The entire Soviet war production philosophy was about outproducing the Germans with machines that are capable but not necessarily superior technologically. T-34 is a perfect example and so is La-5. They made them as simple as possible to make, train on, and operate in harsh conditions. Automation, expensive materials, advanced sensors - these were all judges luxuries Soviets didn't posses to win the war. And, it was largely a very successful strategy as Germans went to the other extreme - make increasingly costly, complex, hard-to-operate, and unreliable new machines. Be they Panther and King Tiger tanks or jet fighters. 8 T-34s vs. 1 Panther generally won, so was probably true for 3 La-5s vs. 1 FW
You are just pulling s×it out of your ass and presenting it as "fact". When T-34/76 made it to mass production it was the lightest - yet best armored (compared to its weight) tank, with more than adequate arnament and probaby best mobility for any medium tank ever made. Its successor T-34/85 was fully capable of dealing with HEAVY tanks while it was itself a medium tank. Now please try very hard and find a similar machine in its class if you can. Your comment is as ignorant as it is denegrating. The age old "well they just made a lot of stuff", often paired with equally echoing nonsense like "they just had more men" and some thing or other about Russian winters and what not.
@@mrvk39 fair point. I just wanted to highlight that La-5s weren't cannon fodder as their predecessor LaGG-3. From what I know, La-5FN was comparable to FW-190 A-5 and A-8
@@iansysoev9462 agreed! La-5 and its variants were an advanced design for WWII and its most advanced modifications held up to eve advanced German fighters. It was still cheaper, though, and produced in larger quantities which was USSR's overall strategy. That was my original point. USSR tried to outproduce rather than built "miracle weapons" Hitler pinned his absurd hopes on.
I always had the feeling that Soviet fighters, particularly the Yaks, had something of a wasted potential. And I will blame the Stalin purges before the war for that. When you look at them, the general layout is "right", better than the Spitfire and Bf-109, with the landing gear retracting inwards and fuel tanks in the wings, something NA also did with the Mustang. The wings also had thin profiles, something that Hawker took a lot of time to correct on their fighters. They also had armament centralized in the nose, again a better concept. They also adopted "bubble" canopies before the Spit, P-47 and P-51 did. Where I feel they were let down was with the M-105 engine. His fault or not, Klimov failed to keep pace on the horsepower race with the other V12s of the war, namely the DB600, the Merlin and V1710. That forced Yakovlev to remove stuff from his fighters to keep them competitive. Shvetsov on the other hand, had no such problems, and his M82/ASh-82 was delivering power on par with his German and American counterparts, making the La-5 standout among other Soviet fighters of the era, where there was no need to alleviate weight so drastically as in the Yaks. The thing holding the La-5 back was quality of manufacturing. Once that stabilized in late 44, the La-7 became almost unstoppable at lower altitudes.
Oil and fuel, lack of stamped aluminum, poor quality of airframe manufacturing. In the USSR, there were problems with high-octane fuel with high-quality oil, powerful engines were dying and could not be mass-produced.
While Stalin's purges often seen as a bad thing in general, they weren't as useless as people tend to say. At the time of purges, a lot of the military staff in command was stuck in "Old habits", believing in outdated tactics, outdated equipment, refusing to change. Purge was necessary to rid out of such people in command, but, as it usually goes with such projects, it wasn't done perfectly, a lot of promising people were purged from military, as well as a lot of incompetent people were left in the military. And it is especially noticeable in soviet airforce, glaring example - Alexander Pokryishkin story when he got discharged by regiment's commander, colonel Isaev, his Party card was revoked and he almost got court-marshalled beacause of his constant criticism of ourdated tactics. But regimental commisar and high command did intercede and Pokryshkin was reinstated in command and in Communist Party.
And about La-5 quality of electronics and manufacturing - it was mostly due to Yak fighters having the biggest priority, as was mentioned in a video. Yakovlev used all tools at his disposal, including political connections to secure production lines for his fighter. Lavochkin only had what's left. Even with M-82 Lavockin kinda got lucky, cuz Shvetsow already had engines produced, but with cancelling of Su-2 already produced engines were gonna be left to rust, as well no new orders for production would be given. La-5/7 is my favourite USSR fighter plane and i would love to see how it would turn out if Lavocking would get priority in production instead of Yakovlev.
Stalin purges!? Oh, I have been an officer in one of the European armies for nearly three decades and I can say that a purge would come as a blessing! The command and leadership functions have been taken over by the totally incompetent, corrupt and above all evil, who bring around even more stupid and incompetent people so that they stand out as indisputable quality! Negative selection has taken off so much that your quality is practically reflected in the fact that you are not progressing to higher positions! Stalin, all is forgiven, stand up and come to enlighten this rotten institution where I work...
@@jerromedrakejr9332 A bit harsh, but in general - purges sometimes are required, since military chain of command can become quite inefficient and rotten, if not adressed. In scope of soviet military - it's performance diring Soviet-Finnish war is good enough indication that severe changes in it's command and structure are required.
Seriously underrated channel, especially glad that you post sources in the description as well. Hope we see more Soviet and Italian planes, those are vey much deserving of more attention.
The top Allied ace being a Soviet pilot, it proves that though the La-5 was a flawed machine, it is not the aircraft, but the man flying it that ultimately makes the difference. Thanks for your insightful video on this aircraft.🙂👍
@@frankdrevinpolicesquad2930 AFAIK, these figures were confirmed lately to be more or less accurate for Russian top aces. Average overclaim is what is being studied in regards of the counts. Here in Russia, at least. For both Russian and German sides. Germans overclaimed slightly less, as it seems by now, but still considerably. Those differ quite seriously, depending on regiment, for instance. Some did report almost real figures, others used to overclaim about 3-5 times. And the key problem is lack of German docs. They are a real mess, if exist. Much of their archives were lost in the end of the war.
Excelent video, one I was waiting since the Lagg 3 that you did a whyle ago, the only thing I miss from your older videos is the full comparation between aircraft, not only speeds, but, still this channel is one of the best in WW2 aircraft, now to wait for the La 7 video, in other subjet, still waiting for the FW 190 with the BMW 801 engine video, I said it like this because the 190 had diferent engines in it's lfe span, the Jumo 213 (A, E, F models), the DB 603 (prototypes), even the ASh-82 engine used by the La 5/7 aircraft (yeah I know, that those ones are replikas done after the war, but, they were made non the less), and it would be easier if is divided in diferent videos, one with the models that used the BMW 801 (the A, F and G models), other with the Jumo 213 (the Doras 9, 11, 12 and 13), and since the Ta 152 could be in second video, is diferent enought to have it's own video,
Ivan Kozhedub: Loyalty to the Motherland. Seeking fight. These are his memoirs. A very high quality book. Written in simple language. By the way, the book notes a general pattern of how the Germans used their FV-190s on the Eastern Front. I think the FV-190 is a great aircraft. But the Germans used it as a fighter-bomber. The Germans became hostages of their technology and pilot training. The front needed a lot of planes and a lot of pilots, but the Germans could not prepare both planes and pilots in such numbers. The Luftwaffe was trapped. But the Soviet Air Force had no such problems. And those of the pilots who survived in the first years of the war were able to train air fighters. Such as Kozhedub. That's the point. Kozhedub is an amazing pilot. Having destroyed 62 enemy planes, he was never shot down. Compare with Hartman, who was shot down 19 times (or so). Then he commanded a Soviet air division in Korea, but did not fly himself. He was forbidden to fly. At the end of his career, he was a Soviet Air Marshal
I just think its funny that WW2 started with dated aircraft with the up and coming new ships being liquid cooled, but by the end of the war, radial engines were becoming more popular due to their reliability and lacking the fragility of liquid cooled systems.
Always had a soft spot for the La5, ever the first IL2 game I always liked it for its easy handling and speed. IIRC it wasn't exactly the fastest or tightest turning but was competitive and easy to use.
All La fighters had slats and CG closely hugging the centre of lift. So the very, very delayed stall and nauseatingly tight turns in Il-2 weren't so far off real performance. You get it in any tight turn combat and those Fws are getting their anus torn open wide. Only real enemy was G2/G4, anything beyond that the Bfs were so heavy they never stood a chance.
The greatest words of respect, praise and appreciation I dedicate to you for this wonderful and distinguished work Thank you for your great giving and effort I wish you lasting success. My utmost respect and appreciation
A thousand greetings, great respect and admiration for your esteemed and wonderful channel, which provided accurate and useful information. I wish you lasting success. A wonderful work and a great effort that deserves pride, appreciation and pride. My utmost respect and appreciation to you
The more I learn about Soviet era aircraft and the situation ,and hardships endured during design ,and manufacturing . The Respect for the people there has grown with it. Not hard to understand why so many left following the revolution , and why some many more as I write this are fleeing .
Wow! Two 20 mm cannons through the propeller right in front of the pilot! I am surprised by this since I would imagine the blast from the 20 mm would make it really difficult to see the target, or much of anything in front. Especially in any kind of dim or dark setting like late afternoon or under heavy clouds. Guns firing in front of the pilot through the propeller was nothing new, but historically those were machine guns. 20 mm cannons have much brighter blast. Interesting. Edit: I just read a bit more on this and it seems Soviet 20 mm cannon had a rather ingenious method of using a rubber sleeve to decrease the effects of blast.
One cannon, not two. And not through propeller, the cannon was inside the engine and propeller axis, thus the muzzle was in front of the propeller and not behind like nose-mounted MG's. This also helped with spreading the cannon's exhaust around the cockpit and not into the frontal glass.
@@user-kf7kv8zp5v You can’t install anything in the middle of M-82. It’s a radial engine . There’s no room. La-5 indeed had two 20 mm ShVAK canons installed on the top of his nose and they did shoot through propeller . While “20 mm” sounds respectable in reality ShVAKs were rather crappy guns.
Proof of the old adage, Excellence is the enemy of good ENOUGH. All you have to be is close enough to your enemies ability. Most dogfights were decided by circumstances and piloting ability
Even if the La-5 was slightly worse than the FW-190 when you have 20 and they have 1 it's far less of a big deal. Great channel. Need more coverage of lesser known planes and their variants. Glad to see you're filling that role at such a high level.
A fighter aircraft - like any other product - has an optimum build man-hours/manufacturing cost/time needed for maintenance/operational effectiveness ratio. When quantity is added into the equation it becomes easier to see what rises to the top. Superior products don't always reign supreme even on the free consumer market. VHS was reportedly the worst home-video cassette system from a quality point of view (which is why tv networks didn't use them) but it was the cheapest and most practical for non-technical minded people. In a long war of attrition any weapon is only as effective as its operational time. And time is a luxury one rarely if ever can afford in a war. Considering that the Soviets had to scramble for new weapons while being on the front-line (sometimes literally) and being forced to use non-trained farmhands (many of them illiterate), women and kids to assemble complex machines on barely adequate rations they did remarkably well. I suppose it's true what they say about wars accelerating both invention and production - especially when one's own country is invaded. Both the Poles and the French had secret weapon programs while under nazi occupation. For the French, as soon as they were liberated, some of these project were greenlit as they already had been on the drawing board.
The lines on the prototype M-82 LaGG-3 are absolutely gorgeous, like the later La-9 and La-11 - that streamlined engine cowling is downright beautiful. You could almost mistake one for the other were it not for the conventional greenhouse canopy.
The saying "if it looks right, it must fly right" certainly applies to the La-5. Just like it does with the Spitfire, Bf 109, Zero and P-51. What I find fascinating is how Russia under such pressure and conditions knew how to produce such capable fighters with the materials they had. Love from the Netherlands, who had famous avaitors and designers from the brink of aviation aswell, like Fokker, Koolhoven and our own Royal Prince Bernard.
Very interesting- been interested in ww2 history for many years 40 years or so - I didn’t realise the highest ranking allied ace was Russian cool 😎 Regarding simple being better one needs look no further than the T34 tank - even Germans admit T34’s were not as technically advanced and its welding was not as good but as they point out when Russians can make 54000 compared to Germans who can produce in many cases only up to 7000 of any model the Russians have a clear advantage this combined with ample fuel resources meant Germans couldn’t hope to beat them in the end , 4 out of 5 German casualties in ww2 were on the eastern front. Without Russians no victory would have been possible against Germany. Very good video 1st I’ve seen will seek out more of your videos in the future, 🙏 ❤️🇷🇺 All the best from down under Lewis Sydney 🇦🇺
Yup! exactly! everything was staked at USSR having more steel, aluminum, oil and manpower to simply outproduce the Germans with superior technologies but lacking the scale of the Soviet industrial might. It was a winning strategy.
Yes I agree. Less can be very much more if you use your resources carefully. One example I can think of is the Commonwealth Boomerang. Despite a total number of enemy aircraft destroyed of zero for the whole production run, it was actually a very successful fighter in its specialist role of ground attack in mountainous regions. Highly manoeuvrable and capable of very low speed attack it was invaluable air support for the troops in New Guinea. Indeed it performed a role no US or UK aircraft was available to fill. It was also relatively cheap. Which for a country of 6 million people is a very important consideration in Wartime.
A wonderful channel that deserves a thousand thousand greetings, great admiration and greater respect. Your esteemed channel is full of very accurate and useful information. Your effort is remarkable and great. I wish you lasting success. And I write to you with the utmost frankness and respect, and in the form of hope ((translate into Arabic)) The number of your followers will increase greatly. I am absolutely confident that you are interested in providing benefit to everyone without exception. My utmost respect, appreciation and pride to you, gentlemen
I am an aviation writer and historian. This channel is excellent in terms of well researched and balanced content. No hype and good factual information. A question. Although the Soviet fighters normally had less numbers of cannon/machine guns the weapons themselves often appear to have higher rates of fire, better muzzle velocity and larger projectile weights, meaning that the Kg/sec power was often equal to other lesser (higher gun quantity) weapon systems. The fact that weapons were concentrated in the fuselage with no 'scatter' is also significant. Has anyone got and factual support information. The pic of the engine mounted Shvaks almost looks like they had rotary actions. A BIG thank you for NO MUSIC - with which other amateur UA-camrs wreck their contributions. Keep informing me. Thanks.
@AllthingsWW2 This is singularly the best video about the La 5 on the internet. Thank you for an interesting and inciteful video. If you would like some help to tighten up the grammar in your relatively error free scripts to make them as good as possible let me know. I would obviously do that for nothing.
I think you missed the mass production potential/ existing jigs and templates, its use of non strategic materials, its easy construction and it being easy to learn how to fly when comparing it to the FW190.
The Soviet ace Pokrychkin, the second only after Kotzedub ( and who could actually have been the first, given the way the victories were counted) loved the American P39 Aeracobra... and was almost sent to gulag for liking a foreign fighter plane.
A great review, thanks! When I watch or read Western videos / articles about Soviet WWII military they often have some misconceptions,mistakes or prejudices (although they are getting much better recent years) but here I have found none (except maybe, as a clarification, that the speed should have been connected with the altitude - like 600 km/h for La-5 was achievable at over 6000 m - that is at above usual operational altitudes on the Eastern front; at the sea level, it was only 515 km/h) and not that I am an expert, to disclaim). If you have not done this already, it would be fascinating if you could make a video about Polikarov’s I-185 I-187 and I-188 which, VERY unfortunately, were not mass produced due to some objective and subjective factors (including intrigues of Yakovlev AND Lavochkin) - and which I regard as a lost chance of the Soviet VVS.
wish you continuous success . A very beautiful and wonderful work that deserves admiration and all appreciation. Never stop.. It would be great if all your works are translated into Arabic. I wish you well and happiness. Thank you for your exceptional and distinguished effort in presenting this very beautiful work
All of the presented aircrafts had better manuverability then the BF-109's as well as they could've been equipped with timer-contact AA missles, thus were forcing them to flee or make a circle manuewer which prevented the BF's from attacking the Soviet ground-attack aircrafts in the process. As well as earlier of these Soviet fighters had more powerfull armament then early BF-109's. Mig-3 and LaGG-3 were exclusively transfered to separate AA defense command, thus they played their role during the invasion and were discontinued and scrapped after early counteroffensives.
Тhe most important aspect is missing entirely. FW-190 was undoubtedly technically superior but to the point of being ridiculously over-engineering, which was a bureaucratic necessity in order to compete with ME-109. While 190 was a true combat work horse for the soldier of the sky, 109 was a thoroughbred with racing pedigree that was beloved by the of the Luftwaffe elites. 190 absolutely had to be technologically advanced to secure production funding. All that tech brought the price, complexity and time of manufacture so high that in comparison La-5FN was a honed war machine with a significantly lower costs and complexity of manufacture. Pilot testing is highly subjective, but when a combat veteran tests two planes, determines the winner and then give an option which situation would he be rather in, he in a technologically superior machine vs. two marginally lesser performing machines or the other way around, the answer is always the same, because combat pilots know the price of survival.
The Hawker Hurricane is also a perfect exemple. It was less efficient than the Spitfire but was much faster to produce and cheaper. Which probably make the british win the battle of britain.
yak-1 and yak-9 difference were never about canopy it is Yak-1b on the picture, it had bubble canopy yak-9 was developed from yak-7 that is a battle version of two-seater training aircraft
Very well-balanced video. Still, quite difficult to rely on German memoirs as well as narrative about outdated Soviet tactics. Besides, German win numbers were practically always very exaggerated, which was also a part of propaganda and remains until now. Another aspect is that the tactics differed very significantly between war parties. Not to forget which one led to air superiority and victory and another to defeat. Cold and balanced analysis of fighter and, generally, Soviet air force vs. Luftwaffe performance is still to be made
The soviets truly pulled of some miracles of making maximum use of scarce materiel on a massive scale. The Nazis simply couldn't match that becasue of the tribal infighting.
I wonder if diching the twin 20 mill and going for a more conventional gun through centerline and two smaller 12.7 would have made it more lethal. In IL2 the flash from the guns really takes your eyes of the target too much
It's well known the Soviet Union embellished the amount of kills it's pilots and aces made and also the specs of its equipment. If I recall Soviet air kills and ace kills should be divided by 1/3 because they claimed to have shot down more planes than the III Reich ever produced...
The La5 was unquestionably the best Soviet fighter plane of WWII. Soviet pilots preferred the La 5 over the La 7 due to the formers lighter weight and low drag courtesy of its wood construction. It was not quite up to the level of the contemporary FW 190, but it was competitive. Similar to the FW 190 and the P47 its radial engine was robust and durable. I am guessing here, but the wood construction (the FW 190 was all metal) might have been more susceptible to structural failure when hit and that would explain the high loss rate. The key here is "when hit", Pilots like Ivan Koshedub had the skill to avoid that. I very much appreciate you stating that the performance and value of a fighter plan is very much a function of attributes beyond speed, climb rate etc. Instrumentation and avionics were very sophisticated in German planes. The sophisticated (compound) throttle of the FW 190 is one example, but radio, navigation gear, gyroscopic sights, and artificial horizon are all of extreme importance. I believe the La 5 and the La 7 served well beyond WWII.
"Soviet pilots preferred the La-5 over the La-7 due to the former's lighter weight and low drag courtesy of its wood construction"... bullshit! First, the deltawood wasn't a light material and after the dural crysis ended the factories built the La-5FNs with as much aluminium structural elements as possible similarly to the La-7 which has a 100 kg less empty weight than the La-5FN. The weight reduction of the Lavochkin fighters was a continuous process throughout the war. Speaking of the drag and wood construction, even the late war La-7 had the same plywood finishing like the ones before and many elements remaind wood-based. It was precisely from the aerodynamic and drag point of view that the La-7 was an improvement and at the same time that caused the only drawback as well. Namely the reduced reliability because the engine was more prone to overheating due to less efficient cooling and they couldn't iron this out until after the war. Most Soviet pilots not even see an La-7 let alone compare it to the 5, given that development has been problematic and protracted and few have made it to the front line in time.
But the lightweight La5FN gained this speed much faster, and it had a much better climb rate. When it came to dogfighting 'group vs group' and intense maneuvering (esp. vertical), the La5FN could sustain greater speed for longer time. The FW was good for solo hunting, hit suddenly and run away, without any sharp turns and loss of speed. But as a dogfighting machine, the La5FN was much more able.
Soviet Union couldn't set up aluminum mass production before the war. This was one of the drawbacks because the planes had to use mixed wood metal structure which increased weight
Love soviet aircrafts! Soviets were so innovative and creative with the limited resources and very heavy pressure of coming up with workable designs while their nation was being invaded and they in a fight for their own survival . Really they performed almost miracles to win the final victory!
the factor of pilot skill turned the other way in the west, when the Germans couldn't train enough pilots long enough to become proficient. They had less flying hours under their belt, which added to th numerical and technical disadvantages.
The entire Soviet war production philosophy was about outproducing the Germans with machines that are capable but not necessarily superior technologically. T-34 is a perfect example and so is La-5. They made them as simple as possible to make, train on, and operate in harsh conditions. Automation, expensive materials, advanced sensors - these were all judges luxuries Soviets didn't posses to win the war. And, it was largely a very successful strategy as Germans went to the other extreme - make increasingly costly, complex, hard-to-operate, and unreliable new machines. Be they Panther and King Tiger tanks or jet fighters. 8 T-34s vs. 1 Panther generally won, so was probably true for 3 La-5s vs. 1 FW
You are just pulling s×it out of your ass and presenting it as "fact". When T-34/76 made it to mass production it was the lightest - yet best armored (compared to its weight) tank, with more than adequate arnament and probaby best mobility for any medium tank ever made. Its successor T-34/85 was fully capable of dealing with HEAVY tanks while it was itself a medium tank. Now please try very hard and find a similar machine in its class if you can.
Your comment is as ignorant as it is denegrating. The age old "well they just made a lot of stuff", often paired with equally echoing nonsense like "they just had more men" and some thing or other about Russian winters and what not.
La-5s were good enough to beat them 1 on 1
@@iansysoev9462 which La-5 modifications beating which German fighters at which stage of the war? it was a constant race between the two.
@@mrvk39 fair point. I just wanted to highlight that La-5s weren't cannon fodder as their predecessor LaGG-3. From what I know, La-5FN was comparable to FW-190 A-5 and A-8
@@iansysoev9462 agreed! La-5 and its variants were an advanced design for WWII and its most advanced modifications held up to eve advanced German fighters. It was still cheaper, though, and produced in larger quantities which was USSR's overall strategy. That was my original point. USSR tried to outproduce rather than built "miracle weapons" Hitler pinned his absurd hopes on.
The LA 7 was an absolute low altitude beast!
I always had the feeling that Soviet fighters, particularly the Yaks, had something of a wasted potential. And I will blame the Stalin purges before the war for that.
When you look at them, the general layout is "right", better than the Spitfire and Bf-109, with the landing gear retracting inwards and fuel tanks in the wings, something NA also did with the Mustang. The wings also had thin profiles, something that Hawker took a lot of time to correct on their fighters. They also had armament centralized in the nose, again a better concept. They also adopted "bubble" canopies before the Spit, P-47 and P-51 did.
Where I feel they were let down was with the M-105 engine. His fault or not, Klimov failed to keep pace on the horsepower race with the other V12s of the war, namely the DB600, the Merlin and V1710. That forced Yakovlev to remove stuff from his fighters to keep them competitive.
Shvetsov on the other hand, had no such problems, and his M82/ASh-82 was delivering power on par with his German and American counterparts, making the La-5 standout among other Soviet fighters of the era, where there was no need to alleviate weight so drastically as in the Yaks.
The thing holding the La-5 back was quality of manufacturing. Once that stabilized in late 44, the La-7 became almost unstoppable at lower altitudes.
Oil and fuel, lack of stamped aluminum, poor quality of airframe manufacturing. In the USSR, there were problems with high-octane fuel with high-quality oil, powerful engines were dying and could not be mass-produced.
While Stalin's purges often seen as a bad thing in general, they weren't as useless as people tend to say. At the time of purges, a lot of the military staff in command was stuck in "Old habits", believing in outdated tactics, outdated equipment, refusing to change. Purge was necessary to rid out of such people in command, but, as it usually goes with such projects, it wasn't done perfectly, a lot of promising people were purged from military, as well as a lot of incompetent people were left in the military. And it is especially noticeable in soviet airforce, glaring example - Alexander Pokryishkin story when he got discharged by regiment's commander, colonel Isaev, his Party card was revoked and he almost got court-marshalled beacause of his constant criticism of ourdated tactics. But regimental commisar and high command did intercede and Pokryshkin was reinstated in command and in Communist Party.
And about La-5 quality of electronics and manufacturing - it was mostly due to Yak fighters having the biggest priority, as was mentioned in a video. Yakovlev used all tools at his disposal, including political connections to secure production lines for his fighter. Lavochkin only had what's left. Even with M-82 Lavockin kinda got lucky, cuz Shvetsow already had engines produced, but with cancelling of Su-2 already produced engines were gonna be left to rust, as well no new orders for production would be given. La-5/7 is my favourite USSR fighter plane and i would love to see how it would turn out if Lavocking would get priority in production instead of Yakovlev.
Stalin purges!?
Oh, I have been an officer in one of the European armies for nearly three decades and I can say that a purge would come as a blessing! The command and leadership functions have been taken over by the totally incompetent, corrupt and above all evil, who bring around even more stupid and incompetent people so that they stand out as indisputable quality! Negative selection has taken off so much that your quality is practically reflected in the fact that you are not progressing to higher positions!
Stalin, all is forgiven, stand up and come to enlighten this rotten institution where I work...
@@jerromedrakejr9332 A bit harsh, but in general - purges sometimes are required, since military chain of command can become quite inefficient and rotten, if not adressed. In scope of soviet military - it's performance diring Soviet-Finnish war is good enough indication that severe changes in it's command and structure are required.
Seriously underrated channel, especially glad that you post sources in the description as well. Hope we see more Soviet and Italian planes, those are vey much deserving of more attention.
High praise! Actually, I thought nobody looked at the sources section. It's good to know that people do. Thank you very much!
Handsome aircraft too. Especially the later version.
The only history channel that I'm always happy to watch
Oh hey babe
Thank you! That's really nice of you!
Only way soviets made good showing was by raw elan ,too bad their government didn't match that devotion to it's citizens .
Ever tried Indy Neidell WW2?
Omg smigol hi
I've been more of a yak fan, thank you for showing me that the la-5 is cool too, well made video
Thank you!
Such a great video. So much information, and extremely well edited. Always a treat to see you upload
Thank you!
The top Allied ace being a Soviet pilot, it proves that though the La-5 was a flawed machine, it is not the aircraft, but the man flying it that ultimately makes the difference. Thanks for your insightful video on this aircraft.🙂👍
The phrase that came to mind......it's the Indian, not the arrow
👍👍.
With all of the propaganda out of Stalin's regime, I hope his count was accurate
@@frankdrevinpolicesquad2930 Propaganda is when you are sure that your country is good and your opponent is bad 😄
@@frankdrevinpolicesquad2930 AFAIK, these figures were confirmed lately to be more or less accurate for Russian top aces. Average overclaim is what is being studied in regards of the counts. Here in Russia, at least. For both Russian and German sides. Germans overclaimed slightly less, as it seems by now, but still considerably.
Those differ quite seriously, depending on regiment, for instance. Some did report almost real figures, others used to overclaim about 3-5 times. And the key problem is lack of German docs. They are a real mess, if exist. Much of their archives were lost in the end of the war.
Excelent video, one I was waiting since the Lagg 3 that you did a whyle ago, the only thing I miss from your older videos is the full comparation between aircraft, not only speeds, but, still this channel is one of the best in WW2 aircraft, now to wait for the La 7 video, in other subjet, still waiting for the FW 190 with the BMW 801 engine video, I said it like this because the 190 had diferent engines in it's lfe span, the Jumo 213 (A, E, F models), the DB 603 (prototypes), even the ASh-82 engine used by the La 5/7 aircraft (yeah I know, that those ones are replikas done after the war, but, they were made non the less), and it would be easier if is divided in diferent videos, one with the models that used the BMW 801 (the A, F and G models), other with the Jumo 213 (the Doras 9, 11, 12 and 13), and since the Ta 152 could be in second video, is diferent enought to have it's own video,
Thank you! I've been willing to do the "Dora" for a long time, but not in the near future (2022). Thank you for the suggestions!
@@AllthingsWW2 So, there is hope in 2023? if yes maybe next year might be better than this one
As one who has been almost totally ignorant of WWII Soviet aircraft, this is very enlightening!
Ivan Kozhedub wrote a book about his combat experience. I believe it was called, "I Attack". Have yet to read it, not easy to find.
Ivan Kozhedub: Loyalty to the Motherland. Seeking fight. These are his memoirs. A very high quality book. Written in simple language. By the way, the book notes a general pattern of how the Germans used their FV-190s on the Eastern Front. I think the FV-190 is a great aircraft. But the Germans used it as a fighter-bomber. The Germans became hostages of their technology and pilot training. The front needed a lot of planes and a lot of pilots, but the Germans could not prepare both planes and pilots in such numbers. The Luftwaffe was trapped. But the Soviet Air Force had no such problems. And those of the pilots who survived in the first years of the war were able to train air fighters. Such as Kozhedub. That's the point.
Kozhedub is an amazing pilot. Having destroyed 62 enemy planes, he was never shot down. Compare with Hartman, who was shot down 19 times (or so). Then he commanded a Soviet air division in Korea, but did not fly himself. He was forbidden to fly. At the end of his career, he was a Soviet Air Marshal
Great video, I enjoyed it. I love the La-5 and soviet warbirds in general.
Subbed. Regards from Norway
Thank you! Regards from Portugal.
I just think its funny that WW2 started with dated aircraft with the up and coming new ships being liquid cooled, but by the end of the war, radial engines were becoming more popular due to their reliability and lacking the fragility of liquid cooled systems.
Ships go to sea they don't fly.
Always had a soft spot for the La5, ever the first IL2 game I always liked it for its easy handling and speed. IIRC it wasn't exactly the fastest or tightest turning but was competitive and easy to use.
All La fighters had slats and CG closely hugging the centre of lift. So the very, very delayed stall and nauseatingly tight turns in Il-2 weren't so far off real performance.
You get it in any tight turn combat and those Fws are getting their anus torn open wide. Only real enemy was G2/G4, anything beyond that the Bfs were so heavy they never stood a chance.
Amazing video. The best I have seen on the plane. Unbiased and sticking to facts. Keep on the good work!
Outstanding video production effort! Bravo!
Most Excellent! I was hoping you would present the La-5 and an excellent job u did in representing it. 👏
Thank you!
Excellent vídeo and description with your sources. And sometimes, less is more, and the La5 is a very nice example of this.
Good enough and cheap on resources to build.
Thank you!
The greatest words of respect, praise and appreciation I dedicate to you for this wonderful and distinguished work
Thank you for your great giving and effort
I wish you lasting success. My utmost respect and appreciation
Yes I’ve been waiting for this video👍
A good review with a detailed description!
Very well put together.
Obrigado
Thx for video! Very interesting!
My favorite aircraft, I made a 1/4 size RC one and always attracted a crowd at the local air club, still have it 😊
Thank you for a very thorough expose of this aircraft - clearly the type, and its pilots, made a valuable contribution to the war effort.
A thousand greetings, great respect and admiration for your esteemed and wonderful channel, which provided accurate and useful information. I wish you lasting success. A wonderful work and a great effort that deserves pride, appreciation and pride. My utmost respect and appreciation to you
Hoping the La 7 is next! Great content per usual from you!
Thank you!
@@AllthingsWW2 You always make amazing stuff no problem!
First time for me, I had only heard about YAK design/Good video!!!
Enjoyable insight into probably the best soviet fighter of ww2.. Thanks for uploading
Love your channel, I linked you to my Discord. Excellent videos and content.
The more I learn about Soviet era aircraft and the situation ,and hardships endured during design ,and manufacturing . The Respect for the people there has grown with it. Not hard to understand why so many left following the revolution , and why some many more as I write this are fleeing .
Very good! Ive been vaiting for a good La5 review a long time.....
Thank you!
excellent video . very complete a whole complete story in few minutes very well done....!!!!!
Thanks, great channel.
Enjoy your work a great deal, thank you.
Wow! Two 20 mm cannons through the propeller right in front of the pilot!
I am surprised by this since I would imagine the blast from the 20 mm would make it really difficult to see the target, or much of anything in front. Especially in any kind of dim or dark setting like late afternoon or under heavy clouds.
Guns firing in front of the pilot through the propeller was nothing new, but historically those were machine guns. 20 mm cannons have much brighter blast. Interesting.
Edit: I just read a bit more on this and it seems Soviet 20 mm cannon had a rather ingenious method of using a rubber sleeve to decrease the effects of blast.
One cannon, not two. And not through propeller, the cannon was inside the engine and propeller axis, thus the muzzle was in front of the propeller and not behind like nose-mounted MG's. This also helped with spreading the cannon's exhaust around the cockpit and not into the frontal glass.
@@user-kf7kv8zp5v Your explanation makes much more sense.
@@user-kf7kv8zp5v You can’t install anything in the middle of M-82. It’s a radial engine . There’s no room. La-5 indeed had two 20 mm ShVAK canons installed on the top of his nose and they did shoot through propeller . While “20 mm” sounds respectable in reality ShVAKs were rather crappy guns.
Thank you, very good video as usually 👍
Thank you!
Nice video. underrated channel
An extremely good video, thank you 🙂
Excellent video. Love its later cousin in War Thunder, the La-7B-20
Thank you!
Interesting and enjoyable.
Thank you!
Thanks for the video. I didn't know this aircraft
Thank you!
Excellent channel. Just discovered and subscribing.
Thank you!
Proof of the old adage, Excellence is the enemy of good ENOUGH. All you have to be is close enough to your enemies ability. Most dogfights were decided by circumstances and piloting ability
Simply Outstanding!
Excellent channel.
Very interesting, thanks.
Very nice visualisation :)
Thank you!
Even if the La-5 was slightly worse than the FW-190 when you have 20 and they have 1 it's far less of a big deal. Great channel. Need more coverage of lesser known planes and their variants. Glad to see you're filling that role at such a high level.
A fighter aircraft - like any other product - has an optimum build man-hours/manufacturing cost/time needed for maintenance/operational effectiveness ratio. When quantity is added into the equation it becomes easier to see what rises to the top. Superior products don't always reign supreme even on the free consumer market. VHS was reportedly the worst home-video cassette system from a quality point of view (which is why tv networks didn't use them) but it was the cheapest and most practical for non-technical minded people.
In a long war of attrition any weapon is only as effective as its operational time. And time is a luxury one rarely if ever can afford in a war.
Considering that the Soviets had to scramble for new weapons while being on the front-line (sometimes literally) and being forced to use non-trained farmhands (many of them illiterate), women and kids to assemble complex machines on barely adequate rations they did remarkably well. I suppose it's true what they say about wars accelerating both invention and production - especially when one's own country is invaded. Both the Poles and the French had secret weapon programs while under nazi occupation. For the French, as soon as they were liberated, some of these project were greenlit as they already had been on the drawing board.
And you just boiled the entire war down to a sentence, lol. :)
The lines on the prototype M-82 LaGG-3 are absolutely gorgeous, like the later La-9 and La-11 - that streamlined engine cowling is downright beautiful. You could almost mistake one for the other were it not for the conventional greenhouse canopy.
Fascinating, thank you.
The saying "if it looks right, it must fly right" certainly applies to the La-5. Just like it does with the Spitfire, Bf 109, Zero and P-51. What I find fascinating is how Russia under such pressure and conditions knew how to produce such capable fighters with the materials they had. Love from the Netherlands, who had famous avaitors and designers from the brink of aviation aswell, like Fokker, Koolhoven and our own Royal Prince Bernard.
Muito bom meu amigo!
Very interesting- been interested in ww2 history for many years 40 years or so - I didn’t realise the highest ranking allied ace was Russian cool 😎 Regarding simple being better one needs look no further than the T34 tank - even Germans admit T34’s were not as technically advanced and its welding was not as good but as they point out when Russians can make 54000 compared to Germans who can produce in many cases only up to 7000 of any model the Russians have a clear advantage this combined with ample fuel resources meant Germans couldn’t hope to beat them in the end , 4 out of 5 German casualties in ww2 were on the eastern front.
Without Russians no victory would have been possible against Germany.
Very good video 1st I’ve seen will seek out more of your videos in the future, 🙏
❤️🇷🇺
All the best from down under
Lewis
Sydney 🇦🇺
Yup! exactly! everything was staked at USSR having more steel, aluminum, oil and manpower to simply outproduce the Germans with superior technologies but lacking the scale of the Soviet industrial might. It was a winning strategy.
Kozhedub even shot down americans - unknown history in last days of 2.WW
Yes I agree. Less can be very much more if you use your resources carefully.
One example I can think of is the Commonwealth Boomerang. Despite a total number of enemy aircraft destroyed of zero for the whole production run, it was actually a very successful fighter in its specialist role of ground attack in mountainous regions. Highly manoeuvrable and capable of very low speed attack it was invaluable air support for the troops in New Guinea. Indeed it performed a role no US or UK aircraft was available to fill.
It was also relatively cheap. Which for a country of 6 million people is a very important consideration in Wartime.
A wonderful channel that deserves a thousand thousand greetings, great admiration and greater respect. Your esteemed channel is full of very accurate and useful information. Your effort is remarkable and great. I wish you lasting success. And I write to you with the utmost frankness and respect, and in the form of hope ((translate into Arabic)) The number of your followers will increase greatly. I am absolutely confident that you are interested in providing benefit to everyone without exception. My utmost respect, appreciation and pride to you, gentlemen
Exceptional presentation that gives credit to the human sacrifices that occurred on the Eastern Front. By far an under reported portion of WW2
Thank you!
Great video.
Thank you!
"Being simpler is not a bad thing" that statement is certainly true for the AK-47.
I am an aviation writer and historian. This channel is excellent in terms of well researched and balanced content. No hype and good factual information. A question. Although the Soviet fighters normally had less numbers of cannon/machine guns the weapons themselves often appear to have higher rates of fire, better muzzle velocity and larger projectile weights, meaning that the Kg/sec power was often equal to other lesser (higher gun quantity) weapon systems. The fact that weapons were concentrated in the fuselage with no 'scatter' is also significant. Has anyone got and factual support information. The pic of the engine mounted Shvaks almost looks like they had rotary actions. A BIG thank you for NO MUSIC - with which other amateur UA-camrs wreck their contributions. Keep informing me. Thanks.
@AllthingsWW2 This is singularly the best video about the La 5 on the internet. Thank you for an interesting and inciteful video.
If you would like some help to tighten up the grammar in your relatively error free scripts to make them as good as possible let me know. I would obviously do that for nothing.
Good video, thumbs up.
Thank you!
Great content thanks 4 upload. The Mustang was a lot cheaper to build than Thunderbolt. Less is more?
Thank you!
I think you missed the mass production potential/ existing jigs and templates, its use of non strategic materials, its easy construction and it being easy to learn how to fly when comparing it to the FW190.
Good Video!
Thank you!
Beautifully done. What's the two G's in LaGG stand for?
Two of the three designers: Lavochkin-Gorbunov-Gudkov.
Bonjour , merci . Je découvre votre chaîne , et je la trouve très bien . Je m'abonne .
Au revoir et bonne journée .
The Soviet ace Pokrychkin, the second only after Kotzedub ( and who could actually have been the first, given the way the victories were counted) loved the American P39 Aeracobra... and was almost sent to gulag for liking a foreign fighter plane.
The La-5FN really was a game changer, there was no turkey shoot with this one
A great review, thanks! When I watch or read Western videos / articles about Soviet WWII military they often have some misconceptions,mistakes or prejudices (although they are getting much better recent years) but here I have found none (except maybe, as a clarification, that the speed should have been connected with the altitude - like 600 km/h for La-5 was achievable at over 6000 m - that is at above usual operational altitudes on the Eastern front; at the sea level, it was only 515 km/h) and not that I am an expert, to disclaim). If you have not done this already, it would be fascinating if you could make a video about Polikarov’s I-185 I-187 and I-188 which, VERY unfortunately, were not mass produced due to some objective and subjective factors (including intrigues of Yakovlev AND Lavochkin) - and which I regard as a lost chance of the Soviet VVS.
I do intend on going into Polikarpov's creations, starting with the I-16. Thank you for the suggestions.
wish you continuous success . A very beautiful and wonderful work that deserves admiration and all appreciation. Never stop.. It would be great if all your works are translated into Arabic. I wish you well and happiness. Thank you for your exceptional and distinguished effort in presenting this very beautiful work
The prevailing frame of mind was that better is the enemy of good enough.
All of the presented aircrafts had better manuverability then the BF-109's as well as they could've been equipped with timer-contact AA missles, thus were forcing them to flee or make a circle manuewer which prevented the BF's from attacking the Soviet ground-attack aircrafts in the process. As well as earlier of these Soviet fighters had more powerfull armament then early BF-109's. Mig-3 and LaGG-3 were exclusively transfered to separate AA defense command, thus they played their role during the invasion and were discontinued and scrapped after early counteroffensives.
Тhe most important aspect is missing entirely. FW-190 was undoubtedly technically superior but to the point of being ridiculously over-engineering, which was a bureaucratic necessity in order to compete with ME-109. While 190 was a true combat work horse for the soldier of the sky, 109 was a thoroughbred with racing pedigree that was beloved by the of the Luftwaffe elites. 190 absolutely had to be technologically advanced to secure production funding. All that tech brought the price, complexity and time of manufacture so high that in comparison La-5FN was a honed war machine with a significantly lower costs and complexity of manufacture. Pilot testing is highly subjective, but when a combat veteran tests two planes, determines the winner and then give an option which situation would he be rather in, he in a technologically superior machine vs. two marginally lesser performing machines or the other way around, the answer is always the same, because combat pilots know the price of survival.
Please put out a video on the whole yak 9 series too including the yak 9b
Yes, it will happen. Thank you for the suggestion.
Nice video. What is the music? It reminds me of the game FallOut.
Thank you. The music is - Beautiful Oblivion by Scott Buckley You can find it there --> www.free-stock-music.com
Can anyone tell me what the message, that is painted on the fuselage, of the fighter at 6:46. Thank you.
Can someone tell me which version of IL2 is this game from near the end of the video please ?
3:02 I-185 with M-71 engine 630 km/h - TOP1 at that moment.
The Hawker Hurricane is also a perfect exemple. It was less efficient than the Spitfire but was much faster to produce and cheaper. Which probably make the british win the battle of britain.
0:30 Isn't that a Yak-9 in place of the Yak-1? Those have the tall rear fuselage ("razorback" in American parlance).
yak-1 and yak-9 difference were never about canopy
it is Yak-1b on the picture, it had bubble canopy
yak-9 was developed from yak-7 that is a battle version of two-seater training aircraft
Very well-balanced video. Still, quite difficult to rely on German memoirs as well as narrative about outdated Soviet tactics. Besides, German win numbers were practically always very exaggerated, which was also a part of propaganda and remains until now. Another aspect is that the tactics differed very significantly between war parties. Not to forget which one led to air superiority and victory and another to defeat. Cold and balanced analysis of fighter and, generally, Soviet air force vs. Luftwaffe performance is still to be made
The soviets truly pulled of some miracles of making maximum use of scarce materiel on a massive scale. The Nazis simply couldn't match that becasue of the tribal infighting.
I wonder if diching the twin 20 mill and going for a more conventional gun through centerline and two smaller 12.7 would have made it more lethal. In IL2 the flash from the guns really takes your eyes of the target too much
And another thing maybe they of diched that 3 inch bullet proof glass.
It's well known the Soviet Union embellished the amount of kills it's pilots and aces made and also the specs of its equipment. If I recall Soviet air kills and ace kills should be divided by 1/3 because they claimed to have shot down more planes than the III Reich ever produced...
The La5 was unquestionably the best Soviet fighter plane of WWII. Soviet pilots preferred the La 5 over the La 7 due to the formers lighter weight and low drag courtesy of its wood construction.
It was not quite up to the level of the contemporary FW 190, but it was competitive.
Similar to the FW 190 and the P47 its radial engine was robust and durable.
I am guessing here, but the wood construction (the FW 190 was all metal) might have been more susceptible to structural failure when hit and that would explain the high loss rate. The key here is "when hit", Pilots like Ivan Koshedub had the skill to avoid that.
I very much appreciate you stating that the performance and value of a fighter plan is very much a function of attributes beyond speed, climb rate etc. Instrumentation and avionics were very sophisticated in German planes. The sophisticated (compound) throttle of the FW 190 is one example, but radio, navigation gear, gyroscopic sights, and artificial horizon are all of extreme importance.
I believe the La 5 and the La 7 served well beyond WWII.
"Soviet pilots preferred the La-5 over the La-7 due to the former's lighter weight and low drag courtesy of its wood construction"... bullshit! First, the deltawood wasn't a light material and after the dural crysis ended the factories built the La-5FNs with as much aluminium structural elements as possible similarly to the La-7 which has a 100 kg less empty weight than the La-5FN. The weight reduction of the Lavochkin fighters was a continuous process throughout the war. Speaking of the drag and wood construction, even the late war La-7 had the same plywood finishing like the ones before and many elements remaind wood-based. It was precisely from the aerodynamic and drag point of view that the La-7 was an improvement and at the same time that caused the only drawback as well. Namely the reduced reliability because the engine was more prone to overheating due to less efficient cooling and they couldn't iron this out until after the war. Most Soviet pilots not even see an La-7 let alone compare it to the 5, given that development has been problematic and protracted and few have made it to the front line in time.
@@zoli8603 I can’t deny that you are right. I learned this from my flight teacher …. I did not cross check. Thank you.
Thank you fo the video! It's "L"a, not "LA" btw =)
Beautiful aircraft
4mph difference at SL is basically the same exact speed, not an advantage for the La-5, just parity.
But the lightweight La5FN gained this speed much faster, and it had a much better climb rate. When it came to dogfighting 'group vs group' and intense maneuvering (esp. vertical), the La5FN could sustain greater speed for longer time. The FW was good for solo hunting, hit suddenly and run away, without any sharp turns and loss of speed. But as a dogfighting machine, the La5FN was much more able.
Okay, that was fun.
2 big thumbs up
Thank you!
Soviet Union couldn't set up aluminum mass production before the war. This was one of the drawbacks because the planes had to use mixed wood metal structure which increased weight
I picture a heavy fighter based off the Lavotchkin, equivalent to the Corsair or Sea Fury
Later versions of the YAK were in my opinion better.Klimov engines were a good design but hampered by the lack of higher octane fuel.
Love soviet aircrafts! Soviets were so innovative and creative with the limited resources and very heavy pressure of coming up with workable designs while their nation was being invaded and they in a fight for their own survival . Really they performed almost miracles to win the final victory!
I think it is telling that until late 1944 the best fighters in the Red Air Force was the P-39 (US plane) and the La5 (US powerplant).
Using your logic, the rocket engine F-1 is a germany powerplant because it came from a engine of the german V-2 rocket.
the factor of pilot skill turned the other way in the west, when the Germans couldn't train enough pilots long enough to become proficient. They had less flying hours under their belt, which added to th numerical and technical disadvantages.
Your voice kinda reminds me Yul Brennon. :)
With America, a good comparison would be tanks to planes. Russia’s T34 was America’s P51 Mustang, and the LA5 was America’s M4 Sherman.