PDA

View Full Version : Artificial horizon: why not?



Cippacometa
03-08-2004, 06:49 AM
I have a technical-historical question.
Why on the cockpit of several russian a/c, even those quite recent, there was not an artificial horizon?
For example, all Yaks, including 3 and 9U produced in '44, had no AH. All Mig-3s, all Las (exluded La-7-3xB20) also lack AH, as well as the Rata and the Biplane (but these latter are quite ancient and simple machines, so could be justified).
On the other hand, all IL-2 Sturmoviks have an AH, even the older models.
Now, IL-2s used to fly very close to the ground, where an AH is more or less useless since you constantly keep the land and the horizon on sight.
Instead, for example a Yak-9U or a La-5FN could easily reach high altitudes, where you can lose sight of the land and of the horizon (clouds, fog, distance, etc) and thus need an AH.

So, why this choice?
Was it a technical choice (like pilots didn't need it) or was more an economical (AH were too expensive for mass production)?
Do you know if some pilots installed an AH on their a/c?

Thanks! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Cippacometa
03-08-2004, 06:49 AM
I have a technical-historical question.
Why on the cockpit of several russian a/c, even those quite recent, there was not an artificial horizon?
For example, all Yaks, including 3 and 9U produced in '44, had no AH. All Mig-3s, all Las (exluded La-7-3xB20) also lack AH, as well as the Rata and the Biplane (but these latter are quite ancient and simple machines, so could be justified).
On the other hand, all IL-2 Sturmoviks have an AH, even the older models.
Now, IL-2s used to fly very close to the ground, where an AH is more or less useless since you constantly keep the land and the horizon on sight.
Instead, for example a Yak-9U or a La-5FN could easily reach high altitudes, where you can lose sight of the land and of the horizon (clouds, fog, distance, etc) and thus need an AH.

So, why this choice?
Was it a technical choice (like pilots didn't need it) or was more an economical (AH were too expensive for mass production)?
Do you know if some pilots installed an AH on their a/c?

Thanks! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Taylortony
03-08-2004, 11:41 AM
bump

BuzzU
03-08-2004, 11:48 AM
Lots of Russian pilots were killed in bad weather for that very reason. Oleg simple modeled what was real. Why they built them that way I have no clue. How much can one gauge cost compared to lost lives?


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buzz
http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/eagles/4fg.jpg

horseback
03-08-2004, 01:03 PM
Instrument mix may have been the choice of the Bureau that built the plane. Various US manufacturers used different types of instruments/displays to give the pilot necessary info, although the War Dept. apparently dictated basic required instruments.

Of course, maybe the AHs were installed in the Russian fighters, but they were placed above the compasses and are COMPLETELY hidden by the gunsights in FB.

cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

BfHeFwMe
03-08-2004, 06:58 PM
Il-2's had to fly night missions, and didn't get the day off on foul weather blind flying days, ground combat went on, they had to go. From what I've read the AH type that's installed in the IL-2 wasn't very advanced, it was only accurate to a certain bank angle, so not suited to fighters, but plenty good for bombers and attack to get the job done.