Luftwaffe reports on downed Lavochkins

[John Manrho]

Just my two cents...... in the ranks of JG 6, especially with I./JG 6, there were still a lot of pilots with experience on the Eastern front. Within I./JG 6 several pilots had flown numerous missions with I./ZG 1 in Russia. I./ZG 1 became later I./ZG 26 and then I./JG 6. Also in II. and III. Gruppe were several pilots who had seen combat on the eastern front in other units before.

cheers,

John.

Ps. I am not familiar with difference between La-5 and La-7, so I can not comment on the validity of the report itself.

[Franek Grabowski]

Joerg
There is a difference between teething problems and design misconceptions, etc.

Kjetil
What is your point? Are you trying to prove that Soviet aircraft were on par with Western ones? Stalinist propagandists tried to prove that as well.
Fact is I have some pieces of Soviet hardware at home and it is not a problem for me to compare them to Western stuff. Also, there is plenty of Soviet hardware in Poland, so I am used to it in general. The difference is huge.
In regard of Lavochkins, your claim that there was no structural difference between La-5FN and La-7 is just ridiculous and proves you have no slightest idea about those aircraft. Sorry.
That said, your comment about importance of pilots' capabilities is not valid as well. While Western aircraft were automatised to a high degree (radiators, propeller/pitch settings, fuel mixture, gyro gunsight), thus allowing pilot to concentrate on combat, Soviet aircraft still required a lot of manual adjusting. Eg. young pilots often set their radiators fully open just to avoid overheating, thus substantially reducing performance. So simple. I do not even mention quality and wear problems, that were very important issues.

[Kjetil Aakra]

Franek, you do make some of the most ill-informed, yet funny, posts on this forum!

I'm not trying to prove anything really, since my points should be clear to most by now. Of course certain late-war Soviet aircraft were on par with Western ones! It has nothing to do with "Stalinist propaganda", something you would know if you weren't blinded by your Polish nationalist propaganda.

I don't get your reference to your Soviet hardware at home, are you talking about household appliances or are you saying that you have a real La-7 at home???? Otherwise I cannot see the relevance of your statement. Or are you really saying that a WWII La-7 is bad because you have a kitchen blender that dosn't quite work for you?

You are a master of turning things around (which you need to be since your arguments are usually so inherently bad og faulty).

Your original statement "the main difference between La-5FN and La-7 was in internal structure" is wrong. The main difference is external, as I said. Find some good drawings, liker in Erik Pilawskii's book on VVS fighter colours, and see for yourself.

I didn't say that there was no structural difference between them (so here you are actually lying unless you retract that statement), I said that the majority of this was external.

Kjetil (slightly amused)

[Franek Grabowski]

Kjetil
As I wrote earlier, I cannot understand what you are trying to prove. The main difference between La-5FN and La-7 was a metal spar and this was the reason of the new designation. Otherwise it would have been called like La-5FNb or something like that.
Concerning Soviet hardware, I have some aircraft parts of various origin in my collection. Unfortunatelly it turned impossible for me to acquire a complete seat for La, but I am crossing fingers I will get it one day. So, I know what I am talking about, when I say that Soviet hardware was inferior. Frankly, it often looks so awful, the one does not want to touch it!
Thus said, such Soviet fighters like Spitfire or Kingcobra certainly were on par with Western aircraft, but Soviet designs were not. Soviet propaganda tried to prove otherwise and found some followers in kind of Pilawski, but the facts are undeniable. Both Kingcobras and Spitfires were in Soviet service in the early 1950s, long time after Soviet designs were phased out. Kingcobra, while tested against ultimate Yak-9P turned superior, still being much older design. It was mentioned on very this forum some time ago, but apparently you are not interested in facts, if you repeat what you wrote previously.

[Kjetil Aakra]

The main difference between La-5FN and La-7 was a metal spar and this was the reason of the new designation. Otherwise it would have been called like La-5FNb or something like that.

Now we are moving into the realm of Polish contrafactual history and I dare not go there!

Frankly, it often looks so awful, the one does not want to touch it!

And yet you keep it in your house! Better hire an interior decorator!

Both Kingcobras and Spitfires were in Soviet service in the early 1950s, long time after Soviet designs were phased out.

LOL!

Kingcobra, while tested against ultimate Yak-9P turned superior, still being much older design.

A better turner, hence a better fighter! Ahh, now I see where you are going with this. The ultimate fighter of WWII was the PZL 7/11. Of course!

I wonder if other Polish contributers on this board agree with Franek's opinions of Soviet aircraft?

Kjetil

[kalender1973]

Originally Posted by John Manrho

Just my two cents...... in the ranks of JG 6, especially with I./JG 6, there were still a lot of pilots with experience on the Eastern front. Within I./JG 6 several pilots had flown numerous missions with I./ZG 1 in Russia. I./ZG 1 became later I./ZG 26 and then I./JG 6. Also in II. and III. Gruppe were several pilots who had seen combat on the eastern front in other units before.

Hi John,

IIRC you write the book about JG6 ? Could I ask you, when it appears ?

My assumption was, that after more then one year figthing in the west, not many pilots survive from I./ZG1... But I suppose you are better inform as me

Best regards

[John Beaman]

Kjetil and Franek:

Let’s keep it nice and on subject which is Luftwaffe reports on LaGGs. If you keep up the personal attacks, I’ll lock the thread.

[Kjetil Aakra]

John, certainly understand your concern and the discussion with Franek regarding the merits of Soviet aircraft is over from my side.

I do have something else however, that may add to the original disucssion.

According to Soviets pilots Luftwaffe fighter often stayed at high altitude in the last months of the war, refusing to engage Soviet fighters low down in dogfights, often to the frustration of the latter (since the high-altitude perfomance of their Lavochkin wa snot as good as the Germans, reportedly). And I suspect that if they did engage it was the usual hit-and-run tactic
leaving little time to gain an impression of the opponent's aircraft. This could be one reason why the reports often refer only to "generic" La-5s.

Kjetil

[kalender1973]

Hi all,

I suppose, we have hier one very simple explanation. All pilots from all air forces could not really correct identify there opponents. Why we discuss about La's ?? The same issue was with P-47C/D or P-51B/C if we look in Tony Wood's list. The same issue is with identity of german planes. E.g. all Fw-190 for soviet pilot were "foker" FW-190 and they never report about Fw-190A,F,G etc. The same story with Bf109...

The report from JG6 astonished me personally, because I suppose, it is unable to distinguish both type, if you don't take a seat on the chair

Regards

[HGabor]

Hi Igor,

this is very interesting. Can you tell me which IAPs used different colors to mark the spinners of their 3 squadrons? Would be especially interested in the 5th and 17th VVS, - if any. Thanks,

Gabor