polikarpov I-16 - Aircraft of World War II

Neto · 11-01-2007, 05:18 PM

It is true that I-16 was one of the most monoeuvre fighters in ww2 ??

HoHun · 11-01-2007, 06:16 PM

Hi Neto,

>It is true that I-16 was one of the most monoeuvre fighters in ww2 ??

Yes.

Generally, fighters became less manoeuvrable from 1930 to 1945. The reason is that they were designed for high speed, not for manoeuvrability.

The Polikarpov I-16 was in fact designed for high-speed in the early 1930s, when it was less manoeuvrable than the I-15 series biplanes.

Compared to a Me 109 in the early 1940s, the I-16 was much more manoeuvrable (at low speeds), but much slower.

(The 1940s I-16 variants were less manouvrable, but faster than the early 1930s I-16 variants.)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

The Basket · 11-01-2007, 06:20 PM

Yes. but it was outdated by 1941 and agility can only go so far.

The 109 Fredrich was much faster and could outpower the rata at will. But its agility and small size must have made it a hard target.

comiso90 · 11-01-2007, 06:34 PM

If maneuverability were king in 1943, they still be using the Fokker DR. 1 Triplane, albeit with 20 MM cannons..

.

evangilder · 11-01-2007, 10:06 PM

The I-16 was certainly maneuverable, but with a 19 foot long fuselage and 20 foot wingspan, there's not a whole lot to move around. Couple that with the 1,000 HP motor on the front and it is a real unstable pony. Turn too quickly, it will spin. But from what I have heard, if you can fly an I-16, you can fly anything.

Here is one of about a half a dozen survivors when it visited our museum.

It took a hearty Russian to fly in an open cockpit in those Russian winters! BRRR!

Neto · 11-03-2007, 08:34 AM

i stay amased with this video..
YouTube - Polikarpov Fighters
look the impressive roll rate of the I 16 exlent!.

Graeme · 11-03-2007, 06:37 PM

Soviet aircraft designer V V Nikitin produced two aircraft that looked like 'miniatures' of the I-16 and I-15. The NV-2bis had a 300hp engine that produced "near fighter like performance". Not adopted, but it was intended to be a 'military training fighter'.

Looking similar to the I-15, the UTI-6 was a "miniature aerobatic plane".

DBII · 11-05-2007, 01:52 PM

EVANGILDER, you beat me to the posting. I also have photos of two I16 and the Biplane version. I wish that I had your len. Those plans are so small that neither my 300mm or 600mm was much good. White 45 had just touched down when a cross wind hit it. I was surprised that the plane did not flip over. Your photos are much better, I had to many people around mine and then again later packed inside of a hanger.

11-01-2007, 05:18 PM	#1
Neto Banned Join Date: May 2007 Location: Lisbon Posts: 36	polikarpov I-16 It is true that I-16 was one of the most monoeuvre fighters in ww2 ??

11-01-2007, 06:34 PM	#4
comiso90 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: FL Posts: 3,529	If maneuverability were king in 1943, they still be using the Fokker DR. 1 Triplane, albeit with 20 MM cannons.. . __________________ http://www.BOOKSonWAR.com/ .

11-01-2007, 10:06 PM	#5
evangilder "Shooter" Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Moorpark, CA Posts: 15,421	The I-16 was certainly maneuverable, but with a 19 foot long fuselage and 20 foot wingspan, there's not a whole lot to move around. Couple that with the 1,000 HP motor on the front and it is a real unstable pony. Turn too quickly, it will spin. But from what I have heard, if you can fly an I-16, you can fly anything. Here is one of about a half a dozen survivors when it visited our museum. It took a hearty Russian to fly in an open cockpit in those Russian winters! BRRR! __________________ For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return. Leonardo Da Vinci

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

11-01-2007, 06:16 PM	#2
HoHun Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,765	Hi Neto, >It is true that I-16 was one of the most monoeuvre fighters in ww2 ?? Yes. Generally, fighters became less manoeuvrable from 1930 to 1945. The reason is that they were designed for high speed, not for manoeuvrability. The Polikarpov I-16 was in fact designed for high-speed in the early 1930s, when it was less manoeuvrable than the I-15 series biplanes. Compared to a Me 109 in the early 1940s, the I-16 was much more manoeuvrable (at low speeds), but much slower. (The 1940s I-16 variants were less manouvrable, but faster than the early 1930s I-16 variants.) Regards, Henning (HoHun)

11-01-2007, 06:20 PM	#3
The Basket Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 626	Yes. but it was outdated by 1941 and agility can only go so far. The 109 Fredrich was much faster and could outpower the rata at will. But its agility and small size must have made it a hard target.

11-03-2007, 08:34 AM	#6
Neto Banned Join Date: May 2007 Location: Lisbon Posts: 36	i stay amased with this video.. YouTube - Polikarpov Fighters look the impressive roll rate of the I 16 exlent!.

11-03-2007, 06:37 PM	#7
Graeme Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 2,082	Soviet aircraft designer V V Nikitin produced two aircraft that looked like 'miniatures' of the I-16 and I-15. The NV-2bis had a 300hp engine that produced "near fighter like performance". Not adopted, but it was intended to be a 'military training fighter'. Looking similar to the I-15, the UTI-6 was a "miniature aerobatic plane".

11-05-2007, 01:52 PM	#8
DBII Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Texas Posts: 1,774	EVANGILDER, you beat me to the posting. I also have photos of two I16 and the Biplane version. I wish that I had your len. Those plans are so small that neither my 300mm or 600mm was much good. White 45 had just touched down when a cross wind hit it. I was surprised that the plane did not flip over. Your photos are much better, I had to many people around mine and then again later packed inside of a hanger.