PDA

View Full Version : Aircraft research thread €œThe La-5FN€



USMC_Tailspin
07-17-2006, 02:42 PM
"The La-5FN"


http://www.cubpilot.com/LaGG3.jpg
A LaGG-3€s (Lavochkin, Gorbunov, and Gudkov) original engine was a Klimov M-105PA in line liquid-cooled V12 of 1100hp. It€s armament was one 12.7mm Berezin synchronized machine gun. And one engine mounted ShVAK 20mm cannon firing through the spinner. It was taken from the production line and fitted with a M-82 radial engine. It was called the LaGG-5 (prototype of the La-5) the new radial engine was an Shvetsov 14-cylinder air-cooled of 1676hp. This engine came directly from a Su-2 bomber.


http://www.cubpilot.com/LaGG5.jpg
The LaGG-5 (La-5 prototype) with its new engine had a dramatic performance boost and changed a marginal fighter for the VVS into one of the great combat aircraft of WW2. Note the smooth top surface of the cowling, no air intake or enlarged gun breech covers. And no leading edge slats.

Other examples where aircraft performance was dramatically improved was the Allison to Rolls Royce switch on the P-51 for the RAF and USAF. And the Ki-61 to the Ki-100, which replaced it€s V-12 with a 14-cylinder radial for the Japanese Army Air Force.


http://www.cubpilot.com/La5.jpg
The La-5 initially had used the unused LaGG-3 airframes and appeared later with the rear of its fuselage lowered with a canopy that provided the pilot with better visibility. The wing and fuselage were still made of wood with a birch plywood skinning. The Ailerons, Flaps, Elevator and the Rudder were aluminum and covered with fabric. The La-5 (prototype) did not have the leading edge automatic slats or a retractable tail wheel. Unlike the LaGG-3 the La-5€s cannon did not fire through the prop spinner. What you are seeing is the Hucks type starter dog. Not a cannon. It was impossible to run the cannon through the nose because the M-82€s gearbox shaft was not hollow. Two ShVAK 20mm synchronized cannon€ were mounted above the engine.


http://www.cubpilot.com/La5F.jpg
La-5F had an Shvetsov M-82F 14-cylinder air-cooled of 1676hp Boosted (WEP) engine with a downdraft carburetor. Which provided improved performance at altitudes above 1500 meters. Now we can see the revised canopy.


http://www.cubpilot.com/La5FN.jpg
La-5FN was the next production model and was fitted with the Shvetsov M-82FN 14-cylinder radial air-cooled engine of 1850hp at 2500 rpm. It was Boosted (WEP) and had fuel injection. Along with the new engine it had lots of aerodynamic improvements as well. The late series version of the La5FN even had the new alloy metal wing spars. You can see the hump up on the cowling. It is the Superchargers Intake.

Pick an aircraft and put together your own http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

USMC_Tailspin
07-17-2006, 02:42 PM
"The La-5FN"


http://www.cubpilot.com/LaGG3.jpg
A LaGG-3€s (Lavochkin, Gorbunov, and Gudkov) original engine was a Klimov M-105PA in line liquid-cooled V12 of 1100hp. It€s armament was one 12.7mm Berezin synchronized machine gun. And one engine mounted ShVAK 20mm cannon firing through the spinner. It was taken from the production line and fitted with a M-82 radial engine. It was called the LaGG-5 (prototype of the La-5) the new radial engine was an Shvetsov 14-cylinder air-cooled of 1676hp. This engine came directly from a Su-2 bomber.


http://www.cubpilot.com/LaGG5.jpg
The LaGG-5 (La-5 prototype) with its new engine had a dramatic performance boost and changed a marginal fighter for the VVS into one of the great combat aircraft of WW2. Note the smooth top surface of the cowling, no air intake or enlarged gun breech covers. And no leading edge slats.

Other examples where aircraft performance was dramatically improved was the Allison to Rolls Royce switch on the P-51 for the RAF and USAF. And the Ki-61 to the Ki-100, which replaced it€s V-12 with a 14-cylinder radial for the Japanese Army Air Force.


http://www.cubpilot.com/La5.jpg
The La-5 initially had used the unused LaGG-3 airframes and appeared later with the rear of its fuselage lowered with a canopy that provided the pilot with better visibility. The wing and fuselage were still made of wood with a birch plywood skinning. The Ailerons, Flaps, Elevator and the Rudder were aluminum and covered with fabric. The La-5 (prototype) did not have the leading edge automatic slats or a retractable tail wheel. Unlike the LaGG-3 the La-5€s cannon did not fire through the prop spinner. What you are seeing is the Hucks type starter dog. Not a cannon. It was impossible to run the cannon through the nose because the M-82€s gearbox shaft was not hollow. Two ShVAK 20mm synchronized cannon€ were mounted above the engine.


http://www.cubpilot.com/La5F.jpg
La-5F had an Shvetsov M-82F 14-cylinder air-cooled of 1676hp Boosted (WEP) engine with a downdraft carburetor. Which provided improved performance at altitudes above 1500 meters. Now we can see the revised canopy.


http://www.cubpilot.com/La5FN.jpg
La-5FN was the next production model and was fitted with the Shvetsov M-82FN 14-cylinder radial air-cooled engine of 1850hp at 2500 rpm. It was Boosted (WEP) and had fuel injection. Along with the new engine it had lots of aerodynamic improvements as well. The late series version of the La5FN even had the new alloy metal wing spars. You can see the hump up on the cowling. It is the Superchargers Intake.

Pick an aircraft and put together your own http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

slipBall
07-17-2006, 04:22 PM
Nice research work, i pick the last one 5fn,
now get back to work moderatoring! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

HayateAce
07-17-2006, 04:44 PM
Looks like a banana.

http://www.cubpilot.com/La5FN.jpg

http://www.miksang.net/galleries/gal_whitjones/images/banana.jpg

MLudner
07-17-2006, 06:14 PM
Actually, to me it looks like....uh, <head scratching smiley> .....um, well... best left unspoken but somewhat implied.

Kurfurst__
07-18-2006, 03:23 AM
That's a very nice compilation of th variants, Tailspin, thank you.

Kocur_
07-18-2006, 07:59 AM
Just a tiny correction: there was no "LaGG-5" as La-5 prototype. Each of the LaGG-guys, worked separately on improving LaGG-3, as they split right after LaGG-3 serial production begun: Lavotchkin was made chief of No21 plant in Gorki, Gorbunov was the same in No31 plant in Taganrog and Gudkov stayed as chief of OKB-301 design bureau. Both Lavotchkin and Gudkov designed M-82 radial conversions of LaGG-3. Gudkov's fighter was the Gu-82 (http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/gu82.html) .

TgD Thunderbolt56
07-18-2006, 08:01 AM
Mostly general information, but well presented and the accompanying pics are cool. One of my favorite rides. Nice post Tailspin.


TB

alert_1
07-18-2006, 10:36 AM
Nice post Tailspin, Kocur excells too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

La5Cat
07-18-2006, 10:58 PM
Thanks Tailspin.

Nice picture too, eventhough staged.

Xiolablu3
07-19-2006, 06:27 AM
BBB Hyperion posted some good info on the La5FN 1943 model we have in game on the Ukdedicated boards . The La5FN we have in game is actually the boosted 1944 version. Take note map makers, only use the La5FN in 1944 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

He made interesting findings, I hope you dont mind me linking to your thread, Hyperion, if you want me to remove it pls say :

http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/showthread.php?t=11094

VW-IceFire
07-19-2006, 02:54 PM
Hopefully if/when Oleg returns to the east he'll further graduate the La-5FN's with a La-5FN 1943 and a La-5FN 1944 instead of the La-5FN with 1944 performance with the 1943 date beside it.

Nonetheless...not a huge problem to use the La-5F in its place as the La-5F is similar in many ways in performance but not quite the same. In many scenarios the La-5F should be used and not the La-5FN.

Does anyone have some detailed information on the weight of the La-5 series as it was modified? So for instance compare the La-5 original with the 5F with the early and late 5FN? We know the engine power went up but I thought I had read that the weight had actually been reduced with less wood and more aluminum.

Xiolablu3
07-19-2006, 06:19 PM
It would have been nice to have the correct date on the plane in game, its used in too many 1943 maps online, and it make it very hard for Axis.

I think the best matchups with the models we have now for online style 'mini war' maps (1 and a half hours where each side has to eliminate targets to win stylee)

La5 - late 1942 vs 109G2/Fw190A4/A5
La5F - 1943 vs 109G2/109G6/F190A5/A6
La5FN - 1944 vs 109 G6A/S G14 /Fw190A6/A8/ Maybe Dora if its late enough in 1944.
La7/La7B20 - 1945 vs Me262/Dora/109K4

I played a map with Xabre and Brain today which was La7B20/Yak3 vs Me262/109K4/FW190D9, and I really liked it. Me and Xabre were red and Brain was blue, we all had some success, the La7 B20 is good for fighting the Me262 etc, as long as you concentrate on the map goal and dont try to just dogfight with them. Of course the ME262 is pretty untouchable if flown well, but to try and win the map, they are forced to take risks and so they are very vulnerable when trying to cover their bombers or attack ground targets with flak shooting back etc. Any pilot worth a **** will not just fly around at 5000m B&Zing 'safe' targets, and will try and help his teamates win the map, which leads to a great fight, if both teams actually go for the objectives.

I think it was called 'Berlin' and I think Brain enjoyed it from the Blue/Axis point of view too. Maybe if he sees this post he will add his thoughts about this matchup fromt he blue perspective. From the red side its a nicely balanced map. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

BBB_Hyperion
07-19-2006, 08:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Does anyone have some detailed information on the weight of the La-5 series as it was modified? So for instance compare the La-5 original with the 5F with the early and late 5FN? We know the engine power went up but I thought I had read that the weight had actually been reduced with less wood and more aluminum. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As production progressed weight changed wood replaced by alois etc.

Lagg 3M 82 (La5 Prototype) (42)

Empty 2832 kg
Takeoff 3380 kg

La5(42)

Empty 2681 kg
Takeoff 3360 kg

La5F(43)
Empty 2590 kg
Takeoff 3220

La5(43)
Empty 2600 kg
Takeoff 3200 kg

La5(43) 2 x 20 mm
Empty 2582 kg
Takeoff 3168 kg

La5FN(43)
Empty 2678 kg
Takeoff 3322 kg

La5FN(44)
Empty 2605 kg
Takeoff 3265 kg

BillyTheKid_22
07-21-2006, 07:17 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif LOL!! COOL!

carguy_
07-21-2006, 07:21 PM
Was ze hell is zis???!Herr Kurfurst,warum gibt es kein Rechlin tests yet hier?! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

BBB_Hyperion
07-21-2006, 08:08 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://img22.imagevenue.com/loc550/th_20144_La5FN_550lo.jpg (http://img22.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20144_La5FN_550lo.jpg)http://img138.imagevenue.com/loc471/th_20164_la5g1_471lo.jpg (http://img138.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20164_la5g1_471lo.jpg)http://img132.imagevenue.com/loc402/th_20176_la5g2_402lo.jpg (http://img132.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20176_la5g2_402lo.jpg)http://img106.imagevenue.com/loc406/th_20182_la5g3_406lo.jpg (http://img106.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20182_la5g3_406lo.jpg)
http://img153.imagevenue.com/loc379/th_20188_la5g4_379lo.jpg (http://img153.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20188_la5g4_379lo.jpg)

Ratsack
07-22-2006, 01:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BBB_Hyperion:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://img22.imagevenue.com/loc550/th_20144_La5FN_550lo.jpg (http://img22.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20144_La5FN_550lo.jpg)http://img138.imagevenue.com/loc471/th_20164_la5g1_471lo.jpg (http://img138.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20164_la5g1_471lo.jpg)http://img132.imagevenue.com/loc402/th_20176_la5g2_402lo.jpg (http://img132.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20176_la5g2_402lo.jpg)http://img106.imagevenue.com/loc406/th_20182_la5g3_406lo.jpg (http://img106.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20182_la5g3_406lo.jpg)
http://img153.imagevenue.com/loc379/th_20188_la5g4_379lo.jpg (http://img153.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=20188_la5g4_379lo.jpg) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow. That's not the La-5FN we have in the game.

520 km/h at sea level, at emergency power? Doesn't the beastie in the game manage 580 km/h on the deck? I mean, I don't want to nitpick, and we'd have to make allowances for a captured machine, but 60 km/h is quite a margin.

cheers,
Ratsack

BBB_Hyperion
07-22-2006, 02:30 AM
It is most likely a 43 model . But maybe using wrong fuel and bad surface condition ,rough engine , low production quality or something could lead to this topspeed. On the other hand stalin send everyone not producing a competive fighter in nice places to be . So at least on the paper the top speed was 573 km/h for a 43 model . If this data was compression corrected is another thing.Likely similar to the spit dive max values. The instruments react too slow and indicate a higher number duo compression effects and using wrong air density for speed duo delay in gauge.

Kocur_
07-22-2006, 05:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ratsack:

520 km/h at sea level, at emergency power? Doesn't the beastie in the game manage 580 km/h on the deck?
Ratsack </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, no! The only true, historical SL top speed of La-5FN was 580kmh before Fw-190A5 1,65ata with 590kmh at SL was introduced in a recent patch. Since then the only true, historical SL top speed of La-5FN is 590kmh.

luftluuver
07-22-2006, 06:38 AM
A website for the La a/c,

http://www.btinternet.com/~fulltilt/deshist.html#La-5FN (http://www.btinternet.com/%7Efulltilt/deshist.html#La-5FN)

For those that read Russian,

http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/la5fn.zip

Other stuff from the same site,

http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/il2rle.zip
http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/la5manual.zip
http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/lagg3rle.zip
http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/tu2man.zip
http://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/yak3.zip

Finally it is questioned what model of La-5 was actually tested by the Germans. Here is a thread from the Aces High forum worth reading,http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=96545&highlight=Lerche

LEBillfish
07-22-2006, 07:35 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by USMC_Tailspin:
And the Ki-61 to the Ki-100, which replaced it€s V-12 with a 14-cylinder radial for the Japanese Army Air Force. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

For the record, that change did NOT improve performance, it infact trailing off some yet did by sheer luck manueverability due to weight......Though I don't know "why" this was done for the LA5, it was simply done for the Ki-61/Ki-100 due to a lack of engines to try and make use of existing air frames......Just stating that to help you clean up your write up, nice work http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
07-22-2006, 08:35 AM
But as you well know, while the Ki-100 didn't improve on performance it took the Ki-61 which was somewhat unreliable in the engine department, the Ki-61-II which they had quite a bit of trouble with in the engine department, and turned the design into an aircraft that had a high degree of reliability. The reducing in weight and the improved handling was just what the Japanese Army needed for its inexperienced pilots.

The La-5 switch to radial I think was because there was a large number of the ASh-82 engine sitting around waiting for a fighter to put it in and because I think they felt they had gotten as much as they could out of the current Klimov engines. Could also be that they were reserved for use in the Pe-2 and Yaks so Lavochkin went looking for an alternative.

The La-5 like the Ki-100 received a reduction in weight over its predecessor. I think thats important to note because most Western planes (Germany, Britain, United States and so forth) got heavier as time went along. Generally speaking of course.

tigertalon
07-22-2006, 09:59 AM
The La5 switch to the ASh-82 was because Lagg-3 performed soooo poorly and was no match for german fighters, that it was demanded to build a new fighter. Now the constructors knew there is nothing wrong with the airframe, that they just need a stronger engine. So they put a ASh-82 in and a combo was a superb plane. (Each of them trying separately now, but Lavochkin team was most succsessful)

In this sim this difference somehow is not reflected. In general, planes with stronger engines do not show their historical advantages, especially accelerating / accelerating in a dive at slow speeds, plus sustained turning ratio. In PF there are many pilots that choose Lagg over La5 and to be frank, I am scared of both equally down low when in Anton, Friedrich or Gustav. Utterly contra to history, as the Lagg should perform more like a hurricane, but is almost on a par with spitIX...

VW-IceFire
07-22-2006, 10:09 AM
I don't know about that...most people fly the LaGG-3 because its old DM is rock hard...particularly in the rear fuselage. Oleg added some extra weight to the LaGG more recently and its not the hapiest plane to fly anymore. Which is great http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ratsack
07-22-2006, 10:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:


...I am scared of both equally down low when in Anton, Friedrich or Gustav. ... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Scared is the best way to fly when you're down low in an Anton. Never underestimate the power of abject fear to unleash your most agressive instincts. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

cheers,
Ratsack

anarchy52
07-22-2006, 11:28 AM
LaGG-3 was severely underpowered with all the associated performance hit that comes with it (bad acceleration, climb, sustained turn). Another disadvantage was the lack of experience of the soviet aviation industry with building modern planes resulting in serialy produced planes having signifficantly lower performance then factory prototypes (speed variations of 40km/h were not uncommon).

LaGG-3 was outperformed by Bf-109 E in all respects except top speed at low altitude (at least the prototypes on which game FM is modelled, however there are doubts whether results were accurate or represent the performance of serial produced aircraft). It was disliked by pilots due to poor performance and quote: "heavy controls at all speeds". As soon as alternatives were available it was replaced.

What's more to say of an aircraft that had a peak climb rate ~10 m/s (VK105P) - in game 15m/s http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif and was virtually useless above 4000m? The design wasn't bad, it was in fact pretty clean, and when the airframe was coupled with far more powerfull engine soviets finally got a domestically built aircraft that could compete with luftwaffe fighters on more or less equal terms (at low altitude).

Soviet LaGG/La fighters are highly "overmodelled" in game far exceeding even the optimistic TsAGI charts.

Kocur_
07-22-2006, 12:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The La-5 like the Ki-100 received a reduction in weight over its predecessor. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually LaGG-3 empty weight, apart from the worst series, which grew up to ~2.800kg, stayed in 2.500-2.600 area. M-105 dry weight was 620kg and 860kg in M-82 case, but coolant radiator was deleted too. I have no idea what was actual weight of LaGG-3 coolant radiator, but P-51 dry rads weighted 204kg http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Badsight-
07-22-2006, 04:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by tigertalon:
In PF there are many pilots that choose Lagg over La5 and to be frank, I am scared of both equally down low when in Anton, Friedrich or Gustav. Utterly contra to history, as the Lagg should perform more like a hurricane, but is almost on a par with spitIX... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>100% truth

Freelancer-1
07-23-2006, 10:21 AM
Slightly OT here.

Russian cammo in 1944 is boooring.

Wanting to skin something a little different, I found this scheme from Kursk '43.
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y189/Freelancer1/gbLa5FN.jpg

Does anyone have any more info on this? This pretty much sums up everything I could find.