (RAF, here's the case of prince Galitzine). The USAAF also occasionally stripped P-39s of their underwing mgs, but their doctrine was more about firepower in this regard so to say.

 

Now, back to La-11: it was a "specialist" fighter built specifically for coastal/marine patrolling and reconnaissance, as well as escorting strategic bombers. And a bit of working beyond the Arctic Circle as well. So yeah, a bit of a unicorn in terms of application when compared to the more "average frontline" La-9.

=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

I wonder how far they though with weight reduction though. The La-11 had armrests and a urinal which be the first things in my mind to go, but also things like the extra fuel tanks, or maybe even the oxygen system if I was confident I wouldn't be going too high. I wonder how creative/daring they got in reality.

CzechTexan
Posted

A urinal?  That would be interesting to simulate! ha!

=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

They weren't sweaty enough to piss themselves for a .01% weight reduction. Now we know why they lost the early air war so quickly.

  • Haha 1
Trooper117
Posted
21 hours ago, Jackfraser24 said:

Absolutely beautiful! Looking forwards to blowing it out of the sky with my Mustang and Corsair...

 

Just fixed that for you Jack 👍🏼

  • Like 2
BlitzPig_EL
Posted

I suspect for the contest between the Allied props and the La11 to work out historically in single player, you will have to set the AI La 11 to absolute numpty settings and make sure it always starts with 100% fuel load.  It will be the only way to simulate the poorly trained NKAF.

  • Confused 1
=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

Poor NKAF pilots </3. They were sent to the slaughter in underpowered planes while being undertrained, and this is how they get remembered. Gotta set them to numpty settings to accurately represent them.

Jackfraser24
Posted
35 minutes ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

Poor NKAF pilots </3. They were sent to the slaughter in underpowered planes while being undertrained, and this is how they get remembered. Gotta set them to numpty settings to accurately represent them.

It was sad. 

  • Sad 1
Lord_Cool
Posted (edited)

In game I should imagine these might be used (as with the Yak-9P) to intercept prop bombers like the Douglas B-26 Invader and B-29 Superfortress or used for ground attack missions? Directly going up against the F-80C, F-84E, F-86A-5, and F9F-2s that are patrolling the skies is going to be pretty brutal (and likewise for the F-51D Mustang against the MiG-15bis).

Edited by Lord_Cool
Avimimus
Posted
14 minutes ago, Lord_Cool said:

In game I should imagine these might be used (as with the Yak-9P) to intercept prop bombers like the Douglas B-26 Invader and B-29 Superfortress or used for ground attack missions? Directly going up against the F-80C, F-84E, F-86A-5, and F9F-2s that are patrolling the skies is going to be pretty brutal (and likewise for the F-51D Mustang against the MiG-15bis).

 

I think a few ineffective attempted interceptions against the B-29 and then switching over to the night fighter role?

 

For ground-attack they didn't carry bombs - so you just have 225 rounds of 23mm cannon for a couple of strafing passes. I don't think they were used in this role. I will attempt to strafe airbases with them though... but I don't think it was historically done.

=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

I think it will be almost mandatory to be ahistorical to get longetivity out of this. 

  • Upvote 1
Trooper117
Posted
1 hour ago, =MERCS=JenkemJunkie said:

I think it will be almost mandatory to be ahistorical to get longetivity out of this. 

 

True, but when all said and done, it is a flight sim 'game'... there are very skilled sim pilots out there that will probably enjoy flying the La-11, and enjoy shooting down some hapless Corsair and F-51 pilots.

=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

True, but I'm also thinking about more than just A2A balance, and looking at how to get mission type variety. Even if the planes were perfectly balanced, the historical mission variety looks very lacking.

BlitzPig_EL
Posted

In reality, air to ground was almost solely the province of the Allied air forces.  That won't stop clever mission builders from coming up with scenarios for the NKAF and PVAAF.

Still, the communist forces will be hampered by their limited plane set.

 

Shredding IL 10s with a 20mm armed Corsair or Sea Fury should be good fun though.

  • Like 2
BladeMeister
Posted
2 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

True, but when all said and done, it is a flight sim 'game'... there are very skilled sim pilots out there that will probably enjoy flying the La-11, and enjoy shooting down some hapless Corsair and F-51 pilots.

Are we even getting the Corsair or Sea Fury in this first Korea installment?

 

S!Blade<><

=MERCS=JenkemJunkie
Posted

r/hoggit - Confirmed plane list (minus one) for IL-2 Korea

Corsair yeah, Sea Fury maybe later?

  • Thanks 2
  • 1CGS
Posted

The F4U-4 is planned for the initial release. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
AEthelraedUnraed
Posted
9 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I think a few ineffective attempted interceptions against the B-29 and then switching over to the night fighter role?

Does anyone have more information about the La-11 as a night fighter? Were they vectored to target by ground radar? Any particular successes?

 

It should be pretty fun, flying at night over mountains in a blackout zone in a small fighter that's totally unequipped for the task 🥰

Posted

Tu-2 should be flyable.With La-11 added,the planed 8 aircraft planeset expands to 9,still lack one Soviet aircraft.

F-51D          Yak-9P
F4U-4         La-11
F-80C         
F-84E          IL-10
F-86A          MiG-15bis

migmadmarine
Posted

I don't think we should assume a symmetrical plane set. They've shown UI elements including the F9F, and I think confirmed it for the base pack, but don't quote me on that part. 

Avimimus
Posted
49 minutes ago, migmadmarine said:

I don't think we should assume a symmetrical plane set. They've shown UI elements including the F9F, and I think confirmed it for the base pack, but don't quote me on that part. 

 

Yes. My thinking as well. I believe the Briefing videos have indicated that the F9F is likely but that the Tu-2 is unlikely for a few years. The Po-2 would be more likely perhaps. Anyway, there isa thread for such speculations: 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Does anyone have more information about the La-11 as a night fighter? Were they vectored to target by ground radar? Any particular successes?

 

It should be pretty fun, flying at night over mountains in a blackout zone in a small fighter that's totally unequipped for the task 🥰

 

I'll see if I can find out more. Apparently their main opponent was the B-26 (which reinforces how great it would be to have an AI B-26 eventually). I do think it could be done as flyable with just the cockpit and possibly the dorsal turret periscope (many of them had the ventral turret removed, and some had the dorsal turret removed as well). Anyway, it seems like a common enough target - hopefully the sim will sell well enough to encourage an expansion or two. :)

Alexmarine
Posted
On 4/13/2025 at 1:07 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

I suspect for the contest between the Allied props and the La11 to work out historically in single player, you will have to set the AI La 11 to absolute numpty settings and make sure it always starts with 100% fuel load.  It will be the only way to simulate the poorly trained NKAF.


You would also not have to use the La-11, given that the fighters of the NKAF were Yaks.

The La-11 users during the Korean war were the Chinese (which also used it for a brief period as an escort to some rare Tu-2 bombing missions) and as a night fighter in soviet service to complement the daylight MiG-15

Posted
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

 

Ehm, no. 🙂 The F9F is coming. 

I'm shocked.I always thought F9F was impossible because there is no aircraft carrier, unless it's Marine.

So the planed 8 aircraft planeset expends to 10?

F-51D          Yak-9P
F4U-4         La-11
F-80C         
F-84E          IL-10
F-86A          MiG-15bis

F9F-2

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Bell said:

I'm shocked.I always thought F9F was impossible because there is no aircraft carrier, unless it's Marine.

 

We will get at least one carrier for Korea (in a separate mini-module).

Edited by Aapje
Posted (edited)
32 minutes ago, Aapje said:

 

We will get at least one carrier for Korea (in a separate mini-module).

Is it confirmed?I knew they could potentially make carrier.LukeFF said 'it's a very real possibility'.

 

Edited by Bell
Posted

They also said it near the end of this episode (around minute 43):

 

 

The way I interpret it, it is almost certain that we will get a carrier, and there is a little bit of uncertainty how they will release it.

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Aapje said:

The way I interpret it, it is almost certain that we will get a carrier, and there is a little bit of uncertainty how they will release it.

Thanks.I have actually found it.

 

 

Edited by Bell
Avimimus
Posted
3 hours ago, Bell said:

I'm shocked.I always thought F9F was impossible because there is no aircraft carrier, unless it's Marine.

 

F9F, AD-2/AD-4, and F7F were all operated from land bases. The F7F is unlikely (as it requires radar) - but it would be pretty cool. It was used for a lot of interdiction work (not just as a night fighter), and was used as a night bomber alongside some daylight close support missions. It goes along with the F-82 as part of the 'unlikely, but fascinating' category. That said, if the product does really well... maybe? They are certainly interesting high performance (last generation) propeller aircraft - and outside of Korea we're unlikely to ever see them modelled (both arrived too late for WWII modules).

Posted
8 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

F9F, AD-2/AD-4, and F7F were all operated from land bases.

F9F and Skyraider were used both by USN and USMC during Korea War.F7F seems to be used only by USMC during Korean War.

  • Like 1
Posted
6 hours ago, Bell said:

I'm shocked.I always thought F9F was impossible because there is no aircraft carrier, unless it's Marine.

So the planed 8 aircraft planeset expends to 10?

F-51D          Yak-9P
F4U-4         La-11
F-80C         
F-84E          IL-10
F-86A          MiG-15bis

F9F-2

Ted Williams flew the F9F from Marine land bases.

  • Like 1
  • 1CGS
Posted

Yes, the plan is to have a USMC career option with land-based Panthers. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Irishratticus72
Posted
1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

Yes, the plan is to have a USMC career option with land-basrd Panthers. 

Think you left out a "T" and an "A" of the second last word there.

  • Haha 2
Posted
3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Yes, the plan is to have a USMC career option with land-based Panthers. 

 

Until the Carrier DLC, of course :P

  • Upvote 1
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...