Author Topic: Ki-61 tips (Read 1589 times)

Yoshimbo · « **Reply #15 on:** August 14, 2006, 07:37:14 AM »

i despise the ki61 "tony" on aotp, i still do here on ahII

which reminds me, wut do ya'll think of the ki45 "nick" from wut i remember it was a long range escort fighter for bomber and served in the ground attack role, also, it was packin,i think it was like 2x20mm and 1 or 2 30mm cannons, and it had the secuirity of being a twin engine fighter.

also, when i went back to aotp to look at tony, i saw a plane they made me fly for the jaaf in the beginning, that god forsaken ki27 "nate" good lord i hat that more than tony as if these planes weren't slow already, i think the family minivan couldout run it, top speed was like 200mph in a dive and was packin a whopping 2x7.7mm gunz:lol surprised i survived thef first tod.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #16 on:** August 14, 2006, 08:51:02 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Iron_Cross
The Ki-61 can not stallfight efectively. I have killed more Ki-61's that tried to stallfight than I care to name. The Ki-61 came about with German technology transfer IMHO. Japanease enginers got ahold of 109 plans and made their own modifications, and adapted the design to suit their purposes. You will note that it is the only Japanese fighter to mount an inline engine. The wing loading is to high for it to be an efective stallfighter. The Ki-61 is an E fighter PERIOD.

Try geting into a horizontal scissors fight on the deck with a 109-F, you will get your arse handed to you on a silver platter.

I disagree with this, and agree with OOZ. I've never had an issue with the Tony, in a turnfight, stallfight, etc. The tony holds E almost on an La7 level. I'll also use common sense when stallfighting in this, I don't do it with 5 cons around, I do it 1 on 1. This plane is not deserving of the "40" ENY tag, but what the hell, I'll farm the perks with it. I almost always get to within 200 of the con before pulling the trigger, the Tony makes it known.

Karnak · « **Reply #17 on:** August 14, 2006, 10:59:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Iron_Cross
The Ki-61 came about with German technology transfer IMHO. Japanease enginers got ahold of 109 plans and made their own modifications, and adapted the design to suit their purposes. You will note that it is the only Japanese fighter to mount an inline engine.

This is incorrect. The engine is based on the German transfer, but the Ki-61 other than the engine is a completely Japanese design and not based on the Bf109 at all. The Japanese engineer who designed it was an advocate of liquid cooled engines. His name escapes me at the moment.

He did adapt the Ki-61-II airframe to take a radial engine in a very short time, resulting in the Ki-100. Apparently he felt he was butchering his design though.

The D4Y1 and D4Y2 dive bombers also had a liquid coold DB based engine, but switched to a radial in the D4Y3 and D4Y4 versions.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #18 on:** August 14, 2006, 11:39:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
This is incorrect. The engine is based on the German transfer, but the Ki-61 other than the engine is a completely Japanese design and not based on the Bf109 at all. The Japanese engineer who designed it was an advocate of liquid cooled engines. His name escapes me at the moment.

He did adapt the Ki-61-II airframe to take a radial engine in a very short time, resulting in the Ki-100. Apparently he felt he was butchering his design though.

The D4Y1 and D4Y2 dive bombers also had a liquid coold DB based engine, but switched to a radial in the D4Y3 and D4Y4 versions.

Takeo Doi or Shin Owada? I believe it was Takeo, that you are thinking of Karnak.

Karnak · « **Reply #19 on:** August 14, 2006, 12:01:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
Takeo Doi or Shin Owada? I believe it was Takeo, that you are thinking of Karnak.

I'd need my books to be sure. Besides the big British and German names (Geoffrey De Haviland, Reginald Mitchell, Sidney Camm, Wily Messerschmitt, Kurt Tank) I only know Jiro Horikoshi (A6M, J2M, A7M) and Joe Smith (Spitfire development after Mitchell's death) without needing to look them up in books.

MOSQ · « **Reply #20 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:11:20 PM »

The Ki-61 is average or below average at everything. But it's still lots of fun. Carries a reasonable bomb load.

It does have pretty good views.

You don't want to dive at high speed. It sheds parts and augers well!

Ack-Ack · « **Reply #21 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:13:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
This is incorrect. The engine is based on the German transfer, but the Ki-61 other than the engine is a completely Japanese design and not based on the Bf109 at all. The Japanese engineer who designed it was an advocate of liquid cooled engines. His name escapes me at the moment.

He did adapt the Ki-61-II airframe to take a radial engine in a very short time, resulting in the Ki-100. Apparently he felt he was butchering his design though.

The D4Y1 and D4Y2 dive bombers also had a liquid coold DB based engine, but switched to a radial in the D4Y3 and D4Y4 versions.

When the Tony was first encountered by USAAF pilots they at first reported the Tony as a bf109E or a c.205.

ack-ack

Masherbrum · « **Reply #22 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:29:16 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
When the Tony was first encountered by USAAF pilots they at first reported the Tony as a bf109E or a c.205.

ack-ack

Not to be a technical dweeb, but I thought a 202. Either way, yeah, this one caught them by surprise, but were easy kills for the USN.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #23 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:30:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MOSQ
The Ki-61 is average or below average at everything. But it's still lots of fun. Carries a reasonable bomb load.

It does have pretty good views.

You don't want to dive at high speed. It sheds parts and augers well!

MOSQ I've had this thing in a dive at 500+ and haven't had the "Mosquito Flap rip" happen. IMO, it handles E just as good as a pony or La when it gets cooking.

Karnak · « **Reply #24 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:41:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ack-Ack
When the Tony was first encountered by USAAF pilots they at first reported the Tony as a bf109E or a c.205.

ack-ack

Yes, but that was an error. The myth persists to this day as evidenced in this thread.

icemaw · « **Reply #25 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:46:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
MOSQ I've had this thing in a dive at 500+ and haven't had the "Mosquito Flap rip" happen. IMO, it handles E just as good as a pony or La when it gets cooking.

maybe the ki84 is what your thinking it sheds its elevators in a dive. i cant recall ever losing anything off a ki61 in a dive. infact of all the japanese planes the ki61 it by far the best diver

Masherbrum · « **Reply #26 on:** August 14, 2006, 02:51:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by icemaw
maybe the ki84 is what your thinking it sheds its elevators in a dive. i cant recall ever losing anything off a ki61 in a dive. infact of all the japanese planes the ki61 it by far the best diver

me 2nd.

Oldman731 · « **Reply #27 on:** August 15, 2006, 07:44:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Masherbrum
me 2nd.

Agreed.

- oldman

Mako15 · « **Reply #28 on:** August 18, 2006, 03:03:34 PM »

Ok since this was first brought up I've flown the ki in multiple FT and TT engagements....and while I'm no expert, I do agree that it dives well, and given the right circustances, has the capablility to shred most of the planes in the game....I had 10 air to air kills in one sortie a week ago....was unable to rtb with them because of slight augering problem (mossie made me dodge into the ground...dam those things are fast!)

Krusty · « **Reply #29 on:** August 18, 2006, 03:49:49 PM »

Ki61 is one of THE best planes for cutting into a spitty's turn circle and getting a nasty burst right into him because you have amazing "under the nose" shot capability -- just bank a little and you have unlimited view under the nose.

Hard to explain, but if you're turning chances are you're at 45 degrees or so and you can see when the other tight-turning planes are in the right spot to squeaze the trigger.