YAK-52 FAQ

:D So OK, I did come back because the latest patch seemed so damn good - and it indeed is - but am still not buying anything (or at least no EA modules) unless and until the Yak is finished at last.

What changed ?

Yea, I didn't see anything for it in the patch notes?

• Sound. Update for new sound feature Origin Sphere (wip) - P-51, Spitfire, Bf 109, Yak-52, Fw 190, and others
  

The only thing I saw, but it is super vague

Whaddaya mean what changed?

https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/news/official-updates/201318-dcs-world-2-5-changelog-and-updates-of-open-beta?p=7126460#post7126460

Ah, sorry, gotcha. Nothing unfortunately changed with the Yak per se, but plenty of other stuff was fixed, and hence my reinstalling the bugger.

Och aye! Thanks for the info Jester.

YAK-52B was only ops with 

UPK-23-250 and can maybe use UB-16-57 insread of UB-32 (to heavy for wings)..

ЯК-52Б

История началась в далеком 1956 году, когда руководство Министерства обороны СССР приняло ошибочное решение об упразднении штурмовой авиации и передаче функций штурмовиков истребителям-бомбардировщикам.

Однако к 1970 году стало понятно, что это была грубейшая ошибка. И различные ОКБ страны получили задание на разработку штурмовиков. Результатом соревнования стало рождение Су-25, который до сих пор стоит на вооружении.

Речь, однако, пойдет не о нем.

На протяжении тех лет СССР постоянно участвовал в разных конфликтах. И, применение истребителей-бомбардировщиков, гласное или негласное, показало, что для действий в условиях, сложных для пилотирования, нужен особый самолет. С небольшой скоростью, но отличной маневренностью. Что-то вроде Douglas A-1 Skyraider, который, несмотря на свои "минусы", успешно использовался США в Корее и Вьетнаме.

А боевые действия в Афганистане показали необходимость такого самолета, более быстрого, чем вертолет, и более маневренного, чем истребитель-бомбардировщик. Су-25 тогда только разрабатывался.

"Нам нужен самолет, который может заглядывать в окна и бросать бомбы в дымовую трубу". Такая фраза кого-то из командования ВВС СССР осталась в истории.

Некоторые издания, публиковавшие материалы о Як-52Б, писали, что он был создан именно во время войны в Афганистане. Потребность в создании такого самолета возникла намного раньше. И к 1978 году испытательный прототип был уже готов. Но затем начались проблемы, которые пытались решить на протяжении нескольких лет, но так и не решили.

Переделывался набор крыла, усиливались крепления. К сожалению, ни к чему это не привело. Кто летал на Як-52, тот знает, что летать эта машина могла очень даже. Для учебно-спортивного самолета.

Як-52Б тоже летал вполне себе, как и прародитель. А вот вести огонь так и не научился. Не смогли научить, точнее. Машина оказалась слишком легкой что для ведения пушечного огня, что для пуска ракет. При пуске НУРСов самолет мало того что застывал на месте, так еще имела место курсовая неустойчивость. Болтало его, поскольку синхронизировать пуск ракет в то время так и не удалось.

А что значит зависание такого аппарата в воздухе в условиях зенитного огня, пусть даже из стрелкового оружия, объяснять, думаю, не стоит.

Подобные работы так же проводились еще и в 1983 году. По инициативе заместителя главного конструктора КБ "Скорость" А.А.Яковлева, сына Генерального конструктора А.С.Яковлева, на стендах отделения 21 производились испытания самолета Як-52Б стрельбой из подвесного контейнера УПК-23-250 и пусками из орудийных блоков. Цель испытаний заключалась в проверке возможности спортивных самолетов ДОСААФ нести подвесное авиационное вооружение и выдерживать стрельбу авиационных пушек. Данные испытания в объеме 6100 выстрелов самолет выдержал и был рекомендован к летным испытаниям. В качестве альтернативного вооружения на Як-52 так же подвешивали вертолетные контейнеры (гондолы) ГУВ-8700 (9А669).

Самолет оказался слишком маленьким и легким для серьезного вооружения. Не удалось решить проблему рассеивания НАР. При их пуске самолет резко тормозился и болтался по курсу, не позволяя ракетам точно идти в цель.

Большим вопросом стала боевая живучесть машины, не имевшей хоть какого то бронирования и защиты жизненно важных агрегатов и экипажа. Радиус действия Яка, также не устраивал военных. Без подвесок Як мог пролететь всего 465 км, что было было явно недостаточно. В результате в конце 1983г. программу свернули, а Як-52Б оказался в Монино.

Единственный экземпляр Як-52Б ныне "прописан" в запасниках музея авиации в Монино. Как некий укор тем временам, когда Н.С. Хрущев решил, что СССР может воевать только межконтинентальными ракетами.

Was flying the yak yesterday and scrapped the ground at the bottom of a loop with no ill affect. So I decided I'd just drive it around on the ground with the gear up since its prop and engine are invincible.

Bignewy amd Nineline, 

You guys have admitted several times the ball has been dropped with the Yak. It still has no place in the queue. No plan. No updates. Normally I'd get it but we need a plan so we CAN hold EDs feet to the fire. The neglect of the Yak is unacceptable. I love DCS and I'm a "whale" that buys modules I already own to show support(I gift them to friends who can't afford them or wouldn't consider them). But I expect modules to progress at reasonable rate regardless of how profitable they are or aren't.

On 2/4/2021 at 7:15 PM, Jester986 said:

Was flying the yak yesterday and scrapped the ground at the bottom of a loop with no ill affect. So I decided I'd just drive it around on the ground with the gear up since its prop and engine are invincible.

 

Bignewy amd Nineline, 

You guys have admitted several times the ball has been dropped with the Yak. It still has no place in the queue. No plan. No updates. Normally I'd get it but we need a plan so we CAN hold EDs feet to the fire. The neglect of the Yak is unacceptable. I love DCS and I'm a "whale" that buys modules I already own to show support(I gift them to friends who can't afford them or wouldn't consider them). But I expect modules to progress at reasonable rate regardless of how profitable they are or aren't.

Its a cool plane huh?

Love that thing.

On 2/4/2021 at 9:15 PM, Jester986 said:

The neglect of the Yak is unacceptable.

Indeed, and for me, one of the reasons why I've uninstalled DCS and won't be coming back soon - if ever.

3 hours ago, msalama said:

... I've uninstalled DCS and won't be coming back soon - if ever.

Yet, you still visit this Forum? 

I would love to have news on the Yak-52. I hope that one day it will be completed.

3 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

Yet, you still visit this Forum? 

Every now and then, yeah. I'm still interested in simulators per se, and DCS to my knowledge is one.

On 3/12/2021 at 2:52 AM, Rudel_chw said:

Yet, you still visit this Forum? 

  Hey, those trumpets won't blow themselves  That said, waving a flashlight in my reflective vest while jumping up and down, hoping for a last minute rescue before we run out of supplies

16 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

  Hey, those trumpets won't blow themselves

So you're happy with the Yak's current state, I take it? Well, good for you if so.

25 minutes ago, msalama said:

So you're happy with the Yak's current state, I take it?

 No? But you still sound a bit dramatic

9 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

 No? But you still sound a bit dramatic

Is it significant in any way if I sound overtly dramatic to you?

13 hours ago, msalama said:

Is it significant in any way if I sound overtly dramatic to you?

  Apparently

12 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

  Apparently

I'm apparently on the verge of giving you just 6/10 for snarkiness because I'm sure you can do better if you try. So I'll se ya the next time I'll remind ED of their tardiness, OK?

On 8/2/2018 at 9:23 PM, MonnieRock said:

Unclear answer about Languages

 

 

 

 

Could you please elaborate. The answer is unclear

 

 

There is Russian. English and Chinese are WIP?

There is Russian, English and, Chinese which are all in WIP?

All three are WIP?

 

 

Happy Simming,

Monnie

It came to me as all three are works in progress.

"The time a product remains in Early Access can vary widely based on the scope of the project, technical hurdles, and how complete the module is when it enters Early Access. Eagle Dynamics and all of our third parties strive to make this period as short as possible."

I must note that the statement in bold does not apply to the yak-52:

It's not a technical hurdle, that's for sure.

The module was not too much completed when released in EA, but come on, 3 years for a prop trainer? The p-47 has been quicker, and it releases bombs - the yak doesn't.

Then its scope is the only one left: to take the easy money and run away with the loot?

I got the YAK-52 during the 2021 Steam Autumn Sale and it was love at first sight. The sensation of flying with an open cockpit is fantastic, I could close the canopy but I choose to leave it open for every fligt. And sometimes it's just nice to take off and land a prop plane that doesn't try to kill you in the process. I like to just do some sight seeing and practice patterns, and even if I could do this in any module, somehow doing it in a trainer feels more 'right'. And the option of disabling different instruments for the student is cool, and I look forward to experimenting further with this.

But, I feel I must join the chorus of pilots that laments the shortcomings of the module...

• The lack of damage model might easily lead to negative training, since the aircraft, and you, survive even harsh aircraft to ground interaction completely unscathed.
• The lack of communication options with tower etc. detracts from the immersion, it might be just me, but I cant open the communication menu with the "/" key, nor if I bind it to a joystick button.
• The keybinds for HOTAS are lacking or not working, can't bind kneeboard to the HOTAS, for example the comm menu will bind, but doesn't have any effect.

I would really like to see, the YAK-52 getting some love from the people who assign work packages for the guys and girls who do the actual coding. Make it a priority to get the plane to a finished state, preferably to the same level as the P-47 but least enough to reach the minimum expectations to a complete module. 

I have bought pretty much every module, map and campaign as a way to support content creators and have pre-ordered the Apache. But even though I'm looking forward to the Apache, my wish for Christmas would be to have more finished modules, rather than more work-in-progress or even stagnant modules. Alternatively, cut your loses and officially discontinue the module and be a sport and offer a refund, at least partially, for the pilots who bought and funded the development of it with the legimate expectation that it would be finished. Managing expectations is one of the things that in my proffesional life distingushises professional business partners.

Thank you for your passion - and hopefully for the support of existing modules... 

/TR

3 hours ago, TangoRomeo71 said:

But, I feel I must join the chorus of pilots that laments the shortcomings of the module...

• The lack of damage model might easily lead to negative training, since the aircraft, and you, survive even harsh aircraft to ground interaction completely unscathed.
• The lack of communication options with tower etc. detracts from the immersion, it might be just me, but I cant open the communication menu with the "/" key, nor if I bind it to a joystick button.
• The keybinds for HOTAS are lacking or not working, can't bind kneeboard to the HOTAS, for example the comm menu will bind, but doesn't have any effect.

I would really like to see, the YAK-52 getting some love from the people who assign work packages for the guys and girls who do the actual coding. Make it a priority to get the plane to a finished state, preferably to the same level as the P-47 but least enough to reach the minimum expectations to a complete module. 

100% agree. I used it initially during my two week trial period and loved it! That was until I intentionally did a stall spin and didn't recover... but I didn't die on impact with the ground? I have seen plenty of videos of weird ground stuff after lawn darting, and in general it seems the multi-crew got bugged throughout the ages. It just seemed to get worse and worse...

I used it as a light spotter plane with a buddy in the back seat and another P-47 actually engaging the threats, and it really opened my eyes about just how incomplete it actually is(or at least bugged). I started the aircraft up(*with* him in my backseat the entire time) and he said the propeller wasn't moving an inch. During taxi, he mentioned how the flaps weren't down(they were), and on takeoff he had to raise the gear on his end because it didn't show his gear was up when I brought it up. It seems to just be desync but its really bad and completely ruining to the immersion. 

It particularly sucks this is how it is for so many modules. The F-5E still has the RWR bug, the Burner-Mil bug(both of which are pretty much deal-breakers as having the RWR not functional is obvious but as landing is really difficult with wacky engine physics), and is generally not updated to the current standard. I would be perfectly fine and I would love it if ED took the time after the Apache to finish things off with these older modules instead of a new aircraft. This doesn't even get into Combined Arms, which probably needs a brand new module, CA2 does sound epic. 

Whatever happens, this module was and should be the pinnacle of flight sim training especially for military aircraft like the ones in DCS. Its a shame it looks like this...

Smooth Skies,

Mordant

12 hours ago, TangoRomeo71 said:

I got the YAK-52 during the 2021 Steam Autumn Sale and it was love at first sight. The sensation of flying with an open cockpit is fantastic, I could close the canopy but I choose to leave it open for every fligt. And sometimes it's just nice to take off and land a prop plane that doesn't try to kill you in the process. I like to just do some sight seeing and practice patterns, and even if I could do this in any module, somehow doing it in a trainer feels more 'right'. And the option of disabling different instruments for the student is cool, and I look forward to experimenting further with this.

But, I feel I must join the chorus of pilots that laments the shortcomings of the module...

• The lack of damage model might easily lead to negative training, since the aircraft, and you, survive even harsh aircraft to ground interaction completely unscathed.
• The lack of communication options with tower etc. detracts from the immersion, it might be just me, but I cant open the communication menu with the "/" key, nor if I bind it to a joystick button.
• The keybinds for HOTAS are lacking or not working, can't bind kneeboard to the HOTAS, for example the comm menu will bind, but doesn't have any effect.

I would really like to see, the YAK-52 getting some love from the people who assign work packages for the guys and girls who do the actual coding. Make it a priority to get the plane to a finished state, preferably to the same level as the P-47 but least enough to reach the minimum expectations to a complete module. 

I have bought pretty much every module, map and campaign as a way to support content creators and have pre-ordered the Apache. But even though I'm looking forward to the Apache, my wish for Christmas would be to have more finished modules, rather than more work-in-progress or even stagnant modules. Alternatively, cut your loses and officially discontinue the module and be a sport and offer a refund, at least partially, for the pilots who bought and funded the development of it with the legimate expectation that it would be finished. Managing expectations is one of the things that in my proffesional life distingushises professional business partners.

Thank you for your passion - and hopefully for the support of existing modules... 

/TR

+1... And what a beautifully written post. The Yak 52 truly is one of my favorites. It won't be replacing the Mustang, but I really do love it. Like you, I picked it up in a previous sale and couldn't be happier with the purchase. ED should not interpret that as a blind willingness to wait indefinitely for outstanding issues to be addressed, but they should know that their fans are with them.

Two of the best YouTube videos on DCS IMO are the one where someone takes off and lands on the side of a mountain repeatedly, and the one where the guy takes off in a blizzard and then pushes the Yak and himself to the limits as he scales the spine of a mountain range to reach his landing. No need to mention either of the authors, you know who you are. I think it is the Yak's bare-bones simplistic nature that makes it so beautiful. The rest is up to you ED!