Jump to content

Yakovlev Yak-9UT


  • 5 months later...
  • 2 months later...

Could you elaborate please?

Stat card says it's 18.3 

EMQaLZe.jpg

 

This is realistic stats 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oftopic but since elbarca is here i wonder why alot of russian planes overperform? And why stalin steel is better than regular steel?
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oftopic but since elbarca is here i wonder why alot of russian planes overperform? And why stalin steel is better than regular steel?

Can you explain what you mean by "overperform" and "stalin steel is better than regular steel"?

 

Regarding the FMs, what exactly is wrong that makes you think a lot of Russian aircraft overperform? Could you do some testing please so that we know what is wrong? We can't fix feelings, after all.

 

You can see the way armor works in 1.43, what materials are used where etc. You should have tried it out when the dev server was open.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you explain what you mean by "overperform" and "stalin steel is better than regular steel"?

 

Regarding the FMs, what exactly is wrong that makes you think a lot of Russian aircraft overperform? Could you do some testing please so that we know what is wrong? We can't fix feelings, after all.

 

You can see the way armor works in 1.43, what materials are used where etc. You should have tried it out when the dev server was open.

With overperform im reffering to how mutch better they fly ingame when compared to other aircraft than what they did in irl. i cant write every problem becouse im at school and dont have time. and with stalin steel i reffer to that they can put out fires alot easier than other aircraft. on another note the yak9t/k´s cannons had so mutch recoil that the plane could never shot enything more then 2 shots without loosing the engine ore breaking the plane. and the (mostly 45mm) cannon was to heavy for the plane so it could barely turn ore climb. ingame both of them turn like spits (in rb) and the cannon never jams. they never went into battle becouse of their probems even though they passed prototype stage. these 2 are the most overperforming aircraft in the game and needs a more realistic fm and a cannon that jams after 2-3 shots if auto firing and could possibly damage the fuselage and engine of the plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

With overperform im reffering to how mutch better they fly ingame when compared to other aircraft than what they did in irl. i cant write every problem becouse im at school and dont have time. 

I need examples. What are they doing that is too good? Concrete data, numbers, please. Things can't be fixed unless you provide those.

 

 

 

on another note the yak9t/k´s cannons had so mutch recoil that the plane could never shot enything more then 2 shots without loosing the engine ore breaking the plane. and the (mostly 45mm) cannon was to heavy for the plane so it could barely turn ore climb.

The Yak-9K weighed 3kg more than the Yak-9T, including the gun and ammo difference. It sounds to me like you're just reading wikipedia instead of learning about these aircraft. You can do some calculations to find how they would perform as well, and they are not performing out of the ordinary right now.

 

 

 

 ingame both of them turn like spits (in rb) and the cannon never jams. they never went into battle becouse of their probems even though they passed prototype stage. these 2 are the most overperforming aircraft in the game and needs a more realistic fm and a cannon that jams after 2-3 shots if auto firing and could possibly damage the fuselage and engine of the plane.

They most certainly do not turn like Spitfires, not should they. Again, for the FM, what exactly about them is overperforming? I disagree that the gun should jam after 2-3 shots - that is incredibly unrealistic. Please try to research these aircraft and their guns a bit more before making such claims. Please avoid wikipedia when it comes to learning and reading about aircraft.

 

It is clear you have done no performance testing of these aircraft. Please at least attempt to do so before claiming that they are performing too well or have a broken FM. It wastes my, and everyone elses time when such claims are made without a foundation to base them on.

Edited by Nabutso
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I need examples. What are they doing that is too good? Concrete data, numbers, please. Things can't be fixed unless you provide those.

 

The Yak-9K weighed 3kg more than the Yak-9T, including the gun and ammo difference. It sounds to me like you're just reading wikipedia instead of learning about these aircraft. You can do some calculations to find how they would perform as well, and they are not performing out of the ordinary right now.

 

They most certainly do not turn like Spitfires, not should they. Again, for the FM, what exactly about them is overperforming? I disagree that the gun should jam after 2-3 shots - that is incredibly unrealistic. Please try to research these aircraft and their guns a bit more before making such claims. Please avoid wikipedia when it comes to learning and reading about aircraft.

 

It is clear you have done no performance testing of these aircraft. Please at least attempt to do so before claiming that they are performing too well or have a broken FM. It wastes my, and everyone elses time when such claims are made without a foundation to base them on.

i cant provide u data since i mostly find information about these in swedish webbsites and threads here at the forum. all of them are saying about the same thing and a person with an IQ above 50 knows that firing a 45mm cannon (this thing> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dSp7CipN1pw ) in this thing ( http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/yakovlev_yak9um_andreibezmylov.jpg ) is xxxx suiside. even twin engined fighters had problems with these calibers. and even if i cant provide numbers its very likely that some russian faked its test results. and even if i cant give numbers ask enybody else here in the community. it is not necesary op but it is and alot of other russian aircraft overperforming. (overperforming = better than irl)

Edited by Umbriellan
change for a politically correct expression

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

i cant provide u data since i mostly find information about these in swedish webbsites and threads here at the forum. all of them are saying about the same thing and a person with an IQ above 50 knows that firing a 45mm cannon (this thing> https://www.youtube....h?v=dSp7CipN1pw ) in this thing ( http://www.flugzeugi...reibezmylov.jpg ) is xxxx suiside.

I don't see how it's really any different than the B-25 firing 57mm or Hs129 firing 75mm projectiles. Besides, yeah, they decided they didn't want the 45mm variant to go into full scale production, so it didn't. There is no benefit to flying the Yak-9K in WT compared to flying the Yak-9T, it just flies worse, and has an equally fast-firing but lower muzzle velocity cannon. There aren't many targets which will survive a 37mm often enough to warrant a 45mm cannon. That is the real reason the Yak-9K wasn't favored.

 

 

 

even if i cant provide numbers its very likely that some russian faked its test results.

I don't understand. Test results aren't the end-all be-all proof for how these aircraft performed. Performance calculations are fine as well, and those done using British, American, German etc methods all show that nothing that the Russians 'claimed' their aircraft could do was abnormal for their configurations. These types of calculations entirely remove the possible aspect that their data was faked - and these calculations not only remove that factor but prove that their data indeed was NOT faked after all. Math is a very powerful thing.

 

 

 

even if i cant give numbers ask enybody else here in the community. it is not necesary op but it is and alot of other russian aircraft overperforming. (overperforming = better than irl)

You are one of those members of the community. You, like like the vast majority of others who make claims that these aircraft are performing incorrectly, have no interest in actually showing this, only in whining about it. I say, if you want them to be changed, you must take initiative and prove some sort of concrete data. I will listen, I will forward everything you do to the FM developers responsible for the mistakes. If such proof is posted, of course - which no one ever bothers to do. This is your chance to show something, if you don't want to, then that is entirely your decision. 

Edited by Umbriellan
change for a politically correct expression
  • Like 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how it's really any different than the B-25 firing 57mm or Hs129 firing 75mm projectiles. Besides, yeah, they decided they didn't want the 45mm variant to go into full scale production, so it didn't. There is no benefit to flying the Yak-9K in WT compared to flying the Yak-9T, it just flies worse, and has an equally fast-firing but lower muzzle velocity cannon. There aren't many targets which will survive a 37mm often enough to warrant a 45mm cannon. That is the real reason the Yak-9K wasn't favored.

 

I don't understand. Test results aren't the end-all be-all proof for how these aircraft performed. Performance calculations are fine as well, and those done using British, American, German etc methods all show that nothing that the Russians 'claimed' their aircraft could do was abnormal for their configurations. These types of calculations entirely remove the possible aspect that their data was faked - and these calculations not only remove that factor but prove that their data indeed was NOT faked after all. Math is a very powerful thing.

 

You are one of those members of the community. You, like like the vast majority of others who make claims that these aircraft are performing incorrectly, have no interest in actually showing this, only in whining about it. I say, if you want them to be changed, you must take initiative and prove some sort of concrete data. I will listen, I will forward everything you do to the FM developers responsible for the mistakes. If such proof is posted, of course - which no one ever bothers to do. This is your chance to show something, if you don't want to, then that is entirely your decision. 

i dont whine since i rarely gets shot down by this thing and i can do very well in it though it is perforimg better than similar aircraft with similar armament. history lesson, russia didnt have the best airforce during the war, but it wasnt the planes that where bad it whas the pilots ho where bad. the planes where mostly in the same class as other nations of the time. but ingame alot of them performs better and more balanced than other aircraft in respective tier. they turn good, they climb good, they retain and gains energy good, their armament is basic but almost never fail, and they can often take alot more dmg than similar aircrafts. they are good in almost every catagory and it makes it hard to hit their weakspots and therefore even the pros can have a hard time to fight with them. in irl they where not good climbers, not good at retaining energy and their armament whas not as good as the ingame guns, mostly thinking of accuracy and jaming. nuff said they need a nerf. mostly in dm,fm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still have not quantified what they are doing too well with numbers and performance testing vs real world values. When you do so, then you will be taken seriously. I'm always around and willing to listen when such data is provided.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I dont think i can find numbers on how well they respond to controlls and how the systems responds to eachother.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think i can find numbers on how well they respond to controlls and how the systems responds to eachother.

I have plenty of NACA reports that you can use to calculate such things if you are interested in learning for a few months on how to use them, as well as diagrams of the control systems for almost every Yak and La that I can think of.

 

Plus you can always watch videos of them in flight; as well as compare to tested data of the time period, which, while not always available, is out there if you look hard enough.

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have plenty of NACA reports that you can use to calculate such things if you are interested in learning for a few months on how to use them, as well as diagrams of the control systems for almost every Yak and La that I can think of.

 

Plus you can always watch videos of them in flight; as well as compare to tested data of the time period, which, while not always available, is out there if you look hard enough.

Im not into this stuff but thanks. but still i can tell when something is wrong. and i will try to find a person ho can find the numbers u are asking for. i have seen a mockup fight betveen a bf109g(?), spit mk(?) and a yak(?). the bf 109 won but the spit where close. the yak whas completly outperformed in almost every way. in warthunder the yak would have a 70% chance of vinning since it turns better than a bf109 in all alts. and retain energy alot better than the spit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said: can't fix feelings.

do u even work on the game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work with the FM devs yeah.

 

 
 

Complaints don't make things true.

still the community talks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still the community talks.

The Russian community also likes to complain stating that the Yak-3 is underperforming in several aspects.

 

:dntknw:

 

The devs don't listen to baseless criticism. Lots of people saying something is wrong != something is wrong. It just means those people think it is due to their preconceptions about the plane. Russians think Yak-3 should turn like a Spitfire (it does not, and should not). International forum thinks the Yaks should all be garbage and fall apart when they shoot (they do not, they should not). 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Russian community also likes to complain stating that the Yak-3 is underperforming in several aspects.

 

:dntknw:

 

The devs don't listen to baseless criticism. Lots of people saying something is wrong != something is wrong. It just means those people think it is due to their preconceptions about the plane. Russians think Yak-3 should turn like a Spitfire (it does not, and should not). International forum thinks the Yaks should all be garbage and fall apart when they shoot (they do not, they should not). 

CONTENT REMOVED

Edited by WoIfman
Keep your comments directed at the topic, NOT OTHERS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...