Military Review

Combat aircraft. The amazing fate of a training fighter

139

Sometimes the fate of airplanes can easily surpass the most badass detective story. This happened with the I-26 aircraft, more precisely, with its training version I-26UTI or UTI-26.


It was decided to design and build this aircraft in accordance with the decision of the Government of the USSR of March 4, 1940. That is, even before the adoption of the MiG-3, LaGG-3 and Yak-1 fighters.

It is quite normal to take care of an airplane that will become a training class for pilots who will have to be retrained for new technology. The decision on the I-26 was made mainly because the design of this aircraft initially allowed it to be converted into a two-seater trainer aircraft at low cost.

In addition, of the three groups of designers (Mikoyan and Gurevich, Lavochkin and Gorbunov with Gudkov, Yakovlev), only Yakovlev had experience in building training aircraft, and his UT-1 and UT-2 became "ducklings", classic training machines that gave a ticket to the sky not one thousand fighters.


UT-1


UT-2

So it is absolutely not surprising that the training aircraft, on which Soviet pilots will be retrained for new equipment, will have to be born within the walls of the Yakovlev Design Bureau.

But who would have thought that an aircraft for transporting and training flight personnel would later turn into a combat vehicle and play a more important role than the one that was originally intended for it.

How did it happen that the two-seater trainer aircraft became a fighter again? Moreover, during the time that the Yak-7, as a fighter, was on the assembly line, 18 modifications were developed, of which 10 were serially built. A total of 6 399 copies of the aircraft were built.


The main reason for the massive rework was the beginning of the Great Patriotic War and the huge losses of the Red Army Air Force in the first months of the war. The losses had to be compensated for, so an unprecedented decision was made - to convert the two-seater planes back into single-seater ones and send them to the front.

The Yak-7UTI is a serial training fighter with dual control, built according to the drawings of the prototype UTI-26-2.


The aircraft has been modified to simplify the design. The retractable tail wheel was replaced with a conventional "crutch", the engine operating speed was reduced from 2700 rpm to 2350 rpm, and one 7,62-mm ShKAS machine gun with 500 rounds of ammunition was left from the armament. This was enough for the shooting practice.

The Yak-7UTI made its first flight on May 18, 1941, and the aircraft was mass-produced from June to November. All 186 aircraft were manufactured out of the planned 600.

Yak-7UTI became a forge of personnel for the Red Army Air Force. All pilots, regardless of which aircraft they subsequently flew, LaGG-3, Yak-1, MiG-3 or further models, went through school on the Yak-7UTI.

But in addition to training work, the Yak-7UTI was used as a reconnaissance and spotter. The application turned out to be successful, a good view from the cockpit allowed for visual observation, and the high speed made it difficult for the air defense to work on the aircraft. The Yak-7UTI scouts were also used by representatives of the command for personal flights with the aim of reconnaissance of the terrain and the location of troops, both their own and the enemy.

Yak-7 with M-105PA engine and VISH-61P propeller


Combat aircraft. The amazing fate of a training fighter

This was the conversion of the Yak-7UTI two-seat training fighter into a single-seat combat fighter.

The alteration was carried out at the plant number 301 in the Moscow region of Khimki by the forces of the plant brigades and the brigade of the Yakovlev OBK under the leadership of the leading engineer K. B. Sinelnikov.

A lot of work was done on the aircraft during the alteration (it is difficult to call it modernization):
- the chair and controls were removed from the rear cockpit, an armored backrest was installed;
- dismantled the photo-machine gun;
- conventional gas tanks were replaced with protected ones and a system for filling the tanks with carbon dioxide from a cylinder was installed;
- installed a ShVAK motor-gun with 120 rounds of ammunition and another ShKAS machine gun. Ammunition of machine guns was brought to 1500 rounds;
- guides for launching the RS-82 were installed under the wings, plus they were equipped with electrical equipment for launching shells.

Almost a miracle happened: in comparison with the Yak-1, the single-seat Yak-7 has become more perfect! The centering shift improved the longitudinal stability, the change in the elevator and stabilizer design improved controllability, the empty cab made it possible to transfer operational loads or technical personnel when relocating parts, or to place an additional fuel tank.


The improvements were reported to Yakovlev, who reported upstairs. As a result of the NKAP, by two orders and two resolutions of the State Defense Committee, the aircraft began to be mass-produced at two plants at once: in Khimki at plant No. 301 and in Novosibirsk at plant No. 315.

At the same time, a project was developed to install a more promising M-7 engine on the Yak-107.

The aircraft showed itself very positively in operation. Especially impressive were his anti-screw abilities. To get the plane out of the spin, it was enough to put the pedals and the stick in neutral position and the plane exited. In this regard, the Yak-7 was much better than the LaGG-3. The suspension of rockets did not worsen the aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft, and the good stability provided the Yak-7 with less dispersion than that of the MiG-3 and LaGG-3 when firing at targets on the ground.

Yak-7A



A very decent modification of the fighter mainly consisted in the radioification of the fighter. RSI-4 "Malyutka" receivers and RSI-3 "Eagle" transmitters began to be mounted on all aircraft.

The tail wheel was returned to the design, which was removed by pneumatics into the fuselage. Installed additional flaps, which covered in flight the niches for the wheels and landing gear.

In place of the machine-gun belts link retractors, link collectors were installed, which made it possible to eliminate the holes in the hood and ensure the preservation of the links for reuse. Reduced the radii of the grooves for machine guns in the engine hood.

Installed a system for filling gas tanks with exhaust gases from the engine. The pneumatic reloading system of the gun was dismantled, leaving only the mechanical one.

The armament of the Yak-7A was left the same, a 20-mm ShVAK cannon and two ShKAS 7,62-mm machine guns.

Yak-7A was produced at the plant number 153 in January-May 1942. A total of 227 aircraft were built.


Production aircraft showed worse performance than the original I-26-2 model. The weight of the aircraft increased by 73 kg, the speed dropped to 476 km / h at the ground and to 550 km / h at an altitude of 5000 meters. The time to climb 5000 m has increased from 5,9 to 6,8 minutes.

The Yak-7A performed well against the FW-190A and Me-109F. The 434th IAP (later the 32nd Guards IAP) equipped with these aircraft shot down 163 enemy aircraft during its stay in the skies of Stalingrad.

The high survivability of the Yak-7A was noted. Multiple bullet and projectile hits did not lead to fatal damage, and after repairs in the field, the fighters continued combat work.

Yak-7B



Further development of the Yak-7A with the M-105PA engine. Notable for more powerful weapons and aerodynamic improvements.

Two 12,7 mm UBS machine guns were added to the ShVAK motor-gun by enormous efforts. The ammunition for machine guns was unequal, 260 rounds for the left machine gun, 140 for the right. In addition, 6 RS-82 rockets or two bombs weighing from 25 to 100 kg could be placed under the wings. Since May 1942, Yak-7B aircraft began to be produced without guides for rockets.

A huge amount of work has been done on aerodynamic improvement of the aircraft. The air supply ducts were sealed, the finish of the flaps, hatches, and hood sections was improved. Improved water and oil cooler tunnels have been installed.

The engine revs were increased to the original 2700 rpm.

As a result, the flight characteristics of the Yak-7B, despite the alteration of the hood associated with the installation of large-caliber machine guns, the increase in mass and the installation of the mast of the radio station, turned out to be higher than that of the Yak-7A.


Enhanced armament brought the Yak-7B to the lead in terms of the weight of a second salvo. ShVAK and two UBS fired a salvo of 2,72 kg per second. This was higher than that of all Soviet fighters. Yak-1, Yak-7 and Yak-7A were inferior by 1,57 times, LaGG-3 by 1,36 times, MiG-3 and in general by 2,56 times. But more interesting was the superiority of the Yak-7B over German fighters. The Me-109F was 2,87 times inferior, the Me-109G-2 (with three firing points) 1,62 times. The only one who had the upper hand was, of course, the FW-190.

Considering that with the Yak-7B, work was constantly carried out to improve flight performance (more modern radio stations, radio semi-compass), and the improvements did not affect the flight characteristics and combat data of the fighter.


Significant merit in this belongs to the Yakovlev Design Bureau employees, who step by step improved the design of the aircraft.

Naturally, within the walls of the Flight Research Institute and TsAGI, comparisons were made between the Yak-7B and classmates, both Soviet-made and German equipment, both purchased before the war, and captured, and received under Lend-Lease. Based on the research, it was concluded that the Yak-7B with the M-105PA engine is not only not inferior, but also superior to many samples of foreign technology.

Yak-7B aircraft proved to be very effective in the skies of the Battle of Stalingrad and in the Kuban.


Assessing the effectiveness of the Yak-7B, many experts, based on the analysis of air battles, concluded that of all Soviet fighters by 1943, the Yak-7B was the best.

The Yak-7B calmly conducted air battles with the Me-109 in the horizontal and vertical directions. In the horizontal direction, the Yak-7B and Me-109F had the same speed, but the Yak-7B easily entered the tail of the Me-109F in horizontal turns. On the vertical, the Yak-7B lagged behind the German fighter, as well as the Me-109F had an advantage in gaining speed.

The main disadvantages of the Yak-7B were considered:
- Excessive weight, which affected the speed gain;
- high resistance due to water and oil radiators;
- there was practically no backward review;
- poor celluloid in the lantern, which makes observation difficult and makes it impossible to fly with a closed hood;
- a weak engine for such a mass;
- when shooting, you have to remove your hand from the throttle sector and transfer it to the trigger, which worsens the control of the aircraft and knocks down the accuracy of the sight;
- the plane requires long and good take-off sites.

The Yak-7B began to feel somewhat better in the sky after a new, more powerful M-105PF engine, with a capacity of 1180 hp, was installed on it. Plus, once again, we have worked on aerodynamics.


The best way to express evolution in numbers is to compare the plane with the enemy's machines. The Yak-7B with the M-105PF had an advantage over the three-point Me-109G-2 at the ground by 23 km / h and at an altitude of 1000 m - by 16 km / h. However, already at an altitude of 5000 m, the Me-109G-2 surpassed the Yak-7B M-105PF in speed by 24 km / h. Above 5000 m, the Messerschmitt's speed advantage reached 80 km / h.

The Yak-7B with the M-105PF engine was produced at two factories, # 153 in Novosibirsk and # 82 in Moscow. The planes of the Moscow plant turned out to be a little heavier (the difference was 25-35 kg) and had a speed lower by about 15 km / h.
Only two factories in the period from May 1942 to July 1944 produced 5 aircraft.

At the end of 1942, experimental work was carried out by the Yakovlev Design Bureau's technical team to replace the glazing of the Yak-7. Pilots everywhere complained about the lack of backward visibility from the Yak-7, which gave obvious advantages to the enemy. The Yakovlev Design Bureau responded by sending the required number of trained specialists to the 42 IAP, which operated as part of the North-Western Front.

The OKB employees cut off the gargrot directly in the field and installed a teardrop-shaped lantern.


The aircraft converted in this way were tested by the pilots of the 42nd IAP in combat conditions, accompanied by bombers. The converted aircraft made 242 sorties, took part in 6 air battles, shooting down 4 enemy aircraft and losing one of their aircraft. The cockpit with a drop-shaped lantern received positive feedback from the pilots and was recommended for use on all fighters of the Red Army Air Force.

Directly at the front, a brigade of the OKB A.S. Yakovlev carried out work to improve the view back from the Yak-7 M-105PF cockpit - the gargrot was cut off, the lantern was given a drop-like shape. From November 17 to December 13, 1942 on the North-Western Front in 42 IAP (commander F.I.Shinkarenko) 240 IAD 6 VA military tests for combat use were carried out.

Test results: 242 sorties, 6 air battles, 4 enemy aircraft were shot down, including: Me-109F - 2, He-126 - 1 and FW-189 - 1; their losses - one Yak-7B. The cockpit with improved visibility received a positive assessment from the pilots and was recommended for use on all fighter aircraft.

Another modification of the Yak-7B with the M-105PF was put on stream. It was called the Yak-7B MPVO and was intended for service in air defense units. These aircraft were equipped with an RPK-10 radio compass and a landing light installed in the left wing. In total, about 300 vehicles of this modification were produced.

Yak-7D (long-range)



It was a big job of converting the Yak-7 into a long-range reconnaissance aircraft with an observer (passenger) or with an aerial camera in the rear cockpit. Initially, a Yak-7V fuselage with an M-105PF engine was used. The landing gear, tail unit and tail wheel were taken from the Yak-7B, the wing was redesigned.

To ensure adequate flight range, the aircraft was equipped with 11 fuel tanks with a total capacity of 925 liters, which required a new large wing. Eight gas tanks were installed in the wings, the rest in the fuselage. The oil tank was made larger by 65 liters. Installed in a regular place behind the engine.

The new wing had the same area as the standard one (17,15 sq. M.), But a smaller span, 9,74 m instead of 10 meters. The wing tips were made less rounded; in the future, it was planned to install slats.

The standard equipment of the Yak-7D did not differ from the Yak-7B. The photo reconnaissance version was equipped with an AFA-B aerial camera. The camera had a remote control, brought to the control stick and could take 50 photographs from an altitude of 8000 meters. In addition, the aircraft was equipped with an oxygen supply system for the pilot, which made it possible to stay at an altitude of 8 meters for up to two hours.

To lighten the aircraft, the armament was reduced. The machine guns were completely removed, the ShVAK cannon ammunition was halved, to 60 shells.

The result is a long-range multifunctional reconnaissance aircraft.


The design of the aircraft made it possible to easily re-equip the aircraft for solving various tasks. Installation of AFA-B took 5-6 minutes, dismantling - about 1 minute. Installation of the chair for the observer-spotter - 5 minutes, dismantling the chair - 3 minutes.

There was also a minus: refueling the plane took a very long time. Since the wing tanks were connected in series, it took a while for the gasoline to overflow from the throat at the end of the wing to the tanks at the root. Refueling could take up to 1 hour.

Naturally, the equipment of the second cabin, oxygen tanks, an increase in the amount of fuel and oil could not but affect the flight performance. The maximum speed of the heavier Yak-7D dropped by 30-40 km / h in all ranges. The time to climb 5 meters has increased by almost a minute, and the practical ceiling has also become 000 meters less.


However, in terms of range and duration of flight, the Yak-7D was unmatched. The flight range was 2 km, the duration was 285 hours.

For comparison, the Fw.189 reconnaissance spotter flew much closer (665 km) and "hung" in the sky for much less (2,5 hours). Although the blood spoiled our soldiers in full.

Interestingly, after a series of tests, which passed quite normally, the plane was not presented for state tests. Yakovlev preferred not to risk it and ordered to stop all work on the Yak-7D.

However, the work was not lost in vain, all the developments in layout and equipment were subsequently used to create long-range fighters Yak-9D and Yak-9DD.

Yak-7M (modified)



This is a very interesting work, which went parallel to the first conversion of the Yak-7UTI into a combat aircraft. the work was carried out at plant number 21 in Saratov by the forces of plant specialists and a group of engineers from the Yakovlev Design Bureau, who were sent to the plant to help establish the production of the Yak-1.

The Yak-7M was a standard Yak-7UTI with an M-105PA engine. The wingspan was reduced to 9,74 m (the same one born within the walls of the Yakovlev Design Bureau under the use of slats), automatic slats were installed, the area of ​​the landing flaps was increased from 1,77 to 2,15 sq. M.

The main changes concerned weapons.

ShKAS machine guns were dismantled along with cartridge boxes. The ShVAK motor-gun with 120 rounds of ammunition remained.

At the roots of the wings, two more ShVAK cannons were installed with an ammunition load of 110 shells per barrel.

In order to accommodate the guns, two gas tanks had to be removed. To compensate for fuel losses, a gas tank with a capacity of 80 liters was placed in the second cabin.

The attachment points and wiring for the RS-82 rockets have been retained. The wings have been heavily reinforced.

As a result, at the end of 1941, an aircraft with cannon armament was obtained, which was unmatched. The weight of the second salvo was 3,84 kg / s.

This was more than that of the LaGG-3 with three cannons (1SHVAK and 2B-20S) by 1,5 times, the MiG-Z - by 3,2 times, the Me-109E (with two wing MG-FFs) - by 1,5, 109 times, Me-4F - XNUMX times.

In terms of flight characteristics, the Yak-7M was not inferior to other aircraft. The increase in the mass of the aircraft did not greatly affect the controllability, and the piloting technique was greatly facilitated thanks to the automatic slats.

The speed characteristics are slightly lower than those of standard aircraft. The maximum speed at the ground is 470 km / h, at an altitude of 5 meters - 000 km / h.

In October-December 1941, the aircraft was admitted to state tests, which he finished with satisfactory results. It was noted that the fighter is available for use by intermediate-skilled pilots and can be easily mastered. It was recommended to launch the Yak-7M into mass production.

However, for some reason, the aircraft did not go into production, although in 1942 the presence of an aircraft with such weapons would have been more than useful. Moreover, apart from the placement of a gas tank in the second cabin, none of the innovations was applied. Automatic slats "because they were not needed", wing guns due to the fact that significant wing reinforcement was required.

In general, some kind of sediment remains from the results of work on the Yak-7M. The exit turned out to be an aircraft with a gorgeous second salvo, capable of destroying any aircraft of that time. The Germans produced such an aircraft only in 1942 (Focke-Wulf 190), and even later - La-7 in 1944, and even then, three-cannon La-7 with B-20 cannons were produced in very small quantities.

What is the reason for Yakovlev's refusal from the Yak-7M, we will never know. Perhaps there were good reasons for this, and it is possible that the project was "screwed up" by Yakovlev himself, since it is known that Alexander Sergeevich was, to put it mildly, jealous of his subordinates.

The argument that "wing cannons are not good, since when firing from one cannon, the aiming is lost", voiced in many studies, personally seems to me delusional. Who will fire from ONE wing cannon if it will inevitably lead to the unfolding of the plane? Physics has not been canceled.

Apparently, there were other reasons that we do not know about the termination of work on the aircraft, which passed the cycle of state tests.

Yak-7P (cannon)



This modification appeared through a complex of work on the Yak-7B with the M-105PF engine. The UBS synchronous machine guns were dismantled and two synchronous ShVAK cannons were installed instead.

The cannon installations were assembled from parts and assemblies of other aircraft: the front attachment points from the La-5 aircraft, the rear assemblies from the Hurricane.

The work was carried out by a brigade of engineers of the 1st Air Army. In November 1943, the aircraft was presented to the Air Force Research Institute for testing.

The tests revealed:
- replacing three-cam washers with single-cam ones increased the rate of fire of synchronous guns by 150 ... 175 rounds per minute;
- the installation of new cannon armament did not worsen the aircraft's flight and aerobatic qualities.

Were identified and disadvantages:
- the retraction of the cannon links was unsuccessful: when firing in the air, the links and sleeves fell into the stabilizer, damaging its leading edge;
- the absence of fuses for synchronous guns excluded the possibility of a quick and reliable termination of spontaneous firing and was fraught with the danger of shooting through the propeller blades. During the tests, there were two lumbago.

In the conclusion, it was said that replacing two large-caliber machine guns with two synchronous cannons deserves attention, since they do not worsen the flight characteristics of the aircraft. It was decided to install two B-20 synchronous cannons on the prototype and conduct another test cycle.

The Yak-7P with three ShVAK cannons was shown to the chief designer A.S. Yakovlev, but in the end it did not go into production. The armament scheme used on the Yak-7P was subsequently used on the Yak-9UT and Yak-3P.

Yak-7PD



A high-altitude fighter-interceptor specially designed for use in air defense. Continuation of work begun on the Yak-5 interceptor project in 1940.

The prototype M-105PD engine with an E-100 supercharger became the heart of the development. The gargrot and the lantern were redesigned according to the Yak-1 type, armored glass and a radio mast were installed. Radio equipment was not installed, since the aircraft did not have a generator and shielding.

The armament consisted of one ShVAK motor-gun with 120 rounds of ammunition. This was clearly not enough, since the interceptor usually operates at altitudes close to the maximum ceiling and repeated attacks at such altitudes were unlikely. But it was decided to sacrifice the high-altitude weapons.

The Yak-7PD was superior to the high-altitude MiG-3 with the AM-35A engine at a speed of up to 5 meters and was inferior to it starting at 000 meters. The La-6 with the M-000A engine was faster at altitudes up to 5 meters and was inferior to the Yak-82PD above 4 meters.

The practical ceiling of the Yak-7PD was higher than that of any Soviet fighter of that time.

But there were a number of significant drawbacks that called into question the need for the Air Force in such an aircraft. The M-105PD engine was not completed, in addition, manual control of the turbo couplings, which did not have a pump for pumping oil, complicated the operation of the aircraft, distracting the pilot from managing the need for constant monitoring of the supercharger.

In addition, the pilot was simply physically unable to accurately maintain the nominal boost pressure in accordance with the change in atmospheric pressure, as a result of which the aircraft's flight characteristics were reduced.

Based on the test results, work was carried out to install a turbocharger control machine and one UBS machine gun with a caliber of 12,7 mm with an ammunition load of 200 rounds. After all, a radio station was installed.

Despite the "work on the mistakes" carried out, the Yak-7PD did not go into production. Mainly due to the lack of knowledge of the M-105PD engine and the absence of a great need for high-altitude interceptors.

What can you say about the Yak-7 aircraft in general? It was one continuous experiment. An experiment on converting a training aircraft into a fighter, reconnaissance and spotter, the introduction of new developments.

The fact that many developments were later applied in the Yak-9 and Yak-3 airplanes suggests that the work was not in vain. As for the Yak-7 aircraft itself, its role in the battles in the skies of the Battle of Stalingrad and the Battle of the Kuban can hardly be overestimated. The plane was in place.


LTH Yak-7B

Wingspan, m: 10,00
Length, m: 8,50
Height, m: 2,75
Wing area, м2: 17,15

Weight, kg
- empty aircraft: 2 490
- normal takeoff: 3 010

Engine: 1 х М-105PF х 1 180 HP
Maximum speed km / h
- near the ground: 514
- at height: 570

Practical range, km: 645
Rate of climb, m / min: 862
Practical ceiling, m: 9 900

Crew, prs: 1

Armament:
- one 20-mm ShVAK cannon (120 rounds of ammunition);
- two 12,7 mm UBS machine guns with 400 rounds of ammunition (left machine gun - 260, right - 140);
- under the wing it was possible to hang six RS-82 or two bombs from 25 to 100 kg each.

This was the fate of the originally UTI-26 training aircraft. The aircraft fought and delivered reconnaissance data and became a platform for many developments, some of which found their application in the future.
Author:
139 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. andrewkor
    andrewkor 23 December 2021 18: 20
    +13
    Without a powerful, reliable engine, all aerodynamic tricks, relief are seen at a dead end. As an example, a Rolls-Royce motor has breathed new life into a mediocre Mustang with Allison!
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Elturisto
      Elturisto 23 December 2021 20: 13
      -9
      Why carry this irrelevant nonsense? What does the Mustang have to do with the subject?
      1. LastPS
        LastPS 23 December 2021 22: 43
        +9
        I think he brought the mustang to support his words. This is a fairly well-known story.
        1. Elturisto
          Elturisto 23 December 2021 23: 16
          -12
          He wrote nonsense. The presence of a powerful engine does not negate either weight perfection or aerodynamics. The presence of a powerful engine did not prevent the Americans from improving aerodynamics and reducing weight, for example, in the F8 Birket.
          1. English tarantas
            English tarantas 24 December 2021 07: 38
            +15
            That you are trying with some nonsense to make this person's words inappropriate. Yes, the presence of a powerful engine does not interfere with working with aerodynamics, but the presence of work on aerodynamics does not give the same increase in LTX as an engine, it is obvious to everyone why you wrote this at all. Moreover, the aerodynamics of the corsair and the bolt are clearly worse than those of the Jacob, as well as that of the tag, whose flat muzzle apparently does not bother you at all. The man gave a very good example to his words, the mustang initially had good aerodynamics, but only the engine saved it, you tried to be smart, but it didn't work out very well.
            1. Elturisto
              Elturisto 24 December 2021 09: 03
              -19
              You forgot to ask me what to write. What does your reasoning have to do with the topic? And here is the Mustang in general, can you explain the smart guy? Do you at least understand that the increase in power is accompanied by a general increase in mass, requires the organization of a new motor production, new propellers, radiators, new fuel tanks, changes the alignment of the aircraft and a lot of other things, such as high-quality fuel. What did Yakovlev have to do - put Merlin or what?
              1. Tima62
                Tima62 24 December 2021 10: 20
                +12
                Quote: ElTuristo
                What did Yakovlev have to do - put Merlin or what?

                Here is Lavochkin's fool. Instead of endlessly polishing the aerodynamics, instead of the M 105, I stuck the air vent ASh 82. And the plane flew off.
                1. Elturisto
                  Elturisto 24 December 2021 10: 25
                  -17
                  Don't attribute your own stupidity to others.
                2. Vladimir_2U
                  Vladimir_2U 26 December 2021 16: 20
                  +1
                  Quote: Tima62
                  Instead of endlessly polishing the aerodynamics, instead of the M 105, an ASh 82 air vent was inserted.

                  And then he polished the aerodynamics.
          2. Alexey RA
            Alexey RA 24 December 2021 11: 58
            +6
            Quote: ElTuristo
            The presence of a powerful engine does not negate either weight perfection or aerodynamics.

            Doesn't cancel. But it allows you to ignore them for the sake of manufacturability - and as a result you get a "killer" Zero "with an overlapping tail section and an overweight power set. smile

            Left - Zero, middle - Wildcat, right - Hellcat.

            Left - Zero, above - Wildcat, below - Hellcat.
            As a result, the weight of the "dry" F6F "Hellcat" was 1517 kg more than that of its predecessor. Although its engine group (including all equipment, the more powerful Pratt-and-Whitney R-2800-10 engine, for the sake of which everything, in fact, was started, as well as significantly increased protected fuel tanks) was only 668 kg heavier than the engine group with a Pratt and Whitney R-1830-86 aboard an F4F-4 Wildcat. Thus, the weight of the airframe itself increased by 850 kg, which was, no less, almost exactly half of the "dry" mass of the entire "Zero" - 1680 kg.
            © midnike
            1. Elturisto
              Elturisto 24 December 2021 13: 03
              -2
              Yeah, thanks, interesting information. I don’t think that the F6 was still quite an iron. For example, on a dive, he easily left the Zero, which had a design that was called at the limit. And you should not discount the overall technical and quantitative superiority of the Americans. On the other hand the Japanese also muddied new fighters with a takeoff weight of 6 tons for new aircraft carriers. Yes, and the large mass of the F6 could be ignored up to a certain limit - when meeting with ground fighters of new models, Helleket got nuts.
              1. volodimer
                volodimer 24 December 2021 15: 38
                +3
                I don’t think the F6 was really an iron. For example, on a dive, he easily walked away from Zero

                So here you described its "ironing". Big and heavy, he picked up speed faster and faster than Zero on a dive. The same technique was used by PV and Corsairs. Competent use of the advantages and leveling of the disadvantages of your aircraft is the key to victory. But this is in a particular battle, you survived, remained intact.
                And for our pilots, the main thing was the fulfillment of the combat mission. He drove the foe away from the guarded attack aircraft or bombers, honor and praise. He got involved in a fight and knocked someone down, but your "charges" were bitten, there is no honor or honor.
                1. Elturisto
                  Elturisto 24 December 2021 16: 12
                  -7
                  Yes, that's right. Only the dispute flared up, on another occasion, Goebbels's grandchildren use every opportunity to shit and spit in the direction of the USSR. And why the Corsair was especially fond of anti-Sovietists, I don't even know why. But this iron had a number of fatal flaws , so the Americans fired it first into the Marines, and then to the Allies, like trash.
                  1. volodimer
                    volodimer 24 December 2021 16: 58
                    +4
                    Well, I don't see "grandchildren" here, although one comment has been deleted, so I can't be 100% objective.
                    Rolls-Royce engine breathes new life into a mediocre Mustang with Allison

                    Undoubtedly, the possibility of installing a more powerful engine is good.
                    What Tim62 wrote about Lavochkin and ASh82 is also true.
                    But do not forget that Yakovlev also tried this motor and did not work.
                    And let's imagine:
                    LaGG is on the verge of being phased out. MiGs have already been removed. And only Yakovlev machines are mass-produced ... It was lucky that the LA-5 turned out. Not yet a masterpiece, but with an eye to the future. But it would not have worked, there were YAKs.
                    But Yakovlev began to remake all his cars for a new engine.
                    And yes, rearrangement, overweight, change in the technological cycle ... And then: disruption of the supply of aircraft to the troops.
                    Why did your opponents not even mention the obvious: "Why produce the Yak-7 instead of the Yak-1?" And because it requires a change in technological processes at the manufacturing plant. After all, the wing and its attachment to the fuselage on the Yak-1 and Yak-7 are different in technology. As a result, by the end of the war Yak-9 and Yak-3.
                    Two models. Simply because the technological process is different.
                    Well, and one more thing: the M-107 engine ... If it were made, then both YAKs and PE-shki would receive the necessary power increase without any special alterations.
                    Yakovlev has great respect for the fact that with the materiel that our industry could provide him during the war years, he made fighters that allowed our pilots to "land" the "grandfathers" dressed up with crosses-swords-oak leaves.
                    1. Elturisto
                      Elturisto 24 December 2021 18: 49
                      -4
                      Everything went there with the M-82 at Yakovlev. It was just that the capacities were created for the production of the M-105, M-82 and the LaGG airframe. That’s the whole mosaic. The latter’s glider required quite complex equipment, believe me, I worked in production, I know not by hearsay .Once investments are made, then they must be used, in the USSR rationalism prevailed in industrial policy.
                  2. volodimer
                    volodimer 24 December 2021 17: 02
                    +3
                    In general, Yakovlev is the greatest designer of "flying desks". I think that he and his design bureau can compete for world leadership in the number of pilots taken into the air in their cars.
                    And the fact that his UT also became a very successful fighter is another confirmation of the genius of the designer.
                    1. Elturisto
                      Elturisto 24 December 2021 18: 42
                      -6
                      Here is ... the best comment on the topic ... wait the matzo eaters minus ...
                  3. Alf
                    Alf 25 December 2021 20: 14
                    +4
                    Quote: ElTuristo
                    therefore, the Americans and fused him first in the Marines,





                    You know the difference between NAVY from MARINE? And what are the ILC aircraft doing on the decks of aircraft carriers?
                    The corsairs made 12 boards, while Britain received only 500.
                    P.S. The vertical arrow on the keel indicates that the aircraft belongs to the aircraft carrier Bunker Hill, but not to the ILC.
                    1. LastPS
                      LastPS 30 December 2021 18: 00
                      0
                      The corsairs really actively used the marines as strikers, but not because he was bad, but because he had a very good strike potential, well, he also served in the navy, albeit not as actively as the Hellcat.
                      1. Alf
                        Alf 31 December 2021 17: 12
                        0
                        Quote: LastPS
                        but because it had a very good impact potential,

                        And also because the ILC can only rely on the support of aircraft carrier aviation.
            2. Ol willy
              Ol willy 1 February 2022 08: 25
              0
              Hellcat is the cheapest American fighter of that war, by the way
          3. Alf
            Alf 25 December 2021 18: 47
            +3
            Quote: ElTuristo
            The presence of a powerful engine does not negate either weight perfection or aerodynamics.

            The Americans themselves said in such cases, the victory of power over aerodynamics.
  2. Undecim
    Undecim 23 December 2021 18: 23
    +31
    bad celluloid in lantern

    Celluloid lanterns have never been made. Celluloid is a plastic based on nitrocellulose. They made film and rulers from it, which burn very well. And the lanterns of aircraft were made of polymethyl methacrylate or, if it is simpler, plexiglass.
    1. mark1
      mark1 23 December 2021 18: 42
      +11
      In the 30s, they did, the same I-16, SB, plexiglass in the country began to be produced before the war, although they were synthesized in 36m, in the case of the Yak-7, perhaps really plexiglass of poor quality, although for training aircraft it may be (mine assumption that can probably be refuted) and used celluloid.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Undecim
        Undecim 23 December 2021 19: 27
        +11
        For some reason, the comments disappeared after writing, so I wrote a little incorrectly, skipping "during the Second World War." For example, on DB-3 celluloid was replaced by plexiglass back in 1939. Although Shakhurin's memoirs also contain the phrase that the fighters flew with open lanterns due to the fact that they were bad celluloid. Perhaps due to interruptions in the production of plexiglass associated with the evacuation of factories, some of the aircraft were really produced with celluloid lanterns and I should not criticize the author?
        1. mark1
          mark1 23 December 2021 19: 36
          +5
          On this issue, research should be carried out (but there is no desire), and it is so logical to assume that with a chronic deficit of everything, the Plexiglas was replaced with celluloid (at least partially, for example, with the sliding / rear part of the lantern).
          1. Mooh
            Mooh 23 December 2021 22: 42
            +11
            Or maybe it was just that the pilots were not very interested in delving into what the lanterns were made of and, out of habit, they called plexiglass celluloid. Something like how we call a copier a copier and an off-road wagon jeep. Oh, by the way, almost every first person calls polycarbonate glass when talking about phones or car headlights.
            1. mark1
              mark1 24 December 2021 07: 30
              +1
              Quote: MooH
              Or maybe it was just that the pilots were not very interested in delving into what the lanterns were made of, and out of habit they called plexiglass celluloid.

              Yes, easily ...
        2. mmaxx
          mmaxx 24 December 2021 03: 52
          +7
          Most likely called out of habit. As now, some have zalafan bags. Nobody makes cellophane for a long time. And polyethylene and other polymer films are still called tsalafan by those who have never seen it before.
          1. volodimer
            volodimer 24 December 2021 16: 06
            0
            I can still tell the difference between cellophane and polyethylene. Somewhere in the nightstand there is still a bit. As a child, he was a wrapper for packs of cigarettes and for bouquets of flowers. The household used cellophane for gluing polyethylene with a hot iron. I used to wrap all my textbooks like that. Cellophane transferred heat, but did not stick to the iron. Now you won't find him. If fiberglass became fiberglass-fiberglass, then cellophane apparently went down in history.
  3. Undecim
    Undecim 23 December 2021 18: 29
    +18
    This was 3 times more than the LaGG-1 with three guns (2SHVAK and 20B-1,5S)

    Such a LaGG-3 did not exist, although information roams the network, even in the "Corner of Heaven". The B-20 cannon began to be produced when the LaGG-3 aircraft had already been taken out of production.
    1. KERMET
      KERMET 1 January 2022 12: 19
      0
      This infa is copied from Stepants' book about Yaki
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 1 January 2022 13: 24
        +2
        And Stepanets is wrong.
  4. Alf
    Alf 23 December 2021 19: 33
    +9
    However, in terms of range and duration of flight, the Yak-7D was unmatched. The flight range was 2 km, the duration was 285 hours.

    For comparison, the Fw.189 reconnaissance spotter flew much closer (665 km) and "hung" in the sky for much less (2,5 hours). Although the blood spoiled our soldiers in full.

    Hmmm, I compared a single-seat long-range scout and a special spotter of the battlefield ... A snake and a hedgehog ...
    On the vertical, the Yak-7B lagged behind the German fighter, as well as the Me-109F had an advantage in gaining speed.

    On the vertical, the YAK is worse than the 109th, on the horizontal, the YAK accelerates more slowly. But at the same time
    The Yak-7B calmly conducted air battles with the Me-109 in the horizontal and vertical directions.

    Maybe I don't understand something?
    By the way, in the Combat Manual of 42, it was said that the Yak-7 is the only Soviet fighter that catches up with the FV-190 on a dive. I sell what I bought.
    1. Fitter65
      Fitter65 24 December 2021 12: 45
      +4
      Quote: Alf
      By the way, in the Combat Manual of 42, it was said that the Yak-7 is the only Soviet fighter that catches up with the FV-190 on a dive. I sell what I bought.

      The first FW-190s on the Eastern Front, near Leningrad, appeared as part of a reconnaissance squadron as part of the JG26 in the FW-190A-3 variant.
      Here in this edition was printed a chapter from the book "Fighter Aviation Tactics" 1943.
      by the way it says
      At the end of 1942, the FV-190 aircraft appeared on the Soviet-German front.
      although it is known that the first two FW-190s were shot down in one battle, and fell on our territory. Quote from the book
      Our pilots on Yak-7 aircraft, who fought with the FV-190 and repeatedly shot down planes of this type, came to the conclusion that the Yak-7 can fight the FV-190 in any conditions and is easier than with the Me-109G aircraft. During all battles, it was not observed that the FV-190, at the same altitude with our fighters, made attempts to go up. This confirms its lower rate of climb in comparison with our fighters and with the Me-109G. On a dive, the Yak-7 catches up with the FV-190. On the right bend, the Yak-7 easily fits into the tail of the FV-190; on the left bend, it fights on equal terms. On the Yak-1 and La-5 aircraft, it is even easier to fight the FV-190.
      A chapter from a 1943 book:
      "TACTICS OF FIRING AVIATION"
      The text of this publication is reproduced with minor abbreviations and in accordance with the modern spelling system.
      Air combat with fighters

      read here https://vk.com/@soldiers_of_fortune-taktika-istrebitelnoi-aviacii-1943-god
      1. Alf
        Alf 24 December 2021 18: 58
        +2
        From there I took it. By the way, it was an excellent magazine, the very thing for modelers, especially the layout in gray English colors. And the designation system for US naval aircraft was very helpful.
  5. Constanty
    Constanty 23 December 2021 19: 46
    0
    In addition, of the three groups of designers (Mikoyan and Gurevich, Lavochkin and Gorbunov with Gudkov, Yakovlev), only Yakovlev had experience in building training aircraft.


    Yakovlev, on the contrary, had practically no experience in building fighters (unlike Mikoyan, he had an influential brother, but who worked for Polikarpov and stole his finished I-200 project, and Gorbunov, thanks to his experience in working on bombers, supported the People's Commissariat defense industry).

    But Yakovlev, thanks to his audacity and even lies, however, enjoyed the support of Stalin.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty 23 December 2021 20: 33
        +5
        So what was Yakovlev's experience in building fighters before? How to evaluate the assurances given to Stalin about the characteristics of the BB-22?

        Mikoyan? You can even read it in the Russian Wikipedia and in numerous monographs on the MiG-200 that the preliminary design of the I-3 was developed at the design bureau of N.N. Polikarpov. And the fact that his brother Anastas he was an influential person - since 1937 he was the Deputy Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR. - is a fact.
        An anecdote about the creation of the LaGG team in the Kaganovich corridor can be found in every monograph about this aircraft.

        Just read
        1. Elturisto
          Elturisto 23 December 2021 20: 56
          -14
          The BB-22 was an experimental aircraft, and was offered as a reconnaissance aircraft. Polikarpov "developed" a lot of things, including the I-180, which killed 2 outstanding pilots. Regarding LaGG, this is also nonsense.
          1. Constanty
            Constanty 23 December 2021 22: 01
            +4
            nonsense these are your statements about aviation - the BB-22 was in the concept of a high-speed бthe ombudsman бlizhny action became a reconnaissance aircraft (Yak-4), when the Yak-2 was disastrously unsuccessful.

            In the death of Chekalov, it was not the plane that was to blame, but the engine (not to say the conspiracy), while in the crash of the I-26 (prototype Yak-1), the tester Yulian Piontkovsky died - and this is due to errors in the design of the aircraft - damage to the wing structure due to protrusion and then landing gear breakage in flight.

            Solonin is an aviation engineer, you are a tourist - the choice is simple.
            1. Elturisto
              Elturisto 23 December 2021 23: 18
              -12
              Is it jammed or what?
            2. LastPS
              LastPS 30 December 2021 18: 06
              +1
              Chkalov himself was to blame for his death when he violated the flight program in a frankly damp machine, which he did not really know.
          2. Fitter65
            Fitter65 24 December 2021 13: 29
            +3
            Quote: ElTuristo
            The BB-22 was an experimental aircraft, and was offered as a reconnaissance aircraft.

            If I were you, I would first read about BB-22 so as not to shine here with intelligence like a sledgehammer.
            Plant No.1 named after Aviakhim, one of the most powerful in the country, in March 1940 presented the serial BB-22 for testing, head. No.1012 (the first flight on the serial BB-22 was made on December 26, 1939 by the pilot A.N. Ekatov).
            This is, for example, about the fact that the plane was, as one connoisseur claims, experienced. We read further about the production of BB-22
            Something radical had to be done to save the car. The first such measure was the transfer of production of the BB-22 at the direction of the NKAP to the Tushino plant No.81 im. V.M. Molotov (there were also plans to deploy the construction of aircraft of this type at plant No.381). Plant No.1, having produced 81 aircraft (which was 116 percent of the plan, many times adjusted downward), switched to the production of I-200 fighters. The second measure was the development of a serial modification of the BB-22 with M-105 motors, which was done in the formed at the plant No.81 ............ In accordance with the order of the NKAP, the Yakovlev machines also received new names: BB- 22 with M-103 engines became known as Yak-2.
            By the time of the official cessation of production, plant No.81 managed to build 30 Yak-2 Thus, the total output of twin-engine Yak at two plants was 111 Yak-2 (all buildings in 1940 were built in XNUMX).
            So before being rude to people, you would have tightened your knowledge, at least to the level of Wikipedia.
            Quote: ElTuristo
            Polikarpov "developed" a lot of things, including the I-180, which killed 2 outstanding pilots.

            And how did the PLANE kill the outstanding pilots? If you are talking about the death of V.P. Chkalov ...
            Chkalov died on December 15, 1938 during the first test flight on the new I-1 fighter at the Central Aerodrome.

            The flight was being prepared in a great hurry in order to be in time before the end of the year. The release of the aircraft to the airfield was scheduled for November 7, November 15, November 25.

            On December 2, 190 defects were revealed on the assembled car. NN Polikarpov protested against the unnecessary race when preparing the I-180 for the first flight, which is why he was removed from these works.

            On December 7, the I-180 was taken to the airfield; On December 10, V.P. Chkalov taxied the aircraft on the ground, during which the engine often stalled; On December 12, when re-taxiing, the throttle control rod of the engine broke.

            On December 13, Polikarpov presented the I-180 test program: the flight mission ordered a test flight in a circle for 10-15 minutes without retracting the landing gear. Subsequently, after a thorough examination of the entire machine, it was planned to carry out a test flight and 1-2 flights for 30-60 minutes; finally flight with the landing gear retracted to an altitude of 7 meters.

            Valery Chkalov was supposed to make only the first, the most expensive flight in terms of payment, after which the car passed into the hands of another pilot - S.P. Suprun ... Despite the very low temperature, the flight went well, the car gained an altitude of 1-100 meters and with a bend went to the 120st circle over the airfield. Then the flight continued at an altitude of 1-500 meters.

            After the 1st lap, the plane went to the 2nd lap, stretching the last one in the direction of plant number 22. According to V.K. , they say, everything is fine, after which I went to land.

            According to the testimony of observers at the airfield, "before reaching the airfield one to one and a half kilometers, at an altitude of about 100 meters, the plane made a turn to the left and disappeared behind the buildings." During the landing approach, the M-88 engine suddenly stopped. The pilot, as it was noted in the act of the commission to investigate the causes of the accident, “until the last moment, he flew the plane and tried to sit and sit outside the area occupied by residential buildings”, in the area of ​​the Moszhilgosstroy car depot (Magistralnaya st., No. 13)
            What about this disaster?
            Yulian Ivanovich Piontkovsky (February 13 (25), 1896, Kiev - April 27, 1940) - Soviet test pilot who died on April 27, 1940 while testing the I-26 fighter (the prototype of the future Yak-1).

            I recommend reading for general development,
        2. Fitter65
          Fitter65 24 December 2021 12: 54
          +1
          Quote: Constanty
          An anecdote about the creation of the LaGG team in the Kaganovich corridor can be found in every monograph about this aircraft.

          Moreover, Semyon Mikhailovich Alekseev shed light on this story.
  6. CHEREDA73
    CHEREDA73 23 December 2021 20: 14
    +10
    The many times criticized Yakovlev fighters are workhorses that took the brunt of the air battles. I will not go into the characteristics of vertical and horizontal maneuvers, this has already been done many times and is not in favor of Yakov. But, having the M-105 in stock, the Yakovlevskoe design bureau jumped over its head in order to give decent performance. By the way, the M-105PF is Yakovlev's initiative, not Klimov's, who was sure that "very soon" he would issue the M-107. It didn't work "soon".
    Let's not forget that the Yakovlev Design Bureau is not only Yakovlev, but Oleg Antonov too.
    1. Constanty
      Constanty 23 December 2021 20: 42
      +1
      Yes, I know that Mark Solonin is being renounced in your country, but the statistics of non-combat losses of Yak aircraft, which he cites, is appalling.
      It is also symptomatic that the real champions - Kozhedub and Pokryshkin - achieved most of their victories either on the La-5 or on the P-39.
      1. CHEREDA73
        CHEREDA73 23 December 2021 20: 53
        +4
        This is all known.
        No need to cite common truths, here people who understand the details are found.
        And one more thing: war is not a sport.
        It's ugly to call war heroes champions. They were doing something else ...
        1. Constanty
          Constanty 23 December 2021 21: 23
          +7
          Forgive the champions, - I wrote in the translator, - asów myśliwskich - "air aces", so I was translated
          1. CHEREDA73
            CHEREDA73 23 December 2021 23: 24
            +3
            As for the aces: there is also such an ambiguous topic ...
            You know, Pokryshkin cannot be equated with anyone at all, he is head and shoulders above everyone (and you don’t need to look at the battle scores, I already said that war is not a sport).
            Here is a real ace-hunter - this is, perhaps, Grigory Rechkalov. He always followed Pokryshkin, but it seems he did not understand what Pokryshkin's advantage was.
            Kozhedub, although he had more OFFICIAL score, also recognized Alexander Ivanovich's moral seniority.
            1. Elturisto
              Elturisto 24 December 2021 00: 01
              +4
              The Aircobra had one undoubted objective advantage over the aircraft produced in the USSR - the high dive speed due to the all-metal structure and aerodynamics, which in turn made it possible to successfully fight against German aircraft that often used diving to exit an attack, for example, during tests in England, the R-39 Because of the design features associated with the wide use of wood, they could not develop speeds comparable to those of the enemy during a dive. no combat losses.
              1. CHEREDA73
                CHEREDA73 24 December 2021 06: 09
                +2
                Yes, we have a cobra, which is called "entered". Of course, if used correctly. Alexander Ivanovich, as a fan of "vertical", fully opened the cobra, but he and the MiG-3 was good at maneuvering.
                But Savitsky did not appreciate the cobra, which is understandable: he commanded and flew on Yaks ...
                But this is a separate topic already - a comparison of aircraft, an article about the Yak-7.
                1. English tarantas
                  English tarantas 24 December 2021 07: 56
                  0
                  Yes, we have a cobra, which is called "entered"

                  Otherwise, roughly speaking: we had nothing guaranteed to catch up with the Messer, except for cobras. It is not surprising that it only opened up here, for lack of a stamp ... Perhaps the Germans were relaxed and in the east believed that no one would catch up with them, and that is why the cobra succeeded. On a quiet corsair, when he appeared, he smeared the Japanese planes along with their aces, namely the speed.
                  1. Elturisto
                    Elturisto 24 December 2021 09: 08
                    -9
                    Yes, enough lies and revenge with the tongue like a broom is not on the topic. The fact that being healthy and rich, better than the poor and sick, is known even without your garbage. Look at the non-combat losses of the Corsairs, take a gallop and calm down.
                    1. Alf
                      Alf 24 December 2021 19: 08
                      +1
                      Quote: ElTuristo
                      Look already at the non-combat losses of the Corsairs,

                      The non-combat losses of the Pirates were great due to the severity of the landing vehicle.
                2. Sergey Kyulyan
                  Sergey Kyulyan 24 December 2021 08: 19
                  +1
                  Well, the weapons of the cobra, as they say, are also gone. 37mm cannon and from 2x to 4x 12.7 Browning. The weight of the volley is very even. Although, of course, there were problems, both with alignment and with leaving the car. But on the whole, the plane turned out to be successful. And it came to us very well.
                  1. Alf
                    Alf 24 December 2021 19: 12
                    +1
                    Quote: Sergey Kyulyan
                    Well, the weapons of the cobra, as they say, are also gone. 37mm cannon and from 2x to 4x 12.7 Browning. The weight of the volley is very even. Although, of course, there were problems, both with alignment and with leaving the car. But on the whole, the plane turned out to be successful. And it came to us very well.

                    Our pilots also praised the quality of radio communication very much, they spoke as if talking on the phone to the next room.
                3. Elturisto
                  Elturisto 24 December 2021 09: 17
                  0
                  In this case, it depends on the tactics. To counter the German tactics, which were based on attacks using vertical maneuver, the USSR developed their own bookcase. Yak aircraft maneuvered at low altitudes, and the more durable Airacobra and La-5-7 flew higher. This tactic had Of course, it did not always work 100%, but in general it allowed the escorted attack aircraft to strike an effective blow at the enemy. This was the main task of the fighters. And the large aces' scores are largely due to the lack of mandatory escort tasks and the work of other pilots on them.
              2. fighter angel
                fighter angel 24 December 2021 11: 21
                +1
                Alas, with the "Cobra" diving, not everything was as good as we used to think:
                Here is what the veterans write about the Cobra: in the regular modes, the AiraCobra was inferior to the 1943 Messers according to flight data. Bf109G, notes the veteran of the 19th Guards ID Gaidaenko, “significantly” surpassed the “cobra” in vertical maneuverability; in general, having received "gustavs", the Germans "began to squeeze us." To the level of flight data Bf109G "Airacobra" - heavy, durable and possessing good aerodynamics - approached only in dive speed (up to 800 km / h370). But it was not always safe to dive on it: with a sharp maneuvering (and therefore with a sharp withdrawal from a dive), the 1943 Cobras could deform the tail section of the fuselage and the tail. During intensive maneuvering due to large overloads, the tail unit was deformed, rudders jammed. defects were not freed. And the pilots went into battle, and some of them died “not in battle, but from an unforgivable mistake of the creators of technology.” Not only hastily trained wartime pilots were destroyed, but also experienced pilots. " The Cobra "was not very maneuverable at low altitudes."
                1. Elturisto
                  Elturisto 24 December 2021 11: 45
                  0
                  At speeds exceeding 700 km / h, the likelihood of a flutter onset increased, which was the reason for the destruction of structural elements in aircraft. The destruction of the tail on the Airacobra was associated not with the insufficient strength of the basic structure as such, but with the excess of permissible loads on a dive. Problems of a similar type were for example and Mustangs.
                2. Elturisto
                  Elturisto 24 December 2021 11: 52
                  0
                  Merlin-powered Mustangs were noticeably heavier and fitted with wide-bladed four-bladed propellers. Therefore, the R-51V and R-51S during a dive had a noticeable deterioration in stability. The load on the pedals dropped, and if the pilot did not operate the rudder, then the plane began to twist the barrel and fell into an uncontrolled spin. In this situation, several aircraft lost their tail.
              3. Alf
                Alf 24 December 2021 19: 07
                0
                Quote: ElTuristo
                Apparently, with the violation of the operating rules (limiting the dive speed), the relatively large losses of the USSR Air Force, which fall on non-combat losses, are associated.

                Not only. Low production culture at our factories has had its say. Quite a natural result, women, old people and adolescents worked. On the Kursk Bulge, there were cases of separation of planes from YAKs precisely because of a factory defect. You can't get away from this, it's impossible to embrace everything, the men went to the front.
          2. Fitter65
            Fitter65 24 December 2021 13: 37
            +1
            Quote: Constanty
            - asów myśliwskich - "air aces",

            If my memory serves me right then - myśliwiec in Polish means fighter, so rather aces-fighters.
      2. mmaxx
        mmaxx 24 December 2021 03: 56
        +6
        The statistics of non-combat losses of ALL fighters of ALL countries during the war is striking. From 30 to 50%.
        1. Sergey Kyulyan
          Sergey Kyulyan 24 December 2021 08: 21
          +1
          Of course. You can imagine what a field airfield is, especially in spring / autumn. And can you imagine what it is like to land an inexperienced pilot at such an airfield. And this is just 1 example.
        2. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 24 December 2021 12: 11
          +2
          Quote: mmaxx
          The statistics of non-combat losses of ALL fighters of ALL countries during the war is striking. From 30 to 50%.

          EMNIP, our statistics of non-combat losses was also spoiled by the fact that they recorded aircraft written off by age, wear or obsolescence.
          1. mmaxx
            mmaxx 24 December 2021 15: 27
            0
            Well, Duc, if the plane is written off, it's a loss. To be honest.
            1. Illanatol
              Illanatol 28 December 2021 14: 25
              0
              Quote: mmaxx
              Well, Duc, if the plane is written off, it's a loss. To be honest.


              And what is honest here? If the plane crashed, then yes, a loss. And if it is written off due to wear and tear (the salagi finished off the motor resource, going through the last stage of training), then why should it be recorded as "non-combat losses"?

              "Nothing lasts forever under the moon, even Mercedes rusts ..."
      3. Alf
        Alf 24 December 2021 19: 02
        +1
        Quote: Constanty
        It is also symptomatic that the real champions - Kozhedub and Pokryshkin - achieved most of their victories either on the La-5 or on the P-39.

        Yes, but the war was won not by a few aces (who actually brought a lot of things into aviation), but by the conveyor-based reproduction of pilots.
  7. Elturisto
    Elturisto 23 December 2021 20: 18
    -1
    Thanks to the author for the article. The country must know its heroes, who gave simple and reliable weapons for defense in difficult times.
  8. exo
    exo 23 December 2021 20: 18
    +1
    Here, by God, I did not understand:
    "To ensure the proper flight range, 11 fuel tanks with a total capacity of 925 liters were installed on the plane, which required a new large wing." (C)
    And further:
    "The new wing had the same area as the standard (17,15 sq. M.), But a smaller span, 9,74 m instead of 10 meters." (C)
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 24 December 2021 15: 32
      0
      Well. Wing redesigned. To get more fuel.
      1. exo
        exo 24 December 2021 16: 29
        0
        Unless, they changed the wing profile towards thickening.
  9. CHEREDA73
    CHEREDA73 23 December 2021 20: 20
    +4
    Regarding the "guns in the wing", the author expressed doubt that the aiming was getting lost and even called it nonsense.
    Dear author - this is not nonsense. And precisely because nobody canceled physics.
    1. Ol willy
      Ol willy 1 February 2022 08: 42
      -1
      It is urgent for the author to read about the "point of convergence of wing armament"
  10. CHEREDA73
    CHEREDA73 23 December 2021 20: 23
    0
    In general, I liked the article.
    The novel writes well, and most importantly, after reading it, I want to refresh the information on other sources. hi
    1. Constanty
      Constanty 23 December 2021 21: 26
      +8
      For me this is a simplified version from airwar. ru, and strongly propagandistic.
      The original is definitely better.
      1. kytx
        kytx 24 December 2021 04: 21
        +3
        Well, airvor is generally a more serious approach. hi
      2. Fitter65
        Fitter65 24 December 2021 13: 47
        +1
        Quote: Constanty
        For me this is a simplified version from airwar. ru, and strongly propagandistic.
        The original is definitely better.

        Honestly, I like this edition better.
  11. 75 Sergey
    75 Sergey 23 December 2021 20: 26
    -1
    Yes, the engine for the plane is in second place after the pilot, what then, what now.
    It is always surprising that our people will bungle something like that, and then they try to do the engine for it, the Chinese are guilty of this.
    And we need to start with the engine, then we determine the weight of the entire apparatus based on the characteristics of speed, climb rate and maneuverability, and only then we fill it with the amount that allows us not to reduce flight characteristics.
    The engine is the main unit of the aircraft.
    1. Elturisto
      Elturisto 23 December 2021 21: 02
      0
      Why is this empty chatter? The license for the Hispano-Suizu was bought either in 1932 or in 1934, the AM-34 series engines brought all the 30s, and so on - what did the Soviet leadership do wrong?
      1. Constanty
        Constanty 23 December 2021 21: 48
        +1
        Where is Rome, where is Crimea?

        The development of the Hispano-Suiza 12Y - M-100 became the M-105, but development of the M-34 began in 1928 as a replacement for the M-17, a licensed copy of the BMW VI, it was believed that the M-34 was originally developed in Italy by Fiat.
        However, the history of Soviet aviation knows many designs and prototypes that were lost due to the unsuccessful development of the engine - for example, the I-180 with the M-87 engine, the I-185 with the M-71 engine, Tairov Ta-3 with the M-89 engine. .. ...
        1. Elturisto
          Elturisto 23 December 2021 23: 20
          -7
          Go have a bison drink, how old are you?
        2. Elturisto
          Elturisto 23 December 2021 23: 31
          -6
          On, read about the tests of the I-180, you can get a little crazy.
      2. 75 Sergey
        75 Sergey 23 December 2021 23: 28
        +4
        Did he understand what he wrote?
        Suza-La Perouse ....
        I say, without a good engine, everything flies badly, there is no efficiency! LaGG, when it flew, when the engine appeared good!
  12. Shiden
    Shiden 23 December 2021 21: 29
    -1
    About the Yak7M in general, before the war, they tested three cannon I 30, so there were some groundwork. And why did not they launch into the series so there is the logic of the ShVAK, except for the aircraft, it was also put on T 60 tanks, of which 5000 were released, corny would not have enough guns.
    1. Elturisto
      Elturisto 23 December 2021 23: 26
      +1
      The wooden wing was not suitable for the installation of guns, the I-30 had an all-metal wing.
  13. Pavel57
    Pavel57 23 December 2021 21: 31
    +1
    So it remained unclear how and why it was necessary to pull two lines Yak-1/3 and Yak-7/9, what prevented one line of fighters from being made? Or the differences were not so significant, but what a variety of fighters.
    1. Saxahorse
      Saxahorse 23 December 2021 23: 17
      +3
      The differences were significant. The Yak-1 in its first version was very difficult to pass tests, and there were questions about accidents and performance characteristics. Therefore, in the course of the tests, an improved version was immediately developed. But the government was running out of time and gave the order to launch the Yak-1 into series without waiting for the revised version to be tested. Which, by the way, was the reason for the raids on Yakovlev due to the launch of an obviously damp car. But the Yak-7 was originally created on the basis of a full, revised version. Therefore, in the combat version it turned out to be better than the raw Yak-1. This is how the Yak-7 \ Yak-9 line was born.
    2. Elturisto
      Elturisto 23 December 2021 23: 25
      -2
      The types you named actually differed very little from each other, much less than the Me-109 E from the Me-109 K or Spitfires of different series. In essence, this is one basic design. Fuselage structure, empennage, equipment, engine, weapon system - everything was identical.
    3. dauria
      dauria 24 December 2021 00: 36
      +2
      So it remained unclear how and why it was necessary to pull two rulers Yak-1/3 and Yak-7/9,


      Various factories. And no more reason. Equipment, templates, etc. were for training. And the differences are significant. We urgently needed one-seater - they just redid it, closing the cockpit. Without changing practically anything in the established production. So it turned out that the line of Novosibirsk Yak-7, 9 is much more numerous than the Saratov Yak-1, 3
      By the way, 7,9 turned out to be a workhorse precisely because of those very "differences". Had more room for modifications. And on the frame, and on the chassis, and on the "empty" place behind the cab and more forward centering.
      1. Elturisto
        Elturisto 24 December 2021 00: 45
        -2
        The Yak-7/9 was larger because the plant in Novosibirsk was more powerful, and was originally intended for LaGG-3, which, by the way, makes fools of the talkers who claim that Yakovlev flunked Polikarpov. The cockpit was moved back to the Yak-9. Explain what are the fundamental differences between the Yak-1 and the Yak-9?
    4. mmaxx
      mmaxx 24 December 2021 03: 58
      +2
      It's simple. The plant makes the plane. So let him do it. The launch of a new aircraft pauses or stops the main one.
      What this meant in that war, I think there is no need to explain.
  14. kytx
    kytx 23 December 2021 21: 45
    +2
    Nice article.
    But....
    Photos must be signed.
  15. Pavel57
    Pavel57 24 December 2021 02: 13
    0
    Well, if Yakovlev planned to deploy the Yak-7 in Gorky, then why did he deploy the Yak-3 in Tbilisi?
    And about Polikarpov in Gorky. In addition to Yakovlev, there were enough people who wanted to take the plant for their aircraft. Yakovlev's monopoly did not suit many, so the La-5 was born, and contrary to the mood of Lavochkin himself, otherwise it would have been Yak7 / 9.
    1. Elturisto
      Elturisto 24 December 2021 09: 23
      +1
      In fact, in addition to Lavochkin, there were other attempts to alter, for example, the Gu-82. The history of the appearance of the La-5 is well known, why come up with any nonsense about the monopoly. Initially, LaGG was planned to be the main one in the USSR. And La was born because with the M-105 it was inferior to the Yak outright And the production facilities for LaGG were already created. Therefore, M-82 was prescribed for LaGG and not for Yak.
      1. Alf
        Alf 24 December 2021 19: 24
        0
        Quote: ElTuristo
        Therefore, M-82 was prescribed for LaGG and not for Yak.

        They tried to put the M-82 on the YAK, and the result was the YAK-7M-82, but the result from the LA-5 did not differ much. Green color.
        1. Elturisto
          Elturisto 24 December 2021 19: 55
          -1
          And what does this mean - Yakovlev teran?
          1. Alf
            Alf 24 December 2021 19: 59
            0
            First, not "Teran", but "Tyran".
            And secondly, the fighter with the M-82 did not work out for Yakovlev.
    2. Alf
      Alf 24 December 2021 19: 20
      0
      Quote: Pavel57
      so La-5 was born, and contrary to the mood of Lavochkin himself,

      ??
  16. English tarantas
    English tarantas 24 December 2021 07: 26
    0
    Comrades Lavochkin and Yakovlev are the fathers of victory in the sky! Glory to the Heroes of Labor and Front!
  17. Pavel57
    Pavel57 24 December 2021 09: 43
    0
    Quote: ElTuristo
    In fact, in addition to Lavochkin, there were other attempts to alter, for example, the Gu-82. The history of the appearance of the La-5 is well known, why come up with any nonsense about the monopoly. Initially, LaGG was planned to be the main one in the USSR. And La was born because with the M-105 it was inferior to the Yak outright And the production facilities for LaGG were already created. Therefore, M-82 was prescribed for LaGG and not for Yak.

    Production facilities were created for I-180 and nothing. We scored easily. Everyone knows the history of LaG-5, I hope. Gu-82 was not created in Gorky, if it was created within the framework of the triumvirate, it would have had a chance.
    1. fighter angel
      fighter angel 24 December 2021 11: 45
      +1
      With the I-180, the Polikarpites themselves are to blame.
      Nikolai Nikolaevich, knowing that the fate of his design bureau and his I-180 fighter was being decided, did not go to the plant in Gorky !!! And he sent a brigade there, headed by a young, inexperienced and then toothless Yangel, the future rocketman! As a result, Yangel "twitched and hammered" on the promotion of the I-180, letting the issues of preparing it for mass production go by itself. And then he pulled himself away altogether! Further, that brigade of Polikarpovites, which worked in Gorky on the I-180, constantly arranged alterations of the original machine, which led to the disruption of all possible dates for the production of an experimental batch of I-180! But that's not all. For a whole year, the Polikarpovites did not bother to MAKE AND PROVIDE THE FACTORY I-180 DRAWINGS !!! How is it in general? The plant asked, demanded, wrote to the design bureau and to the NKAP - no result! And what should the plant do, which was required to introduce a new type of fighter into the series? Dementyev, the future Minister of Aviation of the Union, and then the director of the aircraft plant in Gorky, rightly doubted the capabilities of the Polikarpov Design Bureau to work out an experimental series and launch the I-180 !!! And then Shakhurin and the NKAP gave him Pashinin with the IP-21 project. A promising aircraft, but there was not enough time and opportunities for its completion. And the brigade of Polikarpov in Gorky continued, excuse me, to grind out the I-180. Plus constant trouble with his motor. Well, in addition to everything, Nikolai Nikolayevich himself had already lost interest in the I-180, and reoriented to a new fighter - I-185. So, Polikarpovtsy are mainly to blame for not seeing the I-180 series.
      1. KERMET
        KERMET 24 December 2021 20: 31
        +1
        Polikarpov could, of course, go to Gorky himself, having scored all the other projects of his design bureau, probably for this he would be praised.
        Young Yangel, but not the most successful candidate, about pushing the plane, on which the plant put a big bolt
        The team in Gorky did not alter anything itself; it was sent to help the plant in setting up mass production.
        The drawings of the I-180 from Polikarpov's design bureau were handed over, but the experimental design bureau of the plant, and not the design bureau of Polikarpov, was supposed to remake them to fit the factory standards. The battery of the plant was busy with its own project because it is much more profitable for the plant to have its own factory project. The end of this mess was put just after the removal of the I-180 from the series.
  18. geologist
    geologist 24 December 2021 11: 14
    0
    Many laughed at my friend in the artel when he wrote in his application that he needed several meters of "salofan". To avoid ridicule, I cheated because completely confused as to how to spell this damn word with double letters and wrote that you need 10 m of plastic film for a food tent.
    1. Alf
      Alf 24 December 2021 19: 26
      0
      Quote: geologist
      Many laughed at my friend in the artel when he wrote in his application that he needed several meters of "salofan". To avoid ridicule, I cheated because completely confused as to how to spell this damn word with double letters and wrote that you need 10 m of plastic film for a food tent.

      And what is this for?
  19. Mikhail3
    Mikhail3 24 December 2021 12: 08
    +1
    I would venture to suggest. The plane turned out to be more successful than the profile ones, because Yakovlev himself paid little attention to it, moreover, referring to the "non-core topic" of the designers that were undesirable to him. That still figure was ...
    On the topic of training aircraft in general, and combat, of course. Here we have the USSR, where everything had to be done according to a single plan. What kind of plucked angel did all Soviet aircraft have ABSOLUTELY DIFFERENT CABINS ?! Why did all the controls have individual characteristics, right down to the ball that had to be pulled in order for the machine gun to fire ?! Who invented all this, and why was not he shot?
    The hobby for records and record holders played a cruel joke on the Soviet leadership. The sense was in the guidance from characters like Rychagov, who will fly on a stupa, not looking at the fact that it is inconvenient to control the broom. I understand that it is stupid to worry now), but still sad ...
    1. fighter angel
      fighter angel 24 December 2021 12: 39
      +3
      Michael, that's enough for you. He was a normal figure!
      We would have it now, a long time ago both the MS-21 and the IL-112 with the IL-114, and the IL-276, and the Su-57 with engines of the "third cycle" would have flown ...
      Antonov Oleg Konstantinovich, his deputy, not only let go, but also tried to get him a design bureau.
      Thanks to him, An-2 flew: Yakovlev's resolution: “This is an interesting plane.
      to build. "decided the fate of the machine, which everyone laughed at and did not take seriously.
      Shcherbakov's Shche-2 plane was put into production, having removed his Yak-6.
      The Yak-100 helicopter on tests turned out to be better than the Milevskaya "one". Nevertheless, Yakovlev not only gave way to Mile, but also presented him and the entire helicopter world with such an important thing as a "step-gas" handle !!! Yes, yes, the "step-gas" was first made in the Yakovlev Design Bureau.
      1. Elturisto
        Elturisto 24 December 2021 13: 24
        -2
        Thanks for the interesting information. The topic of the tyrant Yakovlev is being pushed by anti-Soviets. On the I-180 and the tests were not all right https://airpages.ru/dc/i180doc.shtml. And I-180 Yatsenko was supposed to replace the I-28.
      2. Mikhail3
        Mikhail3 24 December 2021 13: 50
        -2
        Yes. Polikarpov was flattening with all his might. I wanted to look for the designers in my design bureau. Strikingly fulfilled Stalin's wish about duralumin. Iosif Vissarionych asked to save duralumin as much as possible. So at the afterburner Jacob's wings crumbled! How many people died, horror ... Ilyushin began to prove that he needed duralumin, and got it. And Yakovlev did not, why should he "spoil the relationship"? Because of the dead pilots and unbeaten fascists? Funny, is not it? Incomparable things ...
        I will not) I hate this intriguer.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 24 December 2021 15: 40
          +4
          When a person starts to DO something, he immediately becomes to blame for everything. And Yakovlev combined administrative and design work. He HAD to make decisions. Not comfortable for everyone. Find angels among the big bosses. This is the case for a few. Who was a good boy in those days? Yes, nobody. Tried Polikarpov. What is the result?
          And the history of La-5 is the most striking example that Yakovlev needed a business, not spillikins. He had to start the plant. But he waited until the end. And Lavochkin, largely thanks not even to himself, made the La-5. It cost nothing to devour Lavochkin. At the same time, Yakovlev went under execution.
        2. Elturisto
          Elturisto 24 December 2021 16: 30
          -3
          Another granddaughter of Goebbels :) a sufferer for the pilots who were innocently killed by designer Yakovlev. Something you throw without a spark. I write right away that Yakovlev carried out the shooting of onboard weapons at the living prisoners of Stalinism, no need to reflect, and so they will instruct the advantages.
        3. Alf
          Alf 24 December 2021 19: 35
          +3
          Quote: Mikhail3
          So at the afterburner Jacob's wings crumbled!

          Not on afterburner, but on a dive, and these are somewhat different things.
          Quote: Mikhail3
          Iosif Vissarionich asked to save duralumin as much as possible.

          I asked correctly, duralumin, especially after the loss of Ukraine, does not multiply by budding. LAGG was originally made semi-wooden, MIG too. But for some reason you are not making this accusation to Lavochkin and Mikoyan ...
          Quote: Mikhail3
          Ilyushin began to prove that he needed duralumin and got it.
          Because the wooden IL-2 will not work.
          Quote: Mikhail3
          He flattened Polikarpov with all his might.

          And here are the addresses of the "intriguer" Yakovlev on the I-185.

        4. fighter angel
          fighter angel 25 December 2021 23: 56
          +2
          Mikhail, well, yes, so he "flattened" Polikarpov, that he even wrote an official letter to the NKAP and the State Defense Committee about the LAUNCH OF THE I-185 fighter in series production !!! Yes, it is Yakovlev! In the letter he demanded that the I-185 be launched into the series, form several air regiments of the most experienced aces pilots on them, and transfer these regiments to difficult sectors of the front in order to achieve our air supremacy !!! The document has been preserved, found in the archives and published!
          And also Yakovlev so "flattened" Nikolai Nikolaevich that he was the only person who visited the terminally ill Polikarpov, when everyone had already turned away from him. And it was Yakovlev, after the death of Polikarpov, who achieved and procured an apartment, a dacha, a pension, and all sorts of benefits for his family.
          That's how he "flattened" it ...
          1. mmaxx
            mmaxx 28 December 2021 15: 21
            +1
            From the same monster .... And I thought .... And this is all on the orders of the bloody tyrant Stalin. And also, on his order, duralumin saved. The pilots were killed.
    2. Alf
      Alf 25 December 2021 18: 46
      +2
      Quote: Mikhail3
      What kind of plucked angel did all Soviet aircraft have ABSOLUTELY DIFFERENT CABINS ?!

      Why are Ford and Mercedes also different salons? Are the drivers different?
      Quote: Mikhail3
      Why did all the controls have individual characteristics, right down to the ball that had to be pulled in order for the machine gun to fire ?!

      Because the designers relied on the capabilities of the plant, and not on their own wishes. For example, the T-34 of the 112th plant had a stamped turret, and the 183rd plant drove a cast one. Why? Yes, because the casting technology on the 183rd was worked out at times, and the 112th plant did the best stamping.
  20. abc_alex
    abc_alex 24 December 2021 14: 49
    +2
    How did it happen that the two-seater trainer aircraft became a fighter again?


    Me too, detective.
    The Yak-7UTI was planned to be produced at the aircraft plant # 301.
    Moscow Aviation Plant No. 301 is today's Lavochkin Scientific and Production Association. Not hinting at anything?
    We continue the "tangled story". :)
    It was created in April 1937 as an aircraft plant No. 293 of the People's Commissariat of the USSR's Defense Industry on the basis of the former furniture factory of the People's Commissariat for Forestry ... At the end of May 1939, OKB-301 was opened at the plant to create the I-301 high-speed fighter the use of delta wood under the collective leadership of V.P. Gorbunov, S. A. Lavochkin, M. I. Gudkov.
    Further hint?
    Okay, I will not pull the cat for ...
    Plant No. 301 is the very production that Yakovlev "squeezed" under his Yak-1, having fused Lavochkin to Gorky. But the Yak-1 plane was crude, poorly designed, required numerous modifications, which at the plant, which produced cabinets and bedside tables three years ago, went through with great difficulty. Yakovlev, apparently squeezed the plant on the basis of "closer to home", and not on the principle of technical equipment. In addition, to squeeze the plant from competitors is one thing, but, as it turned out, to establish work with suppliers is another. For the Yak-1, there were neither guns nor a sufficient number of engines. And the plane itself was no longer all-wood. Therefore, it quickly became clear that the release, and most importantly, the revision of the Yak-1 at the 301 plant was Yakovlev's purest gamble. Where Gudkov, Gurevich and Lavochkin could make their own fighter, Yakovlev cannot make his own fighter.
    Therefore, the plant was transferred to the production of UTI. Cannons are not needed, one machine gun was left on it, and the requirements for flight characteristics were significantly reduced. The volume of production was also lower. That is, the thesis about the massive conversion of UTI into fighters does not stand up to criticism. Very few of these machines were made.

    With this project, plant 301 was evacuated to Novosibirsk. To plant # 153, which had previously produced I-16.
    Since the original Yak-1 remained raw, oblique and unfinished, the plant was tasked with producing an already updated Yak-1 with a metal wing, an increased diameter of the wheels, a detachable motor and the presence of a radio station. But, this project turned out to be absolutely unrealistic. The ONLY project suitable for production in the series turned out to be precisely the UTI brought from Moscow, which was redesigned into combat under the leadership of K.V. Sinelshchikov in Moscow.

    Apparently, in order not to irritate the bosses, who were very jealous of other people's developments, the aircraft was initially produced as a Yak-1 of the Yak-7 type. Then the "camouflage" was removed and the plane left the factory under the designation "Yak-7A", but by that time it had already received the name Yak-3 from the Government and the People's Commissariat. Do you feel the scale of the mess in Yakovlev's department? The Yak-3 index was four type of machines OKB. This is I-30; unrealized project of a single-seat twin-engined heavy fighter; Yak-7A and Yak-3 itself.

    That's the whole reason. The purest subjectivity. Yakovlev really wanted "his own aircraft factory" under his ass. If only as a designer and head of the design bureau, at that moment he would be as competent as in undercover games ...
    1. mmaxx
      mmaxx 24 December 2021 15: 50
      +2
      And you can ask: was the Yak-1 better than the LaGG-3? Or not. Maybe more expensive? Or was there delta wood in abundance? About her, I have not heard anything except the writings of Yakovlev himself.
      But I know what it is. Not a gift in processing. Now they prefer to process it (balinite) on metal-cutting machines, and finish the joints with their hands. This is not a pine tree to plan.
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 24 December 2021 19: 08
        +2
        It's not about the plane. It's about the plant. This plant made cabinets and cabinets 3 years ago. No one knew how to work with metal there, and certainly had no experience in aircraft refinement. What then fell on the shoulders of the "factory design bureaus" there simply was no one to do, especially after Lavochkin was removed.
        The Yak-1 itself was an extremely crude machine. Yakovlev had neither experience in designing fighters, nor experience in setting up large-scale production. If there was still some opportunity to mass-produce LaGG at this plant, then the Yak-1 could not even launch this plant into series.
        To launch LaGG at this plant, the efforts of THREE specialists were required: of which Gudkov and Gorbunov had real experience in organizing production, and Lavochkin was directly involved in the deployment of new aircraft factories in 1938-1939 and designing a fighter.
        So the question was not LaGG-1 or Yak-1, but LaGG-1 or nothing. Thanks to Yakovlev, the whole plant, in fact, worked for him personally for a year, serving his design searches on single copies.
        1. mmaxx
          mmaxx 25 December 2021 01: 50
          +1
          Re-drinking of what was happening in the factories can no longer be restored. Everyone is interested in reading and discussing airplanes, but nobody is interested in manufacturing. Even in 30 years a lot of things happen and everything has its reasons. And everything is forgotten. And few people want to delve into the archives about this. Therefore, knowing a little production, I cannot name the exact reasons. We must look at the papers. And link this with previous events. And so, everything turns into speculation. Yakovlev had enough ill-wishers. And he was not an angel. But unlike them, he was responsible for something. And he acted to the extent of his responsibility. I can say that one person cannot make such a decision. This is always a position agreed upon and approved by someone.
          1. abc_alex
            abc_alex 26 December 2021 01: 01
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            Yakovlev had enough ill-wishers. And he was not an angel. But unlike them, he was responsible for something.


            I am far from evaluating Yakovlev's personality. I am stating a fact: by the time of the evacuation, plant No. 301 did not have an aircraft ready for production. And it was only a happy coincidence that the factory engineers proactively adapted the UTI to combat activities. Otherwise, the plant would simply be useless. A whole plant. And, by the way, Yakovlev did not answer for this.

            Quote: mmaxx
            I can say that one person cannot make such a decision. This is always a position agreed upon and approved by someone.

            The specificity of the Soviet military industry in the 20s and 30s was that there were practically a single copy of specialists in entire industries. This is clearly seen, for example, when considering the expert opinions presented to the Politburo and the Council of People's Commissars. For example, who did you think gave an expert opinion on the T-34 tank? Ginzburg. Koshkin's direct competitor in the main tank program. But there was simply no one else.
            So it is in this case. Who could skillfully contradict Yakovlev on the issue of developing a high-speed fighter? Polikarpov? So he just had problems with his own project. In general, the situation was EXTREMELY specific. From Yakovlev's book:

            From the beginning of the summer of 1939, Stalin began to summon me for consultation on aviation matters. At first, I was embarrassed by the frequent summons to the Kremlin for confidential discussion of important issues, especially when Stalin directly asked:
            - What do you say on this issue, what do you think?
            He sometimes perplexed me, finding out the opinion about this or that employee.
            Seeing my predicament, embarrassment and wanting to cheer, he said:
            - Say what you think, and do not be embarrassed - we believe you, although you are young [7]. You are an expert in your field, you are not connected with the mistakes of the past, and therefore you can be more objective than the old specialists, whom we believed very much, and they led us into the swamp with aviation.
            It was then that he told me:
            We don't know who to believe.


            I think Yakovlev obviously abused his influence and "solved the issue" of the plant for his aircraft not from the point of view of rationality and efficiency, but from the point of view of "closer to home". This happened because by that time he did not have the experience of deploying a mass serial production of an aircraft. EMNIP the most massive aircraft of its design bureau by that time was produced in the amount of 138 pieces.
            At the same time, the issue of the deployment of the aircraft industry in the country was just one of those that were decided at the level of the Politburo, and Stalin's opinion was significant there.
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 26 December 2021 05: 43
              +1
              Comrade Stalin had a way of pulling different people to him at different times. It is quite possible that having asked Yakovlev today, yesterday he asked someone else, and tomorrow someone else was brought to him.
        2. mmaxx
          mmaxx 25 December 2021 01: 54
          0
          And the LaGG company had no production experience either. And their plane was even worse. And then they were all of the same generation with the corresponding experience. There were no others. And nowhere to take
          1. abc_alex
            abc_alex 26 December 2021 01: 48
            0
            Quote: mmaxx
            And the LaGG company had no production experience either. And their plane was even worse. And then they were all of the same generation with the corresponding experience. There were no others. And nowhere to take


            You're wrong. LaGG-1, or rather I-301, could not be worse than the Yak-1. Simply because you cannot be worse than what is not. The Yak-1 fighter by that time simply did not exist. There was a project far from being realized. There was an airplane designed from the experience of developing "sports" cars. There was no fighter. What Yakovlev tried to launch into production was anything but a combat aircraft. A whole year was spent on identifying and eliminating design defects. The plane was literally stitched on its knees, changes were made to the design throughout the year, and in the same parts and systems of the aircraft several times:
            oil pipeline - February 8 and April 15;
            exhaust pipes - February 20 and April 15;
            installation of an oil cooler - February 26, April 9 and 11;
            oil cooler blinds control - March 14 and April 9;
            antifoam - March 20 and April 11;
            oil tank - February 8, March 10 and April 15;
            oil tank installation - February 8, March 20 and April 15;
            installation of compressed air and oxygen cylinders - February 11, March 10 and April 2.

            At the same time, I will note that even in the summer of 1940 the plane had never fired. And in May it became clear that the wing needed to be remodeled. Only in the summer of 1940 did he start flying again. At the same time, the entire backlog for the first series had to be redone. Until October, the plane was repeatedly altered, but as soon as the military pilots sat at the helm, it turned out that the machines were also poorly made. After all, they were made in a state of chaos, according to the drawings of the original I-26 with numerous corrections made along the way. And the 301st plant, I remind you, is a furniture factory, there was a culture of production, to put it mildly ... Even having finished, in principle, the design of the machine, Yakovlev could not launch it into series. The factories that were responsible for the production of units and the assembly of aircraft simply could not do this.
            At the same time, the I-301 by the end of 1940 was already a fully developed machine suitable for production in series. Lavochkin, Gorbunov and Gudkov were awarded the 301st degree Stalin Prize for the creation of the I-1. The I-301, retrofitted with additional tanks, was put into production under the LaGG-3 index.
            Until June 22, 322 aircraft were produced, on July 1, 1941 - 805 LaGGs. For comparison, 425 Yaks were produced at the same time.
            1. mmaxx
              mmaxx 26 December 2021 05: 49
              +1
              I read about the usual launch of an airplane. Nothing special.
            2. mmaxx
              mmaxx 26 December 2021 05: 52
              +1
              And in general, I am not shielding Yakovlev. I just look at everything from the outside. And since he is a little familiar with the production and decision-making there, then the logic of everything is seen. Personal qualities may or may not be liked, but business qualities come first. The whole question is how they are used.
      2. hohol95
        hohol95 24 December 2021 21: 53
        +1
        And you read the literature ...
        The military wanted to create a fighter with a long range from LaGG-3 and 5 fuel tanks were "stuck" into it. They wanted an enhanced "second salvo" and the designers "vkryachi in the collapse of the UB engine cylinders," around the engine "2 UBS and 2 ShKAS.
        The Yak-1 had a ShVAK and 2 ShKAS!
        And less fuel !!!
        LaGG-3 (series 1) takeoff weight - 3346 kg.
        Yak-1 takeoff weight - 2950 kg.
  21. Heat meter
    Heat meter 24 December 2021 22: 53
    +2
    It seemed to me alone that the article was a frank copy-paste from specialized sources? Even not verified in an amicable way (especially the duplication of paragraphs about the finalization of the lantern and the cutting of the gargrot ...)
    1. Alf
      Alf 25 December 2021 20: 19
      +2
      Quote: Heat meter
      It seemed to me alone that the article was a frank copy-paste from specialized sources? Even not verified in an amicable way (especially the duplication of paragraphs about the finalization of the lantern and the cutting of the gargrot ...)

      Roman's "corporate" style ...
  22. Givi_49
    Givi_49 27 December 2021 11: 14
    -1
    Empty arguments.
    The war has clearly placed all the planes in their niches:
    - Yaks occupied the lower echelon and were indispensable when escorting attack aircraft;
    - The Lavochkin family, with their weapons and rate of climb, dominated the middle echelon;
    “Cobras, with their excellent downward visibility, great radio and excellent dive, were most appropriate on the top floor.
    It remains only to learn how to correctly use all this arsenal. And that was done.
    1. Alf
      Alf 27 December 2021 21: 59
      0
      Quote: Givi_49
      - Yaks occupied the lower echelon and were indispensable when escorting attack aircraft;
      - The Lavochkin family, with their weapons and rate of climb, dominated the middle echelon;
      “Cobras, with their excellent downward visibility, great radio and excellent dive, were most appropriate on the top floor.

      That's just YAK and LA and P-39 fought up to 5 thousand, very rarely higher.
      1. Givi_49
        Givi_49 29 December 2021 13: 14
        0
        Once we won with this set, then everything else is just words.
        1. Alf
          Alf 31 December 2021 17: 15
          +1
          Quote: Givi_49
          Once we won with this set, then everything else is just words.

          What set? What, the aircraft did not go on guard? Or were the Cobras not involved in the escort? And YAKs were not used on interceptions?
          1. Givi_49
            Givi_49 31 December 2021 17: 45
            0
            Our yaks were sometimes engaged in ground attack. Stormtroopers?
            1. Alf
              Alf 31 December 2021 17: 48
              +1
              Quote: Givi_49
              Our yaks were sometimes engaged in ground attack. Stormtroopers?

              Understand. The familiar policy, when there is nothing to object, begins to chatter the topic. Continue in the same spirit !
              1. Givi_49
                Givi_49 31 December 2021 21: 18
                0
                I have reported everything to you. There is nothing to add and there is no need. And that each rule is full of exceptions is self-explanatory. It got you carried away by exceptions. A familiar story: my opinion is also wrong.
      2. Ol willy
        Ol willy 1 February 2022 08: 52
        0
        The Aerocobra did not have a turbocharger, with a single-speed supercharger and a critical altitude of 3500-4000 meters above the Cobra there was not much to do
  23. fighter angel
    fighter angel 28 December 2021 13: 08
    +1
    Dear Roman Skomorokhov!
    And why did you not mention in your article about such a modification of the Yakovlevskaya "seven" as the Yak-7-37?
    Yak-7-37 was a modification of the serial Yak-7BM-105PA aircraft and differed from it in more powerful cannon armament. Armament: motor-gun MPSh-37 B.G. Shpitalnaya caliber 37 mm, two synchronous machine guns UBS caliber 12,7 mm and overload - six RS-82 [Changes in the aircraft fuselage ensured the installation of any of the following guns: VYa-37, ShVAK (with the last two, the ammunition increased) in combination with two UBS or ShKAS machine guns].
    In terms of fire power, the Yak-7-37 significantly surpassed all known fighters that participated in hostilities in 1942.The second salvo mass was 4,15 kg / s and was 1 times greater than that of the Yak-7 and Yak-2,4A , Yak-7B - 1,53 times, LaGG-Z-37 - 1,15 times, LaGG-Z of the last series - 2,07 times, Curtiss P-40 Kittyhawk - 2,55 times, Me -109F with MG-151 machine gun - 4,4 times and with MG-FF cannon - 1,46 times.
    The Yak-7-37, as of some interest for the Air Force, was released in a small series in August 1942 - 22 aircraft without slats, passed military tests on the Northern Front at 42 IAP 240 IADs and showed itself well in air battles.

    The Yak-7-37 fought 12 group battles with an approximately equal balance of forces. 10 enemy aircraft were shot down, of which: Me-109 - 8, FW-190 - 1, He-129 - 1; damaged 2 Me-109. Their losses: 4 planes were shot down, 3 were knocked out.

    The MPSh-37 cannon has established itself as a reliable and formidable weapon. The hit of the projectile in the gas tanks was accompanied by an explosion, in the wing - the appearance of a hole with an area of ​​over 1,0 m *. The hit of one shell was practically enough to destroy the enemy aircraft. An armor-piercing projectile pierced 200-mm armor from a distance of 50 m.

    The recoil when firing was tolerated by the pilot and the aircraft, in general, painlessly. However, at first, there were cases of oil leakage from the rear seal of the gear shaft after 200 ... 300 shots. The defect was eventually eliminated by unclenching the leather seal cuffs, as well as by installing (like a LaGG-Z aircraft) a tapered bushing with spiral grooves.


    LTH:
    Modification Yak-7-37
    Wingspan, m 10.00
    Length, m 8.50
    Height, m ​​2.75
    Wing area, m2 17.15
    Weight, kg
    empty 2697 aircraft
    normal takeoff 3235
    Engine type 1 PD M-105PA
    Power, hp 1 x 1050
    Maximum speed km / h
    off the ground xnumx
    at height 564
    Practical range, km 550
    Rate of climb, m / min 694
    Practical ceiling, m 8250
    Crew 1
    Armament: one 37 mm motor gun MPSh-37
    two synchronous 12.7 mm UBS machine guns
    and in overload - six RS-82.
  24. niksfromru
    niksfromru 29 December 2021 16: 39
    0
    "Offset centering improved longitudinal stability" Not to improve, but to make it excessive. When pulling the handle, the Yak-7A began to parachute - and turned into an ideal target.
    "To get the plane out of a spin, it was enough to put the pedals and the stick in neutral position and the plane would get out." Usually, they write about it in the absence of other merits. The I-16 also had quite satisfactory corkscrew characteristics.
    "The suspension of rockets did not worsen the aerodynamic characteristics of the aircraft."
    "In the horizontal direction, the Yak-7B and Me-109F had the same speed" This is not so. Moreover, since 1942, the Bf-109G was already in progress, surpassing Yakovlev's plane in all respects, except for the turn time. But according to this parameter, the I-15 was the record holder of all times and peoples.
  25. Murrr 27
    Murrr 27 4 January 2022 05: 04
    0
    Fitter65 (Alexander)... , although offtopic, but I will repeat the information that I caught my eye 10+ years ago, I took the book in the library (I have not lived there for a long time, the name cannot be specified). Memories of an aviation engineer, of God's chosen nationality, graduated from school at the end of the Second World War, the Moscow Aviation Institute and was assigned to Sukhoi, where most of the Polikarpovtsy worked. Here they are at the "corporate party" and said that:
    1.if there would have been an I-185, the Germans would have been afraid to attack (no comment),
    2. and also about Chkalov's last flight: the plane was, of course, with remarks, but that was then the norm. It did not have air-cooled louvers, and the device - the temperature sensor was in an inconvenient place and was shallow - and V.P. already had noticeable vision problems ... And he also got a little sneaky - he was an ingenious pilot, but this plane had a much higher wing load relative to the I-15 and I-16, and this caused a steeper landing glide path. But this is V.P. did not study and did not realize - like "I'm cool". Further - about two circles instead of one - they have already said, and when V.P. led the plane to land - due to the fact that he did not take into account the data - the calculation was made with an error, it became necessary to violate the then instructions (about this foolishness of the then instructions in the "Sky of War" and A.I. ) - and pull up with a motor. But he did not see the fact that the engine was already supercooled, and the supercooled engine "cut off" when giving gas. Yes, V.P. was a genius in the air - he almost landed the plane, but snatched the power line. What to do - TB is always and everywhere written in blood.
    I can vouch for the fidelity of the retelling of what was in the book.
    And I won't get into an argument - I didn't stand with a candle.
    Oh yes, this engineer, the author of the design of some kind of wing hatch, was worried that he did not register the design at the time, so he did not receive money, when he submitted it, the answer was - "where is the novelty, this is how many years in production" (this is if someone wants to find the book). And I don't remember anything else from it.