LW vs VVS

[-ik-]

The thing you have to remember about 1vs1 aircraft tests: a duel is no good judgement of a fighter's capabilities in a multi vs multi engagement. 1 Spitfire V will kill 1 190A pretty easily, 2 SpitV's and 2 190A's equals 2 dead Spitfires  

----------

Oh and I should've specified, lower wingloading is more drag when you have 2 aircraft of the same weight.

[juzz]

But the Spit V is heavier than the Bf109F...

[janneh]

"And no aircraft is better for a tight BnZ than a 109"

I agree + every vertical maneuver suits Bf109f, only way to fight in it succesfully.
Perhaps You could say it's the E-fighting ?

BTW ik, where's your "Killing spits in 109" pages ? I've lost'em...

[leonid]

aper,
How much money would I have to pay you to transcribe those books into English???  

------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA

[BBGunn]

I noticed that in AC of WW2 by S. Wilson there is a note about the Yak-3.  The Luftwaffe pilots (109-G and FW-190 drivers) were given a general order not to engage Yak-3's below 15000 ft.  In July 1944 18 Yak-3's took on a mix of 30 109-G's and FW-190's and shot down 24 for one Yak lost.
Even though its armament is not the best it was a very effective fighter.  The free French Normandie-Rieman fighter unit picked the Yak-3 over allied fighters like the 51 and scored quite well.  The Reno air racer, Bill Destefani from California, also has a Yak-3 and loves to fly it- Its a hot plane.  I would like to see Yak-3's in more sims.

[leonid]

BBGunn,
Don't worry about the Yak-3.  I'm sure it'll be here, since Pyro has a great FM of the Yak-3 in his files.  You think the La-5FN is a good vert fighter?  Wait till you see what that little baby can do!

Of course, I'll always be loyal to the Lavochkins, but the Yak-3 is quite the plane.  Good points are:

1) It has the best canopy of the war with complete uncluttered view both in front and in back.  The only thing cluttering the side views are two vertical bars which wrap around over the top.
2) More horizontally maneuverable than a La-5FN.
3) Vertical maneuverability that rivals the La-7.

Bad points:
1) Weak armament of one 20mm ShVAK and two 12.7mm UBS with sparse ammo loads for each.
2) Fragile structure.


------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA

[-aper-]

To Leonid:

Georgy Zakharov wrote about Yak-3 that the main advantages of this fighter were very low inertia and extraordinary quick and easy response on the stick. These features made Yak-3 really unbeatable in fight. Yak-3 was also very easy to fly (forgiving piloting mistakes plane) and even unexperienced pilots could fly it well. This was also a big difference comaperd for rather tough La-5FN. Though Zakharov wrote that many pilots who flew Lavochkin's fighters considered La-5FN as a best fighter, and some pilots who flew Yak-9U were sure that VK-107 engine and high speed/climb abilities were good compensation for the lack of manouverability compared to Yak-3.

[leonid]

aper:
That's the way I felt about the Yak-3 Pyro made for brand W.  It felt like you were flying with your hair on fire    I was able to do a left combat turn in it that was out of this world.  Another thing I enjoyed doing was taking advantage of the reverse torque of the Klimov engines.  In fact, with a little alt even a Yak-9D was quite deadly with that right turn.

------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA

[Pongo]

ik.
that is exactly my experiance. Even with 2 fw to 3 spit. All planes benifit from a wingman of course but the fw seems to really turn the tables if it has support.

[-aper-]

Leonid:
Yak-3 was modeled very well in speed/climb/turn characteristics in WB. Pyro made a great work. But the WB's FM could not provide the real agility of Yak-3. As the  FM of AH much better I hope that Yak-3 would be real blast here. Unfortunately it may be the reason we'll not see Yak-3 soon. This plane can disbalance the arena.


[This message has been edited by -aper- (edited 12-18-1999).]

[This message has been edited by -aper- (edited 12-18-1999).]

[-lynx-]

Prolly need another thread to clarify this but:

ik - wingloading has nothing to do with lift, same as lift is not directly responsible for drag.

The former is just a ratio of weight/wing surface; the latter is a function of not only the airfoil but also the airspeed and shedload of other factors.

A brick would generate quite a lot of drag and very little lift. On the other hand Burt Rutan's Explorer had very low wingloading and drag close to non-existent .

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

[leonid]

aper:
I agree, the Yak-3 could really unbalance the arena now.  I remember when they had Russian front scenarios in the WB Historical arena with the Yaks vs. the 109/190.  The LW-types got slaughtered everytime.

------------------
129 IAP VVS RKKA