Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Rich46yo on October 04, 2014, 10:54:02 PM
-
Out with it. Who flies it and how and when. Were all adults after all and we all pay our $16 bucks.
Why should there be any shame? With 13,000+ K/Ds last month SOMEONE is flying it.
And on a related note the T34/85 seems to be the 2nd most favorite tank. Could one called it the tracked version of the LA-7, IE: the pinnacle of Soviet war time design?
-
I used to fly the Lala quite often back in the day. It is excellent for forcing runners into fighting. Good dogfighter too. :cheers:
-
The only times I've ever flown it was during my 2 K/D in every fighter/attack plane rotations several years ago or in the DA.
The LA-5 on the other hand I've flown a lot more. It's more than capable and more fun to fly than the LA-7.
-
:noid
-
I flew La7 in AH1. In fact, my first fighter kill in AH was in an La7 after spraying my entire ammo load at a P-38... on the last day of my 2-weeks... :o
I was never interested in Russian WWII aviation so I hardly flew it. Later it felt like cheating. I dont think I've flown it more than 10 times past my first year in AH - that's about 12 years ago... The La5 I flew in events and the AvA. A strong contender to the most underrated plane in AH set, due to the La7's long shadow.
The La7, especially the 3-cannon version deserves to go the way of the C-hog. It is the ultimate revenge plane because it is almost impossible to disengage from this plane even by killing it - I have a very vivid memory of a P-38L sortie in which I shot down an La7 over his field, then started to RTB. A 1/3 of the way home the La7 caught up with me and got shot down again using my last ammo. Then it caught up with me AGAIN a couple of miles from my field. With empty guns, the only option was to drag him into the acks to get killed. My luck was that this guy had the typical flying skills of La7s.
-
Alexander Povrickin did just fine in a P-39.
La7 should be slightly perked IMO, especially with that 3 gun package which almost none of them flew with in reality(biggest weakness and complaint of the LA series was lack of firepower).The MA environment is baised towards planes with good Low altitude performance. its a late war fighter that's only claim to fame is the performance advantages it holds over its contemporaries In game. The plane as it is in game currently can maintain a good dive, knife fight like a 109k4, and Zoom away like a 190D.
Rant over. I'm gonna go to the MA now and pick only La-7s until im convinced the don't need to be perked again.
-
Losers
-
Yes, Lala gets a lot of hate from runners and horders...
-
Frustrated P51 people.
-
Ok Ok i'll fess up. 12,999 of the killz are mine. Zack stole one and I lost my chance at a HSU so I hate him for it! :mad:
The la7 is a very very good plane so folk look at it as a easy mode crutch plane. But flying a 109k is cool as all hell! heheheh go figure. I wouldn't worry about what they think, If your having fun fly it. Besides I am sure they will find some other reason to hate on ya. :D Just don't go shootin me down with one!!!!! :old:
I have been flying the la5 a bit lately. I have a historic interest in this stuff and that's what influence my choices sometimes. The 5 did a lot of the work and the 7 was a Johnny come late. Ive also been messin with the 39Q with Russian markings as well! :aok
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tIReYQtDGI
Comrade! <S>
-
I flew La7 in AH1. In fact, my first fighter kill in AH was in an La7 after spraying my entire ammo load at a P-38... on the last day of my 2-weeks... :o
I was never interested in Russian WWII aviation so I hardly flew it. Later it felt like cheating. I dont think I've flown it more than 10 times past my first year in AH - that's about 12 years ago... The La5 I flew in events and the AvA. A strong contender to the most underrated plane in AH set, due to the La7's long shadow.
The La7, especially the 3-cannon version deserves to go the way of the C-hog. It is the ultimate revenge plane because it is almost impossible to disengage from this plane even by killing it - I have a very vivid memory of a P-38L sortie in which I shot down an La7 over his field, then started to RTB. A 1/3 of the way home the La7 caught up with me and got shot down again using my last ammo. Then it caught up with me AGAIN a couple of miles from my field. With empty guns, the only option was to drag him into the acks to get killed. My luck was that this guy had the typical flying skills of La7s.
So you're... Altmonkeying, cherrypicking, running, and ackdragging... And the La pilot is the dweeb right? ;)
-
So you're... Altmonkeying, cherrypicking, running, and ackdragging... And the La pilot is the dweeb right? ;)
We did not have the 0.45 pistol in AH1, otherwise I would have bailed out and shot him down with the pistol while in my chute. ;)
Then you could have added "chute shooting bastage" to that list.
-
(http://i61.tinypic.com/j8gv4o.jpg)
-
I came to AH because it was getting an LA7.......
It is and always has been my ride of choice........... Until the Yak3 arrived
-
I feel sorry for those who promptly jump in to an La7 for whatever reason. It doesn't matter.
I cant remember the last time I flew it.
There is no doubt it is a favorite, what isn't to like about it? What cant it do save for some range issues? Triple 20mm cannons with plenty of ammo. High speeds. Quick acceleration. Good turn. Great climb. As far as the range goes, if some of the arcade players would manage their throttle the time in the air would be greatly increased, so outside of escorting bombers to the HQ it can go farther than most give it credit.
I'd much prefer to challenge myself in a 109G-14, 190x, or other such aircraft. I dont like smelling like perfume after I get out of the La7. The La5? Yeah, that is fine. No need to turn in the man card. But the La7???? yeah... turn it in.
-
LA's are poo. :old:
-
I used the LA-7 when the vTards where around. Not because of their skills or numbers, but because it was quick enough to chase down vDallas who would run a the first sign of a co-alt fighter in his P-51/Dora. A few months later I found him sitting high over his meat shield in a LA-7, so I picked up a Tempest.
Ah, the days of chasing him 3 sectors to shoot him down, then have him rant on Vox/PM about your poor skills and how he will hunt you down.
Now days I fly the LA-7 out when I want to get to a fight/base defense quickly.
Oh and I will accept the LA-7 needs a perk when the Pony Bomb-trucks get an equal one. Yes the LA is a good fighter, but its short legs, 3 cannons and 2 small bombs are not enough to worry an airfield. 5 ponys can shut down a small AF, 5 LAs would have to put everything in just to kill the VH.
-
Seems like the P-51 and 190D should be perked long before the Lala... :aok
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/topkillvic_zps5881b6f3.jpg)
-
La-7 was my main ride when I started playing. Had a lot of fun in it, but soon everybody told me I should be ashamed for flying it...
... so I considered my ways and switched to the Tempest :devil
-
:devil
-
Seems like the P-51 and 190D should be perked long before the Lala... :aok
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/topkillvic_zps5881b6f3.jpg)
The difference is that La7s try to turn fight you till they die.
P51Ds think they can turn with you, but find out they can't and run.
190D9 give up turning altogether and just run the moment advantage is lost.
:devil
-
La7 should be slightly perked IMO, especially with that 3 gun package which almost none of them flew with in reality(biggest weakness and complaint of the LA series was lack of firepower).
There is no valid reason to perk the La7, it in no way unbalances the game play in the arena.
ack-ack
-
Ok Ok i'll fess up. 12,999 of the killz are mine. Zack stole one and I lost my chance at a HSU so I hate him for it! :mad:
The la7 is a very very good plane so folk look at it as a easy mode crutch plane. But flying a 109k is cool as all hell! heheheh go figure. I wouldn't worry about what they think, If your having fun fly it. Besides I am sure they will find some other reason to hate on ya. :D Just don't go shootin me down with one!!!!! :old:
I have been flying the la5 a bit lately. I have a historic interest in this stuff and that's what influence my choices sometimes. The 5 did a lot of the work and the 7 was a Johnny come late. Ive also been messin with the 39Q with Russian markings as well! :aok
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tIReYQtDGI
Comrade! <S>
It's, it's, it's, it's OUTRAGEOUS!
I'm not talking to you. :mad:
-
Best Lala pilot I ever met was Shane. He was quite lethal in it.
-
I love the La-7 from the real world history to AH. It's a great choice for the MA with it's abilities to chase down other late war rides and to give you an edge against multiple opponents. It turn fights good, climbs good, good guns. I don't see much of a downside except the range. As was mentioned a little throttle management and you get to stay and play longer. My second favorite ride to the Ki-84 but it's usually my go to in the MA environment.
-
I Love it for running down FW-run90's and P-51 runstangs. I should have recorded every "stick dance" Ive seen the runners do after they run out of Alt to cherry pick. I honestly never saw the fun in upping run90s and runstangs, usually with 12 others, flying to a enemy base and cherry picking before all running back to land their kills. Then getting "WTGs".
One moment the sky is thick with em and the next they are gone. The LaLa allows you to make a few pay the price of dweebery.
-
It's a fun plane to fly. Great low altitude performance and to top it all off, it's easy to fly too.
-
A correctly flown La-7 is almost untouchable against non-perked planes at typical MA altitudes, also exceptional good cannons.
-
I'm not talking to you. :mad:
I shoulda posted years ago then.................... :neener:
-
Only flown it a few times and found it pretty sweet even over
A lot of "low altitude birds" still fly well up high.
-
Seems like the P-51 and 190D should be perked long before the Lala... :aok
(http://i1145.photobucket.com/albums/o507/Snaildude/topkillvic_zps5881b6f3.jpg)
amazing how no Spitfires feature in that list. Maybe raise the ENY of them...
Also confirms the B38 as being a "victim" :lol
-
Only flown it a few times and found it pretty sweet even over
A lot of "low altitude birds" still fly well up high.
The La-7's best speed is 410 mph at 20k. Between 8k and 18k is is roughly equal to a P-51D in climb/acceleration, but the Pony has a 15-20 mph speed advantage. Below 8k the Lala holds all the cards vs a Pony. Above 18k the Pony dominates.
-
amazing how no Spitfires feature in that list.
1. The spitfire usage distributes a bit more evenly over several models, compared with for example the 51, where the D get's about 90% of the usage
2. The Spit 16 get's really a lot of usage, but it's K/D is comparatively low.
Also confirms the B38 as being a "victim" :lol
The L model is, because it's mostly used as a mindless tool of base smashing and not as a fighter. In contrast the J is one of the bigger killers and only barely missed the entry as such on that list.
-
Also confirms the B38 as being a "victim" :lol
The L model is, because it's mostly used as a mindless tool of base smashing and not as a fighter. In contrast the J is one of the bigger killers and only barely missed the entry as such on that list.
It is absolutely shameful how the L is being treated. A fighter with so much unused potential. I have seen many P-38 raids - it seems like they do not even expect to survive. Few things scare me more than a higher P-38 with a good player behind the wheel. In this case it actually is a wheel... or a yoke... but doesn't yoke come out of an egg? :headscratch:
I have not ran into a well flown 38 in a long while. Only a handful of dedicated 38 guys are still around.
Shame.
-
I love the La7, it's a real monster and good at almost everything.
The La7 is to the K4 what the La5 is to the g6/g14. Both are excellent aircraft but really, the La7 wins hands down for an all round dog fighter. Better guns, better power.
The biggest mistake people make in the la7 is not turn fighting with it. A high speed La7 is just an annoyance, a pest to be avoided and occasionally swatted when the chance arises. Once you realise that the lala can turn fight you become dangerous.
-
La-7 does not have "better power" than the La-5FN. Same engine, same power output. They cleaned up the La-5FN's aerodynamics, and made some parts out of metal instead of wood to make the La-7 lighter. It's not really a "new" aircraft and there were fewer changes between the La-5FN and La-7 than between the P-51B and P-51D.
-
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=42&p2=5&pw=1>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=42&p2=5&pw=1>ype=2&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
The La-7 is ENY 5
The La-5FN is ENY 30
-
Yup... A very slight increase in climb at low alt due to being a bit lighter and a solid improvement in speed due to less drag.
-
I shoulda posted years ago then.................... :neener:
Thread dredge this is.
Outrage it is.
-
La-7 does not have "better power" than the La-5FN. Same engine, same power output. They cleaned up the La-5FN's aerodynamics, and made some parts out of metal instead of wood to make the La-7 lighter. It's not really a "new" aircraft and there were fewer changes between the La-5FN and La-7 than between the P-51B and P-51D.
Ok, better power/weight ratio. My wording was not careful, thank you.
You can certainly feel the difference in a vertical stall fight. It is very easy to feel that the La7 has considerably more nose up ability when slow.
-
And an extra pew pew tube
-
Ok, better power/weight ratio.
The weight difference is not really that significant. As you can see from the climb chart above the increase in climb/acceleration is very slight.
-
You perhaps don't fight on the edge of a low speed stall enough to notice the difference?
I know what I'm talking about through hands on experience. The La7 is a UFO, the La5 falls just short of that status and is just a good performing aircraft.
-
What you "feel" is often very subjective and rarely holds up to to the hard facts of reality, but yes the La-7 is about 400 lbs lighter, which I will amend, is not insignificant in a stall fight.
-
What you "feel" is often very subjective and rarely holds up to to the hard facts of reality, but yes the La-7 is about 400 lbs lighter, which I will amend, is not insignificant in a stall fight.
You are suggesting that in my ~10,000 hours of AH experience my 'feelings' about how a plane handles are wrong?
Putting all your faith in the 'hard facts of reality' often limits your ability to 'feel' anything other than what you think you know through studying the numbers. This method of learning leads to a lack of innovation or style, much like watching the AI fly.
The very best dogfighters in this game never looked at a speed chart. You will never be in that category if you limit yourself with the 'hard facts' on paper.
-
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=42&p2=5&pw=1>ype=0&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=42&p2=5&pw=1>ype=2&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
The La-7 is ENY 5
The La-5FN is ENY 30
The La-5 is 20 mph slower than the La7 at nearly all altitudes... but then you read the numbers on the X-axis and realize that this is still nearly 360 mph on the deck for the La5FN! That still makes it a fast plane, it has cannons and ENY of 30. I think it may be crowned the king of perk harvesters.
La-7 does not have "better power" than the La-5FN. Same engine, same power output. They cleaned up the La-5FN's aerodynamics, and made some parts out of metal instead of wood to make the La-7 lighter.
They got +20 mph deck speed just by cleaning the aerodynamics?! What did they do? removed the banner the La5 was towing and took the ski rack off the roof? :rolleyes:
-
What you "feel" is often very subjective and rarely holds up to to the hard facts of reality, but yes the La-7 is about 400 lbs lighter, which I will amend, is not insignificant in a stall fight.
The weights are identical in game with the same loadouts (7385lbs). According to Gordon & Khazanov, 1945 production La-7 weighed 7308lbs and La-5FN 7323lbs. No 400lbs differences anywhere.
-
LA5's cannons are soooo bad. Low rate of fire terrible ballistics, and to top it all off, they don't hit very hard. Got into a prolonged knife fight with joker recently and got a good angle on him. Hit sprite from nose to tail as he pulls up into me. I level out waiting to hear the explosion and get the kill message, but instead I look back to see an angry Dhog d200 on my six with a bloody nose and guns blazing.
I do however think the la5 should at most have an ENy of 25. Its a performance monster
-
They got +20 mph deck speed just by cleaning the aerodynamics?! What did they do? removed the banner the La5 was towing and took the ski rack off the roof? :rolleyes:
Yup... Cowling design is critical for radial engined fighters. They tightened and sealed the cowling, moved the supercharger intake from top of the engine to the wing roots, moved the oil cooler inside the wing as well, wing fillets were improved, improved exhaust piping, new propeller and other minor modifications.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/AH/la5la7.jpg)
-
[snip] improved exhaust piping, new propeller [/snip]
Ahhh, very interesting. Then I was correct in saying 'more power'. Improved exhaust piping alone can boost horse power. A new prop? Creating more thrust? So therefore...more power?
-
The prop was probably designed to be more efficient at the higher top speed. That might actually have made it less effective at low speed. I don't know. The improved exhaust piping primarily allowed the cowling to be tighter. The engine does not produce more hp in the La-7 than in the La-5FN. Parasitic drag is the primary factor in determining top speed. Climb rate is directly proportional to acceleration and power to weight. The difference between the 5 and 7 is almost negligible.
-
The weights are identical in game with the same loadouts (7385lbs). According to Gordon & Khazanov, 1945 production La-7 weighed 7308lbs and La-5FN 7323lbs. No 400lbs differences anywhere.
Strange. I thought the whole point of designing a new aluminum wing spar was to save weight over the old wooden spar. Perhaps the weight savings were eaten up by the other modifications.
-
The prop was probably designed to be more efficient at the higher top speed. That might actually have made it less effective at low speed. I don't know. The improved exhaust piping primarily allowed the cowling to be tighter. The engine does not produce more hp in the La-7 than in the La-5FN. Parasitic drag is the primary factor in determining top speed. Climb rate is directly proportional to acceleration and power to weight. The difference between the 5 and 7 is almost negligible.
And yet the difference between them in the game we play is very noticeable to those who push the virtual aircraft to the edge of their envelopes.
-
Unless you can quantify that in some sort of useful numbers it will remain a subjective "feeling". The La-7 has a better climb rate of about 100 fpm at sea level, and that tiny gap quickly closes with altitude. If you "feel" it has more than that then I simply don't have anything to say to that, except perhaps "prove it".
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/components/com_ahplaneperf/genchart.php?p1=5&p2=42&pw=1>ype=2&gui=localhost&itemsel=GameData)
-
I will put some more time into proving it later when it's not nearly 03:00
Until then, I'm pretty sure this quick test is unarguable proof that the La7 is best.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ekoXq6_jSY
-
Until then, I'm pretty sure this quick test is unarguable proof that the La7 is best.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ekoXq6_jSY
"This video is private"
Very impressive. :)
-
fixed :noid
-
Umm...
-
LVT can do that too. And it has a better climb rate
-
Its quite a handsome bird. One must say.
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/LA-9WanakaApril2006PeterArnoldImg_2906_zps143ff56f.jpg)
-
Its quite a handsome bird. One must say.
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/LA-9WanakaApril2006PeterArnoldImg_2906_zps143ff56f.jpg)
If by handsome you actually mean Clownish, than yes.
-
Its quite a handsome bird. One must say.
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/LA-9WanakaApril2006PeterArnoldImg_2906_zps143ff56f.jpg)
I believe that's a La-9 Rich.
-
The La-9 is just an all-metal La-7 whit a redesigned tail and laminar flow wings.
-
Two LA7s jumped skyraiders and were quickly shot down.
-
LA5's cannons are soooo bad. Low rate of fire terrible ballistics, and to top it all off, they don't hit very hard. Got into a prolonged knife fight with joker recently and got a good angle on him. Hit sprite from nose to tail as he pulls up into me. I level out waiting to hear the explosion and get the kill message, but instead I look back to see an angry Dhog d200 on my six with a bloody nose and guns blazing.
I do however think the la5 should at most have an ENy of 25. Its a performance monster
La7 and La5 in two cannon mode use two ShVAK 20mm while three cannon mode is an Berezin B-20 20mm. Both fired exactly the same round with the same performance of 750-790m\sec. Synchronized through the prop, the RPS will be below 700-800 rnds\min. The ShVAK cannon has a slightly longer barrel which made it a bit more accurate and holding flatter to 200m(218yd) with a 1\2inch drop. It was a much more complex cannon than the B-20 and heavier. That's why three B-20 could be mounted. The round weighed 96 grams which allowed for it's very fast velocity and flat trajectory to 200m. It did not carry a lot of HE content. It dropped by 24in by 400m due to that light weight.
Because the cannons are synchronized through the props, you are putting out less 20mm than the Yak's or spits per second. You need to be closer when you shoot or very familiar with the RoF, ballistics, and deflection allowances while shooting from an La. It's destructive power is not as high as a Hisso 20mm or MG151\20. So 200m is your effective range.
-
The LA-7 is going to feel like it has better climb based on its generally faster top end speed at low alts.
-
Careful Squire, you're going to have to back your feelings up with hard evidence to convince some of the aeronautical scientists round here. Apparently the LA7 and La5fn are so close to the same you cannot possibly feel any difference between them.
-
Careful Squire, you're going to have to back your feelings up with hard evidence to convince some of the aeronautical scientists round here. Apparently the LA7 and La5fn are so close to the same you cannot possibly feel any difference between them.
:rofl :rofl :rofl
I'm going to call you on the 10,000 hours tho mate! I bet it's closer to 9,985 hours but it's just a feeling!
:salute
-
I'm simply pointing out that the perception (by some) of a faster climb is likely because of the LA-7s faster speed.
-
Apparently the LA7 and La5fn are so close to the same you cannot possibly feel any difference between them.
And I wonder if those same people think there is no difference when fighting against them.
ack-ack
-
Careful Squire, you're going to have to back your feelings up with hard evidence to convince some of the aeronautical scientists round here. Apparently the LA7 and La5fn are so close to the same you cannot possibly feel any difference between them.
The real crux of the matter is that you can't seem to accept that you're wrong about the La-7's engine not producing more power than the La-5. It simply doesn't. Accept it.
And I wonder if those same people think there is no difference when fighting against them.
ack-ack
Low and slow I'd be hard pressed to tell them apart without the different icons and skins. The faster we go however the bigger the difference. In a B&Z fight the 7 is much better than the 5 since it can carry more speed out of a dive and hold on to it for longer in the zoom climb. Low parasitic drag is what makes the P-51 so good despite having sub-par power to weight.
I'm simply pointing out that the perception (by some) of a faster climb is likely because of the LA-7s faster speed.
Exactly.
-
The real crux of the matter is that you can't seem to accept that you're wrong about the La-7's engine not producing more power than the La-5. It simply doesn't. Accept it.
I never said that the LA7 engine produced more power other than one badly worded first post. What I said was the LA7 has more power. More vertical ability in a stall fight. It is a UFO where the La5 is just decent. None of my statements in this thread are wrong. If you really care that much I will do some tests to prove this to you.
-
Not quite the impression I got.
Then I was correct in saying 'more power'. Improved exhaust piping alone can boost horse power...
It's not that important. Prove it or don't; it's up to you. :)
-
Not quite the impression I got.
It's not that important. Prove it or don't; it's up to you. :)
No, it's not important. But it is interesting that two people can hold such different views about something that I would think is very basic and obvious.
Your position is that there is no difference that the pilot can feel between the two aircraft. Any feeling that the La7 performs better is subjective and wrong as proved by the speed and climb charts.
I think it is so obvious that I am right, there is a difference and an experienced player can definitely feel it, that there really is not point trying to prove it to you.
So...how about:
You prove that there is no discernible difference that one can feel between the two and then I might take your position more seriously. Don't keep stubbornly throwing those speed charts at me, it makes you seem ignorant to base how the aircraft 'feels to fly' on a speed chart.
-
The La-9 is just an all-metal La-7 whit a redesigned tail and laminar flow wings.
And 4 x 20mm
-
And 4 x 20mm
4 x 23mm actually...
-
The revised exhaust pattern allowed for less drag around the cowling and more efficient engine cooling which allowed the exhaust 'flaps' to be feathered closer under WEP.
All LA7 WEP performance charts are with the cooling vanes front and back of engine fully feathered. Hence again it's all about drag not power.
The one characteristic the LA5FN can use in game over the LA7 is it scrubs E quicker so ( when you want to) it's easier to avoid the over shoot. ......
Low speed accel of both are about the same.... Your fuel weight will make a bigger difference
-
No, it's not important. But it is interesting that two people can hold such different views about something that I would think is very basic and obvious.
Your position is that there is no difference that the pilot can feel between the two aircraft. Any feeling that the La7 performs better is subjective and wrong as proved by the speed and climb charts.
I think it is so obvious that I am right, there is a difference and an experienced player can definitely feel it, that there really is not point trying to prove it to you.
So...how about:
You prove that there is no discernible difference that one can feel between the two and then I might take your position more seriously. Don't keep stubbornly throwing those speed charts at me, it makes you seem ignorant to base how the aircraft 'feels to fly' on a speed chart.
"Feeling" is subjective, not scientific. You're whole argument is ridiculous. You can say you "feel" this or that, but without actually looking at the instruments and comparing the readings it is completely useless.
-
so you are saying that they perform exactly the same?
-
Low and slow the difference in performance is negligible.
-
Turning radius:
La 5: 622 without flaps, 469 with full flaps.
La 7: 619 without flaps, 469 with full flaps.
The difference without flaps is well within the margin of error for Mosq's tests. Difference in climb rate is also within 3% at sea level and diminishing quickly with altitude.
"It felt faster this time" said no test pilot ever...
-
Quoting charts again......turning circle? Means very little unless you are using BFM in a fight. Certainly means very little in regards to how the plane feels to fly.
What about cross control handling, overall stability, stall idiosyncrasies, control authority at different speeds? All you can do it seems is quote the text books. Do you not have any experience in the last 10 years in either plane that you can draw conclusions from?
your answer is 'the difference is negligible'
Are you saying then that it would be possible or impossible to feel the difference between the planes?
-
Both planes have the same wings, the same control surfaces and cockpit controls, same fuselage, same engine. You can "feel" all the difference you want. Doesn't change the facts.
-
If I were a betting man I'd bet the only real difference is that you know you're in an La-7 or an La-5 and your own preconceptions are the cause of your feeling.
-
Quoting charts again......turning circle? Means very little unless you are using BFM in a fight. Certainly means very little in regards to how the plane feels to fly.
What about cross control handling, overall stability, stall idiosyncrasies, control authority at different speeds? All you can do it seems is quote the text books. Do you not have any experience in the last 10 years in either plane that you can draw conclusions from?
your answer is 'the difference is negligible'
Are you saying then that it would be possible or impossible to feel the difference between the planes?
I don't feel any significant difference between those two in handling, satbility and so on. As far as I am cocnerned, they virtually fly and fight the same to be, only notable differences are high speed acceleration and top speed
-
Both planes have the same wings, the same control surfaces and cockpit controls, same fuselage, same engine. You can "feel" all the difference you want. Doesn't change the facts.
If I were a betting man I'd bet the only real difference is that you know you're in an La-7 or an La-5 and your own preconceptions are the cause of your feeling.
So you are taking all human intuition out of the flying of the planes and basing everything on their statistics? I can see why you haven't played in so many years. Must be a very boring game for you. Still, there is SOME statistical difference between the two planes, you have admitted this much yourself. I, personally, can feel it when flying them.
I don't feel any significant difference between those two in handling, satbility and so on. As far as I am cocnerned, they virtually fly and fight the same to be, only notable differences are high speed acceleration and top speed
Do you ever fly them at under 100mph for hours at a time in the DA practicing rolling and vertical stall fights 1v1?
Do you ever deliberately fly to the edge of the envelope in any plane?
I am almost certain neither of you two have ever displayed any innovation or style to me in a dogfight and therefore I doubt you will ever understand how a player can feel the subtle differences between two such similar planes.
-
Do you ever fly them at under 100mph for hours at a time in the DA practicing rolling and vertical stall fights 1v1?
Not for hours, but yes, I did.
Do you ever deliberately fly to the edge of the envelope in any plane?
Yes.
I am almost certain neither of you two have ever displayed any innovation or style to me in a dogfight and therefore I doubt you will ever understand how a player can feel the subtle differences between two such similar planes.
Seeng an AH trainer cops member taking cheap jabs at someone just expressing his own impressions in a particular plane is a sad thing. I would have expected something different.
-
Not for hours, but yes, I did.
Then do it for hours and maybe you will be able to feel the difference between the La7 and the La5FN.
Yes.
Then you must know that beyond the science of charts and statistics there is also a 'feeling' to flying these virtual planes.
Seeing an AH trainer cops member taking cheap jabs at someone just expressing his own impressions in a particular plane is a sad thing. I would have expected something different.
Please explain what I have said that is a cheap jab.
My questions are pertinent to the discussion as well as genuine curiosities of mine considering your view of these two aircraft.
My statement about innovation and style is simply true. If you think it is unjust, then invite me to the DA/TA and show me some innovation and/or style.
-
There were steps in the improvements over the original LA5. The improvements would have put delays on the manufacture which is one of the reason steps were taken. The LA5F had the M82 engine which was carbureted, trunked exhaust pipes and cut down rear fuselage. The LA5FN had a fuel injected M-82 motor which allowed higher supercharging boost. A longer air intake was adapted to supply the engine and individual exhaust pipes were introduced. The engineers also shed weight off the FN wherever they could. The la5F and LA5FN were built side by side. Then came the LA7 with further refinements which included a thinner wing, moving the oil cooler from under the nose to further back and buried in the fuselage, relocation of the air intake from nose to wing root. The whole time the manufacturing process was mastered which led to a higher quality finished product.
-
I have to side with Mechanic on this. To me anyway the LA5 seems more stable at very slow speed when I am in a tight turn. Maybe because of the thicker wing I don't know. I also can not catch a la7 on the deck with a 5 from an equal start. I also can not disengage from spitfires and what have ya in the la5 as easily as I can in the 7. The 7 seems to stay in the air longer on the fuel provided. I guess those aerodynamic improvements are helping. To me saying the 5 and 7 are the same is the same as saying the Spit 9 and 16 are the same. I guess ya could....I guess........... :)
Tally Ho!
-
So you are taking all human intuition out of the flying of the planes and basing everything on their statistics? I can see why you haven't played in so many years. Must be a very boring game for you. Still, there is SOME statistical difference between the two planes, you have admitted this much yourself. I, personally, can feel it when flying them.
Well... First of all, you're not flying them. Your playing a computer game, and if you think it is not just about numbers you don't know much about computers. If you want to believe in some sort of ghost in the machine, that's fine, but don't expect me to take your word for it.
-
To me anyway the LA5 seems more stable at very slow speed when I am in a tight turn.
Perfect example of how this "feeling" is completely subjective. Mechanic "feels" the LA-7 is the superior stall fighter.
I bet that if we could turn the cockpit off and all other distinguishing features neither one of you could consistently tell them apart from low speed performance alone.
-
heheh I bet ya I could...................
But your entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.
The La-9 is just an all-metal La-7 whit a redesigned tail and laminar flow wings.
Im sure since that's all it was they prolly knocked it together in a few hours. Well before lunch break I would suspect. :D
-
heheh I bet ya I could...................
But your entitled to your opinion as I am to mine.
Only if you present your credentials. Are you a man of 'style and innovation'? You need to prove that in the DA first :old:
-
I don't know about innovation, but how's this pipe for style?!
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Hans_Landa_IB_2009.jpg)
-
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
I agree with Bat... there certainly feels like there's a good bit of extra oomph with the LA7.
I would guess that if there were actually as little difference between the two planes as the charts show there would be more of a split between people flying the LA5/7. As it is, it's fairly uncommon to see an LA5 running around and I've never thought it was all because of one extra cannon.
-
Triton... Speed... :huh
-
There is a big difference in the performance of these planes. You have to consider that 40 mph Make a huge difference in fights. Not to mention the la7 can excel a bit faster which makes a huge difference in gaining E during a stall fight. Just because charts show that they have similar characteristics, doesn't mean that fighting abilities and characteristics are the same.
Ohh and one more thing. This game is not real life, so argueing real life statistics with this game is not valid. And arguing fighting performance in this game vs real life is not valid.
And yes the La7 is an awesome freaking plane in real life.
-
I'm guessing you didn't bother to read the whole thread.
-
I actually did.
-
Only if you present your credentials. Are you a man of 'style and innovation'? You need to prove that in the DA first :old:
You don't have to innovate or have style. But if you don't have any 'feeling' of how the planes handle and rely purely on chart numbers then you certainly will not ever innovate or be stylish in the virtual sky. Think LePape and his innovative and stylish moves. Think Krupnski with his tail slide reversal. Think WldThng with the barrel reversal. These are examples of innovators who are 'feeling' what the planes can do, not limiting themselves to a soulless statistical outlook.
People remember fighting these guys because their obvious flare and style left a lasting impression.
I have encountered you many times over the years. I have enjoyed the occasional high altitude bomber vs fighter chess game with you. But other than that I can't think of a single kill or fight that left me thinking 'wow, that was cool what he did there.' That is not meant as an insult, I could not care less how other people fly.
But it certainly proves how flying like a Scientist is hardly noticeable and wins little renown even when you win all the time.
Flying like an Artist is memorable and garners huge respect even when you lose all the time.
I don't know about innovation, but how's this pipe for style?!
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Hans_Landa_IB_2009.jpg)
10/10 for style
-
Triton... Speed... :huh
Right. I'd argue that speed is one of the ways we feel power, and that extra power is what makes it feel like we're flying a different, more capable aircraft... especially when flown to the outer edges of the envelope.
-
I think the LA7 is one of the most fearce looking planes in in WW2
-
Flying like an Artist is memorable and garners huge respect even when you lose all the time.
That's me; the starving artist.
-
Right. I'd argue that speed is one of the ways we feel power...
The argument is over the perceived difference in low speed stall fighting and climb.
-
10/10 for style
Yay! :aok
-
The argument is over the perceived difference in low speed stall fighting and climb.
There's no increased acceleration with the LA7 over the LA5?
-
There's no increased acceleration with the LA7 over the LA5?
Only significant at high speeds (say 250+) due to the better aerodynamics of the La-7. In a stall fight, the accelerations are about identical. Same power, same mass.
-
There's no increased acceleration with the LA7 over the LA5?
At low speed, no. The difference is negligible. Easy way to judge relative acceleration is looking at climb rates. Climb rate and acceleration is directly linked. After all, climbing is just vertical acceleration. The best climbing aircraft will always have the best acceleration at low (climbing) speed.
-
The difference is not negligable! In a slow fight 10-20 Mph can make a huge difference. The planes do not fly the same and it's obvious the la7 handles E and retains E better all around than the la5.
-
The argument is over the perceived difference in low speed stall fighting and climb.
And here I thought it was a discussion................... .Ive been too nice...... :old: ;)
-
At low speed, no. The difference is negligible. Easy way to judge relative acceleration is looking at climb rates. Climb rate and acceleration is directly linked. After all, climbing is just vertical acceleration. The best climbing aircraft will always have the best acceleration at low (climbing) speed.
Best way to judge is to actually fly them. Have you flown either of them at all since the last update to the lavochkins?
-
Both. I can't find any discernible difference in their stall fighting abilities.
-
The difference is not negligable! In a slow fight 10-20 Mph can make a huge difference. The planes do not fly the same and it's obvious the la7 handles E and retains E better all around than the la5.
They have the same stall speed. Top speed is limited by parasitic drag. Stall speed is limited by lift, weight and induced drag. The last is equal for both aircraft. Only at higher speeds, like the 250 mph Lusche suggested, would the lower parasitic drag of the La-7 start having a significant effect.
-
The difference is not negligable! In a slow fight 10-20 Mph can make a huge difference. The planes do not fly the same and it's obvious the la7 handles E and retains E better all around than the la5.
There is no such a difference in slow speed acceleration. Both planes are accelerating from 150 to 200 in virtually the same time, just under 8 seconds. After 10 seconds, the La5 is at 207 mph, the La7 at 210. After 30 seconds (which is a damn long time in combat), the La5 reaches 279 mph vs La7 285 mph.
Tested by film viewer at SL and 50% fuel.
If my math doesn't fail on me (which is very much possible, please feel free to check it), after 10 seconds the La-7 gains something like 25 feet, 50 feet after 20 seconds and around 75 feet after 30 seconds.
Above that, the La-7's better aerodynamics really coems into play and it's pulling away at an increasing rate. But no one ever disputed that. :)
-
The differences are well within the margins of error.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/AH/la5la7.JPG)
-
Why can't you guys stop talking about those two charts? Acceleration is not the question. They do not describe how the plane handles.
Are the models in AH exactly the same aerodynamically?
-
I am talking abut how the plane feels to fly. Why can't you stop talking about those two charts? They do not describe how the plane handles.
If you actually care to read what's been written, you will see that the acceleration topic was brought back in by someone else.
There's no increased acceleration with the LA7 over the LA5?
At low speed, no. The difference is negligible.
The difference is not negligable! In a slow fight 10-20 Mph can make a huge difference.
-
If you actually care to read what's been written, you will see that the acceleration topic was brought back in by someone else.
no. The comment you quoted has far more to do with handling than acceleration
The difference is not negligable! In a slow fight 10-20 Mph can make a huge difference. The planes do not fly the same and it's obvious the la7 handles E and retains E better all around than the la5.
-
no. The comment you quoted has far more to do with handling than acceleration
Look at the messages I quoted. GS says (in reply to triton) that there's no difference at slow speed and Dmon replies "there is a huge difference".
If he meant something different with that, he should have written it.
And again, Triton brough the accel issue back in. That's why I posted my acceleration comparison tests.
-
Look at the messages I quoted. GS says (in reply to triton) that there's no difference at slow speed and Dmon replies "there is a huge difference".
If he meant something different with that, he should have written it.
And again, Triton brough the accel issue back in. That's why I posted my acceleration comparison tests.
Triton asked a question to which the answer is 'Yes, there is a slight acceleration difference'. How important that difference is being not related to Triton's question.
Dmon did not say 'there is a huge difference' in the context of acceleration. He said that 10-20mph can make a huge difference in a slow fight and he is right about that.
One side of this debate is made up of people who have countless hours of experience in 1v1 fighting on the edge of the envelope but not much regard for speed charts. These are the people who think the player can 'feel' the aircraft. X plane has a great character in the stall where as Y plane starts to feel unstable a little earlier, lets keep flying them and see what we can learn.
The other side is made up of people who lack that specific type of experience and prefer to make judgements based off data collected by others. These are the people who consider everything to be a mathematical equation and have no regard for intuition in controlling the aircraft. X plane does this, Y plane does that, end of discussion.
Solving this debate is like trying to make the South and North Poles agree to meet in Africa. :rofl
-
There is no difference in handling at or close to stall speed that I can detect. Until proven otherwise I'll continue to think it's all in your head. No offense intended.
-
Dmon did not say 'there is a huge difference' in the context of acceleration. He said that 10-20mph can make a huge difference in a slow fight and he is right about that.
What 10-20 mph then? If the fight is slow, both on are the same footing acceleration wise. The La-7 won't suddenly gain 10-20 mph over the La-5 from the same start. Only when the fight is already very fast the La-7 enjoys that speed advantage. But one one disputed the latter one. A
The other side is made up of people who lack that specific type of experience and prefer to make judgements based off data collected by others. These are the people who consider everything to be a mathematical equation and have no regard for intuition in controlling the aircraft. X plane does this, Y plane does that, end of discussion.
And some people will just either assume or make up anything about others not sharing the same subjective perception over handling instead of arguing on topic. Like I said "cheap shots", as "have you ever deliberately flown a plane at the edge" was a loaded question from the start.
And I don't even said "there is no difference in handling". That would be an absolute statement, which I didn't feel entitled to. I very much made clear it's just a subjective statement:
I don't feel any significant difference between those two in handling, stability and so on. As far as I am concerned, they virtually fly and fight the same to be, only notable differences are high speed acceleration and top speed
Oh, and I actually took them both out in the TA to explore they slow speed maneuverability and stall behaviour again before I wrote that, just to make sure my memories from dogfights in the main or the TA didn't fool me.
-
There is no difference in handling at or close to stall speed that I can detect. Until proven otherwise I'll continue to think it's all in your head. No offense intended.
No offence taken at all, this is only a discussion about cartoon planes. However, my main issue with your standpoint has been that one cannot 'feel' anything about the handling in this game.
What 10-20 mph then? If the fight is slow, both on are the same footing acceleration wise. The La-7 won't suddenly gain 10-20 mph over the La-5 from the same start. Only when the fight is already very fast the La-7 enjoys that speed advantage. But one one disputed the latter one.
I am not disputing that, I only accurately repeated a quote from someone else that you only half repeated.
And some people will just either assume or make up anything about others not sharing the same subjective perception over handling instead of arguing on topic. Like I said "cheap shots", as "have you ever deliberately flown a plane at the edge" was a loaded question from the start.
That is not a cheap shot. It is a genuine question. I have never been disrespectful to you in the long time I have known you in this game, why would I start now? Perhaps you need to ask yourself why I even had to ask you that question. Why is it that I am in doubt that you have done these things with nearly a decade of knowing you and seeing you fly in the MA?
And I don't even said "there is no difference in handling". That would be an absolute statement, which I didn't feel entitled to. I very much made clear it's just a subjective statement:
Oh, and I actually took them both out in the TA to explore they slow speed maneuverability and stall behaviour again before I wrote that, just to make sure my memories from dogfights in the main or the TA didn't fool me.
Actually, this started when I was told 'you cannot feel any difference in handling between them, you are imagining it'
Your test is 90% useless. To recreate a real environment I will offer that we both spend a few hours fighting intensively. Perhaps 30-40 fights in a row in each plane individually. Then again mismatched, you in the 5, me in the 7, then visa versa. Only then will we each begin to have a realistic understanding of what the edge of each plane's flight envelope feels like.
I will not post in this thread again because all we will do is go in circles. Consider my offer of TA/DA time. We might both learn something. It might even be fun.
S!
batfink
-
No offence taken at all, this is only a discussion about cartoon planes. However, my main issue with your standpoint has been that one cannot 'feel' anything about the handling in this game.
Not quite right. The "feel" is obviously there, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion. Where we differ is on where this "feel" comes from. You're claiming it is from a difference in stall-fighting performance between the La-5 and La-7. I'm claiming it is only your imagination or preconception. To me they are the same low and slow.
-
Certainly any change in aerodynamics will create differences in aircraft handling regardless of speed. Even those arguing with statistics have admitted these changes between the La-5 and La-7. So why is it so hard to believe there can be differences in "feel"?
A case in point: Several months ago there was a discussion in the Help and Training forum on the A6M vs the F4F. Going strictly by the stats no one in their right mind would engage an A6M with an F4F, however, during the Pacific War scenario the F4F dominated the A6M in every frame.
Another case in point: Several years ago in this very forum there was a conversation regarding Spitfires. I claimed that the Spits held E like no other. Saxman IIRC stated that Spits bled E like crazy with the throttle off. He was correct in his assessment, however, under power you'd be hard pressed to get a Spit to slow significantly even in a max G turn.
Bat's been around for years, living much of that in the DA and is one of the better fighter pilots in the game. I believe the numbers presented to be valid but, I find myself hard pressed to totally discount bat's experience. Just like the examples above, there's probably more to this than meets the eye.
-
You're comparing completely different aircraft. These minor changes, mostly in the engine cowling will not change the handling of the La. Case in point: There are two people in this thread who both claim they can "feel" a difference in low-speed handling between the 5 and 7. Only problem is they "feel" the exact opposite of each other; one thinks the 7 "feels" better while the other thinks the 5 "feels" better.
-
I said the la5 feels more stable when slow I didn't say it was better. I think the 7 is flat out better.
-
In reference to the LA7. Squadron book La5/7 fighters. page 37.
"additionally , refinements to the elevators resulted in reduced control stick forces."
-
Again... only pertains to high speed situations.
-
I said the la5 feels more stable when slow I didn't say it was better. I think the 7 is flat out better.
We are only talking about "when slow" here. Do you consider "more stable" to be better or worse?
-
You're comparing completely different aircraft. These minor changes, mostly in the engine cowling will not change the handling of the La.
They are different aircraft in my first example but that's simply to show that stats (very basic ones) don't tell the whole story.
In my second example the aircraft is the very same with no modifications whatsoever. This example illustrates that a simply measured statistic (throttle off in level flight and measure speed decrease) tells nothing of e-retention in powered flight.
Your argument so far is based on three very simple statistics; speed, climb rate and acceleration. Couldn't it be there's differences in roll rate, stall characteristics, control authority, e-retention and a whole host of other aerodynamic factors you're not accounting for?
I'm not taking sides in this debate but from my perspective your argument is as flat as the world you see around you and standing firm in your simplified stats against all other perspectives marginalizes your argument.
Bat offered a very reasonable solution; go to the DA, fight five times with one in one plane and the other in the other then switch planes and do it again. My bet in an on the deck duel is the LA-7 wins more often.
I guess I did take sides.
-
Couldn't it be there's differences in roll rate, stall characteristics, control authority, e-retention and a whole host of other aerodynamic factors you're not accounting for?
Both planes have the same wings, the same control surfaces and cockpit controls, same fuselage, same engine. You can "feel" all the difference you want. Doesn't change the facts.
I grow tired of repeating myself...
-
You just don't get it do ya Scottie
Oh, and yeah 20 mph makes a big difference in a slow fight. It comes down to which plane can flip over more quickly and still retain E better causing the other to flutter out in the stall. The La7 can gain this advantage, which can allow it to be better in a slow fight. However, the la5 may be able to roll inside of it at slower speeds. While the planses may be considered "close" on paper, one plane is better adept to handling planes in the MA, and that is the LA7. You cant agrue that either. The overall 20-40 mph speed difference makes a hell of a difference in the MA.
Your own charts are showing you square in the face that these planes are not that identical, the speed chart is my opinion the biggest indication, givin this one simple "fact" that this plane incurs around 20 mph more speed at any givin point flying straight tells me that it can out climb the La5 in a straight up verticle climb to the top, while also being able to dive more quickly as well.
No matter what you say, the la7 is a better overall fighter in the MA and does have all around better performance charts than the LA5, even if they are close. It is obvious that one can feel these differences in their flying as well. Therefore, both of these statements validate that the La7 is a better overall fighter with better performance.
-
Oh, and yeah 20 mph makes a big difference in a slow fight.
:huh
This is becoming like reading youtube comments... I always regret it afterwards.
-
You just don't get it do ya Scottie
Oh, and yeah 20 mph makes a big difference in a slow fight. It comes down to which plane can flip over more quickly and still retain E better causing the other to flutter out in the stall. The La7 can gain this advantage, which can allow it to be better in a slow fight. However, the la5 may be able to roll inside of it at slower speeds. While the planses may be considered "close" on paper, one plane is better adept to handling planes in the MA, and that is the LA7. You cant agrue that either. The overall 20-40 mph speed difference makes a hell of a difference in the MA.
Your own charts are showing you square in the face that these planes are not that identical, the speed chart is my opinion the biggest indication, givin this one simple "fact" that this plane incurs around 20 mph more speed at any givin point flying straight tells me that it can out climb the La5 in a straight up verticle climb to the top, while also being able to dive more quickly as well.
No matter what you say, the la7 is a better overall fighter in the MA and does have all around better performance charts than the LA5, even if they are close. It is obvious that one can feel these differences in their flying as well. Therefore, both of these statements validate that the La7 is a better overall fighter with better performance.
Nobody has disputed a top speed advantage of the La-7 over the La-5
Nobody claimed the planes are identical.
Nobody disputed that the La-7 is absolutely the overall better MA fighter.
-
A case in point: Several months ago there was a discussion in the Help and Training forum on the A6M vs the F4F. Going strictly by the stats no one in their right mind would engage an A6M with an F4F, however, during the Pacific War scenario the F4F dominated the A6M in every frame.
Off the original subject, but I think to the extent that was caused by any difference between the planes, it was the result of people looking at the wrong stats beforehand. The F4Fs didn't win because there were subtle differences in flight performance not reflected in the performance charts, they won because while the A6M2 can fly loops around the F4F, it also has anemic guns with a woefully inadequate ammo supply, instantly turns into a Roman candle if it's hit by so much as a piece of pigeon poop, and disintegrates if it tries to follow any Grumman in a dive. And those disadvantages matter more in scenario play than in the MA because the style of play is so different.
-
I grow tired of repeating myself...
Me too.
They changed the center section of the wing. They modified the control surfaces. They refined the fuselage. The la5 had a spade stick while the LA7 had a US style stick. They modified the instrument cluster as well. Apparently the VVS thought it was worth while.
-
Off the original subject, but I think to the extent that was caused by any difference between the planes, it was the result of people looking at the wrong stats beforehand. The F4Fs didn't win because there were subtle differences in flight performance not reflected in the performance charts, they won because while the A6M2 can fly loops around the F4F, it also has anemic guns with a woefully inadequate ammo supply, instantly turns into a Roman candle if it's hit by so much as a piece of pigeon poop, and disintegrates if it tries to follow any Grumman in a dive. And those disadvantages matter more in scenario play than in the MA because the style of play is so different.
F4F's durability is, IMO, exaggerated in AH which makes the contest almost impossible for the A6Ms.
-
:huh
This is becoming like reading youtube comments... I always regret it afterwards.
You will regret it because you are wrong.
-
Perfect example of how this "feeling" is completely subjective. Mechanic "feels" the LA-7 is the superior stall fighter.
Mechanic feels it because the difference is there. Performance charts are only useful for few basic metrics. You should have know that...
I bet that if we could turn the cockpit off and all other distinguishing features neither one of you could consistently tell them apart from low speed performance alone.
In AH, LA7 feels differently at slow speeds. It's not as stable at these speeds and high angle of attack as LA5, hence you can throw it around better than LA5. Whilst difference is not huge, it is very much detectable if you fly both a lot.
In short: less stability = more maneuverability, and that, in essence, is difference between LA5 and LA7.
-
Me too.They changed the center section of the wing. They modified the control surfaces. They refined the fuselage. The la5 had a spade stick while the LA7 had a US style stick. They modified the instrument cluster as well. Apparently the VVS thought it was worth while.
No plane in AH has a wing, control surfaces, fuselage, or stick. They are collections of digits meant to model the interactions of those things based on digital inputs from players' electronic controllers. The real-life effect of those changes to the physical planes may or may not be reflected in the modeling. That's the real question here, whether the La-7 in the game has differences from the La-5 in the game that are coded into the plane models but not apparent from the top speed, climb, and acceleration charts. The only sure way to answer that question is to talk to someone who knows the code. Subjective impressions of players can, as we see here, differ significantly.
-
You will regret it because you are wrong.
I never regret being proven wrong.
-
Mechanic feels it because the difference is there. Performance charts are only useful for few basic metrics. You should have know that...
Yes a few basic metrics like top speed at various altitude, climb/acceleration at various altitudes, acceleration at various speeds, turning circle with or without flaps, degrees per second with or without flaps. You know... all the important stuff.
In AH, LA7 feels differently at slow speeds.
Not to me they don't, and I've flown them quite regularly. Mostly La-7 of course.
In short: less stability = more maneuverability...
You're obviously an aeronautical genius.
-
No plane in AH has a wing, control surfaces, fuselage, or stick. They are collections of digits meant to model the interactions of those things based on digital inputs from players' electronic controllers. The real-life effect of those changes to the physical planes may or may not be reflected in the modeling. That's the real question here, whether the La-7 in the game has differences from the La-5 in the game that are coded into the plane models but not apparent from the top speed, climb, and acceleration charts. The only sure way to answer that question is to talk to someone who knows the code. Subjective impressions of players can, as we see here, differ significantly.
OMG, you're arguing that "real life" is somehow not a collection of numbers? You know there's more empty space than real stuff by orders and order and orders of magnitude? Math defines everything. Everything measurable is capable of being defined mathematically.
Also; It's a outrage!
-
I was referring to the real plane. We are kinda talkin about both here...I think...maybe :)
-
OMG, you're arguing that "real life" is somehow not a collection of numbers? You know there's more empty space than real stuff by orders and order and orders of magnitude? Math defines everything. Everything measurable is capable of being defined mathematically.
Also; It's a outrage!
That's some deep thoughts there bro! I have to go get high and try to wrap my mind around it! :old: :D
Now where did I put that lava lamp.........
-
Yes a few basic metrics like top speed at various altitude, climb/acceleration at various altitudes, acceleration at various speeds, turning circle with or without flaps, degrees per second with or without flaps. You know... all the important stuff.
Ah OK, important stuff. If I look at LA5 and LA7 AH charts, there are differences.
Not to me they don't, and I've flown them quite regularly. Mostly La-7 of course.
"Important Stuff" says Mechanic (Batfink) and DmonSlyr are right and you're wrong.
You're obviously an aeronautical genius.
Even if I would be one, I would still be inferior to professional charts wrangler like you, right?
-
Ah OK, important stuff. If I look at LA5 and LA7 AH charts, there are differences.
At high speed yes. We're not discussing performance at high speed. Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?
-
At high speed yes. We're not discussing performance at high speed. Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?
Low speed, sustained turn radius, low alt climb... Subtle, but is there. This (plus what isn't on charts) translates into handling differences which highly skilled guys (Batfink, DmonSlyr and others) would notice.
Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse?
Not at all, it's just that your chart reading capabilities are of rather low resolution. Probably of the same as your subjective feel for LA5 and LA7.
-
Except that two "highly skilled guys" had opposite opinions on which aircraft was better low and slow. This "feeling" is subjective and cannot be quantified in any way. Whether or not it is an advantage in combat is also unquantifiable and highly speculative. "Highly skilled" or not, they're not Jedi...
-
OMG, you're arguing that "real life" is somehow not a collection of numbers?
Don't be silly. The complexities and numbers in real life are many orders of magnitude greater, and many orders of magnitude finer than any computer model we have the technology to create, much less a commercially viable game. It's like the difference between a synthesizer trying to reproduce the sound of a Stradivarius vs. the real item, but a hundred times more complex.
-
You just don't get it do ya Scottie
Oh, and yeah 20 mph makes a big difference in a slow fight. It comes down to which plane can flip over more quickly and still retain E better causing the other to flutter out in the stall. The La7 can gain this advantage, which can allow it to be better in a slow fight. However, the la5 may be able to roll inside of it at slower speeds. While the planses may be considered "close" on paper, one plane is better adept to handling planes in the MA, and that is the LA7. You cant agrue that either. The overall 20-40 mph speed difference makes a hell of a difference in the MA.
Obviously you didn't read all of what I wrote here considering the differences in the LAs at slow turn fighting speeds. I said the la5 could roll in inside of it at slower rolling speeds. But the la7 could use its advantage to out climb or out E the la5.
The fact that you don't think 20 MPH could make a big difference in a turn fight probably means you dont have enough experience flying and dueling or you probably just aren't that good.
-
Except that two "highly skilled guys" had opposite opinions on which aircraft was better low and slow. This "feeling" is subjective and cannot be quantified in any way. Whether or not it is an advantage in combat is also unquantifiable and highly speculative. "Highly skilled" or not, they're not Jedi...
Pipz said the La5FN is more stable.
I said the La7 is more manoeuvrable.
We said the same thing.
:bolt:
-
One day you'll have to take me to the DA and prove it. :)
-
Lets keep this goin! Huzzah! :aok :D
-
One day you'll have to take me to the DA and prove it. :)
I think that would be good fun
-
My wing fell off.
-
the LA7 with further refinements which included a thinner wing,
The wing profile did not change from the Lagg thru to the La7.
The main spa changed from wood to metal during the La5F -La5FN transition. The actual timing was dependant upon the two factory stocks of wings. So one factory used up all its wooden spa's prior to switching to the FN one didn't and so some early FN's had wooden spa's (which were heavier).
FYI the only reason FN production went on until Oct 44 was due to the stock of FN wings.
The rod linkage control to aelerons and elevator was the same for both. Control surfaces also the same construction. The La7 rudder tip was changed by a small amount.
The wing root to fuselage profile was changed several times from lagg thru to la7.
Re "feel", given HTC have put some extra drag down the under side of the La5FN fuselage then I can believe that stability changes under some AoA. I would struggle to believe that the departure characturistics are so different............I can sort of feel that the recovery characturistic might be marginally quicker on the la5FN (AH).
So if we do have experten hovering continually in between AH coaded departure and recovery then they may detect something. Historically these planes were never meant to be flown in combat this way.
I am no experten (definately the scientist and not the artist) I have flown both a fair amount.
I am a poor shot so do not commit for the quick kill but instead (try to) drain my opponents E to give me the eventual time I need on his/her 6. The la5FN does allow me to scrub e once I decide to commit to the saddle i.e it is easier (for me) to control the e state to get the best line when slow in an La5FN.
I don't think there is any diference in roll between them.
and I repeat if the la7 has full tanks and the la5FN has a quarter tank then the rules all change again IMO
-
Tilt in one of my books they said they changed the center section of the wing and modified the controles for less stick force. <shrugs>
In reference to the LA7. Squadron book La5/7 fighters. page 37.
"additionally , refinements to the elevators resulted in reduced control stick forces."
-
The center section of the wing (the part that is inside/underneath the fuselage) was modified to incorporate the engine intake and oil cooler. The wing profile, size or shape was not changed beyond the wing root intakes and the fillet.
-
La7. Its good to have a plane for new pilots. Great plane for them to learn on.
...or for the score obsessed too.
:bolt:
-
Pipz you are correct it does say that on page 37.
I would point you to two other publications being
Lavochkin LA7 by Milos Vestsik ISBN 80-902238-7-7
And
Lavochkin La5 by Milos Vestsik ISBN 80-86524-10-8
Vestsik goes into detail much more than any of Yefim Gordon's or Hans -Heiri Staplers works ( which in the main repeat each other )
Vestsik is able to show diagrams and sketches not published elsewhere ( probably due to the fact he had access to one of the only two remaining La7's and a bunch of Czech records for both the La7 and La5FN.
He describes the control elements in some detail in each book. And in each book the La5fn and La 7 are the same.
There are differences in the elevators. The La5FN has 2 kg bob weights in port and starboard. The La7 has a 2.8kg bob weight in port and 2kg in starboard. The La5FN had travel of +27'30" & -16.30"'. The La7 had travel of +30' & -15'.
The trim tabs changed from Ply to Metal .
The big change in control stick forces (Elevator) came during the La5F to La5FN transition where the " gearing was changed substantially as was the travel (La5F had only +/- 16'30")
-
Tilt in one of my books they said they changed the center section of the wing and modified the controles for less stick force. <shrugs>
That explains my wing falling off. I am outraged.
-
That explains my wing falling off. I am outraged.
:lol Fantastic!
-
Ill have to see if I can pick them up sometime in the near future Tilt. They are both available on Amazon at the moment.
-
I am no expert and know nothing about what mechanics it takes to keep them flying in game, but to me the LA5 seems more nimble at slower and mid range speeds, and the roll rate seems quicker in game.
-
I knew a LA7 thread would have wings. :devil
-
Good job Comrad Rich! :aok :D