Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Alpo on August 16, 2002, 01:53:11 PM
-
I started flying the P51-D last night and I have to admit... I like it :D The combination of speed, payload capability, and guns has vaulted this to the top of my priority rides.
One thing that bothers me is what to do with those freaking LA7s. There I was, de-acking a VH when an LA7 latched onto my six at d1.5. I know the LA7 will catch me as I know I'm below the magic number where the LA loses performance.
He was at 1.3 when I decided that I didn't have a lot of options (duh) and proceeded to get shot down. Any thoughts on what to do in a 1 on 1 vs LA7 other than hitting enter three times? :confused: Any help from the pony drivers out there would be duly appreciated.
-
He's got the speed, you've got the guns and ammo load. You've also got the cockpit visibility. Do some yo-yo's, some scissors, try to work your way into the corners of his views and make him lose SA, then catch him with your six .50cals. Force the long-distance HO's and spray, then pull out before you get too close. Make him burn his rounds. Worth a try, anyway.
-
A lot of La7 drivers are ham fisted and will easily slip out of the envelope when you force them into an ever slowing sissor fight. Use your flaps to burn your E and you may be able to get a snapshot or a high deflection shot at him but beware, a lot of LA7 drivers will not engage you in a slow fight unless they have friendlies close.
The ones that will are either confident of their ACM abilities when low and slow or they are unaware of the abismal sustained turn rate an La7 has when below 200kts.
Ones dangerous and the other will give you either lots of proximity kills or a good view of their 6 while they try to bug out.
-
Alpo.. best thing to do is sissor.. Its the only way I survive when I fly my Jug. Laffers don't like to go slow. The same goes for Spit's drop a couple of notches on flaps and start to sissor. It's the only last ditch thing one can do..
And when they fly past..you better gun them down..or wep it and attempt to get away.
-
I agree with Nuchpatrich, the scissor maneuver is really your only hope if the pilot is worth a darn. Remember to use your flaps and if you happen to get a shot at him at any time, you better get hits in.
Realistically, the only true way to defend against the La7 in that situation is to not get into that situation because 85% of the time your gonna have to hit the silk.
To that end, I still don't believe the La7s flight model is based on actual Russian data from a reliable source. I don't remember one time when the Russians have ever released accurate data about any military equipment - ever. Granted they release data, especially after the cold war ended but by no means is it accurate. There is no way they produced such a stellar aircraft that has virtually no weaknesses.
Power to weight ratio: excellent
acceleration: excellent
top speed: excellent
compression at high speeds: minimal
visibility: good
durability: good
firepower: good
low speed handling: good
climb rate: excellent
At this point in reading, most people will start getting out their books and quoting numbers to dispute the above generalized assessment. Think about it though, planes are made with a purpose in mind. EX - the F6F was designed from the ground up to destroy Zeros. It does that well and proved itself to that ability in the Marianas Turkey Shoot. It can turn well, it's rugged and is excellent at carrier ops but has weaknesses in top speed and compression as well as climb rate & acceleration.
The Fw-190 was designed as a high speed gun platform to destroy allied bombers, the plane was designed accordingly and as a result it has difficulty in turn fights due to wing design etc. It has weakness due to design!
Another example, the Zero was designed to outturn anything in the sky, not designed for speed, and as a result it can't dive and compresses badly at high speeds. It has weakness due to design!
The La7 can outturn any energy fighter, can out accelerate any plane (not perc'd) except one, it hardly compresses in a dive, it climbs like a rocket, it's fast as snot, the pilot can see well out of it, it holds it's energy with the best of them.... I can go on... My point - what weakness does it have?
The sad thing is, even if HiTech drove to my house and showed me the data they used, what could we do about it? Nothing. We may never know how the real La7 flew. I just try to stay out of the way of them and relish the times when I see them going down in flames. That's what the MA is all about, the ability to fly any plane at any time.
Kuben <-- braces self for HTC'ites that think HiTech is infallible
-
"There is no way they produced such a stellar aircraft that has virtually no weaknesses. "
You wouldn't be saying that if you ever fought an LA7 at over 20K. They're meat on the table up there. The LA7 has limited ammo load, no range to speak of, no signifigant mulri-role capability, and performs horribly at high altitudes. Don't those count as weaknesses?
It just so happens that the role the LA& was designed for--low altitude dogfighting over short distances--is exactly what is required in the MA.
J_A_B
-
Talk to Rude or WildThing. Either of those guys can tell you what to do in that situation.
I'd *try* (I do it in 190s and 109s) to create a 'rolling scissors' with the intent of getting a snapshot early if he messes up. Start a gentle turn to one side (I almost always turn left, but if he isnt DIRECTLY behind you you should turn INTO him, i.e if he is on the right side of you, you turn right). Try to get him to about 90 degrees off your nose (anything between 60 and 120 will work though). As he closes in for the shot, I roll wings level and pull straight up (you'll have to vary the distance depending on what guns are shooting at you, and how fast he is closing). For an La-7 closing pretty fast I'd say roll wings level as he closes past 800 and start pulling up as he closes past 600 or 650. Now you will have forced him to overshoot with a lot more speed than you have.
From here you have some options depending on what he does.
1. If he performs a 'flat turn' back into you, you just turn into him- you'll get your nose pointed at him before he'll get his pointed at you.
2. If he goes straight vertical, you are in for a long and boring fight. I'd pull your nose back down and get enough speed to do the same thing once he starts to make his next BnZ pass. (I recommend at least 300 mph, but it is doable at slower speeds with practice).
3. If he pulls back into you obliquely, you just pull back into him, and just like a flat turn you will get your guns pointed on him before he can get his pointed on you. The only thing you have to worry about in this situation is stalling out- you will learn when he is shallow enough that you'll get to kill him without stalling out just by practicing a lot.
If you want some help, I'd be glad to go to the DA and demonstrate what I'm talking about. I go by Urchin in the game too.
-
I'm sorry but, the same argument for the ta152 being perked, is used to explain the why the la7 shouldn't be.. This doesn't make sense to me, could someone explain where I'm wrong?
The ta152 is perked because it ONLY dominates at high alt.
The la7 is NOT perked because it ONLY dominates at low alt.
Whats wrong with this picture?
Two things.
First, 90% of fights happen under 10k.
Second, a plane at high alt has the option to do a high speed dive to a lower more advantagous altitude. A low plane can't simply zoom climb to 20000 feet where it's in it's element. For this reason, to me, low altitude performance is FAR more important than high altitude performance.
I find it terribly hard to believe that the real la7 performed as described. Though, realizing this was a soviet plane, you can trust the data to be padded quite a bit. The only real weakness the la7 has in AH is it's relativly short-ranged guns. However, given it's speed and maneuverability, getting close enough to use them is trivial.
-
I am certain that the Ta152s near non-existance in WWII also plays a part in its being perked, against the several thousand (5,000+?) La-7s that were used.
In my opinion, using the La-7 as a performance benchmark a strong case can be made that the Ta152H-1, F4U-4 and Spitfire Mk XIV should not be perked. That is purely on a performance basis.
In matter of fact though:
The Ta152H-1 was very, very rare and can thus be seen as a reasonable perk plane.
The Spitfire Mk XIV is a super Spit from 1944, and look how common the crappy old 1942 Spitfire F.Mk IX is. Unperked the Spit XIV would be everywhere, thus the Spitfire Mk XIV can be seen as a valid perk plane.
The F4U-4 is....
Hell, I have no idea why the F4U-4 is perked.
-
I dint read any elses posts...Cause i got a simple answer....
The P-51 will turn w/ the best of them at slow speeds...
FULL flaps.....all the way out..you can outurn that LA-LA 7 easy
I have a squad member who regulry duels me in my 109g10 w/ his p51D...and..well he can kill me and im no lump on the log flyer
Use ur flaps and slow down real quik..do a barrle roll..and that dum la7 will go rigth by u..then u sqeeze the trigger
Love BiGB
xoxoxo
-
To that end, I still don't believe the La7s flight model is based on actual Russian data from a reliable source. I don't remember one time when the Russians have ever released accurate data about any military equipment - ever. Granted they release data, especially after the cold war ended but by no means is it accurate. There is no way they produced such a stellar aircraft that has virtually no weaknesses.
You know, Oleg Maddox says the same thing about Western test results and methods. For example, he has dug up some data concerning the P-51D, which was enough to make him believe the P-51D did not really perform as good as those western data suggests. I don't care if he's right or wrong, the important thing is that "reliable" is a very personal, subjective and relative word.
We think the test data from the western Allies is "more reliable" because every data we meet says so, and no plane exists currently in exact the same shape as it were in those days to prove either wrong or right. When someone digs up a data like that claiming how things were, there is basically no way of proving it wrong or right. All we can do is either take a good guess based upon logical assumptions, or pick out the "rights" and "wrongs" by going over all sorts of other corresponding data. No historical source is "objective" whether be it records, memoranda, chronology, diary, test figures and etc etc.
In that aspect, all those "reliable" data we meet are just as much a "claim" as any other. How do we know the P-51 really was that fast? How do we know the Fw190 rolled so good? After all, someone could have always lied when recording things down, no? Or pilots could be misinformed, stating "myths" such as "bouncing bullets killing tanks from under".
As for the La-7, why you would think there is no way the Russians could have built such a good aircraft is beyond me.
Come to think of it, that's what the Americans said when they first met the Zero in combat, eh?
-
EX - the F6F was designed from the ground up to destroy Zeros.
No.
-
Zero was designed to outturn anything in the sky, not designed for speed
Also no.
The A6M was designed to fly a long distance, carry two machine guns and two 20mm cannon while obtaining the then unheard of speed for a carrier fighter of 310mph. There was no mention in the design requirements issued by the IJN for the A6M to be able to out turn everything else, and as a matter of fact it did not. IJN pilots were initially quite put off by the A6M's poor turning and high landing speed in comparison to the A5M they were used to.
-
As for the weaknesses, the La-7 has its own share of them.
Contrary to popular belief, the AH La-7 is no more maneuverable than probably a Bf109G-6 or a Bf109G-2. Of course, it boasts great instantaneous turns at speeds over 300mph, but such turns are hardly worthy of anything in combat since it'd probably induce a black-out, which experienced pilots are aware of and use the very fact to its full potential when in defense.
In lower speeds most VVS fighters are very unstable and hard to control. Sustained turns and low speed handling both suck when compared to a number of other planes. The only reason they seem 'stable' is because in most cases they usually accelerate and regain speed quickly: thus, creating the illusion that it has good low-speed control. In a true low-speed, teeth-gritting stall fights/rolling scissors, even a 109G-10 can outmaneuver a La-7 or a Yak-9U. In order to hold control at those low speeds, the La-7 will accelerate so very often that it will overshoot the enemy.
IMO they deserve about 1~3 point perk(since I believe performance is also something to be considered into perking aircraft - planes like P-51D, 109G-10, 190D-9 and etc etc..), but it is not a plane without weaknesses.
ps) Of course, P-51s suck even more at low speeds - which is precisely why you shouldn't have a La-7 behind you at low alt/speed in the first place.
-
Dont try to run. In fact, let him get close.
Lower your combat flaps, and dance.
The P-51D will own the LA7 if flown by an agressive pilot.
-
i disagree.....
the p-51 with full flaps ...FULL FLAPS..can turn dam well at lo speeds..
I said well...
not bettr then zero's and such
-
just dont fight an LA-7 and skip the problem all together :D
-
Originally posted by CraigThomas
just dont fight an LA-7 and skip the problem all together :D
Are you flying in the same MA as I am?;)
-
Simply meant dont fly the P51 up against the LA-7....try to out manuever it, much easier with like a spit or a seafire or an A6m...:D
-
The only real defense against the la7 is don't get low, or slow. Unless you're a MUCH better pilot than said la7 or get lucky, you're going down.
-
Well the first thing you have to do is find the mothership that is usually parkrd in orbit around the planet. Then send up a P-47 with a Apple laptop and a virus to upload and then.....:D:D :D
Avid
-
So many quazy peoplez:D :D :D :D :D
-
Take a tip from this man. How many he kill?
EDIT.. wrong pic
-
i wonder if Hartmann ever faced the La 7 - any know a complete list of Hartmann's kills on the web?
-
Hi whgates3,
>i wonder if Hartmann ever faced the La 7 - any know a complete list of Hartmann's kills on the web?
Forget about subtype recognition in combat :-) I don't think that ever worked.
Toliver and Constable list 10 "LaGG-7" kills according to Hartmann's log (which ends 13.12.1943) and 8 more according to his letters. (Hartmann's log for 1944 and 45 was taken away from him when he became a POW).
However, it seems like Hartmann just reported all radial-engined fighters as "LaGG-5" first, switching to "LaGG-7" in mid-october 1943. I bet this was in agreement with the contemporary intelligence reports, which were less than perfect.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
*** Shameless Hi-Jack in Progress ***
Incidentally, we really gotta have those round antennae looking thingies on the 109s when they get the new face-lift!!! :D
*** Situation Over, all Hi-Jackers neutralized ***
Carry on, carry on.. :D
-
I appreciate the replies. I didn't really want to start a LA7 is uber, perk it debate ;) because that can be said about almost any plane in it's element.
It sounds like a scissors manuever after the deployment of flaps is the preferred method for attempting the removal of that LA7 on your six. I've done some scissor fighting with the P51 when I was the aggressor and had good success with it and while flaps are something I know how to use, I'm just not really comfortable on knowing WHEN to deploy them. Is there a standard for the speeds at which one/two/more notches should be used??
-
Something else,
If I'm not mistaken it is easier to roll in one direction compared to another because of prop wash/gyroscopic stuff.
Russian engines rotate the opposite direction to most the other planes i.e p-51d
So wouldn't you gain/loose an advantage dependant on which way you decide to roll?
Just a thought that might help :)
-
Originally posted by Alpo
Is there a standard for the speeds at which one/two/more notches should be used??
-
Originally posted by HoHun
However, it seems like Hartmann just reported all radial-engined fighters as "LaGG-5" first, switching to "LaGG-7" in mid-october 1943.
Guess you mean mid Oct 44? I thought Hartmans gruppe operated South & East of Warsaw in mid/late 44.....in which case he would not have seen one (La7) until September at the earliest.
-
Originally posted by Alpo
Any help from the pony drivers out there would be duly appreciated.
Others have said it........ but you can out turn him and sustain e better in slow energy sapping manouvers............
As you start sissors...........
He should nose up to high yoyo or just to use alt gain to keep e and you on his low 12 without over shooting........... (during this manouver he loses sight of you)
If he slows behind your sissors then he has either made a mistake, is about to spray you with the little ammo he has or he has help coming and he is just holding you there........
If he starts to follow your sissors then convert them to rolling asap to avoid his snap shots.......also if he should follow the rolling sissors he will be forced to lag your roll or drain excesive e pulling for a shot........in this instance the La7 pilot has made a major mistake against nearly all AC with equal or better roll/turn capability (cos they all hold e in manouver better than he does) you should actually shoot this guy down.
-
Hi Tilt,
>Guess you mean mid Oct 44? I thought Hartmans gruppe operated South & East of Warsaw in mid/late 44.....in which case he would not have seen one (La7) until September at the earliest.
No, 1943 is correct :-) As I said, subtype recognition didn't really work.
When was the La-7 used in squadron strength for the first time?
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Kuben, your own data seems a little bit "unreliable". Cause beside the statements proved as wrong by Kweassa, Puke & Karnak, the following is also wrong.
The Fw-190 was designed as a high speed gun platform to destroy allied bombers, the plane was designed accordingly and as a result it has difficulty in turn fights due to wing design etc. It has weakness due to design!
The construction of the FW190 started way back into 1937 when Kurt Tabk had the idea of an fighter plane with exellent handling and maintance charactersitics.
Prototpye flew in 1939, 1st production run in early 1941.
That was all way before any four engined buff hit germany.
The FW190 was build primarily as a fighter. That it was the 1st real multitrole plane of WW2 (fighter, interceptor, bomberdestroyer, ground attack plane, tank killer) just showed that Kurt Tank had developed an exellent, highly versatile fighter plane design.
-
Originally posted by HoHun
Hi Tilt,
When was the La-7 used in squadron strength for the first time?
There was a small part regiment trial in late May 44 (with prototypes of mixed La 5/7 assembly lineage) but true Squadron strength La 7 June 44 during Belgration (North of Minsk)for front line assessment which continues till early/mid July 44. Other squadrons started to reiceive in mid July to mix with their La5FN's.
I think a full squad was kitted out on the Southern front for August and then the production was upto full speed intime for the Lvov offensive which ran thru to mid October.
In 43 the La 7 not only did not exist the numeric "7" was not anticipated. Indeed when Lavochkin did the 2nd development prototype in March 44 it was called "La5 1944". In 43 Lavochkin still seems to be hoping for more engine development....... the initial TsaGi work (called la5 FN 206)was only carried out when it was clear that lavochkin was stuck with the Ash82
http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/deshist.html
-
I'd try and lure the La into a turnfight, - in a slow turn with some flaps deployed I'd put my money on the P51, only by a margin though.
If you have problems with the La's, try fighting them with a Yak, not that is one hell of a La killer, hehe
-
You know what haunts too many P-51 drivers vs. the La7, they dive. The worst thing you can do is dive since the La7 is an excellent diver and the lower the altitude more advantage the La7 has. At 9K the La7 can't catch a P-51, maybe even a little lower.
I think it comes from the fact that against almost every other plane a dive like that is effective, so they package that as the "runstang-escape". Problem is, it doesn't work with the La7 and you need to try something else.
I think the P-51 out-turns the La7 anyway if you use your flaps properly and the firepower on the P-51 is far better suited to snapshots and longer ranged shots than the La7's. The Pony is in every way a better plane overall.
-Soda
The Assassins.
-
La7 has better snapshot capability, as far as I am concerned. 3x20mm beats 6x.50 in a snapshot any day of the week. For long range shooting I'd give the edge to the .50s tho.
-
Originally posted by Urchin
La7 has better snapshot capability, as far as I am concerned. 3x20mm beats 6x.50 in a snapshot any day of the week. For long range shooting I'd give the edge to the .50s tho.
i honestly give the edge to the la7, barely, for its guns, speed and acceleration. the pony can hold a turn with the flaps, but the la7 has the acceleration to defeat them... it's a fairly even matchup where it comes down to the pilot, not the plane per se - 2 equal pilots, i'd give a tiny edge to the la7, or rather first to make a mistake will die.
-
Urchin,
I disagree and think the 50's are better. Unless you are a very good shot with the La7 you are going to have serious problems with any sort of tough shot, or one at range. The La7's cannons just fire all over the place unless you are almost point blank. Point blank I agree the 20mm's are better, but under any other condition the 50's are superior. Volume of fire, accuracy of fire, range, etc... all favor the 50. Even in a snapshot landing 10 50's hits is often better than 1-2 20mm. More criticals. Sure, it isn't always instant death like a point blank 20mm broadside, but the writing is on the wall when those 50's start slamming home.
Round for round the 20mm's are better when they hit, but that's only part of the puzzle.
-Soda
The Assassins.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
The F4U-4 is....Hell, I have no idea why the F4U-4 is perked.
<---typing withnbroken hand, been grou nded all summer :(
The hog 4 need not be perked,but it a monster---as are all corsairs and other heavy US planes when flown within their envelope. Few see the hog-4's advantages because most fights are below 15k, and below 10 is furball, die-get-an-la7-reup-and-run-your-killer-down territory. Even the hog-1 is a killer if kept over 15k and flown wisely. Point being, the planes that are perked may not offset the "dynamics" in the MA, save the 262, because IMO-ALL perked planes are high-alt aircraft (I may be wrong, I only began typing this week, let alone been playing).
un-perk the 152, hogs, and Spit14, and Perk the La-7's and these other planes any newbie can sit in and rtb 5+ kills a sortie, and not only would you see a big change in fighting tactics, but I believe the skills of everyone would get better as well, and we woldn't see these new guys flying the same planes and not getting any better with more challenging rides...
-
You've never played in the H2H rooms then, have you?
99% spit14's and tempests.
J_A_B