Defeat of Gladiators - 29 II 1940

[Juha Tompuri]

GL-262 Lt. E. Halme (KIA) LLv.14?
(In some sources Halme is said to have been a pilot in LLv.16 which can't be correct to me because that squadron didn't have fighter flight. Halme was in conversion training in LLv.26.)

Halme was a pilot of LLv.16 and was in conversion training in LLv.26 because of the planned Gladiator transfer to LLv.16.

That puzzles me really because only LLv.12 and 14 were converting to Gladiators. I think LLv.16 might be a mistake here simply because AFAIK LLv.16 wasn't under conversion to Gladiators (it received them much later) and it didn't have a fighter flight during the Winter War. So, either Halme was the pilot of LLv.16 and was to be transferred to either LLv.12 or 14 of which new fighter flights were to be equipped with Gladiators or then LLv.16 is not correct (it's a spelling mistake). I have not managed to confirm that information anywhere. IIRC LLv.16 is mentioned in Hyvönen's book but not in the book I mentioned above. It was not unusual that pilots were transferred between flights and squadrons.

Without better information it is maybe "the safest" to call him the pilot of LLv.26... :roll:

C-E Bruun at his book Hävittäjälentolaivue 26 (Fighter Squadron 26) mentions that "25. 2. 40 Air Defence HQ commander approved that the LeR 1 will be converted as a Fighter Regiment with GL-planes"

2nd Ltn Kauko Nissinen (Blackburn Ripon observer) from LLv. 16 mentions at Talvisodan Taistelulentäjät (Combat pilots of Winter War) by Joppe Karhunen: "Lieutenants Uotinen, Halme and Ripon pilot Vitala (Virtala ?, JT) are ordered to Fighter detachment Kivinen at Ruokolahti."

Regards, Juha

[mirekw]

Hi
" (...) Ilmari Juutilainen at his book Punalentajien Kiusana (So We Harassed the Red Pilots) from 1956 (also availlable in english as Double Fighter Knight ) mentions when chasing Masitsh/Myasitz & co (Blinihin and Kuljman ) that the I-16 had "fixed undercarriage" (skis I believe, JT). would that indicate them as typ 5 or 6 ? Perhaps both new and old types at the Regiment?
At the Finnish sources there are mentions that the attacking Soviet planes were not typically white or green paineted, but "brightly painted". Do you know more about that? (...)

Regards, Juha


Hi Juha
I think that I-16 had not any fixed undercarriage, but the severe winter condition (snwo+ frost+vry rudimentary airfiled tools" makes in these I-16 unfixed into fixed undercarriage. This is also in the typ 5. Second undercarriage was in I-16 hidden, lowered manualy by pilot - the next factor of making this carriage as a fixed one.

Second I think that when Soviet rearmed aviation regiment they did it "total" - the pilot of one escadrila or regiment (better) had gotten the new model and they had handed over the old one to other unit. It makes no sens to use I-16 typ 5 or typ 10 or later typ 18, typ 24 in one combat unit. The difference in speed among these types were to great that whole formation could not sustain the formation. The same you have in other squadrons I do not see the same staffelen with mixed Me 109 E-7 and F-2 or squadron with Spitfire Mk 1 and Mk 2 or Mk 5. So when you have one baisci unit (in IAP escadrila th whole has one typ of I-16.

This unstandard paiting, yes I have met this in some Finnish memories, but Soviet did have any reason to make them so painted. Maybe the Sun and light condition in the combat make the so looked. In this time Soviet had used airstrip with on open space. How do you think about paiting the fighter in such low temperature as was in the winter 1939/40. It is impossible to do this or need very warm hangar (over zero inside). The Soviet do not have such possibiliteis and reasons.
Second comunist regime had not so many paints to be used/collored the planes. Where such paints could come from? he 68. OIAP were not any spacific not any "quard" or other high prized fighter unit. Nothing special among others regiment.


Regards
MirekW

[Harri]

C-E Bruun at his book Hävittäjälentolaivue 26 (Fighter Squadron 26) mentions that "25. 2. 40 Air Defence HQ commander approved that the LeR 1 will be converted as a Fighter Regiment with GL-planes"

2nd Ltn Kauko Nissinen (Blackburn Ripon observer) from LLv. 16 mentions at Talvisodan Taistelulentäjät (Combat pilots of Winter War) by Joppe Karhunen: "Lieutenants Uotinen, Halme and Ripon pilot Vitala (Virtala ?, JT) are ordered to Fighter detachment Kivinen at Ruokolahti."

I see. That explains the whole thing. Unfortunately I have not managed to get that Bruun's book and obviously I need to re-read all books by Joppe Karhunen...

The first sentence is interesting because Flying Regiment 1 (Le.R 1) was never converted to fighter regiment (this is actually the first time I hear about that kind of a plan). Instead all joint operation squadrons were to be equipped with one or two Gladiator fighter flights. LLv.10 was a dive bomber squadron and became later fighter(-training) squadron LLv.30. LLv.12 had eventually two fighter flights and LLv.14 one equipped with Gladiators. Fighter flight (usually about 8 planes) was not formed in LLv.16 because there were not enough planes. But it seems that their pilots were although conversion trained.

At the beginning of the Continuation War LLv.12, 14 and 16 had one Gladiator flight but they all were already during the June and July 1941 moved to LLv.16.

Thanks Juha!

[Juha Tompuri]

obviously I need to re-read all books by Joppe Karhunen

Tough decision

The first sentence is interesting because Flying Regiment 1 (Le.R 1) was never converted to fighter regiment (this is actually the first time I hear about that kind of a plan). Instead all joint operation squadrons were to be equipped with one or two Gladiator fighter flights. LLv.10 was a dive bomber squadron and became later fighter(-training) squadron LLv.30. LLv.12 had eventually two fighter flights and LLv.14 one equipped with Gladiators. Fighter flight (usually about 8 planes) was not formed in LLv.16 because there were not enough planes. But it seems that their pilots were although conversion trained.

Maybe the Gladiator losses changed the plans?

Thanks Juha!

You're welcome, "information not shared is lost"

Regards, Juha

[Juha Tompuri]

Hi Juha
I think that I-16 had not any fixed undercarriage, but the severe winter condition (snwo+ frost+vry rudimentary airfiled tools" makes in these I-16 unfixed into fixed undercarriage. This is also in the typ 5. Second undercarriage was in I-16 hidden, lowered manualy by pilot - the next factor of making this carriage as a fixed one.

Hmmm...
So these are untrue:

"...relative easily I reached two fleeing enemy planes. They were of I-16 type which had fixed undercarriage at downward positition..."

" I-16 tip (with fixed undercarriage) and I-153 biplanes were the main equipment of the Soviet Fighter regiments during the Winter War"

I-16 typ 10 with retractable skies

In the end of 1937 the I-16 Type 10 with increased firepower replaced 5/6 series on the production line, after the Spanish and Chinese combat experience revealed insufficient armament of the I-16. The Type 10 also had new improved M-25V engine and additional 8mm armour plate behind the headrest. This armour was sufficient to stop 12.7mm shells. For winter operation retractable ski gear was fitted (all earlier I-16's had to use fixed ski gear).

http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/RAM/i-16.html




I-16 typ 6 with fixed skies

4.7 Ski landing gear

As the reader doubtless recalls the very earliest flights of the I-16 prototype were made with ski landing gear. In Russia this was a "must have" if one wanted to operate a military aircraft during winter campaigns from primitive front-line airfields. Up to the appearance of the type 10 the landing gear was simply locked in place, the wheels replaced by skis and the wheel wells were usually left open (this is not always the case, it seem as if landing gear doors were sometimes detached from the landing gear itself and used to blank off the wheel wells). The front and rear end of the skis were then attached to he wings and fuselage by means of elastic cable fittings. The landing gear could obviously not be retracted. It was only later that retractable ski gears were developed. These began to appear on various types of the I-16 after the winter war. When provision was made for retractable skis the lowest two exhaust were rerouted to the exhaust ports above them. Where the lowest two exhaust ports had been before there was now a bulge in the cowling to accommodate the tip of the skis. This arrangement became standard on all later types of the I-16 form the later type 10 aircraft and was doubtless retrofitted to earlier types.

http://www.brushfirewars.org/aircraft/p ... i-16_1.htm

Second I think that when Soviet rearmed aviation regiment they did it "total" - the pilot of one escadrila or regiment (better) had gotten the new model and they had handed over the old one to other unit. It makes no sens to use I-16 typ 5 or typ 10 or later typ 18, typ 24 in one combat unit. The difference in speed among these types were to great that whole formation could not sustain the formation. The same you have in other squadrons I do not see the same staffelen with mixed Me 109 E-7 and F-2 or squadron with Spitfire Mk 1 and Mk 2 or Mk 5. So when you have one baisci unit (in IAP escadrila th whole has one typ of I-16.

but didn't the 68.OIAP (already) fly with two totally differnet types (I-16 & I-153 ?)

This unstandard paiting, yes I have met this in some Finnish memories, but Soviet did have any reason to make them so painted.

Maybe the same reason as Richthofen & co

Maybe the Sun and light condition in the combat make the so looked.

Or maybe the planes were painted as reported

In this time Soviet had used airstrip with on open space. How do you think about paiting the fighter in such low temperature as was in the winter 1939/40. It is impossible to do this or need very warm hangar (over zero inside). The Soviet do not have such possibiliteis and reasons.

I too believe that the Soviet airstrip was on open space, but they sure had both possibilities and reasons to repair and overhaul their planes indoors.

Second comunist regime had not so many paints to be used/collored the planes. Where such paints could come from?

From paint factory ? (I believe that there was enough red(?) paint at USSR at those days)

68. OIAP were not any spacific not any "quard" or other high prized fighter unit. Nothing special among others regiment.

I think that the "guard" status was not in use during the Winter War.
Finnish sources mention (special) aerobatic skills of 68.OIAP

Regards, Juha

[mirekw]

Yes
the "guards" status was introduced by Stalin during the defence of Moscow in the winter 1941. The first IAP, SzAP ect. had got this status. In the Winter war there were no so called "guards" regiment.

There were a lot fo red paints in Russia, sometims pilots are seeing what they want to see, which is not exactly the true. If all what pilots did see were true oposit side should be whiped out from the sky. For example Soviet side several tims claimed to shot down Spitfires on FAF side or other such strange types. The same was among FAF side.
It is aslo possible that staff zvieno had before war painted the palnes on red. There was also such planes among Soviets. Next possiblity Soviet in the thirties to inform far away post, which did not have any radio communication had introduced system of alert informing by specialy painted whole red planes (they overflon over the heads of pots). So maybe this was such zwieno? Why not, it was possible?

There were 4 escadrilas and the 3 had I-16 and the fourth had I-153. There were not mixed unit where one zevien has 3 I-16 next 3 I-153 ect. There could be mixed formation when in the air there were dispached I-16, I-153 from different units as it was on 29 II 40. This is nothing special such a mixed formation there were in Spanish Civil war (I-16 and I-15, or I-15bis) or over Chalchin-Gol too.

In the case of 29 II 40 the I-153s could be attached as a top cover. Maybe I-153s where the newest fighters in the whole unit (with the top speed and as Soviet estimated better performance in horisontal combats with Galdiators then I-16 typ 10 - ?). After the morning combat iasich had claimed 2 biplanes fighter. ?
There where 2 fighter formation and each had aditional zvieno of 3 I-153s, which could act as a top cover for assoult formation of I-16s. Soviet did used some expirience from Spain and Chalchin-Gol combat last years, where such a mixed system was introduced agains enemy.

Strange, that this white "red 15" typ 5 had rails for RS-82. In my opinion (maybe I am wrong) mass rearming the old figters (I-153, I-16) with the rails with RS-82 was done by Soviets after Winter War and before June 1941. This weapon was first tested in combat over Chalchin-Gol in VIII/IX 1939 on the 5-6 specily modified I-16s typ 10, and I do not hear of use them again on I-16s in Winter War (?).

Regards,
MirekW