PDA

View Full Version : lag7 damage model



XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 12:52 PM
Does anyone here think the damage model for the lag 7 is accurate cos online lately ive noticed that it can take an awful amount of 30mm 108 hits so i just did a qmb and found this:

flew 109k4 with LA7 as freindly ai got on his six and he managed to take 8 hits with the 30mm before crashing, then flew with FWD9 as freindly AC after 2 hits the engine stopped and it dove away smoking after trying several more times their is a little variation that each can take each time but the LAG7 seems to take way too much damage.

Is this a bug and has anyone else noticed this?

Message Edited on 08/19/0312:02PM by johno__UK

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 12:52 PM
Does anyone here think the damage model for the lag 7 is accurate cos online lately ive noticed that it can take an awful amount of 30mm 108 hits so i just did a qmb and found this:

flew 109k4 with LA7 as freindly ai got on his six and he managed to take 8 hits with the 30mm before crashing, then flew with FWD9 as freindly AC after 2 hits the engine stopped and it dove away smoking after trying several more times their is a little variation that each can take each time but the LAG7 seems to take way too much damage.

Is this a bug and has anyone else noticed this?

Message Edited on 08/19/0312:02PM by johno__UK

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 12:58 PM
nt = no such thing as an LaGG-7

-----------
Due to pressure from the moderators, the sig returns to..

"It's the machine, not the man." - Materialist, and proud of it!

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 01:03 PM
in FB 1.0, definately.. in FB 1.1.. hmm i've noticed that 1-2 mk108 hits is enough every time so far.. so looking good..so no, LA-7 damage model seems about right

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 01:53 PM
First of all, there's no such thing as "Lag7".

LaGG series were designed by Lavochkin, Gorbunov and Gudkov,
hence the abbreviation - "LaGG".
La series were designed by Lavochkin, hence these aircraft are designated as "La".

Now about damage model. Although LaGG aircraft initially had a rather mediochre performance, it was exceptionally
resistant to damage. It was also very hard to set on fire with incendiary ammunition. Many pilots survived in the battle thanks to a tough airframe of this fighter.

"La" fighter basically had the same airframe and was just as tough as its "LaGG" predecessor. Even more than that, the "La" radial engine was significantly more damage resistant than the old liquid-cooled inline engine of the "LaGG". During the fight it could have up to four of its cylinders shot off or damaged and still remain operational long enough to stay in fight and then return home safely. "La" pilots loved its reliability and toughness. Later series of this fighter got even better and better in that respect.

When you meet a "La", you'll be able to cause more damage if you aim at wingroots, cockpit, lower area of the tail section, radiator area below the cockpit or a fuselage area just after the cockpit. Deflection shooting works best.
Trying to settle in the firing position exactly on it's "six" is a waste of time and precious ammo and therefore not recommended.

Cheers.




Message Edited on 08/19/0312:54PM by FPS_Stierlitz

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 02:05 PM
I find that a couple of bursts from machine guns and 30mm are enough to rip the wing off, blow the tail section away, or cripple the plane beyond anything resembling airworthy.

No complaints there...infact I haven't seen much that withstand an inordinate amount of beating.

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/icefire/icefire_tempest.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 02:47 PM
the Laggs were replaced with the La's after the Lagg3-IT models, or you can read more info here:

http://www.il2sturmovik.com/games_elts/fb_aircraft.php

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_01.jpg

XyZspineZyX
08-19-2003, 02:56 PM
thanks..