Author Topic: Ki-84 U.S. testing  (Read 5251 times)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6864
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #60 on: January 31, 2008, 02:22:18 PM »
Don't know Pappy for the Japanese doc starts with 1946, so would guess it is American data.

Quote
The Flying wing was another design started by the Horton brothers and was flying at wars end, not in operational service but flying .


BigPlay ever hear of an American named Northrop? Check out his B-35.

Offline Kweassa

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6425
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #61 on: January 31, 2008, 06:56:33 PM »
Quote
Are those the Japanese texts from which the Americans made their copy? I have the same doc, but I can't read Japanese


 Actually, the Japanese document is of one Nakano Yoshiharu, and starts; "In , printed in July of 1946.... " .. and then the scan gets gritty and my eyes are strained.

 So, the article is actually quoting the US Navy's testings.

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #62 on: February 03, 2008, 05:50:08 PM »
Ah I see.

Is there any way to calculate the Ki-84's actual top speed with the vast knowledge we have on aircraft today?

There must be a database with the Ki-84's dimensions, NACA root/tip, engine specs etc. Now I just have to find them. I cannot rest until I know the Ki-84's true top speed!
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline skaltura

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 13
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #63 on: February 06, 2008, 08:32:44 PM »
Just a note: some info on Nakajima engines, including the Homare, can be had from the SAE paper 881610 "Engine Fuels and Lubrication Systems at Nakajima Aircraft Co. from 1936-1945" by Dr. Nagakawa Ryoichi (Nissan Motor Co. Ltd.) and Mizutani Sotaro (Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd.). I found the copied paper while looking for a replacement plug for my headphones in a drawer!

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #64 on: February 07, 2008, 06:35:22 PM »
haha what a great place to find something helpful. Thanks for the reference.

Another thing we could find out is what other tests were made during the same period as the Ki-84 testing and if these tests produced fantastic results that do not reflect the actual results.
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #65 on: February 11, 2008, 07:35:16 AM »
That particular KI  84 (On the tests) seems to perform closely to a Spit VIII of the era (well, Spit VIII is older) where in those conditions (BurmaIndia) the Mk VIII is recorded as a 420 mph aircraft with ROC to 20K being 5 minutes...
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #66 on: February 11, 2008, 08:08:23 AM »
"can be had from the SAE paper 881610 "Engine Fuels and Lubrication Systems at Nakajima Aircraft Co. from 1936-1945" by Dr. Nagakawa Ryoichi (Nissan Motor Co. Ltd.) and Mizutani Sotaro (Fuji Heavy Industries Ltd.)."

Thats nice info! Where can this document be found?

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #67 on: February 11, 2008, 03:23:14 PM »
Also, gotta know one thing.

I'm finding various claims in different sources: What month in 1944 did the Ki-84 enter service?

Most sources say August, but that's a combat debut date and I'm not sure if it entered service and fought in that same month. Other sources say June and other say as early as April 1944.
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline CPW

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 52
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #68 on: February 12, 2008, 07:55:12 AM »
There's something should be paid attention first.

1. Ha-45 engine was designed for 100 octane fuel, more octane than 100  can't get more power.

2. After 22th Sentai's experimental combat flight at China front, Japanese realized Ki-84 need high octane fuel to make the complicated Ha-45 engine operating well . Later,ki84 units could always receive better fuel(100 in Philippine/92-95 homeland) than other units which used Ki-43/44 or 61(87-91 octane).

3. Ki-84-1a was installed the same engine with ki-84-1b,but early Ha-45-21 rpm was limited(only 1800hp) due to some production problems and safety concerned. That's our 624 km/hr Ki-84-1a. However, early Ki-84 only had one external fuel tank/bomb rack at central fuselage like the famous photo below:

Watching its lower central fuselage and compare to others

4. In light of former imperial army officer's memory,the late full horsepower Ki-84 reached 660km/hr in Japanese official flight test,unfortunately no documents remain.

5. U.S. testing ki84 wasn't full loaded and painted.

Then,choose the truth you want to believe:)
« Last Edit: February 12, 2008, 08:59:22 AM by CPW »

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23048
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #69 on: February 12, 2008, 08:02:07 AM »
Interesting CPW.  660kmph (410mph) is right about where I'd think the absolute fastest the Japanese might have gotten the Ki-84 would be.
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #70 on: February 12, 2008, 10:18:58 AM »
"Then,choose the truth you want to believe"

:p

So many truths around ...can make up my mind...

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."

Offline SgtPappy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1174
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #71 on: February 12, 2008, 02:29:24 PM »
haha, well that's interesting stuff, CPW. Where did you manage to find that information?

I also read somewhere that the Ha-42-21's being produced in wartime were also, like the airframe, of relative poor quality. It was meant to produce extra power but most of the Homare engines were built in such a way that they had to be modified to run with the 100/130 grade octane the U.S. was using.

I could be wrong, I'll look up the source from where I found it.
I am a Spitdweeb

"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of earth... Put out my hand and touched the face of God." -J.G. Magee Jr.

Offline Elfie

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6143
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #72 on: February 12, 2008, 04:53:57 PM »
Quote
1. Ha-45 engine was designed for 100 octane fuel, more octane than 100 can't get more power.


I'm not so sure how accurate that is. Car engines can produce more power w/ higher octane fuel so why couldn't a radial aircraft engine do so as well? Both are internal combustion engines.
Corkyjr on country jumping:
In the end you should be thankful for those players like us who switch to try and help keep things even because our willingness to do so, helps a more selfish, I want it my way player, get to fly his latewar uber ride.

Offline CPW

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 52
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #73 on: February 13, 2008, 12:36:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by SgtPappy
haha, well that's interesting stuff, CPW. Where did you manage to find that information?

I also read somewhere that the Ha-42-21's being produced in wartime were also, like the airframe, of relative poor quality. It was meant to produce extra power but most of the Homare engines were built in such a way that they had to be modified to run with the 100/130 grade octane the U.S. was using.

I could be wrong, I'll look up the source from where I found it.


I bought some books and learned some Japanese:D

Actually from a Japanese military magazine which publicated  in 1950-60s,the most serious problem on ki-84 was landing gear and hadn't described about any engine failure. So, it may solved before war end.

Quote
Originally posted by Elfie
I'm not so sure how accurate that is. Car engines can produce more power w/ higher octane fuel so why couldn't a radial aircraft engine do so as well? Both are internal combustion engines.


I searched for this in Japanese , Chinese and English webs, and they told the same answer.

For instance from IL-2 sturmovik game web:

For the case of the Ki-84 engine , the fact that you use higher octane fuel on it doesn't change anything AFAIK , it's still the same rate of air/fuel mix injected in less than 1 second going in the carburator , same rate of compression ..... it really doesn't change anything because the engine is not designed to accept higher octane fuel , engines need a minimum octane indice , but using a higher octane than what the engine has been designed for is useless , trust me this is for sure  :rofl

link:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/4881000825


----------------------------


Besides,octane too high would cause some problems(from WWII aircraft net):

Problems associated with the use of 150 grade fuel.

150 grade fuel

P-38
Spark plug leading was increased. The extent of this leading was such that plug change was required after approximately 15 hours flying. This conditions was aggravated considerably by low cruising powers used to and from target areas, while trying to get the maximum range possible. It was found, however, that regular periods of high power running for a minute of two in most cases smoothed out any rough running engines unless the cause was other than leading.

P-51
The same type of lead fouling as described in a and b above happened in the case of the P-51 except that is was probably more serious than in either of the other two types. Using 130 grade fuel with 4?cc. of lead, the average operational P-51 could last 5 missions (roughly 25 hours) before the fouling required plug change. With 150 grade fuel containing 6 cc. of lead, 10 to 12 hours, or normally 2 missions, was the average length of time between spark plug changes or cleaning. At various times in the six months of operation of P-51 aircraft on 150 grade fuel many other maintenance difficulties were attributed to the fuel, but final analysis proved that the only real effect of the fuel was the lead fouling. Some units maintained that they had some deteriorations of seals, but this was not borne our throughout the command, nor was there any concrete evidence that it existed in the units.

The excessive fouling of spark plugs usually exhibited itself in roughing up of engines after a couple of hours of low power cruising. Periodic bursts of high power in most cases smoothed the engine out. However, if the engine was allowed to go too long a period without being cleaned out, the accumulation of lead bromide globules successfully withstood any attempts to blow them out. In some instances, long periods of idling while waiting for take-off and a failure to use high power on take off resulted in loss of power during take-off run and in some cases caused complete cutting out with subsequent belly landing. The cases of cutting-out on take-off definitely attributed to excessive fouling were comparatively few, although numerous enough to list it as an effect of the extra lead.

As a result of several months operational use with the fuel, an SOP ?designed to reduce power failures on take-off, leading troubles in flight, and other things which were causing early returns and abortive aircraft ?was published. This is inclosure no. 1. Almost immediately after this section published this SOP practically all of the troubles then existing ceased, although it was necessary to change plugs after each two missions or thereabouts.

P-47
Spark plug fouling was the only maintenance difficulty encountered during the period in which 150 grade fuel was used. Spark plug life was reduced by about 50%, the same low power cruising as described above being the principle cause for the extra fouling. No deleterious effects on diaphragms, fuel hose or any other rubber of synthetic rubber materials were noted.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2008, 02:08:58 AM by CPW »

Offline Charge

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3414
Ki-84 U.S. testing
« Reply #74 on: February 13, 2008, 05:38:00 AM »
Just putting in higher octane gasoline does not really increase power but might in some cases even decrease it.

Using higher octane fuel you can increase supercharger pressure and advance ignition timing. It is another matter how easily this is done in some particular machine. Maybe just changing the pressure regulating spring to a stiffer one and  manually adjusting the distributor timing heads if supercharger can support higher pressure without need to changing it to a bigger one. However some machines may run out of cooling surface so that overheating will destroy the engine if there is no larger radiators installed. Usually it also requires different plugs which are coated with special alloys to withstand increased temperatures or they need to be able to dissipate more heat to the base from the ignition heads so that they do not themselves cause premature detonation.

If the engine is designed ONLY for use of 100 octane and everything is optimized to support only that amount of power and heat (and its dissipation) just putting in higher octane gas and increasing charger pressure is just asking for problems and low serviceability rate.

-C+
"When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a giant meteor hurtling to the earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much screwed no matter what you wish for. Unless of course, it's death by meteorite."