Originally posted by Kweassa
So, if the opportunity ever rises, should there ever be modelled a separate '43 La-5FN as compared to the '44 La-5FN we have?
Your point re the non modelling of production control/quality issues is valid certainly for VVS ac.
The difference in 44La7 to 45La7 (other than the cannon) is purely yhe consistant development toward a difined quality standard.
Very late 45La7's also had additional air intake filters, better radios and some even benifitted from coupled throttle/mixture controls..but none of this really affects our La7 IMO.
The main areas that were consitantly addressed (across all lavochkins) was panel fit and excess use of glue/resin which could add weight to the total construction. Panel fit was often corrected in the field. It was after all only the engine cowlings.
re the La5fn.
Most of the La5's in early 43 were the La5F (normally asperated) and although the 2nd La5FN prototype was committed to production in March 43 it was not introduced as originally intended.
The 2nd prototype had a production target weight (all up) of 3200kgs it was also the first Lavochkin to use metal wing spars. However there were many la5F wooden sparred wings already made so the new plane went into production with those and an all up weight of 3300kgs.
Due to shortages of the injected ash 82 FNV the La5f continued production as well. Indeed the largest production plant at Gorky did not swing totally over to the La5FN until October.
So what you see is a mismash of interim types appearing over the course of 43. such as
La5f std
La5f metal spar (after mid 43 Gorky)
La5FN wooden spar (upto mid 43)
La5FN std after mid 43.
On top of this is the usuall battle with poor fit and excess resin/glue used a a very heavy filler.
Re WEP and the La5FN.
Rechlin data suggest that the La5FN they had was capable of a full 10 mins at 2500rpm but (IIRC) limit its use to lower alts. Other than this I have yet to find data supporting extensive use of WEP certainly Czech pilots in 44 were told not to use it longer than 2 minutes.
How could HTC model this lot?
Well La5FN engines could be modelled to heat up under WEP a little quicker than now.
A mid 43 (Kursk) La5FN could be modelled with wooden spars and little heavier by 100 kg but this would add potentially other problems to modelling a 4 set fuel tank instead of the 3 set we have for the metal sparred La7 and La5FN.
The alternative is to add the La5F.
Your point re HTC not modelling production quality variants is well made and problematic whan considering the La7 and some IJN/IJA variants.
However it could be argued that a wooden sparred La5FN is as different from std as a non paddle bladed P47N would be prior its addition.
For me the easy solution is to separate the 3 cannon La7 as a distinct model. There are other reasons to do this. Latest rendering we have now are improving leaps and bounds over the original shapes adopted for lavochkins. The gun bubbles for the 3 cannon version are not the same as the 2 cannon and I see no way to reproduce this faithfully apart from creating two simialr but quite separate ac.
I actually believe that HTC will eventually do this when it comes time to re render the Lavochkins............I like to think that their priorities are elsewhere right now.
