High altitude Bomber performance

[Vinkman]

I have noticed in recent weeks that the Ki-67 can fly significantly higher than the alt specified in the game specs. I was chasing him in a 410 and persued within Icon range for about an hour but could not get closer than 2K. His plane was clearly above me and my 410 maxed out at 30K, where full WEP on Autoclimb produded a climb rate of zero. Yet the Ki-67s were six thousand feet above me, and I could not get up to them. I tried getting level at higher speed, and as I began to get out in front and pulled up slowly (or quickly, I tried everything) the slats popped out, the plane buffetted, slowed, fell behind, and dropped in alt. Yet the charts say there is no way a Ki-67 can out run or outclimb a 410. Here are the charts. So how did that Ki-67 get to 36K? Are the charts wrong?

[Lusche]

I'm curious what the exact altitude and speed of that Ki-67 was?

(Don't say you did not run film at that time  )

[Vinkman]

I'm curious what the exact altitude and speed of that Ki-67 was?

(Don't say you did not run film at that time  )

I have the film, but I'm not at home now. Perhaps I can stop home for lunch and post.

[Lusche]

I have the film, but I'm not at home now. Perhaps I can stop home for lunch and post.

No need to rush it 

[Vinkman]

And a follow up point. Many have disparaged the 410 but I find it to be a great buff killer. For this tour my record against buffs is 19-0. I've only been killed by fighters, except for an A20 they got me low and slow while I was attacking a GV base. But have yet to get killed by a bomber this tour. I even got a few fighters in return.

[Karnak]

What was the loadout condition of the Me410 and Ki-67?  I suspect the stats shown on the website do not involve a 50mm cannon on the Me410 and do involve 100% fuel for the Ki-67.

[Lusche]

What I can say from my bomber tests at this moment: If you take 100% fuel (which ain't that much in the Ki-67 anyway) and 8x100kg bombs, your rate of climb runs close to 0 once you have passed 30k. So the service ceiling in AH and 'real world' match quite well.
I suspect the Ki-67 was already going home, devoid of bombs and having spent most of it's fuel already.

[Wmaker]

So how did that Ki-67 get to 36K? Are the charts wrong?

Because it didn't get to 36k? Have you actually reviewed the altitude of the Ki-67 from your own film?

I've tested the Ki-67 altitude performance and I'm positive that all your film is gonna show is that it wasn't flying at 36k.

[Vinkman]

Because it didn't get to 36k? Have you actually reviewed the altitude of the Ki-67 from your own film?

I've tested the Ki-67 altitude performance and I'm positive that all your film is gonna show is that it wasn't flying at 36k.

yes that's lusche's point. I'll check it after work today. But I was at 30K and the Ki-67 was 2k (icon reading)  directly above me. We'll see what it says.

[Vinkman]

What I can say from my bomber tests at this moment: If you take 100% fuel (which ain't that much in the Ki-67 anyway) and 8x100kg bombs, your rate of climb runs close to 0 once you have passed 30k. So the service ceiling in AH and 'real world' match quite well.
I suspect the Ki-67 was already going home, devoid of bombs and having spent most of it's fuel already.

So are the charts fully loaded? Then does that mean the 410 chart is fully loaded too? Bk5 weighs 1200lbs. Don't know what's considered fully loaded in a 410.

[Wmaker]

yes that's lusche's point. I'll check it after work today. But I was at 30K and the Ki-67 was 2k (icon reading)  directly above me. We'll see what it says.

Well, my point was that why even open a thread like this before reviewing one's own film? Perception of what happened in the MAs can really play tricks to everyone. Film tells what actually happened.

[icepac]

[Wmaker]

(Image removed from quote.)

How is this image relevant to the ceiling of the Ki-67?

[Vinkman]

Well, my point was that why even open a thread like this before reviewing one's own film? Perception of what happened in the MAs can really play tricks to everyone. Film tells what actually happened.

Yes I got lazy. I was flying yesterday when it happened, and didn't want to log out to go to the film viewer and make screen capts etc. I remembered it today and started the post. While not ideal, the question could be answered if someone knows the answer. It doesn't require checking my facts if someone knows that Ki-67 have a 36K ceiling when empty. Or knowing that the charts are "fully loaded" vs empty.


 

[icepac]

How is this image relevant to the ceiling of the Ki-67?

I met him with me at 36,000 feet and he at 34,000 feet.

That picture is where we were after my chasing him for two full sectors and not gaining.