P1Y Ginga

[AHTbolt]

very interesting bomber

Manufacturer   Yokosuka Naval Air Technical Arsenal
Primary Role   Horizontal Bomber
Maiden Flight   1 August 1943

The P1Y Ginga ("Galaxy") Navy Type 11 medium bombers were twin-engine land-based aircraft designed for the Japanese Navy as replacements for the G4M bombers. The design was complex, which caused problems with manufacturing and servicing on the front lines. 97 night fighter variants, P1Y2-S Kyokko ("Aurora") were also built, but many of them were reverted to the standard bomber configuration due to poor performance in that role. During the production life of the design, 1,002 were built by Nakajima Aircraft Company.

The Allied code name for the design was "Frances".

SPECIFICATIONS

P1Y1a Ginga
Machinery   Two Nakajima HK9C Homare 12 radial engine rated at 1,825hp each
Armament   1x20mm nose Type 99 cannon, 1x13mm tail Type 2 machine gun, 1,000kg of bombs or 1x800kg torpedo
Span   9.99 m
Length   9.99 m
Height   4.30 m
Wing Area   55.00 mē
Weight, Empty   7,265 kg
Weight, Loaded   13,500 kg
Speed, Maximum   547 km/h
Service Ceiling   9,400 m
Range, Maximum   5,370 km

P1Y2-S Kyokko
Machinery   Two Mitsubishi MK4T-A Kasei 25a radial engine rated at 1,850hp each
Armament   2x20mm nose Type 99 cannon, 1x20mm tail Type 2 cannon, 1,000kg of bombs or 1x800kg torpedo
Span   9.99 m
Length   9.99 m
Height   4.30 m
Wing Area   55.00 mē
Weight, Empty   7,265 kg
Weight, Loaded   13,500 kg
Speed, Maximum   547 km/h
Service Ceiling   9,400 m
Range, Maximum   5,370 km

[Karnak]

It is surprisingly small when you see pictures of it with something to use as scale.  In AH it would probably be comparable to the Ki-67.  Perhaps a bit faster, tougher and a bit better bomb load but less firepower.

[B-17]

You know, I've never heard of a vertical bomber... Or a diagonal bomber...

[Karnak]

A "vertical or diagonal bomber" would be a dive bomber, silly.

[Karnak]

Another note I just recalled.  I am pretty sure it could carry larger bombs that the Ki-67 as well.  I recall seeing loadout options for the P1Y1 of two 500kg bombs, and that would make it pretty useful for a Japanese bomber, being able to drop two hangars with a formation.

[bangsbox]

A "vertical or diagonal bomber" would be a dive bomber, silly.

i only fly parallelogram bombers   

[jeffdn]

Just wanted to give this a bump to restart discussion, as it looks like an interesting addition to the bomber lineup and the stable of Japanese aircraft.

[Karnak]

There are many aircraft that ought to be added first, but I would use this one for sure and with 1002 built it has enough to warrant inclusion.

[jeffdn]

There are many aircraft that ought to be added first, but I would use this one for sure and with 1002 built it has enough to warrant inclusion.

Agreed. There are many, many medium bombers from several countries that should be added, in my opinion. Our current bomber lineup is strong for the Americans, but not so much for the other countries.

[Karnak]

If added, the P1Y1 would be my main hangar smasher.  Currently none of the bombers I favor are really good at hangar smashing because they lack 1000lb class bombs.

[Slade]

Looks like a great addition.  +1

[Rino]

     Trying to figure out how the Ginga and Kyokko can weigh the same when the former has only one
20mm and one 12.7mm as opposed to three 20mm cannon for the Kyokko.  

[HighTone]

Would love for the Ginga to be added, be honestly I think the next Japanese Army bomber I would like to see would be the  Ki-49.

We kind of need something between the Betty and Peggy....well year wise anyway.


But I still can't help but say yea....

+1 P1Y

[Krusty]

Before you cite 1000 built, "oh it should be in" Karnak, you should look up its combat record. Very few used. They were building and stockpiling them for use as kamikaze against a homeland invasion, as they did with a number of types at the end of the war.

In actual conventional combat, its service record is skimpier than the Ta152. It was designed in 1940, didn't see its first flight til 1943, and didn't see any action until spring of 1945 (yes, last 6 months of the war).

About 500 of the total built were built before the Japanese Navy ever accepted delivery of any of them. It was wholly unreliable as an airplane and many of them sat because they were unacceptable for use. The Homare 12 engines were completely unusable, and almost NEVER developed full power during its use on this airframe. As a result, performance at altitude was far below what was expected. 100 airframes were modified to be a night-fighter fleet (its hypothetical top speed was impressive enough to warrant the effort) but almost all of the night fighters were so unsatisfactory that the guns were removed and they were restored to standard configuration and put back into the "bomber" role.

Even though they were intended as bombers, even some of their earliest combat encounters were kamikaze attacks by the P1Y.

As far as worthiness for inclusion into AH goes, it's a major "no"... The Ki-67 was actually based on this airframe, and saw much more service than this one did.

Just as an interesting link: Google book preview with some comments on the P1Y Ginga:
http://books.google.com/books?id=ma1teOqjMNQC&pg=PA224&lpg=PA224&dq=p1y+ginga+combat&source=bl&ots=mrI4AhdTNv&sig=Q3z3efM9N6kaGy_qgdQ2YEk011g&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lyT3Ub6fL8HayAHE6IBA&ved=0CCAQ6AEwAjgU#v=onepage&q=p1y%20ginga%20combat&f=false

[Lusche]

The book you are presenting in that link is contradicting you.