Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Saxman on June 10, 2009, 10:42:38 AM
-
Looks like we're getting some EW planes.
Any chance of an Oscar in there? :D
-
At long last. :)
-
Looks cool. Can't wait!
-
Me Want :aok :aok :aok :aok :O :D :salute
-
YYYYYEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Woohoo!!
:rock
-
Can't wait to try out the RATT.. :aok :aok :aok
RC
-
YES! :rock
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/waffle/i16/i161.jpg)
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/waffle/i16/i162.jpg)
(http://downloads.hitechcreations.com/screenshots/waffle/i16/i163.jpg)
-
:aok :aok :aok
nice little plane to add.
-
The Russian's are coming!!!!
-
Looks like we're getting some EW planes.
Any chance of an Oscar in there? :D
Oscar and a Nick for the cherry on top.
-
Yeah!!
More red stars to aim at.
Looks to me like a well placed tater will split that thing from stem to stern. :devil
-
WOW!!!!!! Very nice. Now all I have to do is wait for the insurance to come up with the money for my comp that was struck by lightning. :cry
-
If we get a Yak-1 or LaGG-3 and a Pe-2 or DB 3 now we will have an acceptably complete planeset for an Operation: Barbarossa setup... :devil
-
:O :O :O
-
Nice... Hurray for PK and pilot wounds. :P
It would be really cool if we got historical tracer colors. The I-16's fast firing green tracers and agility would really be something unique.
-
How cool is this . . .
-
Just noticed the flaperons. Will its roll rate suffer with those lowered?
(BTW this is officially the coolest update for AHII yet :D )
And will this be armed with ShKAS or UBS machine guns?
-
Cool, so which one is it? Horsepower and armament please!
Infidelz
-
I am looking at the pictures and still can't believe this :O :O :O
-
This one was a suprise for sure. Cant wait to put some lead in them :)
-
Hanger queen....calling it now..
Especially with the light armament.
-
Cool, so which one is it? Horsepower and armament please!
Infidelz
It will probably be one of the tightest turning aircraft in the game, but it wasn't particularly fast (even for an early war aircraft) and was only armed with two 7.62 ShKAS or .50 UBS machine gun.
IIRC this was the first low wing monoplane with retractable landing gear.
Historically it was pretty much meat on the table for the Bf 109E. It'll be interesting to see how it does in game.
-
Hanger queen....calling it now..
Especially with the light armament.
No duh....
HTC, any chance we can see a cock-pit view of the plane?
-
they just posted it apparently cause i got on just a few mins ago and it wasn't there but anyway more planes :aok :)
-
Redo the C-47?
-
they just posted it apparently cause i got on just a few mins ago and it wasn't there but anyway more planes :aok :)
New aircraft won't come out until the update is released, and they will all come out at once along with the terrain/lighting overhaul.
-
and was only armed with two 7.62 ShKAS or .50 UBS machine gun.
Depends on the version. The I-16 Type 24 (1939, most numerous version) carried 2x 20mm ShVak as well :rock
-
i know that motherland i meant i got on their homepage this looks like a relative to the La's doesn't it?
-
Looking at the photos too.. The rudder is the size of a barndoor, and ailerons are about 3/4 the length of the wings... Probably turn and stop on a dime.. Combined w engine torque, I'll bet it has a SCREAMIN rollrate... And overall the thing is TINY!!! I can imagine shootin at one as it squirms and bounces all over the sky,
Holy smokes!!! LOL!!!
20/23mm cannon? OH YEAH!!!! With that, I might like it better than my Wildcat...
RC
-
Redo the B-26...Kind of thought the HE-111 would have been done before this thing, or even the Beaufighter
-
Should be interesting, undoubtedly it will be painfully slow, but the turn rate should make it tons of fun. :aok
-
Depends on the version. The I-16 Type 24 (1939, most numerous version) carried 2x 20mm ShVak as well :rock
Cool... I imagine that'd be the one we get, then. May be fairly popular afterall.
i know that motherland i meant i got on their homepage this looks like a relative to the La's doesn't it?
No
In fact, the La5 was developed out of directly out of the LaGG3 (kind of a reverse Fw 190A- Fw 190D deal, they swapped out the Vee engine for a radial)
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/AARG/images/lagg3-2.jpg)
Redo the B-26...Kind of thought the HE-111 would have been done before this thing, or even the Beaufighter
I would guess they wanted to give the Brewster a historical adversary, they might take it further by giving us some more EW Soviet aircraft so we can have a fairly complete plane set for some scenarios ( :pray )
-
Woohoo!!! :rock
-
well it looks like an La to me
-
:aok :aok
-
well it looks like an La to me
I wonder why :noid
-
i think EW arena will be popular now
-
well it looks like an La to me
It's just an appearance. These three are from three separate development families.
(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2431/3613592655_a351047a10.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3603/3614411530_58384f9c7c.jpg)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3372/3613595919_30106e5167.jpg)
-
http://kelso.stormfront.org/Kelsoimages/HughesH1racer.jpg (http://kelso.stormfront.org/Kelsoimages/HughesH1racer.jpg)
The H1 looks more like a 190
-
Looks good HTC crew! WTG. Kind of looks like a midget Russian Jug. :lol
-
Has anyone ever seen a real I-16?
The closest thing I seen would probably be an La5/7
-
WTG! We needed a target for Brewster :aok :rock :rock
-
I’m going to enjoy killing those almost as much as I enjoy killing LA7s :devil
-
I’m going to enjoy killing those almost as much as I enjoy killing LA7s :devil
a doubt your going to see many in LW :devil
-
Cool... I imagine that'd be the one we get, then. May be fairly popular afterall.
Whatever armament we got, it certainly isn't ShKAS's.... look at the size of those fairings! :lol
Yup.. doesn't look like a ShVak cannon version.
-
Yup.. doesn't look like a ShVak cannon version.
I didn't realize the cannons were in the wings when I posted that. :o :lol
-
The H1 looks more like a 190
http://home.mit.bme.hu/~tade/ac-pict/Varia-AF/iar-80a.jpg
-
I-16 Polikarpov fighter in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYKD4oD49l4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYKD4oD49l4)
-
I can pretty much guarantee you'll see at least 1 pottering around in the LW arena's - that'll be me.
;)
Wurzel (my sig contains the reason why lol....)
-
i think EW arena will be popular now
a doubt your going to see many in LW :devil
I'm pretty sure we will see more I-16s on LW than in EW, where it's usage will quickly fade away in the face of the ubiquitous Hurricane II with quad Hizookas...
-
http://home.mit.bme.hu/~tade/ac-pict/Varia-AF/iar-80a.jpg
IAR 80?
-
I'm pretty sure we will see more I-16s on LW than in EW, where it's usage will quickly fade away in the face of the ubiquitous Hurricane II with quad Hizookas...
That is exactly why your not going to see them
-
Nice looking, wtg !
-
Really impressed with the modeling. Looks like we will have some fun little planes!
-
Simply not believing my eyes! :O
AWESOME!
Now, with the fun these two planes (I-16 and Brewster) can offer in the AvA for example. I hope more and more people will see these "early war" planes as a good thing! :)
-
IAR 80?
That's what it says :)
-
I can pretty much guarantee you'll see at least 1 pottering around in the LW arena's - that'll be me.
;)
And I'll be after you in a Brewster! :D
<S>
-
Excellent :D I'll be looking for ya Wmaker ;)
<S>
Wurzel
-
That is exactly why your not going to see them
Replying to both you and Lusche: My speculation is that if the I16 doesn't scrub its E too quick in maneuvers, it'll be more than a novelty counter to the Hurricane IIc. All the I16 would require is proper ACM, which trumps most of the guys crutching with the IIc.
-
I'm thinking the next FSO (after the update is released) will be early war europe....
That's what it says :)
did not read the link lol
-
Any chance we can get Hammer, Soda, or somebody to give us some info besides hunting on multiple websites? I'm not familiar with the I-16 (flight characteristics, etc, etc.) Any info on the Brewster would be nice too.
Obie
-
Replying to both you and Lusche: My speculation is that if the I16 doesn't scrub its E too quick in maneuvers, it'll be more than a novelty counter to the Hurricane IIc. All the I16 would require is proper ACM, which trumps most of the guys crutching with the IIc.
Now that I think about it, your right
-
Any chance we can get Hammer, Soda, or somebody to give us some info besides hunting on multiple websites? I'm not familiar with the I-16 (flight characteristics, etc, etc.) Any info on the Brewster would be nice too.
Obie
Since I've been campaigning for this plane for years here's one of my prior posts:
Polikarpov I-16:
General characteristics
• Crew: one pilot
• Length: 6.13 m (20.1 ft)
• Wingspan: 9.00 m (29.5 ft)
• Height: 2.25 m (7.38 ft)
• Wing area: 14.54 m² (156.5 ft²)
• Empty weight: 1,383 kg (3,049 lb)
• Loaded weight: 1,882 kg (4,149 lb)
• Max takeoff weight: 2,050 kg (4,520 lb)
• Powerplant: 1× Shvetsov M-63 air-cooled radial engine, 670 kW (900 hp) driving a two-blade propeller
Performance
• Maximum speed: 460 km/h (290 mph)
• Range: 440 km (275 mi)
• Service ceiling: 9,700 m (31,800 ft)
• Rate of climb: 14.7 m/s (2,900 ft/min)
• Wing loading: 129 kg/m² (26 lb/ft²)
• Power/mass: 0.36 kW/kg (0.22 hp/lb)
Armament
• 4× fixed forward-firing 7.62 mm (.30 cal) ShKAS machine guns, a total of 3,100 rounds of ammunition.
• 6× RS-82 rockets or up to 100 kg (220 lb) of bombs
Built from 1933 through 1941 with over half still in service in 1943 the Polikarpov IL-16 was a historically significant aircraft. I was the worlds first monoplane fighter, the first with retractable landing gear, and the first with a closed cockpit (some versions). It was built in many varients over it's lifespan but the type 24 was the most used varient in WWII. The type 28 replaces two of the 7.62 mm ShKAS with to 20mm ShVAK cannons.
-
32kft in that cockpit?... :lol
-
Will this be historically correct and have no trim tabs?
Also I am loving the early war planes, I hope we can fit in some Defiants, MiGs, and maybe a Gloster Gladiator?
-
Replying to both you and Lusche: My speculation is that if the I16 doesn't scrub its E too quick in maneuvers, it'll be more than a novelty counter to the Hurricane IIc. All the I16 would require is proper ACM, which trumps most of the guys crutching with the IIc.
This is of course totally true...but in a many vs many situation those hispanos are really really nasty...but so is I-16's small size when you try to hit it. :)
-
I can't wait to try it out...
That wing texture is sweet... You can almost feel the metal skin undulations.
-
I think that's canvas :D
-
WOOWOO...Can't wait to see how well it performs :rock
-
Will this be historically correct and have no trim tabs?
I don't think so
It will probably have trim tabs, auto pilot, and a sing throttle control (can't remember the official name).
-
I think that's canvas :D
Really.. We don't have any other canvas wings, do we? Those JPN early models?
-
No aircraft in aces high really has trim tabs, all trim does is change the center point of your stick (if that makes any sense).
Many fighters in game that have the ability to trim in reality did not.
Really.. We don't have any other canvas wings, do we? Those JPN early models?
Hurricane did, didn't it?
This'll be fun :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kM2_QpbM-fY&feature=related
-
I can't wait to try it out...
That wing texture is sweet... You can almost feel the metal skin undulations.
Oh man you're right, that's awesome. WTFG Waffle/Greebo.
(I expect an "I-16 skins" thread soon....:D)
edit: canvas, not metal, just makes it cooler.
-
hard to find data on the service dates, this has some break down....
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t18.html (http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t18.html )
Shows the Type 18 as the 1939 production version and the type 24 as also 1939. I'd assume that those would be the 2 most likey versions for AH....
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t24.html (http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t24.html )
Type 17 has the 2x20mm and is 1938 model....
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t17.html (http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t17.html)
A lot of variations, 20mm seem to be 150 rds each...so 300 x 20mm
-
With 20mm's, I think it would be pretty useful in MWA, as a Hurri hunter...
But with 4 x .30 tickytack guns, it would be like chickenpeckin'em to death..
I'd probably die before I could finish the job, lol!!!
-
hard to find data on the service dates, this has some break down....
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t18.html (http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t18.html )
Shows the Type 18 as the 1939 production version and the type 24 as also 1939. I'd assume that those would be the 2 most likey versions for AH....
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t24.html (http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t24.html )
Type 17 has the 2x20mm and is 1938 model....
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t17.html (http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t17.html)
A lot of variations, 20mm seem to be 150 rds each...so 300 x 20mm
If we get it the Type 28 will likely be the 20mm version we see. See my post above.
-
Cool, an open-cockpit plane. With the addition of the new EW planes, I hope they perk the quad-hispano Hurri-crutch2c! Although it does give me pleasure to saw off a wing or tail of a 2c with my Mk1 from D200. :D
-
I wonder how they're going to model the 'iron finger' model trigger which caused most I-16 pilots to miss their target due to extensive forces required to fire the thing.
-
Here's a picture I took last year:
(http://www.wedge1126.dreamhosters.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=105&g2_serialNumber=2)
-
What an ugly little plane, but I'm all for any aircraft added to the game :lol
-
This is a great bird.The fact that its not fast wont keep out of late war with it,i enjoy getting kills in the f4f and FM2.I will be happy to have a open view for my S.A. :rock
-
thank you HTC.
-
Very nice addition. Was hoping for this one for a long time. Hopefully we get one with the 20mm cannons as an option as well so we'll have one for scenarios and the MAs.
-
Looks like a gee bee
-
Here's a picture I took last year:
(http://www.wedge1126.dreamhosters.com/gallery/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=105&g2_serialNumber=2)
I can see that being a pain in the bellybutton to land hits on!
-
:O :O :O
UNFANTASICULOBELIEVABLE!!! WTG! :aok :aok :aok :x
-
Very Nice!
-
Now we only need a Tupolev TB-3 mothership to carry 2 of them Ishaks :D
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/49/Zveno-SPB.jpg)
-
Looks really nice, great job Waffle and Greebo!
-
Hanger queen....calling it now..
Especially with the light armament.
Heck no! Horde buster :)
-
Looking at the photos too.. The rudder is the size of a barndoor, and ailerons are about 3/4 the length of the wings... Probably turn and stop on a dime.. Combined w engine torque, I'll bet it has a SCREAMIN rollrate... And overall the thing is TINY!!! I can imagine shootin at one as it squirms and bounces all over the sky,
Holy smokes!!! LOL!!!
20/23mm cannon? OH YEAH!!!! With that, I might like it better than my Wildcat...
RC
After you do a roll, try a snap roll. All the way around in around a second (source: IL-2).
-
Heck no! Horde buster :)
:rolleyes:
-
Waffle and Greebo...check ur PMs :aok
-
Nice addition to AH2. :aok
-
Waffle,
Any chance of a cockpit shot, it would be very intresting to see what it's like from the inside out.
-
Has anyone ever seen a real I-16?
The closest thing I seen would probably be an La5/7
I've stood next to the one at the air museum in Odessa/Midland. I'm 6'2" and I was looking down into the cockpit just standing there beside it. Tiny plane, I was amazed at how brave the Soviet pilots had to have been to get in one and go into combat.
-
Looks like the I-16 will be fun to fly but.... I still can't stop admiring the new terrain!
-
It may be small compared to some of our aircraft, but I don't think it will be THAT small... in fact, I think from a dead-six perspective it will probably be fairly large.
I-16 compared to a Bf 109F.
(http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t5/AK_Comrade/I16v109F.jpg)
-
I guess i must remind you all that the il-16 were always short ranged front line fighters.
You will NEVER see these planes attacking each other from airfield to airfield.
The later more capable versions while having more guns and such, also have engines that use MORE fuel, it is in that sence the more ubber version of the il-16 will suffer from range more than the early versions.
Regardless, this will be a NOE buster upper, because the planes so small and light and decently armed it should prove able to knock some attackers off a town.
:Edit: and no, the tiny little drop tanks wont really matter that much when it comes to getting this planes butt to another airfield. Most 16's will find them selfs crash landing with no fuel long before they get shot down in alot of cases.
-Throws two cents-
-
Can't wait to try out the RATT.. :aok :aok :aok
RC
EXCUSE ME????
;)
-
BaDkaRmA158Th,
No "L" in the name. Just "I-16-x" where x is the version number.
-
I guess i must remind you all that the il-16 were always short ranged front line fighters.
You will NEVER see these planes attacking each other from airfield to airfield.
The later more capable versions while having more guns and such, also have engines that use MORE fuel, it is in that sence the more ubber version of the il-16 will suffer from range more than the early versions.
Regardless, this will be a NOE buster upper, because the planes so small and light and decently armed it should prove able to knock some attackers off a town.
:Edit: and no, the tiny little drop tanks wont really matter that much when it comes to getting this planes butt to another airfield. Most 16's will find them selfs crash landing with no fuel long before they get shot down in alot of cases.
-Throws two cents-
It's range isn't THAT much shorter than the La-7 and the Spitfire, two of the most popular fighters in the game...
-
20/23mm cannon? OH YEAH!!!! With that, I might like it better than my Wildcat...
RC
Totally different guns.. Look them up :)
-
Is it going to carry rockets? I read on wiki it had 6 rockets or up to a 500kg bomb.
-
:x
-
The AH I-16 is a late model hybrid that can be configured for all the armament options the various I-16 models had in real life and that includes the version with 20mm cannons. It can also carry the six rockets.
The I-16 had a mixed construction. The wing was of all metal construction, the centre section was metal skinned and the outer sections and tail surfaces were fabric covered. The fuselage was a wooden structure which was then ply skinned.
The real life I-16 was highly maneuverable, very sensitive to the controls and only marginally stable. So a ham fisted pilot could find himself in a spin very easily. It was also quite tricky to land and there were a lot of accidents when it was introduced.
-
Totally different guns.. Look them up
No, no no no no!
That's 20 23mm cannon, not 20/23mms.
You can sink ships with it. There's a clip that runs to the ground fed by a diesel powered autoloader so you have enough ammo along with a silk and nylon tube of vodka and borscht for the pilot.
I found that on the internet so I think it's failry accurate.
-
The AH I-16 is a late model hybrid that can be configured for all the armament options the various I-16 models had in real life and that includes the version with 20mm cannons. It can also carry the six rockets.
The I-16 had a mixed construction. The wing was of all metal construction, the centre section was metal skinned and the outer sections and tail surfaces were fabric covered. The fuselage was a wooden structure which was then ply skinned.
The real life I-16 was highly maneuverable, very sensitive to the controls and only marginally stable. So a ham fisted pilot could find himself in a spin very easily. It was also quite tricky to land and there were a lot of accidents when it was introduced.
Thanks for being our inside man, Greebo :D
I forgot about the stability problems. Wasn't there a saying in the VVS that, if you could fly the I16 that you could fly anything?
-
No, no no no no!
That's 20 23mm cannon, not 20/23mms.
You can sink ships with it. There's a clip that runs to the ground fed by a diesel powered autoloader so you have enough ammo along with a silk and nylon tube of vodka and borscht for the pilot.
I found that on the internet so I think it's failry accurate.
That was the first design auto loader. The second design used wind power to help green things up, and if you saw it on the internet, it haas got to be true!
-
Sakai - I don't get it. The only thing those two numbers bring up are the russian 20mm and 23mm guns, which are totally different. What does 20 23mm mean and which I-16 had a 23mm? The only Russian 23mm I know would be huge for something like the I-16.
-
... along with a silk and nylon tube of vodka and borscht for the pilot.
One tube for both vodka and borscht!?!?
-
The AH I-16 is a late model hybrid that can be configured for all the armament options the various I-16 models had in real life and that includes the version with 20mm cannons. It can also carry the six rockets.
The I-16 had a mixed construction. The wing was of all metal construction, the centre section was metal skinned and the outer sections and tail surfaces were fabric covered. The fuselage was a wooden structure which was then ply skinned.
The real life I-16 was highly maneuverable, very sensitive to the controls and only marginally stable. So a ham fisted pilot could find himself in a spin very easily. It was also quite tricky to land and there were a lot of accidents when it was introduced.
In that case I think the I-16 will be surprisingly common for an early war fighter, and perhaps even the bane of Hurricane Mk IICs in the EWA.
One tube for both vodka and borscht!?!?
Design flaw.
:P
-
WOOOOOOT! My new main ride has arrived....... :x
-
:aok
-
:x :aok
-
Weren't Russkie pilots known for drinking the go juice from their alcohol injection systems... BAD IVAN!!! LOL!!!
So its 20mm, not 23, OK!!! Whatever man.... I don't claim to be a master of the completely inconsequential details... If you are, then goody gumdrops for you!!!! I have more important things to think about, lol!!! Heck, I didn't know they were equipped with cannon at all.. Thought they were MGs only... Pleasant suprise!!!
RC
-
No more vague dweeb16 topics. :lol
-
I guess i must remind you all that the il-16 were always short ranged front line fighters.
You will NEVER see these planes attacking each other from airfield to airfield.
The later more capable versions while having more guns and such, also have engines that use MORE fuel, it is in that sence the more ubber version of the il-16 will suffer from range more than the early versions.
Regardless, this will be a NOE buster upper, because the planes so small and light and decently armed it should prove able to knock some attackers off a town.
:Edit: and no, the tiny little drop tanks wont really matter that much when it comes to getting this planes butt to another airfield. Most 16's will find them selfs crash landing with no fuel long before they get shot down in alot of cases.
-Throws two cents-
Cruise settings are your friend.
-
completely inconsequential details...
Huge difference between the russian 20mm's and 23mm.
-
What Wmaker said :O :x
This I-16 is longitudinal neutral or even unstable plane, right? At least I once read something like that from somewhere...
-
:x
-
After you do a roll, try a snap roll. All the way around in around a second (source: IL-2).
You can also see this in the You Tube video that was linked in an earlier post. It snap rolls in the blink of an eye!
-
Huge difference between the russian 20mm's and 23mm.
Yeah about 3mm. :devil
Looks like it will be a great plane to DA in.
-
I guess i must remind you all that the il-16 were always short ranged front line fighters.
You will NEVER see these planes attacking each other from airfield to airfield.
The later more capable versions while having more guns and such, also have engines that use MORE fuel, it is in that sence the more ubber version of the il-16 will suffer from range more than the early versions.
Regardless, this will be a NOE buster upper, because the planes so small and light and decently armed it should prove able to knock some attackers off a town.
:Edit: and no, the tiny little drop tanks wont really matter that much when it comes to getting this planes butt to another airfield. Most 16's will find them selfs crash landing with no fuel long before they get shot down in alot of cases.
-Throws two cents-
:confused:
Range: 440 km (275 mi)
25-35 miles from one airfield to the next plus the trip home leaves you about 200 miles of range remaining.
Greebo, are we getting the bomb loadout too and if so what configuration?
-
half that with the 2.0 fuel burn ration in MA
-
That figure is for cruise setting...and planes in the MAs consume fuel twice as fast compared to real life.
-
:confused:
Range: 440 km (275 mi)
25-35 miles from one airfield to the next plus the trip home leaves you about 200 miles of range remaining.
Greebo, are we getting the bomb loadout too and if so what configuration?
fuel burn rate for MA considered?
-
Oh yeah... forgot about the 2x fuel burn. Still leaves you around 50-75 miles of range to fight.
-
:x
-
Yeah baby!
Yeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
:x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x :x
:rock
-
Has anyone ever seen a real I-16?
There is one at the Commemorative Air force HQ in Midland, Texas.
-
I hope we can get some Chinese National Air Force skins. Should be very interesting with an early China vs Japan set-up. :aok
(http://www.geocities.com/cwlam2000hk/i16003.jpg)
(http://www.geocities.com/cwlam2000hk/i16004.jpg)
-
(http://www.samolet.co.uk/jpegs/I-16_12.jpg)
I-16 type 29, V.P.Sagalaeva 71 IAP -KBF (Baltic Sea Fleet Air Force), Leningrad 1941.
Thanks once again for your awesome default-skin choise, Greebo! Fits well with the Brewster. :)
One thing that came to my mind were the flaperons. Were they phased out in the Type 24 or not? They were first introduced early on, taken away and then put back in in the Type 10. Now I'm not sure if they were still there from Type 24 onwards. HTC has modelled them, IIRC Oleg's IL-2-sim has not (for the Type 24)...
I'm assuming the 12.7mm UBS on the lower cowling section goes away when 20mm guns are added to the wings as Type 29 never had them?
-
Big kudus to AH. :aok The I-16 is going to be a fine addition.
I see visions of Continuation War, Barbarossa, Battle of Khalkhyn Gol "if we got KI-27s", Spanish civil war, They were at The Winter War.
All in all had a large footprint in the early war years. Battle of Khalkhyn Gol was about as big a bttle as a battle can be without calling it a war. It was also the first babtism of the early version zero, a small number having faced the Soviets in Manchuria. Interesting fact is that the Soviet check on Manchurias resources only solidified the Imperial Govt. to look south, at Euro/Yank holdings, for their mineral/resource wealth. Thats how badly the Soviets thumped them in Manchuria. And thats how big an impact it had on Japanese strategic thinking. Some go as far as to think Japan never would have attacked the West had they secured Manchurian/Siberian mineral wealth. So the little I-16 kept finding itself at important fights.
But the real winner of the I-16 inclusion will be any early war scenerios on the eastern front. Most of all the FAF vs the Soviet AF.
There were quite a few I-16 versions. Some of them more then adequatly armed and if were lucky we'll get the type-18 with the turbo-charged M-63 engine, armed with 2 7.62 MGs and 2 20mm cannon.
-
:aok sweet! very nice addition from a historical standpoint.....it's gonna be fun to set up fights between them and 109e! Thanks HTC, waffle, greebo :) :salute
-
My favorite I-16 picture:
(http://i707.photobucket.com/albums/ww72/imbe/I-16x401.jpg)
-
if were lucky we'll get the type-18 with the turbo-charged M-63 engine, armed with 2 7.62 MGs and 2 20mm cannon.
All production Type 18s had M-25V (1000hp) with normal mechanically driven two-stage supercharger and four ShKAS mgs.
-
It Looks like a La7's Younger Brother.
:huh
Anyway, its a new plane so its still cool! WTG HTC!
:x
:salute
-
Urrah, Polikarpov! Spasibo bolshoi, HTC! :D
-
Maybe an odd thought... Will the pilots head turn when scanning views, and will it stick out when checking 6?
And can ya see him bleed when ya blast him? LOL!
RC
-
Blood streaks out the cockpit, since it's open.. hehe
-
I-16 was a copy of the GeeBee racer.
-
Do I see drooping ailerons ("flaperons") in that one screenie? If so, this lil' tyke is gonna be *nimble*, though somewhat slow.
-
Looks like we're getting some EW planes.
Any chance of an Oscar in there? :D
EW is a gross understatement Its a 1932 design. LMAO
Unless they are planning on adding such planes as the Heinkel HE51
(http://www.aviation-history.com/heinkel/he51l-2.jpg)
The Arado-Ar68
(http://www.historicaircraft.org/Other-Country-Aircraft/images/Arado-Ar68.jpg)
Or the FIAT CR.32
(http://members.tripod.com/Roberto_Lionello/nino/cr32_03.jpg)
I dont really see the point
but like I said in the other thread. "More targets for me"
-
Waffle,
Any chance of a cockpit shot, it would be very intresting to see what it's like from the inside out.
+1, I'd really like to see what the inside looks like.
-
I-16 was a copy of the GeeBee racer.
Copy, no. Inspired by, most likely. If you look at the two next to eachother the I-16 is clearly not a copy. It has a very different tail, cockpit position and retractable landing gear.
EW is a gross understatement Its a 1932 design. LMAO
That is like claiming the Spitfire Mk XIV or Bf109K-4 are 1936 and 1935 aircraft.
-
EW is a gross understatement Its a 1932 design. LMAO
The variant seen in the pics was produced during 1940-41. Prototype of the I-16 first flew in 1933. Although it will have the earliest first flight in the AH planeset, there are fighters in AH that first flew in 1935...
-
All production Type 18s had M-25V (1000hp) with normal mechanically driven two-stage supercharger and four ShKAS mgs.
New
more advanced and powerful M-62 engine was designed by Arkadij D. Shvetsov team at Perm aero-engine factory (GAZ-19). Retaining the cubic capacity of M-25V, new engine was equipped with two-stage supercharger, gaining 225hp of power on expense of 46kg extra weight.
M-62 was rushed to production, and in early 1939 it was fitted to the I-16 Type 10 airframe. AV-1 automatic propeller (differed by larger blunt spinner and wide chord blades) was fitted. Other new external features included additional air intake on top of the engine cowling and paired exhaust stacks in the lower cooling/exhaust ports.
Thanks to the more powerful engine engine and advanced propeller, Type 18 had a considerable increase in performance, specially speed and ceiling. Handling also became better, aircraft was more stable on sharp loops and turns than all predecessors. Landing also was easier. The only parameter to suffer was range (due to more consuming engine), but problem was solved by provision of external underwing fuel tanks (developed on the I-16 Type 20 testbed).
Despite series production, the I-16 Type 18 remained and interim variant to keep production busy until arrival of more advanced M-63 engine.
http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/i-16-t18.html
Tho if I rememeber right not all type-18s had the super-charged M-25V, "otherwise known as the M-62".
I always thought type 18s were better armed but it appears your right. In order to have a better armed one we'd need the 17, or even better, the 24. The later 24 versions had the M-63 at 1,100 HP, drop tanks, 2 7.62 in cowling, 2 20mm SHVAK in wings, and could launch RS-82 rockets. Since it was first used in 1939 it would probably still fit early war. Unfortunatly it wouldnt be as nimble as the type-18, but that would be the trade off.
I dont know how many M-24s were built. In fact other then overall I-16 production I cant find anywheres that tells me how many of each model were built. :salute
-
It looks like a Fosters Oil Can LOL!
-
We got some of these flying in NZ :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXF5Ni_LpNg
-
That is like claiming the Spitfire Mk XIV or Bf109K-4 are 1936 and 1935 aircraft.
"History: The first low-wing monoplane fighter with retractable landing gear to enter service, the Polikarpov I-16 was obsolete even before the Second World War began, yet plodded along as the Soviet Union's first line fighter until 1943 when the Red Air Force finally introduced top-notch aircraft to slug it out with the Luftwaffe for the remainder of the war.[/color]
Of advanced design for its time, the I-16 was, none-the-less, an illustration of poor timing, being the fastest of its type when first introduced, highly maneuverable, with excellent climbing speed and roll rate, yet soon outclassed by a newer craft developed by Germany and Japan. While the aircraft performed well against German combat aircraft during the Spanish Civil War (1936 to 1939), and against the Japanese Air Force in Manchuria starting in 1937, by the time Germany invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, the aircraft was outclassed by new generations of enemy fighters. Yet, as the most numerous of the Soviet fighters available at that time, it bore the brunt of the battle for several years.
On the plus side, its simple, rugged construction, all-wood monocoque fuselage and metal wings made the I-16 easy to maintain under frontline conditions, and enabled it to absorb heavy punishment while staying in the fight. In fact, the plane itself was sturdy enough to be used as a ram to destroy enemy aircraft in midair when ammunition ran out in a dogfight.
On the negative side, it had poor longitudinal stability, a tendency to stall in a glide, and was exceedingly temperamental, requiring highly skilled airmanship to perform well and not kill the pilot before the enemy had a shot at him.
Although more than 7,000 of the fighters and their two-seat trainer variants were produced, not more than a handful have survived, with 3 non-flying craft being in museums (two in Russia, one in China). However, at least 6 wrecked I-16's had been restored to flying condition in New Zealand by the end of 1998, all of them Type 24s dating from 1939. At least one was imported to the USA in 1999. "
Nicknames: Yastrebok ("Hawk") or Ishak ("Little Donkey") in Russia. In Spain it was known as the Mosca ("Little Fly") to the Republicans, and Rata ("Rat") to the Nationalists against whom it was flown. It was also called Abu ("Gadfly") by the Japanese.
Specifications (I-16 Type 24):
Engine: One 1,000-hp M-62 radial piston engine
Weight: Empty 3,252 lbs., Max Takeoff 4,542 lbs.
Wing Span: 29ft. 1.5in.
Length: 19ft. 9.75in.
Height: 7ft. 10.75in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed at 10,000 ft: 304 mph
Ceiling: 31,070 ft.
Range: 373 miles
Armament:
Four 7.62-mm (0.3-inch) Sh KAS machine guns (Two in forward fuselage; two in wings)
Up to 441 pounds of bombs or six RS-82 rockets on underwing racks
Number Built: 7,000+
Number Still Airworthy: 6
-
I was just thinking. Yanno what this thing looks like?
A midget Jug (P47) LMAO
-
Maybe an odd thought... Will the pilots head turn when scanning views
RC
IIRC this was discussed at the last Con as something HTC wanted to develop in the future, for all aircraft.
wrongway
-
IIRC this was discussed at the last Con as something HTC wanted to develop in the future, for all aircraft.
wrongway
We had our convention this past weekend which gave us the chance to speak with players in person and talk about the future of AH. We’ve been thinking about how we were going to move forward and came to some conclusions that we decided to announce at the convention.
The main news is that we have decided to put Combat Tour on an indefinite hold. The reason for this is that we have decided that it is better to steer our development in a way that allows us to implement our CT developments first as part of the regular game.
The way we’ve been going has been like trying to fight a two front war with only one army. It’s stretched us too thin and has hurt our overall level of productivity. It also has handcuffed us in a lot of our development decisions by forcing us to indefinitely postpone a lot of other things.
Our biggest obstacle with CT is in breathing life into it to make it fun and immersive. While a basic structure is there, there’s a ton of detail work to be done to reach that end goal. Without it, it just has too much of a cardboard cutout feel that’s not going to engage players and hold their attention for long.
What this all means for now is that we are going to focus on core game development. We’re going to pull the CT AI mission system and redevelop it for use by CM’s in scenarios and special events. We’re working on new terrain upgrades in both the technology and the art used. We want to implement a character animation system. We want to bring back the old 8 player H2H but expand it both in the number of players and with additional gameplay capabilities. There’s a lot of systems in the game engine that are dated and in need of overhaul.
In hindsight, this is how we should have approached it from the start. This will keep us heading in the right direction while getting improvements out to our current players and speeding up our development. It’s really a chance to reboot our process to get back to our old development cycle that saw things moving at a faster pace.
Are you sure that's what they meant, though? My original thought for what this meant was giving the troops a run cycle and maybe having cycling bolts for machine guns.
-
I-16 Polikarpov fighter in action
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYKD4oD49l4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYKD4oD49l4)
Jesus! Look at that thing flip and flip around!
-
I hope we can get some Chinese National Air Force skins. Should be very interesting with an early China vs Japan set-up. :aok
Too bad we don't have the right Japanese aircraft. As has been discussed elsewhere, China was mostly if not entirely an IJAAF op, so the Zero is only a substitute. We need:
Ki-43
Ki-21
Ki-27
G3M
G4M-1
-
OMG, the RAM'ers got a new all-in-one weapon... really nice plane to add to the Soviet set, wtg HTC :aok
-
DREDIOCK,
Yes, I know all of that. But saying the 1941 I-16-24 with a top speed of 304mph is a 1933 aircraft because the I-16-1 with a top speed of 224mph first flew in 1933 is misleading. That was my point.
-
Fantastic, WTG HTC :x
Can´t wait for the Brewster vs I-16 matchup :rock
-
Squueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeal!
Oooooo
Squueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeal!
-
Jesus! Look at that thing flip and flip around!
That would call for a new pair of shorts...
-
With the turn rate, cannon and "sturdy construction" I think I'm looking at the next ace pilot/hotard ride of choice! :uhoh
Thanks for the new rides Hitech :salute
-
My book says 180 rounds per cannon on the cannon armed versions.
-
If half of Finland has not joined AHII before this HTC is about to get the other half now.
-
I hope everyone noticed it's 20 feet long (6.1m) and wingspan is under 30 feet (9m)
ever try to shoot at an rv8 ?
just about the same size.. probably wiggles around almost as much too :)
-
I hope everyone noticed it's 20 feet long (6.1m) and wingspan is under 30 feet (9m)
ever try to shoot at an rv8 ?
just about the same size.. probably wiggles around almost as much too :)
If it doesn't, I'm sure some will learn quickly how to make it jiggle. :)
Fred
-
If half of Finland has not joined AHII before this HTC is about to get the other half now.
What i have already heard, there will be quite many pilots lining up to open up the subscription once the patch is released.
Cartoon aircombat games aren´t in that high demand here in overall gaming community, we few just make the most noise around here it seems.
Hint to HTC, please release the patch by end of June, so we can drink our salutes to you in Mosquito Meeting´09 Rovaniemi 2-5th July (After we consume enough FPO, we would start to fly Brewster sorties) :salute
Edit.
And i heard Wurzel is waiting eagerly to shoot us down in a I-16 :rock
-
You heard that right big K,
Actually, it went more like, I guarantee that you will see at least one in the LW arena's, which will be me, then Wmaker saying he'd be looking for me in a Brewster, and me telling him to bring it on :D kinda deal.
Actually, that sounds like a really really good idea, i-16 v brewster furball anyone??
Wurzel
-
God DAYUM I might even get into skinning just for this bird!
:rock
-
This was a supprice to me.
Im happy to see more russian planes. But while this was the most used plane by the Russians until like 1940 I would still have prefered to see LaGG3 or Mig3 as the next russian plane to enter.
Tex
-
This thing is going to be a nightmare to shoot down. :eek:
-
Is it update time yet? Im just shaking! :x
-
Another sight that lists the type-18 as having 2 7.62 SHKAS and 2 SHVAK 20mm cannon. Tho I think they are wrong and the cannon never went in the 18s, unless a field modification.
Specifications:
Polikarpov I-16 Type 18
Dimensions:
Wing span: 29 ft. 6.5 in (9.18 m)
Length: 6.13 m (20 ft 1.25 in)
Height: 8 ft 5 in (2.57 m)
Weights:
Empty: 3,110 lb. (1,412 kg)
Operational: 4,034 lb (1,831 kg)
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 288 mph (463 km/h)
Service Ceiling: 29,500 ft. (8,998 m)
Range: 500 miles (805 km)
Powerplant:
Shvetsov M-62R 1,000 hp 9-cylinder radial.
Armament:
Two 7.62 mm machine guns with two 20 mm cannon.
http://www.aviation-history.com/polikarpov/i16.html
-
Another sight that lists the type-18 as having 2 7.62 SHKAS and 2 SHVAK 20mm cannon. Tho I think they are wrong and the cannon never went in the 18s, unless a field modification.
My main source for I-16 info, http://www.wio.ru/index.htm, shows only the models 16, 17, 27 & 28 as having the 2xShKAS + 2xShVAK armament. Of course it doesn't show a model 18 at all; so one wonders if the given source is correct on all things Polikarpov.
-
Nice to have a new plane coming, thank you, HTC!
Now, now... since they're coming in pairs.... what about the Gloster Gladiator and the Fiat CR.42 Falco? :D
-
Gian, your a bad man, you have no idea how much I'd love to see the Gladiator ingame - that would be another fantastic addition.
Yeah, I'd die a lot in it, but it would make for some fun fights - well, except for them dastardly one pass n run pilots lol...
Wurzel
-
Nice to have a new plane coming, thank you, HTC!
Now, now... since they're coming in pairs.... what about the Gloster Gladiator and the Fiat CR.42 Falco? :D
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,266311.0.html
-
Gladdy and CR42, :aok heck yes! Oops, this is an I16 thread... :huh
Isn't it interesting how HTC introduced these two planes as a set
in opposition, (I 16 + Buffalo)... One for each side, I kinda like it!
Wonder what other scenario pairs could be possible?
RC
-
The more I think about it, the more likely that the I-16 will become my fav. de-acker in EW & possibly even MW; especially if it has the ability to carry 6xRS82 ROCKETS!!! :x
-
Like everyone else I welcome the new addition...Thanks HTC.
Speculating I'm going with 2x20mm + 2x7.62 with a choice of 4x7.62. Rockets or 2x 100kg's. Maybe a drop tank.
Thinking out loud I'll wager it flies like the D3a.....optimum word being....."LIKE". Take a D3a up and imagine it being faster. You'll be impressed.
-
Another sight that lists the type-18 as having 2 7.62 SHKAS and 2 SHVAK 20mm cannon. Tho I think they are wrong and the cannon never went in the 18s, unless a field modification.
Yep, my info comes from Yefim Gordon's I-16 -book. He's pretty much the world's leading expert on soviet military aviation. Our's seems to be Type 28/29 -hybrid (in Type 29 configuration in the screenshots, with 2*20mm/2*7.62 it would basically be a 28).
About the turbocharged version, there was an experimental version with TK-turbochargers but it never went to production.
EDIT/Type 29 had options for 6 RS82s and two drop tanks./EDIT
-
This thing is going to be a nightmare to shoot down. :eek:
The more I read up on it, the more I agree with this. :uhoh
-
Dont forget Russia supplied the Chinese with I-16s during their war with Japan. I dont have any exact figures handy but the I-16 had a huge foot print in the war. Maybe the only fighter to go from the start, "Spain", to the end.
So we have them in Spain, in Manchuria, in Finland "winter war" "continuation War", in Barbarossa, in China against japan. I know WW-ll was one big airplane swap but still, the I-16 had a large presence.
At its birth it was revolutionairy, being first cantilever monoplane fighter with retractable landing gear to see squadron service in any country in the world. It flew from '33 into the '50s in some air forces. If we get the 1939 type 28, "which it looks like to me", then its a later model, better armed, a little faster...ect
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/polikarpov-i-16.jpg)
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/i-16-1.jpg)
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/i-16-3.jpg)
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/i-16-5.jpg)
(http://i478.photobucket.com/albums/rr149/Rich46yo/i-16-8.jpg)
-
Will pilot wounds show up in the cockpit still, or will we get to see the gray matter all over the fuselage?
-
should be easier to see when your leaking oil
-
Russians had really fast (and small) aircraft carriers lol
(http://www.palba.cz/forumfoto/albums/SSSR_1918_1945/Z-7_01.jpg)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/Z6_01.JPG)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/aviamatkaPVO.JPG)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/Z-2_01.JPG)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/I16SPB.jpg)
Now we need to TB-3
-
Spanish markings
(http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/4/0/7/1038704.jpg)
-
Russians had really fast (and small) aircraft carriers lol
(http://www.palba.cz/forumfoto/albums/SSSR_1918_1945/Z-7_01.jpg)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/Z6_01.JPG)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/aviamatkaPVO.JPG)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/Z-2_01.JPG)
(http://aerostories.free.fr/appareils/compopara/I16SPB.jpg)
Now we need to TB-3
That would be a very fun gimic to have in AH2. :aok
-
This thing is going to be a nightmare to shoot down. :eek:
Not if this nightmare is flying it..
:D
-
Spanish markings
(http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/4/0/7/1038704.jpg)
I think the 1st person to shoot down a 109 was flying a I-16 for the spanish.
-
<snip> In the negative side, it had poor longitudinal stability, a tendency to stall in a glide, and was exceedingly temperamental, requiring highly skilled airmanship to perform well and not kill the pilot before the enemy had a shot at him.<snip>
Yes, that's what I was thinking.
I wonder if this is included to the fm...
-
Every time they update the home page with info on another goodie that is coming out in the next update, at first im like :x ... but then im like :( because that means it will be that much longer till it actually comes out..
Such a roller coaster.
-
Yes, that's what I was thinking.
I wonder if this is included to the fm...
huge disadvantage if so, considering all the other notoriously twitchy aircraft are modeled (arguable) more forgiving than they really were.
-
Which ones?
-
Which ones?
F4U, P-39 spring to mind.
-
huge disadvantage if so, considering all the other notoriously twitchy aircraft are modeled (arguable) more forgiving than they really were.
The Type 18 though was far more stable than the previous versions but lacked the range of earlier versions due to the more powerful engine used in the Type 18.
ack-ack
-
I'd like to see a Finnish skin for the I-16 Type 18.
(http://www.aviation-history.com/polikarpov/i16_4.jpg)
ack-ack
-
I'd like to see a Gee-Bee skin. :D
-
Yup, there could be a FAF skin for Rata as well, but was there a policy against skins for captured planes, or do I remember wrong?
-
I'd like to see a Gee-Bee skin. :D
Gee Bee and I-16 only look superficially similar:
Gee Bee:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/Gee_Bee_R-1.jpg/800px-Gee_Bee_R-1.jpg)
-
Yes, that's what I was thinking.
I wonder if this is included to the fm...
I've been wondering the same thing.
If modeled correctly. This isnt going to be like the spit, NIKI, the KI84 or the Zero. Your actually going to have to learn how to fly this thing. Much like the P47 for example.
If modeled anything even resembling accurate it should not be an EZmode plane by any stretch of the imagination.
I also think your goig ot find two kinds of pilots of it.
Like with the P-40, P-47 and a few others. There will be a few who fly it really really really well.
And the rest who dont. Your not going to stumble across many if any mediocre I-16 pilots. Just like you dont usually come across and mediocre P40 pilots.
Its going to be. Either your really good with it. Or your not.
And like the P40 An experienced player will be able to te the difference in the first few seconds.
Also Im wondering. I've read that in spite of having armor protection. the fuel tanks had a tendancy to catch fire when hit. Wondering if thats going to be figued in as well.
-
Great another never used early war plane with no oxygen (heck, this one is open cockpit for xsakes) that will be flown at 24k during FSOs.
And my He111 is still nowhere to be found :cry
-
Great another never used early war plane with no oxygen (heck, this one is open cockpit for xsakes) that will be flown at 24k during FSOs.
How does the open cockpit equal no oxygen? :huh
I-16 very much had an oxygen system...
-
Cool thanks guys, yeah i didnt take into account the x2 fuel burn aswell.
Im not TOO worryed about it tho, granted we have the ever so perfect EBT to fly with, not to mention no cross winds and such.
I am very* interested in the max speed/alt needed, how it will handle at such speed/alt and how much fuel will be burned a minute at full power/wep "if any" settings. (That sweet spot)
Not to mention if we are indeed getting another "GAH!" hybread with a good engine and good fuel ration how much it will effect this A/C for historic use and sanarios.
THANK YOU HTC FOR BRINGING US MORE EARLY BIRDS!!!! :rock :rock :x
:EDIT: In another ww2 online game i use to play "cant remember the name think it was fighter ace" the i-16 had a oxygen system, that if not turned on or ran out, the pilot would black out "think pilot wound that never recovers above 10k"
Interesting.
-
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
-
How does the open cockpit equal no oxygen? :huh
I-16 very much had an oxygen system...
Later models did.
It kinda makes me wish for getting two models of the I-16. The types 4,5,6, could all easily turn into our LA-7 and were light with almost the same climb rates as the later, up-gunned and up-engined types. Hopefully we'll get at least two different gun packages to pick from.
-
Later models did.
Oxygen system was there from the Type 5 onwards. Makes absolutely no sense to limit yourself to an operational cealing of ~12000ft, even in the mid 30's.
-
No mood to fight today.