A question about Russian planes

[beaker126]

Why is it that most of the Russian planes are so lightly armed? Was it to save weight? More Room for fuel/ammo? Design philosophy? I never could figure out while they built some really nice fighters and then seemed to send them out with minimal armament.

[Reknad]

Originally Posted by beaker126

Why is it that most of the Russian planes are so lightly armed? Was it to save weight? More Room for fuel/ammo? Design philosophy? I never could figure out while they built some really nice fighters and then seemed to send them out with minimal armament.

are they? try the IL10 and LA5/7 lol

[Ancient Seraph]

Actually, the guns on the La5/7 aren't that great. Even the Spit seems to have more armament then those.

[mattd27]

Just wait, I'm sure Soviet Ace will be here soon to settle this.

[fuzzychickens]

Originally Posted by Ancient Seraph

Actually, the guns on the La5/7 aren't that great. Even the Spit seems to have more armament then those.

The guns on the la5/7 are excellent, certainly better than the P-51 if you want to destroy a plane.

The 109k4 or G6as has the most fun gun on the PC il2, something seems off on the console version. You could really tell the mk108 was lower velocity - you had to lob them at planes because they would drop faster than the high velocity rounds - haven't messed with it enough in BOP, but seems this was simplified or something.

[FOZ_1983]

Originally Posted by mattd27

Just wait, I'm sure Soviet Ace will be here soon to settle this.

Thats what worries me lol

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by mattd27

Just wait, I'm sure Soviet Ace will be here soon to settle this.

Originally Posted by FOZ_1983

Thats what worries me lol

My forth coming has been told!

Anyway, to answer your question. It's simple really. The way they were designed. Light weight steel aka Cromolli Steel, fabric skin, and plywood covering, made it so that the weapons would need to be light. You can't be a low-medium altitude fighter and have several layers of a heavy weight steel covering like the P51, and other planes.

The reason they were lightly armed, was also because they didn't want them to be weighed down by fuel and ammo. The more ammunition and fuel you have, the heavier you are. Just take the F86 for example. When they first took off, and headed to MiG Alley, they couldn't climb as high or fast. BUT! When they were returning from MiG Alley, they could climb like a rocket!

So it's all a matter of weight and maneuverability. The Russians liked light and fast planes, that could get the job done in a little time as possible.

I think that answers the question Also, on another question I saw earlier somewhere: The only reason the La-5FN or any La-5 for that matter has more shaking in the frame; is because unlike the La-7 which had an ASh-M82FN Engine with 1895hp (something like that). The La-5FNs, they were stuck with the same engine as the La-5 and La-5F. The "FN" just stands for what the next step in the M82 engine was, which was a M82FN Engine.

The La-5 was equipped with a M82 1700hp Engine, the La-5F was equipped with the more higher powered M82F which had 1850hp. And the La-5FN was equipped with the M82FN Engine that was 1860hp.

[beaker126]

Thanks. I had an idea but thought I'd ask th expert.

[Soviet Ace]

Originally Posted by beaker126

Thanks. I had an idea but thought I'd ask th expert.

I'm here to help

[baldwin8]

Originally Posted by Soviet Ace

My forth coming has been told!

You can't be a low-medium altitude fighter and have several layers of a heavy weight steel covering like the P51, and other planes.

Several layers of heavy weight steel? Uh!!!!

I've never heard of World War II aircraft covered in steel. Aluminum yes, but not steel. But I will dig deeper into this one.