Author Topic: Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84  (Read 843 times)

Offline CurtissP-6EHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1452
Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« on: August 09, 2004, 08:15:05 PM »
272 Ki-61-II-KAI airframes sitting forlorn at Kagamigahara were converted to take the Ha-112 engine, and the aircraft was formally accepted for service as the Army Type 5 Fighter Model Ia (Ki-100-Ia). Soon ground crews and pilots alike were singing the praises of the Goshikisen (simply, “Type 5 Fighter”) as the best, most reliable, and easiest-to-fly of all operational JAAF fighters. It was so easy to handle, even the greenest Japanese flyers, with fewer than 100 flight hours before arriving at their new units, were soon flying the Ki-100-Ia like masters. JAAF pilots flying the Goshikisen came to look upon the US Navy’s formidable F6F Hellcat carrier fighter as a relatively easy kill; indeed, the first time the Ki-100 ever encountered the F6F, the Japanese shot down 14 Hellcats without loss. It proved quite capable of intercepting B-29s as well. But the hardest test came with the arrival of the P-51D Mustang in Japanese skies, flying from bases on the newly-captured island of Iwo Jima. Mustang-vs.-Goshikisen dogfights were ferocious affairs. The Mustang was faster, and could engage and disengage at will, but if the American chose to stay and fight, he would have a real hurricane on his hands. The two enemies were so evenly matched in a dogfight, usually, only pilot skill would determine the winner, not the capabilities of the plane alone.



Ki-84

It was in the Philippines, however, where the Ki-84’s weaknesses were discovered. In the furious rush to produce them in great numbers and attempt to replace the older Ki-43, the Hayates, flying under primitive conditions, suffered from faulty engines that could lose oil and/or fuel pressure disconcertingly in combat. They also had poorly designed and unreliable hydraulic systems, and their landing gear legs could snap during rough landings on jungle airfields, due to poor hardening of the steel used.

The Allies must’ve counted themselves very fortunate, indeed, that the Hayate was plagued by poor workmanship and an unreliable engine that limited the type’s serviceability under combat conditions.

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2004, 08:38:41 PM »
However by no means did it always break.  When it worked (which it did more often than not, just not nearly as often as anything the Allies would have accepted) it was the best Japanese fighter of the war.  When the Ki-84 first showed up over Indochina it dominated any fight that it participated in.


All that said, it really depends on what you're looking for in a sim.  If you are looking for absolute historical realism in regards to reliability and maintainance you are going to be looking long and hard.  Not even the vaunted IL-2:FB:AEP models that.  If, perchance, you do find it you had better hope that it is player vs AI because you will never have many volunteers to fly for the side that is preordained to lose.


Perfect reliability, perfect maintainance and weapon systems that never fail may not be realistic, but it makes a much better player vs player game.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline CurtissP-6EHawk

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1452
Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2004, 10:10:36 PM »
The Allies must’ve counted themselves very fortunate, indeed, that the Hayate was plagued by poor workmanship and an unreliable engine that limited the type’s serviceability under combat conditions. As well as most strapping on bombs and crashing them into ships instead of dogfighting fighting.

This has nothing to do with the flight sim. I never said it did.

Offline Slash27

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12795
Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« Reply #3 on: August 10, 2004, 12:53:52 AM »
The more I read about the Ki-100 the more I like it. I wonder why some refer to the Ki-100 as the best while others claim the Ki-84 the best?

Offline TimRas

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 560
Re: Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« Reply #4 on: August 10, 2004, 03:20:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by CurtissP-6EHawk
JAAF pilots flying the Goshikisen came to look upon the US Navy’s formidable F6F Hellcat carrier fighter as a relatively easy kill; indeed, the first time the Ki-100 ever encountered the F6F, the Japanese shot down 14 Hellcats without loss.


I wonder if this can be verified by US records or is this only Japanese claim (which were notoriously inaccurate). During the period of 1. Sept. 1944- 15. Aug. 1945,  the K/D -ratios of F6F were:
against "Tony": 275/11
against "Tojo": 283/9
against "Frank": 114/12
against "George":  28/0

Source: http://www.history.navy.mil/download/nasc.pdf
« Last Edit: August 10, 2004, 03:22:04 AM by TimRas »

Offline Squire

  • Aces High CM Staff (Retired)
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7683
Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« Reply #5 on: August 10, 2004, 08:15:26 AM »
Despite what many people think the Ki-100 was no better performance wise than a Ki-61, it just had a more reliable engine.
Warloc
Friday Squad Ops CM Team
1841 Squadron Fleet Air Arm
Aces High since Tour 24

Offline Reschke

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7724
      • VF-17 "The Jolly Rogers"
Ki-100-1a vs Ki-84
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2004, 11:31:40 AM »
I haven't seen it (Ki-100) in a flight sim since it was in FA2.x. I don't know if it is in the latest incarnation of Fighter Ace but in the 2.x version in the "advanced" arenas it was a heck of a plane to go up against 1v1 in a Corsair or P-51. I enjoyed playing around flying it also since it was on pretty equal ground when you flew it against the late war rides of the other countries.
Buckshot
Reschke from March 2001 till tour 146
Founder and CO VF-17 Jolly Rogers September 2002 - December 2006
"I'm baaaaccccckkk!"