Forgotten Soviet aircraft

48
Forgotten Soviet aircraft

Inheritance


The Workers 'and Peasants' Red Air Fleet would not have taken place without the Air Force of the Russian Empire, it was from the old army that the structure and equipment of 33 (out of 96) air squads passed. 2300 aircraft passed through it during the entire Civil War, but by its end only 300 of them remained in service, moreover, foreign models, and often outdated ones. The main problem was not losses, the main problem was the wear and tear of equipment. After the war, the structure was reformed:

“According to the peacetime states introduced on September 12, 1922, the aviation detachment had 8 active and 2-4 spare aircraft. Three detachments were reduced to a squadron, which was a military unit, two squadrons - to a squadron. There were also separate detachments and squadrons. All air units on the territory of the military district were subordinate to the assistant commander of the district for aviation. There were also parts of the central subordination that performed special functions.

But it required machines. Machines preferably domestic, so as not to depend on potential opponents, and machines based on the experience of the war, at the best world level. There were factories and design bureaus in Russia, there was no engine building, and the post-war devastation with the loss of part of the designers did not add optimism. However, work began already in 1923. The motors were still foreign, but the planes were their own. And these cars of the 20s - early 30s became a school. A school for designers, a school for production workers, mechanics, pilots, military leaders. Some of them are in third roles, but managed to make war.



Fighters


About Polikarpov - the king of fighters, and his difficult fate should be written separately. Now only about his cars, which came with the index "I", from one to 16, the same Ishak, who pulled out the pre-war conflicts and the beginning of the Patriotic War. And the first was the semi-serial I-1. The plane of a difficult fate.

The development of the first-born began in March 1923 and was carried out at a rapid pace. The result was a plane with a 400 hp engine. with. Liberty, with a speed of 264 km / h at altitude, a range of 650 kilometers and a ceiling of 6750 meters. They armed him with two 7,62 mm machine guns, which at that time was quite up to par. On July 18, 1924, the first flight took place, and then there was a stopper. The plane was finalized, processed, improved, modified ... In total, 14 aircraft were produced (12 serial ones). The idea of ​​building monoplanes was too premature for that era. And the age of the firstborn also did not please - I-1 survived only until 1933.

At the same time, Polikarpov was manufacturing the 2I-N1, a two-seat fighter, but the disaster on March 31, 1926 put an end to the project:

“Suddenly, a cloud seemed to rise above the upper right wing and the wing seemed to explode - this was a breakdown of its plywood sheathing, first from the upper side of the wing, then from the bottom. Behind the upper wing, the lower right wing collapsed, and the plane, having passed another five hundred meters, fell to the ground. The crew is dead."

The materials and technologies of the First World War at a speed of 300 km / h were no longer suitable ... The I-2b Grigorovich turned out to be more successful, which were built by 107 units, but the plane turned out so-so:

“The I-2bis aircraft, having low speed, rate of climb, ceiling and poor maneuverability, cannot be recognized as a modern fighter. Compared to the I-2, it is inferior in its flight performance, but design and operational improvements make the I-2bis aircraft more desirable. After eliminating all the shortcomings, the I-2bis can be used as a training-transitional one.

Although it was sold to Persia. By the mid-30s, he left the combat units. But Polikarpov was successful with the I-3 one and a half plan, adopted in 1929, far from being a record one (263 km / h at altitude and still the same two machine guns), it turned out to be reliable and unpretentious. 389 units in the series at that time is a lot. He served until 1934, having managed to become the first mass fighter of our Air Force. The BMW motor, better known to us as the M-17, was also the first to receive it.

More modest was our all-metal first-born Sukhoi - I-4, of which as many as 177 units were produced. Having received the M-22 engine (British Bristol), it was hard for production workers and pilots, and as a result, in 1935 it was quietly withdrawn from service. But they tested it to their heart's content - both as a hydroplane, and in the "Link" project, and with jet boosters, and even with a Kurchevsky dynamo-reactive cannon. And so about 250 km / h and a bunch of design flaws, the middle peasant is closer to the bottom of the table.

An attempt to do something foreign gave the I-7 aircraft, aka Heinkel in girlhood. 131 units were built, and even transferred to the troops, but their life span was short - until 1934. 258 km / h and a range of 700 km made it obsolete immediately after the launch of the series. Something similar happened in the USSR, without payments to the Germans. In the end, the mass model was never found. Although the search continued - Polikarpov's I-5, designed in prison, turned out to be exactly the machine that they had been looking for for eight long years. An ordinary polutoraplan with an M-22 engine, it accelerated to 278 km / h and already carried four machine guns. Like most of Polikarpov's cars, it was not a record, it was massive and reliable, having served in combat units until 1939. And having managed to fight in the skies of the Patriotic War - as a night bomber and attack aircraft on the Crimean front. Not because of the qualities he fought, out of need, but still ...

The time has come for other machines, they were being worked on. And the Polikarpov bureau made two of them - I-15 and I-16, it was their modifications that became the main aircraft at the beginning of the war. But they would not exist without the entire line and the search for the ideal, which began back in 1923. And the winner in this race was not a record holder, not an all-metal aircraft, and not even miracles with dynamo-reactive guns, the middle peasants won. It was the I-3 - I-5 - I-15/16 line without outstanding characteristics that formed the basis of our Air Force. But the I-17 Polikarpov with a liquid-cooled engine remained an experimental aircraft. The country needed a massive air force, and the records are good for parades. And in the face of problems with engine building, aluminum and qualified personnel, the state preferred simpler, but cheaper cars.

Bombers


Their path was shorter and less tortuous. And if the fighters were eventually made by Polikarpov, then the bombers were made by Tupolev. Although it all started at GAZ with a completely forgotten aircraft - B-1 in 1924. The all-wood biplane could lift 500 kg of bombs and deliver them 800 km at cruising speed, climbing 4000 meters. Long tests showed a simple thing - a wooden plane with a speed of less than 200 km / h is no longer suitable for the Air Force. Moreover, Tupolev showed his ANT-4 (aka TB-1) in operation. The twin-engine all-metal aircraft was originally carried out as a torpedo bomber, and became the first strategic bomber of the USSR. 207 km / h, a thousand kilometers of range, a ton of bombs ... Plus durability. Metal is not wood, there is no rapid wear, and the transition to M-17 engines guaranteed the replacement of components. Their century was long, first as combat, then, after the start of construction of TB-3, as transport and airborne. The last one was written off in 1947. They were replaced by the equally successful TB-3, which served the country for many years. And who fought the war as a transport and night bomber. Fortunately, 197 km / h and 1350 km of practical range, supplemented by 5000 kg of bombs at maximum load, were impressive.

But these are all serial and well-known models, and in addition to them, the search continued for something simpler and something heavier. What is simpler - they tried to buy from the Germans. Their civilian Junkers in the version of the Yug-1 bomber went to the Air Force from 1926. But as bombers, they were still imperfect, and as transport workers, they did not have engines. As a result, in 1931, the Yug-1s were decommissioned, and in 1935 they were decommissioned at Aeroflot, where they were handed over to the Air Force. But more abruptly ... The Douai doctrine owned the minds, and the creation of superplanes began, here is Tupolev's TB-4:

“With a wing span of 54 m, a length of 32 m, a height of 11,73 m, a wing area of ​​422 m2 during tests of TB-4 with M-34 engines, we received a maximum speed near the ground - 200 km / h, a maximum speed at an altitude of 2000 m - 187,5 km / h, a climb time of 2000 m was 33,32 minutes, a practical ceiling - 2750 m, it took 84 minutes to achieve it, the takeoff run was 800 m, it took 36 seconds to take off, with 4000 kg of bombs the aircraft had a range of 1000 km. All this was far below the requirements of the Air Force."

He became a greatly enlarged TB-3, from which the military simply disowned. But the designer Kalinin went the farthest. His K-7 is:

“K-7 was a giant elliptical wing of a thick profile with a span of 53 m and an area of ​​452 m2, from which there were two tail beams of a trihedral section, carrying the tail horizontal and vertical plumage with a mechanism for turning.

It had six engines, up to 1 ton of bombs and a range of 1000 km. The miracle did not work, and the experienced K-7 crashed. The car was ahead of its time, it was too early to calculate such designs. But Kalinin did not stop and began building the K-1933 flying wing in 12. Much more modest in size, it was ready only by the second half of the 30s, when its technical characteristics were no longer impressive, and Kalinin’s arrest put an end to the project ... In general, an interesting topic of Kalinin’s car, they were undoubtedly ahead of their time, but with they couldn’t go into the series - it’s expensive and difficult, and it’s not always clear why. And his successes were the usual cargo-passenger K-4 and K-5, the planes are simple and reliable.

As a result, the disputes ended in 1934 with the flight of the ANT-40, aka the Tupolev Security Bureau. As in the case of fighters, the winding road led to a simple, reliable and successful machine, numbering 6616 pieces, which fit for export, and in wars, and in the Civil Air Fleet. And the heavy bomber niche was also occupied by Ilyushin's non-record DB-3 (IL-4).

Summing up, the 20s, on a wave of enthusiasm, brought a number of models of unusual and advanced aircraft, often ahead of their time. But design romanticism did not survive the collision with the harsh reality of the Land of the Soviets. Neither the industry nor the treasury of the model, which has no analogues, did not pull, and the army did not demand miracles with 16 tons of bombs or dynamo-jet cannons, but workhorses in order to close the sky of a huge country. So in the end it happened - evolution did not lead to record-breaking, but massive aircraft. This, of course, can be regretted, but we would not have won the war with a small number of record cars. Time and logic put everything in its place.
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +16
    9 May 2022 04: 39
    What is the article about? There is absolutely no analysis. Just a list of well known facts.
    1. +12
      9 May 2022 13: 05
      Yes, about nothing. Impromptu on the run. Without photos it is not readable at all.
    2. +4
      9 May 2022 17: 32
      Quote: Tucan
      What is the article about? There is absolutely no analysis. Just a list of well known facts.

      An article about how bad everything was in the Soviet country.
      The Workers 'and Peasants' Red Air Fleet would not have taken place without the Air Force of the Russian Empire, it was from the old army that the structure and equipment of 33 (out of 96) air squads passed.

      This dirty stuffing here sets the general content of the article. The fact that there was no aviation at all in the Republic of Ingushetia is not even remembered here. They just casually threw more dirt on the first works of Soviet aircraft builders.
      1. 0
        27 July 2022 14: 13
        Well, why wasn't it. Firstly, the world's first bomber squadron. Accordingly, the world's first heavy escort fighter "Sikorsky C-XVI", although they did not manage to build many of them, but the latter were decommissioned at 23. But in the main, of course, they flew on imported ones.
  2. -14
    9 May 2022 05: 14
    And the winner in this race was not a record holder, not an all-metal aircraft, and not even miracles with dynamo-reactive guns, the middle peasants won.
    And they won because the aviation industry of the USSR was not capable of producing excellent "miracles" in huge commercial quantities ... It was because of this that the NKAP then supplied "middle peasants" to our Air Force throughout the war
  3. +16
    9 May 2022 06: 13
    V.B. Shavrov "History of aircraft designs in the USSR until 1938."
    My desk book. The author of the article pulled from it, slightly diluted it with "water" from himself, counting on primary school students.
    1. +2
      9 May 2022 09: 37
      Actually, Polikarpov's planes were already on the site. Skomorokhov told more interestingly
  4. +10
    9 May 2022 06: 14
    Quote: svp67
    And they won because the aviation industry of the USSR was not capable of producing excellent "miracles" in huge commercial quantities ... It was because of this that the NKAP then supplied "middle peasants" to our Air Force throughout the war


    The aircraft is assembled (designed) around the aircraft engine.
    There is a decent motor, then the designers are able to blind something decent. If we take into account that engines purchased from the bourgeoisie were installed on record aircraft (not all), then it is understandable why they did not go into series.

    No one was going to sell us the technology of advanced aircraft engines: there were sanctions under the Curzon Pact. And to buy aircraft engines for hundreds of aircraft - there is not enough gold in the country. And no one was selling.

    So they assembled cars, with average characteristics, from their own, until they learned how to design their own motors and produce them. This is not a quick business, but in 15 years by 1940 they managed to master it. Our falcons celebrated Victory Day on planes with domestic aircraft engines.
    1. 0
      9 May 2022 06: 42
      Quote: bulava74
      Our falcons celebrated Victory Day on planes with domestic aircraft engines.

      Nevertheless, even then these aircraft were "average". Yes, "strong middle peasants", but nothing more ... And given that our enemy then made a qualitative breakthrough in the aircraft industry, starting to massively use jet propulsion, then in general
      1. +1
        9 May 2022 07: 13
        Why only the enemy? The Allies also had jet aircraft, but were in no hurry to share technology.
    2. +2
      9 May 2022 09: 47
      "on airplanes with domestic aircraft engines" read Yakovlev. He has how the Soviet embassy in Germany did not want to buy a motor from Meserschmidt, and Yakovleva offered to call Stalin.
      1. +3
        9 May 2022 18: 25
        Quote: vladcub
        He has like the Soviet embassy in Germany did not want to buy a motor from Meserschmidt

        The company Bayerische Flygzeugwerke, where Willy Messerschmitt worked, did not produce aircraft engines ...
    3. +1
      10 May 2022 19: 57
      Quote: bulava74
      The aircraft is assembled (designed) around the aircraft engine.
      There is a decent motor, then the designers are able to blind something decent. If we take into account that engines purchased from the bourgeoisie were installed on record aircraft (not all), then it is understandable why they did not go into series.

      In addition to the motors themselves, there is another problem. The name of which is aviation gasoline.
      You can lick the design of the engine as much as you like, but if you have only a B-70 and a little B-78, then you don’t have to wait for normal performance characteristics from the engine.
      The use of high-octane fuel made it possible to significantly increase engine power. So, in 1937, at the Central Research Institute of Aviation Motors, the engine of the designer Mikulin AM-34FRN was tested using extra-100 gasoline, while the engine power increased from 970 to 1 hp. with. The result was just fantastic. It would take 700-5 years of development of the engine design to achieve it on ordinary “combatant” gasoline, and such power was achieved in 6, when Mikulin created the AM-1943F engine, which had a take-off power of 38 hp. with. Gasoline "Extra-1" was produced in a semi-artisanal way in very small quantities (the minutes of the meeting with the Head of the USG of the Red Army on the use and testing of aviation gasoline "Extra-700" are given in Appendix No. 100) and was used for testing and record flights (for example, the flight of Chkalov and Gromov across the North Pole). The lack of modern high-octane gasoline in combat units led to the fact that aviation equipment had underestimated performance to ensure operation on the fuel that was available. So, when creating the AM-100 engine, its characteristics were deliberately worsened in order to be able to use low-quality fuel. Despite this, as aviation developed, the requirements for both the quantity and quality of aviation fuel continuously increased. With the re-equipment of aviation with new types of aircraft, the situation became more and more aggravated.

      The need to establish the production of high-octane gasoline, primarily for the needs of military aviation, began to be felt more and more acutely from the mid-30s. The solution of this problem for a number of reasons encountered significant difficulties. The domestic oil refining industry could hardly cope with the production of ever-increasing volumes of motor gasoline (octane number 59) for the national economy and aviation gasoline (octane number 70) for the rapidly growing aviation and tank fleet of the Red Army. The construction of petrochemical plants required the loading of significant machine-building capacities, the allocation of significant volumes of high-alloy steels. The production of high-octane gasoline required the development of the highest level of chemical technology of that time, the highest quality of equipment manufacturing and the most qualified personnel for its operation. Significant difficulties arose with the development of the technological processes themselves.
      © Melia A.A. Mobilization training of the national economy of the USSR.
      To understand the depth gaping heights with high octane - here is an excerpt from the minutes of the meeting mentioned above.
      Tov. CHERNOZHUKOV /Glavneft/ - Reports that the development of aviation gasoline "Extra 100" is carried out by Glavneft at present in Baku at the plant named after. Andreeva in quantity 150 tons per month. There are no other high-octane aviation gasolines yet, because Glavneft still has not put their production in factory quantities - gasoline "Extra 100" - a way out of a difficult situation today. There were no experimental trial launches of Extra 100 gasoline production units in Baku. The issue of "Extra 100" gasoline should and can be resolved only after a trial run of the installation and a number of measures to sort high-quality oils in Baku. An order on this issue has been issued by Glavneft. He does not know the situation with the production of Extra 100 gasoline at the Krasnodar plant, on this issue Comrade Kevorkov left for Krasnodar and Grozny, after whose return this issue can be resolved.

      Not bad, but: the year is 1937, and in Baku there is not even a basic stage in the production of high-octane gasoline - oil sorting.
  5. +1
    9 May 2022 07: 01
    It would be nice to mention Porokhovshchikov's planes, the P-IV of various modifications was produced even under Lenin ...
  6. +7
    9 May 2022 07: 11
    Wars are won by economies.
    There is an excellent product in terms of combat characteristics, but extremely complex. As an example, we can take the Tiger and Panther tanks, which are extremely difficult to manufacture, from fascist Germany. They could not be produced in huge quantities: about 1400 of the first and about 6000 of the second.
    And there is the Soviet T-34 tank: extremely simple technologically, using the labor of low-skilled workers, including women. More than 43 tanks were produced in various modifications.

    So it is with airplanes.
    We had a huge deficit in dural-aluminum. That is why they mass-produced aircraft from plywood, percale, and wood. And on these materials you will not achieve outstanding performance characteristics.
    But on the other hand, you can rivet them in tens of thousands - the motors have already made their own. Crushed by a mass of aircraft, which happened later, starting in 1943.

    Happy Victory Day dear comrades!!!!
    1. +3
      9 May 2022 07: 29
      Quote: bulava74
      And there is the Soviet T-34 tank: extremely simple technologically, using the labor of low-skilled workers, including women.

      Automatic welding of armor plates is the pinnacle of technology of those times ... that's why it was possible to use "low-skilled workers" ...
      1. +2
        9 May 2022 15: 07
        And for the first time, stamping was used in the manufacture of towers. It's just that many people really believe that the Tiger, with its manual assembly and use of work, seems to be more technologically advanced.
    2. +3
      9 May 2022 08: 18
      People like you are not our friends. The T-34 was not an extremely simple design - a welded hull, a long-barreled gun, a powerful diesel engine, a cast tower, wide tracks. The efforts of Soviet workers, designers and engineers under the leadership of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks made it technologically advanced. Extremely simple was the T-26 or Renault-35.
      1. +3
        9 May 2022 09: 14
        Sorry, but you are confusing production technology and "consumer qualities". The panther had all of the above, but as mentioned above, the Germans riveted 6000 of them. This despite the fact that their industry was not inferior, but even surpassed ours.
        1. +1
          9 May 2022 23: 26
          Where did the fierce nonsense about not yield? It will only introduce a walker with a staggered arrangement of rollers, it’s not even worth talking about automatic welding. So the fascist industry was inferior to the Soviet, socialist.
          1. 0
            10 May 2022 13: 35
            Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
            Where did the fierce nonsense about not yield? It will only introduce a walker with a staggered arrangement of rollers, it’s not even worth talking about automatic welding. So the fascist industry was inferior to the Soviet, socialist.

            Here on VO there was an article that towards the end of the war managed to reduce the marriage in the manufacture of tank armor to ..... 52% belay !!!
            Sheet - armor, sheet - marriage ....

            I don’t even want to remember about radio stations in the troops ...
            1. -1
              10 May 2022 14: 55
              Marriage is different ... let's not be smart, okay?
              1. 0
                10 May 2022 16: 40
                Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
                Marriage is different ... let's not be smart, okay?

                Well, do not be smart, who forbids you?
                Marriage in tank armor is the death of the crew. No options.....
                Buckets can be made from marriage - no tanks.
                1. -1
                  10 May 2022 17: 43
                  Are you a metallurgist, a welding specialist, an experienced machine builder?
                  1. 0
                    10 May 2022 20: 09
                    Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
                    Are you a metallurgist, a welding specialist, an experienced machine builder?

                    And you?
                    I have enough documents signed by authorized persons and in the public domain
                    Judging by your comments, you are an expert in aviation (especially UAVs), air defense, engine building for trucks, the Navy, Daggers, diplomacy, history, jurisprudence of the USSR of the 1930s ...
                    Well, tank building, where without it, with such coverage of everything and everything
            2. 0
              9 June 2022 14: 57
              The main marriage of the armor was obtained during the rental, the wear of the mills and at first a poorly developed technology
          2. -1
            10 May 2022 20: 21
            Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
            It will only introduce a hodovka with a staggered arrangement of rollers, it’s not even worth talking about automatic welding. So the fascist industry was inferior to the Soviet, socialist one.

            No. It's just that we and the Germans went different ways.
            The Reich initially had a large number of highly skilled workers - so they could afford manual welding and other "non-conveyor" technologies. The advantage of this approach is the possibility of producing a wide range of vehicles on the base chassis.
            Even before the war, we had tension with personnel, which intensified even more during the war. Therefore, our path was the classic Ford assembly line - a large number of simple operations, a small number of highly qualified specialists and the automation of everything that requires the labor of skilled workers. Hence the automation of welding: a skilled worker - a tuner - is one for several devices, and the qualifications of users are not so critical. A similar situation was not only in the tank industry: for example, the production of La-5 went on for several months according to the modified drawings of the LaGG-3 with double skin in the bow and a cropped power set designed for the M-105 - simply because there was no one to quickly remake the equipment for new nose with M-82.
            The reverse side of the conveyor was a narrow tailoring for a specific model: we make only one tank and vehicles based on it with minimal alteration. This, in particular, ruined the S-51 self-propelled guns: the NKTP could only give it the KV-1S chassis with the original armor, which was redundant for the self-propelled guns, reduced the payload mass, worsened maneuverability and increased firing loads. The GAU asked for a chassis with half the armor, but the NKTP could not give it.

            And second: we and the Reich initially had different approaches to war. The USSR, with its open spaces, human resources and workforce, could only afford total war and the concept of attrition - a lot of the average quality of fighters on mass medium equipment. The shadow of WWI dominated over the Reich, when total war brought the previous Reich to revolution. Hence the emphasis on blitzkrieg, wunderwaffe and elite training - for a long war means defeat, and equipment with high performance characteristics, coupled with trained personnel, in theory reduces the number of armed forces (by quality to beat quantity), their losses and the duration of the war. And the first couple of years it rolled.
            1. -1
              10 May 2022 21: 27
              Oh, another endorser of sausage tank builders. The fascist trash could not come up with anything technologically advanced and effective - it was necessary to follow the theory of racial superiority, and therefore there was no way without crazy samples of a miracle weapon.
              And that total war is not compatible with blitzkrieg?
              The first La-5s were released from the old LaGG reserve.
              1. +1
                11 May 2022 02: 58
                Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
                The fascist trash could not come up with anything technological and effective

                It was just technological for the Reich that for our production it would have been a hell of a hell. And vice versa.
                Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
                And that total war is not compatible with blitzkrieg?

                Total war is incompatible with the Reich. The Reich tried to hit her in WWI - it all ended with a crisis in the rear and a "stab in the back." That is why the next Reich tried by all means to avoid the totalen Krieg rake and announced it only at the beginning of 1943.
                Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
                The first La-5s were released from the old LaGG reserve.

                The first La-5? belay In fact, double-skinned vehicles were produced from July to December 1942.
      2. +7
        9 May 2022 10: 26
        Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
        Extremely simple was the T-26

        Watching when. The T-26, like the T-34, became extremely simple only after several years of mass production. And at the beginning of her career it was English flea, which had to be somehow done in the Motherland, and so that she would not stop dancing. smile
        Serial production of T-26 tanks immediately revealed a large number of different problems. Thus, the armored hulls and turrets coming from the Izhora plant had a large number of cracks. Many of the hulls had an armor thickness of 10 mm (instead of the planned 13 mm) - they could not immediately establish the production of armor plates of the required thickness due to the large number of defects. The T-26 engines, with their apparent simplicity in comparison with domestic developments (for example, in comparison with the engine of the T-19 tank), required a higher production culture, which domestic factories did not yet have. Therefore, the engines constantly failed, not having time to cover even the minimum mileage. In addition, the gearboxes “crumbled”, the suspension springs and tracks burst, the rubber of the road wheels crumbled. Nevertheless, with great difficulty, the Bolshevik plant produced only 120 T-26s by the end of the year, of which 100 vehicles were able to pass military acceptance (at least 35 had hulls and turrets made of non-armored steel).

        It should be noted that the production of a number of complex assemblies and parts was first launched at many allied enterprises and required a certain amount of time to organize the work. In addition, there was a catastrophic shortage of qualified personnel - not only engineers and technicians, but also ordinary workers. The low qualification of the labor force, the novelty of the program, with insufficient equipment of production with the necessary number of machines, tools and fixtures, all this led to a huge amount of marriage. As a result, the monthly schedules for the production of tanks were not met, the manufactured tanks were not accepted by military acceptance and accumulated at the plant.
        The situation was aggravated by the fact that plant No. 174 did not have a well-established technical process for the production of tanks, and planning for the production of components for the T-26 at allied plants went very badly. In addition, at the beginning of the second half of 1932, it became clear that plant No. 174 would not be able to obtain all the necessary equipment, tools and fixtures.

        The T-26 was powered by a 90-horsepower four-cylinder air-cooled carburetor engine with a horizontal arrangement of cylinders, which was an exact copy of the Armstrong-Sidley engine of the Vickers tank. The only difference was that the Soviet-made motor was much worse in quality and refused to work normally. It was possible to bring it to the working out of the warranty period only by 1934.
        © Maxim Kolomiets. T-26. The hard fate of a light tank.
  7. +6
    9 May 2022 07: 20
    Is it really necessary to post articles of a similar level on VO, "for children of younger and middle age"? No need. It spoils the "charisma" of a generally good site, especially on a day like this.
    I congratulate everyone on the holiday - the Great Victory Day!

  8. +9
    9 May 2022 07: 27
    The author is in his repertoire ... and the name is strange .. forgotten, even contradicts the text of the article .. Well, yes, well, yes, apart from galoshes .. The author does not want to please with an article about forgotten aircraft of the Russian Empire?
  9. Alf
    +7
    9 May 2022 07: 52
    Where is DB-A?
    1. -1
      9 May 2022 08: 13
      isn’t this an N-209? The cabins are different, the DB-A has a streamlined lantern.
      1. Alf
        +2
        9 May 2022 18: 17
        Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
        isn’t this an N-209? The cabins are different, the DB-A has a streamlined lantern.

        It is he. I just couldn't find good quality photos.
      2. +2
        9 May 2022 22: 48
        Yes, the serial DB-A, and it was built in a small series, indeed there was a fairing behind the cockpit, and not a fairing, as shown in the photo of Dear Alpha N-209, in place of the second cockpit there was a machine-gun closed turret, and the landing gear was retractable into beveled engine nacelles. The M-34 engines were equipped with turbochargers, which indicated its purpose for working at heights. This car passed under the code DB-A 4 M-34 FRN / TK.
  10. +5
    9 May 2022 08: 11
    After reading the article, I became anxious for the author. What was the matter with him? Who were Kalinin’s ugly designs ahead of? This is a typical drink of funds, a very relevant problem for the modern Russian Federation. remember Armata or a grandiose cut under the program for creating an engine for PAK DA.
    1. 0
      10 May 2022 16: 42
      Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
      a typical drank of funds, a very relevant problem for the modern Russian Federation. Only in the 30s they put them against the wall for such tricks, but everything is fine in the God-saved fatherland.

      Very successfully, they did not have time to put Rokosovsky against the wall ...
      Well, with Korolev, with his cuts to the country, they were also wildly lucky that they didn’t slap ....
      Well, how they invented aircraft engines, swelled a bunch of dough, and at the end - they couldn’t make a WORKING engine in 10 years - find it for yourself ...
      Shot? Uh-huh .... 1930s ....
      And the epic with overfulfillment of the plan for 45mm shells? EVERYONE (to the last cleaning lady!) Should have been shot there ....

      1. -1
        10 May 2022 17: 41
        Will there be examples?
        1. 0
          10 May 2022 20: 02
          Quote: Vladimir Michailovich
          Will there be examples?

          Examples what?
          That the Queen wasn't spanked by any chance? Or Rokosovsky?
          Or the seats of the "king of fighters" - with a executed death sentence in prison?
  11. +1
    9 May 2022 08: 39
    The formation of aviation interesting years. The farthest. The heaviest. The fastest ... And the time of creating new letaks was not measured in decades.
    And now the routine. A little longer, a little thicker. And look - the twins are brothers. It is clear that the laws of aerodynamics and economics. But I want something outstanding. :)
  12. -1
    9 May 2022 10: 45
    Kamrada, Polikarpov, Tupolev or Ilyushin, they all learned from experience: Sikorsky, Gakel, Porokhovshchikov.
    The main thing is not to forget the workers who created the first Russian aircraft.
    The Soviet workers learned from their experience, and the current workers learned from them.
    1. Alf
      +5
      9 May 2022 18: 21
      Quote: vladcub
      Polikarpov, Tupolev or Ilyushin, they all learned from experience: Sikorsky, Gakel, Porokhovshchikov.

      And where and when did Tupolev, Polikarpov and Ilyushin intersect with Gakkel or Porokhovshchikov? Yes, and Tupolev, as it were, was in parallel with Sikorsky.
  13. +1
    9 May 2022 11: 03
    it was a breakdown of its plywood sheathing


    At that time, there were also problems with wind tunnels, which also needed to be able to build and modernize on stream.
  14. +1
    9 May 2022 12: 47
    Where is the R-5 ?, it’s also a bomber.
  15. +2
    9 May 2022 15: 20
    Strange article. The author just decided to declare himself beloved
  16. +3
    9 May 2022 22: 36
    To paraphrase the classic:
    We call this nonsense an article !!!
    I quote:
    "... And it was not a record holder, not an all-metal aircraft, and not even miracles with dynamo-reactive guns that won this race, the middle peasants won. It was the I-3 - I-5 - I-15/16 line without outstanding characteristics that formed the basis our Air Force..."
    The author, but nothing that in the local wars of the mid-late 1930s, THE I-15, I-15Bis, I-153, I-16 FIGHTERS WAS NOT EQUAL !!! They fought their classmates of the same age Non-51, Ar-68, Fiat CR-32, Ki-10, Ki-27, A5M, Bristol-Bulldogs, Nieuport-Delyazhi, Devuatins - FOR THE MOST LTX !!! In Spain, Mongolia, China!!! Even the first Vf-109, which Berta, Clara, Caesars, our Donkeys of types 10, 18, 17, 24 beat, and beat very well!
    Yes, then Emil appeared, but before him, Polikarpov's cars literally ruled the sky!
    And this is confirmed by many facts!
    Do you seriously think that they "did not have outstanding characteristics" ???
    I feel sorry for you, dear author...
    For the mid-1930s Polikarpov's Soviet fighters WERE THE BEST FIGHTERS IN THE WORLD!
    Why write deliberate nonsense?
  17. 0
    10 May 2022 22: 04
    Somehow smoothly, srach switched from aircraft to tanks.

    But this is not about the aircraft themselves, but about cause-and-effect relationships in their production.

    These PSSs are broad and deep. The main problem was the general lag in the education of the country's population at that time.

    This backlog was managed to stop only by the beginning of the 60s.