Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
We hear lots of info about how the Axis aircraft matched up head to head with the Allied aircraft, but I have never heard or seen anything written about how the Allied aircraft matched up with their contemporaries. Specifically, I am curious how the Russian aircraft stacked up against the Mustang and Spitfire.
Thanks,
Dave Myrick
I would like to compare actual performance, not paper to paper. Turn rates, roll rates, climb rates, dive speeds, and acceleration rates within the combat envelope, also the firing rates of the armament and weight of lead on target. These are what I am interested in. For this comparison it is irrelevant what the Soviet pilots liked or disliked.
Dave
The early Soviet airforce was woefully outdated but towards the end of the war, the YaK-9 emerged as comparable to the P-51.
The airwar in the east was fought on very different terms, so you'll see a difference in their aircraft reflecting that condition.
Add to that, the YaK-1 (comparable to the Bf109E and F), the La-7 (good high-altitude fighter) and the MiG-3 (solid early war front line defender) and the Pe-2 (good dive-bomber, heavy fighter and night-fighter)Completely agree. I would also throw in the La-5 and Yak-3, which were spectacular aircraft in there role.
Soviet aircraft have the same problem as Soviet tanks. Performance looks good on paper but they perform poorly in combat. Soviet Union tended to scrimp on details such as radios, weapon sights, crew ergonomics, ammunition quality, weapon quality control causing low service life and/or performance less then technical manual suggests etc.
Which makes it tough to compare Soviet equipment to western equipment. Are you comparing paper values or demonstrated real world combat performance?