Sovietwarplanes
November 14, 2019, 04:10:34 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  Print  
Author Topic: Page on La-7s  (Read 15582 times)
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #30 on: March 07, 2017, 09:27:22 PM »

Hi Aleksandar,
I have other drawings and photos for other interesting planes.
Anyway, now I am considering to make a drawing of plane 33, things are a bit more clear and I can hope that Vestsik had some verbal sources, even if he mistaked the association to the photo. My main doubt is if it was really a 3-guns plane.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #31 on: March 08, 2017, 06:25:06 AM »

Hi ,
who knows if it is possible to contact Milos Vestsik, the author of the monograph edited by MBI?
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1512

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: March 08, 2017, 12:11:06 PM »

Hi Massimo,
I communicated with him via e-mail some years ago, I found him at VIF. I will try to find that address.
Regards,
   66misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #33 on: March 08, 2017, 01:36:44 PM »

Hi Misos,
it would be great.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #34 on: March 09, 2017, 06:30:19 PM »

Hi,
I've tried a reconstruction of the plane of Golubev.



I've explained all the considerations on it at

http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/la-7/la-7colors/10whitenose/10whitenose.htm

The similarity with plane 10 suggests that its identification as the plane of Zaitsev, the deputy division commander, is likely.



Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1512

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #35 on: March 10, 2017, 09:09:49 AM »

Hi,
I've tried a reconstruction of the plane of Golubev.



I've explained all the considerations on it at
http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/la-7/la-7colors/10whitenose/10whitenose.htm

Hi Massimo,
if that profile should represent this plane:

I do not think it has board number 33. On the bw photo above the first digit of the board number has straight top horizontal bar (3 or 7), but the second digit behind Golubev's left shoulder is rounded (0,2,6,8 or 9).
Regards,
   66misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #36 on: March 10, 2017, 09:25:18 AM »

Hi Misos,
no, it is not the same plane. The plane on the photo is a La-5FN photographed in summer 1944, after his last victory. The roster of individual victories is complete (39), excluding the shared ones. The wire is as on La-5FN, and it is named as La-5 by Geust and Mellinger.
The base for my profile is the photo from the front shown on a Russian magazine, that let see a piece of the tail, and the resemblance to plane 10.

Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1512

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 10, 2017, 11:20:10 AM »

Hi Massimo,
check the antenna wire at this photo:

The upper wire clearly connects the top of the antenna mast behind the cockpit with the top of the small mast on the tail. But if I see correctly, the bottom wire goes from the top of the small tail mast to the base of the mast behind the cockpit (not typical for La-7).
I do not see there bottom wire going in standard "La-7 way" e.g. from the base of the small tail mast to the top of the mast behind the cockpit like on your profile.
Or is it only optical illusion?
regards,
   66misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #38 on: March 10, 2017, 03:34:00 PM »

Hi Misos,
I think that you are right about the wire. In facts, n.10 has a nearly identical arrangement.

the only difference is that, both on the mysterious 3x and on the La-7 from the front, the wire looks to join directly to the base of the mast instead of an insulator moved a bit back.  This is not a factory arrangement, n.10 has still the hole for the original insulator on the glazed panel where it enters on usual La-7s.
Implications: this seems to point that 3x and the other plane are the same, and 10 is at least of the same division. Certainly 3X is of Golubev because it has the right number of victories. If it is so, 33 is wrong. should 33 be right, this would say that 3x is his La-5FN.
If Golubev wrote memories, then he could have written both the number of his La-7, both the number of his last La-5FN. It shouldn't be so difficult to find who has read them.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1512

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #39 on: March 10, 2017, 04:58:50 PM »

Hi Massimo,

according to the http://www.airaces.narod.ru/all1/golubev.htm:
"On June 28, 1944, he won his last victory, sending to the water of the Gulf of Finland fighter FW-190. And the last combat sortie at Koenigsberg was carried out already on the new La-7 fighter."

I have found Golubev's memoirs "In the name of Leningrad" at http://bookscafe.net/book/golubev_vasiliy-vo_imya_leningrada-29299.html
and there is written:
"Yes, I fought (on I-16). It had board number 33, the same as now..."
"On 1st April (1945) our regiment came to the airport near Koenigsberg on La-5 and La-7 fighters...our pilots there flew american Cobras..."
"On 6th May we came to airport Aglonen near Palanga...there were two rows of La-5 and La-7 fighters..."
"Four La-5...the zero sixteenth (Call sign of Shestopalov)", e.g. 016?...I (e.g. Golubev) "the thirty third..."


At least according to this book it looks like Golubev flew La-5(FN) with board number 33. Huh
Regards,
   66misos
« Last Edit: March 10, 2017, 05:07:57 PM by 66misos » Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #40 on: March 10, 2017, 08:55:08 PM »

Hi Misos,
I have asked to Oleg, he found this:
Quote
There are 2 books. Regarding La-period is Vtoroye Dykhanie (second breath). There he mentions that his callsign is 33. In the I-16-period book Kryliya krepnut v boyu (wings get stronger in the fight) he describes that his first bort number was 13. after being shot down several times his tech Bogdanov had changed bort number to 33. Ever since his number was 33. Repairing La-7 is presented in second book, but it is not described as Golubevs airplane! Just one of La-7 of the regiment

Strange, plane 3x has the right number of victories and has to be his plane. But which one? The medals seem the same of the photo with Semyon Lavochkin, dated 25 september 1944. This is compatible both with La-5FN and with La-7.
Perhaps the La-7 had a different number when delivered, and he made it change into 33 in a second time. Numbers of Lavochkins were painted in factory, but it is strange that he always received n.33 from factory, (La-5. 5FN, 7) so it could have been repainted  at the unit on his order, just as his I-16 n.13. If so, the plane on the photo has to be a La-7 just delivered, they had the time to paint the starlets and to arrange the wires in that unusual way, but the work on the number has still to be made.

Regards
Massimo

Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #41 on: March 11, 2017, 07:22:33 AM »

Or, perhaps his callsign wasn't the same of the number painted on his plane?
The plane 3x of the photo looks already personalized, if they had to change the number, they would have done this first.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1512

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #42 on: March 12, 2017, 11:10:32 AM »

Hi Massimo,
to complicate things a bit more - on this photo red arrows point to the blotch that is apparently brighter than surrounding AMT-11. Even its boundaries are not do nicely difuse like on dark area on the left. Is it repainting of the original number (33?) or only a local repair?


That dark area is exactly there where one would expect dark grey AMT-12 - compare it with the standard camouflage on La-5FN on the photo bellow:


Your profile should have the right boundary of the AMT-12 more to the right. 2-3 left columns of the victory starlets should be on dark AMT-12, you have them on AMT-11:


Regards,
   66misos
Logged

Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5801


« Reply #43 on: March 12, 2017, 12:25:26 PM »

Hi Misos,
you are right about a double change of shade in the greys.
Though, I have the impression that the repainting is the darkest part on the left, because it returns light close to the star.
Besides, I think to see a light repainting at the base of the mast, probably related to the modification necessary to make the wire enter here.
If so, th dark band of the original camouflage was moved unusually back.
The plane doesn't seem as just delivered, but aged and repaired. It would be good to know the date of the shot for sure.

Another question:
Quote
I have found Golubev's memoirs "In the name of Leningrad" at http://bookscafe.net/book/golubev_vasiliy-vo_imya_leningrada-29299.html
and there is written:
"Yes, I fought (on I-16). It had board number 33, the same as now..."
"On 1st April (1945) our regiment came to the airport near Koenigsberg on La-5 and La-7 fighters...our pilots there flew american Cobras..."
"On 6th May we came to airport Aglonen near Palanga...there were two rows of La-5 and La-7 fighters..."
"Four La-5...the zero sixteenth (Call sign of Shestopalov)", e.g. 016?...I (e.g. Golubev) "the thirty third..."

The same as now, he answered... was this an interview? When was it made? He uses the past to speak about 6 May (1945?)

Regards
Massimo
« Last Edit: March 12, 2017, 12:28:27 PM by Massimo Tessitori » Logged
66misos
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1512

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.


WWW
« Reply #44 on: March 12, 2017, 04:16:05 PM »

Hi Massimo,

...I have the impression that the repainting is the darkest part on the left, because it returns light close to the star...
Could be, or it could be only a shadow from something not very close to the aircraft, or only damaged photo (blotches like from water drops are visible)...

...The same as now, he answered... was this an interview? When was it made? He uses the past to speak about 6 May (1945?)...
No interview. Standard soviet memoirs - telling stories from the past with minimum technical details. I doubt they flew La-5 in 1945 like described in memoirs. IMHO those so called "La-5" were actually La-5FN.

Regards,
   66misos
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!