Does a king need royal honors?

127
Does a king need royal honors?

King of Fighters" is a very honorary title. Once I read from one author that “Yakovlev tried on the crown for himself” and, apart from regret about what he read, there are no emotions. The king is always the king, no matter what you do with him. And Nikolai Nikolaevich Polikarpov, in question, is not just a majestic figure in the world aviationshe is one of the greatest. Why - I dare to explain.

The biography of Nikolai Nikolaevich has been disassembled to the screws, however, there is nothing to add. Born, baptized (of course, in the family of a priest), studied. A theological school, a theological seminary, but for some reason, the affairs of heaven did not greatly interest the young man.




First row, second from the left - N. Polikarpov. Livny Theological School

And therefore, with all his might, Polikarpov rushed to technology. And he ended up in the ranks of students of the St. Petersburg Polytechnic University.

It was not easy for a spiritual person to get there; seminary graduates were not accepted. Polikarpov is taking exams as an external student at the 1st Oryol Gymnasium. Education at the university is not only paid, it is also expensive. And the church for studying at the theological seminary, where Polikarpov, as the son of a priest, studied for free, also demanded to pay for education.

Nikolay works as a highway repair technician, builds and repairs bridges. In parallel with studying at TWO departments of the university, he works as an engineer on orders at the Petrograd branch of the Moscow plant "Dux". Aircraft factory, I note.

The works of the student Polikarpov attracted the attention of the greatest man in stories aviation, Igor Sikorsky.


Here it becomes clear that Sikorsky saw in the student something that others did not see. But the fact is: Sikorsky sends a nominal application to the Directorate of the Air Force fleet of the Russian Empire, where he says that he is going to the "Russian-Baltic Carriage Works" (in Russia it is customary to do Tanks and airplanes) requires a graduate of Polikarpov University.

And Polikarpov immediately after graduation (in 1916) begins to work, and not as a simple engineer, but as the head of the production of S-16 fighters. Further, the young engineer participates in the work on the modernization of the S-16 and the Ilya Muromets bomber, different aircraft not just, but in principle. And - copes.

Then there was work on the Sikorsky C-18, C-19 and C-20 fighters, although the C-19 can rather be called the world's first attack aircraft.

In 1918, Sikorsky, not finding common ground with the new government, emigrated. Polikarpov stayed. It is difficult to say how the fate of Polikarpov would have developed if he had emigrated with his teacher, but Nikolai Nikolaevich remained.

Left behind, Polikarpov begins to work on what he could work with. At the Dux plant in Moscow, he begins to work to ensure that the newly-minted Soviet Air Force, under conditions of intervention and civil war, would receive at least Farmans of all possible models and Ilya Muromets.

And at the same time he is working on aircraft of his designs. In conditions where there was nothing. No developments, because a few engineers followed Sikorsky (like Lebedev and others), there are no engines, no factories.

It turns out that a fierce desire to create can fly far.

In August 1922, the GAZ-1 plant (former Dux) was given the task of mastering the production of Airco DH.9 aircraft. Polikarpov makes a complete recalculation of the De Haviland design and makes significant structural changes to it. So literally a year later, the first serial Soviet aircraft appeared: the R-1 reconnaissance aircraft, produced at that time in a huge series of 2 copies.


At the same time, together with the designers I. M. Kostkin and A. A. Popov, Polikarpov, on his own initiative, develops and builds the world's first cantilever low-wing fighter IL-400 (I-1). And at the same time, the project of the OL-1 "Fighter" attack aircraft based on the IL-400 is being worked out.


Let me remind you that it is 1923 in the yard. In Soviet Russia. On the ruins of a Russian aircraft industry that did not really exist.

The project was innovative, but not without flaws. There was also a lack of experience and a lack of technology. Therefore, the I-1 was built in a series of 33 aircraft, which, in principle, can be considered a success for Polikarpov's start as a designer.

In February 1926, Polikarpov was appointed head of the department of land aircraft construction (OOS) of the Aviatrest Central Design Bureau. And this is where the full program begins.


1927 Training aircraft U-2.


The main training aircraft until the 50s, a light night bomber during the Great Patriotic War, one of the most numerous aircraft in the history of Soviet aviation (33 units).

1928 Fighter I-3. The main fighter of the Red Army Air Force until 1933. Released in a series of 399 units.


In February of the same 1928, Polikarpov was appointed chief designer of the state aircraft plant No. 25. Polikarpov came to the plant with a group of designers with whom he worked on previous projects, Olkhovsky, Kocherigin, Krylov.

And at the end of 1928, the R-5 multi-purpose reconnaissance aircraft was presented, which became not just a good aircraft, it took first place at an international competition, ahead of the aircraft of such aviation giants as Great Britain and France.


R-5 was released in the amount of 6676 copies. The plane proved to be very worthy in the epic with the Chelyuskin in 1934, and was operated for quite a long time after the Great Patriotic War.

At the same time, work began on the I-6 fighter. But the aircraft in 1929 was already being completed by designers led by Kocherigin, because Grigorovich and Polikarpov had already been arrested.


I-6 was raised into the sky on May 23, 1930 and participated in the competition for serial construction, but ... lost to the I-5 fighter, which was designed and built in the prison design bureau by Grigorovich and Polikarpov, who were sitting there.

Both Grigorovich and Polikarpov were repressed for absolutely no reason. On the standard charge of "participation in a counter-revolutionary wrecking organization" in October 1929, the designers were sentenced to capital punishment. Without trial and special investigation. And for two months Polikarpov was just waiting to be shot. Fortunately, it did not follow, and in December, without annulment or even a change in the sentence, Polikarpov was sent to TsKB-39 of the OGPU, a special design bureau organized in Butyrka prison.


Here, during 1930, suicide bombers Grigorovich and Polikarpov create the same I-5 fighter, which became the main fighter of the Red Army Air Force for the next 9 years.

The Board of the OGPU highly appreciated the activities of the designer Polikarpov, because in 1931 he received 10 years in the camps.

However, after the plane was shown to Stalin and Voroshilov, the attitude softened. The verdict was considered conditional. That is, they could return to him at any moment, and until the very end of his life, Polikarpov went under this sentence. Only 12 years after the death of the great designer, the Military Collegium of the Supreme Court of the USSR in 1956 overturned the sentence against Polikarpov and dismissed the case against him.

Well, in our country they knew how to be grateful at all times.


Having been released, Polikarpov simply rushed to create. Not everything was smooth and beautiful, he was removed from his posts, appointed as an ordinary engineer, and again put higher. Ilyushin and Sukhoi, each of them, gave Polikarpov great help at one time, which at least allowed the designer to work calmly.

1933 Fighter I-15.


It is adopted by the Red Army Air Force, 384 vehicles are produced in the USSR and another 297 units under license in Spain.

1933 Fighter I-16.


In service with the Red Army Air Force from 1934 to 1942 as the main fighter. Built in quantities of more than 10 units, it was used in the Great Patriotic War until 000 and even longer. He served in the Spanish Air Force until 1943.

1937 Fighter I-15bis.


Modernization, which did everything better than the I-15. Produced in the amount of 2408 units. I-15 bis takes part in the Spanish Civil War, was used by the Chinese Air Force against the Japanese, fought at Khalkhin Gol and near Lake Khasan. In the fighting of the Great Patriotic War, it was used as an attack aircraft until the middle of 1943.

1938 Fighter I-153. The third and last modernization of the I-15


With a more powerful engine and retractable landing gear. 3437 units were produced, the I-153 was used for almost the entire war as a light attack aircraft and reconnaissance aircraft.

It was after this cascade of very impressive machines, each of which was adopted by the Red Army Air Force, that Polikarpov received the title of "King of Fighters". At that time, these were really very good cars that corresponded to all world levels.

In 1938, after the arrest of A. N. Tupolev, Polikarpov was appointed chief designer of the aircraft plant number 156.


In 1939, a new I-156 fighter was built at factory #180.


Unfortunately, this aircraft caused many problems, the main of which was the death of test pilot Valery Chkalov. Polikarpov again falls into disfavor, he was saved from arrest and reprisal only by the fact that he did not sign the act of readiness of the aircraft for departure. As a result, amateur performance cost Chkalov his life, and the designer Tomashevich his freedom.

In May 1939, Polikarpov was transferred to the State Aviation Plant No. 1, to the position of chief designer and technical director. The design bureau also moved here.

During 1939 and 1940, Polikarpov was working on two lines of fighters at once: the I-180, I-185 and I-200 monoplanes and the I-190 and I-195 biplanes.

During Polikarpov's business trip to Germany in 1939, Plant No. 1 director Voronin and chief engineer Dementiev (the future minister of the aviation industry) defeated Polikarpov's design bureau, taking away the best engineers and designers from there, organized a new design bureau under the leadership of Artem Mikoyan and transferred to him the entire accumulated production base and even I-200 fighter project.

Polikarpov returned from Germany to the ashes. There were no personnel, there was no production base, what was organized under the guise of state factory No. 51 in the old hangar on Khodynka was on the same level as the Yakovlev bed factory.

But even in such inhuman conditions as the old hangar, without a normal design bureau, with the remnants of personnel who had not fled to Mikoyan, Polikarpov continued to create. From 1939 to the time of his death in 1944, Polikarpov designed and built a number of experimental combat vehicles: TIS, VIT, SPB, NB, I-185.


I-185 passed both state and military tests and reviews about it were the most enthusiastic. It really could be the best Soviet fighter. But the unfinished M-71 engine caused several accidents, in one of which test pilot V.A. Stepanchonok. The lack of a reliable engine and a minimum production base did not allow serial production of the I-185.

Polikarpov was organized a real persecution among colleagues. This was probably the most unpleasant moment in the life of the designer, when streams of criticism poured in from all sides against him from young colleagues who had already tasted the delights of mass production of their aircraft.


By the way, in A. Yakovlev's book "The Purpose of Life" often slipped "injections" against Polikarpov.

Only when Stalin himself stood up for the designer did the situation calm down. But it was really too late. On July 30, 1944, Nikolai Nikolaevich Polikarpov died. The cancer of the stomach turned out to be stronger.

During his work as a designer, Polikarpov created more than 80 aircraft projects. Plant No. 1 built almost 17 thousand aircraft, the rest of the factories even more, and the total figure for the number of Polikarpov aircraft crossed over 50 thousand.

After the death of Polikarpov, his design bureau was headed by Vladimir Chelomey, who concentrated the efforts of the team on the development of the first in the USSR cruise missiles with pulsed air-breathing engines (aircraft projectiles).

It is worth saying that Mikoyan did not benefit from what Dementiev and Voronin arranged for him did not benefit. The I-200, which Mikoyan passed off as the MiG-1, was never brought to its natural end. No wonder Polikarpov was in no hurry with this car. Mikoyan was a good hardware player and organizer (as, indeed, all Mikoyans), but a very mediocre designer. Therefore, through the efforts of a student of Polikarpov Gurevich, the MiG-1 was finalized to the MiG-3 and fought in the initial period of the Great Patriotic War. But we already know the fate of this difficult aircraft. The MiG-3 was abandoned in favor of more advanced aircraft at the first opportunity.

And until the beginning of the jet era, nothing sensible was created in the design bureau of Mikoyan and Gurevich. Unlike Polikarpov, who worked in a barn.


VIT-2

At the historical moment when the Russian Empire was replaced by the Soviet Union, there were many people in the new world who had a desire to create. Including in aviation. But aviation is a very complex business, and in reality the number of designers was small compared to other industries.

Nikolai Polikarpov had everything: talent, desire to create and good luck. He was incredibly lucky to become a student of the great Sikorsky, he was lucky that he could create. Lucky to have people around. Grigorovich, Chkalov, Suprun, Yangel, Baidukov, Tairov are associates and students with whom the great designer created combat aircraft. Thanks to cooperation with Grigorovich, Polikarpov was not shot, thanks to the intercession of Chkalov and Baidukov, he did not fall under repression a second time.

Favoritism, which has always taken place in our country, regardless of the name, whether it be the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union or the Russian Federation, is an immutable thing. He was, he is, he will remain in the future.

In those years, a slight nod was enough, and any business folded up and went under the carpet. Stalin said that "Our army needs IL-2 like bread, like air" - and they immediately forgot about Polikarpov's VIT-1 and VIT-2 and Sukhoi's Su-6 and Su-8. The war wrote off a lot, including competitions. We needed combat aircraft that could go into battle, so there was absolutely no time for competitions. Such was the policy, therefore, during the entire Great Patriotic War, practically no new aircraft models were received in the Red Army Air Force. Only modifications already in service. Only La-5 (with a certain stretch) and Tu-2 can be called fundamentally new.

And even then, a difficult question regarding La-5. If the People's Commissariat for the Aviation Industry did not force Polikarpov to transfer part of the developments on the I-185 to Lavochkin, it is not an option that the La-5 would fly at all. And the I-185 had already flown, had already fought, and had good feedback from the pilots.

So we can safely say that Polikarpov was robbed twice.

And in the end they took everything. Plant, design bureau, machine tools, designers. Indeed, all that remained was to die, because there was really no hope that Polikarpov's positions would return. Or build planes against all odds.

Apparently, there was something in the character of Polikarpov, from his priest-father. Love for the country in which he was born and raised. For which he lived and worked. Could Polikarpov repeat the fate of Sikorsky in terms of going abroad and becoming a rich and revered person there? Could. Whether working with a teacher, going to Boeing or Lockheed, founding his own company, Polikarpov's success would be guaranteed.

However, he chose to stay and build aircraft that protected the skies of Russia. His Russia. Despite the accusations, unrighteous actions, robbery and all the other delights that our history has been so rich in.

Anyone who understands even a little about aviation is perfectly aware of what Polikarpov did. To create good aircraft that are not inferior to world analogues and even surpass them in a country that was able to master a couple of not the best imported engines in production, in a country where aluminum was smelted in a teaspoon per hour and it was necessary to make planes from wood, in a country where instrumentation and radio engineering were at an embryonic level - it was a daunting task.

But Nikolai Nikolaevich Polikarpov did it, moreover, exactly when it was most needed: in the twenties and thirties. It is a pity that the great designer was not able to realize all of his plans. But his technical and political contribution to the security of the country is truly invaluable.

The political one is when everyone outside the USSR saw and understood that a new country with a new way of life could build both planes and tanks. Unlike the Russian Empire. And these are good tanks and excellent planes.

The technical one is that Polikarpov's "obsolete" planes quite obviously fought until 1943, and in some cases even until 1944. "Seagulls" as light attack aircraft turned out to be very useful aircraft, capable of taking off "from a spot", striking and leaving at low level. Some analogue of Po-2, only daytime, since there was no navigator.

Polikarpov's planes, on which the Heroes of the Soviet Union Clubs, Rechkalov, Akhmet-Khan, Safonov, Faddeev fought, are better than titles and awards. Or the best reward.


"King of Fighters" is still too pompous. And little. The great designer who created beautiful machines “out of nothing”, at the call of his heart, is more worthy, as well as what we still remember, what we owe to the most modest and brilliant person Nikolai Nikolaevich Polikarpov.


Human memory cannot be compared with any royal titles and honors. And all those interested in the history of aviation will remember this man. The great Russian aircraft designer and real person Nikolai Nikolaevich Polikarpov.
127 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +23
    24 June 2022 03: 35
    A great man, a magnificent aircraft designer, was a patriot of Russia, we are grateful to him for the fact that in the 20-30s he created aircraft for the Air Force.
    1. -16
      24 June 2022 04: 24
      Quote: Borik
      A great man, a magnificent aircraft designer, was a patriot of Russia, we are grateful to him for the fact that in the 20-30s he created aircraft for the Air Force.

      And the pygmy Stalin interfered with him in every possible way. (Sarcasm)
      1. +23
        24 June 2022 04: 47
        Quote: Vladimir_2U
        And the pygmy Stalin interfered with him in every possible way. (Sarcasm)

        It was not Stalin who interfered with him, but those worthless pygmies who, by humiliating talents, slandering and slandering, tried to win the trust and favor of the leader.
        (Take the example of the NSH - there is nothing behind it that could increase its significance in the eyes of the ITT, and Stalin did not touch it)
        1. +7
          24 June 2022 06: 41
          Nikolai Nikolaevich was head and shoulders above the pygmies surrounding him, both in talent and in spirituality, and the hammer, as you know, hits the head of a WORKING nail...
        2. +13
          24 June 2022 09: 15
          I strongly disagree with the Author about the misery of the MiG and the mediocrity of Mikoyan. All his colleagues unanimously recalled that he had some kind of brilliant seventh sense to find the correct and optimal solution from a variety of options. Not surprisingly, his design bureau created the most massive MiG-15 jet fighter in history. Is it from mediocrity? And so, note to the author, the MiG-3 was the fastest serial fighter in the world at that time. Also from Mikoyan's mediocrity? The fact that its production was then curtailed and the MiG engines reoriented to Ilys is a completely different story.
          1. +10
            24 June 2022 17: 25
            As far as I understand, the MiG-3 was created as a high-speed interceptor. The fact that it was used as a front-line fighter ... then everything that was at hand was used.
            By the way, Pokryshkin fought on the MiG-3. Fought and shot down.
            So about the "squalor" (more precisely, its absence), I agree with you.
            1. +3
              24 June 2022 20: 31
              Where did the author write about the misery of the MiG? They themselves came up with and themselves rushed to refute
              1. 0
                25 June 2022 00: 18
                Quote: KERMET
                Where did the author write about the misery of the MiG? They themselves came up with and themselves rushed to refute

                Have you tried reading the article? There is not much material there. Enjoy reading. It colorfully describes how the Germans spoke about the moment, how our pilots ...
                1. +2
                  25 June 2022 06: 41
                  You apparently confused the articles? Where in the article above did you find all these reviews? Share a quote?
            2. +3
              25 June 2022 10: 59
              No, you don’t understand, there was no concept of a high-speed interceptor in the 40th, the experience of fighting in the west required height, this is a general development trend at this point in time, the same M-105 was high-altitude, in the 42nd due to the altitude increased power.
              According to all documents, the MiG was held as a front-line one, the AM-38 installation on the MiG-3 received a significant increase in performance near the ground.
            3. 0
              27 June 2022 10: 28
              Quote: Martyn
              As far as I understand, the MiG-3 was created as a high-speed interceptor.

              Like a fast fighter. It's just that the design bureau took as a basis the most powerful engine that the USSR had in iron - AM-35. And the altitude was attached to it.
              Quote: Martyn
              The fact that it was used as a front-line fighter ... then everything that was at hand was used.

              Before the war, MiGs were equipped with fighter regiments of mixed air divisions designed to support ground forces. So he became a front-line soldier from the very beginning, even before the war.
        3. +2
          24 June 2022 20: 03
          It was not Stalin who interfered with him, but those worthless pygmies,


          And thanks to what, or to whom, did this become possible in the country?
  2. +4
    24 June 2022 04: 17
    The great designer who created beautiful cars “out of nothing”, at the call of his heart

    That was exactly the thought that was going through my head when I read the article...
  3. +9
    24 June 2022 04: 41
    Just tears welling up:
    Polikarpov was organized a real persecution among colleagues.

    Correctly say:
    If a person stands out in some way against the general gray background, then “dullness” will not leave him alone ...
    This is repeated from generation to generation, and only the death of an outstanding person makes him a hero in the eyes of people who do not know him at all.
  4. Eug
    +7
    24 June 2022 04: 48
    There was a very "demonstrative" battle, held in March 1943 by the Baltic AS V. Golubev, where he perfectly used the advantages of the I-16, "landing" two Me-109s. And this is not an isolated case on the scale of the Air Force .... a description of the battle is on the Internet.
    1. +7
      24 June 2022 05: 51
      I told THIS fight many times *in my arms* to different people! I know it in detail! The daughter of Air Defense Aviation General Trombachev noted my characteristic gestures when I told her about this battle!
  5. +4
    24 June 2022 04: 53
    Thanks for the article very informative
    The author has a typo
    1928 Fighter I-3. The main fighter of the Red Army Air Force 1943 year.
    probably meant 1933
  6. +4
    24 June 2022 05: 34
    1928 Fighter I-3. Air Force main fighter Red Army until 1943. Released as a series in 399 units.
    belay Don't confuse anything?
  7. +2
    24 June 2022 05: 46
    Mikoyan was a good hardware player and organizer (as, however, all Mikoyans), but a very mediocre designer.
    There was a “comrade from the east” on the site a few years ago, and maybe already from Moscow, who argued with snot that Stalin was just lucky and A. Mikayan could well have been in his place. And the USSR would blossom like a garden. Mikayan just got unlucky request and us with him. fool
    So we can safely say that Polikarpov was robbed twice.
    Has the market settled? No, petty people, not clean at hand, without a king in their head! fool
    1. +4
      24 June 2022 08: 29
      Quote: Mavrikiy
      There was a “comrade from the east” on the site a few years ago, and maybe already from Moscow, who argued with snot that Stalin was just lucky and A. Mikoyan could well have been in his place.

      An association has arisen:
      He worked for himself quietly peacefully in the canteen. The most extreme atrocity that I dealt with was cutting amateur sausage. And suddenly here you go.

      Article published in 2018:
      40 years ago, 21 October 1978, Anastas Ivanovich Mikoyan died. He had an amazing political longevity: having begun his public career with V. I. Lenin, Mikoyan completed it with the coming to power of L. I. Brezhnev. People said about him: “From Ilyich to Ilyich without heart attack and paralysis.”
      The main area of ​​his activity was the foreign trade and food industry of the USSR, to the development of which Mikoyan made a significant contribution.

      https://topwar.ru/148636-anastas-mikojan-ot-ilicha-do-ilicha.html
      Let's thank Mikoyan for the "Doctor's" ... And let's not equate the IVS and AIM ...
      1. +4
        24 June 2022 11: 41
        From Ilyich to Ilyich, without a heart attack and paralysis.
        1. +4
          24 June 2022 13: 09
          - Anastas Ivanovich, what about the umbrella?
          - Yes, no, I'm somehow between the drops.
  8. +6
    24 June 2022 05: 48
    Great designer! Admire his cars since childhood! I-16 is the most favorite plane! And for me, the most beautiful!
  9. +10
    24 June 2022 06: 13
    The work of the student Polikarpov attracted the attention of the greatest man in the history of aviation, Igor Sikorsky.
    - Sikorsky, advertised to the point of loss of consciousness, is a huckster from aviation. There is not a single constructive innovation proposed by Sikorsky. Captured to the snot "Ilya Muromets" was the worst bomber of the First World War. If someone disagrees with this, then name at least one single-engine bomber model of that time with a lower bomb load and range. The only four-engine tactical bomber in the world is cool to this day. Sikorsky became world famous by selling helicopters. However, he does not have a single priority invention in the field of helicopter construction.
    Once I read from one author that “Yakovlev tried on the crown for himself” and, apart from regret about what he read, there are no emotions. A king is always a king, no matter what you do to him.
    - the main thing is to cry in Khrushchev's style about another victim of the system!
    The question is - was Polikarpov the "King of Fighters"? If you count the planes in pieces, then it was. If you count his successful fighter designs, then he wasn't.
    Polikarpov's fighters up to I-16 did not participate in mass battles. Talking about their genius is incorrect. They just were. The author writes:
    [I-16] In service with the Red Army Air Force from 1934 to 1942 as the main fighter. Built in the amount of more than 10 units, it was used in the Great Patriotic War until 000 and even longer.
    - in fact, out of the allegedly 10000 I-16 fighters, 3233 unarmed two-seat training type 14 UTI-2 type 15 UTI-4 were produced. Those. only 7 thousand combat I-16s were actually produced, although this is quite a lot.
    The I-16 was the pinnacle of the "King of Fighters". The beginning of its operation is dated 1934. And now without ads. His contemporary Me-109 made its first flight a year later, and went through many modifications throughout the war. He had flaws, but calling the Me-109 a bad plane will not turn your tongue. And vice versa. This is not entirely fair, but, nevertheless, the failures of 1941 are attributed precisely to the I-16. Against the Me-109E and above, the I-16 was clearly weak, and there was no possibility for its modernization. And after that, Polikarpov is king?
    Polikarpov was clearly not friendly with aerodynamics. He adhered to the erroneous concept - a short aircraft has less friction on the air, and the speed is greater. Alas and ah! In practice, the frictional resistance of the skin against the air is only one of the many braking forces of the aircraft against the air, and it is not the most important. The length of the I-16 type 29 (its latest modification) is 6.13 m. The length of the Me-109E is 8,64 m, the Me-109 G and K is 9 m. The main advantage of the Me-109 is that it quickly accelerated in a dive. The short length of the I-16 fuselage, combined with a blunt forehead, created additional frontal resistance for it and did not allow this aircraft to accelerate in a dive. Let's compare the main parameters of two fighters of the same age:
    Airacobra, beginning of production 1940. Characteristics obtained during testing of the P-39D modification aircraft in the USSR:
    - Maximum ground speed: 493 km / h and 585 km / h at an altitude of 4200 m;
    - Normal takeoff weight 3556 kg;
    - Engine power 1150 hp, i.e. specific power 3 kg/hp
    I-16, type 29, beginning of production in 1940.
    - Maximum ground speed: 419 km / h and 470 km / h at an altitude of 4480 m;
    -Normal takeoff weight 1966 kg.
    - Engine power 1100 hp, i.e. specific power 1,8 kg/hp
    In terms of specific power, the I-16 made the Aerocobra almost 2 times. The specific power of the Me-109 E (the main enemy of the I-16 in 1941) is 2,5 kg / hp, i.e. also inferior to I-16. And now remember Pokryshkin on the Aero Cobra and at least one period of the war, when the I-16 terrified the German aces. Excuse me, but the king is naked!
    In addition, the “King of Fighters” Polikarpov believed that the lower the stability margin, the more maneuverable the aircraft. Due to the low stability margin of the I-16, not all pilots could fly. From this dangling aircraft in flight, aimed shooting was difficult. And vice versa. When in 1940 the USSR purchased the Me-109E, our aircraft designers were surprised to find that stability does not impede maneuverability at all. But before that, Polikarpov crushed them all with his authority. In turn, it is still unpatriotic to doubt the genius of the "King of Fighters".
    The short length and insufficient stability of the fighter is the "crown" move of the "King of Fighters". The last representative of this concept in the USSR was the MiG-3. The length of the aircraft is 8,255 m. one of the shortest fighters of World War II. Low stability made shooting from the MiG-3 problematic. This aircraft did not deserve special praise, the German pilots treated it with contempt and called the MiG-3 oak.
    If we talk about the I-185, then it was not the machinations of Yakovlev and Lavochkin that brought him a death sentence, but only one phrase in the description of the design:
    Wing - all-metal two-spar

    During the war, aluminum was a strategic material. Aluminum is, first of all, tank engines and bombers. Lavochkin was able to put aluminum spars on the La-7 only in 1944. Yakovlev's fighters were made of plywood until the end of the war. An aluminum fighter in 1942 was a utopia in the USSR. Well, the "King of Fighters" Polikarpov did not know how to build fighters.
    1. +1
      24 June 2022 08: 30
      That's right, OLD ELECTRICIAN! It would be better to do electricity.
    2. +6
      24 June 2022 10: 49
      We have to explain to the OLD ELECTRICIAN what he is wrong about. There is such a thing as "after-knowledge". Naturally, Polikarpov N.N. worked, among other things, by the empirical method, i.e. by trial and error. At that time, there were no well-established and proven theories and methods for designing high-speed aircraft, the theory was only developing. To blame Polikarpov for mistakes now is simply not to have an idea about design work in new directions. Here you can cite Jewish wisdom from Odessa folklore: "I wish I could be as smart as my Sarochka later." The OLD ELECTRICIAN is likened to a similar Sara. Some of the OLD ELECTRICIAN's statements are simply mind-boggling. In conclusion, I have to cite the wisdom of the Eastern peoples: "Any donkey can kick a dead lion." That's why I wrote that it would be better if an electrician left comments on electrical topics. Well, then, who is Polikarpov Nikolai Nikolaevich in the world is very well known, and who is the OLD ELECTRICIAN, it's just a nickname under which a person is hiding something dissatisfied with Polikarpov. The Russian people say that they take water to the offended.
      1. 0
        24 June 2022 14: 12
        Quote: 2112vda
        Well, then, who is Polikarpov Nikolai Nikolaevich in the world is very well known, and who is the OLD ELECTRICIAN, it's just a nickname under which a person is hiding something dissatisfied with Polikarpov.

        So no one knows 2112vda.
        1. 0
          6 August 2022 15: 00
          So he does not seek fame. Who needs it, they know.
          1. -1
            6 August 2022 16: 40
            I hope there are orderlies among those to whom you are known ...
      2. -1
        24 June 2022 16: 28
        We have to explain to the OLD ELECTRICIAN what he is wrong about. There is such a thing as "after-knowledge". Naturally, Polikarpov N.N. worked, among other things, by the empirical method, i.e. by trial and error.
        - Wow, how cool!
        Especially for 2112vda, I will once again repeat the main characteristics of fighter aircraft of the initial period of World War II.
        Me-109 E, the beginning of production in 1939.
        - Maximum ground speed: 464 km / h and 510 km / h at an altitude of 4000 m;
        - Normal takeoff weight 2400 kg.
        - Engine power 1000 hp, i.e. specific power load 2,4 kg/hp
        Spitfire Mk.I, early production 1938.
        - Maximum speed 582 km / h at an altitude of 5 m;
        - Normal takeoff weight 2 692 kg.
        - Engine power 1030 hp, i.e. specific power load 2,6 kg/hp
        Airacobra, beginning of production 1940. Characteristics obtained during testing of the P-39D modification aircraft in the USSR:
        - Maximum ground speed: 493 km / h and 585 km / h at an altitude of 4200 m;
        - Normal takeoff weight 3556 kg;
        - Engine power 1150 hp, i.e. specific power 3 kg/hp
        I-16, type 29, beginning of production in 1940.
        - Maximum ground speed: 419 km / h and 470 km / h at an altitude of 4480 m;
        -Normal takeoff weight 1966 kg.
        - Engine power 1100 hp, i.e. specific power load 1,8 kg/hp
        As you can see, in terms of engine power, the I-16 surpassed all competitors, except for the Aerocobra. Just as confidently, all competitors surpass the I-16 in all other indicators - a trend, however.
        The reason for this trend is obvious - Polikarpov's competitors were friendly with aerodynamics, but the "king of fighters" was not. And do not need fairy tales about empirical methods. Where are they at Polikarpov? The layout of all his latest experimental fighters is one to one like a blueprint.
        I will not say that the Soviet science of aerodynamics in the 20-30s was the best in the world, but one thing is certain - it was at the world level. On December 1, 1918, the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute (TsAGI for short) began operating in Soviet Russia. Already in the mid-30s, TsAGI, using the T-106 variable pressure wind tunnel, studied the aerodynamics of transonic speeds. During the war, TsAGI carried out research that was beyond the power of the Americans. What, besides the crown of the "king of fighters" on his head, prevented Polikarpov from taking full advantage of the services of TsAGI? - Nothing. The reason for all his failures is the ambitions of a bronzed authority and nothing more.
        PS. I can’t imagine a specialist in what field a person with the nickname 2112vda can be, obviously a couch strategist.
        1. 0
          24 June 2022 22: 25
          Quote: Old electrician
          As you can see, in terms of engine power, the I-16 surpassed all competitors, except for the Aerocobra. Just as confidently, all competitors surpass the I-16 in all other indicators - a trend, however.

          I just wanted to discreetly praise you for the previous comment, as you immediately spoiled everything .. laughing

          Well, what nonsense are you writing? How can you compare cars with air-cooled engines and cars with a well-streamlined engine but with an external radiator .. Especially the very first models of air vents with a huge forehead on the I-16?

          The I-16 is a very good car for the early 30s, but the fact that Shvetsov's compact and forced engines, which played well on La-5 and La-7, came late is not Polikarpov's fault.
          1. -1
            25 June 2022 06: 39
            Well, what nonsense are you writing? How can you compare cars with air-cooled engines and cars with a well-streamlined engine but with an external radiator .. Especially the very first models of air vents with a huge forehead on the I-16?
            - You write nonsense. Let's compare the Me-109 versions of the G-K and La-7. In fact. La-7 for Messers was too tough. Fokkewulf 190 with an air-cooled engine drove liquid Spitfires furiously, but did not consider liquid Hurricanes as rivals at all. The diameter of the forehead of the La-7 is much larger than the diameter of the forehead of the I-16, but aerodynamically it is much more perfect. To a good dancer... I forgot further. Therefore, it is not necessary to portray the technical weakness of an aircraft designer as an unrecoverable design flaw in air-cooled engines.
          2. 0
            6 August 2022 15: 11
            The funniest thing, the P-47 Thunderbolt in the common people had the least drag, and not all kinds of messers, spitfires and mustangs. But the R-47 had a 2-row star. Well, there is no need to talk about the combat survivability of air vents, in comparison with dropsies. The lumbago of the jacket of the dropsy block led to the loss of fluid for several minutes, then the engine overheated the leash of the shaft line and camshafts, the engine was remelted. In air vents, shooting through the cooling fins only led to the replacement of a damaged cylinder. For this reason, at the end of the 2nd World War, dropsies were abandoned in all countries of the World, finishing off the remnants. It is now that effective experts are trying to step on the old rake again and forcibly shove car dropsy on airplanes. Here, as Bismarck said: "Smart people learn from the mistakes of others, everyone else learns from their own."
        2. +3
          25 June 2022 01: 57
          Insanity Emelyan appeared in the 39th R-39 in the same, but the I-16 is much (at that time) generally an eternity older. And fought on the level! With the same 109E.
        3. +1
          25 June 2022 07: 03
          Quote: Old electrician
          What, besides the crown of the "king of fighters" on his head, prevented Polikarpov from taking full advantage of the services of TsAGI?

          When there was a need, he used it, but the same TsAGI in those days was also not without errors, it claimed that the newly designed I-16 would be generally dangerous in terms of a spin, and only Chkalov refuted this in practice. Or the so-called pseudo-scientific work of TsAGI about the maximum load on the wing
        4. -4
          1 July 2022 13: 57
          Polikarpov to fully use the services of TsAGI? - Nothing. The reason for all his failures is the ambitions of a bronzed authority and nothing more.

          You understand what is the reason for such a praising of Polikarpov now, just another attempt to tell how bad the USSR was, tormenting the most brilliant designer ...
          And the fact that the designer was not so ingenious, and they were somehow not particularly tormented. This in the environment of propaganda causes rejection, which you are now observing
    3. +8
      24 June 2022 13: 57
      Quote: Old electrician
      Polikarpov was clearly not friendly with aerodynamics. He adhered to the erroneous concept - a short aircraft has less friction on the air, and the speed is greater.

      This is not an erroneous concept, but a trend in high-speed aircraft of the first half of the 30s - "flying barrels". Back then, short and big-bodied cars were the kings of speed.

      Let's compare the main parameters of two fighters of the same age:
      Airacobra, beginning of production 1940.
      (...)
      I-16, type 29, beginning of production in 1940.

      With the same success can be compared two peer fighters MiG-23MLD (produced since 1984) and Su-27 (produced since 1982). At the same time, taking for the characteristics of the Su-27 TTX from the modification of the Su-27SM. smile
      1. -4
        24 June 2022 16: 56
        With the same success, you can compare two fighters of the same age as the MiG-23MLD (release from 1984) and the Su-27 (release from 1982). At the same time, taking for the characteristics of the Su-27 TTX from the modification of the Su-27SM.
        – where and what is the success? Aircraft MiG-23MLD and Su-27 are fundamentally different concepts. The MiG-23MLD is an aircraft with variable wing geometry, the Su-27 is a bright example of the use of a wing with large swept roots. Unlike the concept, the release date for these aircraft is not fundamental. These are completely different aircraft. It's like comparing the I-16 and Yu-88 in the air defense night fighter variant. For that matter, the world's first large-sweep winged aircraft is the Swedish 35 SAAB J.1958 Draken. The world's first production aircraft with a variable sweep wing is the American F-111 from General Dynamics, produced since 1967. What is the point of comparing MiG-23MLD and Su-27? Then start from the beginning with Adam and Eve.
        Unlike the MiG-23MLD and Su-27, there are no conceptual differences between the Me-109E and I-16. Unless we consider the difference between water-cooled and air-cooled engines as a conceptual difference. You can tell any tales about the same age as the MiG-23MLD and Su-27, but the I-16 will not get any better. Is the "King of Fighters" the one who built unsuccessful planes?
        1. +4
          24 June 2022 17: 12
          Quote: Old electrician
          – where and what is the success? Aircraft MiG-23MLD and Su-27 are fundamentally different concepts.

          Well, you are comparing a modification of a high-speed fighter developed in the early 30s with a cannon fighter of the late 40s. smile
          Quote: Old electrician
          Unlike the MiG-23MLD and Su-27, there are no conceptual differences between the Me-109E and I-16.

          You compared the I-16 type 29 with the Aerocobra, and the D models. You can compare the I-16 and LaGG-3 of the 8th series with the same success.
          1. -3
            25 June 2022 06: 19
            You compared the I-16 type 29 with the Aerocobra, and the D models. You can compare the I-16 and LaGG-3 of the 8th series with the same success.
            - you deliberately change the thread of the conversation. We are not talking about comparing the characteristics of aircraft for War Thunder, etc. shooters. We are talking about stating the fact with which the aircraft designers of different countries came to the beginning of World War II. War is the toughest and even cruelest examiner. She does not care about someone's "Wishlist". When a German pilot drove another Soviet plane into the ground, he was completely on the drum what praises to the "King of Fighters" the Soviet press sang before the war. He was absolutely indifferent to the outstanding ideas and designs of the brilliant aircraft designer and student of the no less brilliant Sikorsky. The German, in fact, knew that his "Emil" or "Friedrich" was better than "Rata".
            Well, you are comparing a modification of a high-speed fighter developed in the early 30s with a cannon fighter of the late 40s.
            - you deliberately ignore the fact that the start of operation of the I-16 dates back to 1935, and the Me-109 to 1937. Those. the difference is only two years, and they were tested at the same time in Spain. The war absolutely does not care about who, according to what concepts, designed aircraft for it. The winner is always right.
            The fact that the I-16 is losing to the constantly improving Messer became obvious following the results of the Spanish Civil War. In February 1939, i.e. just two years before the start of the war, it was decided to urgently design high-speed fighters. Everyone who only expressed a desire to work in this field was involved in the design. Including completely random people who have never been involved in the design of fighters. For example, Gudkov. From the order of the NKAP dated July 3, 1943:
            According to the conclusion of the accident commission, the accident occurred due to the low flight qualities of the aircraft, resulting from poor layout and a number of design errors, for example, overweight by 1000 kg, which indicates the low qualification of the designer.
            Considering that Comrade Gudkov M.I. this work revealed his inconsistency, as a designer, I order:
            1. Deprive Gudkov M.I. the title of Chief Designer of the 2nd degree and forbid him to engage in independent design work.
            2. Personnel of the OKB Comrade Gudkov M.I. transferred to the Lavochkin Design Bureau.
            3. Appoint Comrade Gudkov M.I. Deputy Head of Quality Control Department of Plant No. 84
            .
            Nevertheless, the problem was solved, and just before the war, the Yak-1, LAGG-3 and MiG-3 went into production. Aircraft, of course, raw, with a lot of flaws, but they took the first blow, and the galaxy of Soviet aircraft designers was replenished with new brilliant names. It was from the Yak-1 and LAGG-3 that the Yak-1B, Yak-7, Yak-9, Yak-3, LaGG-3 of the latest modifications (produced before 1944), La-5, La-5FN, and La-7 grew who drove the Luftwaffe into the ground. The "King of Slayers" is not involved in this. In 1939, he had excellent starting opportunities, but none of the I-164, I-165, I-17, I-180, TIS, TsKB-12 and I-185 ever made it to the front. This indicates Polikarpov's inability to solve design problems. Nothing personal, but calling him the "King of Fighters" does not turn the tongue.
            1. 0
              27 June 2022 10: 24
              Quote: Old electrician
              - you deliberately change the thread of the conversation. We are not talking about comparing the characteristics of aircraft for War Thunder, etc. shooters. We are talking about stating the fact with which the aircraft designers of different countries came to the beginning of World War II. War is the toughest and even cruelest examiner. She does not care about someone's "Wishlist". When a German pilot drove another Soviet plane into the ground, he was completely on the drum what praises to the "King of Fighters" the Soviet press sang before the war.

              You deliberately change the thread of the conversation. ©
              This is not about comparing the I-16 with the Bf-109, but about comparing the I-16 with the P-39D.
              Quote: Old electrician
              - you deliberately ignore the fact that the start of operation of the I-16 dates back to 1935, and the Me-109 to 1937.

              They survived ... the 109th as a heavy cannon fighter. smile
              Once again - I'm talking about the "Aircobra" with its order of the first series in 1940. And you suggested comparing the I-16 with it.
    4. +2
      24 June 2022 20: 51
      So many words and such mess....
    5. 0
      26 June 2022 21: 31
      there is a dark story with the I-16 based on almost rumors that it was possible to install a geared engine and a three-bladed propeller on it and immediately seriously increase its performance.
      And so before the war there was a serious theory that a fighter should not weigh more than 3000 kg and have a minimum wingspan and length.
  10. -3
    24 June 2022 06: 27
    The Board of the OGPU highly appreciated the activities of the designer Polikarpov, because in 1931 he received 10 years in the camps

    The original estimate... heh heh ten years of camps.
    As one respected forum member says, the enemies of the communists ... received a high rating from the OGPU for wrecking.
    Polikarpov talent ... one of the first pilots of the Heroes of the USSR Vodopyanov flew on his planes.
    How many such talents have been rotted by denunciations and slander under Article 58 ... therefore, I am against those who propose to introduce mass executions ... even if they are enemies of the communists.
    1. -3
      24 June 2022 08: 37
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      therefore, I am against those who propose to introduce mass executions ...

      Mass shootings? They offer the death penalty for specific CRIMES and a tribunal for the duration of the war ... If you are still shy, then in the West they openly talk about the war between Putin and NATO ... ABOUT WAR !!! And we are all afraid to get our hands dirty on frenzied murderers and rapists...
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      As one respected forum member says here communist enemies...

      Our esteemed TATRA is fixated on the “enemies of the communists” in such a way that any answer begins with these words. Sorry. Without hands, without legs, went into the head ...
  11. +10
    24 June 2022 06: 35
    The entire article is a collection of aviation gossip and rumors. The author, as usual, did not give himself the slightest trouble to think at least a little, I'm not even talking about reading literature on the topic. Although you also need to be able to read literature.
    1. +2
      24 June 2022 11: 42
      Suggest your version or article, weakly?
  12. +7
    24 June 2022 06: 48
    In the sequel.
    I185 is M71F, but M71 never went into production. Those who write about the transfer of Lavochkin VMG from I185 should think about what this very VMG consists of. And what could be attached to the future La5. If we talk about the La5, then in general Yakovlev signed a telegram to Stalin about the need to start production of the LAGG 3 with the M82 engine as soon as possible, and the key technical solution that determined the creation of the famous La5 was first tested on the Yak7.
    By the way, according to Gallai’s calculations, Nikolai Nikolaevich’s testers died more than all the other designers combined, and Valery Palych crashed, in general, because of the usual mess on the Polikarpov LIS
    1. +2
      24 June 2022 21: 00
      Where did you connect M-71F and I-185? Why not with the M-72, or not immediately with the ASh-73?
      Regarding the number of dead testers - in general, the more they flew, the more they fought. And if you start to understand those deaths - half if not more is not the fault of the designer
  13. +1
    24 June 2022 06: 52
    in October 1929 the designers sentenced to the highest punishment. No trial and special investigation.

    Sentencing ... without trial ... How is it?
    "Troika" or "special meeting", etc. This was the judiciary of the time.
    Well, "kicking" the Soviet government "with or without need" - this is the path of V.O. Shpakovsky.
    1. -1
      24 June 2022 09: 59
      Sentencing ... without trial ... How is it?
      But it’s unknown .. At that time there was a Special Meeting of the OGPU, but it had limited rights, it didn’t sentence to death. Troikas appeared in 1937.
      1. +2
        24 June 2022 14: 33
        Quote: kor1vet1974
        Troikas appeared in 1937.

        Before. Troikas were recreated in 1923, and by the end of the 20s, almost all the affairs of the OGPU fell into their diocese.
        In addition to the “troika” for combating counterfeiting, by 1929 seven more “troikas” were working in the Central Office of the OGPU.
        (...)
        The competence of the “triples” of the OGPU for the preliminary consideration of cases completed by the investigation was as follows:
        1. The "Troika" of the Counterintelligence Department considered the cases of the Counterintelligence Department, the Special Department and the Moscow Military District.
        2. The "troika" of the Secret Department considered the cases of the Secret Department and partly of the Information Department.
        3. "Troika" of the Operative Department - the cases of recidivist criminals and gangsters.
        4. "Troika" of the Transport Department - cases of recidivist criminals, gangsters and others related to transport.
        5. "Troika" of the Economic Department - cases against socially dangerous economy-currency traders, speculators, etc. cases.
        6. "Troika" of the Main Directorate of the Border Guard - the case of smugglers.
        7. "Troika" of the Special Department - cases related to their review, camp crimes, as well as cases on early release.
        8. The “Troika”, under the special commissioner, considered cases against employees of the OGPU, cases against persons whose term in camps was ending, exile, etc., cases against homeless children and others that were not subject to consideration in other departments.

        In addition to the "troikas" of the central administration, there were also regional "troikas" - for example, in the Far East. Moreover, in the cases of the White Guards, spies and bandits, these "troikas" had the right to issue VMN.
        In 1929, due to the delay in the consideration of cases (many fell within the competence of several "triples" at once), the number of "troikas" was reduced to three:
        ... a troika for the Secret Department, the Counterintelligence Department, the Main Directorate of the Border Guard, the Transport Department, the Operations Department and the Information Department;
        Troika for Economic Management;
        troika in all other cases.

        Further, this system was reformed several more times, the competence of the regional "troikas" expanded (primarily due to the transfer of collectivization cases to them).
        And in 1938 the Special Troikas appeared.
      2. 0
        25 June 2022 14: 01
        Quote: kor1vet1974
        There was at that time a Special Meeting of the OGPU, but it had limited rights, it did not sentence to death.

        And they also had no right to give long terms of imprisonment. I don't remember exactly, but I don't think it was more than 6 years.
    2. -1
      25 June 2022 13: 58
      Quote: Nafanya from the couch

      "Troika" or "special meeting", etc. This was the judiciary of the time.

      By the way, legalized by the Supreme Council. And once again, by the way, this is not an invention of the Bolsheviks. This is an invention of the tsarist government.
  14. +3
    24 June 2022 06: 59
    Both Grigorovich and Polikarpov were repressed for absolutely no reason. On the standard charge: "participation in a counter-revolutionary wrecking organization"

    Was the "Industrial Party" also invented at the Lubyanka? Everything is clear, it turns out that the country in those years developed in spite of Stalin.
  15. -5
    24 June 2022 07: 19
    Quote: Aviator_
    Was the Industrial Party also invented at the Lubyanka? Everything is clear, it turns out that the country developed in those years in spite of Stalin.

    The country then developed not thanks to, but in spite of ...
    the old peasant way of life was breaking down ... then collectivization and industrialization took place ... the country needed millions of workers ... for this they started collectivization and attracted cheap prison labor.
    Remember the famous Belomor Canal ... the Volga Canal and corresponding cigarettes ... smile the death rate of prisoners there was very high ... lovers of the communists prefer not to spread about this.
    It would be nice to read the secret party archives of the Communist Party of those times ... a lot of dirty laundry about the enemies of the people can be found there.
    1. +3
      24 June 2022 08: 43
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      Remember the famous Belomor Canal ... the Volga Canal and corresponding cigarettes ... the death rate of prisoners there was very high ... Communist lovers prefer not to talk about this.

      Why don't you, not fans of communists, remember the years 1989-1992? No less than innocent (not convicted, but sentenced by the GMS-EBN teams) citizens from the USSR died there ...
    2. +1
      24 June 2022 09: 39
      for this they started collectivization
      and now the land was mainly in the hands of 5 land oligarchs and the peasants began to ride like cheese in butter.
      1. +3
        24 June 2022 11: 44
        And what are the names and where are these lands of these 5 people? Just do not need excuses for the type of mod, and so everyone knows, look on the Internet.
        1. +1
          26 June 2022 04: 07
          Quote: Andrey VOV
          And what are the names and where are these lands of these 5 people?

          Do not be like a provocateur who enjoys the meanness he has done. It's mean to provoke a person into public disclosure of unverified data...
          Read here:
          https://myrussia.life/10903-skolyko-zhiznej-unesli-banditskie-razborki-90-h.html
          This is an illustration for:
          Quote: ROSS 42
          Why don't you, not fans of communists, remember the years 1989-1992? No less than innocent (not convicted, but sentenced by the GMS-EBN teams) citizens from the USSR died there ...

          *****
          By the way, there is no doubt that those who “turned out to be witnesses” in criminal cases today have a completely different status.
    3. +5
      24 June 2022 14: 41
      Quote: Lech from Android.
      the old peasant way of life was breaking down ... then collectivization and industrialization took place ... the country needed millions of workers ... for this they started collectivization and attracted cheap prison labor.

      In short, the Bolsheviks carried out what other countries went through two or three centuries ago. Fencing, vagrancy laws, workhouses, courts stamping sentences of deportation to remote lands for hard labor. It's just that it dragged on for centuries, and people somehow got used to this state of affairs, which, moreover, was slowly improving. And we have - "to run for ten years."

      According to the mind, in Russia all this had to be carried out, starting from the eighteenth or nineteenth century.
      1. 0
        26 June 2022 04: 45
        Quote: Alexey RA
        According to the mind, in Russia all this had to be carried out, starting from the eighteenth or nineteenth century.

        And by what mind was this very fencing carried out in the 90s, when the "land - to the peasants" was divided into parts (by shares), and then bought up for a pittance by enterprising little people?
        It was then that the status of a refugee, a homeless person, a drug addict was legalized; and also - the status of a professional beggar, speculator, fraudster and various other get-rich-quick lovers. “Brothers” from various groups began to enjoy a special status, who, based on their education and moral considerations, rushed “to live at least a week for their own pleasure” ...
        And in the order of things, officials appeared who spoke of their appointment in no other way than:
    4. +1
      24 June 2022 21: 25
      According to official data, during the construction of the canal in BelBaltLag, 12 prisoners died, including 300 in 1931 (1438% of the number of workers), in 2,24 - 1932 (2010%), in 2,03 - 1933 (8870%), which was due to a reduction in supply due to famine in the country and a rush before the completion of construction.
      Nearly 20000 people died during the construction of the Panama Canal.
      1. 0
        25 June 2022 11: 50
        How would you say.....
        1880-1889 France 21,9 thousand dead
        1904-1914 USA 5,6 thousand dead.

        For twenty years ... If we "compare official data. According to which, by the way, half of our population is the middle class wink
        Many of these earlier deaths were due to yellow fever and malaria. According to the doctors of that time, these diseases were caused by polluted air and poor conditions. By the early 20th century, however, medical experts had uncovered the key role of mosquitoes as carriers of these diseases, allowing them to greatly reduce the number of deaths among workers. Special sanitary measures were carried out, which included draining swamps and reservoirs, removing possible insect breeding grounds, and installing protective screens on windows in buildings.

        These are the same bloodsuckers in Panama feel ...... Whether the matter is in the BBK, the share of the earth was. you can compare the scale and channels themselves and the efficiency of operation (at least for the first time) .... True, in your case ........
        1. -1
          25 June 2022 14: 27
          Yes, say so - then it was so good to see in the country after the revolution that diseases and famine were only dreamed of in distant America (apparently there was also a revolution, they had a civil war there ...)
          And the prisoners are accountable personnel, you can’t indulge with him as with the middle class (hospital temperature)
          1. 0
            27 June 2022 16: 57
            And here is the famine in the country "after the revolution" (which, by the way, who did it?) And the losses during the construction of the LBC? And, for the talented, not only the channel, because the BBK is a special type of White Sea-Baltic Combine. It started a little north of Murmansk and ended on the Svir.
            And yet, yes, something else funny about accountability s / c s / c tell me, have fun?
            And so, at the same time, I can remind you how the number of losses of the USSR in the Second World War changed .... And it is not known, today's number of "official data" is the final one ....
      2. -1
        26 June 2022 05: 05
        Quote: KERMET
        According to official figures, 12 people died during the construction of the canal in BelBaltLag

        There is a figure 50 in this part of the WIKI ... (UNOFFICIAL ... From Solzhenitsyn)
        Above there is a reference to the losses in the "liberal" 90s, but they can and should be compared with the "bloody Soviet" - twelve thousand three hundred:
        In total, in the early 90s, the number of deaths was 1,7 million people, by the mid-90s this figure had grown to 2,3 million. The maximum death rate covered men aged 30 to 55 years - most of them died as a result of criminal showdowns ...
        ... Up to one and a half thousand contract killings were committed annually. For example, in the mid-1990s, people were killed in Moscow because of apartments 15 thousand old people.

        https://myrussia.life/10903-skolyko-zhiznej-unesli-banditskie-razborki-90-h.html
    5. +1
      25 June 2022 14: 06
      Quote: Lech from Android.

      The country then developed not thanks to, but in spite of ...
      the old peasant way of life was breaking down ... then collectivization and industrialization took place ... the country needed millions of workers ... for this they started collectivization and attracted cheap prison labor.

      A prime example of putting the cart before the horse.
  16. +5
    24 June 2022 07: 40
    "Do not make yourself an idol"
    The next article will be about Sergey Petrovich Shukalov?
    "Father" of Soviet tank building.
    Creator of the T-18/MS-1 tank.
    Fallen a victim of intriguers and envious people ... otherwise the Soviet BTT would be "Uhhh" what.
    1. -1
      24 June 2022 07: 46
      Quote: hohol95
      so the Soviet BTT would be "Uhhh" what.

      Who knows who knows...
      now, if Sergei Korolev had not survived in the camps, it is still unknown when the USSR would have launched the first satellite and brought the astronaut into near-Earth space. what
      So I'm even surprised at the stubbornness and faith of our talents in a better future, despite the fact that they are hit on the head by all and sundry.
      1. +2
        24 June 2022 08: 23
        Dyrenkov, Kurchevsky, Taubin...
        Now, if ... not envious ...
        1. +3
          24 June 2022 14: 48
          Quote: hohol95
          Dyrenkov, Kurchevsky, Taubin...

          Silvansky and Tsyganov. smile
          Quote: hohol95
          Now, if ... not envious ...

          Well, the unrecognized geniuses knew how to solve this problem - just write to the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks:
          ... the production was delayed due to: the pest Firsov, the former head of the design bureau at the KhPZ plant, where it was transferred by the pest Neiman, the former head of the Special Mastrest; at the factory number 48 (Kharkov), where those. The director was the wrecker-fascist Simsky, who dragged the fascist Gakkel to plant No. 48 and placed him at the head of BT-IS production. ... Farmanyants - Deputy Head of the 8th Ch..Upr.NKOP tried to disrupt the release of BT-IS. ... your intervention is needed
          1. +2
            24 June 2022 17: 07
            "Pest" Firsov died in 1943.
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. +6
    24 June 2022 08: 17
    I do not consider myself an erudite on the topic of aviation, but:
    Polikarpov develops and builds the world's first cantilever low-wing fighter IL-400 (I-1). And at the same time, the project of the OL-1 "Fighter" attack aircraft based on the IL-400 is being worked out.

    The first flight of I-1 1923.
    Junkers DI first flight in 1917, by the way, it is the first all-metal fighter.

    1. 0
      25 June 2022 11: 52
      Fu on you good You will say, what good, that Russia is not the birthplace of elephants wink
  19. +1
    24 June 2022 08: 54
    For all that, a very worthy article, I can’t help but refrain from sarcasm towards the leavened Soviet pseudo-patriotism inherent in many posts that belittles the Russian Empire.
    Aviation in the Russian Empire was! On the eve of the October criminal coup, the Russian air fleet consisted of more than 300 different units and subunits, including 14 aviation divisions, 91 air squadrons, Ilya Muromets airship squadron, 87 aeronautical squadrons, 32 hydro squadrons, 11 aviation and aeronautical schools, a naval aviation division, 8 aircraft fleets, and much more. In these units, there were up to 35000 soldiers and officers and about 1500 airplanes of various types.
    Since the time of the Provisional Government, all practical stocks and factories have remained on Soviet territory. With the exception of Odessa Anatra and the Lebedev plant in Taganrog. Their production capacity was at least 1000 aircraft and 300 aircraft engines per year. And the warehouses were filled with ready-made aircraft. So Soviet designers did not start from scratch.
    And yet, what is often hushed up by Soviet historians is the SCHOOL! Soviet designers were not hooligans from the Vyborg side. And Polikarpov, and Sukhoi, and Grigorovich, and Tupolev, and Korolev and many other talented designers had a wealth of knowledge of the academic science of the Russian Empire behind them.
    1. +3
      24 June 2022 11: 45
      Aviation may have been, but there was no aviation industry, there was no engine building
      1. -1
        24 June 2022 12: 58
        By 1916, the growth rate of aviation development in the Republic of Ingushetia was such that the Soviets reached it only in the 30s. Already in 1916, in Petrograd, at the Mechanical Plant, mass production of RBVZ-6 engines with a power of 150 hp was started. So the prospects were great!
        1. +5
          24 June 2022 13: 26
          Sorry, there were no prospects
        2. +5
          24 June 2022 17: 37
          Quote: Alexander Kuksin
          Already in 1916, in Petrograd, at the Mechanical Plant, mass production of RBVZ-6 engines with a power of 150 hp was started.

          He is "Benz" in 150 hp. Released 5 experienced and 45 serial.
          The plant did not have equipment for forging shafts, they did not have the required steel. Cracks appeared in the shafts purchased from the Swedish company Scania. It was possible to organize the manufacture of shafts at the Obukhov or Putilov factories in Petrograd, but the military department did not do this. Only ten months after the start of mastering the engines, it was possible to obtain steel for the shafts from the Izhora plant.

          As a result, "Murometsy" continued to be produced "in form 8" - what we got, we put it on.
          Simultaneously with the receipt of the first two sets of RBVZ engines for the needs of the squadron, 10 engines of the French company Renault were obtained. These are 12-cylinder liquid-cooled engines with an in-line arrangement of cylinders with a capacity of 225 hp. with., weighing about 420 kg each. Under them, very successful ships of the E series were built. Later, English in-line 6-cylinder liquid-cooled engines with a capacity of about 200 hp were also used. With. With them, the Muromets reached a ceiling of 4900 m.

          Quote: Alexander Kuksin
          So the prospects were great!

          Sure sure. smile
          England already had 270 and 360 hp Rolls-Royce aircraft engines. With. In France, they created 8-cylinder Hispano-Suiza engines with a capacity of 300 hp. With. Finally, the American 12-cylinder Liberty engines with a capacity of 400 hp appeared. With. All of them are in-line liquid-cooled engines, and the weight of the heaviest of them did not exceed 420 kg, that is, the weight of the Renault engines already used on the Muromets.
          1. -1
            24 June 2022 18: 18
            Indeed, it was .... But it was already the time of the collapse of the country's economy. When I wrote about the country's prospects, I meant this despite the fact that these prospects could be without taking into account subversive actions within the country. Of course, more technically advanced countries in the aircraft industry were ahead, but Russian thought was not stagnant either. Moreover, in Soviet times they took foreign developments. The MiGs were equipped with English engines, Li-2-Douglas, the Pobeda car - the German Oppel-Captain .... There is nothing shameful here. If there were no revolutionary upheavals, then the prospect was unconditional. And the best designers would not have left Russia.
            1. +4
              24 June 2022 19: 24
              Quote: Alexander Kuksin
              When I wrote about the country's prospects, I meant this despite the fact that these prospects could be without taking into account subversive actions within the country.

              The main underminer was the leadership of the Empire. The fact is that the entire high-tech industry of the Empire lived exclusively on government orders. If the state is not preoccupied with something new, this will not happen. It is more profitable for the domestic market to buy serial goods abroad than to wait and overpay for domestic ones, so that production can be developed only at the expense of the state. And the volume of the domestic market was small.
              The state did not take care of the auto industry until 1915 - and RBVZ produces a teaspoon a year, and the Bolsheviks put the Ryabushinsky plant into operation. The state did not bother with aircraft engine building - and the aviation industry for new cars is even forced to assemble and repair engines from crashed Germans. The state did not bother with the railway - and the only manufacturer of tool steels carries raw materials and finished products back and forth along the broken primer to the river pier (on the freezing river).
              Quote: Alexander Kuksin
              Moreover, in Soviet times they took foreign developments. The MiGs were equipped with English engines, Li-2-Douglas, the Pobeda car - the German Oppel-Captain ....

              They took. But the difference was that the Union took licenses and localized production at home, simultaneously developing the design and squeezing the maximum possible out of it with the available materials. The purchase of the same engines over the hill was only during the period of development of the product, so the release of equipment was not made dependent on what they would sell to us today and what not.
              1. +2
                25 June 2022 07: 28
                Yes you are right! Moreover, our country stepped on the same rake in the 90s. History does not teach, it punishes for lessons not learned. And yet, it was the Russian Empire that gave us outstanding scientists, designers, pilots, nuggets of aviation devotees, who later raised their talented students.
  20. +3
    24 June 2022 09: 21
    Aircraft factory, I note.
    "Dux" switched to the manufacture of airplanes from 1912, and started with bicycles, then they took up steam cars, then gasoline ones. They even built a soft-type derezhable.
  21. +3
    24 June 2022 09: 25
    Regarding the magnificent I-185.

    And here's the trick, on 185s just a horse's amount of putty was used, about 100kg per plane! I found a funny document prescribing to use less putty in order to save weight. There was also information about why this was all, a very poor production culture had an effect, putties had to be removed aerodynamics. Well, in a very high resolution photo, you can see that the edges are metal, and not plywood. It is certain that if 185s were mass-produced, then one could forget about the beautiful seamless transition from the center section to the fuselage, and the fairing would be visible in all details in the photo of production cars.
    Wing in kind, that's why it took such a huge amount of putty


    By the way, in all the prototypes on the entire wing, there were no screws and rivets, no seams between the skin sheets, in fact, everything was smeared with a thick layer of putty and polished. Keep this in mind.

    [Center]

    Who will believe that this is also the same all-metal wing? However, this is true, thanks to a thick layer of putty, no seams or rivets are visible.

    https://yuripasholok.livejournal.com/13556617.html
    Just for reference: they tried to attach the M-71 to the La-5. In tests, the maximum speed at an altitude of 685 km / h, aerodynamics found that the shape of the hood is not optimal, when finalized, the really achievable speed should have been 720 km / h (quite realistic, KMK, La-9. More aerodynamically clean, compared to La-7 , had a maximum speed of 10 km / h more, despite the fact that it was heavier). EMNIP, on the I-185 of the latest versions of the project, under the M-71, approximately 700 km / h was expected.
    This is what I mean: in fact, both the I-185 and La-5 are equivalent.
    1. -1
      24 June 2022 21: 37
      Where did this drug addict get a lot of I-185 putty? Did you measure and count from the photographs? .. good grass ...
      Where is the equivalence with La-5?
      In rapidity? At dive speed? In combat load? Range? Volley weight? Please clarify
      1. +1
        26 June 2022 07: 18
        Follow the link, it says that the historian Dmitry Linevich is digging this topic, according to the mass of putty - all questions are for him.
        Equivalence with La-7 in terms of actual performance characteristics - if the I-185 went into mass production with the ASh-82FN engine. There, they would begin to facilitate in all possible ways (including changing the composition of weapons).
        1. +1
          26 June 2022 10: 06
          If it was the historian who dug the topic, then he would definitely leave at least a link to such a document about the mass of I-185 putty, I would venture to suggest that he came across such a document that was not at all connected with this aircraft (almost all Soviet aircraft were puttied, primed and painted ) For example, I came across information about measures to reduce glue when gluing LaGG-3, the savings seem to have reached either dozens or hundreds of kg.
          So in terms of putty, the I-185 could not stand out in any way, how much could it be, for example, on an all-metal Pe-2? Moreover, the Americans often did not bother with this at all - their planes sparkled with polished metal. So, according to this historian, I-185 also had a reserve for saving mass? wink
          You will decide with what you are comparing the equivalence - then with the La-5 (over the years it is just necessary with it) or with the La-7 released 2 years later? And even here, apart from the speed characteristics of the La-7, there is nothing to oppose to the 185
  22. +7
    24 June 2022 09: 44
    Why does the author not talk about the actual failure in the mid-30s with the development of a new fighter? after all, they already understood in Spain that 16 is a dead end. time passed, but Herman was still gone, rather Emil. The authorities, in the person of the "pygmy" Stalin, hear that this is it, but in fact - nothing. The credit of trust has ended, and the resources are extremely limited, so they relied on others. And the eternal squabbles - who borrowed what from whom, so the Soviet aircraft industry in 1938 was not a private shop, but a state machine, with one task - to make many such machines that, with a certain wretchedness of engines, materials and production personnel, can at least for due to the mass character to resist the bourgeoisie. And 16 - an aircraft designed for an above-average pilot, very skittish. The pilots who survived the pogrom in 41-42 spoke very highly of it, emphasizing that after 16, any other device was simple to operate. To each his own time. And the man was really outstanding, and the rest came out of his school and Tupolevskaya.
    1. +4
      24 June 2022 11: 47
      Yes, the main trouble of those years in the absence of an engine! Well, its own school of engine engineers had not yet grown up, and where was it supposed to grow from?
    2. +3
      24 June 2022 13: 28
      And 16 - an aircraft designed for an above-average pilot, very skittish. The pilots who survived the pogrom in 41-42 spoke very highly of it, emphasizing that after 16, any other device was simple to operate.

      It was these pilots who calmly mastered the Aerocobra and became the best aces of Soviet aviation, such as the most productive aces Alexander Pokryshkin, Grigory Rechkalov, Alexander Klubov, Nikolai Gulaev, Pavel Kamozin, brothers Dmitry and Boris Glinka. And only our pilots could fly well on the R-39. And the Aircobras came to us after the refusal of the British pilots to fly them, and ours, who mastered aerobatics on the I-16, fell in love with these aircraft. Although the I-16 was a more tenacious machine than the armored Airacobra.
    3. +1
      24 June 2022 22: 32
      Quote: Petrik66
      The pilots who survived the pogrom in 41-42 spoke very highly of it, emphasizing that after 16, any other device was simple to operate.

      You contradict yourself. The I-16 was very difficult to master, and if it were not for the Yakov military series, which are very easy to operate, a new generation of military pilots would not even have had time to be born ..
      1. 0
        25 June 2022 05: 42
        Removed from the tongue about the "problem of takeoff and landing"
  23. +2
    24 June 2022 12: 46
    Yes, he wanted to spit on titles and titles.
  24. BAI
    +1
    24 June 2022 12: 54
    1.
    Fighter I-3. The main fighter of the Red Army Air Force until 1943.

    Probably until 1933. For further the author writes:
    Here, during 1930, suicide bombers Grigorovich and Polikarpov create the same I-5 fighter, which became the main fighter of the Red Army Air Force for the next 9 years.

    2. R-5 in the photo is a remake, which is commendable. For, unfortunately, there were no living R-5s.
  25. +4
    24 June 2022 12: 56
    Author - It is worth saying that Mikoyan did not benefit from what Dementyev and Voronin arranged for him. ...

    Not correct judgment. Mikoyan was able to push off from this project into large aviation. MiG-1 and MiG-3 are essentially the same aircraft that the Germans really considered. And if not for the IL-2, it would have had further development.
  26. +1
    24 June 2022 13: 05
    “We sing glory to the madness of the brave!”
  27. 0
    24 June 2022 13: 17
    The technical one is that Polikarpov's "obsolete" planes quite obviously fought until 1943, and in some cases even until 1944. "Seagulls" as light attack aircraft turned out to be very useful aircraft, capable of taking off "from a spot", striking and leaving at low level. Some analogue of Po-2, only daytime, since there was no navigator.


    With much better survival than IL-2. With an aimed launch of RSs, unlike the same IL-2. In addition, it did not require fighter cover in combat sorties, since the fighter itself had very high maneuverability. And he could dive vertically and put bombs on target no worse than Yu-87.
  28. 0
    24 June 2022 13: 19
    In the summer of 1943, the second department of operational management of the Red Army Air Force headquarters drew up a document - "Conclusions from the preliminary analysis of aviation losses", which analyzed the losses of aircraft of various types in the first couple of years of the war. These "conclusions" have truly revolutionary significance for understanding the course and outcome of the entire air war on the Eastern Front - from its first to the last day.

    They included combat survivability, which Soviet aircraft of various types showed in 138 sorties on the fronts from Mozdok to Murmansk. It turned out that the most tenacious Soviet fighters - I-16 and I-153. They made 128 sorties before losing the aircraft in combat for the I-16 (118 flight hours) and 93 sorties for the I-153 (91 flight hours). Here and below, the figures are given without losses at airfields, since they do not say anything about the combat qualities of the aircraft in the air. The number of sorties before loss is also called combat survivability, and this is the most important indicator for an aircraft in a war.


    Even more interesting are the "Conclusions" figures in the stormtroopers section. In June 1941-March 1943, the I-153 (aka "seagull") had a survivability of 93 sorties (91 hours of combat flight), and the Il-2 - only 26 (27 hours of flight). A gap exceeding three times. The Il-2 did not achieve the "Polikarpov" survivability of the I-153 at all - even in 1944-1945 it was below the level of the "seagull" in 1941-1943. And this despite the fact that the "seagull" worked in the sky, where German aircraft dominated, and the Il-2 at the end of the war worked in the sky, where the Soviet air force dominated.

    https://naked-science.ru/article/history/aviationww2
  29. +2
    24 June 2022 13: 51
    There was even this.
    Immediately after the start of World War II, one of the main targets of Soviet aviation in the southern direction was the Chernavodsky bridge across the Danube. It was necessary to bomb it in order to slow down the advance of the Romanian troops. The first few attempts were made using conventional bombers, but they all failed, after which it was decided to use aircraft carriers.

    As a "training" task, but in fact - the first sortie in history, one "Zven-SPB" was instructed to bomb the oil plant in Constanta. This mission has been successfully completed.
    On July 26, 1941, a TB-3 with two I-16s on board approached the target at a distance of 40 kilometers, after which it disconnected the fighters. Their appearance in the sky over Romania was a complete surprise, because previously Soviet fighters had not flown so far, and at first they were mistaken for their aircraft. This allowed the I-16 crews to bomb the target, after which they landed in Odessa for refueling, and then calmly returned to Evpatoria. And two weeks later, with the help of two Zveno-SPB complexes, the bridge across the Danube was also attacked. A second raid on it took place on August 13, and three Zvena-SPBs already participated in it. As a result, the bridge received significant damage, and the goal of the operation was achieved.


    The I-16 was also capable of pinpoint bombing.
  30. -9
    24 June 2022 13: 58
    The constructor who proposes a biplane for service in 1941 is a nerd. They didn’t shoot in vain before, it’s the “king” who turned out to be naked. By the way, all the competing aircraft designers Yakovlev, Yatsenko, Pashinin did the I-180.
    1. +1
      24 June 2022 21: 42
      Rather, the cretin here is a couch expert armed with an afterthought,
  31. 0
    24 June 2022 15: 23
    Quote: aleks neym_2
    Nikolai Nikolaevich was head and shoulders above the pygmies surrounding him, both in talent and in spirituality, and the hammer, as you know, hits the head of a WORKING nail...

    Yeah, just from Khrushchev the collapse of the union began
  32. -2
    24 June 2022 16: 35
    Times were uncertain then. A huge number of mistakes and cruelty, along with the dream of the future and the real development of the country, which hundreds of millions of people saw with their own eyes.
    One slogan - youth, on the plane, according to which hundreds of thousands of people have learned to fly, which is worth it. Can you imagine now that some guy or girl in the village studied at the flying club? Although it would be easy and quite cheap to make something similar to the U-2 at the modern level.
  33. +2
    24 June 2022 18: 43
    So it was not for nothing that at 41-42 they raised the issue of resuming the production of the I-16.
  34. 0
    24 June 2022 19: 01
    Skomorokhov has a fad - to exalt Polikarpov to the skies
    and water the rest of the aircraft designers. Especially Yakovlev.
    But Polikarpov was not a genius, and Yakovlev was not a villain. Both
    there were achievements and failures. At the same time, Yakovlev, Mikoyan, Ilyushin,
    Lavochkin still had more achievements. As for the aftermath.
    An outstanding designer (and not only an aircraft designer) is different
    from simply good, that understands development trends and knows how to do a lot
    anticipate.
    1. +2
      24 June 2022 21: 57
      Quote: borys
      At the same time, Yakovlev, Mikoyan, Ilyushin,
      Lavochkin's achievements were still more

      At the time of Polikarpov's death, there was no more. Moreover, much of what they used was mastered for the first time again in the Polikarpov Design Bureau.
      As for the aftermath, again, it was the Polikarpov mixed design of fighters that ended the war, it was he who first argued and proved the inevitability of increasing the specific load on the wing
  35. +1
    24 June 2022 22: 47
    With all due respect to Polikarpov (and I consider his U-2 and I-16 to be very outstanding machines for their time), I still note that love for a gull-type wing, as in the entire I-15 series, is a fat minus. No matter how much I read, pilots speak negatively about such a scheme in principle. The appearance of the I-15bis, in which Polikarpov was forced to raise the wing higher, is a clear confirmation of this!

    It is clear that Chaika I-153 looks extremely brutal! I really like it myself! laughing However, any pilot will immediately indicate that these wing creases block most of the visibility in the most interesting direction for the fighter - forward and down !!! When you attack the enemy from above or try to go into the tail on the turns, and the enemy disappears behind the damn folds of the wing or insanely big-headed engine! But you need to shoot ahead of time, i.e. move the sight forward yourself and immediately lose sight of the enemy! I also suspect that the love of fighter pilots for the Yak-m of the first series is caused by the same. This is the first car we have in which the cab is shifted forward. And the pilots finally saw their opponent on the bend!

    In general, there is an unpleasant impression that the abundance of Seagulls in aviation is due more to their aggressive appearance, which the high management liked very much, than to the opinion of the pilots, who, as we know, demanded the I-15bis.

    Moreover, I repeat, Polikarpov, for U-2 alone, can be safely called an air marshal!
    1. +1
      25 June 2022 07: 36
      In defense of the gull-type wing - given that the I-153 is a maneuverable, and not a high-speed fighter, it should have attacked more from a turn, and not from a dive, namely, the "gull" type scheme suggests a better forward-upward view, which is what is needed in a horizontal turn. The pilots also noted the better stability of this scheme in the turn.
      1. +1
        25 June 2022 09: 06
        And yet, just the use of the "seagull" is the desire to push the upper and lower wings as far as possible relative to each other, which also improves side visibility
        1. +1
          27 June 2022 22: 28
          Quote: KERMET
          And yet, just the use of the "seagull" is the desire to push the upper and lower wings as far as possible relative to each other, which also improves side visibility

          Just the opposite. Look at the photos in the article, from top to bottom: I-15, I-15bis, I-153. It can be seen with the naked eye that the greatest distance between the upper and lower wing of the rack-mounted I-15bis. And this was done to improve the review. What kind of improvement in side visibility are you talking about, I can’t understand at all. The kinks create a tunnel that obscures significant angles to the right and left of the line of sight. Such an X-shaped wing mounting scheme really improves handling in turns, but you have to shoot blindly.
          1. 0
            27 June 2022 23: 08
            Such an X-shaped wing mounting scheme really improves handling in turns, but you have to shoot blindly.

            Machine guns and cannons are rigidly fixed, therefore, it is impossible to shoot into a blind zone on bends or on straight lines.
          2. 0
            28 June 2022 00: 31
            Yes, the corners are shaded (but if you give a slight roll, everything is visible), but there is no “visor” (upper wing) blocking the forward-upward view just above the sight. Watch the video I-153bis and I-153 were exhibited at MAKS, everything is clearly visible where the pros and cons of the reviews are.
            1. 0
              28 June 2022 23: 26
              Quote: KERMET
              Corners yes, shaded

              In order not to argue in vain, take a look at the view from the cockpit of the I-153.


              Taken from the game "IL-2 Sturmovik". It is clearly seen that the kinks strongly close the view.
  36. +2
    24 June 2022 23: 19
    Very interesting article. Thank!
  37. 0
    25 June 2022 06: 47
    It scratched the eye about "without investigation and trial." But was there a conversation? Otherwise, what was Polikarpov "waiting" for? Especially if the "standard wording" was out of place. And the verdict directly implies both the investigation and the trial. Or was it taken out by no-know-who on no-know-what-for-what-the-base? And no one in the USSR was interested, what the hell from the mountain here arbitrarily decides who lives and who dies, appropriating the powers of the country's leadership? As for me, this entire block in the text is a burp of Yakovleshchina and Solzhenishshchina, fermented at the XNUMXth Congress.
    1. 0
      21 September 2022 09: 17
      I agree .. For 30 years we have been tirelessly hammered into our heads that such a gigantic country was raised not thanks to but in spite of. True, over the years they themselves have not achieved anything either thanks or in spite of ... But no, a bunch of crises, a drop in living standards - demographics + war
  38. +1
    25 June 2022 22: 24
    He was just Russian!
  39. 0
    26 June 2022 02: 47
    Thank you for the article.
  40. 0
    28 June 2022 13: 10
    Fortunately, it did not follow, and in December, without annulment or even a change in the sentence, Polikarpov was sent to TsKB-39 of the OGPU, a special design bureau organized in Butyrka prison.


    Tell me, the author, or someone who knows, how can you organize a sharashka in prison? I'm talking about the fact that they really installed drawing boards in the Lenin Room and all that. It's just for me to understand. I think they were simply transferred to some factory. ..
  41. Kim
    0
    26 July 2022 10: 09
    thinking out loud ...
    what if Sikorsky and his colleagues had stayed in the country? and Polikarpov would not be imprisoned?
    maybe there would not have been 27 million losses?
    ------------------
    this is the question of the cost of a coup for the people
  42. 0
    6 August 2022 01: 55
    The man is a mountain, the years go by, but the scale of a man to this day causes admiration and pride that he is Russian.
  43. 0
    17 August 2022 05: 12
    Quote from kim
    thinking out loud ...
    what if Sikorsky and his colleagues had stayed in the country? and Polikarpov would not be imprisoned?
    maybe there would not have been 27 million losses?
    ------------------
    this is the question of the cost of a coup for the people


    1. And if he was carrying cartridges? What if he was carrying pasta?
    2. And if the country was created in order to make a loss of 27 million?
    3. And if any semi-fool can win the Second World War and create an industry?

    After all, it’s a trifling matter .... it’s enough to drive everyone into the Gulag and lose an unimaginable number of people in the war, so that everything floods like that ..... both Victory and the second economy of the World .....

    Heh... heh.... It's only in other countries of the world that only the most talented leaders achieve success, but in Russia it's the other way around. The more maniacs and cretins, the better things go uphill ....

    One thing is surprising, if there were victories under such terrible Bolsheviks, then what is stopping you now? Your own ......?
  44. +2
    26 August 2022 01: 00
    Let's not talk about "if yes, if only", what WOULD be, if the M71 engine were ready. If my grandmother had ... well, you understood, yes. So what about the wonderful wunderwaffes that would have turned out if ... no need. Let's talk about what happened. And there was an I-16, licked from an American GB racer. Note that there were few such aircraft with a short body and a large "forehead". Polikarpov tried to make a fighter out of the American G.B. And what happened? And the result was an aircraft that was DIFFICULT in piloting, which was an UNSTABLE weapon platform, and which, even at the peak, could not reach normal speeds. An aircraft that cannot be fully flown by an average pilot - BY DEFINITION cannot be considered good. By the way, G.B. also had a reputation as a "rookie killer." The I-16 did not differ in survivability either, since it was ... wooden and canvas sheathing. It's hard to be waist-deep wooden. In the Japanese Zero, the engine was weaker, but the speed, maneuverability, rate of climb and range were higher. And survivability, by the way, too. Also, Zero had no habit of scouring the course and falling into a tailspin. And they caught fire from several hits from both Ziro and I-16. By the way, the superiority of the Zero over the I-16 in air combat has been proven more than once or twice. So the I-16 was the most common fighter, with its own set of advantages and disadvantages, like any aircraft.
    The fact that Polikarpov ripped off the concept with GB is not surprising. The USSR bought a lot of aircraft documentation from the USA. For example, the SU-2 was made under the impression of single-engine light bombers produced by American companies (usually for export). But if the Su-2 was an excellent aircraft that carried more weapons than the IL-2, while there were LESS losses on sorties, and which could be controlled by a pilot of mediocre qualifications, then the I-16 was not so successful.

    And the I180 and I185 and others like them - another # having no analogues, exactly like Kurchatov's Dynamo-reactive cannons, which "worked" IN THEORY and in factory tests, but did not on military ones. What's the difference that "the motor was not ready." I'll give you an example. The US Air Force had such an aircraft - P-51B. With Allison engine.
    Absolutely average plane. Nothing but survivability is not remarkable ... Until MERLIN was put on him.
    The designer must assume that his Wishlist regarding engines may not be implemented, and he will have to put what is and not what he wants. I did not find any mention anywhere that the ASh185 was installed on the I-180 and I-82 and tested against the LA-5FN with the same engine. This would be an indicator of how good the PLANE is, and not the engine that was screwed to the plane. Let me give you an example of a good design. Tank Sherman M4. All sorts of engines were shoved into it. By and large, what was available, then they pushed it in. In some version, 5 car engines were stuffed :-). And went, and fought. In the same Sherman, the turret shoulder strap was made in such a way that a lot could be stuffed into the turret: a 75mm cannon, a 76.2mm cannon, a 105mm howitzer, a British 17 pounds, a French turret with an AMX-13, the French even shoved a 105mm cannon into the Sherman. Why am I? In addition to the fact that a GOOD designer, an aircraft, or a tank, is not necessarily tied to one engine. Well, there is no engine, which means we are cramming something close in size and power. By the way, Lavochkin, as well as the Japanese designers of the Ki-61, can be safely called brilliant. They made planes for the engines that they had, with a reserve. Having screwed ASh82 to Lagg, they got LA-5. Having screwed the star-shaped engine to the Ki61, they got the Ki-100.
    If the I185 was really that good, then it would have taxied into the minuses of the La-5FN while working on the same engine. About the same as the Italian Fiats and Macci, flying on the same engines as the Messers, they surpassed the Messers in speed, maneuverability and rate of climb. If there were such tests (I-185 with ASh82 against La-5FN), I did not read about them. And I certainly did not see information about the tests of the I-180 with the ASh82 against the LA-5FN with the same engine.
    The process is not important, the result is important. And the result is this - without the M71, Polikarpov's # unparalleled planes did not show themselves in any way during tests.
    What do we have on Polikarpov's planes:
    a) I-16. In all respects, it was inferior to Zero, despite the fact that Zero had a weaker motor.
    b) I-153. It was approximately equal to the Italians CR42, and this is given the fact that the Italian did not remove the chassis.
    c) I180 and I185 are hype. Just like they make a hype to all "brilliant" designers, and "brilliant" generals like Yakir and Tukhachevsky there. With cries of #Stalinneotsenilgenii, #analogueoffnet. Wunderwaffe if there are 2000hp engines, but without them? I'll tell you a secret, if you screw the 2000 HP engine to the Zaporozhets, it will also fly. Look at the Hellket, a brick with wings, but thanks to the 2200 hp engine, it flew, and it flew very well. But this does not mean at all that the Hellket was aerodynamic perfection (but Fiats and Macchis were, since they flew better with German engines than Messers with the same engines). It would be possible to talk about superiority and # no analogues with comparative tests of WHAT WAS IN THE SERIES. For example ASh-82M. But there is no information about comparative tests of the I-185 against the La-5FN. By the way, the very famous F-4 Phantom aircraft says a lot about the fact that the power of the engines decides a lot. Even the Americans say about him that "it flies contrary to the laws of aerodynamics." They also said about the Phantom that the Phantom is a triumph of engine power over aerodynamics (a triumph of engine trust over aerodynamics). By the way, the Phantom was made in such a way that when the British decided to shove their Spey engine (better than the American j79) into it, everything worked out and the plane flew. To push a powerful motor is not necessary. Anything will fly.
    But to "lick" the design in order to squeeze out everything that is possible on those motors that are - this is the design genius. And this distinguished Yakovlev, and Lavochkin, and Tupolev, and Petlyakov, and the guys from Fiat, Macci and Reggae. The really brilliant Jiro Horikoshi, who created the Zero, R. Mitchell, who created the Spitfire, distinguished himself by this, Yakovlev also distinguished himself by making the Yak-1, Yak-1B and then the magnificent Yak 3.
    And Polikaropov copied and pasted Jibi, and his #unparalleled planes didn’t fly anywhere without super strong engines. M71 was supposed to be 2000hp. I remind you that on the Fv190A8 there was an engine in 1775LS. That is, Polikarpov's "unique" aircraft gave good performance only with an engine more powerful than the one on the Focke-Wulf. It remains only to say that with an engine of 2000ls, not like a Hellket, Zaporozhets will take off. So the indicators of the I-185 with engines that never went into production (due to buggy) do not say anything. If the USSR had American Double Vospy, maybe the I-185 would have shown itself. But this would be the merit not of Polikarpov, but of the creators of Double Vospa. By the way, during the tests of the I-185 with the M71 (2000 hp) it showed a speed of 630 km / h. A Focke Wulf 190 with a 1775 hp dyke accelerated to 650 km/h. Even with a more powerful engine, the plane was slower than the Focke Wulf. What speaks of aerodynamic IMPERFECTION.
    But if the same double respawn from the Hellcat is screwed to the La-5FN or to the Yak-9 or to the Spitfire there, then this will also change the performance characteristics :-) But this will already be the merit of the DOUBLE VOSPA designers, but not the aircraft designers.
    It's easy to get good performance when you have working motors like there Double Vosp or M71. And when all you have is the repeatedly raped Hispano Swiza - like it or not, but the Luftwaffe must be shot down. That's when the genius of the designer (Yakovlev) is shown. When all you have is not new German engines, but the British and Americans need to be shot down at least somehow, then the genius of the designer is shown (Macci / Macchi, Fiat, Reggae). When your motors have the same power as the Germans, only your Spitwier tears them apart, then the genius of the designer (Mitchell) shows up.
    Design genius is not the creation of #unparalleled samples in scanty series, tied to hand-assembled, almost knee-deep, super motors that themselves are so buggy that they cannot be put into series, and these aircraft themselves regularly kill pilots, even experienced testers, but in the creation of a MASS aircraft that can be easily owned by a pilot of average qualification. Design genius is not just screwing the most powerful engine to the carcass, and then saying "I'm cool and powerful, I'm the king of fighters", and when they tell you "That's what it is" and you create something even better (I remind you - Yakovlev, Lavochkin, well, designers from Fiat and Macchi). And when your most massive aircraft is a copy-paste of a buggy GB (which was also difficult to master and killed a lot of pilots), and this copy-paste is scouring the course, not being a stable weapon platform, and it strives to break into a tailspin, and cannot reach normal speed even at the peak (shitty aerodynamics), and at the same time does not have survivability, then this is not a "brilliant" designer, but simply an artisan.

    I understand that in the early 30s there were simply no other normal-level constructors. But calling Polikarpov the best is like saying to your only son "You are my most beloved son."
    I'm not saying that Polikarpov was a bad designer, but he simply wasn't a genius. Otherwise, as I said, the I-185 with the ASh82 would have taxied the La-5FN with the same engine to the minus, and the I-16 would not have been so difficult to operate and would have been a stable weapon platform.
  45. 0
    8 September 2022 20: 00
    zizn polikarpowa demaskirujet ahineju sprawedliwosti socjalisticnoj
  46. 0
    9 September 2022 18: 14
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    introduce mass executions... even if they are enemies of the communists.

    masowyje rastrely komunistow Partii Mira liberastow i procej 5 kolonny = spasene Rossji
  47. 0
    21 September 2022 09: 04
    The article is good, one drawback is too little bloody NKVD, repression and tyrant