La-5

[Imowface]

Yefim Gordon's and Dmitri Khazanov's Soviet Combat Aircraft of the Second World War Vol.1. It is a great source on Soviet single engined a/c. The second volume deals with twin engined combat aircraft. It is basically the best single source available in english.

EDIT/Here's a 3-view drawing showing the slats: http://www.airwar.ru/image/idop/fww2/la5/la5-1.gif/EDIT

ah thanks for clearing it up, I will have to order that book, and perrine yes the La-5 did have two extra wing tanks, but in the La-5F, and FN they switched to a metal spar so the later two only had a total of three fuel tanks

[Ruah]

waiting for the yak-3
and as long as the K4 is not perked, neither will the yak-3 (please?)

[Krusty]

It would appear the La-5F and La-5FN got their F and FN from the model of Ash-82 engines they carried (82F and 82FN respectively). Supposedly the major benefit the Ash-82FN had over previous models was they replaced the carbeurator with fuel injection.

Does that mean the prior model, simply "LA-5" cut out under negative Gs if it had a carb?

Wasysin, Wmaker, I'm not saying "This is why it does not meet AH criteria" I'm just saying "It's very very very similar to one already in-game" and that the effort spent adding it wouldn't be worth it. The airframe and wing were the same, so climb speed would be the same, stall speed about the same, the only real difference would be top level speed at any given alt.


Although that extra fuel would be nice.... 

[Imowface]

would the engine having less power not contribute to the plane having a lower climb speed? due to it producing less thrust? I am not an expert on this but would like to know if im wrong?

[Wmaker]

Wasysin, Wmaker, I'm not saying "This is why it does not meet AH criteria" I'm just saying "It's very very very similar to one already in-game" and that the effort spent adding it wouldn't be worth it. The airframe and wing were the same, so climb speed would be the same, stall speed about the same, the only real difference would be top level speed at any given alt.

Using your "logic", AH wouldn't have half of the variants it has currently. La-5 would most probabaly be 34mph slower on the deck than La-5FN that's in the game and saw its first combat in August '42, a year earlier than the La-5FN. Like I said, it would be very wellcome addition for special events/ava/coming player hosted arenas just like the earlier variants of the USAAF fighters, already in the game, are. "Airframe and wings" doesn't govern the climb rate like thrust and weight do (simple physics). M82 had less power than M82FN, La-5 weighed roughly ~270lbs less than La-5FN.

[Imowface]

Thank you for the support Wmaker, I agree with everything you just said, as for service dates I agree aswell, right now we have the La-5FN in  the stalingrad map in the ava,  which walks over top of everything that the germans had at the time


sorry for all the spelling mistakes, I am drinking right now and probably shouldnt be posting on  the bbS

[Perrine]

i hope La-5 gets complimented with earlier (and wep-less?) variant Fw-190 A-3 or A-4 for axis/allies matchups

[Imowface]

I am not expert on LW birds, but from what I thought the A-5 we have in the game would already "compliment" the La-5

[Krusty]

Using your "logic",

No... Not "using my logic" -- I don't think you even understand what I was typing. Forget it. You're going to try and take it and run with it this long when you don't even get what I was saying in the first place?

Forget it.

[Wmaker]

Funny stuff!

No... Not "using my logic" -- I don't think you even understand what I was typing. Forget it. You're going to try and take it and run with it this long when you don't even get what I was saying in the first place?

Forget it.

You really aren't worth replying....

[Imowface]

something I was going to ask krusty before,  you say it has the same airframe, but you the "razorback" of the La-5 not give it more stability over the F and FN models

[Wmaker]

Just couple general comments regarding Soviet first line fighters. Imowface, I hope you don't mind.

Eastern front was the longest landfront of the war and over it raged a huge air war. Very different from the air war in the western front but just as big, if not bigger in many instances. Lavochkin, Yak-1/3 and Yak-7/9 series of fighters were just as important for the VVS as the P-38, P-47 and P-51 series of fighters were for the USAAF. Right now, we have 10 aircraft covering those USAAF fighters and only 4 covering those VVS fighters. And, two those Soviet fighters AHII has are "late-in-the-war" somewhat unrepresentive examples of the total production. I don't think anyone could imagine a situation where AHII would still totally miss one of the 3 major USAAF ETO-fighters while having only 4 variants to divide between the two that AHII actually would have!! That is the situation where these VVS fighters are in right now. We have none from the Yak-1/3 -series and have only two variants per series for the other two. And they saw MASSIVE amounts of action more or less right from the start of Great Patriotic War (starting with Yak-1 and LaGG-1) to the end and were produced in tens of thousands.

La-5 is for the La-5FN, in many ways, what P-38G is to the P-38J. More powerful engines slightly higher wingloading and their operational debuts are one year apart.

[Imowface]

Thank you for the imput Wmaker, I would have to say that my thread would have floundered by now without all the info you have given everyone

[Ruah]

i will wait for the yak-3 so i can finally have the fighter i want to stay in forever.  untill then, LA-7s and Yak-9u will have to do. . .

I agree though, teh russian fighter and bombers are very much lacking in AH2 and considering the realtivly liniar development of these planes - the modeling should be a lot easier then the huge variety the allies, spacifically the americans have. . . Its always been a bit of a dissapointment really, since the yak-3 is completly different from the Yak 9U in so many ways. . .

Thats why I am sorta 'against' the LA-5 being introduced first, because teh FN and 7 is actually a good pick.  And I will not say anything about the bombers since I don't even know where to start with that. . .