several modifications and M-88A engine without reduction gear. The aircraft could also accept the new M-89 engine with 1,007 kW (1,350 hp) (up to 1,165 kW (1,560 hp) with fuel injection) which would raise its top speed to over 650 km/h (404 mph). There was also a proposal for the I-180Sh with improved main landing gear. Then, near the end of 1940, Polikarpov was suddenly informed that the I-180 was being cancelled, and that Factory no.21 would manufacture LaGG-3 fighters instead. The reason for this was a misconception of the Ministry of Aviation Industry, that radial engines in NACA cowlings were poorly suited for aircraft with top speeds of over 500 km/h (310 mph), owing to high drag. Former government officials later admitted that the fascination with liquid-cooled engines stemmed in part from attempts to imitate the then state-of-the-art Messerschmitt Bf 109. Stalin's dislike for Polikarpov after Chkalov's death probably also played a role. According to some recent historians, such as Mikhail Maslov, the cancellation of the I-180 was caused by personal and non content-related reasons and might be considered an error. Especially after Chkalov's death, the Soviet authorities started to promote young designers, in preference to Polikarpov, despite the fact that the I-180 was the best performing Soviet fighter at the time of its cancellation and that it was faster than the Bf 109. One prototype series I-180 developed a speed of 585 km/h, that could be improved after projected changes, such as adding a closed canopy. The next best fighter, Yakovlev's I-26 (Yak-1 prototype), suffered from a troublesome and protracted development cycle, but Alexander Sergeyevich Yakovlev was one of Stalin's favorites, which most probably saved his design. In addition, the I-180 could have been available much earlier than the Yak-1 and LaGG-3 types, and there was the possibility of producing it with a temporary M-87 engine, until the M-88 could be improved. Crashes of I-180 prototypes were mostly accidental, and should not be regarded as disqualifying the design. Moreover, the I-180 showed much fewer "teething problems" than its counterparts, especially the Yak-1, confirming Polikarpov's competence in aircraft design. Another advantage was that the construction of the I-180 was similar to the I-16, which was familiar to the Soviet industry and pilots, but handling of the I-180 was even easier and it was more stable. The same situation recurred with Polikarpov's next design, the advanced I-185, based on the