Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Rich46yo on July 11, 2013, 03:43:45 PM
-
1, So what other non-Yak planes do you think have similar performance that the 3 will have?
2, What will be the epic match ups vs the Yak-3?
3, Describe how you think they will turn vs other fighters?
4, What will be going thru your mind when you encounter one?
5, Will it have the same ENY as the 9U ?
Beauty aint she?
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/Yak3_zpsdbe93226.jpg)
-
1, So what other non-Yak planes do you think have similar performance that the 3 will have?
2, What will be the epic match ups vs the Yak-3?
3, Describe how you think they will turn vs other fighters?
4, What will be going thru your mind when you encounter one?
5, Will it have the same ENY as the 9U ?
Beauty aint she?
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/Yak3_zpsdbe93226.jpg)
Um... go fly the -9U and %95 the answers will be had. The -3 offers Spitfire 8 like maneuverability, speed similar to the P51x, and the firepower of a 109G-2 (but with 1/3rd less ammo). There are many that are going to be disappointed that is isn't going to be the next uber-plane. To sum it up: it will be easy to fly and difficult to knock down other planes.
-
To sum it up: it will be easy to fly and difficult to knock down other planes.
The difficulty in shooting down other planes will be a result of the player's skill level and abilities, not the plane.
ack-ack
-
With 1300hp power and wingloading not much different from 9U so I'm not expecting performance much different from 9U.
Somehow I feel that due to its wing design it is not a stellar stall fighter but will be excellent in medium speed fights, as the 9U is.
It looks like a Yak. Yuck.
-C+
-
With 1300hp power and wingloading not much different from 9U so I'm not expecting performance much different from 9U.
Somehow I feel that due to its wing design it is not a stellar stall fighter but will be excellent in medium speed fights, as the 9U is.
-C+
Ya I'd agree though it is slightly lighter so it may accelerate faster and with those slightly shorter wings it may roll quicker which should give it some nice agility.
Oh and firepower would be on par with the G6 not the G2 with 1/3 less ammo or exactly the same as the 9U.....
:salute
-
Speed, turn and acceleration are likely to be very similar to the Yak-9U, but as it is a smaller and lighter aircraft it may be more responsive and roll faster as well as being harder to hit. Contrary to what was posted earlier, its firepower will be better than the Bf109G-2 due to the two 12.7mm guns in place of the 7.92mm guns. The ammo load will be small though.
As to what I think of it, nasty customer if I am in a Mossie as it holds most of the cards.
-
The one in the picture has no head armor. The Russian planes tend to have no behind the head armor. I wonder if that is figured into the damage model?
-
The one in the picture has no head armor. The Russian planes tend to have no behind the head armor. I wonder if that is figured into the damage model?
Yak-3 lacks a bullet proof windscreen, but like the Yak-9s and Lavochkins it has armor protecting the pilot from behind. They use armored glass rather than the steel plates of the USA, UK, German and Japan so as to provide better views to the rear.
-
Its significantly light. How will that effect its acceleration?
-
Its significantly light. How will that effect its acceleration?
Climb rate is excess thrust which makes it an pretty good substitute for acceleration. While the Yak-3 is lighter than the Yak-9U it also has a less powerful engine. The climb rate reported by Wikipedia (yes, I know, but I don't have another source for the Yak-3) is 3,645fpm, which is very, very close to what AH shows the Yak-9U's initial climb rate to be. Those both being true the Yak-3 can be expected to accelerate pretty much the same as the Yak-9U and much better than the Yak-9T.
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=24&p2=43&pw=2>ype=2&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
The difficulty in shooting down other planes will be a result of the player's skill level and abilities, not the plane.
ack-ack
BULLCHIT. Tell me a person isn't going to have a MUCH easier time shooting down an enemy fighter while in a george vs while in a 109F/G or Yak-9U (think single 20mm and dual .50 cals). Sure, the ability to aim properly is key, but the ability to rip apart a plane is another. A Yak-9U/-3 needs a longer time on target because of the lack of RPM's and the lack of volume. Funny that the "aces" in AH are not using the -9U vs the Spit's, P51's, and La7's??? I mean really, the -9U is quite capable except for 1 thing: firepower (it doesn't have it). The Yak-9U (and -3) do not have the "hit hard" capability and they certainly do not have the ability to sustain what firepower they do have for very long.
The plane allows the pilot to do certain things more so than the pilot allows the plane to do certain things, otherwise the spectrum would far more level than it is. Do not fool yourself in to thinking that the single 20mm and dual .50cals with their low ammo count is just as effective as a 190A-5/8 with the quad 20mm's, a Spit 8's dual 20mm's and quad .30 cals, or even the 6/.50's on a US fighter. Unless the Yak is able to saddle up and hang on like a gay man riding a mechanical bull until the target plane has blown all of its E, the Yak is at a distinct disadvantage.
-
Unless the Yak is able to saddle up and hang on like a gay man riding a mechanical bull until the target plane has blown all of its E, the Yak is at a distinct disadvantage.
Picturesque, but probably accurate. I expect that the Yak 3 will be able to do this, just as the 9U already can.
...but....are you implying that Yak Attackers are something less than manly...?
- oldman
-
It's really small and hard to hit!!!!!! :noid
-
It's really small and hard to hit!!!!!! :noid
You've got to keep your personal problems off the board, man. :D
-
...but....are you implying that Yak Attackers are something less than manly...?
- oldman
Not at all. In fact I would expect the best of the best to be in such aircraft since their gunnery skillz are uberz yo. but alas... it is too much of a challenge thanks to a lack of firepower and lack of sustained firepower. Anyone who has ever spent time in the -9U knows that it can hang with any plane out there in maneuvers, it truly is an impressive aircraft. Seriously though, 400 mph at 15k, the turn radius, climb, and acceleration of a typical MA Spitfire (Spit 9/8/16), a very good roll rate, a great pilot view, etc, but yet it has the punch of wet paper bag (and no available ordnance).
-
BULLCHIT. Tell me a person isn't going to have a MUCH easier time shooting down an enemy fighter while in a george vs while in a 109F/G or Yak-9U (think single 20mm and dual .50 cals). Sure, the ability to aim properly is key, but the ability to rip apart a plane is another. A Yak-9U/-3 needs a longer time on target because of the lack of RPM's and the lack of volume. Funny that the "aces" in AH are not using the -9U vs the Spit's, P51's, and La7's??? I mean really, the -9U is quite capable except for 1 thing: firepower (it doesn't have it). The Yak-9U (and -3) do not have the "hit hard" capability and they certainly do not have the ability to sustain what firepower they do have for very long.
The plane allows the pilot to do certain things more so than the pilot allows the plane to do certain things, otherwise the spectrum would far more level than it is. Do not fool yourself in to thinking that the single 20mm and dual .50cals with their low ammo count is just as effective as a 190A-5/8 with the quad 20mm's, a Spit 8's dual 20mm's and quad .30 cals, or even the 6/.50's on a US fighter. Unless the Yak is able to saddle up and hang on like a gay man riding a mechanical bull until the target plane has blown all of its E, the Yak is at a distinct disadvantage.
Why do you keep talking about the 109F and G-2 as if they've got anything to do with anything? Do you not know how they're armed or are you just trying to mislead people? The G-6 and G-14 are plenty popular, and a lot of people take the G-14 (which has an almost equivalent ordinance save for ammo load differences and a marginal superiority of the MG151/20 over the ShVAK and the UBS .50 cal over the MG131) over the K-4 just for its armament, which, again, is equivalent to the Yak-3's, so I think that's saying at least something.
As someone who flew 109s primarily in this game the entire time I've flown it I'd take a dual machine gun and single cannon all down the centerline armament over just about any wing armament short of 4 20mms any day of the week. And judging from the popularity of the 109 line I'd say a lot of other people agree with me. Is it going snatch away someone who only flies Hogs and Jugs and just holds down the trigger the entire time they're flying? No, but that doesn't mean it won't find a niche. It will likely be a better dogfighter than the Yak-9U at least marginally, and the Yak-9U isn't exactly a rare bird. Will it displace the La series or Spitfire series as dominant MA birds? Who knows and who cares? Probably nothing will.
-
Why do you keep talking about the 109F and G-2 as if they've got anything to do with anything? Do you not know how they're armed or are you just trying to mislead people? The G-6 and G-14 are plenty popular, and a lot of people take the G-14 (which has an almost equivalent ordinance save for ammo load differences and a marginal superiority of the MG151/20 over the ShVAK and the UBS .50 cal over the MG131) over the K-4 just for its armament, which, again, is equivalent to the Yak-3's, so I think that's saying at least something.
As someone who flew 109s primarily in this game the entire time I've flown it I'd take a dual machine gun and single cannon all down the centerline armament over just about any wing armament short of 4 20mms any day of the week. And judging from the popularity of the 109 line I'd say a lot of other people agree with me. Is it going snatch away someone who only flies Hogs and Jugs and just holds down the trigger the entire time they're flying? No, but that doesn't mean it won't find a niche. It will likely be a better dogfighter than the Yak-9U at least marginally, and the Yak-9U isn't exactly a rare bird. Will it displace the La series or Spitfire series as dominant MA birds? Who knows and who cares? Probably nothing will.
I bring up the 109G's for comparing firepower. The single 20mm and dual MG's. I figured it was easy enough, I guess for those of the likes of you I'll spell it out more next time. If you've read my other posts I've always compared the -9U plane performance more towards the P51 and Spitfire hybrid with the firepower of a 109G. As far as 109 popularity goes, do a quick search and see if that hinges on the k-4's 30mm and get back to me. ;) The 109G armed with a single 20mm and fuel MG's has a wee bit of an advantage over the Yak: it has another %40 more ammo to use and that ultimately means more rounds on target. Rate of fire is too similar to give an advantage to either platform. Still, with %40 more ammo available the pilot is more apt to hold on to the burst that extra split second. For anyone to say that a single 20mm trumps dual or quad 20mm's because of a center mount is a bit of a rebel yell, don't you think? I understand fully the benefits of a center line mounting, but we're not talking about the Mossi, 110, 410, or even the P38. We're talking about a single 20mm and a pair of MG's on a 109. Big difference. It may suffice, but not the most desirable in terms of actual hard hitting abilities.
-
As a 109 stick, I'd like to say that firepower is more of a problem than many would intrinsically think, the G-6 and - 14 packing the equivalent of 5 . 50s. As loon says, the issue is more of doing damage quickly, than an inability to do damage.
This is a particular concern for snapshots, where you might very well be physically incapable of getting enough rounds on target to kill your opponent. This is a bigger problem for the 109, since it tends to get fewer chances to saddle up and keep guns on an enemy, but might be mitigated by the fact that the Yak -3 will be more of a maneuver fighter than an energy fighter.
-
Um... go fly the -9U and %95 the answers will be had. The -3 offers Spitfire 8 like maneuverability, speed similar to the P51x, and the firepower of a 109G-2 (but with 1/3rd less ammo). There are many that are going to be disappointed that is isn't going to be the next uber-plane. To sum it up: it will be easy to fly and difficult to knock down other planes.
Not nearly.
Somewhere i was reading that it could do a full turn in 17 seconds - thats better than the 109F, but is nowhere near the Spit8's 15.6s. I cant remember to the source though.
Its speed wasnt all that great, unless youre talking about the post-war Jak3.
Think about a 109F what is a little bit better in every aspect but firepower.
-
Not nearly.
Somewhere i was reading that it could do a full turn in 17 seconds - thats better than the 109F, but is nowhere near the Spit8's 15.6s. I cant remember to the source though.
Its speed wasnt all that great, unless youre talking about the post-war Jak3.
Think about a 109F what is a little bit better in every aspect but firepower.
Yak-3 is better in firepower than the Bf109F-4 or Bf109G-2 while the ammo lasts. The 12.7mm guns are noticeably superior to the 7.92mm guns.
-
True, my bad.
The 120 vs 200 rounds was in my mind :)
-
Its speed wasnt all that great, unless youre talking about the post-war Jak3.
Think about a 109F what is a little bit better in every aspect but firepower.
what? if the speed in ah is accurate, it should do 407mph at around 13,500ft and the g-6 only does around 398mph at 21,500ft. seems pretty fast to me.
-
Yak3 and Yak9U wing loading is almost identical as is the Sea Level top speed. The Yak9U has a distinctive speed advantage at 15K. Turn rates are very similar with some sources crediting the 3 with a second better than the 9U. I have no data on turn diameter but would not be surprised to find it less than the 9U.
The 3 seems to have a better climb time to 16500 which must all be won lower down. I would assume its optimum climb rate is at a lower air speed than the 9U.
Roll......its ailerons are the same size as a 9U slightly further inboard and the ac is lighter. I know that Pyro has the pilots notes which give roll data but I do not have any understanding as to how it may compare with the 9U.
Its dive acceleration could be one of the fastest in the game.......... better than a P51 (but then the same should be said for the 9U). Nose down training was very much about limiting stuff to its critical airspeed
Its flat acceleration from low speeds was considered the best on the Eastern front even in comparison with the La7
Its zoom potential is pretty poor compared to the US heavies and mediocre to the rest, as it has little mass. Its departure characteristic was considered "gentle and easily handled". An ideal aircraft for new pilots.
Its cockpit view is its AH USP.
-
what? if the speed in ah is accurate, it should do 407mph at around 13,500ft and the g-6 only does around 398mph at 21,500ft. seems pretty fast to me.
The K4 does about 400 at 500ft. Just saying, it really matters what your basis for comparison is.
The La-7 can do 380 on the deck.
-
Yaks aren't that bad. I've killed a formation of 17's with the 9U which used to be my main ride. 3 kills a sortie isn't bad for such a small weapon load.
It's all what the pilot is capable to do with what they have to work with. With the small load, you need to take different shots, like small deflections, dead 6, and slashing is okay.
I personally like to get within 200 so I can hit hard and fast.
I look forward to seeing how the plane will perform.
What's the difference between the 7 from the 3, and 9's?
-
The K4 does about 400 at 500ft. Just saying, it really matters what your basis for comparison is.
The La-7 can do 380 on the deck.
:headscratch: i don't see 400mph at 500ft...it's more like 5000ft with wep.
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/images/0/02/109k4spd.jpg)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/images/6/6a/La7spd.jpg)
besides, my reply was to Debrody's misconception of the yak-3 performance. if the yak-3 can pull 407mph at 13,500ft then theoretically it very well could be on par with the la-7 on the deck without wep.
-
:headscratch: i don't see 400mph at 500ft...it's more like 5000ft with wep.
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/images/0/02/109k4spd.jpg)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/wiki/images/6/6a/La7spd.jpg)
besides, my reply was to Debrody's misconception of the yak-3 performance. if the yak-3 can pull 407mph at 13,500ft then theoretically it very well could be on par with the la-7 on the deck without wep.
Obviously wep is assumed in maximum performance. That's why it's maximum performance.
And especially in the K4, that WEP is a huge factor, since it had nearly 10 minutes of it.
-
Obviously wep is assumed in maximum performance. That's why it's maximum performance.
And especially in the K4, that WEP is a huge factor, since it had nearly 10 minutes of it.
That's true, but it is still 375 at 500ft, not nearly 400.
25mph might not sound like a lot on a 400mph scale, but remember the scale is not 0-400mph, it starts at the top speed of the slowest fighter, so about 260mph to 385mph on the deck, Hurricane Mk I to Tempest Mk V. Me262 is so much faster it isn't worth putting on the chart.
-
My personal thoughts are that the Yak-3 will be a tough customer for many fighters. I do, however, believe that any 109 will defeat it in maneuver combat. The Yak will have a notable speed advantage of the 109F, somewhat lesser vs the 109G-2. However, those two should have no trouble in a low-speed maneuver fight with any Yak. The G-6 is the least able of the 109 line, but it should still have an advantage in the vertical and match it in turn radius. The K-4 won't be quite as agile, but can dominate the vertical and be faster and offer better acceleration.
I'll surely fly the Yak, but I don't think it will be significantly better than the the 9U taken overall.
-
Youzza, I didnt realize 3 of the 109s outclimb the 9U so decisively. Of course I knew the K4 did but I thought the 9U was at least comparable with the others. Thing is I just dont see all those many 109s anymore, other then the K4.
In the next few weeks I should have more time to play and am going to fly Yaks exclusively. Hopefully Ill run into more 109s and try and develop a strategy to cope. Im looking forward to seeing how the 3 turns at lower speeds then the 9.
-
what? if the speed in ah is accurate, it should do 407mph at around 13,500ft and the g-6 only does around 398mph at 21,500ft. seems pretty fast to me.
I didnt know much about the speed curve - 407 at 13.5k is good enough. But above that? (true, thats about to be at the sweet spot for AH's tipical engagements)
Could someone dig the deck speed, please?
-
I cannot see how the Yak-3 will be very different from the 9U except in nuances. Our 9U is an amazing platform that is very much under appreciated because its slow speed handling is difficult. This, coupled with the weak gun package and limiting forward view tend to make it a teeth-less shark for many players - difficult to slow down + saddle up, and difficulty in snapshot kills.
Oh yes, short legs too for those who have not yet discovered that such a plane does not have to fly at full throttle (WEP equivalent) 100% of the time.
The improved forward view and perhaps slightly better slow speed handling will go a long way in increasing its popularity. Both 3 and 9U can be sweet rides for those that figure out the gun package.
-
Lets wait and see the new Yak 9u cockpit forward view. Maybe the view will resolve slightly better with AH2 current gen graphics.
-
Comparing Yak-3 to the Yak-9U:
The speed difference depends on the data used. It is true that according to one dataset the difference is only 6mph (351mph vs 357mph). A serial production Yak-3 was taken from the production line for testing and it did 345mph on the deck.
*The power out puts listed are "at altitude", not at sea level.
(http://i46.photobucket.com/albums/f147/Wmaker/Yaks.jpg)
Both wingloadings and powerloadings are very close to each other. Both use similar props, and identical airfoils (Clark YH 14% at the root and 10% at the tip.) and very similar wing planforms. How it will compare to the rest of the planeset depends largely on whether Pyro updates the Yak flight models in general.
-
Comparing Yak-3 to the Yak-9U:
...
Good stuff, thanks.
The Yak-9 flies weirdly compared to the rest of the planeset, guessing, thats the decade-old flight model. It will surely change, but the main parameters are likely to remain the same, or something simmilar.
~350 mph on the deck is a LOT, considering that the 1350hp 109F only does 333, and even the 1700 (?) hp clipped wing spit16 tops out at 344.
-
Yakolev put a lot of effort into minimizing drag on the Yak-3, but that did involve compromises such as the aerodynamic front windscreen that is not armored. I'd be nervous attacking a bomber in a Yak-3 as the pilot has the same protection as the pilot of an A6M2 from the front.
EDIT:
I've seen a drag profile for a Spitfire somewhere and that flat, armored windscreen created a lot of drag. I am sure the Bf109's does the same. The Bomber Mossie's with the unarmored V shaped windscreen had significantly less drag from the cockpit than did the fighter Mossies with the big, flat armored and optically flat windscreens.
-
As long as a single 30-cal round from a Lancaster can instantly pilot kill a 262 from the front, straight through its "bulletproof" windscreen, everything is possible :)
By the way, pretty much what i was thinking about, that Yak must have been very well streamlined - not sure how it affected its handling characteristics.
-
I agree the Yak-9U is "under appreciated". I myself would name it the best bang for the buck perk-wise as it is very survivable in. And Im not just talking "stretching out". It seems to be a high eny plane that very often has some advantage that can be exploited against similar or even much lower eny opponents. Most of all the P-51D. But it does well against everything as long as you dont get low and slow in it.
-
I've seen a drag profile for a Spitfire somewhere and that flat, armored windscreen created a lot of drag. I am sure the Bf109's does the same. The Bomber Mossie's with the unarmored V shaped windscreen had significantly less drag from the cockpit than did the fighter Mossies with the big, flat armored and optically flat windscreens.
I don't know about that. When the P-47s were switched from the birdcage with the split front screen to bubble top the claim was that added drag was negligible. The lowering of the razorback probably had a larger effect on the drag and even that was not much. Compare our D11 and D25 MIL power speeds, and here the D25 even includes drag from the fixed wing shackles.
-
Lets wait and see the new Yak 9u cockpit forward view. Maybe the view will resolve slightly better with AH2 current gen graphics.
This. And for the Yak 3 of course. That is the biggest handicap to flying the Yak-9, even moreso than the tiny ammo count. If the Yak-3 flies similarly or better, and has a better under the crosshairs view, it will be a killer.
-
The other key difference between the 3 and the 9U is mass. How would we expect them to perform ( comparatively) during changes in direction due to reversals of control surface state?
-
The difficulty in shooting down other planes will be a result of the player's skill level and abilities, not the plane.
ack-ack
You couldn't be more right! Lol, I have been gone for a very long time but I was starting to fly the Yak a lot more before I left and I was one of the few who asked for the other versions of the Yak. With the limited amount of ammo it is imperative that you get in nice and close and just put a nice burst into that bad red guy.
-
Im wondering with Yak fever growing how many non-Yakkers will now become Yakkers now that the 3 is shortly to be here.
I suspect the Yak-3 will win over much of the 20 eny+ crowd. Those of us who get incredibly bored flying 51's, Spit 16s, LA7s, and other brain dead low eny aircraft. One thing the Yak-9 needed was a little bit of turn to make it even better. Just like the 9 I expect the 3 to always have at least one trait that can be exploited against any adversary.
I expect the Yak-3 will become my main ride. Dudes I so wish it was here already.
-
I suspect the Yak-3 will win over much of the 20 eny+ crowd. Those of us who get incredibly bored flying 51's, Spit 16s, LA7s, and other brain dead low eny aircraft. One thing the Yak-9 needed was a little bit of turn to make it even better. Just like the 9 I expect the 3 to always have at least one trait that can be exploited against any adversary.
I like that it has a similar gun setup/layout to the 109s, which I fly most regularly. I have a feeling I'll really like the Yak-3.
-
been flying the yak9u for about 2 days that thing handles great I don't mind the small ammo count at all in it its enough for 2 or 3 kills and normally you run out of fuel before you run out of ammo in that thing if you know how to aim with the 20mm :D anyways I can't wait for the update it looks sexy :rock :rock :rock nice job HTC :cheers: :cheers:
-
Im wondering with Yak fever growing how many non-Yakkers will now become Yakkers now that the 3 is shortly to be here.
I suspect the Yak-3 will win over much of the 20 eny+ crowd. Those of us who get incredibly bored flying 51's, Spit 16s, LA7s, and other brain dead low eny aircraft. One thing the Yak-9 needed was a little bit of turn to make it even better. Just like the 9 I expect the 3 to always have at least one trait that can be exploited against any adversary.
I expect the Yak-3 will become my main ride. Dudes I so wish it was here already.
No, the ENY 20+ crowd is looking for perk farmers, or a challenge. And I highly doubt many will make the Yak their main ride, simply due to a lack of flexibility. It will dogfight like crazy within a 2 sector radius, and not much else.
Even after 6+ years, I don't have a "main" ride, unless you just want to use the plane I have the highest number of sorties in.