Why were not put into serial production of the Su-6 and IL-2M: the arguments of the historian


During World War II, the role of the main striking force of the Soviet Union was played by the combat aviation. Despite the fact that in the first hours the German invaders managed to destroy about a thousand Soviet aircraft, our country mobilized its efforts in the shortest possible time, subsequently taking a leading position in the number of air combat vehicles produced.


Throughout the war, our aircraft engineers developed and created a large number of aircraft thus contributing to the victory of our people in the Great Patriotic War.

Meanwhile, not all developments that were proposed by Soviet designers were launched into mass production.

The guest of the “Archival Revolution” program Oleg Valentinovich Rastrenin will continue the conversation, begun earlier, about attack aircraft, which were necessary for the Red Army Air Force during the war years, but which were never put into serial production. The leading aviation historian will talk about the reasons that did not allow the launch of the production of Su-6 P.O. Sukhoi, as well as the proposed S.V. Ilyushin alternative to the creation of an attack aircraft Il-2M.

The arguments of the historian:

Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mavrikiy April 11 2020 16: 08 New
    • 7
    • 1
    +6
    Why were not put into serial production of the Su-6 and IL-2M
    Why, why. There was a war. repeat The transition from model to model is a drop in production. We are until the end of 1943. had no air superiority.
    1. svp67 April 11 2020 16: 10 New
      • 4
      • 8
      -4
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      Transition from model to model - production decline

      Yeah ... And the IL-10 immediately began to be produced in huge quantities ....
      And yet, this is another fact that makes us take a closer look at the role of Yakovlev in the history of our aircraft industry, especially in the pre-war and military periods, as the deputy commissar for experimental aircraft construction ...
      1. Elturisto April 11 2020 16: 55 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Yes, and what is there Yakovlev?
        1. svp67 April 11 2020 17: 11 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: ElTuristo
          Yes, and what is there Yakovlev?

          Yes, NOTHING .. for Polikarpov and Sukhoi - Nothing, well, everything is clear with the first one, but with what did the second hook him so much?
          1. Elturisto April 11 2020 17: 38 New
            • 1
            • 10
            -9
            And what is clear about Polikarpov? What did you develop biplanes before 1941? Everything is really clear with him. Regarding Sukhoi-Yakovlev, he was engaged in pilot aircraft construction, his opinion was decisive in technical matters, the probability of achieving the characteristics declared by the designer. After Tupolev and Polikarpov nonsense, the political leadership of the USSR was compelled to distrust the promises of designers. The expediency of production was determined by the military and Shakhurin.
            1. svp67 April 11 2020 17: 49 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              Quote: ElTuristo
              What did this one develop biplanes before 1941?

              Yeah ... The I-190 was beautiful and the best of the biplanes.

              But his I-180s were especially good,

              And-185

              And-200

              SPB

              Quote: ElTuristo
              After the Tupolev and Polikarpov nonsense, the political leadership of the USSR was forced to distrust the promises of designers.

              And can you find out what she expressed, this nonsense?
              1. ser56 April 11 2020 19: 16 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                Quote: svp67
                And can you find out what she expressed, this nonsense?

                this is an ordinary sketch of an amateur, there will be no specifics .... request
                1. Elturisto April 11 2020 20: 46 New
                  • 0
                  • 3
                  -3
                  above specifically for professionals ...
                  1. ser56 April 11 2020 20: 52 New
                    • 0
                    • 2
                    -2
                    Quote: ElTuristo
                    higher specifically for professionals ...

                    but no ... request
              2. Elturisto April 11 2020 20: 45 New
                • 0
                • 4
                -4
                Yeah, the best of the biplanes ... in 1941 ... Bullshit consisted of reports from Spain about the outstanding qualities of the I-16 and I-15, and especially the relevance of the tactics of the joint use of biplanes and monoplanes. As a result, the production of I-15 and I was continued -153.
                1. svp67 April 11 2020 20: 51 New
                  • 5
                  • 0
                  +5
                  Quote: ElTuristo
                  The nonsense consisted of reports from Spain about the outstanding qualities of the I-16 and I-15, and especially the relevance of the tactics of the joint use of biplanes and monoplanes

                  Stop, stop ... and Polikarpov and Tupolev to these reports which side? Did they bribe the pilots to write these reports? And they were written at the first stage of air battles, before the appearance of "thin" BF-109 in the sky of Spain ... You somehow die your ardor and think for yourself who and what could report from Spain.
                  And the same Polikarpov perfectly understood the importance of speed for the fighter of that time, otherwise he would not have created an I-16 ...
                  Quote: ElTuristo
                  Yeah, the best of the biplanes ... in 1941 ...

                  Of the biplane fighter planes, it was the BEST. Prove the converse
            2. A.TOR April 11 2020 18: 10 New
              • 4
              • 2
              +2
              And what is clear about Polikarpov? What did this one develop biplanes before 1941?

              I-16 is a biplane ... yeah
            3. Alf
              Alf April 11 2020 19: 06 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Quote: ElTuristo
              .After Tupolev and Polikarpov nonsense

              What exactly are the nonsense? With my not-so-best attitude towards Yakovlev, I remember his "cry" at the top that "they are systematically deceiving us." This is about the fact that the designers promised the M-106 1350 horses, and gave only the M-105 ON 300 fewer mares. And with a duralumin the same picture, they promised, but did not give, so turn around as you like.
              1. svp67 April 11 2020 20: 15 New
                • 2
                • 1
                +1
                Quote: Alf
                With my not-so-best attitude towards Yakovlev, I remember his "cry" at the top that "we are systematically deceived"

                To the peak of Yakovlev, one could now imagine how hard the trials were with the accidents and the catastrophe of his Yak-1 and special "fraud" with the Yak-2 high-speed front-line bomber ... How about the "deception" then?
                1. Elturisto April 11 2020 20: 51 New
                  • 1
                  • 5
                  -4
                  Yes, and so what? Like the I-180? Who ditched 3 excellent pilots including Chkalov. By the way, I-26 Yatsenko showed better data than I-180 with the same engine ... https: //airpages.ru/ru/i28.html
                  1. svp67 April 11 2020 21: 04 New
                    • 2
                    • 0
                    +2
                    Quote: ElTuristo
                    Which ditched 3 excellent pilots including Chkalov.

                    Chkalov, Susie, and the third who?
                    Quote: ElTuristo
                    By the way, I-26 Yatsenko showed the best data

                    Firstly, the I-28, and secondly, who set the leg up for him at the serial plant? Whose aircraft instead of the I-28 went into series?
                    The Resolution of the Defense Committee No. 235ss of May 25, 1940 stated: “To discontinue the I-292 aircraft at the factory No. 28. Allow the People’s Commissariat of Defense to accept 10 I-28 aircraft. ” At the same time, there was a decision to deploy at the factory No. 292 the serial production of I-26 fighters (future Yak-1) designed by A. S. Yakovlev.

                    Yatsenko also seems to have suffered for "bullshit" ...
                    1. Elturisto April 11 2020 21: 37 New
                      • 1
                      • 1
                      0
                      The Yak-1 turned out to be better and more technologically advanced ... by the way, initially Yakov planned to produce less than LaGG and only after gaining operational experience in the troops began to change to Yak1-7.
                      1. svp67 April 12 2020 05: 18 New
                        • 0
                        • 2
                        -2
                        Quote: ElTuristo
                        The Yak-1 turned out to be better and more technologically advanced ... by the way, initially Yakov planned to produce less than LaGG and only after gaining operational experience in the troops began to change to Yak1-7.

                        And where do you get the data from? Yakovlev told? I will tell you more that in the 42nd year, according to the results and having "operational experience in the army," the flight commanders asked to stop the production of not only LaGG-3, but also Yakov, to give the front more I-16 ... Something like this , here it was
                      2. Elturisto April 12 2020 08: 58 New
                        • 1
                        • 1
                        0
                        I wrote about this before .... commanders asked :)
                      3. svp67 April 12 2020 09: 02 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: ElTuristo
                        I wrote about this before .... commanders asked :)

                        They fought and had the right to ask for the weapons that they considered the best.
                2. hohol95 April 13 2020 23: 36 New
                  • 0
                  • 0
                  0
                  So there were no problems with mastering the machine at the plant?
                  And the engine was suitable and there were fewer problems with the design than the Yak and LaGG?
                  1. svp67 April 14 2020 11: 04 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    So there were no problems with mastering the machine at the plant?

                    Since he repeated, in many respects, the design of Polikarpov’s aircraft, at that moment - NO, the plant did not experience any problems.
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And the engine was suitable

                    Yes, the same that was installed on the Su-2
                  2. hohol95 April 14 2020 13: 38 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    And what does Polikarpov have to do with it?
                    They write that the I-28s were going to build the R-10 reconnaissance aircraft (I. G. Neman) at the factory that produced the combines and the airplane.
                    The plant of agricultural engineering "Sarkombein" in the city of Saratov.
                    M-88 was "brought to mind." Go, did the M-87B give all the parameters it required?
                    Why then it was recommended to LIGHTEN I-28 for 300 kg?
                    "Not so simple in the Kingdom of Denmark ..."
                  3. svp67 April 14 2020 13: 51 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And what does Polikarpov have to do with it?

                    Yes, despite the fact that the technology was worked out and nothing had to be invented there, it was just worth repeating
                    Quote: hohol95
                    Why then it was recommended to LIGHTEN I-28 for 300 kg?

                    You know, to other fighters, except for the Yakovlevsky, a lot of requirements were put forward that delayed their serial production.
                    Nevertheless, it would be our only new fighter with an air-cooled engine at that time which went into production.
                  4. hohol95 April 14 2020 13: 52 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Nevertheless, it would be our only new fighter with an air-cooled engine at that time which went into production.

                    And were there motors?
                  5. svp67 April 14 2020 13: 56 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And were there motors?

                    Zaporozhye worked properly, supplying engines for I-16 and Su-2
                  6. hohol95 April 14 2020 14: 01 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    I’ll ask for the last time - was the M-88 ready for deployment on the I-28? Was there a lot of them? Did their quality satisfy military acceptance?
                  7. svp67 April 14 2020 14: 05 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    I’ll ask for the last time - M-88 was ready for staging on I-28

                    Judging by the test results - YES
                  8. hohol95 April 14 2020 21: 05 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    And why then M-88 was discontinued in September 1940?
                  9. svp67 April 14 2020 21: 08 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And why then M-88 was discontinued in September 1940?

                    Because it was launched into the M-88B series
                  10. hohol95 April 14 2020 21: 18 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Internet gives out -
                    ... In addition, in the autumn of 1940 the aircraft industry failed to overcome the crisis in improving engines, especially those developed in the design bureau of S.K. Tumansky. On the M-88 engines, burnout of the pistons, shaking of the VMG, increased oil consumption, which led to smoke, were constantly observed. If at the first supercharger speed an excessive depletion of the mixture was observed, then at the second super-enrichment. I had to temporarily suspend their serial production. It was difficult to fine-tune the promising M-90 engine, on which the NKAP had high hopes. As a result, E.V. Urmin was replaced to the post of chief designer of the plant No. 29 of Tumansky. Director S.A. Gromov - only the intercession of Shakhurin saved him from an early reprisal.

                    And such engines were offered for the fighter.
                    After some work, the M-88 was renamed the M-88A and M-88B!
                    ... After obtaining satisfactory M-88 test results, their serial construction was resumed under the designation M-88B. And Kharkovites shortly before the new 1941, these engines were installed not only on the newly built Su-2, but also replaced substandard engines on already manufactured cars.
                  11. svp67 April 14 2020 21: 20 New
                    • 0
                    • 0
                    0
                    Quote: hohol95
                    And such engines were offered for the fighter.

                    And we didn’t have others, and that was the best we had. And they were put not only on the Su-2, but also on the IL-4
                    The M-105 had no less "sores" and until the end of the war they could not eliminate them all
  • Alf
    Alf April 11 2020 21: 29 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: svp67
    To the peak of Yakovlev, one could now imagine how hard the tests went with accidents and the disaster of his Yak-1

    So with the LAGG in the tests also loved.
    By the way, LAGG was also designed with the M-106, but had to be built with the 105th.
  • Elturisto April 11 2020 20: 48 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Yakovlev is neither warm nor cold from your attitude. There are enough opinions about his constructions of enemies and friends.
  • knn54 April 11 2020 17: 01 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    The Su-6 was better than the IL-2M. But the IL-10 was already inferior in terms of basic characteristics.
    1. svp67 April 11 2020 17: 06 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Quote: knn54
      But the IL-10th on the main characteristics was already inferior

      On what? By bomb load? By speed? By security? And most importantly by the time of appearance?
  • Pavel57 April 11 2020 16: 14 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    I think that the conservative moment did not change anything, if possible, prevailed.
    And so five factors-
    1. Readiness on time.
    2. The presence of the motor.
    3. Availability of available materials.
    4. The presence of the plant.
    5. And trust above in the person of himself.
    1. DimanC April 11 2020 17: 08 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      If you look at the entire cycle of videos (the authors of the latter partially recall the past content), it turns out that failure to fulfill all of the above items is a deliberate and man-made affair. Mikhail Timin has already stated a couple of times about the weaving intrigues, and if you add videos about the appearance of LaGG-3 here, the picture becomes even clearer ...
      1. Pavel57 April 11 2020 17: 25 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        And in which system there is no intrigue? The Germans had no less.
    2. svp67 April 12 2020 05: 25 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Pavel57
      Readiness on time.

      How long? If the IL-10 did not order anyone and the terms of reference for its design did not issue
      1. Pavel57 April 12 2020 20: 27 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        The IL-10 was very much wanted by the military. Ilyushin considered promising IL-8.
        1. svp67 April 13 2020 07: 55 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: Pavel57
          The IL-10 was very much wanted by the military.

          They did not hear rumors about him, they didn’t know, but demanded the Su-6 to replace the Il-2 ... But someone (who could have done this?) Was able to cover up Ilyushin’s “independent activity” and pass it off as the best solution, while slowing down the progress of the Su-6 ...
  • Amateur April 11 2020 17: 33 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    Again? Recently it was discussed. Well, there were no engines for Su Shek and others. Why again blablabla.
    1. svp67 April 12 2020 05: 26 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Amateur
      Well, there were no engines for Su Shek and others.

      So them, for a while and for Ilov was not ... so what?
  • infantryman2020 April 11 2020 17: 41 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Regarding the statement in the preamble to the post:
    During the Second World War, military aviation was definitely not the main striking force of the Soviet Union. Neither on a strategic nor tactical scale.
    And, in general, aviation is not a strike force, but a means of fire destruction.
  • Pavel57 April 11 2020 17: 52 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Quote: knn54
    The Su-6 was better than the IL-2M. But the IL-10 was already inferior in terms of basic characteristics.

    Su-6 appeared later than necessary. The engine with which it had advantages - the M-71 was not in the series.
    IL-2M was interesting, which did not go into the series. It was created for the tasks of both the attack aircraft and the bomber.

    But the IL-10 grew out of the IL-1, there was one advantage - higher speed. But the combat effectiveness was lower in comparison with the IL-2.
  • ser56 April 11 2020 19: 18 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    a far-fetched topic, an important question - why the Su-2s ceased to be manufactured - there was a good airplane in the series repeat
    1. Pavel57 April 12 2020 00: 16 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: ser56
      a far-fetched topic, an important question - why the Su-2s ceased to be manufactured - there was a good airplane in the series repeat

      The question is good.
      For starters, one must look at the availability of plants, taking into account evacuation and materials. (There were definitely motors for it).
      And then there was a fashion for twin-engine bombers. Although there is a clear contradiction. Twin-engine attack aircraft were rejected for overrun engines, and bombers give only twin-engine.