Author Topic: I know there no new planes in AH2 for now (Read 1700 times)

straffo · « **Reply #15 on:** May 03, 2004, 03:44:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Batz
Again the yak 3 would require a new model, there’s no need for the yak 3 because the 9u is as good. The yak 3 came from the yak 1 line, the yak 9 from the yak 7. [/B]

Actually I see several reason to had more yaks

And even the Yak3 , the 1M etc ...
But I'm biased see : http://www.nnavirex.com/skins_pilotes.htm

Batz · « **Reply #16 on:** May 03, 2004, 03:48:59 PM »

If it were realistic I would say give us them all.

btw I agree a NN painted Yak-3 would be a fun planes to tear up the furballs in.

But I am biased as well. G-14 please

straffo · « **Reply #17 on:** May 03, 2004, 03:56:26 PM »

ok it's a deal

Pyro · « **Reply #18 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:36:31 PM »

When it comes to variants, I want to try and get the most variety for the fewest number of variants. Hence, you wouldn't see a Yak-9D if I did a 9M because it would be completely superfluous.

The Yak-9M is a great suggestion because it requires very little resources to make. A few minor cosmetic changes to the shape and a new skin. Much of the flight modeling work would already be done because of the -9T.

Citabria · « **Reply #19 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:40:38 PM »

seems there are more yak9ms made than yak9d's is this true?

Citabria · « **Reply #20 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:44:46 PM »

Quote

By February of 1943, the Yak-9M was in production. This standard version was armed with one 20mm cannon and two .50 cal. machine guns, all concentrated in the nose of the airplane. The wingspan was reduced, and the ribs were made of lightweight duralumin. The engine was upgraded to the 1,240 hp. M-105PF-3. The Yak-9MPVO was a night fighter variant equipped with a searchlight and a radio compass.

The Yak-9T was an anti-armor, ground attack version that entered service early in 1943. It was usually armed with a 32mm or 37mm cannon and had wing racks for 5.5 pound anti-personnel bomblets in special containers. Later in 1943 came the limited production Yak-9K, which featured a 45mm cannon. The Yak-9B was another limited production version, this time a light bomber variant with internal stowage for up to four 220-pound bombs in a bay behind the pilot.

The Yak-9D, introduced in the summer of 1943, was a longer-range escort fighter version carrying additional fuel in two outer wing panel tanks, and an optional tank under the cockpit. (Soviet pilots must have been viewed the latter as a mixed blessing.) It was powered by a 1,360 hp. M-105PF-3 engine.

this info conflicts in production dates...

Quote

long-range "Yak-9D" variant was introduced at roughly the same time, and featured four wing tanks, giving the machine a range of 900 kilometers (560 miles). The VVS had acquired a need for a longer-range fighters as the Red Army was now on the advance, and it was not always possible to have forward airfields behind the lines. Over 3,000 were built. The additional wing tanks led to a reduction in performance, and so in early 1944 a number of aerodynamic improvements suggested by TsAGI were incorporated into Yak-9D production to compensate.

The "Yak-9M" was as a modest change to the Yak-9D, with the cockpit moved back to improve production compatibility with the Yak-9T. This was actually an improvement from the pilot's point of view as well, since moving the cockpit back did not reduce the pilot's view, while it helped reduce the degree of noseheaviness that the Yak-9 had inherited from the Yak-7.

The Yak-9M was also fitted with a jettisonable cockpit canopy, an engine dust filter, and other minor refinements. The variant went into production in the spring of 1944, and over 4,200 would be built.

straffo · « **Reply #21 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:45:27 PM »

I certainly can understand your reason Pyro

For me it's more sentimental than anything as in the MA I'm more a Typhoon dweeb than a Yak dweeb because it fit more how I fight .

Citabria I've 4239 9M and 3035 or 3038 9D in my documents.

(but sadly only 282 yak9UT

)

Pyro · « **Reply #22 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:49:13 PM »

Straffo, I was just talking about the 9D. I agree on the Yak 3, but that's more like a new plane than it is a variant.

straffo · « **Reply #23 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:49:32 PM »

Quote

The Yak-9D, introduced in the summer of 1943, was a longer-range escort fighter version carrying additional fuel in two outer wing panel tanks, and an optional tank under the cockpit. (Soviet pilots must have been viewed the latter as a mixed blessing.) It was powered by a 1,360 hp. M-105PF-3 engine.

isn't this more a 9DD than a D ?

hmmmpfff I need to read more accuratly.
I thought it was a quote about the long-range version (and so DD) not a increase in range

missed your post Pyro.
I agree the Yak3 is a complete new plane

What is your alcoolic weakness btw ,I know HT love for Cragganmore but you ?

(it's a not so stealth bribe attempt

)

Citabria · « **Reply #24 on:** May 03, 2004, 04:55:16 PM »

dunno straffo I wouldnt consider those quotes reliable I found them searching for yak9m numbers.

straffo · « **Reply #25 on:** May 03, 2004, 05:00:46 PM »

See my edit Citabria I misunderstood your quote

Batz · « **Reply #26 on:** May 03, 2004, 08:41:20 PM »

Quote

but sadly only 282 yak9UT

lol you ask for a lot don't ya

straffo · « **Reply #27 on:** May 04, 2004, 03:23:27 AM »

Yep I know Batz

Concerning production dates it perhaps depend of the plant.

1K3 · « **Reply #28 on:** May 05, 2004, 03:19:29 AM »

Would Ju-87G be a great addition on low-cost development?

P.S. Ju-87G used the same airframe and engine as the Ju-87D but with addition of 37mm cannon pod on each wings.

1K3 · « **Reply #29 on:** May 05, 2004, 03:19:59 AM »

Would Ju-87G be a great addition on low-cost development?

P.S. Ju-87G used the same airframe and engine as the Ju-87D but with addition of 37mm cannon pod on each wings.