PDA

View Full Version : I-16s in 1943?



Rammjaeger
04-27-2006, 04:08 AM
While flying the Slovakian campaign our squadron encountered I-16s over Kuban in mid-September 1943. I personally doubt that type was still in frontline use at that point.

alert_1
04-27-2006, 04:16 AM
I16 was in use with VVS till '44...

Capt.LoneRanger
04-27-2006, 04:21 AM
We had this discussion just a few weeks ago, because some German ace claimed to have downed a I-16 late in the war.

Somebody quoted a book, which states the I-16 was put out of service until 1943, IIRC, but when I googled it, I found many articles stating the I-16 was used until the end of the war, officially or not.

FPSOLKOR
04-27-2006, 04:34 AM
Take a look at the interview down below. It states that I-16 in the Baltic were still flyable untill 1944

rnzoli
04-27-2006, 04:36 AM
read the forums sometimes, a link to this interview was posted quite recently, excerpts from http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/pilots/tikhomirov/tikhomirov.htm


Q: How transition from one plane to another was made?
A: Well we got new planes and flew them. You see, all Yaks were relatively the same in piloting, so there were no problems. Only case when our 3rd squad was sent into the rear was because until the end of 1943 they flew I-16. Their missions were mostly ground attack or intimate support for Ils. They were great at close support role.


Q: weren't I-16 slow?
A: True, but do not forget, that their task was not shooting down enemy, but to fend it off. Their maneuverability was great, and this helped a lot when they had to fire at the enemy and then turn around for Ils.


Q: Were I-16 able to kill any fighters at 1943?
A: Yes. Actually, their kill tolls at that period were greatest for entire war. When they finally changed to Yaks their kill to loss ratio became more preferable, but kill tolls fell. I do think that some pilots get so used to flying one type of plane, so that they become a part of its body, you may get a feel for every slightest change in it. And better new plane does not always give you such trusting in it.

KIMURA
04-27-2006, 04:45 AM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
We had this discussion just a few weeks ago, because some German ace claimed to have downed a I-16 late in the war.

Somebody quoted a book, which states the I-16 was put out of service until 1943, IIRC, but when I googled it, I found many articles stating the I-16 was used until the end of the war, officially or not.

My father says he had seen an I-16 in spring 45 as the I-16 landed near his refugee trek. It seemed that the I-16 was some kind of communications/liasion a/c.

FPSOLKOR
04-27-2006, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by KIMURA:
My father says he had seen an I-16 in spring 45 as the I-16 landed near his refugee trek. It seemed that the I-16 was some kind of communications/liasion a/c.
At Far east I-16 was still used as a fighter as far as VJ -day. then it was stepped out

PBNA-Boosher
04-27-2006, 06:40 AM
Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
We had this discussion just a few weeks ago, because some German ace claimed to have downed a I-16 late in the war.

Somebody quoted a book, which states the I-16 was put out of service until 1943, IIRC, but when I googled it, I found many articles stating the I-16 was used until the end of the war, officially or not.

That discussion was about a year ago, as I remember Capt.LoneRanger. I posted an interview that I took with a friend of mine, Lt. Gottfried Dulias, who shot down 3 Ratas on the Russian Front in late 1944 and extremely early 45.

LeLv44_Mangrove
04-27-2006, 06:44 AM
There is many cases of FiaF pilot downing an I-16 in 1943. Eg. Olli Puhakka shot down I-16 over Island Seiskari in 20th May 1943 with Bf-109 (MT-229).

Rammjaeger
04-27-2006, 10:52 AM
Thanks for all the interesting info! Funny how the VVS was rather slow at phasing out older types. The LaGG-3 type 66 was also kept in frontline service until the very end of the war. Wasn't it a waste of resources to keep manufacturing I-16s in 1943-44? (well, if they were still in use, I guess they were also manufactured to replace losses, not?) AFAIK the Luftwaffe phased out all F and earlier variants of the Bf-109 by mid-1943.

CornbreadPattie
04-27-2006, 10:59 AM
It could be considered a waist in retrospect. But for at the time it wasn't such a bad idea to manufactur as many fighters as possible. I believe the Soviet ideology viewed fighters very much like infantry, or ground soldiers - make as many as possible. They fought a tactical war and their main purpose was to defend the ground units, or to help them make their advance. In that perspective it makes sense to build as many planes as you can with available resources.

A good supporting point was the excess of US bombers which were manufactured for the air war over Europe. Thousands of B-26s (think 4-5 I-16s worth of resources per Marauder) were built between 1941 and 1945, only to have almost all of them scrapped at the end of the war. The same case for B-32, B-24, early model B-17s, and P-40s. Not to meantion the sea of lend-lease aircraft which were destroyed in compactors and dumped overseas - now THAT is a waist of resources. But at the time it made sense to make as many as you could possibly need.

Rammjaeger
04-27-2006, 11:26 AM
Originally posted by CornbreadPattie:
It could be considered a waist in retrospect. But for at the time it wasn't such a bad idea to manufactur as many fighters as possible. I believe the Soviet ideology viewed fighters very much like infantry, or ground soldiers - make as many as possible.

Yes, but the factories, tools and workers that were building I-16s and Lagg-3s during last years of the war could have been used to build La-5s and Yak-9s instead, not? Especially in a command + control war economy like the USSR. You will still end up with many aircraft.

And dumping surplus war material in the sea etc. after the war was over was indeed shame! Even factory-fresh jeeps and aircraft were destroyed AFAIK.

FPSOLKOR
04-27-2006, 11:54 AM
Originally posted by Rammjaeger:
Thanks for all the interesting info! Funny how the VVS was rather slow at phasing out older types. The LaGG-3 type 66 was also kept in frontline service until the very end of the war. Wasn't it a waste of resources to keep manufacturing I-16s in 1943-44? (well, if they were still in use, I guess they were also manufactured to replace losses, not?) AFAIK the Luftwaffe phased out all F and earlier variants of the Bf-109 by mid-1943.
Production run was stopped at 1941, but planes were still airworthy for 5 years.

crazyivan1970
04-27-2006, 11:57 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
I16 was in use with VVS till '44...

Correct, as a front line fighter it was used to mid 1944. Then it was use as communication plane. I-153 was used almost to the end of 1942 as a sturmovik.

LeLv44_Mangrove
04-27-2006, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by crazyivan1970:
I-153 was used almost to the end of 1942 as a sturmovik.

Apparently same thing with I-152 (I-15bis).

faustnik
04-27-2006, 12:12 PM
The LW was using the Hs123 into '44 for ground attack so, evidently the maneuverable biplanes were still effective.

Rammjaeger
04-30-2006, 05:08 PM
Yes, the Po-2 even had a NATO reporting name ("Mule") since it was in VVS service until 1954.

luftluuver
04-30-2006, 07:26 PM
Originally posted by PBNA-Boosher:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Capt.LoneRanger:
We had this discussion just a few weeks ago, because some German ace claimed to have downed a I-16 late in the war.

Somebody quoted a book, which states the I-16 was put out of service until 1943, IIRC, but when I googled it, I found many articles stating the I-16 was used until the end of the war, officially or not.

That discussion was about a year ago, as I remember Capt.LoneRanger. I posted an interview that I took with a friend of mine, Lt. Gottfried Dulias, who shot down 3 Ratas on the Russian Front in late 1944 and extremely early 45. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Your friend needs to do some better research work on his story to make it believable.

Here are some threads about your friend:
http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=1947&highlight=Dulias

Read what Jochen Prien has to say on pg4

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=1887&highlight=Dulias

http://forum.12oclockhigh.net/showthread.php?t=2106&highlight=Dulias

And a map I posted in the other thread a month or so ago showing the bases 'near' Aachen when he 'claimed' http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif to have shot down a Spitfire. Btw, no Spitfire claims by your friend GD show up in Tony Wood's extensive LW claim list (http://jg26.vze.com/).

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-12/1114844/JG53bases-Aug44-3.jpg

Your friend could not even say which Gruppe of JG53 he was in, nor who his commanding officer was. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Here are the dates for:

II./JG53
12.7 - 18.8 > Hustedt
18.8 - 29.8 > La Fere
29.8 - 3.9 > Eindhoven
3.9 - 9.9 > Darnstadt
9.9 - 1.4.45 > Malmshiem

III./JG53
27.6 - 6.8 > Bad Lippspringe
6.8 - 20.8 > Sachau
20.8 - 17.9 > Mortitz
17.9 - 6.10 > Paderborn
6.10 - 17.11 > Gotzenhain


In late October of 1944, JG53 was relocated to a base North of Budapest, Hungary. I./JG was already in the east and, as can be seen, II./JG53 and III./JG53 were still in Germany in <span class="ev_code_YELLOW"> November 1944</span>. In fact, neither Gruppen left Germany.