The Terrifying Tiny Airplane that Completely Shocked Germany

Germany's early advance through the Soviet Union had been fierce and unstoppable, thanks in part to the air superiority that the Wehrmacht had attained over the region.
As both factions ardently fought during five excruciating months in the Battle of Stalingrad, the Soviets would finally turn the table with Operation Uranus by encircling the invaders and pushing them back.
Despite the overwhelming victory, the Soviet High Command learned a brutal lesson in Stalingrad: the Luftwaffe significantly outclassed their own Air Force; if they wanted to hold their advantage and push the Nazis out of Russia, they would have to develop better warplanes immediately.
So began the development of the Yak 3, the smallest fighter used in World War 2 and an aircraft that would give the Luftwaffe a run for its money.
As the tiny, nimble fighter entered the battlefield of the Eastern Front in the summer of 1944, the German commanders were stunned by what the modest plane could do, and they were forced to issue an urgent order in a frantic attempt to stop the new Soviet threat…
---
Join Dark Skies as we explore the world of aviation with cinematic short documentaries featuring the biggest and fastest airplanes ever built, top-secret military projects, and classified missions with hidden untold true stories. Including US, German, and Soviet warplanes, along with aircraft developments that took place during World War I, World War 2, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf War, and special operations mission in between.
As images and footage of actual events are not always available, Dark Skies sometimes utilizes similar historical images and footage for dramatic effect and soundtracks for emotional impact. We do our best to keep it as visually accurate as possible.
All content on Dark Skies is researched, produced, and presented in historical context for educational purposes. We are history enthusiasts and are not always experts in some areas, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with corrections, additional information, or new ideas.

[@CaptHollister]

Worth mentioning is that a Free-French squadron, the Normandie-Niémen, flew Yak-3s in the Eastern front as part of the Soviet air force. After the war, Stalin sent them back home with their planes. This squadron was integrated into the Armée de l'Air. Surprisingly, maintenance was not a huge issue for France because the Klimov engine used was initially based on a license-built French Hispano-Suiza motor.

[@duellingscarguevara]

I’ve read they had any choice of allied fighter?. The Hispano was the granddaddy, of seaplane racer engines ( RR included?). Didn’t the Italians bolt 2 together, at one stage?.

[@raulduke6105]

Thought it was yak 9’s?

[@admiral_alman8671]

So that’s why there is a yak 3 in the French techtree in warthunder

[@troycarpenter3675]

Is there anything the Russians or Chinese haven't copied?

[@duellingscarguevara]

@@troycarpenter3675 🤣what, like paper money, gunpowder, rockets, and that big wall you can see from space? (Yeah, obviously copied that from ancient American engineers?). Maybe that’s why they won’t let anyone look at their pyramids? (Evidence of coke cans and Hershey bars?). Dream on....🤦🏻‍♂️

[@tebo2770]

I understand that this is a video about the Yak 3 itself. But, the Russian pilots themselves deserve a whole bunch of credit for making the plane as successful as it was. The German pilots were pretty seasoned by that point, and the 109 was no slouch either. Great plane or not, it took some excellent flying to achieve those lopsided victories against the Luftwaffe.

[@casematecardinal]

By the time the yak 3 was in, many of the great german pilots were gone. Most of their pilots were lost to western planes.

[@viper2148]

Yeah, I'm not sure what 'lopsided victories' against the Luftwaffe you're talking about. The Soviets lost 106,400 aircraft during the war, while the Germans lost 76,875. And the vast majority of German aircraft losses came at the hands of British and Americans, while nearly all of the Soviet losses were due to Germans. That tilts the kill-to-loss ratio hugely in favor of Luftwaffe over the Soviet Air Force. In fact, the best Soviet ace ranks at a whopping 231-st spot among the WWII aces, with the positions 1 through 230 stacked with Germans. And all of the best German aces ran up their score by individually shooting down hundreds of Soviets each. Shooting down the British and American pilots was a much tougher task for the Germans and those of them who were unlucky enough to be flying at the Western Theater of operations couldn’t run up their scores quite as easily as their Eastern Front counterparts.

[@viper2148]

@Lex Bright Raven that's possible, but there is zero evidence that the Soviets enjoyed 'lopsided victories' against the Luftwaffe.

[@norwegiangadgetman]

@@viper2148 I hope you noticed that 60300 of Soviet airplane losses were 'non-combat'? And that a lot of the combat losses were older models that were hopelessly outmatched? Also, the Finns(you know, the guys that like Saunas, Ice baths and vodka) claim to have shot down at least 5 of the Soviet planes using captured Soviet Polikarov-153 planes, so not all losses were due to the Germans...

[@viper2148]

@@norwegiangadgetman the Finns shot down a lot of Soviet fighters... because the Soviet fighters and pilots sucked. Back to my assertion: there is zero evidence that the Soviets enjoyed 'lopsided victories' against the Luftwaffe.

[@TheNuckinFoob]

WWII was horrific but it damned sure brought out the ingenuity and creativity that resulted in a ton of amazing aircraft.

[@Satanperkele]

Conflict is the bubbling cauldron of creativity & ingenuity :)

[@JosephStalin-yk2hd]

@@Satanperkele doubt

[@xEvilRaptorx]

Tanks advanced like crazy too. If anyone wants to try a game with these planes (and tanks)... War Thunder

[@HighFlyer6969]

​@@JosephStalin-yk2hd it's true ,without wars we wouldn't have commercial jets as quick as we did ,better engines in cars etc

[@mrgone658]

Sad but true; generally speaking, hostile engagement with each other seems to be our greatest impetus for technological advancement while civility, humility and wisdom are tossed aside.

[@davidbeattie4294]

Timing is everything. The Yak 3 appeared in the last year of the war. The Luftwaffe was rapidly becoming a spent force divided between the defense of the Reich, the war in Europe, the Med and Eastern Front. Germany was suffering from extreme fuel shortages reducing combat capabilities and curtailing their pilot training program. As an excellent aircraft thrown into battle in large numbers by an increasingly capable Red air force, it is almost inevitable that the Yak 3 was successful.

[@Tom-uk2ow]

So you cry and talk like children,just admit they are overrated themself in technical and people term

[@twillison8824]

Exactly, it didn't show up until the luftwaffe was already decimated by American and British.

[@BuzzLOLOL]

Yes, according to the numbers cited, the Yak 3 was 1% better than the Yak 1... LOL!

[@michaelely4349]

I would say that the yak 3 was not as capable or successful as the LA-5 as far as soviet strategy was concerned. Even though fighter aces made for great propaganda on the home front, the goal was to destroy bombers and attack aircraft. LA-5's took on fw 190's , bf 109's on their way back from a defensive mission and often came out ahead.

[@michaelely4349]

@@twillison8824 timeline?

[@Naramsit]

The Yak-9s and the La-5s may be the backbone of the red airforce in the second half of ww2, but the Yak-3 truly struck terror in the hearts of the luftwaffe. A shame it always gets overshadowed by by the BF109 or the P51. They were terrific fighters but they were never so overwhelming to the point were their country's airforce would actively encourage their pilots to avoid combat on sight of the enemy.

[@williamzk9083]

The Yak 3 first saw service in June 1944 or so. The P-51B/C in the ETO was December 1943 though its first combat was in January 1944. Me 109G14 was entering service in June 1944 and K4 in October 44 and G10 in November 44. One can argue about when the Me 262 entered service whether August 44 or November 44. -The Luftwaffe's plans for ground attack was the Focke Wulf Fw 190D12 EB wit Jumo 213 engine capable of 488mph. -It was the USAAF that depleted the Luftwaffe and wore down its fighter force. Some of the best fighters from a technical point of view in the west.

[@nsbioy]

I have read quite a few memoirs by ww2 Soviet pilots. The tone of their memories changes sharply right around the end of 1943, from desperate fighting a clearly superior enemy to being clearly superior themselves. At the end of the war, it felt like Soviet pilots were not concerned about how many and what kind of German aircraft they were engaging due to them having gained experience and excellent aircraft. Not the case for the first two years of the war.

[@johnmortin5603]

That was when 3/4 of the Luftwaffe was recalled to defend Germany.

[@thatguy46744]

Yeah and also the ussr airforce got its @$$ handed to it throughout the entire war. On top of that the bf109 had vastly superior speeds, and acceleration at high altitude, which is what won aerial battles at the time, not just maneuverability.

[@fatdaddy1996]

John mortun, oh dear.

[@getgaijoobed6219]

3:20 as a side note, the JSC stands for “Joint Stock Company”, only introduced after the fall of the USSR. Before that, the Yakovlev was an OKB (design firm) owned by the Soviet Government

[@gueigudze1759]

The author is correct, in his memoirs, Yakovlev himself tells that his first company was JSC. In USSR there was a private company with cooperation between different Government bodies and private workshops. After WW2 the regime for private companies change. Till 1940 there were still private firms.

[@amberwavedrop999]

​@@gueigudze1759 No, Sir. Yakovlev so called firm was yashchic. Do You know what does it mean - yashchic. In Stalin time it was very close to concentration camps, only intelectual concentration camp. It was very closed and militarized structure. And in fact after 1930-n there were no private firms in Soviet union.

[@charlesphillips4575]

The Yak-3 was nothing like the smallest fighter of WW2. e.g. the I-16 had an empty weight of 1,490 kg against 2,105 kg for the Yak-3. Even the famous Zero (A6M2) had an empty weight of 1,680 kg. The Yak-3 might be the smallest late war fighter, but I have not checked all the others.

[@johntillman6068]

CR.42 and Gladiator biplane fighters were also lighter.

[@rocknral]

Smallest being dimensionally.

[@charlesphillips4575]

@@rocknral Still not smallest. Yak-3: Length: 8.5 m, Wingspan: 9.2 m I-16: Length: 6.13 m, Wingspan: 9 m

[@Banner_Bearer_of_Eternity]

"I made everything possible, comrade Stalin!" "I never limited you, comrade Yakovlev. You can make impossible things too"... And yet I think that it was La-5FN/La-7 that was the backbone of VVS RKKA at the end of the War. Thanks for the video!

[@ButchNackley]

The Yak-3 really was a terrific airplane. It could be said to be the plane of the time. Very nimble, well armed and easy to fly. It is what a front line fighter plane should be. Yes, it had some drawbacks, but certainly classed as one of the best overall. I pretty much love all the fighters from that period. But my favorite WW2 fighter is the Yak-3.

[@casematecardinal]

Personally, my favorite is a tie between the hellcat and the corsair. One was thr best naval figher of the war and the other was a monster plane in the hands of a skilled pilot. And both made most of the planes used in Europe look like toys with their massive array of suspended armorment.

[@kirgan1000]

Well armed? for a later war fighter, 1 autocanon and 2 machingun, then the standard was 4 autocanons or 3 autocanons and 2 machinguns, the plane did also have poor reliabilit, if it was lack of skilled mechanics and spare parts or a fundamental flaw is left unsaid.

[@geezee1579]

I'm impartial to the P40 Tiger Shark. Maybe not one of the best but a classic.

[@GonzoDonzo]

Its also a pretty plane

[@GonzoDonzo]

@@kirgan1000 all it takes is one round from a cannon

[@SevenBears1]

Great quick history lessons. Great channel !!

[@gregfromguam]

A radial-engine VVS fighter that saw a lot of success from late 1943 was the Lavochkin La-5FN. Based off the previous LaGG-3 design, it used a Shvetsov radial engine and proved very effective from about 10k on down. A zoom and boom fighter. Had leading slats like the Bf-109. The top Soviet ace flew this fighter until the introduction of the La-7.

[@motherlesschild102]

Many La-5s had a problem in that the cockpit couldn't be opened from the inside once closed. This led to some pilots flying them with the cockpit open, Imagine that during the winter thousands of feet up ! The quality of Soviet aircraft could vary widely depending in part on which factory they were built in.

[@motherlesschild102]

It could be. I would love to be able to find out for myself, in a variety of La-5s from different factories- on the ground, with no one shooting at me, and a couple of people standing outside with crowbars, just in case !@adarvirohfanbelarus8889

[@michaelsteen9396]

The 20mm machine gun coming from center of the aircraft was a big performance gain in WW2 style dogfighting in itself. Improved altitude, improved climb rate, improved acceleration, improved top speed, all these things made the Yak 3 a good air superiority fighter in that particular type of combat

[@em1osmurf]

that, and the wisdom of designers to not slab it with a half-ton of armor. extreme low weight would have made it a contender for the Zero and/or Corsair. fast-forward to Korea.

[@leneanderthalien]

the engine and canon are based on the Hispano Suiza y12 and HS404 canon use on the Dewoitine d520: soviet union did buy the license from the y12 before the war.In France is the Y12 nick named "moteur canon" (canon engine) becasue the canon is integrated between the cylinder banks...The HS404 was still use from the brits to fit they fighter, but in a modified version to allow the use from belt feed and avoid icing problems out from the heat from the engine.The HS404 was use up to year 1999 on the Vought F8 F/N Crusader in the french navy

[@LarryPigeon1]

It was a simple solution instead of clocking the rotor or the guns to fire perfectly true the rotor because german guns kinda love being behind the engine 😅

[@alanm.4298]

Another advantage of having the gun mounted right on the centerline of the airplane is that it simplifies aiming at targets. When the guns are mounted outboard in the wings, they are set up to converge at a select point ahead of the airplane... That might be anywhere from 200 to 800 yards. In order to get maximum bullets on target and do as much damage as possible, the pursuing pilot must try to achieve that optimal distance from the target. Any farther away or closer and some of their guns will be ineffective. This is even more important with a slower firing auto canon, than a more rapid firing machine gun. Of course, the Germans knew this too. The BF109 used a 20mm cannon firing through the spinner, much like the Yak-3. The 109 also had a pair of machine guns mounted on the cowl above the engine, synchronized to fire through the propeller. Most FW190 also had cowl mounted machine guns, while some models also used cannons in the wing roots, all of which needed to be synched to fire through the prop. Other FW190 used outboard mounted cannons. American aircraft that used center mounted guns (or nearly so) for similar advantage were the P38 and B25. Today the A10 "Warthog" uses a similar arrangement, with its 30mm "Gatling gun" cannon only slightly offset to allow room for the nose wheel to retract (the nose wheel is also offset, BTW).

[@BillHalliwell]

G'day Dark, Undoubtedly, the secret of the Yak 3s success was its ease of flying; brought about by it's lower weight and its high destructive potential which is great for a pilot of any skill level as it means, literally 'point & shoot'. The smaller the aircraft, generally speaking, the easier they are to fly. This meant that large numbers of novice pilots could be trained and placed right into a Yak 3 with a high expectation of good outcomes. While in the hands of highly experienced pilots the Yak 3 would be like giving a new scalpel to a senior surgeon. It was such a famous aircraft in Russia, however, I'm finding it difficult to locate a 1/48 or 1/32 scale model to build, even though Russian models of military equipment are not really popular at this moment in history. Cheers, thanks for another great video. Bill H.

[@JosephDukedoms-ub2yz]

Yak 3 and the deHavilland mosquito mach 9 are my favorites. Both were made from wood and other composites they were ahead of their time. Both planes are absolutely gorgeous,de Havilland mosquito had no less than 18 different variants.

[@ericteipen]

Thank you for slowing down your narration. It makes it much more enjoyable to watch.

[@wdtaut5650]

0:41 and 9:27 The MiG 3 was _not_ the smallest fighter of WWII. The French Caudron C.714 was substantially lighter and smaller in every dimension except length.

[@Banner_Bearer_of_Eternity]

Everybody in the West tend to call Polikarpov I-200 "Mikoyan MiG-3". Yes, Mikoyan was known to every Soviet citizen. I mean THAT Mikoyan - Communist Party Central Commitee member, not his brother who has stolen Polikarpov's design bureau. Polikarpov abandoned I-200 project in favor of I-185 that was really supperior to any German fighter back then (the aircaraft tested at the Kaliningrad Front demonstrated that). But... Who cares? 😄

[@air-headedaviator1805]

You know having seen a Yak-3 in person I wouldn’t say it was small. Its fuselage is comparable in size to a P-40, while the wing span is similar in span to a 109. It has an aggressive profile due to that, so it does appear nimble, tho its crazy how much of a difference it made against German fighters. With the G model its overall performance on paper out matched it. I guess its a wonder how their aircraft were optimized, and how supporting those weapons worked on the Eastern front

[@Bagledog5000]

I'd say smallest fighter would possibly go to early Japanese designs like the A5M or the Ki-27. The Polikarpov I-15 or 16 are smaller as well. More click bait from DS, no surprises really.

[@cosmoray9750]

Oslo Freedom Forum kzbin.info/www/bejne/r2e2kJl-qZqhmtE

[@michaeljgraff]

i think the idea was to keep as much weight close to the axis of rotation and therefore increase maneuverability. that is probly why they sucked up high stiill heavy and water cooled with lower power but very little weight in the wings which takes advantage of thicker air.

[@michaelely4349]

Well put - it's hard to quantify things like centerline firepower where roll alone does not change your aim (ask an A6M zero pilot) or

[@leeanderson2912]

By the time YAK-3 came into Soviet Service, the Luftwaffe had lost most of its experienced pilots. Germany had the bad luck of facing this great airplane at the worst possible time.

[@redjacc7581]

simply the best dogfighter of the war that most people have never heard of. It's the only plane that the luftwaffe command ordered its pilots not to engage under a certain altitude.

[@juliancate7089]

How do you define "best"?

[@ricardobeltranmonribot3182]

If you are talking about the best dogfighter, I think the AM6 Zero was better than the Yak 3, Remember that the US had prohibited dogfight the Zero in any way possible, and the luftwaffe ordered no to engage the Yak 3 at altitudes below 3,000 meters, over that altitude, the Yak 3 became the prey

[@sergeyzhigalev]

@@ricardobeltranmonribot3182 They are too different to compare. Zero initially was intended as middle to long range escort/air superiority fighter to operate at high altitudes above the huge areas of ocean, and it's well reflected in Zero's design. Japanese designers likely planned it as an offensive weapon. Yak-3 derived from the rest of Yak family from the beginning of war, when Soviet airforce urged strong defensive airplane - short to very short range, high climb rate, maneuverability and speed at low altitudes. So if we mean "knife fight in phone booth" by saying "dogfight", Yak-3 was obviously the best.

[@олеглетунов-у9ь]

Хватит уже транслировать российскую пропаганду! В каком это документе немецким лётчикам якобы запретили вступать в бой с Як-3?

[@jasper_saberwolf]

Great documentary on an interesting plane I didn’t know too much about before. Curious, where does the narrator get the background music from? Is there a particular artist or playlist of royalty free tracks? I’ve found I quite like the music used in Dark skies’ (and sibling channels) videos. Thanks!

[@Sickofsociety1]

Do a search on KZbin for royalty free music. There are thousands of downloadable songs. It's a wonderful resource. I use it for relaxation.

[@feellucky271]

A friend in making these videos for his business and hobby bought an editing program and I believe not just links to license free music and sound but the fair use of licensed music but I only heard him say he'd gotten it and am assuming a bit but Intend to pursue it eventually for my channels.

[@ericgilbert56]

The Red Airforce is a great story that hasn"t been fully told. Great video.

[@leneanderthalien]

The Yak 3 had similar size and weight at Dewoitine D520 because did use quasi the same engine: the Klimov 105 was a evolution from the french Hispano Suiza Y12 engine use on Dewoitine D520, and the 20mm ShVAK canon was the reproduction from the Hispano Suiza HS404...

[@himoffthequakeroatbox4320]

Dirty thieving patent-infringing commies.

[@afterhourshotrods6882]

What made the Yak 3 so deadly is just simple physics!!! It's known as Power to Rate Ratio!!! Ya stuff a Big Engine into a small lightweight Airframe that's aerodynamically sound and Ta Daaaah!!!! You got yourself one Badass Aircraft....

[@gaius_enceladus]

Power to *Weight* ratio. You're welcome.

[@afterhourshotrods6882]

@@gaius_enceladus Yep! That too.😃

[@cam0865]

This by far for me was your best one yet. Data was good and your diction was very good. Top Notch!

[@LAR-hs2qt]

The right fighter plane design for the right time. If not for weight consideration, I can only imagine, what a super charger added to the engine would have accomplished for this already swift and nimble aircraft.

[@jayg1438]

Very happy aircraft from USSR/ Poland/ Romania etc are being covered now due to channels like this. Great work! Have you covered the IAR 80/81 from Romania?

[@meatpuppet2136]

The Soviet struggle to reduce the Luftwaffe's air superiority was greatly aided by the Anglo-American strategic bombing campaign that really hit its stride in 1943. The defense of the homeland drew a lot of resources from the Eastern Front.

[@georgistarkov717]

Not to mention the blank check support capitalist America offered to communist Russia in the form of Lend Lease on the day after the Germans invaded in 1941. Even though America was technically neutral.

[@Kysushanz]

Just like the Allies could never have landed at Normandy if the Soviets hadn't held up and were destroying 40 plus Divisions on the Eastern Front! Allies don't want to acknowledge that fact.

[@alaindaubresse2161]

85 % de l effort de guerre allemand était à l est source américaine

[@williamzk9083]

@@Kysushanz The allied bombing campaign reduced German production by over 40% and another year would have seen B-29s over Germany. The allied oil campaign in prperaion for D-day knocked out German fuel production down to 85% thereby helping the Russians. The Panther production was very badly effected and seldom reach even half of the 600/month (7200 year). So 12000-15000 Panther tanks instead of 6000 and all of them in the Eastern Front. To that we can add Tiger I/II, larger numbers of StuG and Panzer IV. Take away Russia's 600,000 American vehicles. Germany could have won against Russia.

[@OleDiaBole]

​@@williamzk9083Germany lost 90% of man and material in East. Land Lease comprised around 8% of Soviet aviation. Very welcome help, but far from detrimental. Amrcn and brit bombing raids were so inprecise they harly dented war production and were exclusive cause of German civillian casualties.

[@jimminniehan2548]

Really well done, thank you so much for your hard work.

[@the5thmusketeer215]

My understanding was that the YAK-3 had a very tight turning circle… Once you’re In a dogfight, that’s a tremendous advantage in itself since, whoever can get onto the tail of the other aircraft, is the one more likely to be flying home that Day.

[@xmeda]

If you have speed, fast dive and high ceiling, you can simply choose when to fight and when to go home. While if you only had turn capability, you were the one who always had to accept fight or leave enemy.. Those are the differences which for example ME-262 shown extremely well.

[@the5thmusketeer215]

@@xmeda What you say is true, but if two aircraft have broadly similar performance, then a tighter turning circle is a very significant advantage.

[@GunsmithSid]

This is a reason it was so effective at low altitude - no room for the faster diving plane to gain speed and so you had to turn to escape - and the little Yak did that quite well and could bring its guns to bear.

[@phillipgrubb2443]

@@xmeda The ME262 was not effective at all. It could have been a great fighter if it had been full developed. But it never was. It literally went from paper, straight to manufacturing. It actually hampered them in the end by getting a bunch of the remaining aces killed by p51s and late war Russian fighters. A bunch died before they even got to a fight because the fighter was highly unreliable. Prone to crashing at both takeoff and landing. And that's without mentioning the literal poison the engines released into the cockpit.

[@direktorpresident]

@@phillipgrubb2443 How did twin wing-mounted turbojets release literal poison into the cockpit?

[@littlebritain64]

This upload is very interesting! Thank You!👍

[@marvinschmitz3442]

I've never seen either aircraft in person, but at an airshow in Melbourne Florida I saw a F8 bearcat at the show. My first thought apon seeing it was how large of an airplane it was. Almost as large as an F4 Phantom at least in wing span. Never underestimate the power in small mechanical devices.

[@paulbarnes6124]

Fortunate to see yak 3 at Brisbane airshow 2018.it sounded great 👍

[@shawns0762]

You mean the F8 Crusader? The Grumman Bearcat was relatively small, smaller than it's predecessor the Hellcat.

[@Crashed131963]

The Hellcat which the Bearcat was to replace was a larger plane. The Thunderbolt was larger than Both.

[@shawns0762]

@@Crashed131963 Ha Ha, beat you by 1 minute

[@ssnerd583]

if you want to be shocked, see if you can find pics of a P47 next to a Bf109....that will blow your mind...and the YAK-3 was SMALLER than the 109!!!

[@prof2yousmithe444]

One of my favorite channels! Excellent work!

[@cripplehawk]

2:15 I beg your pardon but Which FW190 squadron was in Stalingrad? Only Fighter and SG squadrons that were present (All BF-109 operators) were JG52, JG53 and JG3 as well as 1st/SG1 (They did ground attacks flying the E variants) and Royal Romanian's 7th Fighter Air Group. Another fighter plane at Stalingrad was IAR 80B which Romanian 8th Fighter Air Group operated.

[@mikyl-fo8rh]

The Yak3, AK47 and T34 exemplifed the underestimated sophistication and practicality of the Russians.

[@chrislong3938]

I've never seen one of these but the Spit was easily the smallest fighter I could have imagined! It's tiny compared to a Mustang If this guy is smaller than those, then I'm really impressed! It's funny because I used to drive past San Jose Airport where all the private planes were chocked, and amidst all the Cessnas and Bonanzas was a Mustang that looked to be twice their size! I used to go to Reno to watch the Air Races and all the racers looked to be about the same size! When One Mustang is parked in the middle of all these other civilian planes, it really sticks out!

[@ssnerd583]

the 109 was a good bit smaller than the Spitfire...this YAK is a touch smaller than the 109

[@nortoncomando3728]

Very interesting and I did not know many of these bits of information thanks

[@darkknight1340]

The Yak family,particularly the 3 and 9 series were incredibly manouevrable but the Lavochkin la 7 ffn really outclassed the FW 190a series and was almost at parity with the 190 D.

[@caralho5237]

Especially when it comes to the soviets. The western media already lies and lied a lot, so imagine what a state controlled one would do. They only let you know what they want you to know

[@GordonjSmith1]

Really interesting. Thank you.

[@derekstocker6661]

Thanks so much for this very well presented documentary, very informative and just goes to show that even in a wartime setting, great advances can be made even under the most difficult of circumstances. Wonderful aircraft.

[@ЛевГригорьев-б6л]

Як-3 -- очень хороший истребитель, но его роль в воздушном сражении на Восточном фронте сильно преувеличена. Истребители Ла-5ФН, Ла-7, Аэрокобра (тем более Кингкобра) были более универсальными самолетами, а по мощи секундного залпа "пушечная" Аэрокобра превосходила почти все истребители Второй мировой войны. На «Кобре» летал трижды Герой Советского Союза Покрышкин (48 из 59 сбитых им "немцев" пришлись на P-39), дважды Герои Амет-хан Султан, Речкалов, Кутахов, Гулаев, Клубов, Камозин, братья Глинки. Только вышеупомянутые асы преимущественно на «Аэрокобрах» сбили более 330 самолетов врага! В целом, на «Аэрокобрах» воевали 11 из 27 лётчиков-истребителей дважды Героев Советского Союза. Так что очень хочется, чтобы авторы данного фильма сделали такой же про роль в боях на советско-германском фронте самолетов, поставленных по ленд-лизу. Еще нужно не забывать, что на Западных фронтах (в Битве за Британию, в Северной Африке, в Сицилии и Италии, а также после высадки в Нормандии) авиация союзников уничтожила в несколько раз больше самолетов и пилотов гитлеровцев и их сателлитов, чем ВВС СССР!

[@whatsreal7506]

Thanks. Very cool. Thanks for sharing and keep 'em coming! Good stuff!👌👍

[@moistmike4150]

My God! That WW2 must've been terrifying! I'm just glad no one got hurt.

[@robertdragoff6909]

What planet do you live on?

[@DraftySatyr]

@@robertdragoff6909 He thinks he's being funny.

[@robertdragoff6909]

Badly

[@timharkins754]

Your videos are always entertaining & informative. Well done.

[@borissljukic1470]

Yak3 had a metal wing carrier which, unlike the wooden one in Yak 1, reduced the weight of the aircraft and the surface of the wing.

[@michaelmartinez1345]

@Boris Sljukic , " a metal wing carrier " - Also Known As ; ' a spar ' ?

[@borissljukic1470]

@@michaelmartinez1345 a connector protruding from the hull, and on which the wing is pulled.

[@borissljukic1470]

@@michaelmartinez1345 or connector bracket. I'm not sure.

[@borissljukic1470]

@@michaelmartinez1345 it is difficult to translate from the Serbian language who is not in the aero profession. I read this in the 1992 book "LOVACKI AVIONA, JUCE, DANAS, SUTRA" (FIGHTER PLANES YESTERDAY, TODAY, TOMORROW) by Angel Oncenski.

[@rollfpeters5159]

like the last video´s --a GREAT WORK--thx rollf

[@BILLYBOBB3080]

You know you laughed when you said Uranus.

[@jwnagy]

I hear Stalin wanted to change the name to Operation Urectum.😃😃

[@burtvhulberthyhbn7583]

@@jwnagy rectum? Hell damn near killed him.

[@badmutherfunster]

Ffs stop it before I piss myself 🤣

[@ptrgreeny]

The Soviets had to wipe out the Klingons

[@ibDirtyGlasses]

I don't know how to feel about you not knowing me yet knowing I laughed when I heard it 🤣

[@keithd5181]

No. The designer favoured the gun to be synchronised to fire through the propeller. Some versions only had a 12.7 millimetre machine gun and 20 millimetre cannon. 16 June 1944. The Germans avoided altitudes below 5000 metres when the YAK 3 aircraft were around.

[@zapszapper9105]

Like the P51 in Western Europe and the Hurricane and spitfire in the Battle of Britain, Right plane at the right time, What they needed was high performance/(more than FW190) at below 10,000ft 3000 m, That is what they got in the Yak3. (Remember also 80% of the fighting against Nazi Germany was also in the East)

[@willthorson4543]

% means nothing. 100% of strategic bombing came from the west. See? War is war.the U.S. fought on every ocean, on almost every continent, had over 100 D-days, supplied and supported all the allies. Literally FED the Russian military and civilians . just because Russia fought across their country into Berlin doesn't mean anything. The allies as a whole won.

[@casematecardinal]

On the ground. Many pilots were lost to western allies with constant incursions into their own airspace

[@johntillman6068]

The Luftwaffe was destroyed in the West by allied tactical air forces and over Germany by the RAF/USAAF combined strategic bomber offensive.

[@Wideoval73]

Thanks for another good video. Little confused about the early British videos, but still very good!

[@kentwilliams4152]

The Yak 3 is my favorite fighter aircraft in WW II combat flight simulation, “Aces High.” It’s only down side is that it carries a fairly small amount of ammunition.

[@cosmoray9750]

How Western propaganda is then and is still now. The lies from News media are design to brainwash people. Vijay Gokhale, Former Foreign Secretary of India told the truth on what real happened. kzbin.info/www/bejne/oGHKq5aCrrOffdE Tiananmen 1989

[@PyromaN93]

Yep, but all in nose mounting is huge profit

[@PyromaN93]

@adarvirohfanbelarus8889 soviet pilots used planes with wing mounted armament by the exact same way. They mostly was too obsessed with dogfights and shooting in close range. But, some liked to use guns in the longer distances, especially YaK-9T pilots.

[@PyromaN93]

@adarvirohfanbelarus8889 I-16, early LaGG series as well, as early Yak-1, and lendlease american planes, like P-40 and P-39. Also Il-2 was sometimes used as heavy fighter, and even Tu-2/Tu-2S. The have not all armament been wing mounted, but still.

[@PyromaN93]

@adarvirohfanbelarus8889 if Il-2 is not mass produced, I can't imagine any other mass produced warplane

[@cramersclassics]

Well done! Most of the footage I've never seen before. Thanks.

[@stevenrichards8880]

Great video! I like the Yak-3 so much in fact I bought one, but it's powered by an Allison V-1710-111! Makes a great little warbird.

[@keithbaker1951]

Steven richards do you have a channel with your bird? Would absolutely love to subscribe to that!

[@stevenrichards8880]

@@keithbaker1951 Thank you Keith, no sir not as yet but perhaps in the future it's been a three-year overhaul process to date getting close to being airborne hopefully by September.

[@keithbaker1951]

@@stevenrichards8880 prayers 🙏 bring that ole bird into the modern world

[@stevenrichards8880]

@@keithbaker1951 God bless ya brother. Yes, it has been quite a daunting task but well worth it she deserves it and the reward will be beyond words. The world can always use another flying Yak right? You bet!

[@plainbreaker1392]

The Yak3 was a testament to simplicity of design wedded to purpose.

[@uumuu]

Aside from its brilliant performance I just really like the look of the plane, simple and well proportioned.

[@doomhippie6673]

when we discuss airwar on the eastern front we have to take into account the number of planes in service, the amount of fuel available and the number of pilots. I don't know the exact numbers here, but a quick google research said that Germany had 793 fighters on the Estern Front in 1944. I don't know how much of those were operational nor about the the fuel situation. However, the losses of skilled pilots of the German airforce by 1944 due to overextaesion, the western allied bombing campaign over the Reich and being outnumbered in the sky was very significant. I don't believe the loss of a couple dozen airplanes "scared" the Luftwaffe out of the sky. If the Yak 3 was really that good of an airplane it makes a lot of sense to tell your own pilots to not engage them if possible in areas in which they excelled. That's basically the same advice as saying: "If the enemy has a machine gun on that hill, don't charge blindly against the hill." I'd call that common sense.

[@bricefleckenstein9666]

The fuel situation for Germany was serious through most of 1944, growing increasingly worse as they needed to keep more of it closer to home to help fuel their industries.

[@6.5x55]

Hard lessons from combat: Don't turn with an A6M and don't fight down low with a Yak3.

[@ijontichy7179]

The pilots. They made the Yak-3 so outstanding.

[@guypehaim1080]

I think the performance of the Yak-3 is due to the power-to-weight ratio and the close coupling of the control surfaces.

[@-Zevin-]

Here is to hoping the next expansion for IL-2 is the battle of Berlin and we get to fly the Yak-3.

[@BuBornham]

Came to say the same thing!

[@evandotterer4365]

Thank you for posting this content despite negative opinions about Russia. History can still be observed and not ignored. Much respect

[@JackGordone]

Only those drunk on the multiple lies spewed by Western media have a negative view of Russia. From my POV, President Putin is one of the very few adults on the international scene right now. He's making a monkey clan out of the "leadership" of the collective West just now.

[@evandotterer4365]

@@JackGordone he’s got some balls but I think he could left Ukraine alone. Realistically who wants to invade Russia. Nobody. I think the main victim is the Russian people like always. Being totally fucked by government is just life for them. But then again it’s happening in America to. So who iam to judge.

[@johnmacdonald1878]

The Yak 3 appeared at a time when the Luftwaffe was being systematically destroyed in the west in preparation for D Day. The average experience of the Luftwaffe pilot was declining quickly due to losses and lack of fuel for training. Germany was still producing aircraft in large numbers but nowhere near the numbers the alies were producing. The result was the Luftwaffe was vastly outnumbered on all fronts. The biggest advantage the Yale 3 had was the sheer number of them.

[@andrewbranch4075]

I flew the combat SIM birds of steel. If that SIM was accurate then I would agree that she is stunning. Boom and zoom or dogfight she is brutal. The armament required close engagement but yes. Good low speed handling as well. Full control on the edge of the stall envelope though you do need power on. Low energy makes her wallow a bit. I put her in the same rank as a n Lf9 Spitfire. I suppose the real thing would be a bit more challenging though eh? Armchair warrior 😁

[@Swimfinz]

Great report, much appreciated!

[@caramelypoops]

I think a group of pilots need to review this plane against its contemporaries like the FW190, ME109, Mustang, Spitfire an d Zero and find out which one they like most, not so much as a weapon but as a flying machine. I think that would be very interesting.

[@jaxxmadine]

Prolly gunna be the zero. Lightweight and maneuverable makes flying more fun and easy.

[@TheOriginalFaxon]

What, The P38 doesn't get any love here? don't forget the P47 while you're at it, it was a highly capable fighter if a bit of a pig, it was like having a pickup truck but with a superturbocharged Cummins V12 in it. Actually that scale of engine isn't far off from what the p47 had period, tbh, with the only exception being it was a gasoline engine

[@jaxxmadine]

@@TheOriginalFaxon what are you on about?

[@TheOriginalFaxon]

@@jaxxmadine talking about WWII era fighters and engines, how bout you?

[@jaxxmadine]

@@TheOriginalFaxon trying to figure out where you got a v12 diesel in a p47

[@KMac329]

Excellent presentation. I'm an amateur generalist when it comes to WWII history. Soviet air power history is overshadowed by developments in the West. Thank you for filling in this gap in my knowledge of Soviet air power design.

[@aviationgaming1564]

Don’t forget that it’s not the aircraft it’s the pilot. You can have an aircraft with good speed and great maneuverability (like the Zero) you could have a good pilot which makes that aircraft feared or have a terrible and make that aircraft look weak.

[@barmherzigsein3259]

Well done! 🙏 Thank You! Salomè (Live well, in Peace). Mögest Du in das Licht, der Wahrheit, und dem SEIN der Schöpfung leben.

[@williammyers1612]

A Zero fighter made a forced landing at Dutch Harbor in the Aleutians in June of 1942. The fighter was found mostly intact by US forces and was shipped back stateside for examination in July of 1942. As a result, the Navy got one of the best fighters made during the war, the F6F Hellcat.

[@MooreFishing-ky3wq]

The F6F Hellcat was already under development by the June of 1942 .

[@rollotomasislawyer3405]

@@MooreFishing-ky3wq Correct and the Zero was almost obsolete by then.

[@filonin2]

The I-16 is much smaller and fought at the Battle of Khalkhin Gol and the Winter War.

[@juliancate7089]

Excellent point. I was just about to post it when I saw your post. The I-16 was also used against the Germans after 1941.

[@Rubashow]

Your absolutely right but it was already quite outdated when the German-Soviet war began. I guess that's why it's connected to Soviet defeats and received no glory.

[@perosoygoyito]

Interesting tribute to the Yak-3 and its tactical superiority vs various dive and level bombers but how did it match up vs the ME 109 or FW 190s in one-on-one dogfighting?

[@elektro36]

On high altitudes the 109 may had some chance due to better compressors but on mid to low altitides the yak3 just performed way better in both turnrate and engine-power due to the low weight of the plane.

[@PyromaN93]

@@elektro36 I'd say, YaK-3 will eat it with ease. 20s for combat turn, lesser than 20s for single turn. This is slightly worse, than Zero can do.

[@tzeffsmainchannel]

Thank you for the video!

[@chrislosso5683]

I've flown in mock dogfights in a yak3. It was like riding a motorcycle of the sky. So maneuverable and quick. Quite a beautiful aircraft!

[@edoardoandretta9550]

Operation Uranus: a colonoscopy for German forces

[@MarkSmith-js2pu]

Wonderful history that I never knew. Thank you. Subbed.

[@guypehaim1080]

Also, relocating the radiator to near the center of gravity/center of lift, reduces the moment of inertia which allows the aircraft to maneuver more quickly.

[@leneanderthalien]

not realy, radiator's weight is low...the location from the radiator is similar to the Dewoitine D520 (the klimov 105 engine from the Yak 3 is a derivative from the Hispano Suiza y12)

[@davem5333]

Aircraft designers generally strive to have the consumables near the center of lift and center of gravity to minimize handling difficulties as they, fuel and ammunition, are used.

[@guypehaim1080]

@@leneanderthalien Think, how much the radiator weighs and then add the coolant to fill it. The weight of it at any extreme of the aircraft would require adjusting trim. I still think the moment of inertia is reduced by a noticeable amount.

[@guypehaim1080]

@@leneanderthalien Also, the P-51 Mustang had its radiator located just aft of the trailing edge of the wing which helped to make its maneuverability better than that of the enemy aircraft.

[@oneshotme]

Badass little planes Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up

[@kit888]

Small fighter. Sounds like they traded off range to get performance, and they Germans couldn't exploit that weakness.

[@casematecardinal]

Basically it was the opposite of the zero.

[@MDzmitry]

Well, the Yak-3's range was around 660-700+ km, which is similar to earlier Yak variants (except for specific Yak-9D with 900-1000km and Yak-9DD with approx. 1300km). And same goes for Bf.109 and the Spitfire, all 3 in their primary "fighter" models had a near similar range varying from 650 to 720-750 km. And that's understandable, as all 3 were built primarily for interception and air superiority. In such scenarios the battles were usually fought pretty close to the "base", and there was no need in more fuel that would make the performance worse. Sorry for vague numbers, I'm too lazy to look up flight ranges for every modification of each design.

[@williampomplun6750]

Maneuverability, turning on the inside of the German fighters was the advantage of bringing guns onto the Enemy's fuselage/wings PROFILE where you are hitting a larger target (Aim LARGE miss small). IF GUNS are brought upon you from behind the profile is smaller, and you don't PULL BACK on the stick 🏒 giving the pursuer a slower, much larger profile, you roll out stick down for speed. Many times you will see WW1 footage of the ace's dogfight low on the deck. WW2 usually there's a crew flying Cap over the Bombers and escort planes like the P38 did so they can drive for speed into the mix. Once the escort planes engage in a dogfight, the P-38 dived behind the Enemy's plane that are jumping the Bombers and escort planes as auxiliary (BIG BROTHER) to equalize and take advantage.

[@SSHitMan]

The Mitsubishi A6M Zero was nearly 1,000 lbs lighter than the Yak-3

[@Tbal_96]

This Channel routinely makes click bait titles and routinely gets names/facts/and visuals wrong... It's not even worth wasting the time to type it out man... Russia themselves used the I-16 as a fighter during the war which is half the size of both the Yak-3 and Zero

[@niclasjohansson4333]

The Yak 3 was a lot faster than the Zero.

[@louisavondart9178]

Soviet fighters were designed for the low level combat that was normal on the Eastern Front, which was fighter protection for ground attack bombers, like the IL 2 Stumovik. German fighters were primarly designed for combat above 10,000 feet. Therefore the tactics used were entirely different. German pilots did not " dogfight " but boomed and zoomed, to use their superior speed, armament and climbing abilty. Once above 10,000 ft the Yaks were easy meat for both the BF109G and FW 190A aircraft. In the end it wasn't that the Yak's were superior but that they were outnumbering the Germans. The Yak 9D was a match for any of the German fighters except the ME 262... but not the Yak 3.

[@bradthackston2323]

Same reason the f-16 is a beast small fast and quick

[@blxtothis]

Am I alone in loving the archive footage from video libraries, British Gunners and airman being actually shown, masquerading as footage of Russians fighting the invading ‘Nazis’ ?

[@Steve-GM0HUU]

No, you are not alone 🙂.

[@narabdela]

Lol, it's a Dark Skies trademark. "Use any old footage, they'll never notice" 🤣

[@1dirkmanchest]

That has the appearance of a downsized and tweaked P-40. Did it have a self-sealing fuel tank? The 20mm cannon was a big improvement over the early or export P-40s. It shared the same ceiling restrictions as the P-40. I wonder how it would have done with a Rolls Royce Merlin engine pushing it aloft. Great job as usual! I never knew this plane existed. This is so much more than a "war channel".

[@casematecardinal]

The merlin was a good engine but it wasn't magic despite its name. If you took the supercharger off it, it wouldn't perform well at all. Alison engines with similar set ups had similar power output at high altitude

[@1dirkmanchest]

@@casematecardinal What in-line engine could the Soviets have copied that would have produced enough power in a relatively low weight package?

[@casematecardinal]

@@1dirkmanchest an Allison 1710. The merlin just had a good second stage supercharger. And at the time it was easier to replace the 1710 in the mustang than to wait for a redesign or get a turbo supercharger installed. And eventually turbo supercharging was the route taken. It was a better system than a dual stage. Its what the germans used.

[@randallturner9094]

@@casematecardinal dude while true you’re sort of missing the point. We needed that high altitude performance. A great performing low-altitude Allison was next to useless to us. (And would have been to the Soviets had they used their air power strategically.)

[@casematecardinal]

@@randallturner9094 no Im not. Im just telling you that the engine itself isn't what matters. The merlin being the best engine is a myth.

[@sigeberhtmercia767]

I think the I-16 Polikarpov might be a little smaller than the Yak 3 but not by much and unlike the Yak 3 was already outclassed at the start of hostilities.

[@kikichevy]

the Yak3 was really good, but it also benefitted from pilots in the USSR being traned better as well. The early war was disastrous for the Soviets because of recent purges while the Luftwaffe was chock full of experienced staff from the Spanish civil war, and the Soviets' outdated aircraft were cannon fodder. By Stalingrad, the western allies were also occupying the brunt of the Luftwaffe, with them deeming that defending against bombing raids was more important than the eastern front's air war. So most of the best aicraft and best pilots were sent out west, leaving mostly second grade troops and gear to fight the revamped, and reequipped Soviet air force. The Yak3 was definitely one of the best fighter aircraft of WW2 tho, being the only one that beat a F4U4 (in the hands of a very skilled pilot) in post war simulated dogfights.

[@av8tore71]

On the weekends I work at an airplane mechanic and for the past 3 years I have been doing annuals & oil changes on a Yakovlev Yak-3. It's is for sale for $425k. It sits at KRFD

[@thomasburke7995]

Soviet era thinking.. typical to this day.. develope a very robust yet technologically simple piece of machinery.. eliminate as much possible distractions or for thought to operate it. Find and train the simplest of people to use it.. then build it by the thousands..

[@carlguile2856]

Entry monologue perfect! 👍🏻

[@_od_7825]

There were smaller fighters than the Yak-3, I-16 or I-153 for example. Brewster Buffalo was probably smaller too. The Yaks aren’t that small.

[@johntillman6068]

Buffalo was small but weighed a bit more. US planes had armor.

[@jeeperspeepers8323]

These vids are the very best on KZbin!

[@TBreezy17]

Impressive. I have seen a 109-G in person and I can tell you it’s not big at all. Surprising something smaller was developed.

[@SUPRAMIKE18]

There's actually an aircraft you may or may not know of called the HA-1112 it's essentially a 109 airframe with a smaller Hispano-Suiza V12, this makes it around 3ft shorter than a 109.

[@TBreezy17]

@@SUPRAMIKE18 very cool. Ya I saw the one I mentioned at Wright Patterson Air Force Base and I was shocked on how small it was

[@SUPRAMIKE18]

@@TBreezy17 Wright Patterson musuem high on my list of places I need to visit, it looks so cool!

[@Otokichi786]

Willy Messerschmitt took the "most powerful engine in the smallest air frame" approach in 1935.

[@TBreezy17]

@@SUPRAMIKE18 it’s amazing. One of the best collections in the world and talking with the staff is cool bc they let you know there are several other hangers with more planes and material either not ready or being rotated in and out of the museum

[@Progamer-jk6lm]

What a name for an operation

[@kenegerton7512]

The little bird reminds me of the F5 Mirage. Too small , too slow , low load capacity , BUT ,,, so nimble, nobody wanted to get caught in a fight with the little dog. I'd love to have one of each.

[@allgood6760]

Thanks for this👍 we have a Yak-3 warbird here in NZ 🇳🇿✈️

[@stevenleek1254]

I've heard that BF109s had heavy controls at low altitude

[@casematecardinal]

They were somewhat sluggish in turns and rolls at lower altitudes and speeds but these downsides are generally played up more than what was realistic

[@Shocker-lh6kn]

Great video. Had not heard this before.

[@scotteilers3141]

I knew nothing about this plane. Very interesting piece. All of your videos are so well researched, I don’t know how you find the time to actually make the videos themselves. Very impressive.

[@fredemny3304]

"All of your videos are so well researched". Seriously? Dark Skies is notorious the length and breadth of KZbin for his shoddy research.

[@keithroy9217]

I think the fact that scared the Luftwaffe even more was the fact that many of these fighters were flown by women. The master race couldn’t really cope with that revelation!

[@wrobelx]

meanwhile in war thunder.... *literally impossible to turn*

[@adrian_b42]

I read Yakovlev's autobiographic book and he talks about Yak 3. You are not completely wrong, but you missed completely the background and intents of Yakovlev. I recommend the book, it is a great reading.

[@RARDingo]

The Yak 3P was a remarkably deadly aircraft with 3 x 20mm B20 auto cannons.

[@jimjamjoeyjoejoe]

Possibly the best plane overall in War Thunder.

[@kennethcurtis1856]

​@@jimjamjoeyjoejoeWar is not a video game.

[@vintageflanker7096]

Remarkably deadly? It literally NEVER saw combat. No engagement during WW2, nor after that.

[@RARDingo]

@@vintageflanker7096 Does one need to see combat in order to be deadly? Because I've trained soldiers that have yet to see combat, but I KNOW they're deadly.