PDA

View Full Version : The much-maligned Mig-3 . . .



FI-Aflak
12-25-2003, 03:28 PM
It seems to be general consensus that the Mig-3 is a sub-par aircraft (esp. among the VEF crowd, where until recently they were flying Mig-3's against 109 F-4's, and were new exit holes were being torn.)

So when I saw it on the list at my squadmate's server, I decided to give it ago. First, I flew a 1941 model, killed an I-153 (big deal . . . ) and then tore the wings off at 600kph IAS. Not cool. So then I selected the Mig-3U, a 1942 aircraft.

Well, the Mig-3U is a beast. Plain and simple. It's roll is near that of an FW-190. It will turn inside of an La-7 and a Yak-3 (with proper application of flaps, of course), and even better, it maintains its energy through a turn better than those two.

I killed two Yak-3's online, and offline I can easily kill Ace Yak-3's and La-7's, as well as Ace 109 G-2's, G-6's, etc.

The armament of the 3U is very impressive, the cannons do decent damage, are relatively accurate, and you get enough ammo to do your job. In addition, the Mig-3 aircraft is basically the smallest airframe capable of using its engine and having guns, so you are a SMALL target.

But because you are so small, you have high wing loading. So you can have nasty stalls, if you jerk too hard, but with flaps you can outturn anything but an I-153 and an I-16.

What I REALLY love about it is this: when a Yak-3 or La-7 tries to outrun you, you can catch them. The Mig-3U accelerates like crazy. I don't know how its top speed compares to a Yak or La-7, but I know that coming out of a turn, they cannot escape you.

One problem in the Mig-3 is that its handeling decreases sharply at high speeds, but this problem is shared by the Yak-3 and, to a lesser degree, by the La-7. The Mig-3U is also sturdier at high speeds than its early-war brother, at I've taken it to 750km/h IAS with nary a control surface flying off.

And it can CLIMB!!!

Man, Mig-3U is one of my favorites now.

FI-Aflak
12-25-2003, 03:28 PM
It seems to be general consensus that the Mig-3 is a sub-par aircraft (esp. among the VEF crowd, where until recently they were flying Mig-3's against 109 F-4's, and were new exit holes were being torn.)

So when I saw it on the list at my squadmate's server, I decided to give it ago. First, I flew a 1941 model, killed an I-153 (big deal . . . ) and then tore the wings off at 600kph IAS. Not cool. So then I selected the Mig-3U, a 1942 aircraft.

Well, the Mig-3U is a beast. Plain and simple. It's roll is near that of an FW-190. It will turn inside of an La-7 and a Yak-3 (with proper application of flaps, of course), and even better, it maintains its energy through a turn better than those two.

I killed two Yak-3's online, and offline I can easily kill Ace Yak-3's and La-7's, as well as Ace 109 G-2's, G-6's, etc.

The armament of the 3U is very impressive, the cannons do decent damage, are relatively accurate, and you get enough ammo to do your job. In addition, the Mig-3 aircraft is basically the smallest airframe capable of using its engine and having guns, so you are a SMALL target.

But because you are so small, you have high wing loading. So you can have nasty stalls, if you jerk too hard, but with flaps you can outturn anything but an I-153 and an I-16.

What I REALLY love about it is this: when a Yak-3 or La-7 tries to outrun you, you can catch them. The Mig-3U accelerates like crazy. I don't know how its top speed compares to a Yak or La-7, but I know that coming out of a turn, they cannot escape you.

One problem in the Mig-3 is that its handeling decreases sharply at high speeds, but this problem is shared by the Yak-3 and, to a lesser degree, by the La-7. The Mig-3U is also sturdier at high speeds than its early-war brother, at I've taken it to 750km/h IAS with nary a control surface flying off.

And it can CLIMB!!!

Man, Mig-3U is one of my favorites now.

Raiden48
12-25-2003, 03:31 PM
Hi,

You must feel the same things i do, i also discovered it recently. The plane is fast but i cant seem to outturn a Yak or La, its not meant for turnfighting.

willyvic
12-25-2003, 03:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Raiden48:
Hi,

You must feel the same things i do, i also discovered it recently. The plane is fast but i cant seem to outturn a Yak or La, its not meant for turnfighting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I beg to differ. I find the bird more than adequate for "turnfighting". It does exhibit the properties of a roman candle when pounced upon by capable foes though..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.rcaf-squadron.org/willyvic/images/mig3u.jpg

kyrule2
12-25-2003, 04:06 PM
Not to sound like a jerk, but I think the Mig-3U is likely (please note I said likely) one of the most overmodelled planes in the game. I believe it is supposed to handle very well at high altitudes, but it handles great at low altitudes as well. If it was this good I don't believe they would have made as few as they did. I think only six were constructed which makes this plane a bit of a "fantasy" plane. It has superb roll, speed, handling, visibility, etc. It really has no weakness IMO in '42. I used to fly this plane on servers once in awhile and I would really surprise the 109 guys (nobody flew 190's back then http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ).

In 1942 the best planes in FB are the Mig-3U and 109G-2. As I said the Mig-3U is sort of a fantasy plane so it shouldn't appear on realistic servers or scenerios. The 109G-2 may be overmodelled but I'll let others discuss that (I have no educated opinion on this at all). What does bother me is that the FW-190A-4 should probably be the best fighter in '42 (as it was seen as the best when it was introduced late in '41, and the A-4 was much better than the A-1), but it certainly is not. Perhaps it is simply slower than it should be, I can't say for sure but that is my guess. It's performance should probably mirror that of the A-5, I haven't seen anything state that there was a big performance jump from the A-4 to A-5. Sources I have seen have the A-4 reaching speeds of 418m.ph. I have NEVER seen a source of any kind suggest that the 109 was faster than the 190, especially in the early years. This has always peaved me a little but I never said anything until now.

Like I said, I don't mean to sound like a jerk. Fly what you like and be happy, I'm just throwing my thoughts out there.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

[This message was edited by kyrule2 on Thu December 25 2003 at 09:42 PM.]

noshens
12-25-2003, 05:21 PM
Migs might look nice but they got some fatal flaws. Among these, they are completely useless BnZmers, they handle very poorely at high speed and they got low durability. While they are good turners but you forget that there are even better turners that. I liked mig3s too and i was surprised how good they are, but then I realized that they weren't so good.

Mig3u might be a good plane for 1942 servers, but I'd still prefer p40m, bf106g2, p39n1, etc.

http://www.img.net/cliff-m/vvn/me262.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
12-25-2003, 08:19 PM
i wouldnt mind the Mig 3U in 42 servers either IF ....

after 6 were shot down or crashed they were not allowed to be used anymore

as for them turning in LA7s or Yak3s .... yea right , as if
its a dog at turnfighting & it dont hold E anywhere as good as the LA7
basically if you are tuning in a Yak3 or LA7 in the Mig3U then the Yak or LA pilot wasnt turning as good as the plane can ingame

Hawgdog
12-25-2003, 08:22 PM
Gotta love those migs!

http://users.zoominternet.net/~cgatewood/assets/images/sharkdog.gif
I'm on a spam campaign to regain my post count.

Dont defend hunting, promote it

FI-Aflak
12-25-2003, 09:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
i wouldnt mind the Mig 3U in 42 servers either IF ....

after 6 were shot down or crashed they were not allowed to be used anymore

as for them turning in LA7s or Yak3s .... yea right , as if
its a dog at turnfighting & it dont hold E anywhere as good as the LA7
basically if you are tuning in a Yak3 or LA7 in the Mig3U then the Yak or LA pilot wasnt turning as good as the plane can ingame<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was in a circle fight with an ace La-7 and a diff circle fight with an ace Yak-3.

I know the AI uses combat flaps, which would explain my outrunning them offline (but I also nailed some online).

I had my takeoff flaps extened when the turn dropped to 300 IAS and I was more or less equal, slowly getting inside of them until they either disengaged or stalled out.

They are paper planes, but I withstood a pass from an La-7 (he hit my pilot and my elevators, not too severely, but he seriously reduced my turning ability, but seeing as I had the energy advantage, I pulled a hammerhead and then raped him on the way down.)

I don't know about overmodeled ness or historical accuracy, but any time I see P-51s in the same server as any VVS planes I think that it is laughable (the russkies got what, nine or ten Mustangs?)

Anywho, the game is more or less historically accurate, but it isn't the point.

resev
12-25-2003, 11:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
i wouldnt mind the Mig 3U in 42 servers either IF ....

after 6 were shot down or crashed they were not allowed to be used anymore<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


So according to that nonsence logic, after the 6 3Us got 40 kills, they couldn't be allowed to kill anyone else..........................

I believe you understand my sarcasm.

http://server5.uploadit.org/files2/201203-OKSquad.gif

WUAF_Badsight
12-26-2003, 02:09 AM
i love that fact that the Mig3U is in FB .... more planes the better

but if you want a 42 plane set thats trying to simulate the war then leave it out

LeadSpitter_
12-26-2003, 02:18 AM
the mig 3u is great but noway can it outrun or out turn a yak3, a fully trimmed,flaps and decreased trottle turn on a mig3u cant out turn a non flaps and non trimed yak3 combat turn.

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt
VIEW MY PAINTSCHEMES HERE (http://www.il2skins.com/?planeidfilter=all&planefamilyfilter=all&screenshotfilter=allskins&countryidfilter=all&authoridfilter=%3ALeadspitter%3A&historicalidfilter=all&Submit=+++Apply+filters++&action=list&ts=1072257400)

Themotorhead
12-26-2003, 03:12 AM
The Mig U is Great and defenitly out class the yak 3 in manouvers try to flip it around i 'm imprest how the mig can turn and flip with a hight stability.A nd can stay in the 300/ 450 km/h so easly on exit of a turn.
http://french.themotorhead.com/images/dessin/lb1.jpg

But once again everyone have different way of piloting the planes and the best it's to know perfectly the capabilities of Your Choosen plane. Than you'll see your plane would be the best to your eyes http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

-GOZR

clint-ruin
12-26-2003, 03:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by resev:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
i wouldnt mind the Mig 3U in 42 servers either IF ....

after 6 were shot down or crashed they were not allowed to be used anymore<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

From http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/2072/mig.html

...A more systemic series of improvements was planned for the MiG-3U, most notably the substitution of two 20mm ShVAK cannon for the existing armament, much use of metal in lieu of wood, and a more powerful AM-39. But the AM-39 was not yet ready and the usual AM-35 was used, but the cancellation of AM-35 production delayed its first flight until August 1942 as the I-230. It proved to be even faster at all altitudes than the MiG-3, but all existing production facilities were in use for other aircraft and none could be spared. An improved version of the I-230 flew as the I-231 with the AM-39 in February 1943. It reached 707 kph at 7100 meters (439 mph at 23,300 ft.), but the usual lack of factory space prevented it from entering production.

Like most other Soviet fighters the MiG-3 was modified for a M-82A radial engine. The first attempt, the I-210, was a hasty lash-up and performed poorly. Mikoyan and Gurevich tried again with a total redesign of the fuselage on the I-211. The prototype flew in December 1942 and proved to be able to out perform all contemporary Soviet fighters with a top speed of 670 kph at 7000 meters (416 mph at 23,000 ft.). As usual production was out of the question lest it interrupt the steady flow of Lavochkins and Yaks, but elements of the design were passed to Lavochkin for use in the La-5FN.

The MiG fighters would have been in their element if the Germans had conducted a high-altitude strategic air campaign during 1941 like that conducted by the Allies from 1943. But the Germans mostly flew low-level tactical interdiction or ground support missions during the initial phases of the Great Patriotic War where the MiGs simply weren't as effective as their rivals that were designed for the frontal combat role.

Stalin may have erred in ending production of the MiG-3 in favor of the Il-2 rather than adapting it to the latter's AM-38 engine, but perhaps not. But his decision to phase out AM-35 production in favor of the low-level AM-38 was correct given the tactical environment in the East. Under the circumstances the AM-35A was a luxury that the Soviets couldn't afford with their backs to the wall. However if war had not occurred in 1941 the MiG-3U would have undoubtedly entered production in late 1941 or early 1942. At any rate, Stalin's decision rendered production of the potentially great descendants of the MiG-3 equipped with the M-82FN radial engine impossible unless significant disruption of existing production lines could be tolerated and that was never to be the case.

[This message was edited by clint-ruin on Fri December 26 2003 at 02:35 AM.]

Cajun76
12-26-2003, 09:40 AM
Like the article says, the VVS needed IL2s more than high alt fighters. But the more the better, as has been stated. It would be nice to get the P-47M (130 examples) along with the "fanasy" Ta-152 (12) http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Good hunting,
Cajun76

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-Aristotle

Meanwhile, in the 20th century:

BOOM! Yeah, Alright you primitive screwheads, listen up. See this? This is my JUG!! It's has 8 .50cals and 2000lbs+ worth of bombs and rockets. Republic's top of the line. You can find this in the Kick A$$ department. That's right, this sweet baby was made in Farmingdale, Long Island and Evansville, Indiana. Retails for about $82,997.95. It's got a turbo-supercharger, all metal control surfaces with blunt nosed ailerons, and a hair trigger. That's right, shop right, shop Republic. YOU GOT THAT!? Now I swear, the next one of you primates, E-ven TOUCHES me..... - Anonymous http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

kyrule2
12-26-2003, 12:32 PM
Cajun, try 72-200 models of the "production" Ta-152 with many destroyed on the ground and the factories overrun. A far cry from the 6 "fantasy" mig-3U's who's factories were not overrun, their production was ceased after 6 examples. But like I said before, fly what you like and be happy. The more planes the better, just don't expect to see the Mig-3U on realistic servers. I don't anticipate seeing the Ta-152 on too many either.

http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors" by Nicolas Trudgian

Wetwilly87
12-26-2003, 01:22 PM
My opnion of the Mig-3U is that its a great aircraft, early and late. I fly it when servers are full of Yak's, La-7's, and Mustangs. The reason why its in the game is because it saw combat and 6 were built, its not like it has its own campaign in single-player, they just included it to give Mig lovers a cool airplane, and the more planes the better. Now im all for more planes but planes like the Go-229 that 1 or 2 were built and flew only a couple times and saw no combat, but were still getting it is questionable but im all for more planes so let it be. And the argument that the Mig-3U is overmodeled, I dont think so, if it were, it would have been fixed a long time ago. My 2 cents, flame on.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"

Yuri_Stupchet
12-26-2003, 06:30 PM
MiG's biggest weakness is damage control...if you get hit, it's all over...otherwise, they are real nice planes

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Bull_dog_
12-26-2003, 09:08 PM
Well after reading the post I loaded up the Mig 3-U online and flew it for a few hours...I mostly flew the Mig 3 with Shvaks in the past, which can't turn well at all.

The results amazed me...I got peppered a few times and I crashed a couple of times on my own because the plane squashed out...but I bested Ki-84's, Bf-109K's and a P-39 in turn fights...from an energy standpoint it performed well and at 4000 meters, I managed to stay with some 109's. The armement was strong enough to saw the wings of Fw-190's and kill some La's...

Now keep in mind I was flying on a small map which usually makes the combat at low altitude so most fights I went into with an energy advantage. The plane dives well and holds together better than other Migs. The fire from the cannons is accurate and very effective. It doesn't have a huge ammo load, but I could take out 2 or 3 opponents when I was shooting well or none when I missed (as I frequently do). I was able to outpace most aircraft except for late model La's, Fw's and 109's...It was good enough that I could usually get back to my base and get some support....had help a couple of times with team members shooting bandits off my tail that surely would have bagged me.

I will definitely keep this on my list of planes to fly now. If you haven't tried it...try it, you'll like it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Recon_609IAP
12-26-2003, 09:57 PM
I have never include the mig3u, I don't think it ever saw any real action in ww2 - correct?

S!
609IAP_Recon

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg
Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

clint-ruin
12-26-2003, 10:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Recon_609IAP:
I have never include the mig3u, I don't think it ever saw any real action in ww2 - correct?

S!
609IAP_Recon

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg
Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've read that the 6 made claimed 40+ kills during their testing phase, though I can't find a link for it right now.

Re: reasons why Mig3U production was cancelled if it was so good - a quick look into the politics of soviet russia during the 30s and 40s will probably answer that. The infighting for Stalins ear between the various manufacturers was, in a word, intense, and Stalin himself was hardly a candidate for Worlds Greatest Strategic Genius. That said, the quote "Shturmoviks are as needed as bread" from Josif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili has been brought up a few times. A design for a plane that performs outside the typical combat envelope that competes for engines with the Il-2 probably doesn't have a great lifespan.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

CARBONFREEZE
12-27-2003, 02:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kyrule2:
nobody flew 190's back then http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey, I flew Fw-190s back then =) Online (UBI).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kyrule2:
In 1942 the best planes in FB are the Mig-3U and 109G-2. As I said the Mig-3U is sort of a fantasy plane so it shouldn't appear on realistic servers or scenerios. The 109G-2 may be overmodelled but I'll let others discuss that (I have no educated opinion on this at all). What does bother me is that the FW-190A-4 should probably be the best fighter in '42 (as it was seen as the best when it was introduced late in '41, and the A-4 was much better than the A-1), but it certainly is not. Perhaps it is simply slower than it should be, I can't say for sure but that is my guess. It's performance should probably mirror that of the A-5, I haven't seen anything state that there was a big performance jump from the A-4 to A-5. Sources I have seen have the A-4 reaching speeds of 418m.ph. I have NEVER seen a source of any kind suggest that the 109 was faster than the 190, especially in the early years. This has always peaved me a little but I never said anything until now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fw-190 A-4 is 40 kph slower than FB "object viewer" performance. This also seems to reflect my sources as well.

Russian aircraft require skill to fly.
German aircraft require ten times that skill, and one hundred times the patience!

WUAF_CO_CRBNFRZ on HyperLobby