MiG-3 - The Soviet Fighter Few Could Tame

Рет қаралды 394,834

2 жыл бұрын

The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3 was a controversial Second World War Soviet fighter. Some loved it, some hated it. Join us for a look at this very symbolic fighter.
0:04 History
3:56 Strengths
4:36 Weaknesses
5:08 Variants
6:30 Head to Head
8:01 Notable Pilots
9:52 Conclusion
Disclaimer - This channel is apolitical. We do not endorse any kind of political view.
Game footage and aircraft models
War Thunder - / warthunder .
Corrections
- The Maximum speed of the P-40E was possibly higher than the 496 km/h stated in this video.
Music by order of appearance
History:
- Beautiful Oblivion by Scott Buckley ssoundcloud.comscottbuckley
Music promoted by httpswww.free-stock-music.com
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
screativecommons.orglicensesby4.0
Strengths and Weaknesses:
- Music: www.purple-planet.com
Variants:
- Silhouette Of War by Keys of Moon | / keysofmoon
Music promoted by www.free-stock-music.com
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Head to head:
- Music: www.purple-planet.com
Notable Pilots
- Vladimir by Alexander Nakarada | www.serpentsoundstudios.com
Music promoted by www.free-stock-music.com
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Conclusion
- USSR | The Grand Score by Alexander Nakarada | www.serpentsoundstudios.com
Music promoted by www.free-stock-music.com
Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
SFX
Old Vintage Film Scratches:
www.videezy.com/Free Stock Video Footage by Videezy.com
Sources
Russian Aircraft of World War II - Edward Ward - ISBN 978-1-83886-083-7
German Fighter Aircraft of World War II - Thomas Newdick - ISBN 978-1-78274-970-7
Aircraft of World War II - Chris Grant - ISBN 1-84013-336-8
Fighting Aircraft of World War II - Bill Gunston - ISBN 1-84065-092-3
Aircraft of the Aces, Legends of World War 2 - Iain Wyllie & Tony Holmes - ISBN 1-84176-155-9
The Complete Book of Fighters - William Green & Gordon Swanborough - ISBN 0-86288-220-6
Jane's Fighting Aircraft of World War II - ISBN 1-85170-493-0
The Gatefold Book of World War II Warplanes - ISBN 1-85627-947-2
Wikipedia
I do not own any of the images used in this video. The owners of such images are identified in the video itself.

Пікірлер: 570

@Ypog_UA 2 жыл бұрын

Ironically, playing MiG-3 in computer simulators showed me the exact same conclusion. When I was new to those games I immediately hated the plane. Everyone could turn around me and even if I got a shot on someone, it would do almost no damage. Later, I came back to it and now I really love it. I don't stick around low altitudes dogfighting like before and I use its speed to intercept and outrun most of the enemies. I especially like the BK variant, even though it adds weight the firepower is worth it in my opinion. It really is like a stallion.

@bigblue6917 2 жыл бұрын

Same tactics used against the Japanese Zero. Fight to your strengths not theirs.

@ccv1929 2 жыл бұрын

Exactly, if a plane is outclassed in dogfights, simply do not make dogfights, make use of your energy to boom and zoom.

@jotabe1984 2 жыл бұрын

seems legit. In my experience in WT the Mig3 will shine chasing those pesky high altittude bombers. Aim for the engines since the lack of 20mm cannon is very punishing to firepower. Against enemy fighters dive attack and climb is the only doable tactic since that plane will get outturned by about every fighter in the game. Do not carry any Air to Ground payload, that won't work

@farazsid4270 2 жыл бұрын

Armour Piercing Bullets used for ground attack coupled with rapid firing 12.7mm wing mounted guns in BK variant make it lethal fighter specially in Dive and frontal head on attacks weather it be croasair mustangs or spitfires. You just have to play on your own terms.

@LeonelEBD 2 жыл бұрын

@John Martlew yet i was clapping everyone in a zero in the times of cfs2 ...

@jonathanl1276 2 жыл бұрын

The MiG-3's far back cockpit location and sharp shape looks like some of today's racing planes.

@Crashed131963 2 жыл бұрын

It sure looked good.

@andrzejfilip4913 2 жыл бұрын

Stalin made the speed the only factor by which the new fighter plane was to be determined. All design teams fosued on that part, so Jak-1 and ŁAAG-3 were all designed this way...

@jarikinnunen1718 2 жыл бұрын

@@andrzejfilip4913 Anyone can go fast. Few can turn and stopping properly.

@andrzejfilip4913 2 жыл бұрын

@@jarikinnunen1718 no not really. Going fast is very hard on a piston engine fighter. Turing is easy, as any WW1 fighter could outturn any WW2 fighter. My point was the speed as the only tactical requirement was stupid and hence the failure of Mig-1.

@guaporeturns9472 2 жыл бұрын

@@andrzejfilip4913 Not really..use tactics that capitalize on your speed advantage and it’s not stupid. P-51s and P-47s were not nearly as maneuverable as Bf 109s , Fw 190s and A6M2s but shot down plenty of them.. just don’t get into a turning fight. Worked well. Hellcat too

@SteeveeDan 2 жыл бұрын

The honesty of this video is very admirable.

@lifuranph.d.9440 2 жыл бұрын

Da.!.

@davidherbst 2 жыл бұрын

Regardless of performance or record, the MiG-3 was one of the best looking fighters of WWII.

@TheKitMurkit 2 жыл бұрын

@jojomaster7675 2 жыл бұрын

yes

@23gt17 2 жыл бұрын

Another yes vote here. It is SLEEK!

@franciscohughes1757 2 жыл бұрын

Eh, spitfire matches, if not better

@jojomaster7675 2 жыл бұрын

@@franciscohughes1757 respectfully disagree

@Skeeter51244 2 жыл бұрын

Training and tactics can be the key. After all, it took the Royal Navy to teach us how to land as Corsair on a carrier.

@spanishpeaches2930 2 жыл бұрын

It took the greatest test pilot of them all Eric " winkle" Brown.

@bassface8580 2 жыл бұрын

The Corsair was so god damn legendary. Love it and the story of the black sheep squadron

@ih302 2 жыл бұрын

@@spanishpeaches2930 Old Winkle was a legend..

@patchouliknowledge4455 2 жыл бұрын

@@bassface8580 Add how beautiful and unique it looks, and you've got yourself a hell of a memorable plane

@bassface8580 2 жыл бұрын

@@patchouliknowledge4455 yeh and the sound of the things. Werent they one of the fastest planes of the war aswell?

@davidbeattie4294 2 жыл бұрын

The key is to understand where your aircraft is superior and to develop tactics to maximize those advantages. Its also essential to understand your opponents strengths and weaknesses so you can avoid fighting where he has a major advantage.

@tricosteryl 2 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately for the Mig3 pilots, the ennemi was not present at altitudes the Mig was designed for (hi altiude). They had no choice but to fight where the Mig was at a disadvantage.

@spanishpeaches2930 2 жыл бұрын

I love the way the cockpit was so far back. Good looking plane.

@bassmith448bassist5 2 жыл бұрын

Reminiscent of the Corsair.

@spanishpeaches2930 2 жыл бұрын

@@bassmith448bassist5 Except the Corsair had all the good looks of a crop duster.

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

Good looking indeed!

@MrDino1953 2 жыл бұрын

Forward vision during take-off and landing must have been quite terrible. Good looks do not always translate to good function.

@Hibernicus1968 2 жыл бұрын

@@MrDino1953 I doubt it was any more of an issue for the MiG-3 than it was for the Corsair, and could have been compensated for the same way. Having the cockpit placed so far back certainly didn't stop the Corsair from being one of the most effective US fighters of the war.

@bokiboki1119 2 жыл бұрын

I read Pokryshkin's biography when I was a kid. I remember him saying you need to fly the Mig-3 not according to the training manual and he also liked using the rockets.

@MaksimSF 2 жыл бұрын

Pokryshkin was a mythical pilot created by a soviet propaganda... Just like Kalashnikov has nothing to do with AK-47, AK was designed by captured Hugo Schmeisser...

@dianapuskina3448 2 жыл бұрын

Ak was invented by Taras Grygorovitch Shevchenko real Ukrainian patriot and soviets was forced by nkvd to capture hugo shmeiser to hide the real true. Soviets are cunning

@vasjaforutube1 Жыл бұрын

@@MaksimSF I read a biography of one of junior pilots of his squadron. Day-to-day life, routine, missions, deaths of comrades. Not that mythical.

@most_sane_piano_enthusiast Жыл бұрын

@@MaksimSF Kalashnikov's design incorporated elements from various successful firearms, such as the M1 Garand's rotating bolt, the StG 44's overall form factor, the Remington Model 8's safety lever/selector switch, and the ribbed StG magazines for the removable magazines.

@maxkuz334 Жыл бұрын

@@most_sane_piano_enthusiast As most firearm designers do. In factm iirc the AR-15 platform has more comonalities with the STG than the AK platform.

@mukhumor 2 жыл бұрын

It's easy to design a product when you have limitless funds and time. Designing a competitive fighter plane during a war is another story. They did the best they could. Respect to the young men who put their lives into those experimental machines.

@External2737 2 жыл бұрын

Designing planes during purges is hard. The lead designer of the I-16 was only demoted and contributed heavily to the Mig-1 design. Too many Soviet planes were designed in the Gulags. The Mig-3 had the the huge Moscow factory which made it critical at the battle of Moscow. If its factory had been captured, unstead of a primary defense on THE front, we wouldn't talk about the Mig-3. That factory went to IL-2s as soon as fighters were not critically short (which, ironically, led to a fighter shortage).

@cosmoray9750 2 жыл бұрын

No Uyghur kzfaq.info/get/bejne/bZ6jatyBl6jIdmQ.html

@calamityjane9826 2 жыл бұрын

@@External2737 1) planes were not designed in gulags, because they (or rather some of them) were designed in so called sharashkas - facilities with all the necessary equipment, materials and surveillance meant to make sure that designers are doing their assigned jobs instead of writing reports on each other which they grew so fond of. 2) planes could not be designed in gulagS because the only gulag (ГУЛаг - гла́вное управле́ние лагере́й - chief administration of the camps) was located in Moscow and was meant for prison camp management, not for plane design.

@External2737 2 жыл бұрын

@@calamityjane9826 You should read the history of the Pe-2. Some of those facilities were in nicer gulags, but they were still gulags. It is a facinating history.

@calamityjane9826 2 жыл бұрын

@@External2737 as I said, there was only one gulag in Moscow. And it was a bureau, not a camp. Sharashkas were no camps either. They could be considered a sort of prison though, because the staff were not allowed to leave until the job is done.

@lunokhod3937 2 жыл бұрын

really like the layout of the video. gives interesting and cruicial information quickly and in detail without dragging. could watch vids like this on any and all aircraft and i likely wouldnt get bored.

@alwayscensored6871 2 жыл бұрын

These deserve respect as the designs that followed kept getting better. I love those piston Yaks n Migs

@bogstrider0009 2 жыл бұрын

Great work on the video! The presentation was very engaging. Love to see a video on the La-5 or Lagg-3 sometime in the future.

@gryfandjane 2 жыл бұрын

Fascinating information, masterfully presented. Thank you!

@jaybarua7095 2 жыл бұрын

Reminds one of the WW1 Sopwith Camel which was also a difficult plane to master but once mastered and used properly, was a deadly opponent.

@blackbaron2572 2 жыл бұрын

Overall, the camel seems to have been much more successy

@Warmaker01 2 жыл бұрын

When a war isn't going well, training tends to suffer as resources, time aren't given as much as it should have. Imperial Japanese Navy aviators had tough requirements, standards before and early in WWII. But later in the war, come 1943 and beyond, the replacements didn't have that luxury, especially 1944-45. The Luftwaffe was suffering very heavy losses come 1943. Fighting in the Eastern Front and Mediterranean saw them eat heavy losses, particularly trying to save Axis forces in Tunisia and the devastating follow up for Sicily. The Luftwaffe was never the same after Tunisia and Sicily with all their losses. As what happened with Japanese military aviation, time and resources for new pilot training was a luxury that could hardly be afforded. Soviets early on with all the high losses at the onset of Operation Barbarossa probably were scrambling for new pilots. Wouldn't surprise me if their training wasn't sufficient enough until the war situation got better. For an air force in WWII to maintain good training throughout the conflict, that was an amazing luxury.

@bartacomuskidd775 2 жыл бұрын

They executed the board.. under the excuse of Social Justice. Every problem Russia had was based around their type of government.

@roroliaoliao 2 жыл бұрын

By the time in 1945s, Soviet pilots gets to free hunt the Germans. This is how some Soviet Aces rack up the scores despite having less kills in 1943-9144.

@cosmoray9750 7 ай бұрын

The West Scared of Russia || America Trying to ... kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z7iAjbR-kqe7fac.html

@daenery2471 2 ай бұрын

This. Many people think allied planes were better. They weren't. Planes were pretty much equal on all sides (except Italy hehe), but the axis shortages and allies learning to use squad tactics won the war

@Wolfpack345 2 жыл бұрын

Awesome overview for a fascinating aircraft!

@Lowkeh 2 жыл бұрын

Привет, товарищ Ш☭LҒPДСК345! Ғдисч sээїиɢ чоц нєяз!)))

@BrockvsTV 2 жыл бұрын

thank you, I really enjoyed the video. Especially how well laid out it was

@WeeWeeJumbo 2 жыл бұрын

As others have mentioned, it’s just a great presentation. Excellent video

@alexanderyankovsky563 2 жыл бұрын

A very good summary. I would add that this aircraft was fairly successfully deployed in the naval aviation and saw combat well into 1944 (in the Black Sea fleet). There was a squadron of MiG-3s in the Northern Fleet as well, and I believe Sorokin (famous Soviet ace who lost his legs but continued to fly) shot down Bf-110 in MiG-3 just a few weeks after the war started. In the naval units, they were used mostly as interceptors against German bombers.

@saxonforge 2 жыл бұрын

One of my favorite models for attacking German bombers on IL2. I use the cannon armed version and it really works for me.

@patreidcocolditzcastle632 Жыл бұрын

really loving your channel...great work

@kevinmcdonald6446 2 жыл бұрын

Well done.

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@michaelvalenzuela2528 2 жыл бұрын

Great graphics and lots of information👍

@davidbradley3227 2 жыл бұрын

I enjoyed this video and subscribed. Well done!

@FeiHuWarhawk 2 жыл бұрын

Early Yak1 was a heavy plane doggy plane at first. Designers lightened it and got a little more HP. Became a very good fighter.

@ssnydess6787 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the excellent analysis! This shows that just because an aircraft is beautiful, it may have problems. It is also interesting to learn that the Soviet Army, like the American Army was slow to adopt tactics specific for the weapons platform and theatre specific adversaries...excellent!

@schaerffenberg 2 жыл бұрын

"... just because an aircraft is beautiful, it may have problems." Just like a woman.

@louisavondart9178 2 жыл бұрын

@@schaerffenberg ...just like a man to say something like that.

@hobbyhermit66 2 жыл бұрын

Mig 3 was nice looking. I hadn't heard of it's performance before.

@hamletksquid2702 2 жыл бұрын

Years ago, I built an R/C MiG 3 by modifying a Me109 kit, and I used the 1941 white and red color scheme shown at the beginning of this vid. It's so typically Soviet. Paint it white so it blends in with snow, then paint red stars and arrows on it so it looks flashy when it's shown off flying over parades and such. I didn't know anything about its performance - I just thought it was a good-looking plane.

@keithehredt753 2 жыл бұрын

WELL DONE. AMAZING JOB, THANKS

@anthonysantiago1999 2 жыл бұрын

Very good and informative videos.. keep up the good work..

@OgamiItto70 2 жыл бұрын

Interesting video essay. Thanks.

@grumples1517 2 жыл бұрын

I'm really enjoying your videos! keep up the good work

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@markam306 2 жыл бұрын

Nice video, I like your style.

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@1joshjosh1 2 жыл бұрын

Good video!!! Good info.

@JIMIIXTLAN 2 жыл бұрын

Another very good well researched video on a neglected plane. I am hoping in the future you will produce videos on soviet tanks which I personally am a big fan of.

@jaybee9269 2 жыл бұрын

Well-researched, very nice.

@tombowers2020 2 жыл бұрын

Very nice review!

@anxiousseal556 Жыл бұрын

At 5:05 I dreamed that exact part of your video for some reason and now I kinda freak out lol I never watched this before nice video btw

@docraineyIII 2 жыл бұрын

What a great treatment of this tricky fighter. Thank you.

@elisekehle8520 2 жыл бұрын

so stoked to see them in "The Pilot"!

@georgekorres3531 2 жыл бұрын

Awesome video, subscribed!

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you and welcome!

@j.dragon651 2 жыл бұрын

It is a good looking plane.

@cripplehawk 2 жыл бұрын

When I play IL-2 Great battle series. I try to avoid dogfighting when flying this bird. I basically "Boom and Zoom" and try to climb out if clear (Or turn and dive if a BF109 is on my 6). But taking off and landing this thing is tricky. It's almost like a disobedient stallion.

@KillerPro1001 2 жыл бұрын

Хороший и профессиональный обзор. Ничего лишнего. Спасибо автору!

@heinzriemann3213 2 жыл бұрын

Great video

@redtobertshateshandles 2 жыл бұрын

The designer was rewarded with execution. Nice work.

@Duececoupe 2 жыл бұрын

Love the looks of the MiG-3, it looks like a prewar racer! Need to get a couple in 1/32.... Greetings from a Swede in Glasgow, Scotland....🤜🏻🤛🏻🍻

@giggling_boatswain 2 жыл бұрын

Agree. Aerodynamics are pleasing to the eye today. Perfect body lines.

@hansthegermansoldier7550 2 жыл бұрын

I really like the cockpit configuration and the wings design

@theregoesmiller389 2 жыл бұрын

GREAT / OUTSANDING VIDEO ! ! !

@aaronmatthews4612 2 жыл бұрын

Had a model of a mig 3 30 years ago when I was a kid love the look of this fighter.

@christopherbatty3837 2 жыл бұрын

Molodets ! Excellent and balanced presentation ✈ Primary pilot problems - recall POST-WWII Luftwaffe STARFIGHTER fatalities & the primary causes: Mig is short coupled, high wing taper ratio: I agree completely about riding a stallion analogy. PROPERLY TRAINED, the combat results and reduction of accidents would have been startling - recalling some 1/3 BF109 were lost in ground accidents - pilot inability + undercarriage design flaw (typical of ME designs). Noting also, transition of typical RAF fighter jok of docile, slow biplanes & initial poor performance in Spitfire - several noted the "quanta leap" as a bit of a shock. Guns: not only one undergunned - look at extraordinary foolishness of USA early Tomahawk/Kittyhawk armament fit IN FULL KNOWLEDGE of German/British typical fit. *For its time, power output remarkable. *BF109F - certainly THE formidable stage of 109 genesis ...not at all like the Emil. *Combat altitude: did ANYONE "get it right" regarding the variety of combat altitudes which only arose as battle theatres grew ? Very respectable high altitude performance - not surprised about loss of control @ highest altitude - no pressurised cabin: dangerous/fatal physiological impairment + impaired aerodynamics @ such density altitudes.

@velonicatgmaildotcom 2 жыл бұрын

The "Arrow" Paint job seen at 1:30 is Striking!

@josephstabile9154 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for a very interesting & informative video. At Barbarosa's outset, one was forced to "run what you brung", and considering this, the MiG-3 was significantly better than what many of Germany's opponents had with which to fight. U.S.'s P-40, for example, was deficient in important aspects vis-a-vis 1st line axis fighters. I think Mig's "deal bteaking" limitation was likely its demand of very high pilot experience/skill--a nearly intolerable demand at that period of VVS proficiency.

@divyajnana 2 жыл бұрын

May have been unforgiving, but the looks were fabulous.

@edwardpate6128 2 жыл бұрын

Good video but not sure where you got your speed number for the P-40E from. It was much higher than that at 360 mph.

@carsten9168 2 жыл бұрын

Soviet air ace Aleksander Pokryshkin (3 times 'Hero of the Soviet Union') did say that the MiG-3 was like a stallion. Took a considerable time to master it but once you know it, you will ride like the wind !

@ThePilot4ever 2 жыл бұрын

Production also ended because the engines were needed for the on demand IL-2 Sturmovik planes

@OneHitWonder383 2 жыл бұрын

So, like all fighter pilots worldwide, Pokryshkin was honest in his assessment of every aircraft he flew. As much as it helps to have a good plane, there is no substitute for pilot skill. His achievements in the P-39, along with him surviving the war, prove that skill.

@EricF647 2 жыл бұрын

🎥 Excellent

@cluelessbeekeeping1322 2 жыл бұрын

I love the lines of that MIG-3!

@jamesbugbee6812 2 жыл бұрын

My favorite Soviet prop fighter; speed & altitude can be traded for other values, timing was crucial, firepower could be partly made up in numbers &, or course, training. She looked pretty slick, too, & one of her close relatives was beautiful.

@neutronalchemist3241 2 жыл бұрын

From a design standpoint, the Mig-3 only had a real deficiency, The tailplanes were too close to the main wing (a thing it borrowed from '30s racers, that didn't need to be agile) It's enough to compare the shape of the Mig-3 to that of the Yak-1 to see the difference. The rest of the defects were easy fix. It was a high-quote long-range interceptor put on a scenario were all the clashes were low to medium altitude and range had no importance, because the tactic was for the aircrafts to take off immediately behind the first line, to achieve local air superiority, but the low level performances increased greatly using the plug&play Mikulin AM38 engine (that of the Il-2, optimised for low level performances) and, with the two ShVAK 20mm gun, it was better armed than the contemporaries Bf109. Both modifications were so easy that they were made on the field also.

@claudiogontijo1986 2 жыл бұрын

The MIG-3 was designed especially for high-altitude combat, as the Soviets did not know what kind of air war they would have to fight against Germany. Stalin suspended production of the MIG due to the fact that it used the same engine as the IIlyushin Il-2 Sturmovik.

@drstewartshermanful Жыл бұрын

That's what drew me to the Meg three initially while playing war thunder. The MC3 the beast looking fighter. I really didn't know much about it and I'd kind of discovered it while playing. The low altitude thing is definitely correct I cannot turn with anybody and I rapidly losing advantage. But as a booming zoom fighter from high-altitude that thing is relatively incomparable. But yeah, I really like the way that plane looks!!

@rwlewko 2 жыл бұрын

I loved your presentation. I found it balanced and objective. Thank you. Have you any plans to cover the Polikarpov I-16? The I-16 has the distinction of being one of the first monoplane, retractable gear fighters.

@radosaworman7628 2 жыл бұрын

Very advanced yet so awful. And certainly the worst of early monoplane fighters with retractable gear. Bad aircraft are so fascinating.

@TheArcticFoxxo 2 жыл бұрын

@@radosaworman7628 kite go brrrrr

@danieleyre8913 3 ай бұрын

@@radosaworman7628 At least it had retractable landing gear, look at the Boeing P-26! Remember the thing was first produced in 1933 in a nation with little manufacturing technology.

@radosaworman7628 3 ай бұрын

@@danieleyre8913 and how did that help it? Not much. The plane it was built to defeat (p.11c) could outgun outclimb and outturn it with no successful reversals on its record. Ki-27 additionally had better energy retention turn and climb and killed them by the dozens. Plane built to stupid doctrine, with overgrown engine (both of mentioned planes had 300cc less than it) and ridiculous training regime. The best thing about it was that it gave russians experience with building said landing gear which is a thing worth mentioning. It's failure gave birth to mig-1 and mig-3 witch where only reasonable plane in early Barbarossa on soviet side which ofc where hampered by soviet doctrine.

@danieleyre8913 3 ай бұрын

@@radosaworman7628 What on earth are you guffing about? The Soviets didn’t care about Poland, your idea that it was designed to especially defeat the PZL 11c is laughable. And also chronologically challenged. When introduced to the Spanish civil war; the I-16 made an immediate impact. The Heinkel and FIAT biplanes were absolutely hapless against it. Its success was a factor in the Luftwaffe hurrying its own monoplane fighter programme and updating their tactics. The aircraft also made impact when acquired by nationalist China, ending the air superiority the Japanese enjoyed. Yes the I-16 fared not very well in Soviet hands during the battle of Kolkin Gol. Up against far more experienced Japanese army pilots who were flying an aircraft 4 years younger it’s neither surprising nor condemning of the I-16. And the results were not entirely negative; the end result was the Japanese army mistakenly concluding that manoeuvrability was more important than velocity and energy-retention and that “turn-fight” tactics were superior to the more correct & advanced “hit-and-run” tactics of the Soviets, which would have bad consequences for the Japanese army Air Force from late 1942. To be frank; your negative appraisal of the I-16 sounds warped by bias & prejudice and includes your own fantasies and facts cherry-picked to support a sought conclusion. The I-16 may have been far from perfect but it was still an amazing and evolutionary design. And were it not for the rotten politics and influence of Joseph Stalin himself in the Soviet air ministry; it could have been the spawn for an amazing family of fighters including the I-180 & I-185.

@VonRammsteyn Жыл бұрын

For me, MIG-3 was the most beautiful soviet fighter of ww2

@johnhotz1400 2 жыл бұрын

Hot looking playing I also like how the cockpits way back on the fuselage. Pilots make a big difference James Doolittle did things in the b-25 nobody thought could be done.

@andyharman3022 2 жыл бұрын

Doolittle was a phenomenal pilot. He was the only pilot to win a race in the GeeBee. It killed all of its other pilots.

@user-gn6cf8uc8d 2 жыл бұрын

who knows more about pokryshkin, knows that its difficult to find out exact number of his victories. Yes he wrote about mig as a stallion in his memories and also he described that he maybe foght more soviet machinery than the enemy pilots. He didnt care about his kills, some records have been lost during retreat (in my opinion "lost" by his foes in red army), more than kills he valued fact that he never lost his wingman

@davidjohnston800 2 жыл бұрын

Always loved the MIG 3. I have model to this day. I hope you can do a video on the P 39. It was also not well thought of but in the hands on that Soviet Union Ace it performed well in his good Pilot's hands.

@MDzmitry 2 жыл бұрын

To be a little more precise, "the soviet ace" is Alexander Pokryshkin, who is often described to be the one who adapted high-speed area patrols and altitude ranging of pairs. Actually, most soviet P-39 aces come from the same unit as Pokryshkin, because they were the first to adapt his strategies and experience them in battles. But the P-39 was handled more or less fine by most soviet pilots because they were trained in I-16 - a fighter as unstable as an Aircobra. "If you learn how to handle I-16, you'll fly even on a broom"

@soapycactuses9281 Жыл бұрын

@@MDzmitry Do you know something about Kozhedub?(he was the first leading ace while Pokryshkin was 2nd) I only know that he flew first in a I153 and then mostly on a la 5/fn later on the La7 and fought in stalingrad a lot.

@MDzmitry Жыл бұрын

@@soapycactuses9281 Haven't been interested in Kozhedub to be honest, since he came to the frontline only in 1943 and flew for quite a while in a regiment dedicated to "free hunt", unlike Pokryshkin. So shortly speaking, he had near ideal conditions for scoring victories. And a small correction: Kozhedub didn't fight above Stalingrad, his career started at Kursk.

@soapycactuses9281 Жыл бұрын

@@MDzmitry ah thank you

@trickydicky2908 2 жыл бұрын

Very beautiful plane. Would make a good RC kit.

@jamesbottger5894 2 жыл бұрын

I'm surprised no one has posted something about how P-51 pilots are lucky they didn't have to fight this plane during the war because they would've gotten waxed...I swear some people would claim the Buffalo Brewster would outperform the Mustang...

@dionvanderheever9839 2 жыл бұрын

Very impressive

@nzsaltflatsracer8054 2 жыл бұрын

Being an aircraft designer in Russia was a risky job, you fail, you die as an enemy of the state.

@kinglear5952 2 жыл бұрын

Sensible policy i.m.o. More widely applied it would have saved the 1 trillion wasted on the F-35

@bigblue6917 2 жыл бұрын

At the point many if not most designers and engineers were locked up in one of the Gulags as a matter of course.

@kinglear5952 2 жыл бұрын

@@bigblue6917 I believe Tupolev did a bit of stir time for being a plane designer.

@ccv1929 2 жыл бұрын

Has anything to do with the video? Just asking

@nzsaltflatsracer8054 2 жыл бұрын

@@ccv1929 Yes, it's in the video.

@misterbacon4933 2 жыл бұрын

You can say whatever you want about the technical issues of the MIG-3, but... it's a beauty!!! I Love the shape of this plane. I have a rc model in the white camouflage. And I like to fly it!!!

@kkteutsch6416 2 жыл бұрын

A lot of comtemporary allied - american made aircrafts had this issues too and a example is the P39 Airacobra that american pilots refused to fly it and they were sent lend lease to soviets, that obtained some success with it...

@AlteredCarbons Жыл бұрын

i love how like, War thunder and to a lesser extent the World of series has sparked so man youtuber channels on regarding the history of war machines. i love the little details people pull out and pop up and im just like "oh... interested. didn't know that"

@dazzle4416 9 ай бұрын

i would say this is a mythical aircraft that could only be tamed by the most respectful and talented pilots that understood its capabilities and its weaknesses but using its weaknesses as a unique use of the aircraft, an amazing aircraft and Highley underrated, the flaw was lack of training and the time of the war that was upon them gave them little time to train pilots to use the aircraft correctly. the fact that it was a difficult plane to use ,and yet the notable few that could puts them above ace in my opinion. we have to also note that the BF109 also had weaknesses.

@nicksmith2927 2 жыл бұрын

Wow good video...so it is a high altitude fighter..thanks for the insight

@garyhooper1820 2 жыл бұрын

Designed for intercepting strategic bombing efforts it was of little use. As Germany only practiced this for a short time over Moscow. They suffered heavy losses doing so.

@petersnow531 2 жыл бұрын

Adding 300mm to the fuselage length would have cured a lot of instability issues.

@TringmotionCoUk 2 жыл бұрын

surprised there was no photo recon model, sounds ideal

@mpetersen6 Жыл бұрын

Appearance wise it reminds me of the Curtiss XP-37. Which had the cockpit even farther back.

@wa1ufo 2 жыл бұрын

This was a beautiful airplane and I applaud all the Red Airforce pilots who flew to save their country from the Nazis. Thanks for the video! I just suscribed to your excellent channel.

@jonnybeck6723 2 жыл бұрын

Aaah but it looked like an ultimate racing plane (!)

@gliderfs621 2 жыл бұрын

The Mig 3 mishaps is the perfect example of a very good plane is nothing without a very good pilot. My favorite plane in War Thunder, very deadly when you understand it’s strengths.

@abdulabdanahib9617 2 жыл бұрын

Bf-109F-1 and F-2 much better

@kez963 2 жыл бұрын

Really like the design

@neutronalchemist3241 2 жыл бұрын

From a design standpoint, the Mig-3 only had a real deficiency, The tailplanes were too close to the main wing (a thing it borrowed from '30s racers, that didn't need to be agile) It's enough to compare the shape of the Mig-3 to that of the Yak-1 to see the difference. The rest of the defects were easy fix. It was a high-altitude long-range interceptor put on a scenario were all the clashes were low to medium altitude and range had no importance, because the tactic was for the aircrafts to take off immediately behind the first line, to achieve local air superiority, but the low altitude performances increased greatly using the plug&play Mikulin AM38 engine (that of the Il-2, optimised for low altitude performances) and, with the two ShVAK 20mm gun, it was better armed than the contemporaries Bf109. Both modifications were so easy that they were made on the field also.

@garypeatling7927 2 жыл бұрын

Result of a night of passion between spitfire and a mustang lovely

@michaeltelson9798 2 жыл бұрын

Aerial combat was primarily at 15,000 feet or less on the Eastern Front. This was a reason for its problems. The F version of the BF 109 was considered the best version of that aircraft. The P-39 was good at low altitudes which fit this theater’s combat.

@Scrooks1 2 жыл бұрын

Interesting, did not know about the Mig-3. Look very similar to a P-51 Mustang.

@trent847 10 ай бұрын

One of the most beautiful fighters of WW2. Yes it’s beauty ranks up there with the Spitfire or Mustang. It most likely would’ve had a more successful combat record if the Soviet pilots were better trained with their aircraft as well as using better tactics. It was a misused aircraft that had great potential.

@allgood6760 9 ай бұрын

Thanks for this we have MiG-3:warbirds here in NZ👍✈️🇳🇿

@jasonz7788 2 жыл бұрын

Great work Sir thank you

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you!

@basiltaylor8910 Жыл бұрын

Artem Mikoyans Hot Rod is a classic Marmite Fighter, you loved or hated, and like Carol Shelby,s Cobra Roadster, a handful, a fighter not for the faint hearted. Artem took a leaf out of Reggie Mitchells book, designing the lightest airframe around the most powerful V-12 engine Mr Mikulin had available. Yes it looks like a pre war racer small wings, tail, cockpit set well back , long sleek nose, a tiny trolley castor tail wheel ,so taxiing the beast on nothing more than a rough cow pasture is fraught with difficulty. Its sheer unstableness is key to low altitude scrapping ,but most VVS pilots were conscripts with very little or no experience flying such a hot rod some weened on the Polikarpov Po-2 a wheezy rag wing biplane left over from the first world war. Poorly armed Artem,s hot rod stood little chance against a Wurger FW 190A, or Friederich BF 190F. There is one flyable Mig 3 powered by an Allison 1710 C-30, built from several wrecks retrieved from the steppe, and only the best warbird drivers get to fly it.

@Crashed131963 2 жыл бұрын

Stalin- "We have a design flaw did you fix it ?" Russia Pee ons - " Yes we executed the plane designer."

@comesahorseman 2 жыл бұрын

Cancel culture.

@destroyerarmor2846 2 жыл бұрын

@@comesahorseman cancel and delete

@zelfit 2 жыл бұрын

They actually executed the man responsible for discovering these flaws.

@MRtucnakCZE Жыл бұрын

In War Thunder, it trades blows with more manouverable biplanes (which back then the Soviet pilots prefered, albeit being disasterously outclassed by Bf's performance), being faster, sleeker, more rigid and can handle high service ceiling, great for bomber-interception. It's weak armament is it's biggest con and pro, whilst being slightly worse than German counterpart, the ammunition pool is more than enough, unlike later Soviet planes, equiped with (almost always) only 20mm+ cannons. Back when it was 1.7 the standard variant (nowadays 2.3 regardless) could fly circles around the enemies, and if not turn, most certainly out-fly them in a straight line. Later iterations of the design (I-185/I-225) have remained uniform in how they handle and look, despite various changes to the engine/weapons combo. It's a dependable plane, that can and will rain hell, if used accordingly. Bf and Spitfire, head to head have much flatter learning curve and offer very much different feel to both operating the plane and dealing with enemy planes. A comparable plane, the LaGG-3-66, and LaGGs in general at least in my opinion, prepare the players for rather stingy tech tree experience, with limited ammo pool and/or dubious guns, combined with poor flying performance (overall). In ground RB, it's outclassed in every way and any CAS is a waste of energy, unless fitted with 20mm guns (but then again, YAKs perform way better). One of my favourite planes overall.

@demonicusa.k.a.theblindguy3929 2 жыл бұрын

Another fighter of the era with gorgeous lines.

@gekolizzard 2 жыл бұрын

Good looking aircraft.

@HankyInTheTanky 2 жыл бұрын

Any chance to do a Vid of the MiG-1?

@AllthingsWW2 2 жыл бұрын

The MiG-1 had very few numbers built. It's a hard aircraft to cover, but now that you suggested it, you've got me thinking. Maybe I can talk a bit more at length about Polikarpov and his downfall and still cover the MiG-1. So, in short, yes, I will do it.

@craigpennington1251 2 жыл бұрын

Perhaps better and a bit lengthier training sessions were needed to handle the MIG-3 to perfection. Every aircraft has it's own unique quirks and the pilot of must master the quirks or you're a dead duck. Great video on a cool looking fighter.

@bongodrumzz 2 жыл бұрын

Hmm interesting, yes I agree with the idea of pilot training or lack of, being a major issue, considering the Luftwaffe brought a wealth of knowledge going back to the Spanish civil war, and the slapping they received during the battle of Britain, however the biggest problem has always been, and still is, political interference from above, especially from amateurs with no real training or skill in this field. Cure those problems and the Mig-3 could have been quite a fighter to contend with, nice looking too.

@bigblue6917 2 жыл бұрын

The same can be said for those at the top of the military. It was Hitler who insisted on using the 50 mm gun for their tanks while it was those at the top of the German army who showed little interest in doing so.

@johnweerasinghe4139 2 жыл бұрын

The Soviets also got experience in the Spanish Civil War and actually gave tbe opposition a trashing by introducing the world's first monoplane, metal skin, retra ctable wheels and air to ground rockets. While the west was flying biplanes Nothing could beat it until the Germans introduced the Me 109. Of course the west won't dwell in this fact too much. Probably because they copied the concept ...hahaha.

@jjohnston326 2 жыл бұрын

It doesn't matter if you perform better in areas that aren't in the combat envelope. That is why the BF-109 was a better aircraft. That is why your general liked the American aerocobra, it had what we valued; performance balanced with firepower and pilot protection. That was more than the Germans of Japanese focused on. They focused only on performance and firepower.