PDA

View Full Version : I-16 without engine cut for 2 or 3 minutes?



Wildnoob
07-21-2010, 02:13 PM
From this interview (http://www.joint-ops.com/php2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=257&Itemid=154) with a Yak-9 pilot about our I-16:

I-16 (in the background he saw TB3 with 2 I-16s): Boris laughed as seeing a dinosaur coming to life, and said that indeed they were in use. The I-16 s engine would not shut off immediately, if the stick was pushed forward, or even if the plane flew inverted. There was enough fuel for 2 or 3 minutes before the engine stopped working (unlike the game - it stops immediately). The Germans were happy to fight these planes, as they shot them down easily.

Romanator21
07-21-2010, 04:41 PM
It's not good to fly inverted for that long even in fuel injected aircraft. I think 2 or 3 seconds is more appropriate ( still not instantaneous). This would apply to all carburetor aircraft such as the Hurricane, Gladiator. The Spitfire Mk V had a plate in the carburetor to prevent negative G engine shutoff, but it only delayed it for a few more seconds - something not modeled in the game either.

WTE_Galway
07-21-2010, 05:12 PM
Well to run inverted for more than a few seconds the oil and lubrication system also needs to be designed for it. Though that is less of a problem in radials then inline engines with a sump.

JtD
07-21-2010, 11:07 PM
To my knowledge, the (later) I-16 were equipped with the ?-25-4? type carburettor, which I think was a float type carburettor. It's said to be the first in the world with an automatic mixture correction for altitude.

Float type carburettors in general don't like negative g's, so I'd be surprised to hear that the 2-3 minutes are accurate. But then it is not impossible.

Maybe a Russian member of this community can find better sources than what Google shows and inform us about the details?

M_Gunz
07-22-2010, 01:18 AM
There is still at least one I-16 flying in the last decade, IIRC out of New Zealand. Any Kiwis able to ask? Hell of a note if Maddox Games missed on that one!

thefruitbat
07-22-2010, 05:32 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
There is still at least one I-16 flying in the last decade, IIRC out of New Zealand. Any Kiwis able to ask? Hell of a note if Maddox Games missed on that one!

There was a flying I16 at duxford, two weeks ago.

looked and sounded real nice.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v289/jensenpark/101_1894.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v289/jensenpark/101_1891.jpg

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e134/SidCheshire/Planes/Duxford2010/DSCN0372.jpg

Xiolablu3
07-22-2010, 08:39 AM
I think its probably a mis-translation and it actually meant 2 or 3 seconds.

Or it was a very old guy recounting his experiences and got it wrong.

M_Gunz
07-22-2010, 09:40 AM
IMO the main point is that he felt the cut-out was too fast. Maybe his minute is like an "in a minute" minute and not a full 60 seconds minute or something like that?

BTW, I've always like the shape of the I-16's.

JtD
07-22-2010, 09:55 AM
The ?-25-4? apparently was also used in the M-82 engine that powers the La-5 and La-5 F in game, which have no negative g cut out modeled.

I wouldn't discount the 2-3 minutes right away, I'd recommend research.

Wurkeri
07-22-2010, 10:35 PM
Some soviet engines had a diaphragm carburetors but I don't know if that was the case with the engines on I-16.

WTE_Galway
07-22-2010, 11:45 PM
Originally posted by Wurkeri:
Some soviet engines had a diaphragm carburetors but I don't know if that was the case with the engines on I-16.

The Bendix in the early spits and hurries flooded.

The I16 types I and IV used the Shvetsov M-22 which was a license built Bristol Jupiter (forerunner to the Pegasus and Mercury). Carburetors included the Bristol Triplex and at least some variants may have had negative G issues. Certainly the Bristol Mercury engines fitted to the Gladiators were unhappy under negative G.

Apparently the types 5, 6 10 and 17 were fitted with Shvetsov M25 and usually used a K25 solex carb. The M25 was a licence built copy of the Wright Cyclone R1820-F3. I don't recall the R1820-F3 ever having neg G problems.

Types 18, 24 and 27 used the Shvetsov M62 an improved M25 and hence was a Wright Cyclone R1820-F3 derivative.

The M62 was further developed as the M63 and fitted to types 24, 28, 29 and 30 The M62 was also a Wright Cyclone R1820-F3 derivative.



Originally posted by M_Gunz:
There is still at least one I-16 flying in the last decade, IIRC out of New Zealand. Any Kiwis able to ask? Hell of a note if Maddox Games missed on that one!

Pilots report from the Kiwis ...

http://www.alpinefighter.co.nz/pages/i_16pr.html

HellToupee
07-23-2010, 04:49 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
There is still at least one I-16 flying in the last decade, IIRC out of New Zealand. Any Kiwis able to ask? Hell of a note if Maddox Games missed on that one!

They restored about 6 I16s here i remember and i15s most have been sold off.

M_Gunz
07-23-2010, 05:37 AM
Doesn't it say something about restoration work done in Russia in that article or the one linked to?
At least one plane was found in Russia too, the one flown in Texas. Perhaps that's the one worked on in Russia?

And nothing in either article about engine cut-out that I saw.

JtD
07-23-2010, 06:50 AM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:

The Bendix in the early spits and hurries flooded.

The date for the official neg g carburettor modification for the Merlin XX as used on the Hurricane II is 11/44.

---

The Carburettors on the M25/M62 were modified as the engine was evolved. They weren't necessarily the same as on the original R1820. Might still be worth looking into that engine.

Also on the Ash-82, so only some of them would use the same carburettor as the M62.

julian265
07-23-2010, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
From this interview (http://www.joint-ops.com/php2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=257&Itemid=154) with a Yak-9 pilot about our I-16:

I-16 (in the background he saw TB3 with 2 I-16s): Boris laughed as seeing a dinosaur coming to life, and said that indeed they were in use. The I-16 s engine would not shut off immediately, if the stick was pushed forward, or even if the plane flew inverted. There was enough fuel for 2 or 3 minutes before the engine stopped working (unlike the game - it stops immediately). The Germans were happy to fight these planes, as they shot them down easily.

I used to have terrible troubles with cut-outs in this plane and similar types, which turned out to be caused by IL-2 taking notice of the spiky input from my logitech joystick - even if I *really* slowly pushed the stick forward past neutral (and achieve barely less than 1G), the engine would cut, which was completely unrealistic. Once I replaced that stick, the problem disappeared, and it seems to cut out realistically.

I think the issue is that IL2 takes notice of even the briefest input spikes (even if the plane is flying smoothly), which affects both negative G engine cut-outs and also frame over-stress and wing breakage.

M_Gunz
07-24-2010, 01:36 AM
S! Julian!

I think that spikes are the real reason why they have the Filter (right below Deadspot) slider on the Controls page. It might not be the sole reason though, a lot of Filter will smooth out a lot of stick wobble too and can make just about anyone smooth at the stick with 1/2 or less though 1/2 is a half-second or more delay on full-throw.

IIRC from SimHQ discussion years ago that spikes are from dust/dirt getting into the pot. I get that also with my cheap speakers volume knob and when I remember where I put the can some tuner spray sorts that right out.

Tully__
07-24-2010, 05:13 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
S! Julian!

I think that spikes are the real reason why they have the Filter (right below Deadspot) slider on the Controls page.

Correct!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

M_Gunz
07-24-2010, 02:23 PM
BTW, 2 or 3 minutes at negative G? If you weren't inverted then wouldn't you maybe be planted by then?

x6BL_Brando
07-24-2010, 07:45 PM
I used to ride a Velocette m/cycle, a long-stroke single. One time I was sitting at a set of lights in first gear & feathering the clutch and I let the bike roll backwards slightly. There was a light 'bump' from the bottom end, but I didn't pay it any mind. I hauled harder on the front brake and the lights went green, and I rolled on the gas and eased out the clutch as I let off the brakes - and fired backwards under power straight into the front of a Humber saloon car!

I found out later that it wasn't uncommon for that engine to reverse the direction of the crankshaft in a similar situation - but I had no idea at the time. So while this may seem wildly off-topic.....I'm trying to point out that so many of us have little comprehension of how older systems worked and what their quirks were. I'm sure if I'd hung around with a bunch of Velocette riders I would have learnt about it sooner and known what to expect; maybe saved my rear fender and the car driver's front bumper, in the same way that a trained I-16 pilot would have known not to attempt a bunt. I find it hard to believe that the pilot in the article would have done that either.

B

M_Gunz
07-25-2010, 01:25 AM
Sorry to hear about your fender. Cost more to fix than a couple of turn signal lights?
I had an uncle who had one of those BMW MC-sidecars from WWII (he was a medic from D-Day +1 to Occupation) and told me those had a reverse gear. So can I think of a Velocette as having a workable reverse? LOL!

Bunt? What was the bunt?

For all I know there may have been a quirk to the I-16 or just the ones the interview pilot flew that would cause a cut out (air bubble in fuel line perhaps?) 2 or 3 minutes after some maneuver. I just can't see holding negative G's that long in an I-16 but perhaps there is a way?

x6BL_Brando
07-25-2010, 05:27 AM
I wrote bunt to mean pushing the stick straight forwards in order to initiate a dive - not quite the correct definition, sorry. (I was writing at 2.30 a.m.)

What I was trying to convey was my sense that the old gent probably didn't ever carry out the manouevre that causes instant fuel starvation in the Polikarpov engine, as portrayed in the sim - simply because he would have been trained to avoid doing it.
Unlike a generation of simmers who got caught out by a marque-based peculiarity, the old man's instructors would have taught him to throttle back and bank before initiating the dive. Similar to my misadventure with the Velo, a bit of fore-knowledge can avert problems. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

As for the accident I described, I got away lightly. It was in 1966 and the car had a rigid bumper that did its job well and, unlike the modern style of crumple-zones and Euro-styling that requires new panels and days in the paint-shop, the bumper was straightened and the dent beaten out for fifteen quid. The Velo's fender was also metal and easily pulled out to avoid fouling the tyre, and I picked up a better, un-bashed unit at a local scrapyard.
I did own, for a while, the Russian copy of the Wermacht sidecar outfit that was marketed in post-war Europe (and still is, I think). That had a reverse gear, but caution was needed deploying it. Think of the wheel arrangement, then think of castor action, and you may see how cautious it was necessary to be. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

B

PanzerAce
07-25-2010, 12:21 PM
I don't know if it's the model you had, but IMZ-Ural still sell BMW based sidecar models that are REALLY old school in design. Fairly high quality though on the modern ones (modern western gearboxes, electronics, etc). Personally though, I'm more interested in the non-sidecar model that they just came out with.



http://www.imz-ural.com/default.htm

x6BL_Brando
07-25-2010, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by PanzerAce:
I don't know if it's the model you had, but IMZ-Ural still sell BMW based sidecar models that are REALLY old school in design. Fairly high quality though on the modern ones (modern western gearboxes, electronics, etc). Personally though, I'm more interested in the non-sidecar model that they just came out with.

http://www.imz-ural.com/default.htm

You can be sure it's the same model! Re-hashed, sure, and I'm glad to hear that they've improved key areas like the gearbox and the electrics - but the bottom line is not to expect the finish, or the quality, or the reliability of motorcycles from almost any part of the industrial world. That's reflected in the price o' course, which is the best part of the whole deal.

I've owned two Urals and a Dnepr, all with sidecars, and none of then could replace my K100 BMW outfit. I'll happily confess that the sidecar and chassis are provided by Ural http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Those really are the best bits though.
Take a look here (http://www.cossackmotorcycles.com/) before you go throwing your hard-earned around.

B

M_Gunz
07-25-2010, 02:59 PM
From my understanding, any 3-wheeler with 1 wheel in the front doesn't want to corner so well. Uncle H didn't say much beyond that the thing had a reverse gear but IIRC he did mention getting into some trouble with it though that was so long ago and he didn't go into details so I do forget what I didn't really know. He had some good bike tales and taught me the emergency cold-weather gear trick of putting a newspaper inside the front of your coat which got him home one time.

Bunt.. I see how that applies. Sure he would not say what he thought need not be said. We've had some real wingding conclusions and "tests" brought up here based on literal translations of accounts before. LOL, the FAA has been accused of being a bunch of theorists who don't know about real flying over one!