Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /membri/massimotessitori/sovietwarplanes/board/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
The cockpit of the I-16 - site page
Crea sito
Sovietwarplanes
June 19, 2021, 11:12:18 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: This forum replaces the old sovietwarplanes.com whose domain has expired in January 2017. It has been updated with the posts of the year 2016.
The new location of the site 'Sovietwarplanes pages' is at http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
Author Topic: The cockpit of the I-16 - site page  (Read 1653 times)
Psy06
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« on: January 09, 2021, 06:32:44 PM »

https://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/details/cockpit-canopy/cockpit-canopy.htm

Massimo, please be very careful and skeptical about any 3D development, even mine Smiley

I'm about this:
https://www.mudspike.com/chucks-guides-dcs-i-16-ishak/ this page allows to downloadan excellent PDF guide for piloting 3D I-16 on DCS. Excellent and well commented drawings of the cockpit. In English.

The guy who made the guide is certainly a fine fellow, but the development of the I-16 for the DKS itself is far from perfect. There are a lot of mistakes both in the plane and in the reconstruction of the cockpit, and as far as I can judge, they were inspired by my old development for the Il-2 Battle of Moscow, which, in general, is also not without sin, but these guys not only copied my mistakes, but also made a bunch of their own.

More, I must warn you that the plane layout in this guide is a total fake, like a number of other layouts of Soviet aircraft, it was made in the 70s by one Western artist, he simply fable them, these layouts have nothing in common with real aircrafts.
« Last Edit: January 09, 2021, 06:49:20 PM by Psy06 » Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #1 on: January 09, 2021, 08:57:24 PM »

Hi Psy,
thank you for your warning. I had a superficial look only at this pdf. My first impression is that the 3D model is beautiful, but a bit out of proportions: the cowling looks too narrow and/or the windshield too wide.
What is wrong, exactly, about the cockpit? Can the pdf  be of help in the interpretation of historical photos, or is it misleading even for this purpose?
Regards
Massimo
« Last Edit: January 10, 2021, 07:21:03 AM by Massimo Tessitori » Logged
Psy06
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« Reply #2 on: January 11, 2021, 03:44:47 PM »

Hi Psy,
thank you for your warning. I had a superficial look only at this pdf. My first impression is that the 3D model is beautiful, but a bit out of proportions: the cowling looks too narrow and/or the windshield too wide.
What is wrong, exactly, about the cockpit? Can the pdf  be of help in the interpretation of historical photos, or is it misleading even for this purpose?
Regards
Massimo

The best it will do is to recognize the various avionics components if you have a shortage of photographs of such things. In general, this model cannot be used as an example for one's own historical works. Even for just I-16 pits, it is necessary to do major work from scratch, everything that is now very conditionally considers this subject. Unfortunately, I cannot give you examples, while this is a secret. Just for illustration, Maslov's thick book about the I-16 is actually very superficial, has many factual errors, and there are large gaps that are not considered at all, it does not even describe several serial types of I-16. I don’t know whether you know or not, the current flying I-16s have noticeable discrepancies in appearance relative to archival materials.

I can say something about the insboards. The photo of the board with a false panel, as well as the drawing from the technical description of the RSI3 radio, cannot be taken as a fact, the fact is that it has not yet been established that such boards were included in the series at all. Andrey Averin, you seem to know him, thinks that a board with a false panel was just tested on one I-16 to develop such boards for the I-180. And the fact that a drawing for the book was made on the experimental board is a common thing in Russian documentation, in fact, this is not a drawing of a board, but the installation of a radio. So it goes.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2021, 04:03:57 PM by Psy06 » Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #3 on: January 11, 2021, 08:16:14 PM »

Hi Psy,
Quote
The photo of the board with a false panel, as well as the drawing from the technical description of the RSI3 radio, cannot be taken as a fact, the fact is that it has not yet been established that such boards were included in the series at all. Andrey Averin, you seem to know him, thinks that a board with a false panel was just tested on one I-16 to develop such boards for the I-180.
'False panel'... is the black thin plate to overpose to the instrument panel?
Quote
the current flying I-16s have noticeable discrepancies in appearance relative to archival materials.
I've seen that they have no flaps and have vents for ventral exhaust pipes as Type 5 and early 10, but the ailerons are short and the cowling resembles to that of Type 24. They resemble to Type 24 from the top and side, but to Type 5 from below.
I'm in contact with Averin on these days about I-16s.
Regards
Massimo
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2021, 07:27:04 AM »

I was forgetting, it has an engine M-25V instead of M-25A, recognizable for the inlet and outlet of the oil cooler.  Probably the plane was updated around 1940 or 1941, there are photos of other Type 5 showing the same, particularly on those that were modified for ground attack role.
Logged
Psy06
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2021, 12:57:39 PM »

'False panel'... is the black thin plate to overpose to the instrument panel?
I've seen that they have no flaps and have vents for ventral exhaust pipes as Type 5 and early 10, but the ailerons are short and the cowling resembles to that of Type 24. They resemble to Type 24 from the top and side, but to Type 5 from below.
I'm in contact with Averin on these days about I-16s.
Regards
Massimo

Board, yes, it is literally translated from the Russian term.

This one:
http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/details/cockpit-canopy/24instr2.jpg
http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/details/cockpit-canopy/details29.jpg


Plane, what you have listed is a long-known thing, I'm actually talking about something else. They have completely inauthentic engine hoods along the lines and panels, and the lines of the gargot do not match either. With all that I know about the construction of these samples, I think there are other inaccuracies with the authenticity there and still. For example, I compared it with good archive photos and it seems to me that even the shape of the tail is not very correct there.

btw
this is I-180, this mistake started with some kind of bad signature
http://massimotessitori.altervista.org/sovietwarplanes/pages/i16/details/cockpit-canopy/headrest.jpg
« Last Edit: January 12, 2021, 01:09:03 PM by Psy06 » Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1623



« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2021, 04:02:34 PM »

They have completely inauthentic engine hoods along the lines and panels

Is that why the New Zealand I-16s seem to have an unusually large gap at the rear of the cowling (between the edge of the cowling and the fuselage) or is that correct? The gap seems much larger than what is shown in wartime photos of the types 5 and 10; on the other hand, the cowlings on the NZ aircraft seem to have the correct taper. Maybe I'm being fooled by the shadow of the edge of the cowling?

This is a very interesting thread; thank you, Dimitri, for starting it. I'm working on two I-16s right now. They are both conversions of the Amodel 1/72 UTI-4 to single-seat aircraft.

Best regards;
John
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2021, 04:15:11 PM »

An I-180? Thank you, now I have to find something similar that is surely of an I-16. I have a drawing from the manual that could be good for this, but it has a wide backrest cushion that is not always visible on photos.
Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2021, 05:40:23 PM »

Probably I'll have to make drawings of the replicas aside the production versions.
Logged
Psy06
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« Reply #9 on: January 12, 2021, 07:37:46 PM »

Better than a thousand words, at the bottom t24, mirrored.
Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1623



« Reply #10 on: January 12, 2021, 07:51:18 PM »

Very interesting - thank you, Dimitri! Comparison of the two images shows clearly some differences between the original I-16 and the restored version. I see not only a difference in the gap at the rear of the cowling that I referred to in my other post, but also differences between the shapes of the exhaust outlet recesses in the cowling panels, and in the vertical location of these outlets as well.

Again, thank you very much - the comparison of the images is very helpful.

Cheers;
John
« Last Edit: January 12, 2021, 08:06:47 PM by John Thompson » Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #11 on: January 12, 2021, 08:17:20 PM »

There is something different in the root of the windshield, probably it's wider and appears deeper.
About the cowling, I think that the engine needed more cooling air than the original so they had to enlarge the outlet gap.  The propeller seems more massive. Is the engine more powerful?
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 09:53:01 AM by Massimo Tessitori » Logged
Psy06
Full Member
***
Posts: 117


« Reply #12 on: January 13, 2021, 10:22:09 AM »

M-63 is more powerful than ASh-62IR

Massimo, please look to private.
« Last Edit: January 13, 2021, 05:53:48 PM by Psy06 » Logged
Massimo Tessitori
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 6173


« Reply #13 on: January 13, 2021, 10:31:19 PM »

ASh-62 IR... with reduction gear? For what i Know, the original M-62 and 63 hadn't this. It should add a considerable lenghth to the engine.
Logged
John Thompson
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1623



« Reply #14 on: January 14, 2021, 09:55:24 PM »

ASh-62 IR... with reduction gear? For what i Know, the original M-62 and 63 hadn't this. It should add a considerable lenghth to the engine.

Is that the reason the cowling face section looks slightly deeper (in the front to back direction) on the restored aircraft as compared to the GPW photo of an original I-16? It definitely looks different from the original, both in depth and with those rivets or whatever they are ahead of the cowling band.

John
Logged
Pages: [1] 2
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!