Soviet planes of the Second World War: exposure of the myths of filmmakers about the “winged junk”


About inconsistencies and mistakes in films dedicated to the Great Patriotic War (WWII), much has been said and written. A modern viewer often witnesses such scenes on the screen that historical reality are not connected at all in any way. Either the sandwiches flaunted with makeup and manicure obviously not in the 40s of the last century, or the insignia of the military personnel does not correspond to those used in this or that period of the war. But these are trifles.


And there are also episodes where it is already difficult to understand whether this is an accidental slip-up of a group of filmmakers or a purposefully distributed fake.

On the Sky Artist channel, a new series of the film was released about how on TV and in the movie they lie about Soviet pilots.

A statement is made by one of the Russian directors, who, after filming a film about pilots in an interview with the federal channel, said:

It becomes scary, in principle, how one could fly on this at all.

According to the director, "the planes were plywood."

The author of the video notes that he has an idea that the “old” and “cracking at the seams” Yak airplanes shown in Russian films about the war were made deliberately to emphasize the myth of “flying wood” and “winged junk”.

The author recalls how the Soviet Yaks (Normandy-Niemen squadrons) were met in Paris:

They were compared to a race car for the quality of the finish.


Movie with the exposure of cinema judgments about the “winged junk”:

Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

81 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Dmitry V. 4 March 2020 14: 38 New
    • 18
    • 1
    +17
    Well, the series "Fighters" is in itself strange - the author "sees so."
    I'm not talking about historical authenticity and artistic value: clumsy dialogs, shameful graphics - an uninteresting film as a whole.
    1. Malyuta 4 March 2020 14: 51 New
      • 27
      • 1
      +26
      Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
      Well, the series "Fighters" is in itself strange - the author "sees so." I'm not talking about historical authenticity and artistic value: clumsy dialogs, shameful graphics - an uninteresting film as a whole.

      All current war films are like splint, almost none of them have credibility, and the falsity of these. not only in the well-groomed well-groomed faces of the artists, but also in the very atmosphere of these crafts, remakes, remakes. Everything is fake. Moreover, many films carry a clearly anti-Soviet semantic load and I immediately want to ask why and for whose money you are shooting these productions?
  2. Sayan 4 March 2020 14: 44 New
    • 17
    • 1
    +16
    Yes, in general, the entire post-Soviet cinema on the theme of the Second World War, rubbish and a solid blunder and a lie !!! With rare exceptions. Especially the role of SMERSH and detachments was misinterpreted, and now film crews took up the technique, noting the fact that these are WEAPON VICTORIES !!!
  3. rocket757 4 March 2020 14: 51 New
    • 15
    • 0
    +15
    They are already proposing to impose a maratorium on the shooting of military films by the current movie lovers !!!
    I support .... these non-directors with their producers "do not pour a hundred grams!"
    1. hohol95 4 March 2020 14: 58 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      They generally need to be kept away from the "kitchen"!
  4. Jarserge 4 March 2020 14: 56 New
    • 12
    • 0
    +12
    Modern war films comics for idiots. A heap of absurdities and mistakes and almost always either illiteracy or the meanness of the authors in relation to historical facts. And here, as well as in relation to journalists, FULL impunity, because any donkey can kick a dead lion.
  5. hohol95 4 March 2020 14: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The author of the video itself is a little "fixated" in the beginning on the Yak-3. But the main brunt of the battles was carried out by the Yak-1 / 1b / 7/9. And after the war, it was the Yak-9 (of course not wartime) that fought in the Chinese and North Korean air forces!
    And Mr. Zakharov, after the closure of the program, THEIR Morals must have been retrained as an aviation specialist ...
  6. Old Horseradish 4 March 2020 14: 58 New
    • 4
    • 35
    -31
    In fact, one should not so admire plywood wings.
    1) when a shell or machine gun hits, it is clear what happened to them.
    2) the casing could swell and come off due to poor-quality paintwork. The plane could have crashed.
    3) the best aces flew on American aircraft "Aerocobra". It was they who had big accounts of victories.
    4) German high-altitude scouts often quite fearlessly flew into the deep rear of our troops - the reason is clear: the insufficient altitude of our fighters. They could get "Aerocobra" and later modifications of Soviet fighters.
    PS And the most heinous thing was that pilots were forced to fight according to outdated charters and those who did not fly were forced to fight. I mean the majority of commissioners (although there were exceptions).
    1. Dmitry V. 4 March 2020 15: 12 New
      • 10
      • 1
      +9
      Quote: Old Horseradish
      3) the best aces flew on American aircraft "Aerocobra". It was they who had big accounts of victories.


      The armament had a profound effect on performance — weaker armaments on the yaks determined the tactics of the battle. But the Yaks were easier to manage and more maneuverable, which was more suitable for accelerated training sergeants.

      La-5 La-7 had more powerful weapons and the individual performance of aces - no worse.

      Everyone had their own tasks - often the regiments on the Yaks were accompanied by attack aircraft and bombers, but here you can’t get personal accounts, the task is to save the wards, which eliminates an aggressive battle with fighters.
      1. illuminat 5 March 2020 13: 27 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
        weaker weapons on yaks,

        Quote: Dmitry Vladimirovich
        La-5 La-7 had more powerful weapons

        This is a common misconception. Yaks with one BS have a second volley almost like La, and with two 12,7 - almost one and a half times more.
        At the “bench” the guns are synchronous, and this reduces the rate of fire and, accordingly, the second volley by about 30%.
    2. Roman_vh 4 March 2020 15: 13 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      Are you sure of all your statements?
      And can you confirm them with facts?
    3. lucul 4 March 2020 15: 31 New
      • 15
      • 3
      +12
      In fact, one should not so admire plywood wings.

      You have gathered all the myths together ...
      the best aces flew on American AeroCobra aircraft.

      The main advantage of Aerocobra is
      a working radio, always. Need I say how important this is in battle. But our walkie-talkies worked very badly ..
      German high-altitude scouts often quite fearlessly flew into the deep rear of our troops - the reason is clear: the insufficient altitude of our fighters.

      There was such a plane, at the beginning of the war, ours - the MiG-3 was called. "At the height - God," as Pokryshkin said. At an altitude of 7 and above it exceeded Me. 000. But the Germans did not fly so high ...
      1. Old Horseradish 4 March 2020 16: 24 New
        • 1
        • 24
        -23
        Quote: lucul
        You have gathered all the myths together ...

        Tell it A.V. Pokryshkin, who until the end of the war flew on the Aero Cobra, as well as all of his fighter air divisions (3 regiments) And everything on the Aero Cobra, despite the harsh pressure and the demand to rearm on LA-7. After the hero of the Soviet Union of Clubs died twice on LA-7, no one wanted to end the war on this unit. And this is a historical fact. Although the LA-7 was one of the best domestic fighters and many aces fought on it, for example Kozhedub. You still write that the I-16 was the best fighter. I guess it was, they just knocked them down by thousands.
        1. tovarich-andrey.62goncharov 4 March 2020 17: 22 New
          • 14
          • 4
          +10
          I-16 series 24 and above were on an equal footing with ME-109 until the winter of 1942. From the memoirs of a fighter pilot. You have a lot of petty, false information. You know - everything is true (in general) - but a spoonful of crap, with joy ... Whose will you be?
          1. illuminat 5 March 2020 13: 32 New
            • 3
            • 0
            +3
            Quote: tovarich-andrey.62goncharov
            I-16 series 24 and above were on an equal footing with ME-109 until the winter of 1942. From the memoirs of a fighter pilot.

            Golodnikov told this, but this is not so. With all due respect to Nikolai Gerasimovich, he simply did not think that his words would be interpreted so widely.
        2. fighter angel 5 March 2020 10: 36 New
          • 13
          • 4
          +9
          Old horseradish.
          For the umpteenth time I’m already convinced that in almost any discussion about the fighters of the Great Patriotic War, something like this pops up like you, and the "moaning about the aerocobra" begins.
          What she was "unsurpassed", that "the best fought only on her", "everything else is rubbish ..", etc. etc.
          I am telling you the facts.
          About, allegedly, beloved by the entire Pokryshkin’s division, “aerocobra.”
          In accordance with your "worthless" manner of presentation.
          To make it clearer.
          1) All year 1941 Pokryshkin flew on the MiG-3, as well as on the I-16. And it was against them that he won, according to various estimates, from 10 to 15 victories. This is only for 1941.
          2) Throughout 1942, Pokryshkin was first retrained, and then flew on the Yak-1. He shot down about 8-12 enemy vehicles precisely on Yak. During this period he took command of the regiment, he had to lead and command, and therefore such a combat score.
          3) And only at the end of the spring of 1943, his regiment / division received the "cobras", retrained, and entered into battle for them over the sky of the Kuban. By that time, on the account of Pokryshkin there were already about 20-27 shot down.
          4) From January to May 1945, Pokryshkin received La-7 and made a certain number of sorties on Lavochkin. According to various sources, on La-7 he shot down from 3 to 5.
          5) The final combat score of Pokryshkin, officially known, is 59 shot down.
          We believe that it turns out that out of its official 59, about 30-32 are shot down in domestic cars.
          And only 29-27 was shot down by him precisely on the "aerocobra".
          Half, or even less.
          6) Absolutely the same situation with other leading aces 16 GIAD. Specifically, Rechkalov, Dmitry Glinka. They also have about 30-40% shot down from the official account, these are shot down on domestic fighters - Ishachki, Seagulls (Rechkalov met the war on it), MiG-3, and Yak-1 . And only 50-60% directly on the cobras.
          So you fucking lie.
          The most productive aces of the Air Force of the Red Army flew to the Yakovlevs and Lavochkins.
          1. Cyril732017 5 March 2020 17: 18 New
            • 4
            • 2
            +2
            Do not tell these facts to anyone else, they have nothing to do with reality, starting right from the fact that in 1942 Pokryshkin commanded a regiment and ending with the fact that he shot down aircraft on La-7, the last plane he shot down was in July 1944 and he didn’t shoot anything more, although the desire was ... look at a newsreel where in March 1945 he was landing his division on the German freeways and what kind of fighters were there
            1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 10: 42 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Kirill,
              Well, if I think you’re wrong somewhere, then prove the opposite.
              With specific facts and links.
              Will you be so kind...
              For now, you only spoil the air.
          2. Shishiga 6 March 2020 15: 43 New
            • 0
            • 1
            -1
            stormy applause
            bully good good
        3. swstr 5 March 2020 21: 53 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          Well, firstly, about the spring of 1943, he flew both on La and on Yak, and on Aerocobra he only successfully became when he finalized it. Well, the other most productive pilot fighter Kozhedub flew the whole war to La, but at the end the war was even more and Yusovets was shot down :) so. that do not praise the aerocobra. To 64 German planes shot down by I.N. Kozhedub during the Great Patriotic War, at least 2 more American fighters should be added. In 120 air battles he was never shot down! Source and details: http://www.airaces.ru/asy-velikojj-otechestvennojj-vojjny/kozhedub-ivan-nikitovich.html
      2. dmmyak40 4 March 2020 17: 03 New
        • 5
        • 1
        +4
        The main advantage of Aerocobra is a working radio, always.

        You got a little excited. Aerocobra had quite different advantages:
        - high thrust-to-weight ratio (vertical battles);
        - All-metal construction (resistance to overloads, the possibility of sharper maneuvering);
        - good view from the cockpit;
        - powerful weapons;
        - chassis resistant to bonding;
        - Good cabin conditions for the pilot.
        Of the minuses - the problem with the corkscrew in the early series and the difficult exit of the aircraft due to the high probability of hitting the stabilizer
        1. And our engine was forced (imperceptibly for the Americans) - because it was necessary not to fly, but to fight. Pokryshkin wrote - three or four fights, as a result, copper shavings in oil, and put a new engine.
        2. shura7782 4 March 2020 19: 30 New
          • 3
          • 1
          +2
          high probability of impact on the stabilizer
          By the way, Devyatayev felt this on himself. The book "Flight to the Sun."
        3. fighter angel 5 March 2020 11: 01 New
          • 6
          • 1
          +5
          dmmyak40
          Generally correct.
          Except for one important fact.
          The "cobra" on the vertical was not strong. That is why the "Kuban whatnot" appeared.
          Cobra could not normally upright.
          Let's turn to LTX.
          R-39D, "aerocobra" - V1710 engine, power-1150 hp
          rate of climb - 756 m / min.
          For comparison: the Yak-9 rate of climb is 840 m / min.
          rate of climb La-5 - 835 m / min
          rate of climb of the Yak-1B - 980 m / min.
          And the enemy: the climb rate of Vf-109F - 1050 m / min., Vf-109G-2 - 1200 m / min, the Vf-109G-6 - 815 m / min.
          So, on the vertical, the cobra is one of the worst cars.
          1. dmmyak40 5 March 2020 13: 07 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            1. I can not agree completely.
            Yes, the Cobra did not have outstanding characteristics on the vertical, but the available rate of climb, coupled with a solid structure, was enough to conduct an equal battle with the Germans on the verticals.
            Remember what A.A. wrote Pokryshkin in his memoirs: in the presence of a “schmit” on the tail of the AIP, the candles went out and “broke” the Cobra maneuver there (now I can’t remember exactly the maneuver itself, I remembered only expression 3 of the GSS), leaving the German in the tail.
            One of the veterans recalled that in a head-on attack with a divergence between the Germans and oblique half-loops, he and his comrades "cleaned up" gas (sometimes even with the release of guards), and then, after letting the Germans forward, they sat down on his fast and furious and shot him down.
            So the Cobra on the verticals was not so bad.
            2. It seems to me to say that the Kuban whatnot is the result of the operation of the Cobra will be wrong. The vertical separation of the groups was both a borrowing of this variant of construction from the Germans, so developed by our pilots as a result of the first months of the war.
            Guards regiments (including many on LaGG-3) at the KBF and the Black Sea Fleet were among the first to use the whatnot. Remember the memories of Igor Kaberov.
            1. fighter angel 5 March 2020 13: 34 New
              • 4
              • 1
              +3
              Yes, Dmitry, you can partly agree with you.
              LTH is one thing, and air combat is multifaceted, and not only LTH play a decisive role in it.
              But nevertheless, if such an ace as Pokryshkin went to the vertical from the "cob" on the "cobra", then he had a good speed margin. So he translated it in height. At the same time, the “Messer” most likely already drove pretty well, and he lost his speed, this is obvious. Otherwise, Alexander Ivanovich would not risk it. Here I give you 100%. He calculated every maneuver 10 steps forward, quickly and clearly, and only then did it.
              A frontal attack, with the care of a slanting loop, about which you say yes, is quite possible, again, if there is a reserve for speed.
              There has already gone more tactics than LTX. An oblique loop, well, this is not really a vertical maneuver, all the same ... Cobras could go to the vertical in the presence of a reserve of speed. But, the fact is that the "aerocobra" quickly lost speed after 1-2 such maneuvers. And to recruit it again, it took time, which, as a rule, was no longer in battle. And here is the “Messer", and our Yaks and Shops could still "swing the vertical" much more than the Cobra. The thrust-weight ratio of them all was higher than that of the cobra. But FV-190, this one on the vertical line was even worse than the cobra. Here she could fight with him on the vertical, having the advantage.
              1. dmmyak40 5 March 2020 23: 41 New
                • 3
                • 1
                +2
                Alexey, I completely agree.
                Here's another thing I forgot to write: when talking about engine power, we don’t forget that it alone is not enough. The question is in aerodynamics and how much the propeller will remove from engine power.
                Thanks to the layout, the Cobra was a very “clean” plane: looking at it, I recall the motto of the Soviet aircraft designer Neman (creator of the R-10 and several other machines): “Not a single protruding part in the air stream”. The result is obvious.
                As for the screw, the three-blade on most of the machines, and with 21 and 25 modifications - the four-blade, gave decent characteristics.
                1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 11: 05 New
                  • 0
                  • 1
                  -1
                  Dmitry, about aerodynamics - I fully support it.
                  The Cobra was an aerodynamically very “clean” plane.
                  There are no questions.
                  About Joseph Neman and aerodynamics, honestly, I'm not sure what he said ...
                  But God is with him. Bright memory to him.
                  Yes, he is the creator of the R-10, the PS-5 passenger on the basis of the R-10, but at first he still had the KhAI-1. Passenger high-speed aircraft, overtaking fighters.
                  Many of his design bureaus then went to Kharkov Aircraft Plant No. 135, and ended up in the design bureau to Pavel Sukhoi, who set up Su-2 production in Kharkov, and built the I-135 fighter (Su-1 / Su-3).
                  1. dmmyak40 6 March 2020 11: 30 New
                    • 1
                    • 0
                    +1
                    Yes, Joseph Neman had such a motto: just look at the planes to which he had a hand, and everything will become clear. winked Including and Su-1. The plane was interesting. If turbochargers were brought to mind, I think he would have gone in a small series as a high-altitude interceptor.
                    I still really like the I-21 Pashinin. Simply handsome - our answer to Herr Willie at 109. (and the cabin too).
                    But my favorite is TIS Polikarpova. What a handsome man! Flying battery with excellent flight data. How many lives could they save the distant bombers upon their return. Yes, and in the fleet he would have junkers with Heinkels patted great.
                    1. fighter angel 7 March 2020 12: 39 New
                      • 1
                      • 0
                      +1
                      Yes, Dmitry, about I-21, in some sources it is called -IP-21, I agree.
                      The first teardrop-shaped fighter. And, obviously, the first in the world!
                      Great 360-degree view in battle. Good, powerful weapons. And look at the wing shape, swept consoles! This car was ahead of time. No wonder Shakhurin personally oversaw her! However, as I.V. Stalin said: "Shakhurin is a mumble!" Apparently, this affected it here. He could not push it through, comrades were found more toothy and "more trying"! The car was too innovative, it took time to bring it to mind, but time just did not exist. The war was already on the verge ...
                      As for TIS, a good car. But how many of these have not yet reached the conveyor ... Remember V.Tairov- OKO-6, Ta-3, Ta-3bis, DIS (MiG-5) Mikoyan-Gurevich, Gr-1 Pyotr Grushin ... Work was underway, went searches, new cars were built and tested, concepts worked out ... Another year and a half, and the Red Army air forces would be on a completely different level. But, everything happened as it happened.
        4. Edvid 8 March 2020 02: 29 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          The USSR received 2397 King Cobra and one and a half thousand Spitfires, which were not sent to the front, under Lend-Lease; at the direction of Stalin, they were kept for the post-war period. These fighter models were superior to Soviet ones in terms of parameters. Especially in altitude, armament and range ...
      3. Cyril G ... April 19 2020 22: 03 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And where does the fact that the Germans did not climb to heights? MiG just allowed to use strike and run. Due to the superiority in speed, the choice of position for the attack.
        Target selection, dive acceleration, attack, and again using the acceleration energy to climb to a height. But the fact that the flight crew and their commanders used it incorrectly is a fact
    4. hohol95 4 March 2020 15: 34 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      1) when a shell or machine gun hits, it is clear what happened to them.

      Watching from what machine gun to shoot.
      They could get "Aerocobra" and later modifications of Soviet fighters.

      Spitfire forgotten.
      Officially, the arrival of Spitfires in the USSR began in the spring of 1943. (These were their first deliveries from Great Britain abroad). Modifications F.Mk.VB came to us then. They have already served fairly well in the Royal Air Force, and before the departure from England they underwent a major overhaul, during which part of the equipment and weapons were replaced. All aircraft were reduced to a single option "B". In this party, the USSR received 143 cars.
      All this set of features of Spitfire determined its future fate in the Soviet Air Force. Given the strong armament and good altitude data, some of the vehicles were sent to fighter air defense regiments, covering Moscow and Leningrad.
      Since February 1944, Mk. IX began to arrive in the USSR. In total, up to mid-July 1945, 1185 "nine" were delivered, of which 1183 in the low-altitude modification LF.Mk.lXE and two in high-altitude - HFMR.IX.
      Spitfires of both versions have undergone detailed study and testing at the Air Force Research Institute. Their results showed that the most rational, given the excellent altitude characteristics of the “nine” (even LF.Mk.lX calmly gained 12 500 m, and HF-13 100 m, which was significantly larger than the domestic Yak-9U and “squeezed” La-7) and the fact that, according to its data, the plane lagged behind Soviet fighters at medium and low altitudes, to use it mainly in air defense aviation. As of December 1944, there were already about 300 "nine" in the air defense units. These cars practically did not participate in battles. It is only known that on March 8, 1945, a pair of LF.Mk.lX intercepted and destroyed the German reconnaissance Ju 88 modification S (or T) flying at high altitude to Leningrad. For other Soviet fighters, this aircraft was unavailable.

      You forget that the fighting on the Eastern Front was conducted at low and medium altitudes. And to make special high-altitude interceptors or a fighter of high altitude (Su-1) because of problems with the engine did not work! And then a pressurized cabin was not provided for the fighter.
      1. Old Horseradish 4 March 2020 16: 28 New
        • 2
        • 12
        -10
        Quote: hohol95
        You forget that the fighting on the Eastern Front was conducted at low and medium altitudes.

        Actually, I wrote about high-altitude scouts like JUNKER-88, who calmly spied at an altitude of 8-9 thousand meters on Soviet rear. And nobody knocked them down. As for the YAK, to bring down the same Heinkel 111, for example, was, to put it mildly, a problematic task. Lugansky described the battle when a single Heinkel shot down two Yak fighters (quite calmly) and only Lugansky with great difficulty managed to knock him out, and then, after the shooter ran out of ammunition. Read the memoirs of our aces.
        1. hohol95 4 March 2020 16: 50 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Chastali. Yes. And how many radar stations were in the USSR? Such a strong aircraft as the He-111 required more serious weapons for one 20 mm cannon and two rifle-caliber machine guns. How many British have achieved with their batteries simple "Browning" against the He-111? In addition, the He-111 was constantly upgraded and its defensive armament changed from 3- [MG-17 machine guns to one 20-mm MGFF gun with 180 shells in the nose (sometimes another 7.9 mm MG-15 machine gun), one 13-mm machine gun MG-131 in the upper installation (electrified turret on R-1), two 7.9-mm machine gun MG-81 with 1000 rounds in the rear of the lower gondola, one MG-15 or MG-81 with 1000 rounds or twin MG-81 with 500 cartridges on the barrel in the side windows.
          What modification did Lugansky fight with?
          1. Old Horseradish 4 March 2020 19: 27 New
            • 0
            • 6
            -6
            Quote: hohol95
            What modification did Lugansky fight with?

            It’s better to ask him. Read his memoirs. In my opinion it was 1943. He describes how he "watered machine-guns on the wings where the fuel tanks were located, but they did not burn."
        2. gurzuf 4 March 2020 16: 56 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          By chance did you mean not Junkers-86? The Germans did not have "Junkers." Or were they? wink
        3. hohol95 4 March 2020 17: 07 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Hero of the Soviet Union Guard Captain Klimov P. D.
          On October 30, 1942, I was paired with a young pilot on Kittyhaw planes with the task of preventing reconnaissance aircraft from entering the port area. After gaining a height of 5000 m and establishing a radio connection with the ground, we proceeded to patrol ...

          That day, having prevented two nine Yu-88s from flying to the port of Murmansk, he shot down 2 Yu-88s. It is clear that his car was carrying 6x12,7 mm Browning. The Soviet pilot perfectly managed his car.
          Hero of the Soviet Union Guard Major Motuz I.F.
          On August 13, 1942, taking off on an airplane, the Yak-7b entered into battle with 4 Me-109. Shot down 2 Me-109. He was wounded, but landed at his airfield.
        4. shura7782 4 March 2020 20: 01 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          You old hell, make sure again before writing
          JUNKER-88, which calmly spied at an altitude of 8-9 thousand meters on Soviet rear.
          For example, would get acquainted with TTX at least Mig-1 and Lagg-3. At war quietly rummage only sick on the head. Fly, it does not matter to whom, for the front line, it’s not in a car to the country to drive for vegetables.
        5. fighter angel 5 March 2020 13: 55 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          Horseradish,
          if you are lying, then do not lie.
          Vladimir Lavrinenkov, who shot down the largest number of twin-engine bombers, flew and shot them down for some reason precisely on the Yaks.
          Probably, Vladimir Dmitrievich did not know that this was "problematic"?
    5. dmmyak40 4 March 2020 16: 39 New
      • 10
      • 2
      +8
      The man decided to say his "weighty" word:
      the best aces flew on American AeroCobra aircraft. It was they who had big accounts of victories.
      .
      And what did these guys fly on?
      1. Kozhedub - 64.
      2. Evstigneev - 52 + 3
      3. Vorozheykin - 47 + 13
      4. Popkov 40.
      5. Serov - 39 + 6
      6. Lavrinenkov - 36 + 7
      7. Nitso 34 + 6
      8. Lugansk 34 + 1
      9. Stepanenko 32 + 9
      10. Zelenov - 30 + 12
      11. Golovachev - 30
    6. CommanderDIVA 4 March 2020 17: 02 New
      • 5
      • 0
      +5
      Twice GSS Vorozheykin fought in the second half of the Second World War on Yak7, Yak3, GSS Skomorokhov fought on La 5, and these are our recognized aces. To intercept the German high-altitude scouts, our pilots removed oxygen equipment to reduce the mass of fighters since the battles were fought at medium altitudes, well described in the memoirs of Vorozheykin "Soldiers of the Sky"
      1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 11: 43 New
        • 2
        • 1
        +1
        CommanderDIVA
        I’ll supplement you a bit and clarify.
        Vorozheikin also on the Yak-9, and fought on the Yak-9T.
        Along with Koldunov, he is our best Yak-AS.
        And Skomorokhov started on LaGG-3, then moved to La-5, La-5FN.
        One of the best Asov Shopkeepers
    7. boris epstein 4 March 2020 18: 21 New
      • 3
      • 5
      -2
      Both N. Kozhedub and his regiment flew on La-5. Twice Hero of the Soviet Union BF Safonov and the regiment that he commanded generally flew I-16-24 (it was equipped with 2 ShVAK-20 automatic cannons and 2 ShKAS machine guns ). Moreover, it flew so much that one plane simply wore out and was given a new Ishachok. And he died on Hurricane, jammed the engine (report on the radio of Safonov himself). Twice Hero of the Soviet Union Stepan Suprun flew on I-16. The Normandy-Niemen regiment flew on the Yaks and the French pilots loved them. The I-16 had an advantage over the Me-109 in climbing, why a competent Soviet pilot tried to translate the battle with Messer to the vertical. Messer, by virtue of a more powerful motor, had an advantage in horizontal combat, and by virtue of a larger weight, in diving. 2 ShVAK-20 guns were installed on 12, 17,24,27,28,29 I-16 series. On the Yak-3,7P, 9 stood 1 ShVAK-20 cannon, on LaGG-3, La-5,7 were the ShVAK-20 guns.
      1. Mik13 4 March 2020 20: 00 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        Quote: boris epstein
        And he (Safonov) died on Hurricane, jammed the engine (report on the radio of Safonov himself).
        On Kittyhawk same (P-40).

        Quote: boris epstein
        Twice Hero of the Soviet Union Stepan Suprun flew on I-16.
        Stepan Suprun fought and died on the MiG-3 in July 1941

        Quote: boris epstein
        The Normandy-Niemen regiment flew on the Yaks and the French pilots loved them.
        Given the history of the origin of the engine, the Yak was very similar to the French fighters. Probably liked it for that. The alternative to the Yakam in 1942 was either LaGG-3, or something on Lend-Lease, like Hurricane or P-40. So the choice is obvious.

        Quote: boris epstein
        The I-16 had an advantage over the Me-109 in climbing, why a competent Soviet pilot tried to translate the battle with Messer to the vertical.
        So it depends on which I-16 and what kind of Bf ...
        So the Bf 109e really has a climb rate comparable to the I-16 type 24. (930 m / min versus 880 m / min for the I-16) Only Emily was removed from service in 1941, and the Bf 109f climb 1300 m / min .
        That is why in all memoirs, pilots write that they used mainly horizontal maneuver. We stood in a circle and tried to fight back.
      2. dmmyak40 4 March 2020 20: 03 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        The I-16 had an advantage over the Me-109 in climbing, why a competent Soviet pilot tried to translate the battle with Messer to the vertical.
        Please tell me, did you copy it somewhere or is it your own thoughts? For I am for the first time in decades diving into the topic of aviation, incl. combat, I learn that the I-16 had an advantage over the "Shmit" in rate of climb. And about the transfer of the pilot of the I-16 battle to the vertical ... it's just a masterpiece.
        Messer, by virtue of a more powerful motor, had an advantage in horizontal combat, and by virtue of a greater weight, in diving.
        The second part of the Marlezon Ballet ...
        Conclusion: in the comment, the opposite is true.
    8. Old Horseradish 4 March 2020 19: 46 New
      • 2
      • 14
      -12
      All fans of plywood and wood are dedicated:
      “But still there was one American plane, which towards the end of the war became one of the symbols of the dominance of the Soviet pilots in the sky. Bell P-39 Airacobra - aces machine.
      Such a loud epithet is not accidental. Pokryshkin, Gulaev, Rechkalov, Kutakhov and many other masters of air combat at different times flew on the R-39. Pokryshkin, even in his memoirs, called the “aerocobra” his favorite airplane, indeed, because forty-eight out of fifty-nine aircraft shot down by him fell precisely on flights in an American fighter.

      I liked the “Aerocobra” for its forms and, mainly, powerful weapons. Shooting down enemy planes was something - a 37-millimeter cannon, two large-caliber high-speed machine guns and four normal-caliber machine guns at a thousand rounds per minute each. My mood did not deteriorate even after warning the pilots about the dangerous features of the aircraft breaking into a tailspin due to rear centering. "
      PS If we take the statistics of sorties, then the smallest losses among the fighters suffered "AeroCobra". The best booking, review, excellent radio station, powerful weapons. As for the Yak-3, because of him Pokryshkin quarreled with designer Yakovlev. Because Pokryshkin said that "on your plane it will be difficult to shoot down bombers due to weak weapons." You can continue to watch modern films of the Pharisee of Medina about the war.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Dmitry V. 5 March 2020 10: 12 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Old Horseradish
        take statistics of sorties, the smallest casualties among the fighter aircraft were carried by "Aerocobra"


        Here you need to understand why the losses on the Aero Cobra were lower - because the Guards regiments, pilots with combat experience, were re-equipped on Aero Cobras.
    9. illuminat 5 March 2020 13: 39 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Old Horseradish
      1) when a shell or machine gun hits, it is clear what happened to them.
      Everything happened, not depending on the material.

      Quote: Old Horseradish
      2) the casing could swell and come off due to poor-quality paintwork.
      No, not from "poor-quality paintwork." Either excess of permissible loads, or poor-quality gluing of the skin and frame (marriage - it is also not from the material at all).

      Quote: Old Horseradish
      4) German high-altitude scouts often quite fearlessly flew into the deep rear of our troops
      To the rear of “not ours,” they flew in exactly the same way.

      Quote: Old Horseradish
      They could get "Aerocobra" and later modifications of Soviet fighters.
      "Aero Cobra" just could not get them. The ceiling did not allow.

      Quote: Old Horseradish
      But the most infamous thing was that pilots were forced to fight according to outdated charters and those who did not fly were forced to fight. I mean most commissars
      It was not commissars who made them, but commanders of all levels. The most infamous thing is when an ignoramus undertakes to condemn veterans, on the basis of his own stupidity.
  7. Dmitry V. 4 March 2020 15: 02 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    About the supercharger of the aircraft engine M-105
    The motor had a two-speed drive centrifugal supercharger (PTsN) with gear ratios of 7,85 and 10, to increase power at low and medium altitudes.

    These are heights of 3000 and 5000 m. The M105 engine and its modifications have been optimized to deliver more power at low and medium altitudes.

    Yak-3 is a weight compromise in wartime. Maximum weight reduction for glider, armor, fuel, weapons and ammunition.
    Well, it was not possible to create, during the war years, a powerful and reliable engine - they squeezed everything that was possible from the M-105, the M-107 (VK-107) and its modifications.
    The Yak-3, as a fighter made of what was “at hand” with the designers during the war (technology, engine, materials), is a brilliant machine that performed the tasks assigned to the designer.
    1. hohol95 4 March 2020 15: 14 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      The Yak-3, as a fighter made of what was “at hand” with the designers during the war (technology, engine, materials), is a brilliant machine that performed the tasks assigned to the designer.

      But then he appeared as a result of the "evolution" of the Yak-s. And he entered the army in 1944.
    2. dmmyak40 4 March 2020 20: 12 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      In general, we had a blockage with turbocompressors: Treskin, like, worked on them. Until the end of the war they didn’t bring it to mind. It’s good that they managed to create a nuclear bomb, otherwise there would be problems with heavy bombers and their escort at altitude.
  8. parusnik 4 March 2020 17: 04 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    Here in the Constitution they are going to fix the “historical truth” .. If they fix it, will they be planted for films like “Fighters” and the like, or will they understand and forgive? laughing
    1. Dmitry V. 5 March 2020 10: 16 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      Quote: parusnik
      Here in the Constitution are going to consolidate the "historical truth"


      If they can give a definition of what is "historical truth."
      No source can give the only true picture.
      One thing is true - we won the war.
  9. Ros 56 4 March 2020 17: 24 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    The planes at the beginning of the war were indeed wooden except for the attachment points of power elements, engine mounts, landing gears and control systems, but this in no way can characterize its flying and, especially, fighting qualities. Cracked, yes it was, but they flew and beat the vaunted Nazi aces. And even on the IL-2, the entire rear of the fuselage was wooden. But what did Chkalov do on I-16? And on Ishachki they shot down both bombers and fighters. A plane by plane, the main thing is who controlled this plane.
    1. boris epstein 4 March 2020 18: 35 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      All Tupolev's planes (initially, starting with ANT-1) were all-metal. Likewise, all-metal aircraft of Petlyakov, Sukhoi, Arkhangelsky, Beriev, Ermolaev. All-metal was DB-3F Ilyushin, who bombed Berlin in 1941.
      1. Ros 56 4 March 2020 18: 39 New
        • 1
        • 2
        -1
        We are talking about fighter jets, and I know what is better from what I’m better than you, at least not worse, since 68 I have been fond of this business.
    2. Cyril G ... April 19 2020 22: 09 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      In the USSR Air Force plywood I-16 release 1939/40. served until 1945. The air regiment in Kamchatka until the spring of 1945 flew them ..
  10. Goldmitro 4 March 2020 18: 58 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Quote: Malyuta
    All current war films are like splint, almost none of them have credibility,

    Quote: Malyuta
    Everything is fake. Not only that, many films carry an obviously anti-Soviet thought load, and I immediately want to ask why and for whose money you shoot these productions?

    As an example of how to make films about the Great Patriotic War, I would recommend a film to our modern filmmakers "In war as in war" of 1968, if they really want to make a true film! But the Oscars and other prizes will not be given for him - there are no naked asses and other dirty things, and Russian soldiers there do not correspond to the image propagated by the West today and not without the help of our film-makers!
    1. Malyuta 4 March 2020 21: 36 New
      • 6
      • 0
      +6
      Quote: Goldmitro
      As an example of how to make films about the Great Patriotic War, I would recommend to our modern filmmakers the film "In War as in War" of 1968, if they really want to make a true film!

      Thank you, Comrade! hi good drinks It's my favorite movie!!!! I think that in this series the masterpiece is "They fought for their homeland!"
  11. Old Horseradish 4 March 2020 21: 23 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    Why, do you like watching these films more?
    1. illuminat 5 March 2020 14: 41 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Old Horseradish
      Why, do you like watching these films more?

      Awesome movie, thanks for the link! I-3 live, real, stunned (at 12.35)! Not to mention the I-5.
      The film is much better than The Fighters.
  12. Nitarius 5 March 2020 05: 14 New
    • 3
    • 5
    -2
    directors of liberals .. LONG TIME NEEDED to beat along the ridge .. they hate the USSR so much that .. sorry not 37 years! otherwise many wouldn’t interfere with the world to their ancestors!
  13. 2112vda 5 March 2020 06: 42 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Quote: Old Horseradish
    They could get "Aerocobra"

    You are mistaken. The reason why the Aerocobra was not popular with the Western Allies was in the Allison motor, which had a lower altitude compared to the Merlin clone installed on the P-51. On the R-38 stood the Allison with turbochargers, on the R-47 there was also a turbocharger. The USSR had a small number of high-altitude Spitfires used in air defense. AeroCobras have proven themselves well at low and medium altitudes. The trouble with modern Russia is that amateurs took charge of it, including in the information sphere. So we have what we have.
    1. Old Horseradish 5 March 2020 08: 40 New
      • 2
      • 10
      -8
      Well, I will throw Pokryshkin’s memoirs in the trash where he described how he shot down high-altitude scouts and will wait for your memoirs. First, read the memoirs of our aces, but I didn’t come up with it myself, but wrote from their words.
  14. sanik2020 5 March 2020 12: 16 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    But the most infamous thing was that pilots were forced to fight according to outdated charters and those who did not fly were forced to fight. I mean most commissioners (although there were exceptions)

    All charters are written in the blood and time in which you live. There are no charters written once and for all.
    And at the expense of the commissars, it was just that most of them were always in the forefront, it was just a shame for those people not to be in front of everyone, although it was scary like everyone else.
    Just unlike us, they were ideological and conscientious, I remember from early childhood.
  15. Pavel73 5 March 2020 13: 59 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Creating wooden fighters was a very wise and far-sighted decision. We knew that if war happened, we could be left without aluminum. And there are many forests, and they are out of enemy reach. As a result, the wooden La-5FN turned out to be a worthy rival to the Bf-109. Which, incidentally, near the end of the war, the Germans also had to do partially wooden.
  16. Shiden 5 March 2020 23: 33 New
    • 2
    • 7
    -5
    Of course, I apologize but whoever read the memoirs of pilots, designers, and testers. For example, before the war, a small number of BB-22 YAK-2 YAK-4 were released; all Yakovlev’s cars were metal-derivative. So, at the beginning of the war, only a few could fly into the air, you know why, over the winter all the derivative details became worthless. And with the wings on the YAKs there are also written a lot in memoirs. So, to argue that the YAK, LAGG, LA aircraft are masterpieces of world aircraft I would not.
    1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 11: 31 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      shiden.
      When you learn to write normally in Russian, then come.
      In the meantime, and d and those where NOT TO BE! Read memories of METAL-DERIVY!
      1. Shiden 6 March 2020 18: 49 New
        • 1
        • 3
        -2
        Which, in addition to grammar, is not something to argue with. Although it is good that you recalled the memory and memoirs of the participants in the war.
        1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 22: 01 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Go case and declension teach DERIVY!
          And how "not" and "neither" is spelled correctly.
          It can be seen quite badly with the enemy on the information front, if already such slag out of season started to be broadcast ...
          1. Salty 6 March 2020 22: 12 New
            • 1
            • 1
            0
            Quote: fighter angel
            Go case and declension, DERIVY

            Invite him to conjugate the club. And after all he springs up, he will become with him. laughing
          2. Shiden 6 March 2020 23: 16 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Well, you are not in a position to argue, to refute my comment. You did not accidentally watered as an employee in the army. There are a lot of words and the result is 0, as well as the mind. And yes, Russian is not my native language.
            1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 23: 20 New
              • 0
              • 1
              -1
              Ill, you made a mistake with the address.
              Nonsense refuted elsewhere.
              And here it is simply fixed and sent "wherever you go" ...
              1. Shiden 7 March 2020 08: 27 New
                • 2
                • 2
                0
                So you think that people who tested, fought, wrote nonsense. You at least read the history of the adoption of the aircraft YAK, MIG.LAGG. So it may become clear that the aircraft were not as good as they presented us during the Soviet era.
                1. fighter angel 7 March 2020 09: 31 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  You are talking nonsense.
                  Those people do not hide behind, will not work for you.
                  I can tell you the story of adopting aircraft in the first person.
                  With all the details and faces.
                  Therefore, I briefly summarize here for you.
                  The Lavochkin and Yaki, namely La-5FN, La-7, Yak-3, Yak-9U / M / P, are the best front-line fighters of the Second World War. LaGG-3 - the first in the world and the best combat aircraft made of composite material - "delta wood", ahead of its time. MiG-3 is the best in the world, at the beginning of the war high-altitude, high-speed fighter.
    2. AndVikt 7 March 2020 22: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      I remember the British had such a high-speed twin-engine aircraft Mosquito. Most often, in reconnaissance execution, they flew without armament, since they avoided pursuit due to high speed. The highlight was, if my memory serves me, that they were wooden. This is the question of which is better wood or metal.
  17. bbss 6 March 2020 13: 08 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Quote: Old Horseradish
    I wrote about high-altitude scouts like JUNKER-88

    What is called "heard the ringing ...". They had a high-altitude reconnaissance Junkers-86 ... But this is a different machine.
  18. CommanderDIVA 6 March 2020 14: 03 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    The best Soviet-made fighter aircraft for thrust-weight ratio were the Lavochkin family aircraft, the queues of two ShVAK guns mounted on La 5 were more than enough for all Germans, well described in the memoirs of the GSS Skomorokhov, Yakovlev’s experiments with 37 and 45 mm on Yaks showed their insolvency, the gun’s heavy weight and limited ammunition played in the red, Yak 3 top creation Yakovlev Design Bureau
    1. fighter angel 6 March 2020 22: 16 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      I agree about Lavochkin.
      And about Yakovlev, in vain you are. Its Yak-9T with a 37-mm cannon, a fully completed and mass-produced modification of the Yak-9. It was on it that our aces such as Stepanenko, Vybornov, and Vorozheikin fought and shot down the Fritz, by the way, also flew the Yak-9T for some time.
      In addition to the magnificent Yak-3, there was no less cool Yak-9U with the M-107 engine.
      Appeared at the front in the spring and summer of 1944. You will begin to object that the M-107 engine was unreliable, overheated, failed, etc. But the facts are stubborn. Nikolai Yakubovich unearthed in the archives data on the operation of the Yak-9U M-107 in the 163 Red Banner IAP. So, in this regiment, the technical staff strictly complied with the M-107 operating instructions, and the IAS officers carefully monitored this. And here is the result: M-107 ENGINES IN 163 The Red Banner IAP WENT OUT FOR 120-130 HOURS, INSTEAD OF RESOURCE RESERVES 100. How do you like this fact? And the flight crew considered their Yak-9U with the M-107 to be the BEST DOMESTIC FIGHTERS! Details of this are in the books of N. Yakubovich "Yakovlev. Iron Aircraft Designer" and "Yakovlev Fighters."
      1. CommanderDIVA 7 March 2020 07: 30 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        In the memoirs of Vorozheykin “Soldiers of Heaven” there are no references to the fact that he flew on the Yak 9t; in the memoirs of the GSS Zimin “Fighters” there is a mention of the Yak 9t but with a 45 mm gun and not 37 mm, but thanks for the info