« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5   Go Down

Author Topic: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH  (Read 2892 times)

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« on: February 07, 2012, 05:50:06 PM »
Perked Yak??

Yak-9UT
Yak-9U (VK-107) armed with 1 × 37 mm Nudelman N-37 cannon with 30 rounds and 2 20 mm Berezin B-20 cannons with 120 rpg, giving a one-second burst mass of 6 kg (13.2 lb). Similarly to Yak-9TK could be converted to replace the N-37 with a 20 mm B-20, 23 mm NS-23, or 45 mm N-45. Production aircraft carried NS-23 instead of the N-37 cannon as the default armament.

The Yak-9UT version was Yak-9U version serialle # 39-# 083. This was armed with 23mm NS-23 cannon (30 shells) and two 20mm B-20S cannons (120 shells per barrel). Undertaken from 8.03.45 to 29.03.45, Official State evaluation proved successful. To add to the State programme, the aircraft was tested at Air Force Research Institute until 9 June 1945. A total of 282 fighters was built between February and May 1945.


Logged
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10586
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2012, 08:33:56 PM »
Sure why not we have several other platforms in the game with less manufacturing numbers that that.
Logged

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2012, 09:25:27 PM »
How many squadrons did it fill in combat? Or simply prototypes and tested?
Logged
JG 52

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10586
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #3 on: February 07, 2012, 10:12:06 PM »
Quote from: Butcher on February 07, 2012, 09:25:27 PM
How many squadrons did it fill in combat? Or simply prototypes and tested?
Looks like it did see combat per this Russian site.

You will have to translate it. 

It did get kills.


In recent weeks one part of the war, the rearmament of the Yak-9UT, destroyed in 19 air battles 28 enemy aircraft, including 27 FW-190A-8 and an Me-109G-6, having lost only two of its aircraft.
 




http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/yak9ut.html
Logged

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #4 on: February 07, 2012, 10:26:09 PM »
What I've read, it didn't see combat. It was designed as a "universal armament" Yak9 where different guns could be mounted easily in the nose.

The B-20S cannons were essentially the 12.7mm mg adapted to a 20mm cannon round.

Even if it did see combat, who is to say that they were not armed exactly as our current Yak9U is?



wrongway
Logged
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2012, 05:17:14 PM »
I read around on some russian language blogs. Their resident wrongways, krustys and karnaks only complain about the N-37 not being available untill right at the end of hostilities. They point out that the 200+ Yak-9UT that participated at the end of the war used the NS-23 as their main cannon and had heavy aileron forces.

The N-37 was created to reduce the recoil from the NS-37. The shell casing was about 20% shorter. The NS-23 was scaled down from the NS-37 and would have a similar recoil to the B-20 and a slower rounds per minute rate. 550 versus 600. Not alot different than the La7 with 3 B-20 firing except for 19g HEI versus 5g.

Keeping the horizontal speed of the 9U due to the VK-107 engine, this would be a very nasty hit and run away player in the MA.
Logged
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Tank-Ace

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5298
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2012, 05:22:08 PM »
Can't imagine it would be any worse than the K4. I mean the K4 actually has the speed to escape a majority of the aircraft in AH. 400mph at 5k is impressive.
Logged
Quote from: Arlo on April 28, 2014, 06:25:38 PM
You started this thread and it was obviously about your want and desire in spite of your use of 'we' and Google.

"Once more unto the breach"

Offline lyric1

  • Skinner Team
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10586
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2012, 05:45:19 PM »
Logged

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2012, 04:24:42 AM »
Here is a different question....

Can everyone help find support for this aircraft since we all tacitly claim to be  masters of WW2 History PHD or beyond? WoW what we don't accomplish in our personal desire to boost our own EGO by kiiling each other's EGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We all need to help each other since WW2 is dieing at about 700 gentelmen per day now. Can we honor them instead of our small passing Egos?? Some of us seem determined to kill them off with our myopic self worship of counter castration to our fellows ideas. How small can we descend to light our miserable crypts?

How useless are we all that we choose to destroy each others reputaions rather than to support our mutual love of WW2 history.....

Even Hitech has had to honor a few of you for your personal attachments to your EGO's over WW2 history.
Logged
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2012, 05:30:22 AM »
Why limit the time frame to VE day? The Soviets invaded Japanese held Manchuria on August 9 – 20, 1945. They deployed more than 5,000 aircraft in the operation.
Logged
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline PR3D4TOR

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2884
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2012, 05:37:23 AM »
Quote from: AWwrgwy on February 07, 2012, 10:26:09 PM
What I've read, it didn't see combat. It was designed as a "universal armament" Yak9 where different guns could be mounted easily in the nose.

The B-20S cannons were essentially the 12.7mm mg adapted to a 20mm cannon round.

Even if it did see combat, who is to say that they were not armed exactly as our current Yak9U is?



wrongway

Only the hub-gun was "modular", the B20's were fixed standard armament in place of the UBS'. So even if you only put the 9U's ShVAK in the hub it will be a three-cannon Yak.
Logged
No gods or kings. Only Predator.

Offline MAINER

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 607
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2012, 06:32:45 AM »
+1
Logged
Are those our bombers?-famous last words



 Member of the congregation of The church of David Wales

Offline WWhiskey

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3122
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2012, 09:25:29 AM »
+ TWO :aok :aok
Logged
Flying since tour 71.

Offline OOZ662

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7019
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2012, 09:36:58 AM »
Quote from: bustr on February 09, 2012, 04:24:42 AM
Here is a different question....

Can everyone help find support for this aircraft since we all tacitly claim to be  masters of WW2 History PHD or beyond? WoW what we don't accomplish in our personal desire to boost our own EGO by kiiling each other's EGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We all need to help each other since WW2 is dieing at about 700 gentelmen per day now. Can we honor them instead of our small passing Egos?? Some of us seem determined to kill them off with our myopic self worship of counter castration to our fellows ideas. How small can we descend to light our miserable crypts?

How useless are we all that we choose to destroy each others reputaions rather than to support our mutual love of WW2 history.....

Even Hitech has had to honor a few of you for your personal attachments to your EGO's over WW2 history.

Wait, what? You asked if it qualified for Aces High, the answer was "yeah, probably, though there are questions about the gun loadout," and that's somehow an affront to WWII veterans? :confused:
Logged
A Rook who first flew 09/26/03 at the age of 13, has been a GL in 10+ Scenarios, and was two-time Points and First Annual 68KO Cup winner of the AH Extreme Air Racing League.

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: Yak-9UT, Was this in enough numbers to qualify for AH
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2012, 01:18:46 PM »
Quote from: bustr on February 09, 2012, 04:24:42 AM
Here is a different question....

Can everyone help find support for this aircraft since we all tacitly claim to be  masters of WW2 History PHD or beyond? WoW what we don't accomplish in our personal desire to boost our own EGO by kiiling each other's EGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We all need to help each other since WW2 is dieing at about 700 gentelmen per day now.

So a few people who quote it wasn't in combat before the war ended are Ego maniacs because they won't support you?

 :headscratch:

I will support the aircraft long as it fits the bill to add to aces high, secondly you didn't ask for any information only said it needs to be added.

Edited:
What I found so far is the aircraft was tested March 8-29th 1945 - One regiment flew the Yak-9UT and destroyed 27 aircraft total for loss of two during the testing phase during the closing weeks of WW2. I cannot find any information on which Guards Regiment flew it, however "testing" is routinely brought up.

However the gun was not the NS-23 it was a N-37 same as the Yak-9T that was used on the aircraft in action. Between March and August some 282 were built, however I don't see any were sent to the Japanese front.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2012, 01:40:45 PM by Butcher »
Logged
JG 52
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5   Go Up
« previous next »