Aces High I-16 Type 24\29 Incorrect Flaps

[bustr]

The Aces High I-16 is offered in two loadouts\versions.

Type 24
Type 29

Starting with the Type 10 the "aileron flap" was discontinued for conventional trailing edge split flaps like the hurricane. Originally they were pneumatic but, very quickly the mechanism was replaced with a manual hand crank. Subsequently all Types after the Type 10 were built with the reduced length aileron and conventional flaps.

Our Aces High I-16 has an incorrect flap representation. The I-16 never operated with both a aileron flap and split flap. Also the conventional flaps on the Aces High I-16 have too short of a span.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: http://www.airpages.ru/eng/ru/i16_5.shtml

I-16 Type 5
Unless extreme care was exercised, use of the split ailerons as flaps on landing approach could result in the nose of the tighter pitching up and the aircraft entering a stall. When the undercarriage was lowered, the aircraft immediately became sluggish, buffeting was severe and power had to be kept up. since there was a marked tendency to drop a wing. The I-16 had to be literally flown onto the ground, stalling at anything up to 93 mph (150 km/h), and as only one of the three legs of each main main landing gear member incorporated an oleo shock absorber, the damping of the landing impact was inadequate and the aircraft tended to bounce, often resulting in a dangerous nose-up attitude.

From: http://www.airpages.ru/eng/ru/i16_10.shtml

I-16 Type 10
The internal structure of the I-16 Type 10 was strengthened. Also standard in the I-16 Type 10 was a cable-cutter for the pilot. Previous operations with the I-16 showed that the landing gear could easily become struck in partly-retracted position. In order to eliminate the high number of crash landings this caused, the pilot was provided with a cable cutter. In order to decrease landing speeds, pneumatic flaps were fitted, which, when compared with the I-16 Type 5 and Type 6, were considerably reduced in size. Most of the I-16 Type 10 were equipped with a small trim tab on the flaps, however, most early production I-16 Type 10s did not have this trim tab. During operation, the new flap system proved to be extremely dangerous. Driven by a compressed air cylinder, they abruptly deployed and acted like a speed brake. As a result, they were dangerous for novice pilots and in operational service, were seldom used.

From: http://airspot.ru/catalogue/item/polikarpov-i-16-tip-10

I-16 Type 10
6.Removed the mechanism of freezing ailerons. Reducing the landing speed is achieved by installing the landing flaps. Therefore, the magnitude of ailerons. Most of the aircraft type 10 was landing flaps from the air system. Beginning in the spring of 1939, with plane no. 102175 is mechanical production the landing flaps.

Aces High I-16 Type 24\29 Rear View.

 

I-16 Type 17 Flaps Down. Note Ailerons not drooped in response.





Scale drawing showing hand crank.



Translation of 17. : The screw mechanism of management of flaps (the left board).

Schematic of flap hand crank mechanism.

[bustr]

Sorry for this last bit, didn't understand all of the navigation keys for the Skin Viewer.

[tmetal]

to me it looks more like the flaps are not long enough rather than the ailerons not being long enough. From your last post it appears to me that the flaps shown in the crash picture extend all the way to be roughly even with the outter most gear door/strut and in game the flaps are roughly even with the innner gear door/strut.

I think the ailerons are the correct length, but you are definately right about the ailerons not being used as flaperons (yeah, its a word )

edit*
whoops, just reread your post and realised I said the same thing you did. D'oh!

[Chalenge]

Now I'm very interested in learning about a few other aircraft and their flap and landing gear mechanisms.

[bustr]

I learned all of this by accident. I was translating Russian modeling blogs, historic sights, aviation sights and manuals looking for a picture or diagram of a PAK-1 reticle. After 2 weeks I only found a single 1940 diagram from an obscure Russian manual on aerial fighting systems. I also discovered you had to use at least 4 different translation packages and a good OCR package or, you would end up with nonsense like the Type 29 carried "wh_@res with blackjacks" under its wings to drop on the enemy. One poor translation I got from the tech description for the Type 10 flaps and ailerons, could be misconstrued to both were retained together.

================================

I-16 Types 5, 10, 29, Ah Hybrid.

Note length of ailerons in the Type 5 and lack of split flaps. The long ailerons of the Type 5 extend into the center wing unit. With the Type 10 the ailerons were shortened with the introduction of the split flaps running the full width of the center wing section. At the very bottom is the Type AH Hybrid which never existed.

Type 5



Type 10 - Where the split flaps were introduced eliminating "lowering the full length ailerons as flaps".



Type 29 - Final Version.



I-16 Type AH Hybrid

[BaldEagl]

Nice find.

[Arlo]

Yes. Add the Type 10. 

[lyric1]

Good work.

[bustr]

I have to apologize. I keep calling our Type 28 a Type 29.

The Type 28 was a Type 24 with ShVAK cannon in the wings. Both had the M-63 900hp engine. The earlier M-25 family progressed through 700hp, 730hp, and 750hp. While the Type 18 had the M-62 850hp and only 177 built.

The Types 24 and 28 1227 were built. While total types 5, 10 and 17, 1602 were built with M-25 engines.

No Arlo you don't want the earlier versions.

[Arlo]

Yes I do. It's part of the Spanish Civil War set. 

[Mister Fork]

Yes I do. It's part of the Spanish Civil War set. 

And we've run a SCW in the AvA with great results. BTW - great find bustr!

[bustr]

In that case Arlo you would get the Type 5 and Type 6 with all of their problems and 700hp and 730hp engines.

The Type 10, 750hp, was introduced towards the end of the Spanish civil war in very few numbers. The Spanish building many under license. In both cases the flaps if used, killed less talented pilots. Full length aileron droop flaps that caused wing stalls below 95mph or split flaps pneumatically operated in an instant like speed breaks that popped the nose up and stalled the pilot to his death. Stall speed being around 93mph, and the flap ailerons really reduced speed quickly, causing a need for hands on throttle control to keep speed up and avoid wing stalls. Flap ailerons were a design concession in Russia to how short their runways were.

The Type 10 was created for a number of reasons. The wings in the Types 5\6 had fewer ribs and had skin ballooning issues at higher speeds including the ailerons failing or ripping off. Rough landing strips with gravel tore up the undersides of the wings and stabilizer. Spins in the early models to the left had problems in that you had to be very careful in recovery because pulling the nose up could place you in a flat spin. To the right recovery took 12 rotations. And the rudder was over sensitive so it quickly over controlled the tiny airframe.

The Type 10 in Spain were field modified by the Spanish with Wright-cyclone F-54 allowing high altitude flying. So that eliminates the Type 10. The advantage of the R-1820 was it's hp increased to alt while the M-25 750hp dropped off. The R-1820 was an attempt to compete with the late civil war Bf109 being tested. The earlier 109 were powered by the Jumo 210D 670 PS (661 hp, 493 kW) with the Type 5\6 being competitive.

Cyclone R-1820-F54 rated at 655 hp for take-off, 605 hp at sea level, and 690 hp at 15,300 feet.
DB601 A-1, up to 1,100 PS (809 kW) at sea-level with 2,400 rpm, up to 1,020 PS (750 kW) at 2,400 rpm and 14,763 feet altitude.

Doing the Spanish civil war, if you could get the primary protagonist rides, everyone would want to fly the 109 super uber ride so they wouldn't loose. It would be about the same as having a night in the AvA where one side only got D3A and SBD versus the I-16 Type 24 with MG only armament and Bf109 E4.