La-7's correct critical altitude and general flight modeling

[Karnak]

... and there is nothing stock about any of that.  Take a few grease monkeys, machinists, and typical engineers, and a host of grinders, lathes, tools, etc, and some money and any engine/airframe can be made to perform and shine beyond what it was designed to do. 

If HTC changes the La7's performance to a more historically accurate model, I can already hear the cries and kicking and screaming by the La7 fanboi's.  Poor things.   

It is, by all we can tell, modeled as such.  You seem to be asking for it to be modeled as a lemon because Soviet manufacturing almost certainly could not reliably produce the aircraft as designed.  AH doesn't model such things, else all sorts of aircraft would need to be dramatically altered.

[SmokinLoon]

It is, by all we can tell, modeled as such.  You seem to be asking for it to be modeled as a lemon because Soviet manufacturing almost certainly could not reliably produce the aircraft as designed.  AH doesn't model such things, else all sorts of aircraft would need to be dramatically altered.

No no... do not assume anything.  I did not ask for the La7 to be modeled as a "lemon", but rather for it to be accurately modeled.  Two different things.  I see your point as well, there would be a whole host of aircraft that would be altered a bit if their "bugs" were to be modeled.  I actually thought HTC was on to something when the B29 was first released and the engines caught fire when abusing the WEP.  But alas, that was an HTC "coading" bug and not a nod towards realism. 

[Karnak]

What would be "realistic"? How far off spec should it be?  How far is too far?  This seems like a recipe for endless complaints.

As to the B-29 in AH, it was flammable due to damage, WEP had nothing to do with it.  HTC simply toughened it up a bit by reducing the chance it would catch fire.

[Perrine]

Didn't one of LA-7 ace pilots had a run in with a Mustang in real life?

[GScholz]

Even if HTC would model reliability issues I don't understand what needs to be made more unreliable in the La-5/7. The Shvetsov ASh-82 was a reliable engine; and by that I mean insanely reliable. It was a development of the Wright Cyclone series which the Soviets license produced in the 1930s, so if anyone wants to beat his nationalistic chest it is basically an American engine adapted to Russian needs. This engine is so good it is still in production in China as the Dongan HS7.

[Motherland]

I don't really get why people have so much trouble believing that a plane that was designed to make significant sacrifices in armament, altitude performance and range to make sure it was the dominant low-altitude fighter turned out to be an extremely dominant low altitude fighter.

[FA_Refugee]

Even if HTC would model reliability issues I don't understand what needs to be made more unreliable in the La-5/7. The Shvetsov ASh-82 was a reliable engine; and by that I mean insanely reliable. It was a development of the Wright Cyclone series which the Soviets license produced in the 1930s, so if anyone wants to beat his nationalistic chest it is basically an American engine adapted to Russian needs. This engine is so good it is still in production in China as the Dongan HS7.

Provda!   

[save]

I don't really get why people have so much trouble believing that a plane that was designed to make significant sacrifices in armament, altitude performance and range to make sure it was the dominant low-altitude fighter turned out to be an extremely dominant low altitude fighter.

in AH La7 has a very good set of 3*20mm, is fast enough to catch 80-90% of all planes at altitude and 99% at the deck,only fuel inhibit La-7.


According to book :
La-5/7 vs Fw 190: Eastern Front 1942-45 , specially the la-5 where like the 109s, heavy on controls at speed, and with the 2-gun option, could not kill an A8 with a single burst at close range

[GScholz]

"Could not kill an A8 with a single burst at close range..." is a nonsensical statement by the author of that book. A single shell from a 20 mm cannon could potentially down any aircraft regardless of make or size.

[Karnak]

"Could not kill an A8 with a single burst at close range..." is a nonsensical statement by the author of that book. A single shell from a 20 mm cannon could potentially down any aircraft regardless of make or size.

Agreed.  You don't even have to hit the pilot.  I've seen a photo of an He111 (I think, might have been a Ju88) that was downed by a single Hispano hit to the tail.  The control surfaces on the tail were all jammed by it.

[Tilt]

in AH La7 has a very good set of 3*20mm, is fast enough to catch 80-90% of all planes at altitude and 99% at the deck,only fuel inhibit La-7

According to book :
La-5/7 vs Fw 190: Eastern Front 1942-45 , specially the la-5 where like the 109s, heavy on controls at speed, and with the 2-gun option, could not kill an A8 with a single burst at close range

The La7 was seen as an improvement  over the La5fn re control balance. It featured better linkages than the La5fn albeit that the La5fn did adopt the La 7 linkages as soon as it could. La5 fn production continued along side La7 production due to a large quantity of La5 fn wings being made prior to introduction of La7 production. Both latterly had the same control link design minimising cables and maximising rods enabling a slightly better mechanical advantage over control surfaces.

The rof and calibre/explosive potential of the type 99 round was poor. The velocity from both the shvak and the b20 was mediocre. It's poor in AH. The use of the 3 cannon version was much rarer than is found in AH where everyone uses it.

The record of k/d of the La7 is exceptional...... Albeit that this is not only decided by the comparative plane types.

The La5fn of 1943 was considered by the VVS to be he first frontline fighter that they had to match ( not exceed) the 109g4/6.... The 190's were not considered as much as a threat as the 109's. The la7 and the Yak 3 were considered the firts ac superior to that fielded by the LW.

Peak performance figures for the La7 were achieved below 8k by applying WEP and trimming the engine cooling cowl and  inlet vanes. This trimming is done automatically in AH although it is not modelled above  8k where applying WEP should reduce drag a little (losing some engine cooling)whilst giving no additional thrust.

[save]

I dont know how much you can trust the wiki on the la5fn, but it does state that :

"In comparison with Luftwaffe fighters, the La-5FN was found to have a comparable top speed and acceleration at low altitude. In comparison with the Bf 109 the La-5FN possessed a slightly higher roll rate, however the Bf-109 was slightly faster and had the advantages of a smaller turn radius and higher rate of climb.[2]. In comparison with the Fw 190A-8 the La-5FN had a slightly better climb rate and smaller turn radius, however the Fw-190A-8 was faster at all altitudes and had significantly better dive performance. As a result Lerche's recommendations for Fw190 pilots were to attempt to draw the La-5FN to higher altitudes, to escape attacks in a dive followed by a high-speed shallow climb, and to avoid prolonged turning engagements. Utilizing MW 50 both German fighters had superior performance at all altitudes."

If any of this above is true, either the A8 or the LA5FN is not en par with what I constantly see in AH.

Maybe one day we get the fighter version of the A8 and things change.

[Oldman731]

I dont know how much you can trust the wiki on the la5fn,

I would not be surprised if it was an AH pilot who wrote the wiki.  We have a lot of expertise in this group.

- oldman

[Tilt]

I dont know how much you can trust the wiki on the la5fn, but it does state that :

"In comparison with Luftwaffe fighters, the La-5FN was found to have a comparable top speed and acceleration at low altitude. In comparison with the Bf 109 the La-5FN possessed a slightly higher roll rate, however the Bf-109 was slightly faster and had the advantages of a smaller turn radius and higher rate of climb.[2]. In comparison with the Fw 190A-8 the La-5FN had a slightly better climb rate and smaller turn radius, however the Fw-190A-8 was faster at all altitudes and had significantly better dive performance. As a result Lerche's recommendations for Fw190 pilots were to attempt to draw the La-5FN to higher altitudes, to escape attacks in a dive followed by a high-speed shallow climb, and to avoid prolonged turning engagements. Utilizing MW 50 both German fighters had superior performance at all altitudes."

If any of this above is true, either the A8 or the LA5FN is not en par with what I constantly see in AH.

Maybe one day we get the fighter version of the A8 and things change.

Lerche notes (in tactical conclusions and advice) that the La5FN (the airfame he was testing was over 9 months old) could out turn, out accelerate and out climb(at lower alts) the 190. The  tactic (he advises) then left to the 190 was to dive to its top speed then conduct a shallow climb until it reaches its attack altitude.

He points out that the La5FN is better in climb but only at a much steeper angle (slower speed) he goes on to advise to avoid long turning dog fights in a 190 v a La5FN. Good advice for AH combat also............ given you can ignore the usual rants of "timid" etc etc.


EDIT age of airframe revised.

[Babalonian]

I dont know how much you can trust the wiki on the la5fn, but it does state that :

"In comparison with Luftwaffe fighters, the La-5FN was found to have a comparable top speed and acceleration at low altitude. In comparison with the Bf 109 the La-5FN possessed a slightly higher roll rate, however the Bf-109 was slightly faster and had the advantages of a smaller turn radius and higher rate of climb.[2]. In comparison with the Fw 190A-8 the La-5FN had a slightly better climb rate and smaller turn radius, however the Fw-190A-8 was faster at all altitudes and had significantly better dive performance. As a result Lerche's recommendations for Fw190 pilots were to attempt to draw the La-5FN to higher altitudes, to escape attacks in a dive followed by a high-speed shallow climb, and to avoid prolonged turning engagements. Utilizing MW 50 both German fighters had superior performance at all altitudes."

If any of this above is true, either the A8 or the LA5FN is not en par with what I constantly see in AH.

Maybe one day we get the fighter version of the A8 and things change.

We all have dreams...