[RegRag1977]

Sadly it is not possible to model Klimov's and Shvestov oil spillage staining the windshield of early Lagg and all La series to the point of sometimes even forbidding the use of the gunsight (wich was also of poor quality in early war period), or the VVS standard nitro cellulose glass parts that turned yellowish and blur thus restricting view to the point some pilots prefered to fly with canopy open.
Shvestov engines are also known for both overheating and "supercooling" causing stalls and power failures. Unfortunately it is not possible to model exhaust gas entering the cockpit nor exessive temperature rise in the pit caused by the Shvestov engines that forced pilots to fly canopy back (even on late marks La5FN and La7) despite heavy drag penalty.

@Gaunt1

I followed your discussion with 1984 about VVS aircraft performances. I think that all Russian aircraft performance in game are more or less OK, we must remember that Russian designers were at the top, and they did really come up with excellent designs. The aircraft were exactly what was needed tactically and strategically, unlike some other countries (German used high wing loading/high altitude fighter like the Bf109 on the eastern theater for instance).
So for me it is not the performances that are problematic, it is how easily these are reached in game and how smooth the controls are, when we know Russian aircraft had no automatic features to help pilots to reach top performance. There was plenty of levers and lot of cockpit work to get performance.
Flying Russian aircraft was no sinecure as it is in game, this is certainly the reason why Russia's best pilots also were Allied top scorers.
Comparing the conditions and difficulties encountered they sure did an outstanding job. Only the best breed of pilots could get the best out of these excellent but not easy aircraft, in game some of these are rightly called "noob aircraft", and i think this does not give a good picture of VVS and many of the fantastic designs they used.