Author Topic: Polikarpov I-16  (Read 1974 times)

Offline Anaxogoras

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7072
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2009, 11:27:17 AM »
It doesn't surprise me, but I didn't want to overstate the case. ;)
gavagai
334th FS


RPS for Aces High!

Offline Wingnutt

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1665
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #16 on: March 19, 2009, 11:56:54 AM »
looks like it belongs in a happy meal.

Offline Ranger45

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 87
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2009, 12:10:40 PM »
I agree, they need to fill up the early war plane selection, this one, the IAR-80, the P-36 Hawk.  There is a whole list and we have plenty of late war rides.

Offline Helm

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 600
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2009, 03:37:19 PM »
As Captain Piccard would say:   ...."make it so" !!



Helm ...out
XO of ^"^Nazgul^"^
Proudly serving since campaign #13
"No Rain?" ...."No Rainbow, baby!" ....Bootsey Collins 2009

Offline Wmaker

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5743
      • Lentolaivue 34 website
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2009, 05:39:00 PM »
Now that it looks like Brewster is coming. I really really would like to see the I-16 soon. They'd make very fun special event and AvA-setups.
Wmaker
Lentolaivue 34

Thank you for the Brewster HTC!

Offline Noir

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5964
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #20 on: March 19, 2009, 06:11:57 PM »
looks like it belongs in a happy meal.
:rofl
now posting as SirNuke

Offline Cajunn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 723
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #21 on: March 19, 2009, 06:14:51 PM »
They claim that it was equal to the early model BF109's and it also seen action against the Zero's as China had some in the war against Japan.
“The important thing [in tactics] is to suppress the enemy's useful actions but allow his useless actions. However, doing this alone is defensive.”

Miyamoto Musashi (1584-1645)
Japanese Samurai & Philosopher

Offline Puck

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2980
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #22 on: March 19, 2009, 10:10:05 PM »
They claim that it was equal to the early model BF109's and it also seen action against the Zero's as China had some in the war against Japan.

They claim it is faster than an F-22, turns better than a G-164B, and carries more firepower than an F/A-18E.

It is purdy though.
//c coad  c coad run  run coad run
main (){char _[]={"S~||(iuv{nkx%K9Y$hzhhd\x0c"},__
,___=1;for(__=___>>___;__<((___<<___<<___<<___<<___
)+(___<<___<<___<<___)-___);__+=___)putchar((_[__
])+(__/((___<<___)+___))-((___&

Offline Tilt

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
      • FullTilt
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #23 on: March 20, 2009, 05:03:03 AM »
The wierd thing is that looking at its rate of turn, size and general manouverability it would fare better in AH than it did historically.

The 20mm variants were by no means the most common.

However there are many accounts of combat between 109's (E & F's) where the I-16 constantly enabled the pilot to out manouvre the 109 but never had the speed to extend or disengage.
Ludere Vincere

Offline frank3

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9352
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #24 on: March 20, 2009, 07:31:13 AM »
Just noticed something about its service-ceiling (31,825 ft), is this correct? It seems rather high for such a small fighter (small wings aswell).
And the pilot must've been coooold in that open cockpit at those alts :D

Offline Bruv119

  • Aces High CM Staff
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15678
      • http://www.thefewsquadron.co.uk
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #25 on: March 20, 2009, 08:31:01 AM »
Just noticed something about its service-ceiling (31,825 ft), is this correct? It seems rather high for such a small fighter (small wings aswell).
And the pilot must've been coooold in that open cockpit at those alts :D

pffft   it was fine he had ample vodka.
The Few ***
F.P.H

Offline splitatom

  • Parolee
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 765
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #26 on: March 20, 2009, 08:33:26 AM »
People are going to ride you and tell you to do a search.

Me, ill just agree and say again, we need this plane and every other early war bird, before perks and "ubber" rides have any meaning.

period.  :salute
acualy i dont think this plane has been requested in a long time

great addition need a soviet early war plane
snowey flying since tour 78

Offline Rich46yo

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7358
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #27 on: March 20, 2009, 08:50:39 AM »
That would be fun, buzzing around in that little thing. Count my  :aok for the I-16.
"flying the aircraft of the Red Star"

Offline Cajunn

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 723
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #28 on: March 20, 2009, 07:00:18 PM »
Just noticed something about its service-ceiling (31,825 ft), is this correct? It seems rather high for such a small fighter (small wings aswell).
And the pilot must've been coooold in that open cockpit at those alts :D

I think what they were getting at was it could fly at that altitude, but I doubt it did as most of the pilots that flew the little fireball took off part of the canopy and I'm doubting it had oxygen.
“The important thing [in tactics] is to suppress the enemy's useful actions but allow his useless actions. However, doing this alone is defensive.”

Miyamoto Musashi (1584-1645)
Japanese Samurai & Philosopher

Offline Enker

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1553
Re: Polikarpov I-16
« Reply #29 on: March 21, 2009, 10:03:00 PM »
Hmmm, didn't the I-16 have the flaperons? In IL-2, the flaps go down, as well as the ailerons, somewhat akin to the elevons on nowadays.
InGame ID: Cairn
Quote from: BillyD topic=283300.msg3581799#msg3581799
... FOR TEH MUPPET$ TO PAD OUR SCO?E N to WIN TEH EPIC WAR OF TEH UNIVERSE We MUST VULTCHE DA RUNWAYZ N DROP UR GUYZ FIGHTERZ Bunkarz Then OUR SKWAD will Finarry Get TACTICAL NOOK for 25 KILL SCORE  STREAK>X