Talk:Lavochkin La-7

PLAAF
Chinese never served La-7 ! They got next vreison La-9 http://wp.scn.ru/en/ww3/f/700/30 wp --95.188.92.90 (talk) 13:24, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that you're right, but I'm waiting for a better listing of aircraft the Chinese received from the Soviets.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:10, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, therea are another sources: 1. "Military Aircraft in the Chinese Civil War", ISBN:957-8628-02-1, Taipeh, Taiwan; 2. "La-9 - La-11", Armada, No.11. They say PLAAF got La-9s and UTILa-9 trainers. La-11s were also served in China but by the 351st IAP, Soviet AF. wp --95.188.92.90 (talk) 13:15, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi friends! I found Russian source "Aviacollection No.11 2009" monograph at page 28 said "12 La-7 were supplied to China by Soviets in 1950 in not flyable condition. They were used most probably for ground personal training." wp --95.188.92.90 (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That doesn't surprise me at all.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:46, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Exported to North Korea?
Just wondered about the article stating in the opening paragraph (and later in the Operators subsection) that the La-7 was only used by the Soviets and Czechoslovakians. I discovered two other Wiki articles -- Yakovlev Yak-11 subsection "Korean War", and North American F-82 Twin Mustang, subsection "Far East Air Forces" -- that claim North Korean La-7s along with Yak-11s & Yak-9s mixed it up with USAF Twin Mustangs over Kimpo airfield in late June 1950. I'm confused as to which Wiki has it wrong, if either. Am I missing something here? Sector001 (talk) 08:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I looked in printed sources on the Korean War and can find nothing about La-7s going to Korea, but plenty about La-9s and La-11s being exported. Given that the three planes are almost identical visually, I can see how authors and the USAAF might be confused.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:06, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
 * FYI the A-1 Skyraider article also mentions the Chinese flying La-7s, if anybody is taking on the job of cleaning up the references 96.224.34.168 (talk) 17:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

La7 with rocket engine video footage
http://www.kronikarp.com/szukaj,17764,strona-1

around 0:35. Enjoy :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.73.105.39 (talk) 11:29, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

Me 262
The only VVS pilot credited with shooting down a Me 262, was L.I.Sivko of 812th Interceptor Aviation Regiment. Hugh Morgan wrote in his 1997 published monograph, "Soviet Aces of World War 2" p. 53: "Towards the end of war Yak-9 pilot L.I.Sivko of 812.IAP shot down the first Me 262 to fall victim to the VVS on 22 March 1945. He was then in turn targeted by a second Messerschmitt jet fighter and swiftly shot down and killed - possibly by Franz Schall, one of the leading Me 262 jet aces of the war (see Aircraft of the Aces 17 Luftwaffe Jet Aces of Word War 2 for more details)."

I'm going therefore remove the erroneously statement, and if there are other objections please let me know. Dircovic (talk) 08:27, 22 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Edit: Snippet can be found on google book search. Dircovic (talk) 08:48, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

No, besides L.Sivko who shot down on his Yak-9 the Me-262 which attacked Il-2 group, the famous Soviet ace I. Kozhedub on his La-7 shot down the Me-262 on 17.02.1945, also several other pilots from the Soviet 16th Army (Markveladze, Kuznetsov) had the victories over Me-262. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.164.51.164 (talk) 05:02, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

La-9 relationship to the La-7
The article contained my sources saying that there was no direct relationship between these two aircraft. Before you revert me again, what are yours?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:06, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

It was. See Chapter 5 in: Якубович, Н.В. Ла-7, Ла-9, Ла-11. Последние поршневые истребители СССР. Москва: Коллекция, Яуза, ЭКСМО, 2014. Yakubovich, N.V. La-7, La-9, La-11. Poslednie porshnevye istrebiteli SSSR. (La-7, La-9, La-11. The Last Piston-Engined Fighters in USSR). Moscow, Russia: Collection, Yauza, EKSMO, 2014. ISBN 978-5-699-76444-0.--ModelFun (talk) 04:16, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't mean anything
115 La-7s were lost in air combat, only half the number of Yak-3s. Yes, but how many of each type were in service compared to the total lost? A direct comparison of losses is meaningless unless both aircraft were in service in roughly equal numbers (which should be stated to put the statement in context). If there were twice as many Yak-9s in service (and I wouldn't be surprised), having twice the total losses equals the same loss rate. I don't know if there were quite twice as many Yaks, but I'm pretty sure they were obtained in significantly larger numbers than the La-7, which makes the "half" misleading. And that doesn't even go into what different tasks the types may have been assigned to that could have effected loss rates independent of the performance of the respective machine. I bet there were far fewer Hurricanes lost in air combat in 1944 than Spitfires, but that is not because the Hurricane was a superior fighter. It is because the Spitfire was used almost exclusively in air combat, while the Hurricane was mostly used as a fighter bomber by that point. And there were probably far fewer in service by 1944.

64.222.126.65 (talk) 14:56, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Also doesn’t mean anything
The “Design and Development” section has a number of references to “c/n 39210206“. No idea what that’s supposed to be about. Mr Larrington (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2023 (UTC)