Author Topic: So I want Terrible Frank (Ki-84). (Read 2562 times)

Spritle · « **Reply #75 on:** April 18, 2002, 05:52:32 PM »

Sikboy,

Given the authors constraints about not taking notes one has to ask themselves this question. Without taking notes would you actually put in your account of an interview terms like crap, and third rate if you felt the interviewee had just a ho-hum attitude towards the aircraft in question? No more than likely Saki really thought the George was a bad aircraft. I would imagine based on the detail of the rest of the interview that if Saki had a beef with the engine or the turning ability or climbing ability or just one particular aspect of the George then he would have said as much. I get the impression he thought the George was a poor aircraft and not just in one characteristic.

I would like the Ki-84 modeled too, but I think it would be unfair to limit the top end to the 388 mph which has already been established as a prototype aircraft with an engine that was rated at least 100 hp less than the production aircraft.

By the way the second set of figures that I quoted are out of the development history of the type in Green & Swanborough 1977.

I also have a source quoting hand written captured documents that list the speeds ranging from 409 to 430.

I'm just concerned that the 388 speed is being accepted as the end all be all in the Frank top end. I think it's pretty clear that it wasn't. Now more than likely the 427 mph test from the captured Clark Field aircraft is a little optimistic, but I think 388 is completely pessimistic.

Spritle

oboe · « **Reply #76 on:** April 18, 2002, 06:04:44 PM »

You guys are talking like the Frank is really coming. Do you know
something I don't know?

FDutchmn · « **Reply #77 on:** April 18, 2002, 06:09:30 PM »

Gentlemen,

My two cents on this last bit of discussion...

Aces High is a game, and it models under the best conditions the aircraft is in. Under the current modelling concept, other factors like production reliabilities, fuel octane, etc is not considered because this is not a total re-enactment of what happened in the war.

If we are to argue that these other factors should be considered, then the designers at HTC should consider them as parameters that can be added into the arena settings, for example for scenario purposes.

FDutchmn · « **Reply #78 on:** April 18, 2002, 06:29:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by J_A_B
Yes, the Kesmoids took into account which data set they used. However, there reasons for using the best possible data had little to do with WW2 and everything to do with the fact that the Ki-84 was added to AW because a Japanese firm paid Kesmai to add Japanese aircraft to AW. HTC is not affected by such "political" situations and so it's safe to assume that when the Ki-84 is added to AH, it'll better reflect its WW2 counterpart.

J_A_B,

Excuse me, I find this comment funny. Are you suggesting that the Japanese firm who sponsored Kesmai actually asked or vaguely or even remotely implied to Kesmai to sup up the Ki-84 so it has better performance? Or did Kesmai actually felt obliged to sup up the Ki-84?

Nahhhhh. True, a Japanese firm did sponsor, but I believe Kesmai was actually left to its own devices to find the necessary and comparable data they saw fit.

Sikboy · « **Reply #79 on:** April 18, 2002, 08:08:19 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FDutchmn

Aces High is a game, and it models under the best conditions the aircraft is in. Under the current modelling concept, other factors like production reliabilities, fuel octane, etc is not considered...

I don't know that. As I mentioned before, if the Ki-61, N1K2, or any other plane is modeled after the manufacturers data, it WOULD be modelling factors like fuel octane.

Spritle,

I think you and I are closer to agreement than it appears. I'm not simply advocating the 388mph data. Rather, I'm advocating a consistant modeling practice. If they model this bird on the "highest performance data recorded" I think that will be "unfair" to other planes that have been modeled after more commonly accepted data sources. There is already a long line of people who are convinced that they have data showing thier favorite plane is too slow. I guess that it's kinda pointless to argue what should be modelled. Since no matter what the final numbers are, we're going to argue about them when they come out.

Oh, and no, we don't know that the Frank is coming to AH. Some of us would like to see it. This discussion probably will have no effect on its being modelled or not, but at least we keep making noise without begging for it

-Sikboy

FDutchmn · « **Reply #80 on:** April 18, 2002, 08:30:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy

If they model this bird on the "highest performance data recorded" I think that will be "unfair" to other planes that have been modeled after more commonly accepted data sources.

Well, as you pointed out, it is an endless discussion. But I do not think it is unfair in anyway as you feel because the commonly accepted data for the other planes is considered the best they do. Oh btw, I didn't say "highest performance data recorded". Just under the best conditions.

If there are people who think otherwise as you mentioned, let them make their case.

Sikboy · « **Reply #81 on:** April 18, 2002, 08:42:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by FDutchmn

Oh btw, I didn't say "highest performance data recorded". Just under the best conditions.

Um... oh, btw, I didn't say you did.

Karnak · « **Reply #82 on:** April 18, 2002, 09:13:24 PM »

FDutchmn,

You said:

Quote

Aces High is a game, and it models under the best conditions the aircraft is in. Under the current modelling concept, other factors like production reliabilities, fuel octane, etc is not considered because this is not a total re-enactment of what happened in the war.

This is not entirely true. The A6M5b, Ki-61-I-KAIc, Ki-67 and N1K2-J are all modeled with the performance given by the inferior Japanese fuel. Even given that handicap look at what a monster the N1K2-J is. The Ki-84 is better.

Bring on the Ki-84-Ia Hayate!

(Actually, given the screenies today, bring on the A6M2 Zero, Ki-44-IIb Shoki and B6N2 Tenzan)

FDutchmn · « **Reply #83 on:** April 18, 2002, 09:40:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
The A6M5b, Ki-61-I-KAIc, Ki-67 and N1K2-J are all modeled with the performance given by the inferior Japanese fuel.

Hiya Karnak,

Oh my this is something new to me... where can I get hold of this information?

Mitsu · « **Reply #84 on:** April 19, 2002, 01:23:51 AM »

Yeah...Ki-44 is not released in other sims yet.
It would be like Japanese Fw190.

-Mitsu

Sikboy · « **Reply #85 on:** April 19, 2002, 07:10:14 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak

This is not entirely true. The A6M5b, Ki-61-I-KAIc, Ki-67 and N1K2-J are all modeled with the performance given by the inferior Japanese fuel.

Hmmm, sounds so familiar

Thank you Karnak for stringing the words together and making them easy to understand lol.

~~-Sikboy~~

FDutchmn · « **Reply #86 on:** April 19, 2002, 09:46:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Sikboy

Hmmm, sounds so familiar

Thank you Karnak for stringing the words together and making them easy to understand lol.

~~-Sikboy~~

~~well this is good but can I refer to something to confirm this is so? (just an honest question... not a troll)~~

Spritle · « **Reply #87 on:** April 19, 2002, 09:52:14 AM »

Sikboy,

I've felt all along that we were pretty close to agreement on the Ki-84 subject. My personal belief is that the top speed should be somewhere between the 388 figure and the 427 figure, but probably closer to 388. I would be happy with a 395-400 figure as the final say in the mater, but I don't have a say in the mater.

Another somewhat interesting topic is which version should be modeled? The Ki-84 1a with 2x20mm & 2x12.7mm or the Ki-84 1b with 4x20mm? Historically probably the 1a would be the way to go, but the 1b would a monster. Now the 1c with 2x20mm & 2x30mm would be a poor choice just because very few were made. In fact I can't find any production numbers on this particular varient.

Spritle

Sikboy · « **Reply #88 on:** April 19, 2002, 10:03:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by FDutchmn

well this is good but can I refer to something to confirm this is so? (just an honest question... not a troll)

It can't be confirmed because we don't know what data HTC uses for the other models. But if the HTC models of the Japanese Manufacturers data, they would have been using Japanese fuel. If, on the other hand, HTC models after post war american tests using high high octain gas, then one would assume that they would continue this policy with the Frank. The best way to confirm this would be to get a few data samples from either source and compare them to HTCs published data for each airframe.

-Sikboy

gofaster · « **Reply #89 on:** April 19, 2002, 10:25:56 AM »

I wouldn't introduce the Ki-84 unless there was some way to balance it out, either with a small ammo load or some sort of performance inhibitor, and since I'm not a programmer, I can't make any suggestions about which way to go.

When I flew AW (and AW2, and AW3, and AW ME) in FR Pac, the Ki-84 pretty much was the #1 choice of ride because it combined the best parts of a fighter: speed and maneuverability with a flight model that was easy to fly. The Corsair and Hellcat were 2nd and 3rd, with the P-38 and Niki close behind. It wasn't unusual for 2 or 3 Kis to be going into a furball against 2 or 3 other Kis, with maybe a Niki or Corsair thrown into the mix. It got kind of old, but the Ki was just such a superplane that us mediocre pilots had to rely on it just to be competitive.

One of the things I like about AH is that its library of planes is pretty well set up so that no one type dominates the arena. I fly the Spit IX and P-51D (depending on what I want to do that night), and its nice to be able to fight against LAGGS, Niks, Hellcats, Corsairs, and FWs on any given flight. Sure, all of those planes may be better than the others in the library, but at least its a variety. In AW FR Euro it was mostly Spits, FWs, and Mustangs. In AW FR Pac it was Ki-s, Corsairs, and Hellcats.

What I'd really like to see is a P-40 of some sort. And a P-61.