Author Topic: Yak-9t (Read 1581 times)

indy007 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 28, 2005, 11:20:10 AM »

If it were an AT weapon, it'd have the same problem that the Hurri does, with shells going straight through and not making things go boom.

Tony Williams · « **Reply #16 on:** December 28, 2005, 11:22:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by George
According to book of Mr. Stepanetz (Chief flight test engineer of Yakovlev's design office), T means Tankoviy (Tank). It can be understood as 'aircraft which has gun like tank'. In the most of Russian articles T means Tankoviy too.

There have been conflicting interpretations from Russian sources...

Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website and discussion forum

cav58d · « **Reply #17 on:** December 28, 2005, 12:56:04 PM »

So whats everyones opinion...Should I focus on the T or U?? Id like to hear a comprehensive comparsion of strengths and weakness's

Krusty · « **Reply #18 on:** December 28, 2005, 01:29:56 PM »

U has more powerful engine but only 150-200 rounds of 20mm. That's about the same as the 109F. It's hard to get kills with a single 20mm. I think for just getting kills the 37mm with 32 rounds is more effective than the 20mm with 200 rounds. Kind of like the 109s with a single 20mm vs a single 30mm. The 30mm has more potential but is harder to hit with.

Oldman731 · « **Reply #19 on:** December 28, 2005, 01:35:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by cav58d
So whats everyones opinion...Should I focus on the T or U?? Id like to hear a comprehensive comparsion of strengths and weakness's

9U is a far more capable plane, does everything well, I consider it to be one of the half-dozen uber rides in AH. As Krusty says, you can't just spray ammo around, but there's no question (in my view, at least) that the 9U is superior to the 9T.

Which is, of course, a very compelling reason to learn how to fly the 9T.

- oldman

Squire · « **Reply #20 on:** December 28, 2005, 02:44:42 PM »

From what I have read the 37mm in the Yak-9T was not popular with Soviet pilots, it had very limited ammo, the a/c shook terribly when it fired, and it was a difficult gun to aim.

I would like to see the Yak-9 and Yak-3 series (the real backbone of the Yak equipped VVS) and ditch the Yak-9T and the Yak-9U.

1K3 · « **Reply #21 on:** December 28, 2005, 03:49:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire

I would like to see the Yak-9 and Yak-3 series (the real backbone of the Yak equipped VVS) and ditch the Yak-9T and the Yak-9U.

ditch the yak 9U???? u kiddin right?

We have very few Russian/USSR fighters that can reach 400+ mph and u want the -9U scrapped?

for late war East-Front planesets germany more fighters than can reach 400 plus mph than VVS's

the late war 400+ club

luftwaffe
109G-14 (410mph)
109K-4 (450mph)
Fw-190A-8/F-8 (410mph)
Fw-190D-9 (420 mph)

VVS
La-7 (410mph)
Yak-3 (barely 400mph)

Squire · « **Reply #22 on:** December 28, 2005, 04:19:02 PM »

The Yak-9U we have is not much different than a Yak-3 in performance. We do not have the VK-107 Yak-9U (434mph in 1945).

I like the Yak-3 because its more representative of what they used.

I wouldn't be so hasty to diss it IK3, you could very well like it better, by all accounts it was an awesome dogfighter.

1K3 · « **Reply #23 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:36:55 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
The Yak-9U we have is not much different than a Yak-3 in performance. We do not have the VK-107 Yak-9U (434mph in 1945).

You saying AH Yak-9U has VK 105 engine?

cav58d · « **Reply #24 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:39:43 PM »

wow...I ran into an IL2 today with my Yak-T....It actually took two rounds 2 bring her down! I LOVE THIS PLANE!

Kweassa · « **Reply #25 on:** December 28, 2005, 10:45:26 PM »

The Yak-9T, or the Yak-9U for that matter, doesn't really turn any better than the La-7. The only plane that can be said that turns a tad better, would be the La-5FN.

The following are the test figures:

Quote

-Format-
Name (stall limiter angle required for testing)
- time to complete one full circle at normal flight (turn speed), turn radius
- time to complete one full circle with one notch flaps (turn speed), turn radius
- time to complete one full circle with full flaps (turn speed), turn radius

Quote

Yak-9T (0.05)
- 20 seconds (144mph), 205.0m
- 19 seconds (132mph), 178.5m
- 19 seconds (116mph), 156.8m

Yak-9U (0.05)
- 19 seconds (152mph), 205.5m
- 18 seconds (144mph), 184.5m
- 19 seconds (129mph), 174.4m

La-5FN (0.05)
- 18 seconds (156mph), 199.8m
- 17 seconds (150mph), 181.5m
- 17 seconds (126mph), 152.4m

La-7 (0.05)
2xShVAK
- 18 seconds (162mph), 207.5m
- 18 seconds (153mph), 196.0m
- 17 seconds (127mph), 153.6m
3xB-20
- 18 seconds (162mph), 207.5m
- 17 seconds (151mph), 182.7m
- 17 seconds (126mph), 152.4m

The turn capabilities of the two Yaks and Lavochkas are simular, with only the La-5FN at a small lead above others. This amount of advantage in turn the La-5FN holds over the others, is roughly about as much advantage as the A6M5 holds over the Hurricane MkIIc. Basically, they all turn about the same with very slight differences.

Flaps really don't make much of a difference unless; 1) they can be for some reason, deployed a lot earlier than usual(as in combat settings seen in US fighters), or 2) they are particularly efficient in stablizing the plane(the Fowlers in Ki-84 or the P-38s) - which, is neither in the VVS fighters.

Here's a list of turn performance(normal flight conditions) with a few "milestone" planes to give out the general impression on turn performance comparison:

A6M5: 138.7m
Hurricane Mk.IIc: 145.2m
Spitfire Mk.V: 157.0m
Ki-84-I-Ko (0.05): 185.1m
Bf109F-4: 199.5m
[b]La-5FN: 199.8m[/b]
N1K2-J: 202.0m
[b]Yak-9T: 205.0m
Yak-9U: 205.5m
La-7: 207.5m
La-7(3x20mm): 207.5m[/b]
Bf109G-14(20mm): 214.0m
Bf109G-14(30mm): 217.2m
Bf109K-4: 233.3m
P-51D: 248.1m
P-47D-40: 264.8m
P-38L: 275.0m
P-47N(75%) 275.8m
Fw190D-9: 283.4m
Fw190A-8: 296.3m
Fw190A-8(30mm): 296.3m

Therefore, any difference, or 'superiority' one perceives with the Yaks or Las, can be traced to;

1) pure placebo
2) secondary reasons such as E efficiency or superior engine power
3) easier handling and correcting at near-stall situation

...not, pure turn performance.

scott123 · « **Reply #26 on:** December 29, 2005, 06:06:47 AM »

The Yak 9u is as good,if not better tha\n the Yak 3 and has all of the 3's improvements.The Yak 3 was supposed to have more metal in it's construction than earlier Yak's,but a lot had to make do with the composite material of the yak 9.The Yak 9u however was all metal which made it more able to cope with high speed dives.As far as I know the Yak 9T was used not against Tanks but against shipping,although I don't think this was it's original purpose,in aces highg it is more effective against armour than the Hurri D.

George · « **Reply #27 on:** December 29, 2005, 08:49:42 AM »

Only experimental Yak-9U obtained 434.78 mph (700 km/h)
Max speed of serial Yak-9U was:

1. up to December, 1944 - 575 km/h (357 mph) at ground level and 636 km/h (395 mph) at 5000 m, because of problems with motor overheating.
Motor rpm has been limited by 2800 rpm for climb and 3000 rpm for horizontal flight

2. From December, 1944 - 575 km/h (357 mph) at ground level and 672 mph (417 km/h) at 5000 m and 3200 rpm, because of canceling of rpm limit

By the way, Yak-9UT has been produced from Feb., 1945 up to May, 1945 in total q-ty 282 pcs. This fighter also has been used in WWII air combats.
Yak-9UT had 1x23 mm NS-23 and 2x20 mm B-20, 4.23 kg/sec fire rate.
After end of war has been designed all-metal Yak-9P with the same armament as Yak-9UT (801 pcs.).

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
The Yak-9U we have is not much different than a Yak-3 in performance. We do not have the VK-107 Yak-9U (434mph in 1945).

I like the Yak-3 because its more representative of what they used.

I wouldn't be so hasty to diss it IK3, you could very well like it better, by all accounts it was an awesome dogfighter.

Widewing · « **Reply #28 on:** December 29, 2005, 10:22:35 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Squire
The Yak-9U we have is not much different than a Yak-3 in performance. We do not have the VK-107 Yak-9U (434mph in 1945).

I like the Yak-3 because its more representative of what they used.

I wouldn't be so hasty to diss it IK3, you could very well like it better, by all accounts it was an awesome dogfighter.

We do have the VK-107 engine and performance is accurate for the typical war-time 9U.

Speed at best altitude, measured with E6B:

18.0k: 414 mph
17.5k: 415 mph
17.0k: 416 mph
16.5k: 415 mph
16.0k: 414 mph
15.5k: 412 mph

As George noted (although he transposed kph and mph), war-time 9Us were rated at 417 mph at roughly 16,500 feet. The error in AH2 is less than 0.5% at 16.5k, but within 0.24% at 17,000 feet. In other words, more accurate than the test equipment used to record data on an actual aircraft (usually certified to +/- 1%).

My regards,

Widewing

Tilt · « **Reply #29 on:** December 29, 2005, 12:24:06 PM »

We have the Vk107 powered Yak9U..........only 282 Yak9UT were manufactured and its not clear how many saw active duty as the production authorisation was only given in March 45.

I think we would benefit from the addition of the Yak3..............

It has the lesser VK105P2 engine but is considerably lighter (400kg empty) than the 9U and much better manouverability (turning circle 17 secs fully loaded).

Its power to weight ratio suggests that its acceleration from lower speeds is every bit as good as the 9U whilst it will not enjoy the higher speeds of the 9U. Neither would it perform in the mid range of altitude as the 9U does.

It would be the the best VVS close quarter ACM ride if adopted by AH IMO.