[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Franek Grabowski
Never ending romance with communism it seems. I would be very cautious with terms like unfortunately here.
|
I would be very cautious in my turn about your knowledge in the catastrophic situation in the french industry in 1936. We were desesperatly trying to resolve problems, by different ways. I personnaly think that the Polikarpov I-17 produced in the USSR with licensed tree-bladed Ratier prop and hispano engine could have been a good temporary solution.
Quote:
|
then you forget to add, that the former is a little bit heavier than the latter. The same about wood or wood composite.
|
Oh, really? You see that...
Well read my post again...about 1940, thin tubes, chromansils end etc...
Quote:
|
The question is very simple. While performance measurements indicated overall increase of parameters, series aircraft had them substantially worse..
|
Stap'me! Did you find it by yourself once more, without any help?
Thank you for all this
"Lapalissades"* (*trivial evidencies from Lapalisse a french Phylosoph from the Rennaissance aera).
But read Shavrov, Kosminkov: sometimes it was the opposite.
Quote:
|
It looks like I-180/I-185 were overstressed, and cancellation was the right decision.
|
Are you still kidding? I-180, was no more overstressed, understressed either hyperstressed than the others soviet fighters of its time. It was just responding to the soviet specification standarts of the year (7,5-8G, i thing). Maybe more, but NOT LESS. Furthermore before building a plane you have to send a complete file of calculations to the state acceptance commission, and theorycally wait for a positive answer.
But you might be very youg, ask to your older poles what was it to be leaving under soviet (heavy) administration. Even Kafka, would have not enough imagination...
Your Faithfully,
Arsenal
Stay high!