PDA

View Full Version : I-153 at high altitude???? You won't believe this..



XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 01:54 AM
I was flying a I-153P last night in offline campaign and
it was business as usual, I bombed a train then shot down a couple of AI 109s, easy enough. Well then I went to take on
the last 109F2 that my AI buddies were having trouble with.
This Ai controlled 109 then starts to do a slow spiral climb with a Mig-3 of some sort close on his tail. Well I figured I'd never have a chance but I went ahead and started to climb even though initially the 109 had over 1000 meters of a head start. Well up we went, 4000m, then 5000m, so on, so forth. I actually was able to catch up with him at nearly 11,000 meters!!! I shot a few long distance shots at about 90 meters behind him to see if that would scare him into diving. Well that sure did work, I dived after him and when I got close, I started to fire, only to run out of ammo after a few seconds.
That hurt!!
But the point of this story is that I'm questioning three things here. Number one the sustained climb of the 153,
two the ceiling of the 153 and three, the diving power of a
older biplane design. The sustained climb, being a biplane with a lots of lift, might be modelled ok at lower altitude, but wouldn't it lose ground to a 109 past about 6000m??? And what is the ceiling of this thing?? Is ceiling modelled correctly in FB?? I never really thought about that. Does anybody know what the ceiling of the I-153 is supposed to be?? I mean this is a carbourated plane here with a fixed pitch prop!! And how could the dive of a
biplane be all that great with the extra drag of the two wings?? Any of you guys have any answers for me??? By the way, I have a track of this ludicrous mission if anybody wants to see it.

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 01:54 AM
I was flying a I-153P last night in offline campaign and
it was business as usual, I bombed a train then shot down a couple of AI 109s, easy enough. Well then I went to take on
the last 109F2 that my AI buddies were having trouble with.
This Ai controlled 109 then starts to do a slow spiral climb with a Mig-3 of some sort close on his tail. Well I figured I'd never have a chance but I went ahead and started to climb even though initially the 109 had over 1000 meters of a head start. Well up we went, 4000m, then 5000m, so on, so forth. I actually was able to catch up with him at nearly 11,000 meters!!! I shot a few long distance shots at about 90 meters behind him to see if that would scare him into diving. Well that sure did work, I dived after him and when I got close, I started to fire, only to run out of ammo after a few seconds.
That hurt!!
But the point of this story is that I'm questioning three things here. Number one the sustained climb of the 153,
two the ceiling of the 153 and three, the diving power of a
older biplane design. The sustained climb, being a biplane with a lots of lift, might be modelled ok at lower altitude, but wouldn't it lose ground to a 109 past about 6000m??? And what is the ceiling of this thing?? Is ceiling modelled correctly in FB?? I never really thought about that. Does anybody know what the ceiling of the I-153 is supposed to be?? I mean this is a carbourated plane here with a fixed pitch prop!! And how could the dive of a
biplane be all that great with the extra drag of the two wings?? Any of you guys have any answers for me??? By the way, I have a track of this ludicrous mission if anybody wants to see it.

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 02:05 AM
I am not saying the numbers are correct but should be used as a guide.

time to 3000m - 3.0 min. (I-153)
time to 5000m - 6.7 min. (I-152)

ceiling - 9000m (I-153)
ceiling - 9500m (I-152)




"I never saw the Me109 with the black heart again. I mention the Me109 with the black heart and "200" written on the tail."
Me109G-14 of Erich Hartmann

http://www.yeowell19.freeserve.co.uk/hartmanncs_1.jpg

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 02:08 AM
In FB, the climb to 5000m is roughly 4.5 minutes.

Until the patch, the thing is virtually invincible.

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 05:11 AM
They say that FB simulates aircraft correctly only at low to medium altitudes which is fine because both Germans and Soviets rarely fought at high altitudes.

Which kind of depress me because my fave are the MiGs.

I find I~16 alot tougher to kill. I dunno.

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 07:14 AM
I-16 climbs too fast too.

MiG-3 is pretty darn nice around 3000. I find the MiG-3UD equal or better than 109F or G up there.

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 01:58 PM
- Which kind of depress me because my fave are the
- MiGs.
-
- I find I~16 alot tougher to kill. I dunno.



You should :-)

I love the I 16, and it will out turn anything in
the game except for the I 153.

You get good with an I 16, no one will ever be able
to stay on your tail in a LW A/C, no one...
That said, they can B&Z you forever, but again,
probably will never hit you if you can yank the I 16
around the sky confidently. It rolls well, and you
have to remember this because you cannot put any
negative G's on it, unless you want to turn into a
glider fast when the engine quits. (though you can
glide down, land and restart engine on the ground)

In one of the last campaigns I played, I used
to (on A to G miss) send my wingmen after the ground
targets, while I kept the 109's occupied. Here it's
Ok to let the occasional 109 get a round into you every
now and then, just to keep them interested in you,
while your wingmen complete the mission. I've
managed to keep 4 109's fully preoccupied with me
before, while my wingmen did their thing.
Works the same for bomber intercept missions in
a limited degree.......

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 02:59 PM
it might be right coz the 153 set an altitude record at some point

<marquee>I never said it was a good idea, just an idea /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif </marquee>

XyZspineZyX
06-15-2003, 03:02 PM
All the sources I find say 5000m in 5.7 min.

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 07:53 AM
Yup and a service ceiling of 11,000 meters.

I don't think the modeling of either the Chaika or Rata is far off. Neither was fast but both (especially the Chaika) were extremely agile and both could climb very well.

And when someone hasn't even looked up the service ceiling, it's obvious they haven't done any research at all about the airplane.

"Does anyone know what the ceiling of an I-153 is supposed to be?" our thread-starter asks. I know, it's being rude to suggest anyone do a search but (sigh) the info is all there on the internet: www.google.com (http://www.google.com). It isn't like you have to drive across town to the library these days /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

S!

tttiger

"Never wise up a chump!" -- W.C. Fields

Message Edited on 06/15/0308:55PM by tttiger

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 08:09 AM
Always a nice place to be, this...

---> http://lemairesoft.digitalrice.com/schema/3.html

btw, Oleg just sneaked in a late nite post in the ORR.

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 08:25 AM
bi-planes traditionally climb better bu ti have no figures for the I153


a few aitrcraft seem to have scatty climb rates both VVS and LW, the Emil for example also seems to climb a bit too well

XyZspineZyX
06-16-2003, 12:36 PM
ubermodelled, like the I-16.

IBTL


<hr>

<p align=center style="width:100%;filter:glow[color=#33CCFF,strength=2)">

<img src=http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/willey110.jpg border=0 alt="Hier geht's zur I/JG78"> (http://www.jg78.de)

&lt;script>var specwin=window;function openspecs(){specwin=window.open("http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/specs.htm", "specs", "hotkeys=0,width=640,height=480,left=64,top=64,scro llbars=yes");}</script>Die olle Rechenkiste vom noch olleren Willey (java_script: openspecs[))

<font face="Comic Sans MS" size="2">Seit &lt;script>var eventdate=new Date("March 20, 2003 00:00:00 GMT");d=new Date();count=Math.floor((eventdate.getTime()-d.getTime())/1000);count=Math.floor(count/(60*60*-24));document.write(count);</script> Tagen<sup>*</sup> gibts Il-2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
BTW: In &lt;script>var eventdate=new Date("June 21, 2003 00:00:00 GMT");d=new Date();count=Math.floor((eventdate.getTime()-d.getTime())/1000);count=Math.floor(count/(60*60*24));document.write(count);</script> Tag(en) gibt's das n√¬§chste Development Update von Oleg Maddox, wenn alles schiefl√¬§uft /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

<font size="1"><sup>*</sup> In Europa . In den USA gabs FB schon 16 Tage vorher am 4.3. Link (http://forums.ubi.com/messages/message_view-topic.asp?name=us_il2sturmovik_gd&id=zkyee)</font></font></p>&lt;script>c0="#000000";c1="#400000";c2="#000040";c3="#000050";c4="#000060";c5="#000070";a=document.all.tags("table");a[a.length-3].bgColor=c1;a[a.length-4].bgColor=c2;if(a[a.length-5].innerHTML.indexOf("User Options")!=-1){a[a.length-5].bgColor=c3;a[a.length-6].bgColor=c0;a[a.length-7].bgColor=c1;a[a.length-8].bgColor=c4;a[a.length-9].bgColor=c5;}else{a[a.length-5].bgColor=c0;a[a.length-6].bgColor=c1;a[a.length-7].bgColor=c4;a[a.length-8].bgColor=c5;};image="http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/bar1.jpg";oa=a[a.length-2].style;oa.backgroundImage="url("+image+")";oa.backgroundPosition="left center";oa.backgroundRepeat="no-repeat";var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src="http://mitglied.lycos.de/eldur190d9/bilder/transparent36.gif";o.height=36;o.width=36;a=document.all.tags["td");for[i=0;i<a.length;i++)if[a[i].innerHTML.indexOf["Willey")!=-1)ii=i;a[ii+2].innerHTML="Focke-Wulf Testpilot";</script><font color=000040>

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 02:28 AM
ttiger wrote:


"Does anyone know what the ceiling of an I-153 is supposed to be?" our thread-starter asks. I know, it's being rude to suggest anyone do a search but (sigh) the info is all there on the internet: www.google.com (http://www.google.com). It isn't like you have to drive across town to the library these days"


Damn right it's rude dude, for one thing I had just played that mission and got on here right after to check another one of my threads. I simply thought that maybe I wouldn't have to look it up on a web search since a lot of these guys would know without me having to, you dingwit!!! I spend hours searching stuff on the internet but why do it when I knew someone would reply to my post and give it to me. And sure enough, someone had replied with the info in short order. Plus wanted their opinions on all the other aspects of the performance too. Besides I spend almost no time on the internet looking for historical or warplane stuff, only for general aviation stuff since I fly. Why do some of you people have to flame the slightest thing somebody posts on here?? Get a life or something....geesh!!

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 02:36 AM
Ignore tttiger, he seems to get pretty testy when anyone talks about russian planes.

--lbhkilla--

http://lbhskier37.freeservers.com/FW190.jpg .

"Ich bin ein Wuergerwhiner"

"We could do with some of those razor blades, Herr Reichsmarshall."
When Erwin Rommel that British fighter-bombers had shot up my tanks with 40mm shells, the Hermann G√¬∂ring who felt himself touched by this, said: "That's completely impossible. The Americans only know how to make razor blades." and the above was Rommels reply.

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 02:40 AM
mortoma wrote:
- ttiger wrote:
-
- Why do some of you
- people have to flame the slightest thing somebody
- posts on here?? Get a life or something....geesh!!
-
-

/Me throws Mortoma a chilled beer and bats out the flames with a damp towel/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

&lt;script>a=document.all.tags("table");a[a.length-2].bgColor="#005E4D";oa=a[a.length-2].style;oa.backgroundPosition="center center";oa.backgroundRepeat="no-repeat"</script>
&lt;script>for(var pn in window){if(pn.match("doc"))var doc=window[pn];}var a=doc.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src='http://www.km011a0004.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/pride.jpg'</script>
<center>http://www.km011a0004.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/n00bified.jpg <CENTER>
<center><b/><table style="filter:glow[color=#FF0000,strength=4)"><TD><font color="#1A0000"face="americanabt">I love my P39.... Doh!
<font></table></center>

XyZspineZyX
06-17-2003, 02:44 AM
Hehehehehehehehehe

XyZspineZyX
06-18-2003, 04:30 AM
BOTH THE i-153 & I-16 are operated here in New Zealand .. i have seen them fly .. they were/are slow ... i mean SLOW

in FB they are sooo wrong, the accelleration is the worst thing about them that is wrong but its their climb also thats way out

XyZspineZyX
06-18-2003, 05:03 AM
'Flying the Polikarpov I-153 Chaika' by Tom Middleton

This article was written by Tom Middleton, and is the most complete written description of flying the Polikarpov I153 Chaika. It was first published in Pacific WINGS magazine, December 1999. It is Copyright ‚© 1999 Pacific WINGS Magazine.

From left to right - air valve on, mixture rich, throttle set, undercarriage selector down, indicators both green, magnetos set to 1 + 2 (both), battery switch on, instrument switches on, pump the manual fuel pump until the fuel pressure is in the green range, prime eight strokes and leave the primer out, stick back with one leg, left hand on the starter and right hand on the primer, energise the starter and listen to the inertia flywheel wind up - "Clear?" - thumbs up from the engineer with the fire extinguisher, engage, two or three blades and the AsH-62 engine starts up with a series of loud bangs from the open exhausts, pump the primer whenever it dies, watch for oil pressure rising, maintain 800 rpm until it runs evenly and try not to breathe too much of the white oily smoke which billows through the floor and around the windscreen before it whips away in the slipstream to form a cloud 100 metres behind.

This is the Polikarpov I-153 Chaika and I sometimes wonder, as it shakes and snorts after start-up, what a young Russian fighter pilot must have been thinking 60 years ago in Siberia at minus 30‚? with snow showers - his machine-guns all armed and his leather greatcoat buttoned up to his nose.

The warm-up procedure is surprisingly complex for the usually practical "get on with it" Russian-built aircraft: Maintain 800 rpm for three minutes maximum or until the oil temperature reaches 30‚?, then 1000 - 1200 rpm until the cylinder head temperature reaches 100‚? and the oil temperature is at least 30‚?, then 1,600 rpm until the cylinder head temperature reaches 120‚? and the oil reaches 50‚?.

The run-up needs to be done with the chocks in place as the brakes will not hold against reference power. The checks are: check both magnetos for operation, carburettor heat operation is checked at 1,850 rpm, propeller is cycled from 1,900 rpm to 1450 rpm and back twice, magnetos are checked at 2,030 rpm and reference power is 900 mm of boost which should produce 2,100 rpm, while maximum power is checked at 2,200 rpm and 1050 mm of boost.

With a capacity of 1,820 cubic inches, this engine - a copy of the 9-cylinder single-row Wright Cyclone - is reasonably detuned at a maximum of 1000 hp, but it produces a very good power to weight ratio in a biplane with a gross weight of just on 2,000 kg. Heavy armour plate forms the back of the seat and is required to keep the C of G in the correct position in this rebuilt fighter. A parachute is standard equipment as is a helmet and goggles, boots, overalls and gloves.

Chocks away and brakes checked. The brakes are pneumatic and similar to the Spitfire, Hurricane and Yak-3 with a lever on the stick.

Taxiing is simple enough but it is worth remembering that, as the wheels are only about one and half paces apart and the brakes are not too flash, turns should be done gently and care taken - especially in a tail wind as the Chaika tends to want to weathercock - and even with the throttle closed the speed can build quickly.

Take-off is exciting with plenty of right foot required against the torque and slipstream at maximum power and with such poor visibility behind the big round nose it feels like charging along a runway behind a block of flats. The engine noise is very loud even with earplugs, the tail must be helped up to the climbing attitude and the Chaika must be kept straight.

Lift-off occurs at about 110 kph and instead of winding the undercarriage up as with the I-16 this undercarriage is raised pneumatically with a small lever near the left knee. As with the Yak-3, activation is accompanied by a very loud hissing noise clearly heard over the engine at full power.

There is no elevator or rudder trim on the Chaika (the same as the I-16 Ishak), so some leg and arm is required, but as the wheels retract with a couple of heavy thuds elevator back pressure decreases quite a bit. With the holes in the floor more or less closed up all the cold draught is replaced by warm engine air and exhaust - so flying the Chaika is slightly warmer than taxiing!

Power can then be reduced to 2,000 rpm and 800 mm and at 200 kph the Chaika is climbing at about 2,000 ft/min. While the view is good to the sides and below, it is not good ahead in the climb; the carburettor air intake is at the top of the cowling and although the gull (chaika) in the top wing allows some view ahead, the top wings are close to eye level so plenty of weaving is required. Even in level flight the nose seems quite high.

The Chaika is more comfortable than the Ishak (the Spanish Nationalists called the I-16 the Rata, which translates as rat, but the Russian peasants called it the Ishak - little donkey. I prefer the latter), as the windscreen is wider and more effective so the slipstream doesn't tear at my helmet and goggles as it does in the Ishak.

Steep turns, loops, barrel rolls and wing-overs are easy and fun and slow rolls are heavy and a bit cumbersome but still great fun. All through the flying, however, there is an instability around the vertical axis which takes just a little while to get used to. A Tiger Moth can be reluctant to fly in balance without a bit of gentle footwork, but this Russian biplane is in need of constant guidance. A pulse on either rudder pedal will send the slip indicator flailing to full deflection with only minimal self-correcting tendency until the pilot gets his foot down on the opposite pedal. Rolling into a steep turn needs plenty of rudder to counter the considerable adverse yaw. However, a bit of practise does wonders and I find myself grinning and pretending to fire the guns as I draw a bead and dive after some other aeroplane in the distance - or a passing seagull, even.

Stalls are typical of what seems to be Russian with a fairly sudden wing drop, especially in an accelerated stall and plenty of rudder is needed to prevent further yaw once the nose drops and rotation starts. However, 1000 hp and full right rudder enables the Chaika to fly almost instantly out of a stall, which will happen with just moderate power on at about 90 kph.

Despite the instability in the vertical and lateral axes, the Chaika loves to charge around the sky; sometimes needing both hands on the stick to help keep the roll going. Unloading to less than 1g obviously speeds the rate of roll up quite a bit, but on the other hand even at the very slow rate of roll required during a big high loopy barrel roll it's quite heavy.

Returning to land means more loud hissing as the wheels drop and rotate outwards with more thumps as they lock down. Cold air rushes up through the floor and, like the Ishak, quite heavy back pressure is required to keep the nose attitude nailed at 150 kph while keeping the turn going to see the touchdown area. With its unstable tendency in yaw the Chaika just loves to sideslip. Even at a high rate of plummet there is very good control at 150 kph accompanied by a lot of wind around the windscreen and a lot of airframe buffet. However, instead of relaxing the controls back to centre as in the Pitts Special, they have to be almost forced back into balanced flight with the speed then bleeding back to 130 kph as the round-out is started. Three-point landings are easier than in the Ishak, perhaps because the landing speed is only 100 kph instead of 150 to 160 in the Ishak. As with the Ishak though, a go-around from a "ballsed up" landing is easy because with full power and plenty of right rudder to keep it all straight the little biplane just leaps back into the sky.

Wheeler landings in the wind are fine too as with the very narrow track the ailerons, being well out-board of the wheels, have plenty of leverage and give good response at quite slow speeds on the ground.

This will be a great airshow aeroplane. There is an elegance in the slant of the interplane struts. It's a fast, loud, chunky retractable biplane fighter with lots of style and appeal and to see three of them in the air together will be amazing.

The engine, in common use throughout the Eastern Bloc countries, is strong and reliable and the strident exhaust adds to the excitement and exuberance.

Ah well - you know what they say: "It's a dirty job but someone has to do it."

:

XyZspineZyX
06-18-2003, 06:26 PM
Thank you, thank you, thank you. You've renewed my interest in those planes. Gotta go fly one of 'em now!

Tim Schuster
8MXS Inspection Section
Kunsan AB, Korea

-Defend the Dock!
-Accept Follow-on Shifts!
-Take the Fight Upstairs!