Quote:
Originally Posted by Benrizz
Hi seraph,
I'm not totally agree with on the difference between LA5 & LA7.
Indeed the LA7 is clearly faster but the plane has also a faster turn rate. However, Because the LA5 is slower it has a slight smaller turn radius but do not turn as fast as the LA7.
Furthermore, I feel that the LA5 is bit more stable in flight than the LA7, which is easier to get into a stall at low speed. (But I agree that the difference is quite difficult to see)
You could also be a bit more explicit saying that the LA serie is adviced to begin with when you come to realistic or sim mode. Because of the in flight stability.
Of course that's not based on scientific datas just my experience.
Don't know if you agree with those comments
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancient Seraph
Thanks for your comment  . I haven't got a lot of experience with the La-5, and got this info from Soviet Ace. I think it's best if I notify him about your comment, see what he's got to say about it . I did fly the 5 every now and then, and didn't notice any big differences, which is why I trusted SA's opinion.
It's not a bad idea to add the fact they're good beginner's planes to the description.. consider it done  |
In fact, the La-5FN could get into a tighter turn than its later cousin the La-7 which needed more rudder going into a turn. But beside getting overly technical, and boring you to much with every little detail. I'll make it short (as possible that is).
When the first La-5s came out into combat, they had probably the best turning of the La-5 series that there was. Their wooden combined with an early plastic known as Bake Light, and aluminum; gave them a tremendous advantage at turning with their enemy. Later on as the La-5F came around, nothing really changed except for the engine which was a few horse powers faster, and known as the M82F, rather the M82 A (which the La-5 used.) When the La-5FN came around, they structured it better by taking away some of the bake light parts, and replacing them with Cromolli Steel (which was an exceptionally light weight steel. It also was used in the Yak-3 incase you were wondering. Haha) Anyway, the La-5FN was also give an up lifted engine with a few more horse powers, and called the M82FN engine. Both the added Cromolli Steel, and the lack of many bake light parts. The La-5FN was almost like a La-5 (original version) but with better power, and a more reliable body structure. (Some of the La-5 bodies, had the tendency to have the cloth that covered them become weak and gradually become unglued which caused many deaths in La-5s.) With the better more reliable body and structure, the La-5FN was capable of equaling the La-5 in its turning but only for a few moments before the stresses became to much.
When the La-7 came into the picture, the structure of it was completely lacking in Bake Light plastic, and was actually incorporated with more Cromolli Steel, but this Cromolli Steel was heavier and for some reason (can't quite remember the reason at the moment) it was prone to collapsing under to much stress. So while flying the La-7, if you were to pull to much of a G, the heavier Cromolli Steel in the wings had the tendency to give, and either your wing just slumped into a weird position, or could possibly be completely torn away. That's why the La-7 didn't last long before the better and longer ranged La-9 arrived. (But that was after WW2.) So if the La-7 were to try and turn with an La-5FN, it was more likely it couldn't because the possibility of the wings collapsing was an issue.
-You can give your thanks to the book, "Lavochkin's Piston Engined Fighters" for the information. I just read what it said, and put it down.