Bombs on Yak-9u

[Karnak]

Wotan,

I'd add to your list:

LW (Ju88G-7b, Hs129B-1, Do-17 in Finnish colors)
US (F2A1 Brewster Buffalo in Finnish colors, P-39 in Russian colors)

You're "lists" for the Japanese and Russian sets were very, er, general.  Which is a reflection of the poor state and how many aircraft are missing, as listing a few individual aircraft seems almost pointless.  Because of how general they were nothing can really be added as they covered everything.  I will say that I consider the Ki-84-Ia to be the single most needed fighter in AH, and by a wide margin.

It might be nice to get a Blenheim in Finnish colors as well, but they don't really need more than one bomber.

[J_A_B]

"I will say that I consider the Ki-84-Ia to be the single most needed fighter in AH, and by a wide margin. "

Agreed.


I'd say something like a Lagg-3 or Yak-9D is also pretty important.

J_A_B

[Wotan]

Karnak, yes my list for IJAAF/IJN and VVS aircraft is genaral mostly because we could use so many I didnt feel like typing um out

Which is a reflection of the poor state and how many aircraft are missing, as listing a few individual aircraft seems almost pointless.

You are exactly correct. Also others have included good lists of Japanese aircraft in other threads, any or all of which would transform not only the main but events and the like.

[Tilt]

Originally posted by Wotan
The yak 3 first entered service in Kursk (summer 43). Below 5000m its a monster. The were a few versions.

The first was designated the the Yak-1m 1,260 hp VK-105PF its first flight was in 1942.

The Yak-3 version had a 1,225 hp VK-105PF-2 and first flew in the spring of 1943.

I think you have those broadly a year early..................

My understanding is

Prototype Yak 1M   Feb 43
Prototype  Yak 1M tested upto and thru June 43
Prototype with augmented supercharger (now designated M-105PF-2) after June
2nd Prototype  Yak 1M (new prop and fuel tanks) starts tests at NII VVS  October 43
Yak 3 ordered into production October 43
1st production Yak 3 rolled out March 44
1st major dog fight involving Yak 3's 16th June 44 (18 Y3's agin 24 LW "fighters"..1 yak 3 lost  for 15 LW losses)

Yak 3 is a 44 bird

other VVS 44 Fighters I would like would be the
Yak 9 D (which also missed Kursk)
P39

For Kursk (43) I would fancy

P39
Yak 1
Yak 7
La5 F
Lagg 3
I-16 bis


Although I would rather "finish the "44 set" with the pe-2 and the tu-2

[straffo]

Another version of the yak-3 used the VK-107A. I dont think any saw action during ww2.

I have to check but I believe the Normandie-Nieman got Yak3 with VK-107A in January 1944

[butch2k]

The Yak 9U never had any underwing racks, this does not appear in any official test document neither in Stepanetz book, nor in any book being based on Russian archives.

The first Yak 3 was produced in march 1944, by late April 1944 only 22 had been produced and approved by the military (according to production data), too late for Kursk.

Btw the Yak 1M designation is wrong, it was caused by an old misidentification in Shavrov's book, the correct name is Yak 1b, this is the version which took part in the Kursk defence not the Yak 3.

The Yak 3 with VK-107A engine began testing in April 1945 and tests underlined some problems, and finally only 3 aircraft were completed by 1946 when the program was scrapped. No NN Yak  3s were equiped with the VK 107A.

[straffo]

Damit !
made an error in my previous post I wanted to type 1945 instead of 1944 ...
And it was a bad information


@butch  (sorry gents I post in french to be sure to post correctly )
Tu ruines mes espoir les plus fous

c'était des Yak3 a moteur VK-105 sur lequel ils avaient d'énormes problemes d'injection et sur lequel ils devaient pompre comme des fous ?

[Dowding (Work)]

Tilt - the La-5FN was also present at Kursk. In its debut combat I believe, although in small numbers (< 30).

[Tilt]

Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
Tilt - the La-5FN was also present at Kursk. In its debut combat I believe, although in small numbers (< 30).

I know the 1st batch was sent to the "Kursk front" in June .......it was not the La5FN we have now........it had more fuel tanks and was significantly lightened  during production runs from May to October.

I s'pose if we ran a Kursk scenario we could "rotate" squads onto the La 5FN as the frames progressed

[whgates3]

Igor Kaberov's squadron (guards in leningrad area) were equipt w/ LaGG5 in July '43.  the Yak-9 w/ internal bomb bays were the Yak-9B & Yak-9L (carried up to 4 100kb bombs internally.  while were're on the topic, the Yak-9K, w/ it's 45mm cannon,  might be neat to have (53 built).

also, i've read that some Yak-9Us had the VYa-23 23mm cannon rather than the 20mm

[Vermillion]

The Yak3 with the VK107 (same engine as our Yak-9U) never saw combat.

Performance wise, the Yak3 and the Yak-9U were quite similar, and while I would love more VVS aircraft, I would put it down the list a ways for a "needed" plane.

Probably fighterwise, we need the Yak-9UT ( to get our late war "big gun" options for the Yak fighters to compare to the Luftwaffe) and the Yak-9D.  After that you can quite a few "representative" fighters such as the Yak3, Yak7, Yak1, the MiG's, and several others, but they would be most important for scenarios and such.

Anyone else notice the new Gordon & Khazanov book? Yakolev's Piston Engined Fighters.  It covers everything from the Yak1 thru the last Yak-9U.  They're other books on Soviet Fighters are the best I've seen yet, so I'm thinking of ordering this one later today

[Tilt]

Originally posted by Vermillion
The Yak3 with the VK107 (same engine as our Yak-9U) never saw combat.

Performance wise, the Yak3 and the Yak-9U were quite similar, and while I would love more VVS aircraft, I would put it down the list a ways for a "needed" plane.

I tend to agree with this view..............but would point out some of the differences the yak 3 should offer over the Yak 9U

1) Yak 3 wings break at moderately high G

2) faster climb to 16400ft (yak 3=3.9 mins yak9U=5 mins)

3) faster at sea level Yak 3 =611km/hr, yak 9U= 575 km/hr.

4) faster at 5000 m alt

5) longer range 1000km v 675 km

6) less wing area 14.85 v 17.11   (roll rates?)

7) better std turn 18 v 20 secs

Looking at the above it would seem to have tremendous acceleration

[Vermillion]

Tilt, which numbers are you comparing? I'm at work so and I don't have my references handy.

For those that don't know, the Soviet Union was the one country that kept two distinct types of flight test data concerning their aircraft in WWII.  

They are somewhat miss named here in the US.  They're typically called "prototype" and "production".  My understanding is that the "prototype" numbers are actually most similar to the aircraft acceptance testing done in the US and the basis for the flight test data many of our American aircraft.  "Production" aircraft are quality control testing done on aircraft straight off the production line, with no finishing work (which was typically done at the unit level in the VVS). IE if there was a problem with the aircraft, they made no attempt to fix it and tested it "as is".

Unfortunately, Pyro disagrees with me on this subject and uses the lesser of the two sets of data, the "production" data which IMO should be called the "quality control" data.

When I've looked at the Yak3 vs the Yak-9U data in the past (and admittedly I'm working from memory), if you compare "prototype to prototype" or "production to production" the two planes are quite similar.

EDIT: Whgates3, the Yak-9U's with the 23mm cannon were the Yak-9UT's, which I've lobbied long and hard for addition to AH.  It replaced the center hub mounted 20mm, and replaced it with the NS-23, N-37, or N-45, similar to the Yak-9K you mentioned.  Additionally, The two 12.7mm MG's were typically replaced with the new light weight 20mm cannons.

[Tilt]

Originally posted by Vermillion
Tilt, which numbers are you comparing? I'm at work so and I don't have my references handy.

Actually I'm with pyro on this ..............the above 9 U numbers are "production" the -3 numbers are "generic" but not prototype.

The problem with Russian prototype numbers are that they cannot be trusted as we know that results were fiddled to avoid the severe penalties of failure.......  41 and 42 blatantly so......infact the head of VVS testing was executed when the fictions were  discovered.

I have a problem with the range figure quoted for the -3  it looks like that of the 9D which to me seems wrong.   They are all in Gordon & Kazanov which was my first reference after your plaudits.

Frankly when I started the above posting I thought I was just going to be talking about a lighter, slightly faster, more manouverable, better climbing (at low alts) AC that broke easy under certain G loads. its combat advantage being a better turn & roll rate and a better power/ weight ratio low down.

 It was only when I started writing the figures down from the tables that they seemed .......startling


G & K have the1944 Yak-3 with the VK107 listed (not the attempted VK107-A) and the  1944 production Yak-9Uwith VK107-A. (also other variants Yak 9U {prototype} Yak9UT, Yak 9U {45} Yak 1M {dooblyor} and  a Yak-3 with VK108 {post war I think}).

The 1945 Yak 9U seemed to have an improved performance.......would that explain it? do we have a 45 model? I am also at work ..will check with other stuff at home.

Back to production figures........there are more of them to choose from (at least I found so in hunting down La 7 data) and frankly with a spread of several such test reports you can see where the expected standard should be.


btw  I am sorry we only got time for a handshake and a nod at the con.............s'pose I'll have to come over again next year.......

[Vermillion]

Tilt, thats why you come back each year to the Con to finish all the discussions you ran out of time for the year before!

My understanding on the engine is that the WWII version of the engine of the Yak-9U was the VK107, the VK107A was introduced after the war which had water injection I believe (or some other form of WEP). The Korean vintage Yak-9U used the VK107A.   I was reading that in the Air & Space Museum Bookstore in a really good book on aircraft engines, that I wanted too buy but passed on, because it was quite expensive. Like $80 or something.  But since then I've really regretted it, since its hard to find and I wish I'd bought it.  I have some engine charts somewhere of original Soviet data on Yak's and V-105PF and VK107 engines that a friend sent me, but since I don't read Russian, it doesn't help me alot.

I believe that the data on production 9U's from 1945 that outperform the 1944 version is simply a matter of quality.  Production quality increased, and if you read Gordon & Khazanov, made major improvements in performance.

I waffle back and forth somewhat on my stand of the "production versus prototype" issues, and I definitely realize the issue of some "fudging" of data at times, especially early in the war when Stalin was executing everyone left and right.  But then I think back to the fact that the Allied aircraft used for testing purposes weren't exactly "standard" untouched aircraft straight off the production line either.  Usually they had the best engineers and mechanics from the factory and or the Air Force, making sure that the aircraft performed up to its maximum limits.  And if the aircraft wasn't performing up to par, it was fixed and tinkered with until it did.  Remember, big contract's and alot of money were riding on these tests, so there was alot at stake.  

So when you then compare the Allied tests against tests made to determine production line quality, I just don't quite think its an "apples to apples" comparsion either.

I'll let you know how good the new Gordon & Khazanov book is.  I'm really looking forward to seeing if its up to the quality of their past work.  I also bought Gordon's book on the Mig21 and the Mig15, both of which are excellent.  So I have the Mig17 book on order, and the new Yakolev book as well.