Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Sandman on December 01, 2005, 05:56:33 PM
-
(http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~bnagy/houstonApr2002Pics/I16.jpg)
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~bnagy/houstonApr2002Pics/I16.jpg
-
Yes, please. I-16 "Rata" would be useful in early war Eastern front scenarios (heck, they were still in use in 1943).
-
IIRC, Rata's were in active units until 1945, when that last I-16 group was converted to the P-63.
I remember finding this info when I was leaning about Kinga Cobras, so I'm not sure what they were doing with I-16s in 1945, I only cared about what happened afterwards. Maybe I-16 at that point was just an advance trainer.
They certainly weren't using them to run down 190s.
http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/George_Mellinger/soviet_order_of_battle.htm
888 IAP fighter regiment.
-
I would like to see the I-16-21 added. It would make for a very different fighter experience. If I recall it was the last fighter intentionally designed to be unstable until the F-16, but of course the I-16 pilot had no computer to keep it under control.
-
but a good pilot could make it turn on a dime with nine cents change.
-
It seems like the I-16 must've been very fast? I mean, just look at the size of that engine! It's even bigger than the one being squeezed into the 190's!
-
it was obsolete by the beginning of the war. it was slow by early war standards. but it was alarmingly fast for an open cockpit.
-
I'd also think it would have an high torque, because the fuselage is so short
Or at least the pilots would experience trouble flying straight for long periods of times
-
Omg it's soo ugly!
-
That's the Russian tactic, scare their enemy to death
-
Originally posted by frank3
It seems like the I-16 must've been very fast? I mean, just look at the size of that engine! It's even bigger than the one being squeezed into the 190's!
Actually I-16's engine has almost exactly same size (in diameter) as La5's engine and only slighter larger than 190's engine. It just looks so big because of small length of airplane (~6m) and lack of "smoothing".
Originally posted by frank3
I'd also think it would have an high torque, because the fuselage is so short
Or at least the pilots would experience trouble flying straight for long periods of times
Never read about any problems with torque.
-
Remember, the I-16 entered service in 1932. It was a low wing monoplane with retractable landing gear.
Take a look at what the Americans, British, Germans, Italians or Japanese were putting into service in 1932. Fixed gear biplane fighters.
The I-16 was far ahead of it's time, but was obsolete by the time WWII started.
Still, the I-16-21 could do better than 300mph and has two 20mm cannon for armament. It would score some kills in AH.
-
Weren't I-16s used by the Chinese AF against the Japanese?
Also they were definately used in Spain against the Me109s of the Condor Legion.
-
Originally posted by frank3
That's the Russian tactic, scare their enemy to death
as opposed to the english, who would blind their enemies with luxury.
-
No, the Brits just smile at the enemy, who recoil in terror at the dental hygene....
-
Where do you put the batteries in at?
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Remember, the I-16 entered service in 1932. It was a low wing monoplane with retractable landing gear.
Take a look at what the Americans, British, Germans, Italians or Japanese were putting into service in 1932. Fixed gear biplane fighters.
The I-16 was far ahead of it's time, but was obsolete by the time WWII started.
Still, the I-16-21 could do better than 300mph and has two 20mm cannon for armament. It would score some kills in AH.
I don't think it would become popular. Not anymore than the Stuka at any rate.
-
The Russian F-16 is a goood match-up for the A6M2 :) a good setup for China and Far east around 1939-1940.
Note. I on the I-16 stands for *Istrebitel*... meaning Fighter:)
-
Already wondered what it stood for, thanks Ike :)
-
just looked into it: the I-16 was very hard to fly. this was due to the torque to whieght ratio. it had a tendency to violently roll in a turn. soviet pilots said of the little bugger "If you can fly the I-16, you can fly anything."
-
Ah I already thought of that! (read my earlier post)
It must've been because it had such a short fuselage
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I don't think it would become popular. Not anymore than the Stuka at any rate.
I didn't say it would be popular. I said it would score some kills. Even the Spit I scores some kills.
-
Sadly, there are not that many B5N's around today..
-
yes please!
-
i love the B5N. the best carrier torpedo bomber. why? because it can out-turn every single plane in the game. you can just turn and turn and turn till help shows up.
-
If only it could have just 1 .303 in the nose....
-
Most I16s had pea shooters. No cannon armament I mean. Considering the way things are going in AH now, with the 109F-4 losing gondolas and the 109G-6 losing 30mm and the 109K-4 losing all ord, then any I-16 we get has to be representative of the series.
Considering that the I-16 is a pre-war plane, and that MOST were used in the early Soviet war because nothing else was available, we would get an early model. That means 1 or 2 13.7mms (if you're lucky!! THey might have had 7mms early on!) with limited ammo.
After a period of time the lend-lease planes came in and then the Soviet-built new fighters (laggs, migs, etc), so you only need the early I-16 to fill that hole.
I say it has little to no place in AH, with the current damage modeling.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
I didn't say it would be popular. I said it would score some kills. Even the Spit I scores some kills.
I wasn't disagreeing with you... just running on that train of thought.
-
Krusty,
As I undertsand it, by far the majority of I-16s to see combat in WWII were I-16-24s. I-16-24s were armed with four 7.62mm ShKAS machine guns, two sychronized and two unsynchronized, with 650 rounds per gun. Or two 20mm ShVAk cannon with 180 rounds per gun.
Maximum speed at sea level was 273mph and maximum speed was 304mph at 3000m (9,840ft). 5.8 minutes to 5000m (16,400ft). 373 mile range on internal fuel, 600 miles with droptanks. The normal take off weight is a massive 4,215lbs, lighter than even the Ki-43.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Most I16s had pea shooters. No cannon armament I mean. Considering the way things are going in AH now, with the 109F-4 losing gondolas and the 109G-6 losing 30mm and the 109K-4 losing all ord, then any I-16 we get has to be representative of the series.
Considering that the I-16 is a pre-war plane, and that MOST were used in the early Soviet war because nothing else was available, we would get an early model. That means 1 or 2 13.7mms (if you're lucky!! THey might have had 7mms early on!) with limited ammo.
After a period of time the lend-lease planes came in and then the Soviet-built new fighters (laggs, migs, etc), so you only need the early I-16 to fill that hole.
I say it has little to no place in AH, with the current damage modeling.
From what I've read, it had 20mm at the beginning of the war, but the later variants (other than type 27) did not because of the limited supply of ShVAK cannons. The first variant to have the 20mm was the type 17. It was designed in 1938 and fielded in 1939. It had two 20mm ShVAK and two 7.62mm ShVAS. I don't think any of them were armed with 13.7mm (but I could be wrong).
-
omg... 370 miles range on internal gas?!? LOL That'd be 5 minutes in AH fuel burn!!
EDIT: And I thought the spits/109s had short internal range
-
The period of highest production was 1940 (2710 units) and so this would reflect the bulk of I-16's on strength during the early GPW.
It seems that several types were in production across 1940 both with the older M-62 Shvetsov and the newer M-63
Type 18 (counted in the type 24 production) M-62, 4 x 7.6mm Shkas, 2 x drop tanks
Type 24 (circa 760 units) M-63, 4 x 7.6mm Shkas, 6 x RS 82, 1 x 100FAB, 2 x drop tanks
Type 27 (circa 277 units) M-62, 2 x 20mm ShVak, 2 x 7.6mm Shkas, 2 x drop tanks
Type 28 (counted in the Type 27 production) M-63, 2 x 20mm ShVak, 2 x 7.6mm Shkas, 2 x drop tanks
Type 29 (unknown production) M-63, 1 x 12mm BN, 2 x 7.6mm Shkas, 6 x RS 82, 2 x drop tanks
Speed at sea level was circa 256/260 mph
Climb to 5000m was 5.2 to 5.8 mins (depending on engine and load out)
Turning circle circa 17secs sustained.
Wing tanks extended endurance by 60 mins when flown under cruise settings.
-
What about the Type 17 units?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
What about the Type 17 units?
M25 engine 750Hp as opposed to the M62 1000hp.
Produced in 38 (27 units) and 39 (314 units) had the 2 x 20mm and 2 x 7.62mm.
However many type 17's were later upgraded to type 27's and type 28's.
So for 1941 onwards the 27/28 is more applicable for the 20mm versions.
-
This is what my book says about the I-16
-Powerplant:"One 821kW (1100hp) Shvetsov M-63 9-cylinder radial engine."
-Peformance:"Max speed 304mph; range 435 miles; servic ceiling 29,530ft."
-Dimensions:"wingspan 29ft 6in; length 20ft 1in; height 8ft 5in."
-Weight:"2095kg (4619Ib) LOADED."
-Armament:"Four 7.62mm (30cal) machine guns, or two 7.62 (30cal) machine guns and two 20mm cannon; external bomb and rocket load of 500kg (1102Ib)
Many different virsions for different tasks, and say alot of action during the 30s, like Spanish Civil War, fight for the Republican against the Nationalist forces, saw action against the japs during the Sino-Japanese conflict and during this conflict 5 I-16s led by Lt N.I. Zvonarev, where armed with RS-82 air to ground rocket projectiles, fired rocket salvoes at a formation of japanese aircraft and brought down 2 of them in what was the world's first aircraft-to-aircraft rocket engagment. When it was used against the germans in WW2, 5 days into the invasion they deliberately rammed their adversaries, and many times when they were conered they would use there best skill which was manoevrabilty, and do a sharp turn and head for his opponent full throttle. During all these conflicts it was one of the first line aircraft.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
M25 engine 750Hp as opposed to the M62 1000hp.
Produced in 38 (27 units) and 39 (314 units) had the 2 x 20mm and 2 x 7.62mm.
However many type 17's were later upgraded to type 27's and type 28's.
So for 1941 onwards the 27/28 is more applicable for the 20mm versions.
Tilt, you rule.
-
i heard that I-16s accelerate and turn like aerobatic planes... thats if a good pilot is flying it :)
by the way
Bring I-26 Type 28 and Type 29 to Aces High!:aok
-
Originally posted by Klum25th
This is what my book says about the I-16
-Powerplant:"One 821kW (1100hp) Shvetsov M-63 9-cylinder radial engine."
-Peformance:"Max speed 304mph; range 435 miles; servic ceiling 29,530ft."
-Dimensions:"wingspan 29ft 6in; length 20ft 1in; height 8ft 5in."
-Weight:"2095kg (4619Ib) LOADED."
-Armament:"Four 7.62mm (30cal) machine guns, or two 7.62 (30cal) machine guns and two 20mm cannon; external bomb and rocket load of 500kg (1102Ib)
Many different virsions for different tasks, and say alot of action during the 30s, like Spanish Civil War, fight for the Republican against the Nationalist forces, saw action against the japs during the Sino-Japanese conflict and during this conflict 5 I-16s led by Lt N.I. Zvonarev, where armed with RS-82 air to ground rocket projectiles, fired rocket salvoes at a formation of japanese aircraft and brought down 2 of them in what was the world's first aircraft-to-aircraft rocket engagment. When it was used against the germans in WW2, 5 days into the invasion they deliberately rammed their adversaries, and many times when they were conered they would use there best skill which was manoevrabilty, and do a sharp turn and head for his opponent full throttle. During all these conflicts it was one of the first line aircraft.
Your book has the part "the world's first aircraft-to-aircraft rocket engagment" is not true.
Rockets were used by against observation ballons in the first world war
(http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/hargrave/images/le_prieur_cachy1916_500.jpg)
OK, maybe these Le Prieur bottle rockets dont count...
-
Wow, first world war rockets?? Never heard of that!
-
i have. known about em since 7th grade.
-
Heck, i would fly it if it were in Aces High, cool little buggy. :lol
-
you guys dont understand: it is an extremely difficult plane to fly. you think the 190 does a nasty snap roll in a turn? you aint seen nothin yet. if you had lightning reflexes, you could blast anything out of the sky with one.
PS
can anyone else besides me fly a B5N indefinately at 60 mph? so far nobody has succeded in matching my achievment.
-
Originally posted by SMIDSY
PS
can anyone else besides me fly a B5N indefinately at 60 mph? so far nobody has succeded in matching my achievment.
I will try it. Have never tryed actually. (With Flaps?)
-
can anyone else besides me fly a B5N indefinately at 60 mph? so far nobody has succeded in matching my achievment.
AND land it on the bow of a Destoyer?
I have.. ;)
SALUTE!
Newman