soviet planes and 4.1x...

[panzer1b]

now i enevr said the ubs is useless but still for my playstyle it doesnt really work, nor do most mgs. now offline they are fine as its quite easy to get on an ai six, but online i tend to fly hit and run high speed interception then the more common turn fights. i prefer to get in, get a kill or at least cripple a plane, and get out before the 5 or 6 guys in the almost guaranteed furball decide that i make good cannon fodder.

now for hit and run i consider ammo capacity very important as i like to have the option to use attricion and only engage when the situation favors me, the enemy is just climbing to engage me (hes at low speed easy target), or the enemy is preoccupied trying to kill a fellow comrade which i need to save

the yaks and most russian planes with their current ammo capacity just dont give me enough staying power to maintain my altitude and take pot shots at those below at high speeds. they just dont let me stay at altitude over the enemy, and force me to either land much more, or not take the slightest risk of missing (again limiting my options as to how i engage the enemy)


and as for the italian mgs, i think they are the middle ground. they used to be terrible in 4.09 days (had white tracers and did less damage then a single 30cal would) but now at least have attained my respect as they have shot up plenty of enemies when i ran out of the generous suppply of 20mm in the mc205. Now the weakest i consider to be either the japanese 50cal equivalent and the mg131s. the jap variety has neither much firepower nor great accuracy, and the german ones have just as bad firepower with only teh accuracy being the strongpoint. 50cals are respectable as they are almost always in groups of 4+ giving quantity over quality. UBs are imo the best firepower wise but greatly limited by ammunition capacity. they are great but out of all the HMGs run out the fastest.

i know the russian guns realistically had low ammo but if there is a source that says they had more, heck even 50 rounds more id gladly appreciate the additional staying potential for the russian planes

now i know people may disagree but this is just my experience playing the game, not really anything based on game files or such but just what i have experienced while in combat for the like 10 or so years ive played this game....






now one interesting thing id like to know is why most russian planes had so few shells? was it a decision based on practice that few pilots would statistically expend so much ammo before either being shot down or returning to base?

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by panzer1b

and as for the italian mgs, i think they are the middle ground. they used to be terrible in 4.09 days (had white tracers and did less damage then a single 30cal would) but now at least have attained my respect as they have shot up plenty of enemies when i ran out of the generous suppply of 20mm in the mc205. Now the weakest i consider to be either the japanese 50cal equivalent and the mg131s. the jap variety has neither much firepower nor great accuracy, and the german ones have just as bad firepower with only teh accuracy being the strongpoint. 50cals are respectable as they are almost always in groups of 4+ giving quantity over quality. UBs are imo the best firepower wise but greatly limited by ammunition capacity. they are great but out of all the HMGs run out the fastest.

I don't think the SAFATs had anything changed besides tracer colour.
And the Japanese .50 cal equivalent is a .50 cal IIRC.

Originally Posted by panzer1b

i know the russian guns realistically had low ammo but if there is a source that says they had more, heck even 50 rounds more id gladly appreciate the additional staying potential for the russian planes

Absolutely

Originally Posted by panzer1b

now one interesting thing id like to know is why most russian planes had so few shells? was it a decision based on practice that few pilots would statistically expend so much ammo before either being shot down or returning to base?

I think it was done to save weight. Russian fighters were designed to be exceptionally light because early/mid war no real high power aviation engines were available and to get a similar performance (power to weight) to contemporaries they hd to be lighter. Contrary to other nations Russia never faced masses of tough four engine bombers or had the need to escort those far into Indian country - so the need to build heavier, longer range fighters with heavier armament never arose.

[1984]

Originally Posted by IceFire

BTW: Yak-9UT thanks to research and TD's help has 30 rounds on the NS-37mm. Which aircraft has 20 rounds? I'm having trouble following you. What is in-game and what should it be based on your research?

i can't understand you too, i clearly written what book by nudelman, in addition to other sources which posted here before, confirms what exactly n-37 was tested on yak-9 in 44, and not ns-37, but book not really detailed...

and what book by nudelman confirms with quote from document, in addition to another document which i posted here before, what lagg-3 with ns-37 had 36 shells for ns-37, instead 20 shells (check again, in 4.09, 22 in fact) in game which correctly only for early laggs with sh-37, which no in game...

2 quotes from two documents from two time periods - just tests'42 and combat tests'43 - it's really research and help and, personally i think, enough for correction what very easy to do and really important, because 16 shells it's almost half of ammoload...

plus, in fact, my opinion need to give different belts like "only AP", "only HE", "2 ap - he" and "2 he - 1 ap" or something like this, but at first time, at least, correct ammoload for guns like 36/170 (for UBS, maybe, more, but no info about this)...

and sorry, maybe it's my english and type of thinking, but and i all times can't understand where real problem because it's not chinese or russian even now, plus i try to give pics, only some original quotes, and sources...

well, let's see what will be next...

[1984]

Originally Posted by panzer1b

they are great but out of all the HMGs run out the fastest.

you know, maybe, need to check and rate of fire of all guns...

now one interesting thing id like to know is why most russian planes had so few shells? was it a decision based on practice that few pilots would statistically expend so much ammo before either being shot down or returning to base?

it's complex and interesting question for me too, but, even now personally i can't say why, can only guess... for clear answers need read lot of serious books for designers, know reality and thinking of soviet designers, leaders, military chiefs etc... and understand what USSR was catching up all other leaders in aviation, often copy or not understand real need at some moments... etc...

by the way, about ammunition for il-2s - 300 in total for il-2 with vya-23 it's correct, but in tests, reports and even original manuals for il-2 with shvaks all times 400-420 shells in total... ie apparently 500 it's full capacity of ammoboxes, weight limit or something like this, and typical ammoload around 400, although for il-2 two-seaters with shvaks in tests 500 shells in total... well, i mean, apparently need fix ammoloads for il-2s again...

and little about i-185 - in game i-185-71 have performance of etalon ie 600 kph at sl (forsazh), so, apparently for these plane need to do 560 shells in total, MAYBE, because it's need to understand and it's not important at this moment...

[1984]

continuation of this post...

Originally Posted by 1984

m-105p/pa – 1020-1050 hp at sl (nominal power, + 5 min. forzash with 1100 hp only before 200? m)...

apparently, for m-105p nominal power it's exactly 1020 hp at sl and 1100 hp as forsazh...

and interesting, in all tests of planes with m-105p/pa speed at sl with 1100 or 1020 ie for example, speed of serial yak-1 around 470-480 kph at sl can be more? apparently, just need to reread great "yak-1" by Kuznecov...

well, anyway, 110 hp gives for yak-1,7,9 in 42-43 - only my opinion - around 15 kph (in total, confirmed in one document, later about this and yak-7b/lagg-3 in 42)...

well, "around 15" it's my very conservative estimate, in fact mainly in books 20 or even 24-28 kph at sl... so, if around +20 by PF for yaks/laggs it's because 190 hp, around +10 for yak with pf2 true and now, i think... and my real opinion, at this moment, even can be little more...

Originally Posted by 1984

next, we know what in 44 yak-9 (m,d,t) in good condition had 525-545 kph at sl and >537-540, maybe, because new prop (like vish-105v4 for la-5fn/7)...

again, about speed of yak-9m and other yaks in 44 ie strange sharp decrease in speed - 518 kph at sl for many planes in some tests and sources what we have - attached table from Stepanec, for example...

in fact, quality, operation of planes and aerodynamics was even better, for example, for yak-9m new antenna, prop (maybe), maybe even because new ends of wings and have only one reason - фильтр-пылеулавливатель на входе в двигатель - ie filter at air intake against dust etc...

my opinion, filter was like for la-7 (attached one of variants) and works similar -

При взлете и посадке (выпущенных шасси) входные отверстия всасывающих патрубков были закрыты заслонками, а воздух в мотор поступал через расположенные рядом «карманы» с мелкой сеткой «Дельбах» на входе. При уборке шасси заслонки механически открывались, а «карманы» — закрывались, и забор воздуха шел через штатные всасывающие патрубки.

and in fact on yaks-9m it's only small window with mesh, closed in flight, between wheels, and 2 retractable dampers on air intakes (attached photo and part of drawing with prospective view of filter)...

well, maybe it's answer, but personally i think what it's not can be reason for -15-26 kph at sl and it's just too much for approval of VVS and simple filter...

and interesting mention of filter for yak-1 (from "yak-1" by Kuznecov again) -

Лишь к маю 1944 г. (по сути дела, к концу выпуска Як-1) был разработан, испытан и рекомендован к использованию в ВВС КА воздушный фильтр конструкции ВВС СФ с измененной кинематикой управления заслонкой, предложенной опытным заводом НИИ ВВС КА. Этот фильтр не снижал максимальную скорость полета в отличие от других пылефильтров.

yak-9m ie first plane of 25 serie began to produce in may'44 too, so, apparently it's filter and for yak-9m...

so, my opinion at this moment, as before, "518 kph" it's mainly because art-41... or it's speed of one plane of first? serie which was tested in dec'44 (plane could be old/repaired/with some first defects etc)... or error... or just i'm wrong or forgot something, but it's strange, personally for me no any clear answers and reasons why so, and i think we all can only guess or carefully read all what we have...

for example, interesting quote about "vish-61p of 9 serie" whish was successfully tested in april'44 on yak-9-37 ie yak-9t, and yak have 544 kph at sl, and in end "suitable for installation on yak with ns-37" -

20 апреля 1944 года зам. гл. конструктора ОКБ Вигант.

Результаты испытаний самолета ЯК-9-37 с винтами ВИШ-61П 9 серии

Винт ВИШ-61П 9 серии, установленный на самолете ЯК-9-37 прошел совместные, ЛИИ и ОКБ завода N 115, испытания, на основании которых можно сделать следующие выводы:
1. Монтаж винта ВИШ-61П 9 серии аналогичен винту ВИШ-61П.
2. Винт допускает установку серийного кока, при условии переделки храповика.
3. Габариты втулки винта позволяют установку пушки 11 П калибра 37 мм.
4. Управление винтом ВИШ-61 П 9 серии аналогично винту ВИШ-61П.
5. При летных испытаниях самолета ЯК-9-37 с винтом ВИШ-61П 9 серии, получены следующие летные характеристики:
Максимальная скорость у земли 544 км/час Максимальная скорость на 2-й границе высотности 613 км/час Скороподъемность на 5000 м 5,4 мин. Заключение
Винт ВИШ-61П серии 9 пригоден для установки на самолетах ЯК-9 с пушкой 11п калибра 37 мм (1821).

well, it's can be experimental prop/work, or it's just test of 9 serie, but personally i don't know about really new props exept vish-105sv for yak-9m, and props which really gives any number of kph like vish-105v-4 for la-5/7, so, apparently, it's just can be confirmation of 540-544 for serial yak-9x...

explanation can be in following report, but personally i not have this document -

21 октября 1944 Нач. ЛИИ А.В.Чесалов писал письмо N 731с НКАП А.И.Ш. в сопровождение отчета "Сравнительные летные испытания Як-9Г N 1115315 с ВИШ-105СВ, ВИШ-105СВ01, ВИШ-105СВ01 с профилированной комлевой частью, ВИШ-105СВ02 и ВИШ-61Ц2 (2564,30).

and little bit about yak-9k -

8 ноября 1944 года зам. Нач. 7 ГУ Залесский подготовил: Данные по вооружению самолетов...

Наименование с-тов Существующее вооружение

Як-9Т М-105ПФ пулем. УБС 200

пушка НС-45 30

ie, apparently, "тщательная укладка" for K it's 30 shells, in 4.09 29, but personally i'm not really sure what 30 it's true, so...


and just about ammunition for yaks - simple logical chain - yak-7b with high gargrot, m-105pa or m-105pf, had shvak (120 shells) + 2 UBS (left - 260 rounds, right - 140)... yak-7DI ie prototype of yak-9 had motor-cannon and LEFT UBS with recommended ammunition 140/240 ie similar with yak-1b of late series (135-140/220-240)... plus, yak-9t could have 32/220 and 120+220 for yak-9d from справочник основных данных самолетов'45... so, i think yaks-9 really had around 140+240 shells/rounds max., less it's restrictions for some reasons (weight, typical ammoload for all etc)... well, or i'm wrong in something...

and just about yaks, need in addition to correctly front bulletproof glass (and maybe new rear glass), important things like "бензиномер" ie fuel gauges on wings, "солдатик" ie landing gear indicators on wings, mirror, window for release of cartridges, and other little things...

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by 1984

i can't understand you too, i clearly written what book by nudelman, in addition to other sources which posted here before, confirms what exactly n-37 was tested on yak-9 in 44, and not ns-37, but book not really detailed...

and what book by nudelman confirms with quote from document, in addition to another document which i posted here before, what lagg-3 with ns-37 had 36 shells for ns-37, instead 20 shells (check again, in 4.09, 22 in fact) in game which correctly only for early laggs with sh-37, which no in game...

2 quotes from two documents from two time periods - just tests'42 and combat tests'43 - it's really research and help and, personally i think, enough for correction what very easy to do and really important, because 16 shells it's almost half of ammoload...

plus, in fact, my opinion need to give different belts like "only AP", "only HE", "2 ap - he" and "2 he - 1 ap" or something like this, but at first time, at least, correct ammoload for guns like 36/170 (for UBS, maybe, more, but no info about this)...

and sorry, maybe it's my english and type of thinking, but and i all times can't understand where real problem because it's not chinese or russian even now, plus i try to give pics, only some original quotes, and sources...

well, let's see what will be next...

Ok... I think I'm following now. (You're doing much better in English than I can do in Russian )

So... LaGG-3 IT with its 37mm has 20 rounds and it should be 36. I think I've got it. And 170 rounds for the UBS.

Adjustable ammo belts would be amazing but it would also be a huge job. Still I'm sure it's possible with enough effort in research and coding to make it happen.

[1984]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Ok... I think I'm following now. (You're doing much better in English than I can do in Russian )

yes, and thx, partially for online-translators too, i just want to be understood...

So... LaGG-3 IT with its 37mm has 20 rounds and it should be 36. I think I've got it. And 170 rounds for the UBS.

has 22 shells, i was little wrong, and yes, should be 36 for ns-37/170 for UBS...

in fact, about ammunition for lagg-3 it, personally i'm saw only these 2 quotes from 2 documents, apparently, better could be only in clear original documents, which are in archives, or some serious peoples have some other reports...

Adjustable ammo belts would be amazing but it would also be a huge job. Still I'm sure it's possible with enough effort in research and coding to make it happen.

you mean like in clod? oh, it's too good and maybe impossible, and even not really need, i mean at least several historical (like these german typical belts which now in game) and semi-historical (ie presumptive belts which based on researches and logic) ammo belts, and maybe it's simple like change ammoload... personally i just can't imagine what il-2 with ns-37 have only HE shells or "2 he - 1 ap" if target not soft like locomotive or tanks or "marinefährprahm"... or have mainly ap shells against infantry/aa-positions... it's can be only error/problems with supply/accidentally... well, something like this...

[1984]

about props for yak-9, it's was very old post and now i remembered about "temporary technical description of aircraft yak-9", 1944 (approved on 27 may 1944, signed in print, apparently, on 7 july 1944), well, manual clearly says what vish-61p it's for yak-9, vish-105vs it's for yak-9 with ns-37...

but, in fact, apparently it's just details, because and before all types of yaks had around 535 kph at sl and more...

and what interesting, manual have clearly information about fuel load and oil load of yak-9d ie yak with 4 fuel tanks and special oil tank, full fuel load - 480 kg (310 in 2 "average" tanks, 170 in 2 "extreme" tanks, in total 480), oil load - 34 kg (oil system it's 14 kg ie 48 in total)...

so, for example, yak-9m with full weight 3095 kg (max. weights which i saw it's 3117 kg, min. 3050 kg), as typical front fighter (- 170 kg of fuel and, apparently, - around 10-15 kg of oil) have around 2910 kg, in comparison with first series of yak-9 in 42-43 which had around 2875 kg (around 18.5 sec of turntime) instead around 2835 of prototype (16-17)...

well, apparently, better aerodynamics and quality can give for yak-9m with around 2900 kg around 16-17 sec of turn time, plus, in end'44 vk-105pf2 gives for plane extra HPs, so... hmmm... wow......... but, it's only very simple calculations...

[panzer1b]

honeslty after giving it a try i will say that im getting better with the very low ammo load

its just so tough to last a while online when you have to stick to very close range shots which often miss

id say german planes are much better at sustained zoom tactics......

but then again as mentioned before russian planes were more escort and or defense and not free hunt like i like to fly



also the mgs are actually a bit better then i always anticipated, i have actually got a few spits with very high deflection angles (close to 90degree), so i will say they are alot more respectable then i had previously believed them to be

still 190s and anything armored is a pain in the arse to kill without cannons........maybee someone here has an idea how to kill em without gambling for luckshots with the single UBS

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by panzer1b

honeslty after giving it a try i will say that im getting better with the very low ammo load

its just so tough to last a while online when you have to stick to very close range shots which often miss

id say german planes are much better at sustained zoom tactics......

but then again as mentioned before russian planes were more escort and or defense and not free hunt like i like to fly



also the mgs are actually a bit better then i always anticipated, i have actually got a few spits with very high deflection angles (close to 90degree), so i will say they are alot more respectable then i had previously believed them to be

still 190s and anything armored is a pain in the arse to kill without cannons........maybee someone here has an idea how to kill em without gambling for luckshots with the single UBS

FW190s I use the ShVAK on. The UBS works well with the 109s. Basically how I work with those two. With the FW190 I aim for the wing and get as many 20mm hits on one wing as possible from a deflection angle. The fuselage is tougher and I only shoot there if I have a dead 6 approach and the FW190 is not evasive.