Military Review

Yakovlev vs. Polikarpov: True or Fiction?

229



In the article about the fighter LaGG-3, some readers asked a question, albeit slightly off topic (yes, there is a little, quite past), but deserving a separate analysis.

We are talking about the fighters Polikarpov I-180 and I-185, which allegedly surpassed everything that was available at that time in development. And if it were not for the evil genius of Yakovlev, who “stalked” these planes, the alignment would have been completely different.

Let's analyze everything again with a cool head. Basically, it is simple.

Let all supporters of the idea of ​​“Yakovlev spread rot to Polikarpov” calmly appreciate the situation. To begin with, yes, at the time of 1940, Alexander Yakovlev was special, close to the emperor. The young designer, and even "on trust" in power.

However, the same Shahurin, rehabilitated and caressed by Khrushchev, never in his memoirs, he did not confirm that Yakovlev, being his deputy, “snatched” something for himself. Moreover, there were mountains of complaints about Yakovlev, while at that time they were looked at somewhat differently than they are now. And checked.

Confirmations are available from Molotov. Felix Chuev published conversations with him, there they talked a lot about what. Including on similar topics.

And the most important thing. To get "up" in those years was very easy. I think no one will argue on this topic. But how about a hold? But it was much more difficult to stay. As Stalin led the personnel policy, I think you should not repeat. The fact that Yakovlev, who had fallen on the post of deputy director, was trying to get rid of her with all his strength, is also a fact. As a fact, the Yakovlev Design Bureau was by no means the largest and most sophisticated in terms of technology. Everything is also confirmed.

Yakovlev had many ill-wishers; don’t go to your grandmother! What issues did the Yakovlev supervise over at the People’s Commissariat of the Aviation Industry? Yakovlev, being a designer "on trust", was engaged in pilot aircraft construction. And it was smart and right. But the issues of mass production were dealt with by completely different people: Pyotr Vasilyevich Dementiev and Pavel Andreevich Voronin. People who made for the development of our aviation industry is plentiful.

Could Yakovlev "kill" the plane at the development stage?

On time. Moreover, it was his responsibility. And it spawned a bunch of detractors. There is no need to go far for examples.

Moskalev Alexander Sergeevich. The author of 35 designs and modifications of aircraft, the founder of the swept form of the delta wing. The creator of the unique CAM-5, CAM-7, CAM-10, CAM-13 aircraft. Built 23 aircraft, but none was built serially.

In his memoirs, Moskalev directly blames Yakovlev that he did not put his CAM-13 aircraft into action. The plane was really unique, created by the "push-pull", with two engines. Had very good flight characteristics.



It would seem that Yakovlev is a pest. And no! The CAM-13 was a very interesting machine, but its armament did not leave much to be desired, but was completely sad. The maximum that managed to squeeze into the plane - four ShKASA. About large-caliber machine guns and the more guns were not discussed at all. And Moskalev himself admitted this. But - his "fe" remarked.

Pashinin, Florov, Borovkov, Yatsenko, Bisnovat - all built planes. And they tried to compete with Yakovlev, Lavochkin, Mikoyan.

But, for example, the Bisnovat SK-1 aircraft, which flew 100 km / h faster than the Yak-1, could not carry weapons at all. A radiator was the wing. An interesting record aircraft, from what Bisnovat called him a fighter, did not become one.

Yakovlev vs. Polikarpov: True or Fiction?


And so you can find on each item for those who are "offended" by Yakovlev. It is easier to blame someone else than to admit one’s own mistakes.

Polikarpov.



Here is a completely different alignment. Pupil of the great Sikorsky. "King of fighters". Polikarpov developed and built the basis of the country's air security: Р-5, И-5, И-15, И-153, И-16.

Not without problems, of course. Both the “alien class element” and Sikorsky were remembered, and Polikarpov turned out to be in the CDB-39.

But the case was closed, released, given the opportunity to do what he loved.

The fact that Polikarpov was not a fighter-excellent pupil of the front, is also a fact. But, on the other hand, weak-willed and spineless in those days simply did not survive. Peculiar natural selection was present in all spheres of life, and aircraft designers are no exception.

I would single out Polikarpov and Bartini aside, since both showed a slightly different approach to their work. But this is really, except for the origin, not to explain.

Thanks to the articles of a fair amount of writers whose names it is indecent to cite here, Polikarpov was fairly so idealized. The image of a genius who is absolutely not fit to fight. This is after the "sharashka" something and time?

Well and the main thing. "King of fighters", whose aircraft did not go into the series solely because of Yakovlev. A sort of poor, offended by all.

Employment record: from February 1933 to July 1936, Polikarpov works as head of the brigade No. 2 of the Central Design Bureau based on the aircraft factory No. 39. This is the very "sharaga".

August 11 1936 Polikarpov was appointed chief designer of two plants at once: No. 84 in Khimki and No. 21 in Gorky. Polikarp KB (104 man) was relocated to plant number 84.

Fine? From the sharashka to the GK of two plants. Weak? I would not say. Weak would not put in those days.

Let's get on the planes now.

And-16 was a very advanced machine for its time. But here it is worth referring to the pilots who flew it. Memoirs - cars. The essence is the same. Difficult to manage the plane. But if you mastered and could fly - you are a god. You will fly on everything.

The plane turned out to be unnecessarily difficult to master flight crew. Fact. how armory the platform was a strong middling. Two synchronized ShKAS machine guns and something else in the wings (from machine guns to cannons) is still not very good.

And, by the way, Polikarpov was also blamed for having a personal “PR manager” pushing planes through the Kremlin. This, of course, is about the pilot-pilot Valeria Chkalov. Well this is, as we have already found out, crap of that time.

And-16 was a harsh aircraft, not without flaws. The main thing - the wings were destroyed, could not withstand even normal overloads. It was a "trick", approximately, as the failure of the skin on the Yak-1.

In the memoirs of S. Abrosov "Air war in the sky of Spain" refers to a large number of non-combat losses due to the destruction of the wing. 10% of the total number of dead pilots.

The wing turned out to be weak on the I-180 too. This was reported after test flights 1939, test pilot Stepan Suprun. But on i-180 a bit later.



And 17. The blame for this plane was also laid on the NKAP, read, Yakovlev. Not brought to the series, and what was the plane! But sorry, he just was! Yes, work on equipping the I-16 with a narrow water-cooling motor was under way, but it was going on like this ... Neither shaky nor swath. In order initiative CB.

Moreover, when problems arose with the landing gear, the solution was found instantly: the chassis was made non-retractable, and the tests continued Engine! There were absolutely no specific results, respectively, the NKAP did not include the I-17 in the plan for the experienced machines for the 1939 year. And there it was not even before him.

The fact that Polikarpov suddenly threw the plane into a real engine, and I noticed in the previous article that we didn’t develop a motor for a plane, but a plane for a motor, was it also the fault of NCAP? You do not get, you know, to work Polikarpov!

Here, by the way, the picture. Polikarpov does not want to refine his AND-17, which looks painfully similar to Spitfire and Me-109. But none of the NKAP dares to reproach him, everyone understands that the I-180 and I-185 are more promising.

“Terpily” I do not see. I see a designer who himself chose what to work on. It would have turned out - orders, Stalin prizes and so on. It did not work ... Well, they also knew how to "encourage." Because everyone did not just work, but plowed.

But I still see how many "historicalIn his works, frothing at the mouth, some writers tell how bad things were with Yakovlev. "Raw" planes on which suicide bombers flew and the like "truth".

In no way I will not condemn anyone, everyone has their own truth.

Yes, with the I-26 (the future Yak-1) everything was not smooth. Yulian Piontkovsky, test pilot of the Yakovlev Design Bureau, in the first series of factory tests in 43 flights made 15 forced landings! And 27 April 1940 was a disaster that took the life of this wonderful pilot.


Julian Piontkovsky


Presumably, this happened due to the destruction of the center-section plating caused by the chassis failure from the locks. But they say that the reason was the two "barrels" that Piontkovsky spun, just out of boredom, before the next landing ...

Yes, the death of a test pilot does not honor the design bureau. But, on the other hand, everyone who pokes it with Yakovlev, quietly forget that the two Polikarpov projects, I-180 and I-185, took THREE testers to life. Died: V. Chkalov, T. Susa, V. Stepanchonok.


Valery Chkalov



Thomas susie



Vasily Stepanchonok


The same problems of reliability, durability, speed ...

Yes, I would like to talk for a long time about the fact that the car should go "like candy", but in 1940, in our country, no one had any doubt that there would be war, and it would be soon. Worked as they could.

All OKB faced the same set of problems, made approximately the same mistakes and made similar decisions. But they went their way.

I would say that Yakovlev was either lucky or his instincts were. But his bureau was pretty much more operational than others. Perhaps because he worked as a constructor alone. Not a duet, like Mikoyan and Gurevich, and not a triumvirate, like Lavochkin, Gorbunov and Gudkov.

And attempts to push through on state tests and (and suddenly!) In a series of "raw" car were generally all KB. This is normal, I hope you don’t need to tell why? Order did not press anyone yet.

And at least criticize, but I don’t see here oil paintings “bad Yakovlev and good Polikarpov”. I do not see yet.

But if you look a little further, you start to clutch at all.

Polikarpov was really the “King of Fighters”. And its 185 was really just a great car. And, go to the series, the Germans would have to be tight.

But there is one small nuance.

There was nothing to build the Royal X-NUMX fighter.



Moreover, it was clear in 1940 year. And Yakovlev had nothing to do with it. Here the numbers speak for themselves.

1940 year, 1 quarter. Of the 10 000 of the aircraft industry put to the People's Commissariat of duralumin, only 7 307 t was actually supplied, and the main factor limiting the production of duralumin was the lack of aluminum.

Plant No.95, a leading enterprise for dural casting, in January 1940 received 69% of the planned amount of aluminum, and in February - 54,5%.

The NCAA order for high-alloyed steels in 1940 was satisfied by 93%, for aluminum - from 31% to 92% (depending on the grade).

On ignition devices, the NCAP plan was performed on 55%, and on armament - on 81%.

What to say about what happened in 1941, after the loss of Ukrainian factories?

But even in the non-military 1940 year, the NCAP of the USSR consumed almost 45% of all aluminum, almost all magnesium and 93% of high alloy steels. Without a chance of increase, all reserves at that time were used.

I think this is the main answer to the question why. Because at that time we simply could not afford to build an all-metal fighter. There was nothing.

What was the way out? Yes, the simplest. Create a fighter of mixed designs with acceptable characteristics. Can? Can.

By the way, our opponents came to this at the end of the war, when even projects of jet planes were accepted only if they had wood. The winged metal of the Germans ended. Examples? Heinkels Non-162 and 176. "Bachem" WA-349.

It is difficult to say who was very clever in the NKAP or whether Stalin was clever. And he understood that after the start of the war the metal would simply disappear at cosmic speed. And he will go mainly to the production of bombers. Because they, too, will start to fade.

Do you think Yakovlev did not understand that an all-metal plane is better than a wooden one? Or Lavochkin? It is a pity that Nikolai Nikolayevich Polikarpov did not leave his memories. Yakovlev can perfectly read on this topic in the “Purpose of Life”, and in “Notes ...”.

What and how Polikarpov thought in terms of duralumin and other metals, we unfortunately do not know. What did Yakovlev - known. Maximum removed deficient metal from the structure.



"Kremlin suck"? Our pilots on wooden coffins fought against the Germans on the CM "Messers", and Yakovlev ... We will not hurry.

1940 year. NCAA in all its factories manufactured more than 2 000 all-metal (CM) aircraft. 1106 DB-3F, 100 Ap-2 and around 1000 Sat.

1942 year. Plants produce more than 3 thousands of CM-aircraft. 2524 Pe-2 and Pe-3 and 858 Il-4.

What does this mean? But about what! Besides the fact that we came under the Lend-Lease, the NKAP robbed all the fighter factories WITHOUT EXCEPTION in terms of metal-cutting and metal-working machine park.

No metal - no machine needed. Is it logical Full Probably, the machines selected together with the workers.

We look and see: Yakovlev launches a series of Yak-9 with metal wing spars (only spars) in the second half of 1942. But in parallel with the Yak-9, the Yak-7B continues to be produced with a FULLY wooden wing at 153 plant in Novosibirsk until December 1943, and at 82 plant in Moscow until July 44.

Yak-XNUMHU with all-metal wing began to release only after the war.

Lavochkin? No better. La 5FN with metal spars was ready in March 1943 of the year, the decision to launch it in the series was issued in June of the same 1943 of the year. And in the series, this much-needed Air Force aircraft went in May 1944.

Sabotage? Not. It's simple: there was no metal-cutting equipment and metalworkers at plant number XXUMX. After receiving the machines and specialists, the aircraft began to be produced.

You can search for a long time who is to blame, but the truth is there, in the lack of materials and equipment. I am sure that both reasons took place.

So even the adoption of the I-185 first of all would require reworking the CM wing on the wing of a mixed design. And rushed ... It would have caused an increase in the weight of the aircraft and further deterioration of its characteristics. Perhaps we would have to solve the problem of weight by arming. Lavochkin did so.

Yakovlev? Here he acted simply. "I blinded him from what was." The plane of those materials that were available and with the engines that were in the series, and, really. But about engines in general, a special conversation.

And, by the way, Yakovlev was in the groundwork of the I-30.


With five fire points and under the motor M-107. But he did not wait for 107, and launched aircraft with M-105.


Yak-1 with M-105P


And here for NKAP is a very simple choice: either the Yak-1, which is already flying, with the cheapest and most profitable wooden structure, or the I-185. Which will need to be redone from CM to a tree. And what will be there at the exit, the grandmother said in two.

But the wing is still half the battle. Engine.

There was no engine for the 185 either.

In general, to be fair, the engine was not yet for I-180. And-180 was planned under the engine M-88, which was on paper. I-180-2 was charged with an M-87B engine, according to which the calculations were theoretical.

Then M-88 went into a series, and then it began ... It turned out that the engine was not a cake at all. Or rather - complete rubbish. Complaints on M-88 swept the river. The motors gave less power than the M-87B, guzzled gasoline twice (they did not solve this problem, but at least found the cause - the AK-88 carburetor), and they also burned with enviable regularity.

As a result of all this in the summer of 1940, the M-88 motors were discontinued. Production was restored only with 13.11.1940. Given the entire range of engine problems, if the X-NUMX would hypothetically go into series, it is unlikely that thousands of fighters would be released, as some say. Rather - as the Su-180, who had the same engine and a very short fate.

Now by i-xnumx. Polikarpov developed the aircraft under the motor M-185. In addition to M-90, the use of AM-90, M-37 and M-120 was assumed. The list perfectly describes the moment: none of these engines were serially produced.

The M-90 engine passed 50-hour tests only in March 1942 of the year, M-71 - in February 41-th, and M-82 - in April of the same year. In reality, in the 1941 year, M-71 worked out the failure of the entire 12-15 watch. It's all clear, but we're talking about 1940, the year ...

And there are documents that say that Polikarp's OKB had the following work plan for 1941 year:

1.TIC-2 with motor AM-37 - 3 ind.
2. ITP with motor M-107 - 2 ind.
3. And-185 with motor M-90 - 1 ind.
4. And-185 with motor M-71 - 2 ind.
5. And-185 with motor M-81 - 1 ind.
6. And-190 with motor M-88 - 1 ind.
7. And-185 with motor M-82 - 2 ind.
8. Glider "C" - 2 ind.
9. Aircraft "ODB" - 2 ind.

The list is more than indicative. That Stalin is credited with the "historical" phrase about the fact that "Polikarpov ran out of steam" ... Do you agree? Me not.

Sorry, but as if the work is more than a lot planned. Yes, we omit the problems with the engines, and then you can think about the presence of a certain fraud.

Where is Polikarpov exhausted, is not entirely clear. In the list you can see a rather extensive work on four fighters and one bomber at once. This, in my opinion, no one had.

Yes, by the way, here it is worth adding the works that were carried out by the new OKB Mikoyan and Gurevich, selected from the Polikarpov Design Bureau. Which were made from the I-200 MiG-1, and then the MiG-3. But Mikoyan and Gurevich went somewhat along their own path, because the MiG went into the series. Not with AM-37, but with its predecessor AM-35, but it went.

But with the fighters of Polikarpov, the situation was really more than ugly: there is no engine, no excess metal, no machines, no skilled workers.

All in all, the task is to find the engine, redo the wing of the aircraft and start production.

Where are the machinations of Yakovlev, I do not understand. It’s definitely not Yakovlev who advised Polikarpov’s motors, which aren’t, but basically willn’t. And Yakovlev did not allocate resources, other people were engaged in this.

Moreover, Yakovlev’s letters to Shakhurin (official documents), in which he spoke of the need for fine-tuning M-71 or M-107 for I-185, and that this aircraft is needed, are completely preserved. Together with the Yak-9 with M-107, but nonetheless.

Summarize. The tale of how the deputy director Yakovlev interfered with the designer Polikarpov, this can be archived. The guilt of Yakovlev I do not see that the preachers of the idea of ​​a "Kremlin conspiracy" did not write there.

Duralumin for aircraft Polikarpov was not. Duralumin was needed for bombers and attack aircraft. Yes, the fighters suffered, but to do something was just unreal. Who is to blame, the king-father, who did not build factories, or Stalin, who built little, I do not want to understand.

But even this is not important. The main thing - the engines for the aircraft Polikarpov was not there. And this is the main problem. Here miscalculation only Nikolai Nikolaevich. And by the time the I-185 tests began with the M-82 engine, the LaGG-3 with the same engine had successfully turned into a La-5.

By the way, I-185 and LaGG-3 were tested together. But this is a topic for a separate article.

By order of the NKAP No. 438 from 13 of May 1941 of the engine M-82, all designers were invited to carry out work on the use of this motor.

“... 7. Chief designers tt. Mikoyan, Yakovlev, Sukhoi and Polikarpov ensure the installation of M-82 engines on airplanes and begin flight tests:

a) on the MiG-3 - 1 July 1941;
b) on an experienced twin-engine fighter designed by Mikoyan and Gurevich - 25 September 1941 of the year;
c) on the Yak-3 (this is another Yak-3 - approx.) - 15 July 1941 of the year;
d) on the Su-2 - 1 July 1941;
e) on an experienced fighter designed by Polikarpov (I-185) - 15 June 1941 of the year. ”

Yakovlev experimented on the Yak-7 with M-82, but could not solve the problem of uneven blowing of cylinders. In addition, the short Yak chassis did not allow to install a screw with a diameter of more than 2,8 meter, which did not allow to remove the full power of the motor. As a result, Yakovlev lost interest in fine-tuning the aircraft.

Polikarpov was also in no hurry. He hoped to surpass all of his competitors by installing a more powerful motor - M-90 or M-71. Yes, I-185 with M-82 was built, but it was tested and refined third-party systems.


I-185 with motor M-82


And in the end, Polikarpov was left without a motor at all. But where is Yakovlev here?

Purely human understand. Polikarpov wanted to show that the king of fighters remains king. The layout of the royal fighter was. Even the flying prototype was. But the royal engine M-71 or M-90 was not.

If you carefully comprehend all the arguments, I hope it will become clear that all these cries and “facts”, there is nothing behind them. There was a really great designer Polikarpov, who knew how to build airplanes. But when choosing engines for their development, the designer made a fatal mistake by relying on new developments.

And the developments "did not take off." It is good, of course, that there was Yakovlev, on whom all sins can be blamed. But in fairness it is worth saying a word in defense of Alexander Sergeyevich. He was guilty that the Zaporizhzhya factory worked hard on the M-71, and after moving to Omsk more than 30 engines a month could not be physically produced, there was none.

What could have been done on the 30 front (actually less), albeit magnificent planes, I think everyone understands. This is one air regiment plus spare engines. And in the Red Army Air Force there were ... a few more.

Here you can put a full stop. Polikarpov lost to younger designers, but did not lose in the undercover games. Yes, the Yak-1, LaGG-3 and MiG-1 (works of the Polikarp Design Bureau) were not masterpieces. They really sculpted from what was. But they flew and could fight.

How well an 185 would do it is difficult to say because of the numerous “if”. If the industry produced as much metal as was required, if there were engines ... There was no metal, engines too. The plane "did not take off." And during the war years they did not fight with paper TTX, but with quite real combat vehicles. Alas.

Today, of course, the divine army can talk as much as you like on the free theme “but if”. But in the 1942 year, it was not the arguments that were put on the planes, but quite specific motors. And the fact that Klimov and Shvetsov could not provide the promising Polikarpov fighter with the promising M-107 and M-71 (or M-90) engines can also kill any reasoning as killed by the I-185.

Yakovlev? Dementiev? Shahurin? Who is guilty? Or did Polikarpov, Klimov and Shvetsov? The last two could not bring to the mind in time the promising (2 000 hp in M-71 - this is strong) development, Polikarpov did not want to work with M-82. But the principle of "either all or nothing" here gave just "nothing."

But in this mistake of the king of fighters there is absolutely no fault of Yakovlev.
Author:
229 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vard
    Vard April 10 2018 05: 23
    +11
    Ultimately, it was the competition between aircraft designers that allowed us to create airplanes ... by which the great war was won ...
    1. moskowit
      moskowit April 10 2018 06: 44
      +5
      Absolutely right! The goal was achieved. The victory was all-devastating! And everything before her fades
      1. KERMET
        KERMET April 10 2018 14: 33
        +8
        No offense, is Roman a kind of thin Troll here? Practically every paragraph of the article is facts or conjectures turned inside out, is it such a journalistic device so that the discussion of the article would be more heated?
        1. dauria
          dauria April 11 2018 22: 56
          +5
          Almost every paragraph of the article is facts or conjectures turned inside out


          And in my opinion, a good article with reasonable calculations. And to the question of I-185. A fighter without a motor is nothing, an empty place. And there was simply no time. These are not speculations, but facts. Even the Germans tried to buy an engine.

          Polikarpov's letter to Yakovlev

          "Thus, all three copies of the I-185 aircraft (one with M-90 and 2 with M-71) do not fly and it is absolutely not clear when they will be brought ... the engines to a state that allows testing the aircraft with at least minimal risk .

          Due to the indicated situation with the M-90, M-81 and M-71 motors, the I-185 aircraft designed and built by us have been waiting for almost a year to start testing ...

          A year ago, we raised the question of the need to purchase Pratt and Whitney engines or 18 cylinder Wright, but this question was not resolved positively, because there was hope for an early release of our new engines M-90, M-81, M-71. ..

          The past year has shown that the situation has not changed, or rather worsened, as there are no our well-developed and reliable engines, and time has passed.

          Attaching very great importance to a fighter with an air-cooled engine and taking into account the inevitable duration of the development of engines 90 and 71, we again raise the question of the feasibility and necessity of acquiring finished engines, in particular, several BMV-801 engines, and subsequently their construction. We ask your orders "
          1. okko077
            okko077 April 13 2018 22: 57
            +2
            Very bad article ... Read who will return to the topic and view ....
            http://www.nnre.ru/transport_i_aviacija/aviacija_
            i_kosmonavtika_2007_04 / p8.php
            http://www.uhlib.ru/transport_i_aviacija/aviacija
            _i_kosmonavtika_2007_03 / p3.php
          2. NF68
            NF68 15 November 2018 16: 11
            0
            Quote: dauria
            Attaching very great importance to a fighter with an air-cooled engine and taking into account the inevitable duration of the development of engines 90 and 71, we again raise the question of the feasibility and necessity of acquiring finished engines, in particular, several BMV-801 engines, and subsequently their construction. We ask your orders "


            The Germans at the beginning of WWII did not plan to mass-produce the BMW-801. These engines were prototypes necessary for the development of more promising BMW 18 802 cylinder engines and a number of different variants of this engine:

            http://alternathistory.com/aviatsionnye-dvigateli-firm-siemens-bramo-bmw-po-materialam-karla-prestelya/

            The Germans finished the BMW-801 in the 1941 year. The Germans of Semuli also organized mass production of these engines only in the 1941 year. And then everything went with big problems:

            All experimental BMW 801 engines were manufactured at the BMW-Werk 1 factory in München-Milbertshofen. There, pre-production and serial production began. In July 1941, the former Bramo factory in Berlin-Spandau and in May 1942, the new BMW Werk 2 factory in München-Allach began mass production. The main load on the manufacture of BMW 801 engines was carried by BMW. At the factories in Allach and Milbertshofen until the end of the war, 14605 engines were manufactured. At the factory in Spandau 4213. According to the publication published by Richard Faltermair in the Flugzeug Classic (2003) edition, edition No. 10, and in the BMW report “Program Execution” dated February 1945 of the year until the end of the war, engine production was as follows:

            1940 year: 232 engines.
            1941 year: 1708.
            1942 year: 5225.
            1943 year: 8658.
            1944 year: 12222
            January 1945 of the year: 631.
            February 1945 of the year at Allach: 310.
            March 1945 of the year at Allach: 375.

            As a result, the Germans in the 1941 year did not have the opportunity to provide the USSR with everything necessary for serial equipment and documentation.
  2. Vovan 73
    Vovan 73 April 10 2018 06: 28
    +33
    Roman, nevertheless, I once again strongly advise you, before writing opuses on the topic of Soviet aviation of the pre-war and military periods, to read the famous bibliography of Soviet aircraft designer and aviation historian Shavrov Vadim Borisovich. On I-185 you are again wrong. When it became clear that the M-71 engine would not be in time to finish. Polikarpov was offered to do remotorization under the M-82 (Ash-82). KB completed this task and the machine went through an almost complete test cycle. Why the I-185 with the 82nd engine did not go into the series question. But at the same time, they tried to install similar engines on their aircraft and Yakovlev (Yak-7) and Lavochkin. But Polikarpov completed this work much earlier. Yakovlev did not grow together for structural reasons, the landing gear on the Yak-7 did not allow the m-82 to be installed with the standard VISH for it, it seems VISH-105. The rotor blades were critically close to the ground, and the design of the Yakovlevsky wing did not allow to increase the length of the landing gear on the Yak-7. An attempt was made to install vish with shortened blades, but the results were unsatisfactory. Lavochkin had no such problem, he had a problem with the engine overheating. And here, just this moment comes up. According to Yakovlev’s order, as deputy commissar of the AP, Polikarpov’s design bureau was obliged to transfer all the drawings of the VMG (propeller group) to Lavochkin’s design bureau. After this, Lavochkin’s process, as they say, started. However, the La-5 in terms of characteristics turned out to be worse than the I-185. This was primarily due to the overweight of the original Lagg design. Further, the I-185 was a mixed-design aircraft, like all of our pre-war and military fighters. In addition, in the 42nd year, several I-185 fighters with the M-82 engine underwent military tests on the Kalinin Front. According to the reports of testers and front-line pilots, the machine showed excellent results and even raised the issue of mass production, but ...... Yakovlev opposed Stalin at a report, citing the fact that there were no free factories for the new machine. and alteration of mass production will lead to a reduction in the number of aircraft shipped to the front. The excuse looks weak, as the land lease is poorly poor but delivered planes. The reason, in my opinion, is different, the I-185 even with 82 engines in 42 in terms of performance characteristics exceeded even the promising Yak-9s and La-7s, while possessing much greater firepower
    1. alstr
      alstr April 10 2018 07: 02
      +8
      It remains to recall the epic from IL-2, where Yakovlev also had his hand and then the story of I-185 no longer seems strange.
      Unfortunately, airplanes that were not made by court designers were ruining our lives (I mean this about Tupolev).
      1. Fitter65
        Fitter65 April 10 2018 14: 43
        +5
        Quote: alstr
        It remains to recall the epic from IL-2, where Yakovlev also had his hand and then the story of I-185 no longer seems strange.

        And in what place did Yakovlev put his hand to the IL-2? In that S.V. Ilyushin from the two-seat attack aircraft BSh-2 converted it into a one-year one? So the existence of this converted aircraft was legalized only before its first departure, and even then only by order of the NKAP of 11.10.1940/15.10.1940/2, which was signed by A.S. Yakovlev, and by the same order, S.V. Ilyushin was ordered to be released on XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX factory flight tests and a two-seater version of the aircraft. There are a lot of questions on this order, to begin with the fact that the order was signed by Yakovlev the third person in the NKAP ranking table, the order does not contain the number of the Resolution of the KO under the Council of People's Commissars, which such an order was to execute. from the order it follows that the NKAP e knew about the work done by the OKB Ilyushin alteration SB-XNUMX Single-which of course is simply not veroyatno.I Yakovlev and here? Oh yes, he was also Deputy Commissar for skilled construction and science!
        Quote: alstr
        Unfortunately, airplanes that were not made by court designers were ruined in our country (I mean this about Tupolev

        For example, which planes were ruined by court designers and in the name of which planes they were ruined? I would like to know more specifically ...
    2. demiurg
      demiurg April 10 2018 07: 43
      +19
      La-5 went into the series in just a few months. It was a titmouse in a hand, and a titmouse in 42 year.
      The I-185 small-scale assembly, when serviced by factory technicians, of course showed the best results (Yak-7s added 20-30 km / h when serviced by factory crews). What happened while I-185 would be put on the conveyor, and he went into the army? At least at the end of 43 years, they would have had the first cars, traditionally with sores from the development of new technology, with no serialization. And the quality no less traditionally falls when staged in a series. And in the year 43 there was already La-5f, and at the end of the year 43, La-5fn, which immediately enlisted in large numbers and without any special sores. And in fact, in no way inferior to the I-185 M82.
      It’s good to speculate now that would it's better. And in 42, saves had not yet been invented, and it would not have been possible to restart the lost war from the save point.
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 10 2018 10: 59
        +4
        Quote: demiurg
        (Yak-7 was added at 20-30 km / h when serviced by factory brigade crews).

        And the plane lost another 20-30 km / h during the transition from prototypes to mass production. And even more:
        If the pre-war LaGG-3s reached a maximum speed of about 575 km / h, then the LaGGs of the 4th series barely gained 549 km / h, the rate of climb drastically decreased (from 750 m / min to 600 m / min). ceiling and range (from 1100 km to 870 km).
      2. Vovan 73
        Vovan 73 April 10 2018 11: 02
        +2
        You're not right. La-5 went to the front in combat units for the battle of Stalingrad. This is 42-43 years. What are some months ??????
        1. demiurg
          demiurg April 10 2018 13: 16
          +2
          La-5 went into the series 5 months after the first flight. In fact, the M82 on a blue electrical tape was attached to the fuselage of LaGG and continued production. If the USSR wished to put it in the I-185 series in 41, the first combat-ready air regiments would appear in 44. Recall what was in the series in 44?
          1. KERMET
            KERMET April 10 2018 19: 42
            0
            LaGG-3? ... Yak-7?
          2. Dooplet11
            Dooplet11 15 November 2018 12: 06
            0
            Please read this
            http://alternathistory.com/vundervaffe-vvs-rkka-polikarpov-vs-byaka-yakovlev/
            What is the I-185 series in 41? Which motor?
      3. Vovan 73
        Vovan 73 April 10 2018 11: 13
        +7
        I understand perfectly well that breaking serial production in wartime conditions is, to put it mildly, not good. Once you forget one curious fact, it was Lavochkin who was saving his Lagg and the factory from capture by Yakovlev. It has already been almost decided to give the Gorky plant where Laggi was made to Yakovlev, I motivate this by releasing two fighters with one engine, and at the same time, Lagg is OBJECTIVELY worse than Yak's extra waste in wartime conditions. And Lavochkin had no easy options.
    3. mark1
      mark1 April 10 2018 08: 32
      +3
      Quote: Vovan 73
      The reason in my opinion is different, the I-185 even with 82 engines in 42 in terms of performance characteristics exceeded even the promising Yak-9s and La-7s,

      Yakovlev fighters (36000 units) were known to be equipped with Klimov’s engines which produced more than 80 units during WWII, i.e. there was no shortage, ASH-82 engines produced 28 units for 000 shop engines, this was a physical limit, it was not in vain LaGGi with 16 engines up to and including 000 g is a deficit, you know! So for Yakovlev there was not even a theoretical threat.
      1. mark1
        mark1 April 10 2018 08: 52
        +4
        And La-7 in its performance characteristics was higher than I-185M82-alas
        1. Vovan 73
          Vovan 73 April 10 2018 11: 00
          +2
          Of course, taking into account operating experience, La-7 turned out to be better than the 185th, but .... in 1944, and the 185th in 42 on the Kalinin Front already yielded results. And what would be the 185th to 44- Moo year, one can only speculate. The fact remains, confirmation of the recollection of Gromov (the commander of the Kalin Front aviation) and the pilots who took part in military tests (I don’t remember who exactly, I read about it from M. Gallay) who said that there was only one machine on the Kalin front on which it was possible to successfully fight against the Germans - I-185.
          1. demiurg
            demiurg April 10 2018 13: 09
            +4
            Where to get aluminum? Having received a little aluminum, the Yak-9 degenerated into 9y, which was an order of magnitude superior to the I-185. La-5 with aluminum became La-7.
            1. John22
              John22 April 10 2018 19: 26
              +3
              Aluminum was supplied fairly by Lend-Lease. The problem was with technology, machine tools and the lack of workers who knew how to work with aluminum.
              1. Alf
                Alf April 10 2018 22: 15
                +3
                Quote: John22
                Aluminum was supplied fairly by Lend-Lease.

                The uneven supply of Lend-Lease recall? Recall that in the spring and summer of the 42nd, when the question arose of the existence of the state, the supplies were frozen? The bulk of the air supply flooded only at the end of the 42-mid 43rd years?
            2. ARES623
              ARES623 April 10 2018 20: 12
              +1
              Quote: demiurg
              Where to get aluminum?

              During the war years, 283 thousand tons were produced in the USSR + 300 tons of allied supplies. One fighter needs no more than 1 ton. Yakovlev needed only 36 tons for all his production, and as a whole for all fighters 000 tons + 55 tons for bombers. In the total volume of aluminum at the disposal of the USSR, this volume could be found. The question, it seems to me, is different. All design and, most importantly, serial construction of aircraft was initially "ground" under the tree. And these are completely different technological processes, the nomenclature of equipment, specialists, etc. Ultimately, somewhere in 000, after an incident with Jacob trim, Dementiev told Yakovlev: "Is it time to switch to aluminum?" (Aviation historians write about this conversation.) So the point is not in the presence of metal, but in the goodwill of the designer.
          2. mark1
            mark1 April 10 2018 13: 53
            +3
            Quote: Vovan 73
            And what would be the 185th to the 44th year,

            Skint 2-5% on the deterioration of performance characteristics in serial production and the lack of reserves for modernization with a 82m engine as well as other negative factors that alas - life and nothing good in 44 we would not have seen and there would have been much harm
            Quote: Vovan 73
            and the 185th in 42 on the Kalinin Front already yielded results.

            Which one? Take off enthusiastic glasses, the plane flew over its territory and did not bring down anyone
            1. KERMET
              KERMET April 10 2018 18: 24
              +2
              They didn’t set goals to shoot down, moreover, the fall on the territory of the enemy was considered as treason. Do you also propose to remove the Enthusiastic Points from pilots piloting this plane?
              1. 4thParasinok
                4thParasinok April 10 2018 19: 22
                +2
                Quote: KERMET
                They didn’t set goals to shoot down, moreover, the fall on the territory of the enemy was considered as treason. Do you also propose to remove the Enthusiastic Points from pilots piloting this plane?

                An excellent aerobatic aircraft will not always be an excellent combat aircraft. And as far as I understand, they were only engaged in flying along the front line. There is no need for aerobatics to barrage ...
                1. KERMET
                  KERMET April 11 2018 06: 54
                  0
                  We carefully read the report of the Fighting pilots again, there are all the answers to your comment
                  1. 4thParasinok
                    4thParasinok April 13 2018 22: 13
                    +2
                    Quote: KERMET
                    We carefully read the report of the Fighting pilots again, there are all the answers to your comment

                    reports on non-combat sorties ... It's about the same as reporting off-road capabilities of a jeep after a trip on the highway.
            2. Filxnumx
              Filxnumx April 10 2018 21: 35
              +2
              and lack of reserves for modernization with 82m engine
              ????? Do you think La-7 was flying all on the same M-82A, or what? And never was the M-82F (ASH-82F), ASH-82FN, ASH-82T, ASH-83? Or maybe you have not heard about them? What a heresy about the lack of modernization potential: from M-82A - operating power of 1540 hp (nominal, take-off 1700 hp only for a short time) to ASh-82T - working (it is also take-off) 1900 hp. In this case, the M-105 is the same unpromising shit (from M-105PA - 1100 hp to M-105PF-2 - 1290 hp). Why, then, did his “ingenious” Yakovlev put on his pepelats? Well, it was necessary to immediately take the M-107, but only where?
              And about negative factors, you better tell the Germans from the 41st: how they produced aluminum most in the world in the conditions of war and sea blockade, as well as in the complete absence of their bauxite deposits - 324 thousand tons (excluding production in occupied or controlled countries) ) For comparison: in 1940, the USSR, having the richest explored reserves of bauxite ores (Tikhvin and North Ural deposits), smelted as much as almost 60 thousand tons of aluminum without fighting with anyone (the Soviet-Finnish conflict does not count).
            3. Vovan 73
              Vovan 73 April 11 2018 06: 24
              +4
              Well, let's estimate. So compare the La-5 and I-185 in the original engines and performance characteristics. In 42, they were powered by M-82 engines not yet forced. 1700 horses take-off power, curb weight 3330 kg, speed 620 km. Notice in the 42nd year of armament three guns ShVAK 20 mm. Rate of climb 930 m / s.
              Now the La-5 engine is the same, the armament is two guns, the rate of climb is 830 m / s, the maximum speed is at an altitude of 580 km, I recall the Messer of the “F” modification gave 620, the take-off weight of the shop is 3400. Now compare the La-7 with 44 years. in comparison with 185 and on the 7th, the Ash-82 FN 1850 hp engine stood, two guns remained, the three-gun variants appeared already at the very end of the war. Take-off weight of seven 3200 with a penny. speed 670 km / h; climb 1100 m / s. It is clear that history does not have a subjunctive mood, but with a forced motor the 185th would have given 7-ku, while the firepower was higher initially
              1. Alf
                Alf April 11 2018 20: 30
                +1
                Quote: Vova 73
                Well, let's estimate. So compare the La-5 and I-185 in the original engines and performance characteristics. In 42, they were powered by M-82 engines not yet forced. 1700 horses take-off power, curb weight 3330 kg, speed 620 km. Notice in the 42nd year of armament three guns ShVAK 20 mm. Rate of climb 930 m / s.
                Now the La-5 engine is the same, the armament is two guns, the rate of climb is 830 m / s, the maximum speed is at an altitude of 580 km, I recall the Messer of the “F” modification gave 620, the take-off weight of the shop is 3400. Now compare the La-7 with 44 years. in comparison with 185 and on the 7th, the Ash-82 FN 1850 hp engine stood, two guns remained, the three-gun variants appeared already at the very end of the war. Take-off weight of seven 3200 with a penny. speed 670 km / h; climb 1100 m / s. It is clear that history does not have a subjunctive mood, but with a forced motor the 185th would have given 7-ku, while the firepower was higher initially

                Where did you get such data?
                Check it out.
              2. daimon
                daimon April 11 2018 22: 15
                0
                Are you sure of the data on climb? 930 m / s is almost three speeds of sound !!!
                1. Vovan 73
                  Vovan 73 8 August 2018 11: 48
                  0
                  In a minute, Carl in a minute. A typo if she was amiss.
              3. Dooplet11
                Dooplet11 15 November 2018 12: 14
                0
                Where does the I-185 data from the M-82 come from? The specifications you provided for the I-185 with the M-71. Source:
                http://alternathistory.com/vundervaffe-vvs-rkka-polikarpov-vs-byaka-yakovlev/
                Not everything is so rosy with I-185 and its performance characteristics, as you write.
          3. DimerVladimer
            DimerVladimer April 12 2018 15: 42
            +1
            Quote: Vovan 73
            And what would be the 185th to the 44th year, one can only speculate.


            You can not assume - I-185 development projects in I-187 and I188 (4-gun under M-95) were already ready
            1. DimerVladimer
              DimerVladimer April 12 2018 15: 47
              +2
              this is what the logical development series of I-185 might look like
              And this is without a fundamental change in aircraft manufacturing technology, if 21 plants were not given over to LaGG-3
              1. DimerVladimer
                DimerVladimer April 12 2018 16: 07
                +3
                What does the I-188 project mean?
                Which is in parallel with the British, by 1944-45, we could have our own 4-gun Sea Fury only from Polikarpov.
                1. Alf
                  Alf April 12 2018 21: 07
                  +1
                  Quote: DimerVladimer
                  What does the I-188 project mean?
                  Which is in parallel with the British, by 1944-45, we could have our own 4-gun Sea Fury only from Polikarpov.

                  And where would they get the M-90 engine?
                  1. DimerVladimer
                    DimerVladimer April 13 2018 09: 16
                    0
                    Quote: Alf
                    And where would they get the M-90 engine?

                    M-95 Three-row star - I think with proper funding, the chance was to bring.
                    1. Alf
                      Alf April 13 2018 21: 02
                      +1
                      Quote: DimerVladimer
                      Quote: Alf
                      And where would they get the M-90 engine?

                      M-95 Three-row star - I think with proper funding, the chance was to bring.

                      Of course, I am not an expert in aviation, but remind me which 3-row star in which country was brought and went into series? With the cooling of 2-row stars, they were tormented, but they only dreamed of 3 or more stars.
        2. KERMET
          KERMET April 10 2018 14: 23
          +1
          Yeah, do we take into account the difference in the years of characterization?
          By the way, what about the 500kg bomb load on the La-7?
          1. mark1
            mark1 April 10 2018 14: 30
            +3
            Quote: KERMET
            By the way, what about the 500kg bomb load on the La-7?

            And 500 kg from the I-185 with which engine? And by the way, I-185 (with a 71motor) was going to be put into series in 1943, what do you think in what year would the aircraft massively go to the troops? And in the delta, how much would you get La-185FN when you entered the I-5 series?
            1. KERMET
              KERMET April 10 2018 17: 57
              +2
              He lifted 500 kg with all motors (both from the 71st and 82nd) ​​the center section of all was the same for 4 holders. Why do you propose to change FN right away? Vaughn LaGG-3 was released until mid-1944. Can you imagine what the pilot had to test on it in the 44th?
              1. mark1
                mark1 April 10 2018 18: 13
                +2
                Quote: KERMET
                Why do you propose to change FN right away? Vaughn LaGG-3 was released until mid-1944. Can you imagine what the pilot had to test on it in the 44th?

                Well, read at least from the very beginning what I wrote here and you will immediately (hopefully) understand everything.
                1. KERMET
                  KERMET April 10 2018 18: 56
                  +2
                  Are you talking about a deficit of 82? The I-185 has modifications for 3 engines, it was obligated under the 71st, so there is a field for maneuvers, well, even if you let out instead of La-5 then ... read the opinion of the pilots about front-line tests, there is a comparison with La-5
                  1. mark1
                    mark1 April 10 2018 19: 02
                    +2
                    You do not seem to be a reader - you are a writer. I said everything above - 82 and 71 motors could be produced at only one plant, the production of one goes to the detriment of the other, etc., etc. ... Sorry.
                    1. KERMET
                      KERMET April 10 2018 22: 33
                      +1
                      If it’s quite simple. If the production of one aircraft is partially replaced by the best, is this damage?
                    2. KERMET
                      KERMET April 11 2018 19: 33
                      -1
                      By the way "about the birds":
                      read about OMO named after Baranov:
                      On August 12, 1941, by order of the People’s Commissar of the Aviation Industry, the plant was evacuated from Zaporozhye to Omsk on the basis of a decree of the State Defense Committee.
                      On November 7, 1941, the first M-88B engine assembled in Omsk was tested.
                      Since January 1942, the plant began to work in full force.
                      In 1943, the production of motors began ASH-82FN. For exemplary performance of tasks on the serial production of motors, the plant was awarded the Order of the Red Banner of Labor in 1944, and the Order of Lenin in 1945.
                      Repeat, otherwise I’m completely confused winked - how many plants could produce 82 and 71?
                      1. mark1
                        mark1 April 11 2018 20: 15
                        +1
                        Quote: KERMET
                        Repeat, otherwise I was completely confused - how many plants could produce 82 and 71?

                        Let's try to unravel you - ASH-71F could produce factory number 19;
                        -AH-82FN - Plant No. 19 for the Second World War 28000 copies (approximately)
                        Plant No. 29-3000 pcs (approximately) since 1944
                        As you can see the miracle did not happen
                2. 4thParasinok
                  4thParasinok April 10 2018 19: 25
                  +3
                  Quote: mark1
                  Well, read at least from the very beginning what I wrote here and you will immediately (hopefully) understand everything.

                  Yes, he simply does not know the difference between the suspension currents and the mass that the plane can lift.
              2. KERMET
                KERMET April 10 2018 18: 20
                0
                By the way, in the lecture line dated 25.02.43, Polikarpov pointed out that there is a plant not occupied by the series (plant number 81) and that: He is "willingly" to introduce I-185 into mass production as soon as possible and, together with plant number 81 ... has everything chances to become a mighty fighter plant in Moscow
                1. mark1
                  mark1 April 10 2018 18: 38
                  +3
                  Quote: KERMET
                  available (plant number 81)

                  The plant may have existed, but where are the motors (I-185 standard with ASh-71F)?
                  "Won LaGG-3 was released until the middle of 1944."
                  And LaGG-3 has nothing to do with it due to different plants, different technologies and all that I said above. I understand the I-185 - this is a very beautiful plane, but it didn’t work out .... and not through Yakovlev’s fault.
                  1. KERMET
                    KERMET April 10 2018 18: 58
                    +2
                    LaGG-3 is an example of what drove the quantity when it was already possible to switch to quality.
                    1. 4thParasinok
                      4thParasinok April 10 2018 19: 39
                      +3
                      Quote: KERMET
                      LaGG-3 is an example of what drove the quantity when it was already possible to switch to quality.

                      Dreams, dreams, where is your sweetness ....
                      1. KERMET
                        KERMET April 10 2018 19: 40
                        +1
                        This is not a dream, but a missed opportunity to give our grandfathers a better weapon.
              3. mark1
                mark1 April 10 2018 18: 24
                +2
                Quote: KERMET
                He lifted 500 kg with all motors (both from the 71st and 82nd) ​​the center section of all was the same for 4 holders.

                And take-off power differed by 350 hp. By the way, the bomb load of the Yak-9 was 400 kg, on paper, but actually 200-250. Paper can stand it
                1. KERMET
                  KERMET April 10 2018 22: 42
                  +1
                  There was an abundance of takeoff power, are you talking about the Yak-9B? (For there’s nowhere to hang 400kg under), so read what kind of fruit it was, piloting it with 400kg is a circus, bombing only in the horizon (there is no durability for diving) and this is without a bomb sight ...
              4. Alf
                Alf April 10 2018 22: 18
                +1
                Quote: KERMET
                Vaughn LaGG-3 was released until mid-1944. Can you imagine what the pilot had to test on it in the 44th?

                And who said that these LAGGs fought? They were driven to the Japanese border, from where modern planes had already been taken away, and the visibility of the border at the castle had to be ensured.
                1. KERMET
                  KERMET April 10 2018 22: 44
                  0
                  Type in Google and read about the combat use of the latest LaGG-3
        3. Narak-zempo
          Narak-zempo April 10 2018 22: 55
          0
          Quote: mark1
          And La-7 in its performance characteristics was higher than I-185M82-alas

          Actually, the La-7 was forced M-82FN, and the I-185 was tested with the M-82A.
      2. Vovan 73
        Vovan 73 April 10 2018 10: 54
        +2
        It's right. The yaks were equipped with VK-105 motors, but if you dig into the history of this motor you will understand why Yakovlev tried to stick the Ash-82 onto the Yak-7. Yak -7 was a bit heavy for the VK-105, VK-107 to bring to mind, for good, failed even to the end of the war. The Yak-9 U raid with the VK-107 A engine was extremely small before repair in 1944. 82 engine in this regard looked much better, in terms of resource, and even the power of 1450 hp in the unformed version compared to the ss1050 hp of the standard VK-105 on the yak was generally a dream. And they did it because no attempts to raise the power of the 105th really succeeded, and the messer had to be caught up somehow. In 42, Gustav already went into battle, and only, somehow, having caught up with Friedrich, Yakovlev again found himself in the losers. Again, therefore (Yakovlev’s high load), Yakovlev’s aircraft carried very modest weapons. One ShVAK and one BS, even against the Yu-87, were not enough. If you look at the real situation with Klimov’s motors, you will see that the most powerful of the real workers was VK-105 PF2 1350 hp, but ..... at an altitude of up to 3 km, and then with an increase in flight height, the power fell. Shvetsovsky motor was higher and more powerful
        1. mark1
          mark1 April 10 2018 16: 16
          +2
          Vovan 73
          According to your logic, Yakovlev should have chopped off a piece from Lavochkin (no matter how Polikarpov did), especially since the Yak-7M82 was no worse than LAGG-5, and the small diameter of the screw could be compensated by an increase in the width of the blades (as on I- 16 type 29), but he did not, i.e. this is an indicator, one might put it so to say, of decency (although for that time it is an abstraction)
          And scolding Yak-7 do not forget about its origin -
          training aircraft whose main task is maximum ease in piloting and it has grown into a very decent combat vehicle
          1. Vovan 73
            Vovan 73 April 11 2018 10: 33
            +1
            So Yakovlev tried to chop off the Gorky aircraft plant at Lavochkin, and I, and not just me, wrote about this above. Polikarpov was strangled simply because the I-185 was better and Yakov1,1b, 7, 9 and La-5,5f, 5fn. If the 185th machine went into production within half a year or a year (they knew how to start production quickly in wartime), the existing regiments would gradually fill up and the question would arise: why do we need more mediocre cars ... Just like the question arose with Lugg and Yak in '42, when Lavochkin hastily began to fasten the M-82 to Lugg and with the first results rushed to the Kremlin.
            1. Alf
              Alf April 11 2018 20: 33
              +1
              Quote: Vovan 73
              If the 185th car went into series

              If they would throw dural as much as necessary ...
        2. BV330
          BV330 April 22 2018 02: 43
          0
          VK-105PF-2 gave out 1290hls at 700m and 1240hls at 2200m; but the M-106P - yes, 1350ls per 2000m. Yes, a year and a half earlier than pf-second). But as usual a bolt was hammered on him, and they rushed to saw the M-107A, since he promised even more horses. tongue
      3. KERMET
        KERMET April 10 2018 19: 50
        0
        It recalls the 41st year, when the factory where Shvetsov's "air" engines were manufactured was almost given over to the production of Klimov's "water" ones.
        1. mark1
          mark1 April 10 2018 20: 20
          +1
          And who is without sin? But they didn’t give it back, the Lord admonished ...
          1. KERMET
            KERMET April 10 2018 22: 51
            +1
            Yeah, the current is not god .. here the main thing is that someone came up with this idea .... and there would be no La-5 and La-7
        2. Amurets
          Amurets April 11 2018 01: 06
          +5
          Quote: KERMET
          It recalls the 41st year, when the factory where Shvetsov's "air" engines were manufactured was almost given over to the production of Klimov's "water" ones.

          Not Klimov, Mikulin. Two Ufa plants were given over to Klimov’s engines - the motor (384th) and diesel (336th) plants were combined into a single whole and the new motor production in Gaza became aircraft engine factory No. 466 http://www.airpages.ru/mt/gs_mot .shtml
          This is not considering the evacuation of factories.
          “At the same time, the KB-19 group, headed by IP Ewich, was able to“ squeeze ”the dimensions and mass of the engine without losing power: the piston stroke was reduced from 174,5 to 155 mm, while maintaining the cylinder diameter. With a 2-speed monitoring station altitude increased to 6000 m. The M-82 engine obtained in this way passed state tests in 1940, but unexpectedly a decision was made to produce an AM-35A engine in Perm for the new MiG-1 fighter. Motors Shvetsov was defended by the secretary of the Molotov Regional Committee Gusarov, he was not afraid write a letter to the Central Committee of the CPSU (b), proving the prospects of the M-82, using party authorization and the experience of an aviation engineer. By the end of May 1940, Shvetsov finalized the M-82 and submitted it for repeated State tests.On May 22, they successfully completed, and the decision to transfer the plant No. 19 to AM-35A was canceled. , who didn’t recommend putting M-82 on new planes, and aircraft designers were still more interested in the light and compact M-105 and M-88 or the especially powerful high-altitude M-120, M-71, M-81, M-90 ... "
          http://www.airpages.ru/mt/gs_mot.shtml
    4. kapitan281271
      kapitan281271 April 10 2018 08: 55
      +8
      I completely agree with you, but I read somewhere that the VMG Polikarpov himself offered Lavochkin, the only thing, then they issued an order (I don’t remember where, but there were versions that it was almost a death request of Polikarpov). And about Yakovlev ................. Two of my father’s aunts worked one at the Ilyushin Design Bureau and the second at Mikoyan. When there were their rare visits from Moscow to visit, I was still a boy, my ear warmed about what they sometimes talked about so, it was very surprising to hear from these intelligent women, ............. words ... ............. Russian words addressed to Yakovlev, the most respectable of which were BORN. Pokryshkin’s memoirs, to put it mildly, very non-forest references to this man, Kerber L.L. in his memoirs (And the matter went to war), he directly accuses Yakovlev of landing Tupolev and MANY others. With their relative Shakhurin, they did a lot of things.
      1. mark1
        mark1 April 10 2018 10: 49
        +2
        Quote: kapitan281271
        almost directly accuses Yakovlev of landing Tupolev and MANY others. With their relative Shakhurin, they did a lot of things.

        So that's the root of evil! You will carefully study the biography of each “sufferer” and make sure that everything was good from a moral and ethical point of view, and from the practical point of view, there was much more benefit in Yakovlev’s activity than harm.
    5. Snakebyte
      Snakebyte April 10 2018 09: 35
      +2
      Quote: Vovan 73
      According to Yakovlev’s order, as deputy commissar of the AP, Polikarpov’s design bureau was obliged to transfer all the drawings of the VMG (propeller group) to Lavochkin’s design bureau. After this, Lavochkin’s process, as they say, started.

      Fairy tales. No one forced Polikarpov to transfer the drawings. With Mikoyan, they themselves agreed on cooperation, and the VMG La-5 was going "on the knee." The problem with cooling was helped by the deputy Shvetsova Vedernikov, who calculated the desired configuration of the bend of the flow deflectors (they were bent right on the spot, without drawings).
    6. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 10 2018 10: 53
      +7
      Quote: Vovan 73
      However, the La-5 in terms of characteristics turned out to be worse than the I-185. This was primarily due to the overweight of the original Lagg design.

      Not everything is so simple. ©
      The fact is that comparing I-185 / M-82 and La-5, they usually take the data of experimental machines (however, there were no other I-185s). So, there was no experimental La-5. In the sense that there was no prototype assembly machine of the pilot plant licked by specialists to the last screw. The LaGG-3 serial fighter of a military assembly acted as an experimental vehicle, to which the M-82 engine was screwed with minimal changes to the original fuselage. It is enough to say that on the prototype machine (and the first six months on the production ones) it was necessary to leave the power frame in the bow, designed to accommodate the "narrow" water cooling engine, unchanged. Instead of the normal “wide” fuselage, it was necessary to block the “light body” on top of the old frame, smoothly reducing the M-82 circle to the contours of the old fuselage. Why? The answer is simple - at the factory there was no wood specialist who could manufacture a new frame and equipment for its production. That is, according to ready-made templates, the plant could work, but it was no longer possible to change the design.
      That is, the "experienced La-5" in fact can be considered a serial machine. And it is impossible to compare its performance characteristics directly with the I-158 / M-82 for one simple reason: placing the aircraft in series even in peacetime always worsened its performance characteristics. For example, production cars were traditionally inferior to experienced ones in speed - 20-30 km / h.
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer April 12 2018 10: 03
        +2
        Quote: Alexey RA
        The fact is that comparing I-185 / M-82 and La-5, they usually take the data of experimental machines (however, there were no other I-185s). So, there was no experimental La-5


        This is not entirely true:
        Therefore, it was possible to organize the serial production of a new fighter and a new engine only by discontinuing some other aircraft and engines, moreover, with the inevitable failure of the general delivery. It is clear that only plant No. 71 could produce the M-19 engine, which means that it is necessary to remove from production the recently mastered and far from exhausting all reserves of the M-82, and therefore the La-5 fighter. And this is in a situation where Yak fighters and liquid engines needed more modernization.

        Solving this difficult issue, the leadership of the NKAP again preferred to have a "tit in his hand, not a crane in the sky." To the aid of S.A. Both industry institutes — TsAGI, LII, TsIAM, and plant No. 5 — were attracted to Lavochkin in improving the flight data of the production La-19.

        As early as November 21, a lightweight La-5 No. 39210101 with a flight weight of 3200 kg, which was 160 kg less than the serial one, was presented at the Air Force Research Institute.
        Significant alterations were made on the plane: a new flashlight with bulletproof glass and with a rear view was put in, a three-tank gas system was introduced instead of a five-cylinder, one ShVAK gun was replaced with a UBS machine gun (this series of weapons was not used in the series), the bonnet's sealing was improved, control was made easier, etc. The "childhood illnesses" inherent in the aircraft of the first series were largely overcome.

        The M-82 motor, mounted on an airplane, allowed operation on the afterburner not only at the 1st (pressurization 1140 mm Hg), but also at the 2nd supercharger speed (1050 mm).

        The flight data of the aircraft improved compared to serial machines, but in numbers they almost corresponded to the experimental LaGG-5: the maximum speed at ground at face value - 518 km / h, at afterburner - 556 km / h, at the 2nd border of altitude - 600 and 612 km / h, respectively, the climb time of 5000 m - 6,1 minutes at face value and 5,5 minutes at afterburner. The AK-82BP carburetor at the 2nd supercharger speed still worked unsatisfactorily, and the candles did not withstand prolonged operation on the afterburner.
        Candles served 5-6 hours - i.e. they were often changed every day "in a circle."
        Those. nevertheless, the non-serial La-5 was involved in comparative tests.

        Quote: Alexey RA
        That is, the "experienced La-5" in fact can be considered a serial machine.


        Nevertheless, one should not think so - it was much easier, including due to armament, and with a more powerful engine, which allowed for a long time to work on afterburner.

        At the same time, LII conducted flight tests of another lightweight La-5 No. 39210102, on which the M-82NV motor No. 6502975 was installed. Its power in the take-off mode (boost 1113 mm) at the ground was 1735 hp. instead of 1700 hp at the serial engine. The increased boost could also be maintained not only at the 1st, but also at the 2nd supercharger speed. Thanks to the good and stable operation of the HB unit at all modes and altitudes, maximum speeds were obtained higher than in all previous tests of the La-5 with carburetor M-82: at the face value at 532, at fast and furious - 563 km / h, at 2nd altitude border at face value - 610 and afterburner - 618 km / h. The aircraft gained altitude of 5000 m with afterburner in 5,2 minutes. (a good result - did not lag behind the Bf-109F and was slightly better than the FW-190A-4 and FW-190A-8 5.4 min., but significantly inferior to the three-point Bf-109G-2 4.4 min.)

        It was not bad, but still too small to protect itself from a competitor - I-185. Indeed, at the same time - from November 20, 1942 to January 27, 1943 - the "exemplary" I-185 with M-71 passed at the Air Force Research Institute of the state test. It was here that those famous speeds were obtained, which were then featured in all publications devoted to this aircraft: the maximum speed near the ground at face value - 560, at afterburner - 600 km / h, at the 2nd border of altitude 6100 m - 680 km / hours

    7. meandr51
      meandr51 April 10 2018 11: 20
      0
      But nothing that duralumin for I-185 was not?
      1. Filxnumx
        Filxnumx April 10 2018 22: 10
        +2
        But nothing that the Allies "threw" 300 thousand tons of aluminum? Just enough for all 21 thousand bombers fired in the USSR during the years of the Second World War. And 60 thousand tons of aluminum, which the Soviet Union produced only in 1940 alone, would be enough to produce 60 thousand FULL-metal fighters. By the way, we built so much in 1941-45, but "wooden" ones.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA April 11 2018 13: 32
          +1
          Quote: Fil743
          And 60 thousand tons of aluminum, which the Soviet Union produced only in 1940 alone, would be enough to produce 60 thousand FULL-metal fighters.

          Wouldn’t be enough. For there was another product (more precisely, a product family) that required a lot of aluminum for itself - manufactured by order of the department of Lieutenant General Fedorenko.
        2. Alf
          Alf April 11 2018 20: 37
          0
          Quote: Fil743
          But nothing that the Allies "threw" 300 thousand tons of aluminum?

          And bring statistics of deliveries by years.
          Quote: Fil743
          And 60 thousand tons of aluminum, which the Soviet Union produced only in 1940 alone, would be enough to produce 60 thousand FULL-metal fighters.

          And besides fighters in the USSR, there were no other consumers of duralumin?
          And how many durals did the USSR produce in 1941? And in the 42nd? But didn’t aluminum go to B-2?
        3. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer April 12 2018 12: 47
          +2
          Quote: Fil743
          But nothing that the Allies "threw" 300 thousand tons of aluminum? Just enough for all 21 thousand bombers fired in the USSR during the years of the Second World War. And 60 thousand tons of aluminum, which the Soviet Union produced only in 1940 alone, would be enough to produce 60 thousand FULL-metal fighters. By the way, we built so much in 1941-45, but "wooden" ones.


          Enough for a much larger number of aircraft.
          - In the design of an all-metal fighter aircraft - approximately 150-300 kg of aluminum - this is the engine block, skin - about 250-350 kg. sheet of duralumin. Spars, engine mounts, etc. - 150-200 kg of steel type 30HGSA. In general, a little more than a ton of aluminum alloys and steels. But the speed and maneuverability of the aircraft - grow by 15-20% - this is exactly the lag that lasted until the end of the war.
          The post-war La-9 / 11s were wonderful all-metal machines.
    8. Fitter65
      Fitter65 April 10 2018 14: 15
      +1
      Quote: Vovan 73
      According to Yakovlev’s order, as deputy commissar of the AP, Polikarpov’s design bureau was obliged to transfer all the drawings of the VMG (propeller group) to Lavochkin’s design bureau. After this, Lavochkin’s process, as they say, started.

      Please tell me the number of this order, or at least its date! Even if there was such an order, it didn’t forbid further work on the I-185-M82. For your overall development, the first LaGG-3 alteration for the M-82 engine under Gudkov’s leadership (Gu-82) produced in AUGUST 1941. A propeller group from the Su-3, along with a hood and cooling skirts, was docked to the LaGG-2 glider. In September and October 1941, test pilot A.I. Nikashin made several flights on this plane, but because of the evacuation, the tests were interrupted. By the way, plant No. 153 produced LaGG-3-v On October the A.S. Yakovlev Design Bureau was evacuated there. In January 1942, a GKO decree was issued on the issue of Yak-153 aircraft at plant No. 7. Many sources indicate that S. A. Lavochkin received the drawings for the M-82 directly from Shvetsov, but he relied on the promising M-107. S.A. Lavochkin was so skeptical about installing the M-82 on LaGG-3, he believed that without a substantial alteration of the fuselage, which was simply catastrophic, it would not be possible to combine LaGG and wide M-82. The initiator of the installation was deputy S.A. Lavochkin, S.M. Alekseev he convinced Lavochkin to carry out the calculations on LaGG-3 with the M-82 engine. By the way, two finished M-107 A.S. Yakovlev "took" .And in response to Aleseyev’s request to send the M-82 model, Shvetsov provided two new M-82s. As So here. About the transfer of drawings of the VMG with the M-82 from I-185, somehow nothing is whistling in this context. Although the question arises, to whom exactly and to which plant the drawings of this VMG were transferred, from N.N. Polikarprova ? After all, according to a government decree of October 10, 1940, LaGG-3 (I-301 was to be called that, though the first production aircraft with 3 tanks were called LaGG-1, but I think this is not essential) it was decided to launch at factories No. 21, No. 31, No. 23 and No. 153. The head was determined to be the factory No. 21 in Gorky where the design bureau headed by S. A. Lavochkin was supposed to move. Gorbunov headed to the factory number 31-Taganrog. Gudkov remained in Khimki. Where and to whom should the drawings of the VMG from Polikarpov go, ask again?
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA April 10 2018 14: 35
        +1
        Quote: Fitter65
        For your overall development, the first LaGG-3 alteration under the M-82 engine under the guidance of Gudkov (Gu-82) was made in AUGUST 1941.

        Moreover, EMNIP, to replace the motor from M-105 to M-82 on LaGG-3, all three of its designers tried - and Lavochkin, and Gorbunov, and Gudkov. And each of them issued an experimental car.
        1. KERMET
          KERMET April 10 2018 20: 04
          +1
          More for development:
          July 19, 1941 the assembly of the I-185 with the M-82 was completed, and in August the first flight took place.
      2. KERMET
        KERMET April 10 2018 20: 06
        0
        Even if there was such an order, he did not prohibit further work on the I-185-M82.

        if after state tests in Novosibirsk it was supposed to build the I-185 with both the M-71 and the M-82, then after the appearance of La-5 Polikarpov was ordered to build a reference copy only with the M-71.
    9. Huumi
      Huumi April 10 2018 20: 33
      0
      There you can only mention that 185 had a complicated wing mechanization. I read something about it, but I personally don’t think it was such a difficult task. You’re right, even with ash82 185 it was cooler and an order of magnitude than La, and even more so than trough Yak. Actually, I-185 also brought Polikarpov to the grave, a wire ulcer due to nerves was opened to mine. AS 82 even having lower power - not fn - still pulled 185 donkey
      1. Alf
        Alf April 10 2018 22: 26
        +1
        Quote: Huumi
        Here you are right — even with ash82 185 it was cooler and an order of magnitude than La and even more so than the trough of Yak.


        What?
        1. KERMET
          KERMET April 10 2018 22: 53
          0
          The question for front-line pilots is their opinion request
          1. Huumi
            Huumi April 11 2018 22: 33
            0
            I read s stories about yaks - these are the words of one of them: no one! never wanted to fly on a yak-on la-da on a cobra-generally honor-on a YAKE-no one! By the year 44, Yak 3 went, according to the pilots, an extremely high-speed car, but ..... it overheated ... fires were especially special during take-off, extremely insufficient armament. Weak design ... and, most importantly, they were already flying towards the end of the war when the experienced Germans left maaaaalooooo!
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA April 12 2018 10: 24
              +1
              Quote: Huumi
              I read s stories about yaks - these are the words of one of them: no one! never wanted to fly on a yak-on la-da on a cobra-generally honor-on a YAKE-no one!

              I didn’t know that the future Marshal Savitsky was “nobody”. smile
            2. BV330
              BV330 April 21 2018 06: 22
              0
              IMHO you combined in one car and the Yak-3 and Yak-9U. It was on the latter that there were overheating and fires, this was facilitated in addition to the newest engine and a pair of exhaust manifolds inside the collapse of the blocks (.
              And the Yak-3 motor was fully tested M-105PF, only slightly boosted - up to 1240hls takeoff and 1290/1240 maximum at altitudes of 700/2200 meters. Plus improved water and oil systems).
              By the way, there were more armaments there than most other Yaks - 1x20 and 2x12,7 (not counting the first 200 pieces with 1x12,7mm)
              That durability is not enough - yeah. Although it was enough somewhere, I read in the memoirs of Hans that in the battle a German group commander shot at Yak-3, which had jumped forward - 3 shells in the rear bulletproof glass, and didn’t even fly out). Do not substitute the main plane with the tanks.
              1. Huumi
                Huumi 6 May 2018 09: 32
                0
                I can’t say anything about shells))) 151 broke through the armor protection of Ila-about bulletproof glass-only caliber rifle-3 shells from 151 would have smashed the pilot’s head to shreds. I read a huge interview with veterans that he fought only on yaks — he is from 1 to 3 series Jacob gave a detailed review. Yak - a 3-speed machine and extremely gaudy - it was created specifically for free battle but ... they were released by the end of the war and their standard weapons were weak and he kept the load slightly warming the engine up to fires. I already wrote here his words: Nobody! -and never want fly on yaks! -No! On La-Da! -aerokobra-? Go Get in the regiment! We always grit downstairs Germans upstairs! -We have a moody engine .... they climb "on us" -the saddle and wait-beat and go upstairs and we can’t do anything. What was the purpose of Yak? -To cover silt it was ideal, it seems that under Il he was designed to drive Messers away from them. But Il’s even armored, and going to their cover was essentially suicide.
                By the way, read the memoirs - all the pilots say as one: to cover Ily is death
        2. Huumi
          Huumi April 11 2018 11: 42
          0
          power ratio.
    10. kapitan281271
      kapitan281271 April 12 2018 14: 40
      0
      Quote: Vovan 73
      Yakovlev opposed Stalin at a report, citing the fact that there were no free factories for the new machine. and alteration of mass production will lead to a reduction in the number of aircraft shipped to the front. The excuse looks weak, as the land lease is poorly poor but delivered planes. The reason, in my opinion, is different, the I-185 even with 82 engines in 42 in terms of performance characteristics exceeded even the promising Yak-9s and La-7s, while possessing much greater firepower

      Completely in the hole and first of all the Yak-9
    11. mkpda
      mkpda April 16 2018 13: 58
      +1
      You are mistaken, the process at Lavochkin started after the arrival of a group of minders from Shvetsov, who solved the problem of engine cooling (Polikarpov did not solve it in full). There was an order to transfer the VMG, but Lavochkin used a joint solution with Shvetsov, which is clearly visible even with the external comparison of the I-185M-82 with La-5.
  3. Mooh
    Mooh April 10 2018 06: 30
    +5
    Thanks, great article. I would love to read the sequel. We were very interested in the topic of the joint tests of I-185 and LaGG-3, and of course your view on the "rout of Polikarpov’s design bureau" is extremely interesting.
  4. Amurets
    Amurets April 10 2018 07: 50
    +6
    And the development of "not soared." Well, of course, that was Yakovlev, on which you can pile all sins. But in fairness, it is worth saying a word in defense of Alexander Sergeevich. His guilt was that they didn’t work well at M-90 at the Zaporozhye plant, and after moving to Omsk more than 30 motors per month could not be physically released.
    Motor M-71 (ASH-71) Still Shchvetsovsky and was produced in Perm at the factory number 19.
    But about aviation materials, Shakhurin wrote: “It happened and vice versa: we took all or almost everything. For example, we took almost all aluminum, magnesium, cobalt, alloyed steels, the vast majority of alloyed pipes, etc. Here we were monopolists: they gave us something that they didn’t give to anyone. There was still a lot of lacking in the country. Some industries were just starting to develop. But they were not stingy for aviation.
    We were "uncomfortable" in the sense of orders for the future. Predicting the development of our industry, which was largely determined by the tasks that were set before us, we calculated what would be needed in a year or, say, in two years, and came up with relevant proposals. There were still no capacities, some raw materials were missing, something was still missing, nevertheless we received all of this. Each of our orders gave a kind of impetus to a particular industry - it began to produce high-quality metals, high-octane gasoline, non-combustible materials, some other special things that to a certain extent determined the progress of the economy or its individual directions. We were allowed to buy equipment ourselves and put it in factories. So, for a workshop that produced stainless steel at a metallurgical plant, rolling mills were purchased by the People's Commissariat of the aviation industry.
    There was an acute question about the quality of the products supplied to us. At all major suppliers, we had technical acceptance. We had our specialists at these plants, who were, as it were, our eyes and ears, telling what was being done, what was not being done, and most importantly, we monitored the quality. "There were even problems with aircraft wood. The problem of providing forest was even more complicated. Our airplanes were mostly of mixed construction — metal and wood, and the aviation forest was of particular importance to us. It would seem that there are difficulties — there are many forests in the country. But any forest did not suit us. The wood used in the aviation industry was special. It was mined to the so-called "mining" method. Specially trained people from our forest reception, and there were two hundred of them, went into the forests and put special marks on suitable trees. We were mainly interested in pine and birch. Only these two species went into business. The trees were selected straight-line, with few knots, they were branded in the winter and sent to the plants of the People's Commissariat of the forest industry during the winter, while we remained in the south of Ukraine, in Belarus and the Baltic states, the main places where the timber was made. And almost all aircraft plywood and woodworking plants were located there. We lost our main bases with the outbreak of war. There remained the Caucasus, Siberia, and the Urals, where the forest was never harvested for the aviation industry. Now it was necessary to take it to new places. And much more than before. The issue of aircraft was very acute. Even for horses that were used to haul timber, a special ration was established. There came a time when logging became quite tight. Gathered a special meeting at the highest level. With the mandates of the Central Committee of the party, people dispersed to all plywood and woodworking plants, to all timber industry enterprises, to all bases where the forest was stored. It came to the point that for the selection of the aviation forest, special control was established at the sleeper-impregnation plants of the People's Commissariat of Railways, where millions of sleepers had accumulated. Even there, wood suitable for aircraft production was selected. "In Glavsnables, a special position has been introduced - the deputy chief of Glavlesosbyt for timber timber."
  5. BAI
    BAI April 10 2018 09: 26
    +4
    We are talking about the fighters Polikarpov I-180 and I-185, which allegedly surpassed everything that was available at that time in development. And if it were not for the evil genius of Yakovlev, who “stalked” these planes, the alignment would have been completely different.

    Both Polikarpov’s and MiG’s planes (and Mikoyan was not a relative of the last person in the state) ceased to exist during the war years for one reason - ALL production capacities were given up for the production of already worked out and more less relevant to the current requirements of the war. The MiG-3 was hacked off by Stalin's direct instruction - "We need an IL-2." Polykarpov’s aircraft - by the instruction of the State Defense Committee “Under no circumstances should aircraft production be reduced. Therefore, both I-185 and MiG-9 got up, and Sukhoi's work slowed down. Setting production of fundamentally new aircraft is an inevitable decline in output. This is described in more detail in the good documentary series "Wings of the Motherland". There, this moment was specially understood.
    But after the war, when the restrictions were lifted, the MiG and Su were revived.
  6. Snakebyte
    Snakebyte April 10 2018 09: 31
    +5
    How much can you ascribe a bet on promising engines to Polikarpov personally?
    ALL designers have developed their projects for promising engines. The same Yakovlev planned the M-106.
    And developed ... all-metal I-30. Probably from an acute shortage of aluminum.
    There is no direct fault directly with Yakovlev in the misadventures of Polikarpov. Although there are versions that Shakhurin dealt exclusively with organizational issues, and Yakovlev was in charge of issues directly related to aircraft technology. Then it can be blamed on sabotage of serial production of I-180 for the 21st plant. But, this is unconfirmed information. And the exact names of the "pests" are Voronin and Pashinin.
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer April 17 2018 14: 14
      +2
      Quote: Snakebyte
      Although there are versions that Shakhurin dealt exclusively with organizational issues, and Yakovlev was in charge of issues directly related to aircraft technology. Then it can be blamed on sabotage of serial production of I-180 for the 21st plant. But, this is unconfirmed information. And the exact names of the "pests" are Voronin and Pashinin.


      It is worth familiarizing yourself with Shakhurin's memoirs, it is immediately clear that he was engaged in precisely organizational work - the apparatus. Despite his higher technical education and some work experience at the Zhukovsky Academy, he was used to working as a party apparatchik - far from going into details every time.
      According to the memoirs, his task was to increase production, reduce marriage, in general, they even began to support technologists in reducing production costs and optimizing production. True, this did not go beyond conferences and the centralized introduction of technological innovations in the industry, he noted not much. Basically, in the fire mode, substitutes were sought out and the supplies of materials were regulated. Well, evacuation is a very impressive stage of the ego of management.
      Unfortunately, he personally did not care what to release - the main stream.
      Who massively flies airplanes (junior sergeant squad) he saw only in 1942 in Saratov, on the eve of the Battle of Stalingrad.
      As production-oriented, Shakhurin was not interested in radically changing the production technology (changing aircraft types), which would lead to a drop in production.
      Hence the shaft of LaGG-3 and 1,5 years (!) Bringing La-5 to acceptable levels.
      But by the end of the war we had La-7, the Germans had Fw-190D and Ta152
      where exactly the same La-5 / I-185 problems arose with the transition to a new model:
      Despite the strong pressure of the Tank on the RLM to immediately launch the Ta.152 into the series, the ministry did not want to break the established production - the general design of the new aircraft with the Fw.190 was small. Consequently, it was primarily the modernization of already manufactured machines that was required. The Ta.152 program barely kept warm until the spring of 1944, when a serious attempt was made to establish the production of a fighter at the plant in Zorau.


      The Germans were forced to put into production a new Ta-152 aircraft, as the mid-altitude Fw-190D could not resist the American Mustangs.

      Our fighters did not reach the level of the Bf-109G series and Wf-190D series until the end of 1944, despite the fact that the solution - the I-185 had already flown since 1941 and could come into service with the best fighter regiments - the possibilities were to establish production, but the inertia of thinking - to fill up with a mass of mediocre aircraft and a mass of poorly trained pilots - dominated the whole war.
      It does not make sense to say that we ended the war with obsolete equipment - immediately after the war, the production of La-7 was curtailed.
      Air crashes due to quality problems, with the spreading of wooden wings in flight and the failure of the propeller group - pursued La-7 until the end of the war.
      He served La-7 for another 2 years after the end of the war and was decommissioned.
  7. metallic
    metallic April 10 2018 09: 53
    +5
    Quote: kapitan281271
    Kerber L.L. in his memoirs (And the matter went to war), he directly accuses Yakovlev of landing Tupolev and MANY others

    Which (landing) took place long before the appointment of Yakovlev deputy commissar. Kerber generally tells many tales.
    With their relative Shakhurin, they did a lot of things

    Shakhurin was a relative of the Commander-in-Chief of the Air Force Novikov, Yakovlev is here what side?

    Quote: alstr
    It remains to recall the epic from IL-2, where Yakovlev also had his hand

    I would like more details. And the author of these details.
  8. metallic
    metallic April 10 2018 10: 04
    +5
    Gave a tip to a book about Yakovlev: Nikolai Yakubovich "Unknown Yakovlev"
    Having familiarized himself with the aviation industry in Germany, the young deputy commissar began his work in a new position with the “cleaning” of dubious aircraft projects, and the very dubious “Rotoplan”, on which design work had already begun, was the first to come into hand. Following this order, the NKAP appointed a commission, headed by Professor B.N. Yuryev, to review and make conclusions on the feasibility of constructing aircraft and engines on initiative projects that were not included in the pilot construction plan for 1940.

    From the conclusions of the commission chaired by A. A. Senkov
    The opportunity, while very easy, to become the chief designer is noteworthy. To do this, we need an “idea”, a shallow study of the proposal by persons preparing conclusions and decisions, obtaining huge sums and attracting valid designers from anywhere, who are ready to develop anything and create credibility and the title of chief designer for anyone at a “reasonable” price.
    Unfortunately, such designers are still enough. 'Chief designers' such as Shevchenko, Nikitin, Silvansky operate in huge amounts, uncontrollably hire, hire and fire whoever they want, whenever they want and how much they need, and yet they never keep up with the deadline. They always start with acquiring a staff of 'business' people and cars.


    In general, the shop was covered by many who wanted to join the money allocated for new aircraft. And those concerned probably knew with whose filing.
    Not surprisingly, the number of "well-wishers" in Yakovlev after this.
  9. rubin6286
    rubin6286 April 10 2018 10: 16
    +1
    Dear author!
    I agree with you in many ways. Today, it is believed that Stalin, relying on "young designers", was aware of the progress on I-180 and I-185. You didn’t say anything at all about the identity of the designer, the indictment and the placement in the “sharashka” prison TsKB-39. He was released, but his conviction was not removed. Before the war, Yakovlev and Polikarpov were sent on a business trip to Germany. Yakovlev was there for a month, and Polikarpov for almost a year. Cheer did there our "king of fighters", what he achieved and what he did. The article is good, but the designer Polikarpov, in my opinion. deserves to be written more about him.
    From the noteworthy literature on this issue, I would single out the following publications today:

    1. VB Shavrov "History of aircraft structures in the USSR 1938-1950, Edition 2, Moscow, Mechanical Engineering. 1988.
    2.Yu.A. Ostapenko "The Great Yakovlev." The purpose of life "brilliant aircraft designer." Moscow, Eksmo, 2013
    3.M. Maslov "King of fighters. Combat aircraft Polikarpov." Moscow, Yauza, 2009.
    4. V.P. Ivanov “Planes of NN Polikarpov” Moscow “Rusavia” 2004. In it, unlike other books, more attention is paid to the personality of the designer, his character, living and working conditions, and not only to the aircraft created by him.
    5.M. Maslov "Fatal Chkalov fighter. I-17, I-180, I-185. The worst catastrophe of the Stalin era. " Moscow. "Yauza" 2011.
    6. Yu.Guglya “The last fighters of Polikarpov I-180, I-185” Kiev “Archive Press” 1998.
    7. R.A. Belyakov, J. Marmen “MiG Aircraft 1939-1995” Moscow “AVIHO PRESS” 1996.
    8.A.S. Yakovlev "The purpose of life" Moscow. Political Publishing House 1987.
    9.N. Yakubovich “Yakovlev's combat aircraft” Moscow “Yauza” 2013.
  10. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 10: 23
    +8
    Yes, everything was not going smoothly with the I-26 (future Yak-1). Test pilot Yakovleva Design Bureau Yulian Piontkovsky in the first series of factory tests in 43 flights made 15 emergency landings! And on April 27, 1940, a disaster occurred that claimed the life of this wonderful pilot. Yes, the death of a test pilot does not honor the OKB. But, on the other hand, everyone who pokes this at Yakovlev quietly forgets that the two Polikarpov projects, I-180 and I-185, claimed the lives of THREE testers. Died: V. Chkalov, T. Susa, V. Stepanchonok. - And what did you not write about the how the tests of the I-26 and I-180 with the I-185 were carried out? No, that's how it is clear that counting the dead testers is much easier.
    I would say that Yakovlev was either lucky or his instincts were. But his bureau was pretty much more operational than others. Perhaps because he worked as a constructor alone. Not a duet, like Mikoyan and Gurevich, and not a triumvirate, like Lavochkin, Gorbunov and Gudkov. - And with whom did Polykarpov work with a duet? And then where is his efficiency, if he worked alone?
    And at least criticize, but I don’t see here oil paintings “bad Yakovlev and good Polikarpov”. I do not see yet. - a comfortable position ... like Theresa May.
    There was nothing to build a royal fighter of I-185 from. I think this is the main answer to the question “why.” Because at that moment we simply could not afford to build all-metal fighter. Nothing out of it. - only here the I-185 was a mixed design. Oops Here you are a non-respected author a little lie.
    What was the way out? Yes, the simplest. Create a fighter of mixed designs with acceptable characteristics. Can? Can. - and it was created by Polikarpov. I-185 is called.
    1940 year. NCAA in all its factories manufactured more than 2 000 all-metal (CM) aircraft. 1106 DB-3F, 100 Ap-2 and around 1000 Sat. - what prevented the production of 1000 I-1000 instead of 185 SB? The fact that by the 40th year the Security Council is very outdated does not appeal
    We look and see: Yakovlev launches the Yak-9 series with metal wing spars (just spars) in the second half of 1942. Lavochkin? Not any better. La-5FN with metal spars was ready in March 1943, the decision to launch it in a series came out in June of the same 1943. And in the series, this much-needed Air Force plane went in May 1944. - that is, the competitor Lavochkin’s metal spar received only after the metal. spars received "their" Yakovlev aircraft. And so Yakovlev is white and furry, og.
    And here for NKAP is a very simple choice: either the Yak-1, which is already flying, with the cheapest and most profitable wooden structure, or the I-185. Which will need to be redone from CM to a tree. And what will be there at the exit, the grandmother said in two. - the choice is even simpler - I-180, but this car was correctly braked by the "absence" of the engine, and it saddens everyone that then it flew the whole war with the M-88 I-4. The series already had a Yakovlev machine.
    There was no engine for the 185 either. - and here you are, dear author of the lie, once again. M-71 twice passed state tests.
    In general, to be fair, the engine was not yet for the I-180. The I-180 was planned for the M-88 engine, which was on paper. The I-180-2 was charged with the M-87B engine, according to which the calculations were theoretical. Then the M-88 went into production, and then it began ... As a result of all this, in the summer of 1940, the M-88 engines were discontinued. Production was restored only from 13.11.1940/XNUMX/XNUMX - in general, to be fair, then you lied again. As was written above with the M-88, the entire war flew IL-4, and pr-in I-180 had to be renewed just from 13.11.1940/180/XNUMX, then by the beginning of the war would have had some I-XNUMX not inferior to the Germans.
    If the I-180 would hypothetically go into production, it is unlikely that fighter aircraft would release the great thousands, as some say. Rather, like the Su-2, which had the same engine and a very short fate. - or all the same, great thousands would have been launched, like the IL-4 that had the same engine and a very glorious fate. For reference, produced - 1 (DB-528), 3 (IL-5).
    Now by i-xnumx. Polikarpov developed the aircraft under the motor M-185. In addition to M-90, the use of AM-90, M-37 and M-120 was assumed. The list perfectly describes the moment: none of these engines were serially produced. - Both the Yak and LaGG were planned for the M-107, which at that time was also not there. Designing an aircraft for a promising engine is normal practice.
    The M-90 motor passed the 50-hour test only in March 1942, the M-71 in February 41st, and M-82 - in April of that year. - In the autumn of 1940, the new Shvetsov M-82 engine with a power of 1700 hp was successfully passed bench tests. author -> author -> author you are again a lie.
    But with the fighters of Polikarpov, the situation was really more than ugly: there is no engine, no excess metal, no machines, no skilled workers. - This problem exists exclusively in your head. About metal and motors was higher, and if it weren’t for someone’s desire - at any cost to overtake the "king of fighters", even if "holding by the shirt" ...
    Summarize. The tale of how the deputy director Yakovlev interfered with the designer Polikarpov, this can be archived. The guilt of Yakovlev I do not see that the preachers of the idea of ​​a "Kremlin conspiracy" did not write there. - however convenient. A few times to lie, a few reasons to reject the argument - "I don’t see" and voila ... continue on - "do not see", you do it well.
    To summarize - as someone said very well - "Roma decided that he had learned to think and began to write articles." In principle, there is nothing to add.
    1. stalkerwalker
      stalkerwalker April 10 2018 10: 31
      +2
      Quote: Gnus_
      And here for the NKAP there is a very simple choice: either the Yak-1, which is already flying, with the cheapest and most profitable wooden structure, or I-185. Which will need to be redone from the CM to a tree. And what will be there on the way out, another grandmother said in two

      There was a similar forced experiment in the history of Soviet aircraft manufacturing when V. Ilyushin, due to a lack of aluminum, was forced to replace the CM elements in the DB-3 design with wooden ones. As a result, the IL-4 came out, licked with better aerodynamics. But in the end, the weight of the empty aircraft turned out to be greater, and the rigidity of the structure was weaker.
    2. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 15: 15
      0
      same way
      And-16 was a harsh aircraft, not without flaws. The main thing - the wings were destroyed, could not withstand even normal overloads. It was a "trick", approximately, as the failure of the skin on the Yak-1.
      In the memoirs of S. Abrosov "Air war in the sky of Spain" refers to a large number of non-combat losses due to the destruction of the wing. 10% of the total number of dead pilots.

      Googled, dug:
      "62 I-16 type 5 were delivered from the USSR, which were supposed to significantly strengthen the Republican fighter aircraft. In practice, the arriving batch of aircraft proved to be practically unworkable. The M-25A engines were of inferior quality, and the wings had insufficient strength, which led to a number of accidents and a decrease in confidence in the aircraft. In their messages to Moscow, the Soviet representatives called these planes "wrecking," indicating that due to the destruction of the wings in flight, the pilots Lesnikov, Moseiko, Burov, Orzhanov died. Arriving aircraft had to be improved on the spot, to strengthen the wing and change the fully linen casing of the consoles.

      Among the dead due to the destruction of the wing was the commander of the I-16 squadron, Konstantin Kolesnikov
      "
      In total, out of 62 pieces of the defective batch of 5 dead pilots due to the destruction of the wing, there were apparently disasters without the death of the pilot. From this fact, we make a loud statement that the main "trick" of the I-16 is a weak wing ..... I'm in shock (I will be glad if they correct me)
      1. mkpda
        mkpda April 16 2018 19: 14
        0
        Information from Spain must be filtered. There and I-15 wings folded and died pilots, but it was a diversion.
    3. mkpda
      mkpda April 16 2018 19: 11
      0
      You can certainly boo the author of the article for the manner of presenting the material, but the fact remains that of all the new generation engines, only the M-82 went into the series and in the conditions of 1941-1942. these motors went to the warehouse. La-5 became the first aircraft suitable for the mass series under the M-82. All other types of engines, regardless of the number of successfully passed state tests, did not reach the mass series, there were only experimental series.
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer April 17 2018 11: 13
        +1
        Quote: mkpda
        You can certainly boo the author of the article for the manner of presenting the material, but the fact remains that of all the new generation engines, only the M-82 went into the series and in the conditions of 1941-1942. these motors went to the warehouse. La-5 became the first aircraft suitable for the mass series under the M-82. All other types of engines, regardless of the number of successfully passed state tests, did not reach the mass series, there were only experimental series.


        Yes, you can say a lot of things, like that there was no engine.
        In general, Shakhurin’s memoirs clearly state to whom they proposed to install a new M-82 engine on their fighters: Polikarpov, Mikoyan with Gurevich, Yakovlev, Lavochnin Gudkov. Well, on the Su-2 IL-2, Pe-2
        The first aircraft remotorization was made by Yakovlev Mikoyan Polikarpov.
        Shakhurin additionally connected designers to the solution of problems with LaGG-5 remotorization, but even in the summer of 1942 raw La-5 not brought into the troops went.

        The decision to adopt LaGG-3 is one big strategic mistake. - a very sophisticated technology for pasting a wing - 12 layers of veneer (1-1,5 mm thick), first collected on nails for gluing, went to the press in the war - which was certainly better and faster.
        Due to the loss of the only plant in Belarus for the production of wood delta, it was necessary to further weight the aircraft, switching to a pine tree. Materials for delta wood were imported. Clay became scarce already in 1942, they began to make substitutes from components, which is why several hundred finished aircraft by November 1942 turned out to be defective wings - they lost their shoes in flight! I had to urgently eliminate it.
        And high-quality aviation wood remained mostly in Ukraine and Belarus - in general, the bet on wood did not materialize.
        This and a significant weighting of the structure - a drop in maneuvering qualities and a long manufacturing process due to low manufacturability and a large number of special equipment - this is when the aircraft needed to be assembled more than failed.
  11. sivuch
    sivuch April 10 2018 10: 38
    +3
    We are talking about fighter Polikarpov I-180 and I-185, which supposedly surpassed everything available at that time in the development
    ----------
    Do not mix 180 and 185 in one pile. The first was originally just a rework of the donkey under the Gnome-Ron engines. Accordingly, he still had many shortcomings of the donkey, such as a cramped cockpit, poor visibility on take-off, and instability when firing.
    In general, Polikarpov was too scattered - he didn’t develop heavy bombers and flying boats, but he noted in other topics
    1. Amurets
      Amurets April 10 2018 11: 53
      +2
      Quote: sivuch
      In general, Polikarpov was too scattered - he didn’t develop heavy bombers and flying boats, but he noted in other topics

      That's for sure. Even if you look at the encyclopedias: at that time Polikarpov was working on two I-185 and I-200 fighters without modifications. V. Ivanov. Unknown Polikarpov.
      "At the end of 1937, the Tupolev Design Bureau was actually destroyed. The same fate awaited Polikarpov's Design Bureau. We have already mentioned that at the end of 1938 the second largest design bureau was not included in the financing plan for 1939. Systematically, or maybe Perhaps, and deliberately, the programs for the construction of new experimental machines and the introduction of those that had already passed flight tests into the series were disrupted.Polikarpov was accused of the fact that the number of planned tasks of his design bureau was on average 2,5 times greater than the number of tasks of any other design bureau, which is why design time grows, and the quality of development of experimental machines decreases.At the same time, the following facts were completely ignored: 1) that Polikarpov, as already mentioned above, himself repeatedly raised the question of reducing the number of planned tasks; 2) that the Polikarpov Design Bureau as of the beginning of January 1940 . on average three times outnumbered other aircraft design bureaus, since it included actually separate design bureaus at factories 1, 21, 22 and a special armament brigade Yu.
      Nikolai Nikolaevich understood that they wanted to make a scapegoat out of him for the state of affairs in our aviation. What remained for him in this difficult situation? Work, only work ...
      In March-April 1939, after deeply analyzing the prospects for the development of aviation, Polikarpov quite correctly identified the main tendency of this process - an increase in the specific power of the propulsion system simultaneously with an improvement in the aerodynamics of the aircraft.
      By this time, located at plant No. 1, its design bureau included three structural divisions: KB-1 (maneuverable fighters), KB-2 (high-speed monoplane fighters), KB-3 (bombers and multipurpose aircraft). "
    2. mark1
      mark1 April 10 2018 20: 29
      0
      Quote: sivuch
      Polikarpov was too scattered - he didn’t develop heavy bombers and flying boats

      Well why-NB for example
  12. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 10: 49
    +1
    Quote: stalkerwalker
    Quote: Gnus_
    And here for the NKAP there is a very simple choice: either the Yak-1, which is already flying, with the cheapest and most profitable wooden structure, or I-185. Which will need to be redone from the CM to a tree. And what will be there on the way out, another grandmother said in two

    There was a similar forced experiment in the history of Soviet aircraft manufacturing when V. Ilyushin, due to a lack of aluminum, was forced to replace the CM elements in the DB-3 design with wooden ones. As a result, the IL-4 came out, licked with better aerodynamics. But in the end, the weight of the empty aircraft turned out to be greater, and the rigidity of the structure was weaker.

    That's right, only this is not my statement, the author of the article.
  13. Dedok
    Dedok April 10 2018 10: 57
    +1
    Quote: kapitan281271
    I completely agree with you, but I read somewhere that the VMG Polikarpov himself offered Lavochkin, the only thing, then they issued an order (I don’t remember where, but there were versions that it was almost a death request of Polikarpov). And about Yakovlev ................. Two of my father’s aunts worked one at the Ilyushin Design Bureau and the second at Mikoyan. When there were their rare visits from Moscow to visit, I was still a boy, my ear warmed about what they sometimes talked about so, it was very surprising to hear from these intelligent women, ............. words ... ............. Russian words addressed to Yakovlev, the most respectable of which were BORN. Pokryshkin’s memoirs, to put it mildly, very non-forest references to this man, Kerber L.L. in his memoirs (And the matter went to war), he directly accuses Yakovlev of landing Tupolev and MANY others. With their relative Shakhurin, they did a lot of things.

    They were not “relatives” with Shakhurin, but they had common interests (many years later, much that surfaced came up), and “drowning” Polikarpov is one of them
  14. Dedok
    Dedok April 10 2018 11: 07
    +2
    Quote: demiurg
    La-5 went into the series in just a few months. It was a titmouse in a hand, and a titmouse in 42 year.
    The I-185 small-scale assembly, when serviced by factory technicians, of course showed the best results (Yak-7s added 20-30 km / h when serviced by factory crews). What happened while I-185 would be put on the conveyor, and he went into the army? At least at the end of 43 years, they would have had the first cars, traditionally with sores from the development of new technology, with no serialization. And the quality no less traditionally falls when staged in a series. And in the year 43 there was already La-5f, and at the end of the year 43, La-5fn, which immediately enlisted in large numbers and without any special sores. And in fact, in no way inferior to the I-185 M82.
    It’s good to speculate now that would it's better. And in 42, saves had not yet been invented, and it would not have been possible to restart the lost war from the save point.

    By the time of the announcement of the competition for a modern fighter in 1939, the I-180 had already passed all the tests, it was recommended, but as they say today it is banned.
    In the year 40, the I-185 also passed tests; its performance characteristics were better than those of the performance characteristics of the Yak-1, LaGG-3, and Mig-3; they didn’t give money for engines to Polikarpov, i.e. we see you as a purely administrative showdown (i.e., Yakovlev and Shakhurin -worked)
    We are now dealing with the fact that we had equipment comparable with the enemy, but purely on "undercover cases" was not allowed to release.
    And about the "luminium" of such an expensive metal - look at the Mig-3 was it from "percale and plywood"?
    1. mkpda
      mkpda April 16 2018 19: 25
      0
      The I-185 was good precisely with the M-71, which was not brought to the series. In other options, some superiority in performance characteristics was offset by the need for scarce materials and the complexity of production. In fact, all pre-war breakthrough structures (I-185, Tu-2) remained in the prototypes precisely because of the lack of selected engines in the series or lost their qualities when replacing the motor with what it was.
      1. DimerVladimer
        DimerVladimer April 17 2018 11: 43
        +2
        Quote: mkpda
        -185 was good with the M-71, which was not brought to the series. In other options, some superiority in performance characteristics was offset by the need for scarce materials and the complexity of production.


        You first get acquainted with the technology for pasting the wing for LaGG-3 / La-5 - this is up to 12 layers of veneer with glue and varnish - which also became a deficit by 1942, from which some wings from the effects of rain and frost - became unflown.
        What is the 12th layer of veneer with glue (in the center section)? This is a heavy profiled "plywood" garbage, 25-30 mm thick - 3-4 times heavier than a duralumin sheet with a thickness of 1,5-2 mm.
        What is excess mass in the wings - this is a lot of inertia when maneuvering both horizontally and vertically. And the first La-5s in this were inferior to modern German aircraft. Only the La-5FN of 1943 began to catch up in aerodynamics.
        The I-185 was in aerodynamics out of competition with the La-5 - it showed better flight and maneuverability with an engine of lower power M-82A than the La-5F with the M-82F engine.

        And La-5F climbed 5000m in 5,9 minutes, and Bf-109G2 (three-point) in 4.4 minutes - one and a half minutes of the difference in climb - it’s an eternity! The difference between life and death.

        That is, when entering a combat turn, when the La-5 was losing speed and entering the horizon, the BF-109G2 had 50-100m height advantages over it. boomed it at a convenient moment. Given the fact that serzhanitiks with several tens of flying hours were planted in La-5, it was extremely difficult for them to survive. Until the aerodynamically more advanced La-5FN.
  15. Dedok
    Dedok April 10 2018 11: 09
    +2
    Quote: mark1
    And La-7 in its performance characteristics was higher than I-185M82-alas


    I-185 was already "dead" by this time, and you compare I-185 and LA-7 in 1940?
    1. mark1
      mark1 April 10 2018 20: 32
      0
      But he was not alive in 1940.
  16. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA April 10 2018 11: 12
    +4
    What to say about what happened in 1941, after the loss of Ukrainian factories?

    And Volkhovsky.
    Almost the entire war, aluminum in the USSR was produced by a single plant - Uralsky.
    Aluminum smelting in 1942 - 51,7 thousand tons In 1943, 57,9 thousand tons were produced, in 1944 - 72,4 thousand tons, in 1945 - 71,5 thousand tons.
    During the war years, 189,2 thousand short tons of primary and 71,9 thousand short tons of secondary aluminum were delivered from the USA to the USSR, which is equivalent to 256,4 thousand tons of primary aluminum. In addition, the USSR received 35,4 thousand tons of aluminum from the UK and 36,3 thousand tons of aluminum from Canada. Total Western supplies of aluminum to the USSR in 1941-1945 amounted to 328,1 thousand tons
  17. fighter angel
    fighter angel April 10 2018 11: 18
    +6
    You know, here I look at the whole thing, regarding Alexander Sergeyevich Yakovlev, and these are the thoughts that arise. This "pouring mud" over at Yakovlev did not begin yesterday or the day before yesterday; back in perestroika times this "rethinking" began. So many absurd "theses" were expressed then, and we swallowed it all, tried to believe. Then all our self-consciousness, all national pride, was destroyed and humiliated in this way. All this was carried out under the guise of a "struggle for the truth." And it would seem, but where does Alexander Yakovlev? And very much so. And that's why. No one has popularized our Soviet aviation like him. Remember his books. Boys read "to the holes." And how many of us did these books give a guide to our whole lives? Yes, tens of thousands. Aircraft modeling, flying clubs DOSAAF, VVAUL, flight work, life in Aviation. Not enough if health, engineers, designers. For God's sake! But the most important thing is that for all of us, the first machine, our first “training desk,” WAS EXACTLY YAK !!! Someone else has a Yak-18, Yak-12, those who later, this is Yak-18A, Yak-18T, Yak-52. The road to heaven, we all began with Yak. That's why they began to pour mud on Alexander Yakovlev. They can’t forgive him “our friends” from “abroad” that we have “Winged Tribe” in our country. Thanks to him and his "Yakam"! And not just eat, but it was, is and will be! Despite everything. And whatever one of you here would say about Yakovlev, I bow to this Person, Designer! With a feeling of deep gratitude. And no other way.
    Roman, you are a plus! And many thanks for this article!
    1. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer April 11 2018 13: 55
      +2
      Quote: fighter angel
      But the most important thing is that for all of us, the first machine, our first “training desk,” WAS EXACTLY YAK !!! Someone else has a Yak-18, Yak-12, those who later, this is Yak-18A, Yak-18T, Yak-52. The road to heaven, we all began with Yak. That's why they began to pour mud on Alexander Yakovlev. They can’t forgive him “our friends” from “abroad” that we have “Winged Tribe” in our country. Thanks to him and his "Yakam"! And not just eat, but it was, is and will be! Despite everything. And whatever one of you here would say about Yakovlev, I bow to this Person, Designer!

      Calm down.
      You write as if Yakolev, at his own expense, designed and supplied "flight desks" to aviation schools.
      In general, U-1 and U-2 (Po-2) were at the aviation schools before them, then they went UT-1 UT-2 Yakovleva.
      I doubt that the pilots of the 30s wailed - "this is Polikarpov and Yakovlev opened the way for me to the sky."

      If there were no designer Yakovlev — there would be training aircraft of other designers — nothing would have changed in the development of training aircraft of the USSR and Soviet aviation.
      1. fighter angel
        fighter angel April 11 2018 14: 37
        +1
        And you dear, DimerVladimer, do not worry either.
        What does your phrase mean: "Do you write as if Yakolev, at his own expense, designed and supplied" flight desks "to aviation schools.?
        Excuse me, are you “capitalized” completely if you transfer everything to money?
        Understand that the time was completely different then, and people, including A.S. Yakovlev, were not thinking about how to fill a pocket with “dough” and not about “cool” cars, mansions, yachts. And they thought that the youth would go to aviation, by vocation, at the call of their hearts, and work for this purpose, to give an affordable, simple and unpretentious “flying school desk”. And money has absolutely nothing to do with it. People thought about the future of their country, about the future of its aviation. About how to captivate youth with heaven and aviation.
        Write: "I doubt that the pilots of the 30s wailed -" it was Polikarpov and Yakovlev who opened the way for me to the sky. "
        Wailing grandmother at the wake.
        Follow the terminology, be so kind!
        And who if not Yakovlev and Polikarpov? There were practically no other primary training aircraft ... Talk and ask any pilot, he will answer you that he always remembers his very first aircraft with gratitude !!!
        And guess what would happen if ... you can infinitely many. Ungrateful thing. In my opinion, it’s good that the creation of the “first flight” aviation was led by such an indifferent, anxious for the success of the whole thing, and purposeful person as Alexander Yakovlev.
        You would have looked more like these people now, and the Il-112 would have already gone to flight tests, and the PIC would have been taught to pilot the car, rather than pull levers and buttons in a certain sequence.
        1. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer April 11 2018 15: 28
          +2
          Quote: fighter angel
          You would have looked more like these people now, and the Il-112 would have already gone to flight tests, and the PIC would have been taught to pilot the car, rather than pull levers and buttons in a certain sequence.

          I subscribe to this.

          Any pilot warmly recalls his first flight and first plane.
          I mean, if it weren’t for Polikarpov and Yakovlev, there would be other designers.
          At the same time, Yakovlev himself did not personally put his hands on the development of the I-26 (Yak-1) it was done by his deputies or chiefs of the design bureau. The general designer (including Yakovlev) is an organizational and managerial position - that is, to distribute work between departments: layouts, chassis, aerodynamics, structuralists, etc. In the best case, the “chief” approved the preliminary design and Yakovlev didn’t stand by the culman with a pencil when he went to the post of deputy people's commissar.
          When I was involved in design bureaus, no one said that it was Makeev’s rocket, Glushko — there were teams of designers of several hundred people each. And in design bureau Yakovleva was engaged in design at different stages from 20 to several hundred.
          So it’s more true to say - I belong to the cars of Yakovlev Design Bureau, and not to Yakovlev.

          Its like ch. I respect the designer, but as deputy commissar, at first he did a lot of useful and not very useful things. And the fate of the I-180 I-185 is not only the fault of Shakhurin, but also his deputy Yakovlev, including the lives of pilots who died because someone decided that it was better for us to fly on LaGG-1/3 / La-5 than on I-180/185.
          Because the design culture of LaGG was incomparably lower than the experience and knowledge of Polikarpov Design Bureau.
  18. kvs207
    kvs207 April 10 2018 11: 23
    +1
    Quote: Vovan 73
    Yakovlev opposed Stalin at a report, citing the fact that there were no free factories for the new machine. and alteration of mass production will lead to a reduction in the number of aircraft shipped to the front. The excuse looks weak, as the land lease is poorly poor but delivered planes. The reason, in my opinion, is different, the I-185 even with 82 engines in 42 in terms of performance characteristics exceeded even the promising Yak-9s and La-7s, while possessing much greater firepower

    Wow, man knows the realities of that time.
    "Allied supplies were very unevenly distributed over the years of the war. After the Japanese attack on the United States on December 7, 1941, Lend-Lease supplies were suspended and continued on December 28, 1941 with the intention of catching up with the gap by April 1, 1942. [17]. However, the situation returned to normal only since the second half of 1943. Of the 800 aircraft and 1000 tanks promised by England that the USSR was supposed to receive in October-December 1941, 669 aircraft arrived (for comparison, on October 1, 1941, there were 3 of the 568 fronts defending Moscow and 389 of them are serviceable [18]) and 487 tanks. From October 1941 to June 30, 1942 the United States sent 545 aircraft to the USSR, 783 tanks, more than 3 times less than promised, and 16502 trucks, that is, more than 5 times less than planned. " Wikipedia
  19. SASHA OLD
    SASHA OLD April 10 2018 13: 20
    +1
    as an option, the truth is somewhere in the middle, no one has canceled the undercover games either, I read articles where Yakovleva was almost put up as a monster who wanted to gobble up Polikarpov (and everyone else) ... I think that the combination of the real situation described in this article, plus places unhealthy competition, personal qualities of people, their relationship also played a role. But yes, if you look at the realities of that time, it was the situation that was said here that played the most important role that the superplane “did not take off” ...
    nice article thanks
  20. Forever so
    Forever so April 10 2018 13: 24
    +2
    It seems that Yakovlev otmusolil author)) Roman, ay !! The winner writes the story. Yakovlev wrote as he wanted, we were not there. One thing can be said about the Second World War, until the peace generals ran out, neither super planes nor super tanks could do anything. I’ve been disabled and lay there for a couple of years, thanks to the Internet, I re-read the thuja heap and memories and reconstructions and Papadans, the best planes appeared by the time they began to be used correctly. And no matter how many the best planes and pilots saved by the radio and ground observers !!. In general, a strange article.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 10 2018 15: 53
      +2
      Quote: Forever so
      One thing can be said about the Second World War, until the peace generals ran out, neither super planes nor super tanks could do anything.

      Yes, yes, yes .. the generals are to blame. smile
      A very convenient position for colonels, majors, captains, lieutenants and sergeants. In a couple of months, a third of the new rifles were brought to rust in the barrel bore - the generals (or even Stalin) were to blame. They did not begin to dig in immediately after taking up positions - the generals were to blame. Combines fire 122 mm and 152 mm case systems in small groups and even individual enemy soldiers (a real fact that fell into the order in the North-West direction) - the generals are to blame. The sergeant does not know what to do in reconnaissance and returns back from the German trenches - the generals are to blame. The battalion commander forgot about his mortars and did not include them in the offensive plan (or did not forget, but did not give the order to transfer the fire - and they covered the trench already repelled from the Germans) - the generals were to blame.
      All were good. And no general could have done more in 1941, when he had 60% of privates with or without primary education in his subordination, and 30% of the same were illiterate among the youngcoms teaching them. And this is not in the infantry, but in the elite armored forces (statistics for 1941 according to the KOVO).
      As a result, the army had to be trained at all levels already in the war. And take exams by natural selection - those who read the statutes and put them into practice survived. And those who decided "Why dig trenches - anyway, retreat tomorrow"Then they fled from the German reconnaissance battalion as a division and, as a result, they came under German bullets, some under Mehlis’s investigation.
      1. mkpda
        mkpda April 16 2018 19: 57
        0
        There is a zone of responsibility at each level of command. It was the marshals and generals who ordered thousands of tanks and planes from the military-industrial complex without walkie-talkies or at least radio receivers, without security equipment, without the necessary spare parts, etc. It was from the temporary combat Charter of the infantry, signed by Marshal Egorov, that the entire field fortification of the infantry was reduced to the notorious individual cells and survived to the Second World War.
        But the level from the "dresser" to the commander often did not do anything, so as not to be accused of anything else ...
  21. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 15: 03
    +1
    The adoption of a particular aircraft into service, this is far from the intrigue of the designers.
    Of course, competition between design bureaus, and teams within the design bureau exists. Everyone wants to show that the resources were not wasted, and vanity is nowhere to be found.
    Nevertheless, when adopting an aircraft in service, they are taken into account in a comprehensive manner:
    - LTH in full and weapons;
    - industry opportunities;
    - the difficulty of mastering the flight crew;
    - the complexity and cost of operation.
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 15: 49
      +2
      ".. Trying to understand the reasons for not launching the I-185 series, we often come across an argument about the inappropriateness of restructuring well-established production during the war. However, we note that this generally true principle was repeatedly violated even in the most difficult times: in early 1942. in Gorky, the introduction of the Yak-7 began instead of LaGG-3, close to flight data; in the same 1942, the Omsk plant, which had just begun production of one of the most advanced Tu-2 bombers, was transferred to the Yak-7 ...

      By the summer of 1943, the Soviet Air Force quantitatively surpassed Nazi aviation at the front by half. As soon as this issue was decided, it was time to think about quality, especially since no one knew how long the war would last. And the transfer of one or two factories that produced up to 1944 inclusive the Yak-7 or LaGG-3 to the production of I-185 would have looked more than reasonable. (8)

      Another reason is the lack of knowledge of the M-71, and first of all the mistake of Polikarpov, who made a bet on him. (9) But, firstly, Nikolai Nikolaevich designed the I-185 under the M-90, and then sequentially installed all the engines available. Secondly, in the event of a delay with the M-71, the AS-82FN could be temporarily installed on the fighter, a slightly lower power of which would be compensated by a lower weight and midship. Thirdly, back in August 1942, bench tests of a more advanced version of the M-90 in 2080 liters passed. s, and it was supposed to increase its power to 2500 hp On the basis of the M-90, the 27-cylinder three-row "star" M-95 (3300 hp) was developed. But, as Urmin wrote in his articles, the state tests of the M-90, "during which the engine had already run 100 hours with increased power three times," were curtailed, which "meant the termination of the pilot work on the development of the M-88 family." But if after state tests in Novosibirsk it was supposed to build the I-185 with both the M-71 and the M-82, then after the appearance of La-5, Polikarpov was ordered to build the reference copy only with the M-71. "
      Adapted from the book "Fatal I-180" by Yuri Guglya, Vladimir Ivanov
      nothing to add
      1. mkpda
        mkpda April 16 2018 20: 06
        0
        M-90 remained the same as the M-71. The only motor available was the M-82, but Polikarpov could not independently ensure its reliable operation in afterburner, unlike Lavochkin, with the direct assistance of Shvetsov. TTX I-185M-82 were higher (but the difference was much more modest than with the M-71) than the La-5, but the capabilities of the La-5 in combat conditions were higher precisely due to the full use of the capabilities of the M-82. In addition, La-5 could be obtained in a large series tomorrow, and the I-185M-82 with a large delay and much higher costs.
        1. DimerVladimer
          DimerVladimer April 17 2018 12: 30
          +1
          Quote: mkpda
          La-5, but the capabilities of La-5 in combat conditions were higher precisely due to the full use of the capabilities of the M-82. In addition, La-5 could be obtained in a large series tomorrow, and the I-185M-82 with a large delay and much higher costs.


          Tales - The I-186 with the M82 was circled, tested and ready for production in early 1942.
          La-5F had characteristics comparable to a forced engine. And the aerodynamics of the Lavochkin machine, according to the recommendations of TsAGI, La-5 was corrected in the series only 1,5 years (!) Later - with the advent of La-5FN with a forced engine with direct injection.
          And before that, La-5 / La-5F were inferior both vertically (for almost 1,5 minutes Bf-109G-2) and horizontally - the turn time was 21 seconds for La-5F (04.1943 g release) and 20,5 seconds Bf-109g-2
  22. Arkady Kharitonov
    Arkady Kharitonov April 10 2018 16: 04
    0
    with which one can agree with something not. Both I-180 and I-185 had aluminum wing cladding. Yaks and especially LAGGs were made from cheaper materials. But the main aircraft before the war was a MIG with an aluminum center wing. The fact that constantly went under the carpet struggle among designers is a fact. Access to the body was very important. The death of Chekalov worsened the position of Polikarpov. The fact that the leadership was impressed by German aircraft was tuned in favor of water-cooled engines is a fact. Most likely, Yakovlev supported these views among the leadership. But I think that Polikarpov wanted to save the biplanes played an important role. At Polikarpov, fighters were built at 2 plants. 21 plants built monoplanes and another plant biplanes. To preserve these 2 factories Polikarpov and fought for biplanes. As a result, the director of the biplane plant survived Polikarpov and created Mikoyan’s design bureau by taking his plane from Poilkarpov. This started the problems of Polikarpov Design Bureau.
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 17: 49
      +3
      Polikarpov was engaged in biplanes only because the Air Force leadership wanted it, it was it that gave tasks for the design and manufacture of maneuverable (i.e., performed according to the biplane scheme) fighter aircraft with an air-cooled engine
  23. LeonidL
    LeonidL April 10 2018 17: 33
    +2
    "... for example, the Bisnovat SK-1 plane, which flew 100 km / h faster than the Yak-1, could not carry weapons at all. And the radiator was a wing. An interesting record plane, because Bisnovat called it a fighter, didn’t. Similarly, the Germans Me-209, which Rezun called the best fighter in the world and with a squeal, attacked in his manner the Russian ace, who said that he did not meet such a plane in the sky of the war and did not know. Naturally, he did not meet and could not meet, since the Luftwaffe disowned him like hell from incense. But I found this mutant in the English encyclopedia "The worst weapon in the world ..." For those who wish, "The World's Worst Weapons from Exploding Guns to Malfunctioning Missiles". By Martin J. Dougherty. Metro Books, New York, Amber Books Ltd, 2007.
  24. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 17: 56
    +2
    Quote: KERMET
    in the same 1942, the Omsk plant, which had just begun production of one of the most advanced Tu-2 bombers, was transferred to the Yak-7 ...


    Amazed at the persistence of some 1942 year, the problem of deficit duralumin in full growth. And give him another all-metal plane. And most importantly, why? When there is the same type of Pe-2.
    Yes, he is inferior in terms of performance characteristics. But war has its own logic. Therefore, it is correct to increase the output of an existing machine than to launch a new one.

    By the summer of 1943, the Soviet Air Force quantitatively surpassed Nazi aviation at the front by half. As soon as this issue was decided, it was time to think about quality, especially since no one knew how long the war would last. And the transfer of one or two factories that produced up to 1944 inclusive the Yak-7 or LaGG-3 to the production of I-185 would have looked more than reasonable. (8)


    Is this from the point of view of alternative history buffs right?
    In reality, launching the I-185 means lowering the output of existing vehicles, and in return getting a crude fighter, which will be located on the ground much more than in the air.
    Whereas the continued increase in the number of machines even inferior in terms of performance characteristics allows us to gain air supremacy and reduce our own losses.

    Another reason is the lack of knowledge of the M-71, and first of all the mistake of Polikarpov, who made a bet on him. (9) But, firstly, Nikolai Nikolaevich designed the I-185 under the M-90, and then sequentially installed all the engines available. Secondly, in the event of a delay with the M-71, the AS-82FN could be temporarily installed on the fighter, a slightly lower power of which would be compensated by a lower weight and midship. Thirdly, back in August 1942, bench tests of a more advanced version of the M-90 in 2080 liters passed. s, and it was supposed to increase its power to 2500 hp On the basis of the M-90, the 27-cylinder three-row "star" M-95 (3300 hp) was developed. But, as Urmin wrote in his articles, the state tests of the M-90, "during which the engine had already run 100 hours with increased power three times," were curtailed, which "meant the termination of the pilot work on the development of the M-88 family." But if after state tests in Novosibirsk it was supposed to build the I-185 with both the M-71 and the M-82, then after the appearance of La-5, Polikarpov was ordered to build the reference copy only with the M-71. "


    Neither M-71, nor M-90 were in serial production due to lack of knowledge.
    With ASH-82FN I-185 is no better than La-5FN. and inferior to La Xnumx.

    Adapted from the book "Fatal I-180" by Yuri Guglya, Vladimir Ivanov
    nothing to add


    This is exactly when, as evidence, the opinion of historians, there is definitely nothing to add. laughing
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 20: 22
      0
      Amazed at the persistence of some 1942 year, the problem of deficit duralumin in full growth. And give him another all-metal plane. And most importantly, why? When there is the same type of Pe-2.

      I am amazed at the blindness of some, re-read the whole quote, it was about the inappropriateness of restructuring well-established production during the war
      and in return to receive a crude fighter, which will be located on the earth much more than in the air.

      Is this from the point of view of alternative history buffs right? Or is it your personal fantasy?
    2. mark1
      mark1 April 10 2018 20: 39
      0
      Quote: shuravi
      Marvel at the persistence of some

      This is the credo - "here is the count, start the bastard from the beginning"
  25. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 19: 13
    0
    Quote: shuravi
    Neither M-71, nor M-90 were in serial production due to lack of knowledge.


    Many documents refer to the M-71 as a real engine. Was built He is from 1941 small series and was used not only on the I-185, but also on the excellent Su-6 attack aircraft (significantly superior in performance characteristics and combat survivability of the Il-2), later - on the DBV-102 V.M. Myasishchev ...

    Quote: shuravi
    With ASH-82FN I-185 is no better than La-5FN. and inferior to La Xnumx.
    - will it not hinder you to give proof of this revelation?
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 10 2018 19: 49
      +2
      Quote: Gnus_
      Many documents refer to the M-71 as a real engine.

      The M-88 of the first lots was also a real engine. Gosy also passed. And then for six months it was sent for revision.
      M-82 also passed the state. But at the same time, he had a candlelight life of 14 hours and very strict restrictions on the duration of the take-off mode.
      1. mkpda
        mkpda April 16 2018 20: 16
        0
        Problems with afterburner - the problem of engine cooling. It was decided for the first time on La-5. Other types of this mode used with great restrictions or in general it was prohibited.
    2. Alf
      Alf April 10 2018 22: 36
      +1
      Quote: Gnus_
      - will it not hinder you to give proof of this revelation?

      I gave a table above, in which I selected both aircraft.
    3. mkpda
      mkpda April 16 2018 20: 14
      0
      M-71 and M-90 were built in a small series, and M-82 - a large one! And the motors from the factory went for a long time to the warehouse, there were no aircraft under it.
      La-5 was the first aircraft with the M-82, which were able to provide its normal cooling and, accordingly, normal operation on the afterburner. Therefore, in combat conditions, formally inferior to the TTX La-5, it had a definite advantage over the I-185.
  26. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 19: 48
    +3
    Quote: Gnus_
    Quote: shuravi
    Neither M-71, nor M-90 were in serial production due to lack of knowledge.


    Many documents refer to the M-71 as a real engine. Was built He is from 1941 small series and was used not only on the I-185, but also on the excellent Su-6 attack aircraft (significantly superior in performance characteristics and combat survivability of the Il-2), later - on the DBV-102 V.M. Myasishchev ...


    Are you out of your mind? Or is it a great secret for you, what does small-scale production for experimental machines mean?

    Quote: shuravi
    With ASH-82FN I-185 is no better than La-5FN. and inferior to La Xnumx.
    - will it not hinder you to give proof of this revelation?


    Do you not even know this?
    http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/i185.html
    Or are you like any sofa strategist operating only LTX and then not all? bully
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 20: 26
      0
      But Lavochkin did not know that the M-71 does not exist, since he tried to install this fantasy on his plane
      1. KERMET
        KERMET April 10 2018 20: 30
        0
        By the way, where did you get the I-185 from ASH-82FN?
        By the way, I repeat again, at La-7 what was the bomb load?
    2. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 20: 59
      0
      Do you not even know this?
      http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/i185.html

      And where is the confirmation of your words? Rather, the opposite is stated there.
      Indeed, if we consider that when installing the M-82FN, the weight of the fighter was reduced by no less than 300 kg, and the design of the serial I-185 was facilitated, then it can be argued that with the M-82FN the machine would have a weight of 3100-3150 kg and flight data would even surpass I-185 with substandard M-71 in 1942
  27. John22
    John22 April 10 2018 20: 30
    +1
    The mistakes of the NKAPA were: 1. The task for the development of new fighters only with liquid-cooled engines. 2. Armament of new fighters with 7,62 mm machine guns. 3. The lack of radio stations on fighters (they had to be purchased in the USA already from 1939 according to the experience of the Winter War). But understanding was not enough.
    1. Alf
      Alf April 10 2018 22: 41
      +2
      Quote: John22
      1. The task of developing new fighters only with liquid-cooled engines.

      Before my eyes stood two beautiful fighters with such engines, ME-109 and Spitfire.
      Quote: John22

      3. The lack of radio stations on fighter jets

      On all experimental fighters there were radio stations, this was required by the technical task.
      Quote: John22
      (it was necessary to buy them in the USA already from 1939 according to the experience of the Winter War).

      Who would sell them?
      Quote: John22
      But understanding was not enough.

      There was enough understanding. There was not all of the above.
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 11 2018 13: 48
      0
      Quote: John22
      3. The lack of radio stations on fighters (they had to be purchased in the USA already from 1939 according to the experience of the Winter War).

      Yes, yes, yes ... and the stupid ancestors didn’t know that it turned out that one could safely buy air radios in a country that imposed a “moral embargo” on the USSR during the Soviet-Finnish War.
      You can forget about all the talk about the free market and the formal optionality of the moral embargo. In the late 30s, against the backdrop of the unfolding mobilization of American industry and the growth of government orders for military equipment, no one would risk millions in profits for the order of the USSR. For those caught by the hand had every chance of flying past the state contract. Moreover, sales transactions and even the design of military equipment required the approval of the State Department.
      A case in point is Japan, on which such a moral embargo was imposed back in the late 30s (they began with aircraft engines and aircraft) - deliveries from the United States were immediately cut off.
      However, why go far — this is the situation in the United States from the point of view of the head of the Soviet commission V.I. Minakov, who tried to order design and construction of EM for the USSR in the USA in 1939:
      ... In connection with the international situation, the attitude of the American government towards the USSR was deteriorating progressively and by the time I left New York, it had essentially turned into an unbridled anti-Soviet campaign (the notorious Daoya committee, slanderous newspaper articles, public speeches by reactionary congressmen about the requirements for breaking diplomatic relations about the USSR, Roosevelt's open transition to the side of the reaction and supporters of the war, and finally, open pressure on firms that have business relations about us ...
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 11 2018 14: 45
      0
      Quote: John22
      2. Armament of new fighters with 7,62 mm machine guns.

      It’s good to be healthy and rich. ©
      What did our designers have in the alternatives?
      12,7 mm ShVAK machine gun - discontinued in 1937.
      The 12,7-mm Berezin machine gun is only being put into production, and the pace of its release is such that it was necessary to curtail the production of five-point MiGs that had begun, and even begin to remove wing wings from already produced vehicles.
      The 20mm ShVAK machine gun is too heavy. However, this was not his only drawback.

      1. BV330
        BV330 April 21 2018 06: 59
        0
        And the Americans, even before any moral embargoes, proposed building a large factory under the Colt Browning 12,7mm. But someone was very shameful to surrender to the mercy of the capitalists (. Of course, all the terms of development on the UB stream were stolen, but the main thing was that they didn’t let the “enemies” into their territory.
  28. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 20: 54
    0
    Quote: Alexey RA

    The M-88 of the first lots was also a real engine. Gosy also passed. And then for six months it was sent for revision.
    M-82 also passed the state. But at the same time, he had a candlelight life of 14 hours and very strict restrictions on the duration of the take-off mode.

    And that they didn’t fly with them all the war? The task would be set to bring to mind the 71st and it would be brought. With all this, the M-71 was produced in series.
    1. NF68
      NF68 April 10 2018 21: 49
      +2
      Quote: Gnus_
      With all this, the M-71 was mass-produced.


      Neither the M-90 nor the M-71 were brought up. To produce the USSR’s new 18 cylinder stars during the decisive period of the Second World War when the fate of the country was decided was an extremely risky venture and therefore the choice was made in favor of an easier-to-execute 14 cylinder M-82. Although M-82 did not reach the point that they could ever squeeze with M-90 or M-71, but on the other hand, M-82 was preferable to M-88 and M-89.
      1. mkpda
        mkpda April 16 2018 20: 20
        0
        There was a sad experience installing M-82 on IL-4 instead of M-88, flight data only worsened.
        1. NF68
          NF68 April 18 2018 19: 55
          0
          Quote: mkpda
          There was a sad experience installing M-82 on IL-4 instead of M-88, flight data only worsened.


          Do you know anything about the details?
          1. BV330
            BV330 April 21 2018 07: 04
            0
            From memory - lower altitude due to the performance characteristics of the motors, and worse economy, here the M-87-88 were out of competition. A high speed at low and medium altitudes for a long-range bomber is generally not very necessary.
            1. NF68
              NF68 April 22 2018 15: 41
              0
              Quote: BV330
              From memory - lower altitude due to the performance characteristics of the motors, and worse economy, here the M-87-88 were out of competition. A high speed at low and medium altitudes for a long-range bomber is generally not very necessary.


              M-88 also could not boast of good reliability.
  29. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 21: 03
    +2
    Quote: shuravi

    Do you not even know this?
    http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fww2/i185.html
    Or are you like any sofa strategist operating only LTX and then not all? bully
    - well, if we talked about this proof then - Now, after launching the La-5 series, Polikarpov was instructed to focus only on the M-71 - and you, if not the couch strategist operating with all LTTH, know that La-5 was built with M-82A. True I-185 with M-82A, thereby "all" LTTH wings of La-5 with the same M-82A. Therefore, to you as a non-couch strategist, the same question remains - Quote: shuravi
    With ASH-82FN I-185 is no better than La-5FN. and inferior to La Xnumx
    .
    - will it not hinder you to give proof of this revelation? Preferably a sign.
  30. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 21: 30
    +1
    Quote: KERMET

    I am amazed at the blindness of some, re-read the whole quote, it was about the inappropriateness of restructuring well-established production during the war


    And what is the use of established production if there are no resources for it? Replace duralumin with roofing iron?


    and in return to receive a crude fighter, which will be located on the earth much more than in the air.

    Is this from the point of view of alternative history buffs right? Or is it your personal fantasy?


    Well, yes, how do the boys know about such a thing as "childhood illnesses" of an airplane? What does preparation time for a second departure have?
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 21: 41
      +1
      Regarding the first question, re-read the beginning of my message, where do you get quotes from, there is an answer for what I wrote about it
      As for the second I-185, it’s not a whipping up on his knee as in the case of La-5, but about operation, here’s the opinion of not the boys, but your colleagues - pilots and what’s the main thing about the engineer
      In particular, pilots Stefanovsky, Loginov and a leading engineer Lazarev personally addressed I.V. Stalin: The fighter is simple to operate. Its units are easily accessible for repair in the field.
  31. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 21: 39
    +2
    Quote: KERMET
    But Lavochkin did not know that the M-71 does not exist, since he tried to install this fantasy on his plane


    Whatever heard about the resource? bully
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 21: 47
      0
      Question to Lavochkin?
  32. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 21: 43
    +2
    Quote: KERMET
    By the way, where did you get the I-185 from ASH-82FN?


    Typo. However, the additional 150 l / s did not give any advantages to the I-185. He looked pale with 2000 l / s.


    By the way, I repeat again, at La-7 what was the bomb load?
    Two hundred parts. Real bomb load. Polikarpov said reloading.
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 21: 51
      +1
      Quote: shuravi
      Quote: KERMET
      By the way, where did you get the I-185 from ASH-82FN?


      Typo. However, the additional 150 l / s did not give any advantages to the I-185. He looked pale with 2000 l / s.


      By the way, I repeat again, at La-7 what was the bomb load?
      Two hundred parts. Real bomb load. Polikarpov said reloading.

      Fantasy again ....
      Go to Google - there you will find amazing discoveries and even photos of the I-185 with two 250kg bombs bully7
      Why, by the way, 4 pendants for hundreds of I-185?
  33. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 21: 49
    +2
    Quote: Gnus_
    - well, if we talked about this proof then - Now, after launching the La-5 series, Polikarpov was instructed to focus only on the M-71


    It is understandable. I-185 and with 2000 l / s did not particularly shine.

    - and you, if not the couch strategist operating with all LTTH, know that La-5 was built with M-82A. True I-185 with M-82A, thereby "all" LTTH wings of La-5 with the same M-82A. Therefore, to you as a non-couch strategist, the same question remains - Quote: shuravi
    With ASH-82FN I-185 is no better than La-5FN. and inferior to La Xnumx
    .



    This is called a sofa strategist of the second kind. Wait for the first typo and rejoice violently. laughing


    - will it not hinder you to give proof of this revelation? Preferably a sign.


    The links for all LTX aircraft are, read, compare. bully
  34. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 21: 50
    +1
    Quote: KERMET
    Question to Lavochkin?


    Did Lavochkin make engines? laughing
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 21: 58
      0
      No, he just as a designer installed this engine on his plane, ask yourself a question - does he have a lot of free time to suffer such garbage, how is it doing with your useless engine?
  35. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 22: 07
    0
    Quote: NF68
    Neither the M-90 nor the M-71 were brought up. To produce the USSR’s new 18 cylinder stars during the decisive period of the Second World War when the fate of the country was decided was an extremely risky venture and therefore the choice was made in favor of an easier-to-execute 14 cylinder M-82. Although M-82 did not reach the point that they could ever squeeze with M-90 or M-71, but on the other hand, M-82 was preferable to M-88 and M-89.

    M-107 just did not finish, but the aircraft with him were mass-produced. I-180 did not have to be strangled, then such a problem would not have stood in the decisive period of the Second World War. And what new ones are they in 42? M-71 39 of the year, as well as M-82.
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA April 11 2018 14: 53
      0
      Quote: Gnus_
      M-107 just did not finish, but the aircraft with him were mass-produced.

      Good example. The engine was developed from March 1940, and the aircraft with it went to the front only in the 1944 year (because the USSR did not have free capacity to switch from M-105 to M-107 without a drawdown). Moreover, for maintenance by average technical personnel, the engine was complicated - as a result of the declared resource in combat units, it did not give out. There was only one IAP that blocked this resource - only in it it was possible to organize the work of technicians according to the instructions. and not by the order of "come on, come on. quick, quick."
      Moreover, if the Yak-9U were in the series in 1942-1943, then with the voltage of the IA working, it would certainly not be possible for him to see the normal MOT engine. And who then needs a fighter with an engine resource of less than 50 hours?
      1. NF68
        NF68 April 17 2018 16: 57
        0
        Quote: Alexey RA
        Quote: Gnus_
        M-107 just did not finish, but the aircraft with him were mass-produced.

        Good example. The engine was developed from March 1940, and the aircraft with it went to the front only in the 1944 year (because the USSR did not have free capacity to switch from M-105 to M-107 without a drawdown). Moreover, for maintenance by average technical personnel, the engine was complicated - as a result of the declared resource in combat units, it did not give out. There was only one IAP that blocked this resource - only in it it was possible to organize the work of technicians according to the instructions. and not by the order of "come on, come on. quick, quick."
        Moreover, if the Yak-9U were in the series in 1942-1943, then with the voltage of the IA working, it would certainly not be possible for him to see the normal MOT engine. And who then needs a fighter with an engine resource of less than 50 hours?


        It should be noted here that the Junko engine building company of Junkers, which had much more experience in developing piston aircraft engines by the beginning of the 1940's, was rightfully considered one of the leaders in this area in the world. But this unit was also transported with Jumo-213 from the beginning of development to the beginning of large-scale production for about 7 years-from the end of the 1937 year to the end of the 1943 year.
    2. NF68
      NF68 April 12 2018 21: 40
      0
      Quote: Gnus_
      Quote: NF68
      Neither the M-90 nor the M-71 were brought up. To produce the USSR’s new 18 cylinder stars during the decisive period of the Second World War when the fate of the country was decided was an extremely risky venture and therefore the choice was made in favor of an easier-to-execute 14 cylinder M-82. Although M-82 did not reach the point that they could ever squeeze with M-90 or M-71, but on the other hand, M-82 was preferable to M-88 and M-89.

      M-107 just did not finish, but the aircraft with him were mass-produced. I-180 did not have to be strangled, then such a problem would not have stood in the decisive period of the Second World War. And what new ones are they in 42? M-71 39 of the year, as well as M-82.


      On production aircraft, the M-107 engines did not work normally even after the war. Well, the rings would simply collapse, but the cliffs of the connecting rods were not rare. And this is in peacetime when pilots had the opportunity to carefully monitor the operating modes of the engines. During the battle, the pilot is not up to it and the probability of engine failure or destruction in this case is even higher. I agree to the account of I-180, and as for the M-90 and M-71, it is not surprising that despite the fact that the M-71 began to be developed with 1939 and it was not brought to life in 1942, we can Compare with the engine manufacturers of the German company BMW. This company had a bit more experience than in the USSR, but this company in the 1939 year began to develop on the basis of the 14-cylinder BMW-139 18-cylinder engine BMW-140. Then, when the BMW engine division in 1938 was combined with Bramo, all the leading developments were carefully studied and in 1939, on the basis of the new 14 cylinder BMW-801, they started developing the 18 cylinder more promising BMW-802, but also in 1942 the year had not yet been completed, although the Germans at that time had a better industrial situation than the USSR. Then the Germans at the end of the 1942 of the year brought the Jumo-24 A / B-222 3 cylinder engine, and despite this the Germans were also not able to organize large-scale production of this engine and until the end of the war only 289 engines of this type of different series were manufactured. They refused further work on the BMW-802 and began to develop new, more powerful variants of the BMW-801. In the summer of 1942, the Germans rushed to the Volga and the Caucasus, and under these conditions, bet on new / new for the USSR 18-cylinder engines with a denser cylinder layout and the constant overheating of the rear row of cylinders associated with this, especially taking into account all the mistakes already made , was tantamount to real suicide. By this time, the leadership of the USSR already had decent experience in this regard and there was no longer any place for dubious experiments.
  36. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 22: 11
    +2
    Quote: KERMET

    Fantasy again ....
    Go to Google - there you will find amazing discoveries and even photos of the I-185 with two 250kg bombs bully7


    And now we compare the take-off weight of both machines, and most importantly the wing area, and wonder what you have to pay for additional 300 kg.

    Why, by the way, 4 pendants for hundreds of I-185?


    And what religion forbids to hang 4 by 50 kg?
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 22: 26
      0
      Quote: shuravi
      Quote: KERMET

      Fantasy again ....
      Go to Google - there you will find amazing discoveries and even photos of the I-185 with two 250kg bombs bully7


      And now we compare the take-off weight of both machines, and most importantly the wing area, and wonder what you have to pay for additional 300 kg.

      Why, by the way, 4 pendants for hundreds of I-185?


      And what religion forbids to hang 4 by 50 kg?

      So why is there an amazing pay? That I-185 with normal take-off weight plus 500 kg bomb loading flies at the same range as La-7? Enlighten.
      And hang 2po250 or 4po 50, 4po100, and at least 4po10kg, by the way, even VAPs were hung up there - it all depends on the task. But to suspend such loading options on La-5 and La-7 .... the design will not allow
  37. KERMET
    KERMET April 10 2018 22: 11
    +1
    Quote: shuravi
    Quote: Gnus_
    - well, if we talked about this proof then - Now, after launching the La-5 series, Polikarpov was instructed to focus only on the M-71


    It is understandable. I-185 and with 2000 l / s did not particularly shine.

    - and you, if not the couch strategist operating with all LTTH, know that La-5 was built with M-82A. True I-185 with M-82A, thereby "all" LTTH wings of La-5 with the same M-82A. Therefore, to you as a non-couch strategist, the same question remains - Quote: shuravi
    With ASH-82FN I-185 is no better than La-5FN. and inferior to La Xnumx
    .



    This is called a sofa strategist of the second kind. Wait for the first typo and rejoice violently. laughing


    - will it not hinder you to give proof of this revelation? Preferably a sign.


    The links for all LTX aircraft are, read, compare. bully

    It’s better to change the link, otherwise it’s there:
    The best Soviet La-7 fighter, the release of which began in mid-1944, armed, as a rule, with 2 ShVAK guns, flight data, except for the flight range, only approached I-185 M-71. It should be noted that the flight data of the La-7 is practically the limit for this combination of airframe and brought the ASh-82FN motor, and the flight characteristics of the I-185 M-71 were obtained a year and a half earlier, with a substandard engine, with more powerful weapons and more fuel.
  38. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 22: 13
    +2
    Quote: shuravi
    It is understandable. I-185 and with 2000 l / s did not particularly shine.
    - it can be of course and understandable only I-185 with M-82A had only 1700 l / s, but with M-71 where it was 2000 l / s I-185 winged all the Red Army fighters as the same the bull is the same notorious sheep.

    Quote: shuravi
    This is called a sofa strategist of the second kind. Wait for the first typo and rejoice violently. laughing
    - Well, I do not understand the varieties of sofa strategists, unlike you. And if I was sealed up somewhere, then I say so bluntly - sorry, I was mistaken. And I do not give inexplicable links as a confirmation of my typos, especially since these links do not even have these confirmations ...

    Quote: shuravi
    The links for all LTX aircraft are, read, compare. bully
    - Well, as it were expected that an unsurprised strategist in proofs could not. Do not tell me what kind of sofa strategist?
  39. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 22: 21
    +2
    Quote: KERMET
    No, he just as a designer installed this engine on his plane, ask yourself a question - does he have a lot of free time to suffer such garbage, how is it doing with your useless engine?


    You just do not understand the principles. The designer is engaged in aircraft, engine, engine developers.
    Further, the engine may be in a stage unsuitable for combat operations, but quite ready for test flights. For example, a small resource, overly long preparation for a second flight.
    Thus, time is reduced, the refinement of the aircraft and the engine go in parallel.
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 23: 09
      0
      The principle is that the problems of the M-71 were completely solvable, but Lavochkin didn’t discard him from the account
  40. ingenera
    ingenera April 10 2018 22: 30
    +5
    It is funny to compare the non-existent I180 and I185 aircraft with the YAK MIGs and LAGs that fought (then LA). Problems with engines in our country have always been. They are now. But none of the designers of that time surpassed the “weight culture” of YAKI. It is a fact! And it is not for nothing that after the war it was precisely the “Yakovlev” piston sports planes that won the highest prizes in aerobatics competitions for many years. And in life, everyone at the early stages of flying around new models and the pistons “shot” and the stabilizers fell off and the tails “twisted”. Lapping years. devices often occurs several more years after the adoption of the device into service. Read the history of aviation, gentlemen. And not only ours. Yes, and about the performance characteristics of aircraft of the same period, there is nothing to dispute about. Safonov on I-16 failed Meserov so. And in the LAGGs they brought down. who knew how. And, if you look at the statistics, the British in the Hurricanes (who considered them to be "irons") landed the Germans well, and ours in the Northern Fleet were not inferior to them (who knew how to fly). No car is fighting. and the man is in the car. He’s a teapot and a kettle on the SU-27 (well, if you exaggerate).
  41. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 22: 39
    +3
    Quote: ingenera
    Funny to compare nonexistent I180 and I185 airplanes with fought YAK MIGs and LAGs (then LA).
    - not existing? Yes, you are worse than Shuravi. So for a minute, the I-180 was mass-built, and the I-185 passed military tests on the Kalinin Front.
    Quote: ingenera
    But none of the designers of that time surpassed the “weight culture” of YAKI. It is a fact! And it is not for nothing that after the war it was precisely the “Yakovlev” piston sports planes that won the highest prizes in aerobatics competitions for many years.
    - Well, with the fact that Yakovlev did not know how to construct normally anything except sports planes, I won’t argue ... here he got the fighters "niochen"
    Quote: ingenera
    Yes, and about the performance characteristics of aircraft of the same period, there is nothing to dispute about. Safonov on I-16 failed Meserov so. And in the LAGGs they brought down. who knew how. And, if you look at the statistics, the British in the Hurricanes (who considered them to be "irons") landed the Germans well, and ours in the Northern Fleet were not inferior to them (who knew how to fly).
    - Well, Safonov is alone, he will not be enough for everyone, which the Germans showed very well with their bet on aces. In Hurricanes, the British fought mainly against the bombers, and the Germans landed just as much as they slept. And Safonov’s regiment in the same Siberian Fleet suffered the greatest losses just flying on persimmon.
    1. Alf
      Alf April 11 2018 20: 41
      0
      Quote: Gnus_
      So for a minute I-180 was built in series,

      I-180 - Soviet single-engine piston fighter-monoplane of the 30s - 40s, created at the Polikarpov Design Bureau .... Serial production was discontinued in 1940. A total of 10 copies were produced.

      Awesome series.
  42. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 22: 50
    +2
    Quote: KERMET

    So why is there an amazing pay? That I-185 with normal take-off weight plus 500 kg bomb loading flies at the same range as La-7? Enlighten.


    An increase in the separation rate. That in the conditions of field airfields is far from desirable.

    And hang 2 by 250 or 4 by 50, 4 by 100, and even by 4 by 10kg, by the way, even VAPs were hung up there - it all depends on the task. But to suspend such boot options on La Xnumx and La Xnumx .... the design will not allow


    It was far from critical.
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 23: 15
      +1
      The increase in the separation rate, as well as the range, is of course, but here, in terms of the flexibility of the I-185 combat use, it’s beyond competition, do you not understand this as a combat pilot?
  43. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo April 10 2018 23: 00
    +1
    Quote: Vovan 73
    The rotor blades were critically close to the ground, and the design of the Yakovlevsky wing did not allow to increase the length of the landing gear on the Yak-7.


    Tu-2 with M-82 was built with four hazardous screws. What was stopping here?
    1. Alf
      Alf April 11 2018 20: 43
      0
      Quote: Narak-zempo
      Tu-2 with M-82 was built with four hazardous screws. What was stopping here?

      TU-2 was originally built with such screws. Try to install 20-inch wheels instead of regular wheels on your car, you will understand the difference.
      1. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo April 12 2018 00: 21
        0
        Quote: Alf
        TU-2 was originally built with such screws. Try to install 20-inch wheels instead of regular wheels on your car, you will understand the difference.

        Spitfire took off with a two-bladed propeller, ended the war with a 5-bladed modification - the increased engine power had to be removed somehow, without extending the landing gear.
        1. Alf
          Alf April 12 2018 21: 13
          0
          Quote: Narak-zempo
          Quote: Alf
          TU-2 was originally built with such screws. Try to install 20-inch wheels instead of regular wheels on your car, you will understand the difference.

          Spitfire took off with a two-bladed propeller, ended the war with a 5-bladed modification - the increased engine power had to be removed somehow, without extending the landing gear.

          If my memory serves me, my nose was pulled out due to a longer motor, respectively, the distance to the ground increased.
          1. Narak-zempo
            Narak-zempo April 13 2018 08: 06
            0
            Quote: Alf
            If my memory serves me, my nose was pulled out due to a longer motor, respectively, the distance to the ground increased.

            Maybe. But the bottom line is that changing the screw during the modernization of the VMG is not something extraordinary. Offhand remember the “Mustang”, B-29 and “Aerocobra”.
            1. BV330
              BV330 April 21 2018 21: 59
              0
              In the USSR, any change of something to the New is exactly what was extraordinary (.
    2. BV330
      BV330 April 21 2018 22: 00
      0
      The backwardness of the screw industry interfered. Well, the eternal bureaucratic inertia (.
  44. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 23: 00
    +3
    Quote: Gnus_
    - not existing? Yes, you are worse than Shuravi. So for a minute, the I-180 was mass-built, and the I-185 passed military tests on the Kalinin Front.


    Who blathers this? The troll who advocated for I-180? laughing

    - Well, with the fact that Yakovlev did not know how to construct normally anything except sports planes, I won’t argue ... here he got the fighters "niochen"


    Well, yes, they were stupid in Yakovlev Design Bureau. There was no mind to put more duralumin into the structure. Everything was made of wood and percale. lol
    1. KERMET
      KERMET April 10 2018 23: 18
      +2
      No, not stupid, there was a task to make the most of wooden structures, and there was a chance to compete with Polikarpov Design Bureau in this field
    2. DimerVladimer
      DimerVladimer April 11 2018 12: 06
      +5
      Quote: shuravi
      Well, yes, they were stupid in Yakovlev Design Bureau. There was no mind to put more duralumin into the structure. Everything was made of wood and percale.


      Well, in general, the fuselage of the Yak-1 (7, 7B, 9,3) is a spatial truss - steel pipes made of "scarce steel."
      The La-5 and I-180, I-185 fuselage - gluing from birch frames - significantly less scarce materials, but also a heavier structure. Only the motor program from steel pipes 30HGSA.
      Yak-9P

      To reduce the development time, the Yak-1 was launched into mass production before conducting state tests of prototypes, as a result of which it had a number of major defects that did not change, however, the overall high rating of the aircraft.
      Over the past year 1941, the Yak-1 serial production has become noticeably better. In total, in 1941, 7023 changes (!!!) were introduced into the drawings and introduced into production (more than parts in the design) - this gives an idea of ​​the hurry of acceptance into production.
  45. shuravi
    shuravi April 10 2018 23: 18
    +2
    Quote: Gnus_
    Quote: shuravi
    It is understandable. I-185 and with 2000 l / s did not particularly shine.
    - it can be of course and understandable only I-185 with M-82A had only 1700 l / s, but with M-71 where it was 2000 l / s I-185 winged all the Red Army fighters as the same the bull is the same notorious sheep.


    I just goofing. Again we rest on one LTH and completely forget at what price and the fact that we compare serial cars with experienced ones.

    - Well, I do not understand the varieties of sofa strategists, unlike you. And if I was sealed up somewhere, then I say so bluntly - sorry, I was mistaken. And I do not give inexplicable links as a confirmation of my typos, especially since these links do not even have these confirmations ...


    A typo of ASH-82FN instead of ASH-82А (М-82А).

    - Well, as it were expected that an unsurprised strategist in proofs could not. Do not tell me what kind of sofa strategist?


    Links have been given. And cut me out of there laziness. You won’t immediately cite it. hi
  46. svp67
    svp67 April 10 2018 23: 35
    +2
    Well and the main thing. "King of fighters", whose aircraft did not go into the series solely because of Yakovlev. A sort of poor, offended by all.
    There were many who wanted to “move” Polikarpov, and the main one was the Kaganovich brothers.
    And at the expense of not brought the motors. Polikarpov did a lot in this regard. The appearance of our M-105, this is also his meadows. It was he who installed it on his VIT, did everything that he went to the series. But for this he needed his COMPLETE design bureau, and not the nonsense that he had left after the Yakovlev reorganization ...
    And-16 was a harsh aircraft, not without flaws. The main thing - the wings were destroyed, could not withstand even normal overloads. It was a "trick", approximately, as the failure of the skin on the Yak-1.
    In the memoirs of S. Abrosov "Air war in the sky of Spain" refers to a large number of non-combat losses due to the destruction of the wing. 10% of the total number of dead pilots.
    There is a clear distortion .... We read what actually happened:
    On May 7, 1937, the second batch of I-16 arrived in the amount of 31 vehicles, and on May 21 another 17 fighters and four UTI-4. ..... Both parties, consisting of type 5 combat vehicles, were assembled and sent to flight units. Soon a series of mysterious disasters occurred - several Soviet and Spanish pilots died. A thorough investigation revealed that these aircraft have insufficient wing strength. With vigorous piloting, the wing end portion in the area of ​​the aileron suspension was destroyed and the aircraft became uncontrollable. Since during this period trials were conducted in the Soviet Union over political opponents of Stalin, who were accused of wrecking, the wreckage of a batch of aircraft was declared wrecking. As a result, 150 I-16 wings underwent structural reinforcement and a change in skin. Underwent this operation, including 14 cars that arrived on July 1. In the new party, consisting of 10 I-1937s, arrived on August 62, 16, amplifications have already been made.
    That is, the machines of TWO batches had this drawback, which was eliminated in the future with serial production.
    I think it’s not worth recalling how test pilot S.N. Anokhin lost his eye, on May 17, 1945, performing control tests of the Yak-3 fighter for strength ....
    There was nothing to build the Royal X-NUMX fighter.
    And the I-16 was from what or the same MiG ....
    I-185 - M-81 ("RM", "02"). The hood for this new engine was made with a narrow annular gap and for the first time in the USSR it was sealed at the joints with gaskets, and the central hole in the cook was eliminated. The armament was left, as in the original version - two ShKAS machine guns and two BS machine guns, two 250 kg bombs.
    The design of the aircraft was well developed. Fuselage - wooden monocoque type I-16, full metal wing with automatic slats. Sheathing rudders and ailerons - canvas. The chassis is single-rack with pneumatic cleaning, the tail wheel is also retractable. Manual control is hard, foot control is soft. Welded motor mount from pipes, Z0HGSA steel.
    The plane made its first flight on January 11, 1941.

    I-185 - M-71 ("04"). This instance passed state tests and military tests on the Kalinin front simultaneously with the instance with the M-82A engine.
    According to the Air Force Research Institute, the aircraft surpassed all domestic and German serial fighters, there was the possibility of a number of modifications. During the tests, the speed reached 630 km / h at an altitude of 6100 m and 556 km / h near the ground, a range of 835 km with a normal fuel supply, climb rate on the ground - 17,4 m / s, climb time of 5000 m - 5,2 min . The design was changed: wing - one-spar (instead of two-spar in all previous versions), metal; spar shelves - T-profiles from steel Z0HGSA, the walls are double, its installation angle is +10 30 '. Plumage duralumin, sheathing rudders and ailerons - canvas. The wheels were taken 650X220 mm instead of 700) (220 mm before. Armament: two UBS machine guns (400 rounds) and two ShKAS machine guns (1400 rounds), 4X100 kg bombs (or 8 RS-82 or 2X250 kg). There were tests with three cannons of ShVAK-20.

    Let's compare with the MiG ...
    Aircraft MiG-1 and MiG-3 were in many respects similar and differed from each other only in details.
    The fuselage of the aircraft had a mixed design. The front part was lattice made of chromansil tubes (steel 30 XGSA with tensile strength 110 kg / mm²). In the front of the grill was a gas tank, and in the rear - the cockpit. Outside grill covered removable duralumin sheets, mounted on zus locks.
    The wing consisted of three parts: an all-metal center wing and two wooden consoles. The wing had a Clark YH profile with a thickness of 14-8%. The sweep of the wing is +1 g, and the transverse V is 5 ° on the MiG-1 and 6 ° on the MiG-3. Extension of the wing 5,97.
    All-metal (duralumin) center section had a design consisting of a main spar, two auxiliary spars and ten ribs.
  47. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 23: 39
    0
    Quote: shuravi
    Who blathers this? The troll who advocated for I-180? laughing
    - only a miracle blinks here under the chase of a shuravi that does not distinguish M-82A from ASh-82fn, and this is for you to watch at your leisure - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3odNytG_vU about trolling after you failed in the proofs.

    Quote: shuravi
    Well, yes, they were stupid in Yakovlev Design Bureau. There was no mind to put more duralumin into the structure. Everything was made of wood and percale. lol
    - you quoted my message, but just didn’t blunt that it didn’t say anything about wood and percale .. I don’t understand that the tree or maybe percale is close to you and somewhere even vital ... but try to think first and then write.
  48. Gnus_
    Gnus_ April 10 2018 23: 44
    0
    Quote: shuravi
    I just goofing. Again we rest on one LTH and completely forget at what price and the fact that we compare serial cars with experienced ones.
    - And what should one rest against? Experienced? I-185 has already passed the military tests.

    Quote: shuravi
    A typo of ASH-82FN instead of ASH-82А (М-82А).
    - Hallelujah !!!

    Quote: shuravi
    Links have been given. And cut me out of there laziness. You won’t immediately cite it. hi
    - only in them there is no LTTH I-185 with ASH-82FN, and you clucked about it so fervently. Oh, and you have an obatus ...
    PS Well, I then, unlike you, I grow above myself.
  49. The comment was deleted.
  50. Dedok
    Dedok April 11 2018 09: 24
    0
    The question seems to me not so much in the performance characteristics of the aircraft in question, not in the names of Yakovlev or Polikarpov, everything is much simpler: the issue we are considering does not lie in the engineering plane at all, it lies in the so-called "political plane."
    When choosing not the best, but convenient for those who make decisions, mind you - not for us, who are ALL.
    And we pay for these decisions - some with life, some with health.
    And it was even in those harsh years, they were not afraid of anything.
    CYSES. Near the house there is a German cemetery, always well-groomed (we look after “we” for their money), our huge one is a little further, they didn’t even mow it in the second half of summer, but on May 9 they stamped their feet with zeal. And what is this?
    Every year we are less and less.