Li-2 Revisited...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Li-2 Revisited...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2 >> Tech Support >> Scenario Data / Map Issues >> Li-2 Revisited...

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 12:34:07 AM

DeletedUser44

Posts: 397
Joined: 5/27/2021
Status: offline

After doing a bit of a review, the Soviet Li-2 (1941) is nothing more than a Douglas DC-3.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisunov_Li-2

On looking at the stats as they stacked up against the JU-52, specifically, carrying capacity. Was very curious on what justifies the Li-2 having double the carrying capacity of the JU-52.

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/compare-aircraft-results.php?aircraft1=881&aircraft2=895

The plane dimensions are nearly the same. So the difference in carrying capacity did not come from one being much larger than the other.

However, was very curious to discover that the load capacity of the JU-52 actually exceeded those of the Li-2.

( Load capacity estimated as 'Max Takeoff Weight' (M.T.O.W) - 'Empty Weight' )

JU-52: 24,229 lb - 14,356 lb = 9,873 lb
Li-2: 25,133 lb - 18,298 lb = 6,815 lb

Based on these numbers, the JU-52 can carry 3,058 lbs MORE than the Li-2. ( 44% more !!! )

However, WiTE2 has it modeled that the Li-2 carries twice as much freight as the JU-52.

hmmm.....

I am inclined to believe Matrix needs to check their equipment tables or their math.

< Message edited by Sauron_II -- 10/17/2021 12:42:10 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 2:08:12 AM

DeletedUser44

Posts: 397
Joined: 5/27/2021
Status: offline

I am suspecting the WiTE2 'Max load (lbs)' is incorrect for the Ju 52/3m.

WiTE2 has the 'Max load (lbs)' set at '3309'.

Converting to kilograms, that would be '1500' kgs. ???

What???? are you kidding me??? It should be '4000' kgs.

There are numerous sources that rate it significantly higher. Here is just one: https://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acdata_php/acdata_ju52_en.php

No wonder the Ju-52 barely carries 1.5 freight per sortie.

Matrix, you really have the Ju-52/3m data wrong, if it is supposed to be approximate to reality.

------

In comparison to the Li-2 game data, WiTE2 has the 'Max load (lbs)' set at '6617'.

(this is very close to my previously calculated estimate of '6815')

However, Matrix has the Li-2 (1941) with turret and side machine guns. I believe that is a mistake. Based on my research, the 1941 Li-2s were commercial DC-3 aircraft that was pressed into military service. I don't believe the military variants came online until 1942.

< Message edited by Sauron_II -- 10/17/2021 2:31:53 AM >

(in reply to DeletedUser44)

Post #: 2

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 3:55:15 AM

panzer51

Posts: 215
Joined: 9/16/2021
Status: offline

The first converted Li-2 for transport duty actually had a single machine gun. Not in 1941 obviously, but in early 1942. The actual Li-2 was not created until summer 1942 and got 3 machine guns. I would say the unarmed version should be called by what it was, PS-84, and Li-2 should be used from summer 1942.

(in reply to DeletedUser44)

Post #: 3

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 4:07:42 AM

DeletedUser44

Posts: 397
Joined: 5/27/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: panzer51

The first converted Li-2 for transport duty actually had a single machine gun. Not in 1941 obviously, but in early 1942. The actual Li-2 was not created until summer 1942 and got 3 machine guns. I would say the unarmed version should be called by what it was, PS-84, and Li-2 should be used from summer 1942.

That completely corresponds with my own research and agree 100%.

(in reply to panzer51)

Post #: 4

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 7:10:55 AM

Kursk1943

Posts: 445
Joined: 3/15/2014
From: Bavaria in Southern Germany
Status: offline

Again something for the Tech Support, sub-forum scenario data section.

(in reply to DeletedUser44)

Post #: 5

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 11:21:56 AM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

MTOW minus Emty Weight is NOT freight capacity. That would be MTOW minus Gross weight. Gross weight is a/c fully fuelled, manned and equipped.
I will look into Li-2, it was a DC-3 with less powerful engines so should also lose carrying ability.

(in reply to Kursk1943)

Post #: 6

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 1:16:20 PM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

A quick look at the data:
Li-2 load reduced to 2t, C-47 increased to 6500lbs
both had fuel reduced to 2/3rd and endurance reduced accordingly.
both get additional fuel loads in weapon sets for longer range missions at reduced load.

we probably don't need the LR tanks which could be placed inside the cargo compartment f�r VL range at minimal load.

Will look into the Ju 52 next but its commonly reported with 1.5t load capacity.

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 7

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 2:10:07 PM

panzer51

Posts: 215
Joined: 9/16/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

A quick look at the data:
Li-2 load reduced to 2t, C-47 increased to 6500lbs
both had fuel reduced to 2/3rd and endurance reduced accordingly.
both get additional fuel loads in weapon sets for longer range missions at reduced load.

we probably don't need the LR tanks which could be placed inside the cargo compartment f�r VL range at minimal load.

Will look into the Ju 52 next but its commonly reported with 1.5t load capacity.

Deniss, could you tell me what aircraft fuel is measured in? liters, kg, lbs? Thanks

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 8

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 2:58:43 PM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

almost everything is in lbs internally

I made the same treatment for the Ju 52, fuel reduction + maxload increase to 2t. Already existing aux fuel option increased to match max fuel condition

(in reply to panzer51)

Post #: 9

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/17/2021 5:14:58 PM

panzer51

Posts: 215
Joined: 9/16/2021
Status: offline

Not sure about fuel reduction for Li-2, it could carry max 2,320 kg and had a range of 2,500 km. Typically it could carry up to 1,600 kg of cargo. I don't believe any real change was needed other than adjusting max load down 3,532 lbs, removing all armament and renaming it PS-84.

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 10

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/18/2021 5:59:45 AM

DeletedUser44

Posts: 397
Joined: 5/27/2021
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Denniss

MTOW minus Emty Weight is NOT freight capacity. That would be MTOW minus Gross weight. Gross weight is a/c fully fuelled, manned and equipped.
I will look into Li-2, it was a DC-3 with less powerful engines so should also lose carrying ability.

It was a rough estimate, based on available data. It also corresponded with other, published information on the Ju-52.

It may not be exact as you have to account for some fuel and body weight of 3 crew members (not 4 as this is incorrectly listed in the data tables as well), but it is definitely way more accurate than what is currently listed in the WiTE2 Ju-52 data tables, which is undervalued by as much as two-thirds.

In my estimation, it looks like the Li-2 is slightly over-valued and the Ju-52 is grossly undervalued in WiTE2 game terms.

quote:

For the militarised /3mge aircraft, Nowarra gives a cargo weight capacity of 4100 kgs (9038 lbs), and an all-up flying weight of 10,000 kg...and an empty weight of 5900 kg. Maximum range from Junker's paperwork is 1500km, with 1370 litres of fuel in four wing tanks and one gravity tank in the fuselage.

-----

Using fuel load for the Ju-52 as 1370 litres (as cited above)....

Weight of 1370 litre (0.78 kg / litre) = 1,068 kgs (2354 lbs)

Given a difference of 9,000 lbs between M.T.O.W. and Empty Weight (as cited above), that still leaves 6,600 lbs carry capacity.

Then deduct 3 crew at 200 lbs each leaves 6,000 lbs in carry capacity, nearly double what the WiTE2 currently lists for the Ju52/3m.

----

No matter how you slice it, the 3,3xxx lbs value listed in the WiTE2 data table for the Ju52/3m is grossly incorrect.

Note, the following image is for the Ju 52/3 mg 4e, where as the exact sub-type in game terms should be the Ju 52/ 3 mg 5e. I expect the '5e' will be slightly different.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Sauron_II -- 10/18/2021 7:23:27 AM >

(in reply to Denniss)

Post #: 11

RE: Li-2 Revisited... - 10/18/2021 12:21:32 PM

Denniss

Posts: 7902
Joined: 1/10/2002
From: Germany, Hannover (region)
Status: offline

Fliegende Werkstatt as 1941+ variant G7e was almost a tonne heavier (case I, 500 more with just 600kg of fuel in case II) due to heavier more powerful engines and structural strenghtening like some crew armor.
1500km is highly unlikely with just ~1400l fuel, I expect this for the 2400l full fuel load.
I have seen a range figures of 1100km for the G7e with 2400l fuel but no speed is given. Common practice was to use max cruise for this value (would be 250ish km/h) while eco cruise (~215ish km/h) would probably get to ~1500km

(in reply to DeletedUser44)

Post #: 12

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's War in the East 2 >> Tech Support >> Scenario Data / Map Issues >> Li-2 Revisited...

Page: [1]