Piston engine epitome?

[JoeB]

Good Info - but I disagree with some of the Russian sources as if you tally up some of their claims they exceed the actual amounts of aircraft that were in theater (Especially true for the F-80). Again I doubt Soviet pilots were flying La-11 to intercept B-26s. They were there for one thing - fly Mig-15s. Here a breakdown of volunteer units in Korea and there were little La-11s when compared to the Mig-15.

I didn't say Soviet claims in Korea were all correct, I'm not relying on them. The examples I gave are specific 351st Regiment (La-11 equipped night unit) claims that match encounters or losses in US original records not only the same date, but same general time and place.

The linked list is of so called Chinese Volunteer units, really just regular units of the PLAAF (it's from Volkovskiy "The War in Korea"; it says it includes NK units but doesn't list any, though there were several). Note the list includes 2nd Fighter Division, the Chinese La-11's encountered Nov 30 '51. But the 351st Fighter Regiment, La-11 night fighters, was Soviet AF, not Chinese. Most of the Communist air opposition from Nov 1950 until 1953, when the Chinese and NK's became an actual majority, was regular units of the Soviet AF's (VVS tactical, PVO air defence, and VMF landbased naval), again just labelled "volunteer". The 351st Regiment was the only La-11 unit among the Soviet units as the 2nd FAD was among the Chinese, but the 351st had some verifiable victories while flying the La-11 (at night in Korea, plus a handful against Nationalist Chinese a/c before the KW that can be verified), and suffered no La-11 combat losses per Soviet accounts, nor did the US claim any of the 351st's, ie Soviet piloted, La-11's.

My sources on 351st and its specific claims are Russian language published and archival, non-internet, but for those of the 'links=truth' persuasion here's a translation (by same guy who translated the Volkovskiy excerpts, Cookie Sewell) of a 1993 Russian magazine article about their night fighter ops (I believe it has some errors, and info since updated by the same author Igor Seidov, but it's a reasonable overview).
Shield of the Night

Joe

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Good information, but I think it still boils down to the La-11, while being a good recip aircraft was a minimal impact during the Korean War. I read it took the La-11 25 minutes to reach the B-29s altitude and while there the B-29 could easily accelerate away from the La-11 in a shallow dive.

I will concede there could of been B-26 kills by the La-11 but I still question Soviet operation of these aircraft, it conflicts with the standing order directly from Stalin that being the totally secretary of Soviet pilots serving over Korea.

 

[JoeB]

1. Good information, but I think it still boils down to the La-11, while being a good recip aircraft was a minimal impact during the Korean War. I read it took the La-11 25 minutes to reach the B-29s altitude and while there the B-29 could easily accelerate away from the La-11 in a shallow dive.

2. I will concede there could of been B-26 kills by the La-11 but I still question Soviet operation of these aircraft....

I certainly agree the La-11 had minimal impact on the big picture of the Korean War, as all prop air-air combat did, really.

1. As I said not all of "Shield" and other Russian accounts is correct, or doesn't reflect both sides. It and other Soviet side accounts say B-29's were diving and pulling away from Lavochkins, but in fact from their mission reports the B-29's usually only went around 230-250mph true on bomb runs (at usually 19-24k ft at that time), and had to fly a predictable arc to have SHORAN gear get them over a target at night, could only evade after bombs away. It was clearly harder to do wild boar interception against a B-29 w/ an La-11 than a MiG-15 but not easy or impossible with either. The 351st (and some attached pilots from Soviet day units) scored 8 (real) night victories against B-29's from June 52 to Jan 53 with MiG's, but its successor unit the 298th scored none from Feb-July '53. I believe one factor in the 351st's quick success with the MiG was the time it spent building up skill with Lavochkins, though only one marginal success v B-29's December 23 '51; the 298th never built up enough skill despite using MiG's from the start (though there were other factors of course, US tactics and ECM, better Soviet GCI radar in '52, etc).

2. Here's a translation/transcription of a page from Soviet archives, some columns got a little scrambled getting into Word but the general idea should be clear. It can be seen from other sources these are some of the 351st's claims. Note that times and places are given, and other sources also give names of the claiming pilots. For example the Nov 16 claim was by Kapt PF Dushin a sdn CO in the 351st. The places are Russian transliterations of Korean place names, but when deciphered are all pretty far north, again 16 Nov, near Dandong means almost on the Yalu. Of these 5, the first two are attacks recorded by B-26's which weren't lost, the last two correspond to B-26 disappearances, and the March 12 one I can't find in US records, yet anyway. So with specific claims by specific Soviet pilots, I don't know why we'd "doubt" they were Soviet, or why we'd concede disappearances were caused by La-11's (as opposed to anything else) unless we believed these were real claims by the people who say they claimed them: the Soviet AF. Of course all such docs *were* pretty secret for a long time.

503. 12 Oct 51 B—26 75 km South— Aircraft caught on fire and crashed into the sea
1918 hrs west of Andun. The fate of the pilot is unknown.

504. 16 Nov 51 B—26 Southeast of Dandong Aircraft crashed into the sea.
1927 hrs The fate of the pilot is unknown.

505 12 Mar 52 B—26 Cherengvan Aircraft was shot down, crashed 25—30 km
0130 hrs northeast of Cherengvan.The fate of the pilot is unknown.

506. 15 May 52 B—26 Cherengvan Aircraft crashed and exploded 10 km south—
2000 hrs east of Sensen. A parachutist landed 10—15
km southeast of Sensen. Further fate of the
pilot is unknown.

507. 5 Jun 52 B—26 Tehjsyu Aircraft landed on the water 10—15 km
2245 hrs southeast of Sinbi—to Island
Immediately after the landing enemy
cutters were sighted approaching the
B—26 landing site.

Joe

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Great info Joe! BTW I had an uncle who flew in the early portion of the Korean War in B-29s (He was a radio operator). He survived an attack by flak and Migs during a daylight mission but his aircraft crashed on landing in Japan.

In 1954 he flew ferret missions in B-50s.

"So with specific claims by specific Soviet pilots, I don't know why we'd "doubt" they were Soviet, or why we'd concede disappearances were caused by La-11's (as opposed to anything else) unless we believed these were real claims by the people who say they claimed them: the Soviet AF. Of course all such docs *were* pretty secret for a long time."

During that period UN forces were close to the Yalu, again I don't think the Soviets would of risked having one of their pilots being captured, especially the incident around Dandog.

It's funny though - many Soviet pilots have came foward after Korea to tell about their service over North Korea. If the La-11 shot down any B-26s or if any of the Soviet pilots flew La-11s I would think by now something would of been said...

 

[JoeB]

It's funny though - many Soviet pilots have came foward after Korea to tell about their service over North Korea. If the La-11 shot down any B-26s or if any of the Soviet pilots flew La-11s I would think by now something would of been said...

I guess we're just belaboring this now, but I don't get your point. I'm showing you original Soviet records saying they made those specific claims...it's the most original source you can get.

But plenty, relative to the small topic, has been said in print about the Soviet 351st Regiment's ops in China and Korea. Just most of it is in the Russian language only (but the article translation linked above is an exception; also the book "With the Yanks in Korea Vol 1" by Cull and Newton mentions the 351st's ops a bit using Russian sources). Some of Seidov's later articles, again Russian only, on Soviet night ops rely heavily one first hand pilot accounts as well as declassified Soviet records. I think your implication that "nothing has been said" about Soviet Korean War La-11 ops, is just not correct.

The only thing I'm adding here which isn't in print (AFAIK) is correlating specific La-11 claims to US primary source records, which shows that some, not all, of the claims were apparently valid.

Joe

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Maybe mis-understood there, my point is why specific soviet pilots who flew these La-11s have not come foward. We know the identities of dozens of Soviet Mig-15 drivers who give specific accounts of their tour in Korea. You show data from the 351st, but my question, who were the pilots?

 

[Smokey]

Of the aircraft that flew, surely the Goodyear F2G - 1D super corsair is a contender for best piston engine singleseat fighter.

Super Corsair F2G-1D [www.orizzle.com]

Of those that didn't fly, the forward swept wing Heinkel P.1076 may have been pretty impressive

Heinkel He P.1076 Luft Art Images by Andreas Otte

 

[Matt308]

Likely maneauverable with inherent instability of forward swept wings, but probably sacrificed speed.

 

[comiso90]

Of the aircraft that flew, surely the Goodyear F2G - 1D super corsair is a contender for best piston engine singleseat fighter.

Super Corsair F2G-1D [www.orizzle.com]

Of those that didn't fly, the forward swept wing Heinkel P.1076 may have been pretty impressive

Heinkel He P.1076 Luft Art Images by Andreas Otte

Wow awesome pics.. thanks

 

[JoeB]

Maybe mis-understood there, my point is why specific soviet pilots who flew these La-11s have not come foward. We know the identities of dozens of Soviet Mig-15 drivers who give specific accounts of their tour in Korea. You show data from the 351st, but my question, who were the pilots?

Because you (or I, or anyone) haven't read about something doesn't mean it hasn't been written about. The identity of 351st La-11 pilots certainly has been; I already posted a link to a translation of a Russian article with lots of names of 351st pilots. And the original Soviet records give all kinds of additional detail, photo's etc of the same men, no reasonable doubt who they were.

Again a published English source is here:
Shield of the Night
and here's a picture of the most famous 351st pilot, Anatoliy Karelin, only officially credited Soviet night ace in Korea, in his La-11. He made one claim in the La-11, apparently not officially recognized by the Soviets, yet OTOH possibly corresponding to a real B-26 loss, April 4 1952. His 5 official victories were all B-29's claimed in the MiG-15, some confirmed in US records.

Joe

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Bingo! - that's what I was looking for, thank you...

But I think the bottom line here is an La-11 never shot down a B-29...

 

[JoeB]

Bingo! - that's what I was looking for, thank you...

But I think the bottom line here is an La-11 never shot down a B-29...

Bingo! it was there several posts ago.

Several posts before that I think you were saying a B-29 was NEVER damaged by an La-11, where the hell did I get that?!!! now the "bottomline" has changed My original statement was the La-11 had its successes in Korea, downed some B-26's damaged a couple of B-29's; haven't seen any contradicting info.

Joe

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Bingo! it was there several posts ago.

Please don't patronize me, you posted this link only once..

Shield of the Night

Several posts before that I think you were saying a B-29 was NEVER damaged by an La-11, where the hell did I get that?!!! now the "bottomline" has changed My original statement was the La-11 had its successes in Korea, downed some B-26's damaged a couple of B-29's; haven't seen any contradicting info.

And all that is shown is a CLAIM by the 351st that they damaged a B-29. That was in your 2nd post.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Dont hurt him FBJ....

 

[FLYBOYJ]

 

[dahut]

Bearcat, for all out balls-blastin performance.

Another I would cast a vote for is the Kyushu Shinden. Very advanced for it's time, if developed it would have been a terror. Fast (nearly 500 mph in its piston engine version), heavily armed (4 x 30MM cannon) and highly maneuverable, it was almost stall proof with its canard set-up, thus forgiving to newbie pilots.

Finally, it was designed for a turbojet from the outset, by a guy who understood them. If that had've gotten going, whoowee, look out!

 

[Matt308]

Nope. Look at the design. Classic engine overheat.

 

[syscom3]

Skyraider.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Skyraider.

Agree!!!

 

[dahut]

Nope. Look at the design. Classic engine overheat.

Agreed. Overheating in ground handling WAS an identified shortcoming of the J7W1, along with the stalky undercarriage and the dreaded torque roll at full throttle from the combination of drive shaft/engine/massive prop. But, these things were not insurmountable and even the Mersu (Messerschmidt 109), Sopwith Camel and BMW motorcycles suffered from torque-related flaws!

Keep in mind that the follow-on design, the J7W2, was expected to use a turbojet engine, the piston engine merely an expedient. 'Fact is, a jet engine was envisioned as it's rightful powerplant by the designer, Capt. Tsuruno. He was abreast of turbojet design and sample German engines were on hand which could be developed to provide all the power (and more) that the Shinden needed.

But this was about PISTON ENGINES and putting turbojets aside, projected performance with the interim radial would have put even the Mystic Mustang to the test.

The Shinden was intended as a short range, high altitude "bomber buster," as the Japanese were more concerned with that at the time than with aerial acrobatics. However, I suspect that with it's CG radial, near 0 degree dihedral, canard "pitchability" and the planned increases in control surface area ... well, your average 'Stang pilot could possibly have met his match.

And to be honest, the Shinden suffered from several other bugaboos besides the ones mentioned. Bad timing (the design concept was on the boards a few YEARS before it was ever considered for production), a lack of skilled pilots who could fly the thing, production capacity that became merely wishful thinking and a lack of decent airfields also hampered it - oh, and the A-bomb.

However, take note of the fact that I included the comment, "if developed" in my original reply. There were problems with the Shinden, indeed. But, it DID fly in WWII on an internal combustion, piston engine and was acknowledged then as a "Whew! We got lucky" moment.

Did the original post require a production aircraft with all the "bugs" worked out? I might have missed that. I only give my opinion here of what was potentially the "epitome" of piston driven aircraft. If the SHinden wont suffice, then I'll fall back on the Bearcat. Skyraider, eat your heart out.