Originally posted by Slash27
And since I have you here WW, what was the reasons for its lack-luster performance? Was it the actual design of the aircraft or quality issues with engines and such?
Basically, the Ki-100 was terribly slow when compared to what it had to compete with.
Let's see how it compares to a P-40L of 1942.
Speed
P-40L: 370 mph at 20k
Ki-100: 360 mph at 19.8k
Sea level speed
P-40L: 312 mph
Ki-100: 307 mph
Climb, initial from sea level
P-40L: 3,300 fpm
Ki-100: 3,200 fpm
Time to climb
P-40L: 5.9 minutes to 15k
Ki-100: 6.6 minutes to 16.4k
Very similar performance, except that the P-40L entered service in 1942 and the Ki-100 in 1945.
Facing the Ki-100 was the F6F-5, F4U-1D, F4U-4, P-51D and P-47N.
The slowest of these is the F6F-5, which when tested by TAIC attained 409 mph at 21,600 feet (that's 6 mph less than Grumman claimed). At 20k, the Ki-100 can manage only 349 mph, at 21.6k it will be slower still.
The other American fighters were faster yet. How would the Ki-100 hope to compete? Consider that the A6M5 easily out-climbed the Ki-100 and could turn circles around it, the only advantage of the Ki-100 was in speed, and that advantage was less than 20 mph. By 1945, the Zero was hopelessly out of date. Granted, the Ki-100 was easy to fly, meaning low-time pilots could fly it without difficulty. Handling was excellent, but like the Ki-61, its initial and sustained rate of roll was barely average, degrading from 240 mph on up. Acceleration was poor, especially by late-war standards.
In short, the Ki-100 was a solid fighter for 1942, but by 1945 it was completely out-classed. It could and did score victories. But, so did the Zero.
As to sources, I'd avoid most of the books written by pulp factory authors like Gunston. Joe Baugher uses Francillon as a source and Francillon published more fiction than Stephen King...
Indeed, the utter hogwash of Ki-100s matching the P-51D and P-47N is rediculous in the extreme. That claim of 14 F6Fs shot down for no loss was a complete frabrication, unsupported by Navy records. Yet, author after author repeats this nonsense over and over.
The battle these idiots are referring to occured on July 25th, 1945 over Yokaichi Airfield. 18 Ki-100s bounced a group of 10 Hellcats. The Japanese were at 12,000 feet, the F6Fs were down around 5,000 feet, strafing and rocketing the base. In the ensuing fight, two F6Fs were lost. One in a collision with Captain Tsutae Obara. Both pilots were killed. Ensign Herbert Law's engine was hit by ground fire, causing the windscreen to obscured by engine oil. Unable to see, he evaded long enough to crash-land his Hellcat. IJAAF Warrant Officer Shin Ikuta was shot down and killed by the F6Fs. Low on gas and ammo, the remaining 8 Hellcats returned to their carrier. Japanese pilots claimed 12 F6Fs destroyed. Navy pilots claimed 8 Japanese aircraft shot down or destroyed on the ground. Actual losses were 2 lost and 2 damaged for the Americans. Japanese losses were 2 lost and 3 damaged, one of which crash-landed on Yokaichi field. Several Japanese aircraft were left burning on the field resulting from the Hellcats strafing. Gun camera film revealed that 3 utility aircraft had been set ablaze by the F6Fs, and several more unidentified aircraft were damaged to some extent.
Over time, this engagement has been embellished to inflate the Japanese claims and ignore the fact that two Ki-100s went down and another shot-up Ki-100 was wrecked in a forced landing.
In reality, the Japanese force, nearly twice as large as the American force, attacked with the advantage of altitude. Despite being handed a significant disadvanage, the Navy pilots scored as well or better than the Japanese and were able to disengage at will.
Virtually anything written by Henry Sakaida can be trusted to be generally correct. Watanabe is also reasonably reliable, with Kuroe, Jobo and Izawa somewhat less so. Some of these authors accept Japanese claims on face value, therefore it is essential to compare US records to get an accurate picture. However, all the the above can be relied upon to accurately report Japanese losses. Look for english translations as much of the material by the above authors was published in the Japanese language.
My regards,
Widewing
