The LA5fn manual says that the boost can be used up to 1500-2000m of alt so why is it modeled up to 3200m ?
I mean this. russian english Point 79 last subpoint. I cant say if this thing is authentic but if so it is the thing presented to the pilots and not some Stalin's propaganda.
After lots of tests with the La-5FN, these were some of the conclusions... The testing was carried out in September 1944 at Gross Schimanen, East Prussia. Turning circles: "The smallest turning circle at rated power at 2400m is about 28/30 sec for a stable 360 degree turn at constant height. This implies a minimum time for a 360 degree turn at 1000m, with emergency power, of about 25 sec." The tactical conclusions and advice offered to German fighter pilots: "The La 5FN is best suited to low altitude combat by virtue of its engine performance. Its top speed at ground level is slightly below that of the 190 and 109 (using MW 50). The 109 with MW 50 is superior over the whole height band in top speed and climb rate. Acceleration is comparable. Aileron effectiveness is better than the 109. Turning times at ground level are better than the 190 and worse than the 109. In rate of climb the 190 is poorer until 3000m. Because of its greater weight the 190 accelerates less well than the La5FN, but by the same token is superior in the dive. It is basically right to dive away like an American Thunderbolt when flying a 190, thereafter to pull away in a high speed shallow climb to reach a new attacking position, not to let the speed drop and to avoid prolonged turning dogfights." Source: "Luftwaffe Test Pilot" by Hans Werner Lerche. He flew virtually all captured Allied aircraft and most German types, including experimental models. These tests should be regarded as atleast as reliable as Allied tests ! Hans Werner Lerche: This post is copied from a guy under nick Soren from www.ww2aircraft.net/forum I realy dubt that this data will be any near to be considered to be implemented at fh, but wth.
I always thought all Russian planes were better turners than their German counterparts. 25 secs for a full turn seems relatively sluggish for what is generally regarded as a very nimble fighter plane IMO.
So this guy says P-47 turns better than 190? "...atleast as reliable as Allied tests..." if not more so? why?
I cant find anything about P-47 turns in the post. The post says just "...atleast as reliable as Allied tests!" period.
109g and La-5 models were quite equal turners from what i can figure from pilot accounts. 25sec seems bit high for 360°@1km.
Real turn time for La-5FN 18,5 sec (lite model weigth 3168kg) 19,5-20,5 sec turn radius 295-310m. 109G-2 turn time 20-21,5 sec turn radius 290m. Data NII VVS For comparsion load wing La5FN (weight 3280kg) 185,5 kg/m^2 Bf.109G-2 (weigth 3023 kg) 187,8 kg/m^2 load at power at See level La-5FN 1,77 kg/PS Bf.109G-2 2,3 (boost 1,3 ata) kg/PS But high altitude (high 4km) engine Bf.109G-2 was bested. La-5FN low alt fighter as P-39D or Ki-84.
The only thing I am sure about is airframe speed limit: 750 km/h for german planes (109, 190) and 650 for russian ones (La-5(F/N), Yak series). It didn't give germans any advantage in top level speed, but definitely was a valuable safety buffer in case of diving. The only practical comparison of La-5FN and 190 (perhaps A-4/5) was that La was gaining on FW, but not for a long period of time -- its spark-plugs were losing their performance -- poor soviet gaz contained too much of lead tetraethyl and lead residue fucked up the plugs => power loss.
Theres always lots of variables to handling and speed in these turns too. In practice i've read that there was little if any difference. FE. some turnfight when 109 was unable to get angles after 8 turns at deck. 109 pilot decided go bit into vertical, pulled hard to pop out slats which made him turn with smaller radius thus gaining angles. In WB it isn't that noticeable though, but in TW you notice that speed and turning makes a real difference so paper values of sustained turn times matter very little. This is how ie. p-38 can outturn zeke when the speeds are managed right. Slower plane turns tighter, most of time. Faster plane turns faster but with larger radius. Turn fight is just E management, one who keeps best sustained rate will lose if another has plane that can cut corners. Oh..im going off topic. And i don't really think i had any point anyway. Im sure La-5 properly managed would outturn 109 too. It's just about using the little quirks of your plane to your advantage.
Does anyone know if lavochkins had constant speed props? Based on the manual there was no rpm setting in la5fn so aparently it had only variable pitch prop with no rpm guvernor, but im not sure.
La-5/7had automat constat rpm as other plan USSR, USA or UK. Even I-16 (mod18,28) had automat constat rpm.
The la5fn manual is talking about setting rpms using throtle. I think that this is different then setting rpms for propeller governor. As I understand it the throtle sets the amount of mixture which is then compressed and injected into the engine, this basicaly controls the power. So there should be another lever that sets the rpms by the means of the propeller governor. At low throttle the governor reduces propeller blades angle of attack so it produces lower drag and alows the engine turn at desired speed. But as far as I understend the la5fn manual, there is a lever that sets the blades directly! BTW the link to the manual is in my second post this thread.
La5 as other Soviet plan WWII use two lever system. One lever setting boost,second lever setting rpm. But setting rpm had bound regulation. For examle lever boost set at minimal and lever rpm at maximum, how much rpm real ? No, La5, Yak's, LaGG-3 or MiG-3 and even I-16 (18,28) not had directly sets blades of props. Only Germany Plan had its system. Bf.109E in begining only this system, automatic system was set after. Soviet engines M-82 and M-105 had two speed boost, change speed manual. Soviet plan(exclude Yak-3 had automatic cooling system) had manual regulation of cooling. And P-39D too.
According to the manual setting boost was accomplished by setting rpms to 2500 and throttle to maximum. When U talk about a "boost" U probably mean the supercharger. I have read some posts that say that lavochkins regulator had limitations too. Mainly the regulator limited the max dive speed. The engine overrotated and was killed.
Yes, boost for supercharger. Max dive speed limited resistens construction plan, not engine. La-5 had wood and plywood covering. La-5FN had metal construction but plywood covering too. Its limited max dive speed at La5 650kmph (its airspeed not TAS). Yak-3 first series limit 650kmph next series 700kmph.
