Special Aircraft Service

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Rogožarski IK-3 FM  (Read 5815 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Radoye

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #12 on: August 23, 2012, 06:30:09 AM »

...because its performance has been proved by dead Luftwaffe pilots over Belgrade...

7 operational IK-3's have claimed 11 unconfirmed victories for the loss of 4 of their own (+ another 3 destroyed on the ground to prevent capture). Percentage-wise that's a great score.

But most of the damage against Luftwaffe over Belgrade has been done by Yugoslav Emil pilots who were able to sneak near German bomber formations unrecognized and wreak havo, while the IK's with their distinctive silhouette were immediately fired upon.

Another setback was the lack of ammo - there was no incendiary ammo available for the machineguns (only ordinary ball ammo) and there was a shortage of 20mm shells so much that after the first day of the war Yugoslav planes (IK's and Emils alike) took off with only 6 20mm rounds per gun instead of the usual full load. This too had an impact on their efficiency.

Breakdown of the 11 IK-3 victories by type:

Ju 87B: 2
Do 17Z: 2
Ju 88A: 3
Me 109E: 2
Me 110D: 2

About half of these were shot down on the first day of the war, 3 more on the second and the rest for the remaining few days of the war.

But despite all of this most important factor we need to consider was the pilot performance. Because in a hands of a good pilot even an essentially inferior machine can defeat the most modern opponent.

It is an enduring myth among the peoples of former Yugoslavia that IK-3 was "the best fighter plane on the whole world". It was most certainly not.

But it was good for what it was - a light fighter of a size similar to MS.406 utilizing a similar engine and armament, and it was clearly superior to 406 in every imaginable performance aspect by some margin.

And especially with the future upgrades - 2nd series and beyond, look at the postwar Ikarus S-49A which was nothing but an IK-3 with a cut-down rear fuselage, bubble canopy, VK-105 engine (itself a development of the Hispano-Suiza) and armed with 1 x 20mm and 2 x .50cal machineguns for an idea about the potential of the initial design - had the war fortunes went some other way the IK-3 would still be a capable fighter well into the second half of the WW2.

Not the "best in the whole world" - but still pretty good.
Logged
I'm an island, surrounded by a sea of idiots!

warhawk

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 282
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #13 on: August 23, 2012, 07:46:03 AM »

Actually, the twelve built examples (not including the prototype) were all of the pre-production series, delivered in two batches (6 planes each), which differed only in some details, not in flight performance.

First series (25 aircraft) was ordered and production was getting prepared when the Axis forces invaded.
Production examples would have had a different engine (DB601 and RR Merlin were considered, the first version was actually built - a single Rogoschmitt...  ;D)
 
Logged

Radoye

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #14 on: August 23, 2012, 04:58:41 PM »

I assume we have the 1st series?
Yes what we have in the game is representative of one of 12 1st series IK-3's as originally delivered.

Not the original prototype (lost in accident), not the modified #7 (2nd series prototype) nor the 24 airframes being in different stages of completion.

Actually, the twelve built examples (not including the prototype) were all of the pre-production series, delivered in two batches (6 planes each), which differed only in some details, not in flight performance.

First series (25 aircraft) was ordered and production was getting prepared when the Axis forces invaded.

Essentially this is correct - all 12 pre-series machines differed in small details, but not in performance.

However locally this pre-series is being referred to as the "1st series" and the 24 series aircraft (+ modified #7, the only machine ever completed to the new specs to make it a total of 25) were known as the "2nd series".

Production examples would have had a different engine (DB601 and RR Merlin were considered, the first version was actually built - a single Rogoschmitt...  ;D)

Yes there was some consideration to use a Merlin or a DB on further series production of IK-3 (as well as a fully developed DB-Hurricane project known as LVT-1, built and flown and ready for series production) but nothing serious happened by the time Germans invaded - by serious i mean technical drawings, calculations or any work beyond the initial idea.

The one DB-IK that was "completed" was only a mock-up never intended to fly, it was done by mating one of the incomplete airframes from 2nd series production with the nose section from a worn-out Me 109, to be displayed in a museum in Berlin. It was transported there by rail and was destroyed by Allied bombs later in the war.

Logged
I'm an island, surrounded by a sea of idiots!

LuseKofte

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6894
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2012, 12:20:01 AM »

I want to state something about kill/ loss rate.
You can never use this statistic in a FM debate, the kill/ lossrate during the war was mainly based on how many enemy planes could you find. In  BOB there where more targets to find for Allied k/l rate in favor for allied, later in war the other way around. In 1944 it was not unusual for a allied fighterpilot to not ever meet a flying german plane at all.
This is Airkills I am talking about, not groundkills. same in eastfront
Logged

Radoye

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #16 on: August 24, 2012, 05:42:05 AM »

I tend to agree - kill vs loss ratio most definitely should not be the crown argument in an FM discussion. I listed the IK-3 "victims" to show they were mainly bombers, as a counter-argument to the claim of "many dogfighting victories against Luftwaffe pilots over Belgrade".

Yes there are other factors than pure plane performance to consider which can influence the kill/loss ratio and some are already mentioned (tactical situation, pilot quality etc). IK-3 has some of these going for it (their pilots were hand-picked elite, the best of the best, all experienced aerobatics flyers) and some against it (desperately outnumbered, easily recognizable to Luftwaffe pilots unlike the Yugo Emils, lack of 20mm ammo...) and IMHO it has performed quite well under the circumstances.

But does this all mean the FM should be changed? Hell no!
Logged
I'm an island, surrounded by a sea of idiots!

Laufer

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 93
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #17 on: August 24, 2012, 07:43:53 AM »

Yes, you are all right! FM shouldn't be changed, but AI need to be changed definitely !
Logged

LuseKofte

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6894
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #18 on: August 24, 2012, 09:56:41 AM »

What this game however not do is mirroring the fuelproblem Germans had late war. The engine might be good but the fuel was rubbish. Performance on latewar Luftwaffe airplanes was very limited because of this. I am all for adjusting FM and getting AI better so the game feels more realistic.
Your suggestion of changing FM is not a bad idea, many times a FM tweak is nessersery to get this game better even if the tweak isnt historical
Logged

Bombnick

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 82
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #19 on: August 26, 2012, 09:13:04 AM »

What is the current FM of IK-3 based on? Are there any test reports from 1941 available?
Logged

Radoye

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #20 on: August 26, 2012, 11:11:54 AM »

I am not aware of any performance charts and such surviving the war.

There are only some written reports from test flights and mock-dogfights which quote some performance figures.

Such as:

Measured absolute top speed 527 km/h @ 5450 m (specially prepared prototype)

Top speed 520 km/h @ 5000 m (average 1st series machine)

Top speed at sea level 421 km/h

Cruising speed 400 km/h @ 5000 m

Climb to 5000 m:
7 minutes flat (specially prepared prototype)
7 min 49 s (average 1st series machine)

Ceiling 9460 m

Range 600 km, endurance 1 hr 15 min

Takeoff run 200 m

And then there are the physical dimensions:

Length 8 m

Height 3.25 m

Wing span 10.30 m

Wing area 16.50 m2

Aspect ratio 6.43

NACA profile 2215/2212/2209

Weights - empty 2170 kg, normal takeoff 2405 kg, maximal takeoff 2630 kg

Fuel capacity 330 l

Oil capacity 38 l

Engine HS 12Y-29crs 925 hp / 690 kW

Armament 1 x 20 mm moteur-canon w/60 rds, 2 x 7.92 mm cowl machineguns w/ 500 rds

All reports cite "excellent agility and turn performance", "easily turns into a Hurricane or Me 109 during mock dogfights" but no hard numbers are given.


What jumps at me from these numbers is the time-to-altitude value which is quite weak compared to the contemporary opposition, IK-3 would be easily outclimbed by both Hurricane and 109. Top speed is thereabouts with the early mark Hurricanes but 109 again has the edge.

Logged
I'm an island, surrounded by a sea of idiots!

Radoye

  • member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 645
Re: Rogožarski IK-3 FM
« Reply #21 on: August 26, 2012, 11:20:05 AM »

Looking at the charts in Il-2Compare it seems there is some room for improvement (top speed 526 km/h @ 4800) there but nothing that would make a drastic difference. I mean, you still wouldn't be able to chase down a 109 (and you shouldn't).

Logged
I'm an island, surrounded by a sea of idiots!
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 26 queries.