feddawg Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 The Academy kit represents an all metal version straight from the box. Does anyone have any info on the schemes as to weather they all metal or incorporated wooden components. I have already checked the VVS site. Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chuck1945 Posted February 9, 2009 Share Posted February 9, 2009 The Academy kit represents an all metal version straight from the box. Does anyone have any info on the schemes as to weather they all metal or incorporated wooden components. I'm confused, if it represents an all metal aircraft, why ask if it has wooden components? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
feddawg Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 I'm confused, if it represents an all metal aircraft, why ask if it has wooden components? The majority of Il2's produced had wooden outer wing panels and aft fuselages. The majority of the schemes in the kit probably reflect this, similar to filling in the panel lines on a P-51 wing the same should be done for those schemes on this kit. Hope that clarifies it. Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lock n' Load Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I just can't believe a tank hunter, like the IL-2 could have any wooden component.. SPECIALLY it's aft fuselage.. Never read that the weak point in IL-2's were the outer wings and aft fuselages... Imagine a single shell fired upon those weak spots.. everything goes to hell, and that didn't happen with the shturmovik. ''Since the aircraft was supposed to engage tanks (and other thick-skinned battlefield paraphernalia), the designers put in steel armour around the engine and cockpit and moved radiators and air intakes out of harm's way as much as possible. The armoured cockpit glass was up to 65 mm thick in places, providing additional protection for the pilot.'' No information regarding any wooden components even on official sites. Maybe you misheard? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
David Walker Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 (edited) I just can't believe a tank hunter, like the IL-2 could have any wooden component.... And yet it did. If fact the majority of the plane was wood, including the entire rear fuselage. Overall this led to the rear gunners on the two seat model being killed or wounded at a rate four times that of the pilot who was enclosed in armor. Edited February 10, 2009 by David Walker Quote Link to post Share on other sites
feddawg Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 I just can't believe a tank hunter, like the IL-2 could have any wooden component.. SPECIALLY it's aft fuselage..Never read that the weak point in IL-2's were the outer wings and aft fuselages... Imagine a single shell fired upon those weak spots.. everything goes to hell, and that didn't happen with the shturmovik. ''Since the aircraft was supposed to engage tanks (and other thick-skinned battlefield paraphernalia), the designers put in steel armour around the engine and cockpit and moved radiators and air intakes out of harm's way as much as possible. The armoured cockpit glass was up to 65 mm thick in places, providing additional protection for the pilot.'' No information regarding any wooden components even on official sites. Maybe you misheard? There is plenty of info, just not much on specific aircraft. I really trying to pin down which of the markings offered in the Academy kit were all metal and which had wood. Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Steve N Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I haven't researched the Il-2 that deeply, but I was under the impression that the "straight wings" were metal, while the ones with the swept-back outer panels were wood? SN Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Chuck1945 Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I am with Steve on this, I thought metal wings didn't come into use until later in 1944 and on 2-seat Il-2s, not the single seat version. I also thought single seat Il-2 production was phased out for 2-seat versions much ealier, before metal wings came into use. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
feddawg Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 I am with Steve on this, I thought metal wings didn't come into use until later in 1944 and on 2-seat Il-2s, not the single seat version. I also thought single seat Il-2 production was phased out for 2-seat versions much ealier, before metal wings came into use. From what I've read the Il2 was all metal construction until the factories were Eastern factories were abandoned in 1941, afterwards the majority were of wooden construction until 1944. There were of course mixed construction airframes also. I guess during the lean years they did what they had to do to get aircraft onto the frontlines. Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jrallman Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 In general all metal construction of VVS planes was rare early on because the Russians were not very good at producing the light high strength non-ferrous metals needed for all metal airframe construction, nor did they have the resources ready to do so. Not to say it didn't happen, but it wasn't common. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mikehorrell Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 There is plenty of info, just not much on specific aircraft. I really trying to pin down which of the markings offered in the Academy kit were all metal and which had wood.Cheers The very earliest straight wings were metal but they switched to wood almost immediately and it's almost certain that any photo you've seen of a straight wing was one of wooden wing construction. Just to keep things interesting, the swept wing two-seaters reverted to metal wings very late in their construction. In addition, the three-toned scheme on the original AM IL-2M3 boxing is incorrect. All of this was discussed at length a number of times on the now-defunct VVS discussion group. Unfortunately, it has been shut down after technical problems so I can't supply any links. Ain't the VVS fun? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
feddawg Posted February 10, 2009 Author Share Posted February 10, 2009 The very earliest straight wings were metal but they switched to wood almost immediately and it's almost certain that any photo you've seenof a straight wing was one of wooden wing construction. Just to keep things interesting, the swept wing two-seaters reverted to metal wings very late in their construction. In addition, the three-toned scheme on the original AM IL-2M3 boxing is incorrect. All of this was discussed at length a number of times on the now-defunct VVS discussion group. Unfortunately, it has been shut down after technical problems so I can't supply any links. Ain't the VVS fun? I seem to find that the focus of most photos of VVS stuff is the gleaming hero who flew the thing and not aircraft itself. The VVS site was the first place I checked and while it is very good for variant and color scheme information it's not much help for individual aircraft. Hadn't checked their forum in abouut a year or so until I came across this so I guess i missed the Il-2 debate. Good to see an old Mugger reply. Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jrallman Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I seem to find that the focus of most photos of VVS stuff is the gleaming hero who flew the thing and not aircraft itself. The VVS site was the first place I checked and while it is very good for variant and color scheme information it's not much help for individual aircraft. Hadn't checked their forum in abouut a year or so until I came across this so I guess i missed the Il-2 debate. Good to see an old Mugger reply.Cheers This trend in photographs is due to the Soviet mindset. It was the pilot that did the deeds and claimed the victory. They made a big deal of their heroes with awards and propaganda and such. To the Soviets, the planes were nothing more than tools to be used as needed. They were used hard and discarded when needed. this is why they initially had problems keeping their lendlease P-39s in the air, they would push the planes so hard that they would burn out the engines. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Mikehorrell Posted February 10, 2009 Share Posted February 10, 2009 I seem to find that the focus of most photos of VVS stuff is the gleaming hero who flew the thing and not aircraft itself. The VVS site was the first place I checked and while it is very good for variant and color scheme information it's not much help for individual aircraft. Hadn't checked their forum in abouut a year or so until I came across this so I guess i missed the Il-2 debate. Good to see an old Mugger reply.Cheers I rarely post on ARC because I find the sheer volume of threads to be too difficult to follow on a regular basis (the downside of big success..) but I skim through fairly often and always hit "What's New" every day. This was the first time I'd actually logged on in about 2 years. Haven't missed MUG one iota though since it tore itself .. Have fun! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Thompson Posted February 11, 2009 Share Posted February 11, 2009 This is why they initially had problems keeping their lendlease P-39s in the air, they would push the planes so hard that they would burn out the engines. On that subject, here's an excellent reference on the Airacobra in Soviet service: http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/arti.../p-39/index.htm In particular, this paragraph: "From the beginning of mass exploitation reports about exposed hidden defects began to emerge from the horn of plenty. In most cases the engine failed, either upon takeoff or during combat. For example, in the 19th Guards IAP, there was one catastrophic failure and four accidents in the first two weeks; in the 153d IAP, one catastrophic failure and one accident. At first everyone blamed the Allison, in general a decent, light, and powerful engine that did not, however, want to work on Soviet-refined oils. It was real "picky", however, only at the beginning, and not without reason. After filtration, which removed dross and other debris, the Allison stopped "self destructing". Another defect required a great amount of investigation, the so-called "throwing of rods". This allegedly occurred when because of frequent running at the engine's operating limits (without which, of course, aerial combat was unthinkable) the aforementioned parts broke loose, came through the crankcase and destroyed everything in their path, in particular the control rods. A number of flight and laboratory tests were undertaken which enabled the test engineers to recommend the most favorable operating regimes of the engine to combat pilots, and succeeded in reducing the level of this type of failure." Funny how people will behave when their country's being invaded... John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
feddawg Posted February 12, 2009 Author Share Posted February 12, 2009 For those still wondering about the wooden portions here is a great example: Bare Il-2 Cheers Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dark Green man Posted April 7, 2009 Share Posted April 7, 2009 early production Il-2's were of all-metal construction. as need for ever increasing numbers of these machines were needed the use of aluminum had to be 'rationed' demanding that the outer wings and aft fuselage be made of wood. metal wings can be seen on machines having the external aileron mass balances (a.k.a. anti-flutter booms) an internally cantilevered system was employed on the wooden wings making these unnecessary. so if the machine you wish to model has these external balances it has metal wings , if it does not then it is made of wood. as for the 'arrow' wing it was available in wood first , then later in metal. this was necessary because of the need to create new fabrication techniques for the swept metal wings. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bergr Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 early production Il-2's were of all-metal construction. ... metal wings can be seen on machines having the external aileron mass balances (a.k.a. anti-flutter booms) an internally cantilevered system was employed on the wooden wings making these unnecessary. so if the machine you wish to model has these external balances it has metal wings , if it does not then it is made of wood. as for the 'arrow' wing it was available in wood first , then later in metal. this was necessary because of the need to create new fabrication techniques for the swept metal wings. At first- its right at second- the IL 2 was developed as an two-seater. Later was produced as an single-seater. Thats why the external balances to replace the weight of the reargunner. Later the IL 2 was produced /converted as/to a twoseater without the balances. If wooden or metal wings depended of the plant (SAVOD). If I remeber right, there was an article at vvs hobby... that is lost. The main numbers of items were produced as a straight metal version at Savod 18? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
John Thompson Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 If I remeber right, there was an article at vvs hobby... that is lost. The main numbers of items were produced as a straight metal version at Savod 18? The article should still be there - it was just the forum files that were lost; the rest of the site is still intact. Go to the URL linked below and try clicking on either "Modeling", then select "Ilyushin" from the dropdown menu, or on "Research". You might also check "Monthly" at the top of the page. http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/ John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
agboak Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 (edited) At first- its rightat second- the IL 2 was developed as an two-seater. Later was produced as an single-seater. Thats why the external balances to replace the weight of the reargunner. Later the IL 2 was produced /converted as/to a twoseater without the balances. If wooden or metal wings depended of the plant (SAVOD). If I remeber right, there was an article at vvs hobby... that is lost. The main numbers of items were produced as a straight metal version at Savod 18? The first prototype TSKB-55 or BSh-2 was a two-seater, but had to be redesigned as a single seater because the cg was too far aft. It was the single -seat second prototype TsKB-57 that became the Il 2, and it needed no ballast to account for the removal of the gunner - quite the reverse! The external balances on the aileron are an aerodynamic feature of the control surfaces to reduce stick forces and prevent flutter. They have nothing to do with the presence or otherwise of a gunner. The term for factory is Zavod. Edited September 18, 2009 by agboak Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Matt Roberts Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Also how weathered would the planes be in comparison to something say in the CBI or Pacific. I remember discussions about weathering Russian aircraft in particular in that they didn't have really enough of a service life to get all that weathered outside of exhaust and cordite staining. Winter schemes are another matter though. I'll be interested in this one, I still have a couple of AccMin 48ths in the stash (built two already) Matt Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.