|
Title: Yak-7 V armament Post by: marluc on March 20, 2007, 11:27:21 PM Hi,everybody:
This is my first post in this forum,excuse my basic english,please.The Yak-7 V,carried any kind of gun?The diferent sources I have about this topic have discrepancies.I know that the Yak-7 V was just a "familiarization" aircraft,and the Yak-7 UTI was the combat trainer,am I right?.Any help will be very appreciated. Martin Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: John Thompson on March 20, 2007, 11:50:58 PM With all due respect for everyone else on this forum, for my money, the local Yak expert is a guy who uses the posting handle "Dark Green Man". Maybe with some luck he'll jump in on this one, or you could try contacting him by e-mail - check the registered users list. Good luck!
John Thompson Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: Dark Green Man on March 23, 2007, 12:05:58 AM well, you gentlemen really don't need me do you? the Yak-7UTI (conversion trainer/fighter) had a single 7.62 mm SHKas gun on the left side (like the Yak-9) for gunnery training and practice. the Yak-7V (familiarization) had no armament at all. p.s. John, thanks for the vote of confidence ! [/color] Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: marluc on March 23, 2007, 10:36:24 PM DGM:
Thank you for your reply,we really need you(and your knowledge about VVS aircraft).Now,I`ve a clear view about the Yak-7V.See you: Martin Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: Dark Green Man on March 24, 2007, 10:47:15 PM Martin, you are quite welcome. let me know if you need any other Yak fighter info,I do not know everything but I will share it if I know it. while I am at it I should clarify that the Yak-9's had a 12.7 mm UBS not a SHKas , what I meant is that it is on the left side only not on the right or both as in the Yak-7A,b and Yak-3. Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: FPSOlkor on March 25, 2007, 10:34:42 AM I am at it I should clarify that the Yak-9's had a 12.7 mm UBS not a SHKas , what I meant is that it is on the left side only not on the right or both as in the Yak-7A,b and Yak-3. Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: marluc on March 25, 2007, 09:10:57 PM DGM:
Thanks for sharing your information with me and all the "forumers",of course;you are very kind.And thanks again for the aditional data about Yak-9 armament.As a matter of fact,I need more info about the Yak-7V,but I?ll post it in the proper "section" in this forum.Thanks again,see you: Martin Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: Dark Green Man on March 25, 2007, 11:55:10 PM This is a matter of discussion, actually... I've spoken with vets who had 2 UBS mg's on their Yak-9, although it seems that it was not a common weapons arrangement. About trainer weapons - it was not unified, so anything could be used... Yes, I have heard this before... I was referring to the factory installed armament, not field modifications. this personal 'upgrade' would have to have been very rare and only on a regiment -to-regiment basis and not applied to the whole of Yak-9 production. [/font] Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: FPSOlkor on March 26, 2007, 10:39:08 AM This is a matter of discussion, actually... I've spoken with vets who had 2 UBS mg's on their Yak-9, although it seems that it was not a common weapons arrangement. About trainer weapons - it was not unified, so anything could be used... Yes, I have heard this before... I was referring to the factory installed armament, not field modifications. this personal 'upgrade' would have to have been very rare and only on a regiment -to-regiment basis and not applied to the whole of Yak-9 production. [/font] Yak -9 of first production line of at least 50 units had 2 UBS's, then it would be installed with an unidentified frequency, but still in the factory, i suppose - it depended on the mg's presence at this given moment. I heard about reducing the amount of guns in the field, but adding... Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: marluc on March 27, 2007, 03:13:44 AM I understand that the first Yak-9s had 2 UBS because they were based in the Yak-7b,am I wrong?
Martin Title: Re: Yak-7 V armament Post by: FPSOlkor on March 27, 2007, 05:52:46 AM You are right - two machines were built at the same production line, so to reduce the time to conversion they were as unified as it could be only possible...
|