Author Topic: LA-7 (Read 1394 times)

Spatula · « **on:** March 05, 2000, 09:25:00 PM »

I heard rumours a while ago about the LA-7 being a possibility. Being an LA-5 Driver i would leap at the chance of getting a later model kite of the same family.
I dont know much about it excpet that i outperforms the LA-5 which would make it a fearsome sight i would imagine.
The art work would be based on the LA-5.
How about some other Russian planes? Like the Yak-9??
Also, i dont see too many people who fly the LA-5, i wonder why not? Its an awesome ride, dives like a bat out of hell with little compression, zooms well. Turns well, a little bit on the lighly armed side, but if ya cant knock a plane down with 2 20mms then you need help.
So, i ask, why does no-one fly it?

------------------
Supreme Mega-Overlord Spatula
"...perfect for serving"

=1st Airborne Kitchen Utensil Assualt Group=

[This message has been edited by Spatula (edited 03-05-2000).]

funked · « **Reply #1 on:** March 05, 2000, 10:56:00 PM »

La-5FN has poor range in the arena due to the draconian fuel multipliers.

I love to fly it, but by the time I climb and get to enemy territory, I've got bloody little fuel left.

[This message has been edited by funked (edited 03-05-2000).]

juzz · « **Reply #2 on:** March 06, 2000, 02:15:00 AM »

The only bonus of the La-7 is an extra 20-30mph top speed, and maybe an extra cannon if you're lucky.

Spatula · « **Reply #3 on:** March 06, 2000, 05:46:00 AM »

sounds perfect to me

------------------
Supreme Mega-Overlord Spatula
"...perfect for serving"

=1st Airborne Kitchen Utensil Assualt Group=

Saintaw · « **Reply #4 on:** March 06, 2000, 06:33:00 AM »

I like the way that LA5 flies, my main problem are the Views : I hate those bars on the side

Otherwise, I agree it's a nice, but ugly plane

------------------
Saw/Saintaw
KNIGHT'S FINEST FLYING BRICK

JG2 "Richthofen"
"Firepower Mate, that is what separates the men from the boys..."

[This message has been edited by Saintaw (edited 03-06-2000).]

Vermillion · « **Reply #5 on:** March 06, 2000, 07:23:00 AM »

Juzz is right, at best you will get 20mph and an extra cannon.

Really the La-7 is just a La-5FN with some improvements to aerodynamics, and a couple of hundred pounds in weight reduction (and if you load it with the 3 20mm cannon option you will actually be heavier). It will have the same wingloading, and same powerloading as the current La-5FN.

That 20mph sounds like alot, but since its already one of the slowest planes in the set, its all relative. For instance, the La-7 still wouldn't be any faster than the AH Spit IX (max to max comparison).

Why dont' I fly it? Well, the fuel modifier doesn't bother me much, its the speed issue. The La-5 (and 7 too) are primarily E fighters, and your right that they have nice handling characteristics. The problem is that an E fighter at some point in the fight has to have the ability to disengage and escape. And it just can't do that in the AH planeset.

Unfortunately from looking at the performance Specs., I don't think the La7 will solve the VVS need for a competitive Late War fighter. I hope I am wrong but thats my impression

.

IMO I think its gonna take either the Yak-9U, or the Yak-3 with the VK107, to be competitive in this ultra late war planeset.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 03-06-2000).]

Ripsnort · « **Reply #6 on:** March 06, 2000, 08:25:00 AM »

I've been flying the LA-5 as a primary A/C this tour, I enjoy it very much. I've been holding a reasonable K/D ratio with it.

I'd have to disagree with your assessment, Funked, on the poor range, yesterday, I took off from F22, flew to F21, then flew to F8, then flew to F7, when I arrived at F7, I had 1/2 tank of fuel left. No wep was involved at all, so this might have alittle to do with it.

I understand that the LA-7 is alittle lighter A/C than LA-5, which should help it's handling alittle better, combined with that 30 mph faster.

------------------
Brian "Ripsnort" Nelson
++JG2++ ~Richthofen~ XO
Aces High Training Corps
JG2 "Richthofen"

"Opfer mussen gebracht werden"
— Otto Lilienthal

[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 03-06-2000).]

funked · « **Reply #7 on:** March 06, 2000, 09:57:00 AM »

Ripsnort, it's got less range than any plane in the set.

Spatula · « **Reply #8 on:** March 06, 2000, 02:25:00 PM »

From what little research i have done i've found:
- its faster.

- its lighter

- Has a more powerfull engine (i believe another 200 HP)
- Comes in standard 2*20mm cannons (which is enuf)
Bring it on...
I agree with vermillon, that i dont have the legs to disengage, - just means you'll have to do a little earlier thats all. I have had no problems running from spits in the current LA-5, you just have to pick when to leave. The extra 20-30 mph sounds exactly what i need.
The problem is this:
I want to get better at E fighting, but the pony has rubber bullets, the 190 dont handle so well, the 109 compresses like heck, the 38 has terrible views, which leaves the la-5. which is not bad at eveything.
oh well i guess you cant win em all

------------------
Supreme Mega-Overlord Spatula
"...perfect for serving"

=1st Airborne Kitchen Utensil Assualt Group=

[This message has been edited by Spatula (edited 03-06-2000).]

DOW_Cleaner · « **Reply #9 on:** March 06, 2000, 06:47:00 PM »

Verm, I am like you...I want my Yak-3 and I want it now...The ultimate stall fighter!!

[This message has been edited by DOW_Cleaner (edited 03-06-2000).]

funked · « **Reply #10 on:** March 06, 2000, 07:48:00 PM »

DOW_Cleaner - Check out the wing loading on the Yak-3 sometime. It's not really very good.

It's still a great plane, but not the best by far at flat turning.

Sorrow[S=A] · « **Reply #11 on:** March 06, 2000, 10:10:00 PM »

The third gun would not be signifigantly more weight BTW, the three gun setup used bored out machine guns firing SHVak rounds and weighed less than the standard cannons. The weight I believe, would be no different than the dual with the exception of extra ammo.

I have found no problems out running people and am at a loss to understand the slow comments. The La-5FN has a top speed of around 385 mph on deck. at alt it can get up to 397, and furthermore it can get there fairly fast. Admittedly it's low point is that both the La-5FN and La-7 have no supercharger boost over 8000 ft, however they both should handle extremely well right up to their service ceiling. I think that the La-7 should be the _obvious_ choice for the next russian plane. It is an La-5FN with the extra speed to compete with the fighters present in the arena. Personally I am not holding my breath for the Yak, after seeing the relativly weak resistance to bullets the La fighters have in AH I dread seeing what will happen to a paper tissue Yak plane.

------------------
If your in range, so is the enemy.

[This message has been edited by Sorrow[S=A] (edited 03-06-2000).]

leonid · « **Reply #12 on:** March 06, 2000, 11:06:00 PM »

Okay, the improved performance of the La-7 is the result of several factors that together are greater than the sum of the whole. All the parameters you have stated are correct, more or less (the La-5FN & La-7 have the same exact engine). For those of you who have played WB, do you remember the Yak-3's energy retaining capabilities? Well, the La-7 had equal or better capabilities in this department. All this and the La-7 is faster too, by 20mph. And I kid you not, it is a fact that a La-7 could catch up with a Fw 190A-whatever in a dive.

So, to sum it up, the La-7 is:

equal to or better than a Yak-3 in energy-retaining capabilities.
faster than a La-5FN by about 20mph.
of even more potent power loading (3.87lbs/hp compared to the La-5FN's 3.96lbs/hp).
still tough as, if not tougher than, the La-5FN.
capable of having three 20mm cannons.

If no one flies it is fine by me, it'll be the best sleeper in the game.

------------------
leonid, Komandir
5 GIAP VVS RKKA

"Our cause is just. The enemy will be crushed. Victory will be ours."

[This message has been edited by leonid (edited 03-06-2000).]

funked · « **Reply #13 on:** March 06, 2000, 11:13:00 PM »

I'll fly it exclusively.

Vermillion · « **Reply #14 on:** March 08, 2000, 09:41:00 AM »

Leonid, you have drag coefficents for the La-7 and the Yak-3? I would love to see them.

I was really suprised when you said that the La7 is as good in E retention (not that it would be bad either I figure both are pretty good), given the greater wing area (similar in shape) and that it is has a radial engine.

Looked back at the La7 performance stats, and one thing really jumped out at me that I didn't notice before. 380mph at SL ?? Wow. No wonder it can catch just about any Fw190 thru the dive and extension.

Not a bad plane, but I still would prefer a Yak-9U since IMO it is more competitive with the current planeset.

I would give up the La7's superior firepower (3 20mm's vs. 1 20mm + x2 12.7mm MG's) and sea level speed (380mph vs 373mph), for Yak's the slightly better power loading (3.64 lbs/hp vs 3.87), better speed at altitude (437mph vs 420mph), slightly better turn times (18.5 secs vs 20 secs), and very importantly the better visibility of the inline enginge (seeing under/around the nose) and full bubble canopy.

I guess the major factor is my style of flying. At altitude I like to be able to engage/disengage to my advantage, and the 437mph (close to pony speed) allows me to do that, where 420mph is barely the same speed as a spitfire.

Hey don't blame me

Your the one that got me interested in the Yak-9U.

The more I look at them, The more I like late war Russian fighters.

------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure

[This message has been edited by Vermillion (edited 03-08-2000).]