Author Topic: What happened to LW? (Read 23177 times)

Crumpp · « **Reply #420 on:** December 07, 2005, 11:32:27 AM »

Quote

Was also lucky enough to go back July 1990 to see Roger Waters perform 'The Wall'.

Nice! I was over in Germany from 1990-91.

I expect to see some really good histories of the Eastern Air War come out in the next 10 years as things settle down and become more open.

"Black Cross, Red Star" is just the begining. Even today it is a difficult area to research. Nothing like the difficulties of the days of the USSR or the formative years of the CIS, however.

All the best,

Crumpp

Angus · « **Reply #421 on:** December 07, 2005, 12:39:56 PM »

Ah yes, the Big Bear was 1991, got mixed....lol, me showing age.
Still baffled how long ago this was. Lived with my old gran at the time and had moved out in 1991 so should have remembered.
Was scratching my head though hehe.
BTW, Black Cross-red star, - any good?

Was corresponding to Bergström some years back,- was planning to see Grieslawsky. But the old fellow died the week I was going to phone him

Charge · « **Reply #422 on:** December 08, 2005, 03:07:14 AM »

"Your showing your age."

My age? I was born in 1971 and I do know about the Berlin wall.
Just don't understand what you mean with that "wall" thing when Geust and "Under the red star" is mentioned.

-C+

Crumpp · « **Reply #423 on:** December 08, 2005, 03:29:23 AM »

Charge.

No offense meant.

On the book:

If it was published in 1993 access to VVS information was much more difficult.

All the best,

Crumpp

Charge · « **Reply #424 on:** December 08, 2005, 04:04:13 AM »

Rgr Crumpp.

-C+

Crumpp · « **Reply #425 on:** December 08, 2005, 06:32:00 AM »

Quote

BTW, Black Cross-red star, - any good?

It covers a rather broad subject but does an wonderful job IMHO.

All the best,

Crumpp

KurfÃ¼rst · « **Reply #426 on:** December 08, 2005, 07:16:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tilt
I am vry interested in any source docs re this La7 to FW performance trial.

I have the following translation with respect to a performance trial with an 109 G4

....
I assume that LW experts here can take known 109G4 performance figures and transpose those with the FW190?

Depends. The Russians certainly tested at least one 109G-4 but that one had gunpods mounted, it'd make it difficult to compare. Do you have any further details, what's the source?

From what I have, the 10G-4 w. gunpods did 650 kph at 7000m w. 1.3ata 30-min rating, in the russian tests.

Tilt · « **Reply #427 on:** December 08, 2005, 10:46:49 AM »

Zipped scans of the original VVS docs. Some I think have been re typed since 44/45

There is a whole bunch of stuff here I do not have proper translations for.............. and alot of that regularly refers to comparisons between la7 and la5.

Unfortunately the 109G4 is mentioned only in the above respect without other data. Page 1 of the following reports which show performance figures across a range of La7's

http://www.tilt.clara.net/data/page01_10.zip

I would welcome any translations of the following

http://www.tilt.clara.net/data/01-10.zip

http://www.tilt.clara.net/data/11-20.zip

http://www.tilt.clara.net/data/21-30.zip

http://www.tilt.clara.net/data/31-37.zip

ATA · « **Reply #428 on:** December 08, 2005, 01:10:36 PM »

Oh my God!!
Where did you get all this stuff?

KurfÃ¼rst · « **Reply #429 on:** December 08, 2005, 02:31:16 PM »

Very nice! Anybody with a good command of russian?

On the Soviet tests done, I know they got both a G-2 and G-4 with gunpods. The G-2 they tested both clean and as heavy fighter, but for the G-4 I can only find results for a 'five pointer' (ie. 3cannon+2mg) plane. This would of course not mean that was the only condition they tested it, but the russians, like Western allies seem to have developed themselves the idea that the Gustav was a sort of heavy fighter that always flew with gondolas..

Tilt · « **Reply #430 on:** December 09, 2005, 01:18:11 PM »

I have translations for the first set of zipped docs (Page01_10) and have posted them here often.

But not the others........although I have laborious worked thru some of the tables with dictionary in hand.

The reference to the 109G4 I posted above is the only one in all my stuff.

The only thing that I did learn was the sustained dive capability of the G4 was better than the La7 . In comparative terms this is quite informative.

The rest has too many variables that could come to play............(to which is now added the possibility of wing pods!)

Angus · « **Reply #431 on:** December 09, 2005, 04:03:52 PM »

The late 109's could dive very very fast, and they were relatively quick in gaining the speed. They would AFAIK need to be trimmed out of the dive.
Rall has mentioned that the P47 was the first he met that could not be left behind.

Karnak · « **Reply #432 on:** December 09, 2005, 04:35:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Tilt
The only thing that I did learn was the sustained dive capability of the G4 was better than the La7 . In comparative terms this is quite informative.

In AH the only things I have ever dove away from an La-7 in are a Mosquito and an Me262. I remember an La-7 diving away from my Spit XIV. It left me like I was standing still, and the Spit XIV isn't really a slouch when it comes to diving either.

Krusty · « **Reply #433 on:** December 09, 2005, 04:42:10 PM »

AH's dive model is inaccurate across-the-board.

Crumpp · « **Reply #434 on:** December 09, 2005, 04:44:58 PM »

Quote

They would AFAIK need to be trimmed out of the dive.

Yep, they used the flosse. In the Bf-109's it was not difficult to precisely control the recovery. In the FW-190 the flosse became very sensative and it was possible to overload the aircraft very quickly.

There is anecdotal evidence of FW-190's diving in combat, building up speed, and then suddenly disintegrating.

All the best,

Crumpp