Kevin J
Banned
Yes best was I-16 type 24 at 303 mph.
I-16 fighter copied widely and early
- Thread starter tomo pauk
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
How many other countries knew about the I-16 before 1937?
This starts to get the heart of the matter.
When did foreign countries KNOW about the I-16 or know more than fuzzy photograph from a May Day fly past?
And which I-16?
The prototype with the Bristol Jupiter engine (or licence built version?) or the one with the licenced Wright Cyclone?
Which turns into the M25 (several variations) and the M62 doesn't show up until 1938/39, at least in quantity.
Some of the proposed countries may want to use other engines like Bristol Mercuries or P& W Hornets or Wright Cyclones.
The I-16 also had some handling characteristics that were, shall we say, less than stellar. Wither some of the minor counties were willing to put up with that in return for the performance another question.
Judging by the date of that test by 1 Squadron, in France, the Hurricane used would not be fueled with 100 oct, and would not be equiped with a Rotol Constant speed prop. The 100 oct fuel bumps up the Hurricane performance a lot under 15k . The Rotol prop boosts top speed from about 320 to 328 mph.
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
The report states that the test Hurricane did have a constant speed airscrew, it does not say if Rotol or de havilland.
100 octane fuel does a lot from 0 to 10,000ft and then slowly diminishes to around 16,500-17,000ft.
the 40kph or so of speed advantage at lower altitudes has dropped to 10-12kph advantage at around 15,000ft. and disappears much above 17-18,000ft.
100 octane fuel does a lot from 0 to 10,000ft and then slowly diminishes to around 16,500-17,000ft.
the 40kph or so of speed advantage at lower altitudes has dropped to 10-12kph advantage at around 15,000ft. and disappears much above 17-18,000ft.
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
My Apologies, it seems that the I-16 was displayed at an international airshow in Milan in 1935.
This is obviously with one of the M-25 engines and two machine guns.
This is obviously with one of the M-25 engines and two machine guns.
- Thread starter
- #26
IIRC Mussolini was trying to 'cook' something with Soviets in the 1930s - nothing romantic, he needed money - but that mostly bolied down to Soviet buying licence and perhaps a few guns of 100 mm calibre, installed on 'minizini' (Minisini) mounts.
Okay, now that we're with Italians - how about the I-16 with A.74 engine and two 13mm guns for them? Service entry 1937. (this requires the Italians not being in love with biplane fighters, or trying both biplanes and monoplanes and see what works better)
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
Not quite, from Wiki so...................
Fiat G.50
"Gabrielli started work on the design in April 1935.[8][9] The design was state-of-the-art for the era; on its introduction, it would become the most advanced fighter to be produced in Italy.[1] Construction of two prototypes began mid-summer 1936"
First flight 26 February 1937
The I-16 was shown in Milan on October of 1935. By the time the italians could test fly one, negotiate a license, set up a factory and get it into production where are you on the Firat G.50 time line?
Castoldi had been doing a few paper studies in 1935 and the Italians issued the specification/requirement for a monoplane fighter in Feb 1936 that would lead to the MC 200.
Italy, with it's strong (for the mid 1930s) aircraft industry is unlikely to adopt a foreign aircraft.
Fiat G.50
"Gabrielli started work on the design in April 1935.[8][9] The design was state-of-the-art for the era; on its introduction, it would become the most advanced fighter to be produced in Italy.[1] Construction of two prototypes began mid-summer 1936"
First flight 26 February 1937
The I-16 was shown in Milan on October of 1935. By the time the italians could test fly one, negotiate a license, set up a factory and get it into production where are you on the Firat G.50 time line?
Castoldi had been doing a few paper studies in 1935 and the Italians issued the specification/requirement for a monoplane fighter in Feb 1936 that would lead to the MC 200.
Italy, with it's strong (for the mid 1930s) aircraft industry is unlikely to adopt a foreign aircraft.
GrauGeist
Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
Well, the Soviets did have the Italian aircraft engineer Robert Bartini (Tu-2, Yer-2)
Admiral Beez
Major
I like the Jockey. Do you think it could have been a replacement for the FAA's Flycatcher instead of the Nimrod?
Kevin J
Banned
If that can land on a carrier then so could a Venom, but I don't think it would fit on either the Ark Royal or first 3 Illustrious class carriers lifts.
Admiral Beez
Major
I hate to threadjack the I-16 topic so I've created a new thread.
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
IF the West's (or outside of the Soviet Union) first look was at the October 1935 Milan AIr show then some of the Major countries look like this:
Britain, Hawker Hurricane flies the very next month, The Spitfire 5 months after the show. The Blackburn Skua prototypes were already on order. The ROc was ordered 3-4 months after the show.
France, the two prototypes of the D 510 had both flown in 1934, granted they do not have retracting landing gear. But with their more powerful engines they are faster than I-16 displayed at MIlan (it most likely used an M-22 engine, licenced G-R 9 cylinder which was a lincend Bristol Jupiter). The Prototype Ms 405 had flown 2 months before the show.
Germany, The Prototype 109 had flown 4 months before the show the He 112 had flown one month before the show.
Italy, as already mentioned, had several programs in progress at the time of the show.
The US, the Hawk 75 first flew 4-5 months before the show and the P-35 first flew 2 months before the show.
Granted the I-16 was in production and not a prototype but would months if not several years before any minor country would have been able to get a licence, convert the drawings, tool up and get the I-16 into even small scale production. While potential customers might not have known about the handling problems or weak landing gear any decent pilot (most AIr attache) could look at the 156 sq ft wing and the weight and make a close guess as to the landing speed. Early ones landed (or stalled?) at 68mph and had no flaps. This might have been a deal breaker for some of the smaller countries who were used to the slower landing speeds of biplanes. Buying fighters that cannot safely operate from your airfields might be a deal breaker.
