Best Japanese Fighter

[Samm]

Best Japanese fighter, ki83 . Do american planes that are fielded by japan count ?

[-ammo-]

Originally posted by Hristo
Had to be Ki84. It has something that N1K doesn't - speed.

Something else it had, problems that kept it grounded quite often.

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by -=Silo=-


Ki-84 had Excellent fuel economy and range. It was also a very clean airframe with a very good horsepower-weight ratio. Sitting duck? Hardly.

Sitting duck, indeed. Once the Ki loses its E and needed to dive out, it was very much a sitting duck. At least it was for me, both when I flew it and against it. I did not say it was a bad plane, in fact, I like it, but its horsepower doesn't allow it to spiral climb with the US planes. If you do, you will hang on your prop, nose over, and hover.

Please find the sourcee citing the Ki-84 fuel economy, the books I read report something vastly different. Thanks!

[oboe]

Originally posted by Red Tail 444
... but its horsepower doesn't allow it to spiral climb with the US planes. If you do, you will hang on your prop, nose over, and hover...
 

This sounds more like an FM problem than a deficiency of the real life aircraft?

Seems to me, comparing available specs, the Ki.84 should have no problem spiral climbing against US aircraft.

[-=Silo=-]

Originally posted by Red Tail 444


Sitting duck, indeed. Once the Ki loses its E and needed to dive out, it was very much a sitting duck. At least it was for me, both when I flew it and against it. I did not say it was a bad plane, in fact, I like it, but its horsepower doesn't allow it to spiral climb with the US planes. If you do, you will hang on your prop, nose over, and hover.

Please find the sourcee citing the Ki-84 fuel economy, the books I read report something vastly different. Thanks!

Ki-84-Ib had a standard operational range of 1, 053 miles.
A6M2: 1,160 miles.
N1K2-J: 1,066 miles.
----
P-38L: 1,100 miles.
P-47D: 1,030 miles.
P-51D: 1,300 miles.
----

The ranges on the japanese planes comes from Rene Francillion's "Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War"

The American planes I threw in for comparison. That info I grabbed off the web, but they seem good enough to illustrate the point.

The Ki-84 has a powerloading of 4 lbs/hp and I suspect has a cleaner airframe than the N1K2-J (which uses the same engine). The N1K2-J has a powerloading of 4.4 lbs/hp.

-----

Which sim have you flown the Ki-84 in before? Maybe they modelled the 1800hp engine and not the 2000hp

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by -=Silo=-

Which sim have you flown the Ki-84 in before? Maybe they modelled the 1800hp engine and not the 2000hp

Very possible they modeled the 1800hp...AW did not specify which engine was modeled, if they did, I missed it.

I flew in FR Air Warrior, and I also read, (in "Black Sheep", I think, or maybe it was Barret Tillman, "Corsair...")

"Given equal e states, the only way a corsair can outrun trailing ki-84's with a slight climb and wep, if the corsair is at max level speed at the time." I am at work right now, and the books I read are, "on loan," but I also have the Aiwarrior 2 plane manual, which should be consistent with original design specs...

I'll check up on it

Gainsie

[DblTrubl]

Finding reliable specs on Japanese planes can be difficult as there is a lot of conflicting info out there, at least in my experience. Check three different sources and you're likely to find three completely different sets of numbers.

One of the most thorough and well documented sources I've found online is the series of articles written by Joe Baugher. From his article on the Ki-84:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specification of Nakajima Ki-84-1a:

Engine: One Army Type 4 eighteen-cylinder air-cooled radial (Nakajima Ha-45). The following engine models were used:
[Ha-45]11 rated at 1800 hp for takeoff and 1650 hp at 6560 feet.
[Ha-45]12 rated at 1825 hp for takeoff and 1670 hp at 7875 feet.
[Ha-45]21 rated at 1990 hp for takeoff and 1850 hp at 5740 feet.
[Ha-45]23 rated at 1900 hp for takeoff and 1670 hp at 4725 feet.

Performance (early production):
Maximum speed 392 mph at 20,080 feet, cruising speed 277 mph.
An altitude of 16,405 feet could be reached in 5 minutes 54 seconds.
An altitude of 26,240 feet could be attained in 11 minutes 40 seconds.
Service ceiling 34,450 feet.
Normal range 1053 miles, maximum range 1347 miles.

Weights: 5864 pounds empty, 7955 pounds loaded, 8576 pounds maximum.

Dimensions: Wingspan 36 feet 10 7/16 inches, length 32 feet 6 9/16 inches, height 11 feet 1 1/4 inches, wing area 226.04 square feet.

Armament: Two fuselage mounted 12.7-mm Type 1 (Ho-103) machine guns and two wing-mounted 20-mm Ho-5 cannon (Ki-84-Ia).
Two fuselage-mounted 20-mm Ho-5 cannon and two wing-mounted 20-mm Ho-5 cannon (Ki-84-Ib).
Two fuselage-mounted 20-mm Ho-5 cannon and two wing-mounted 30-mm Ho-105 cannon (Ki-84-Ic).
External stores included two 551-pound bombs or two 44-Imp gallon (200 litre) drop tanks.

Sources:
The Nakajima Ki-84, Rene J. Francillon, Aircraft in Profile, 1969.
Famous Fighters of the Second World War, Second Series, William Green, Doubleday, 1967.
Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War, Rene J. Francillon, Naval Institute Press, 1979.
War Planes of the Second World War, Fighters, William Green, Doubleday, 1964.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Judging the performance of a plane by its flight model in AW(or any other sim) isn't the best way to get a picture of its real life capabilities. While it's possible that a given FM may be very close to a planes actual performance, it's just as possible that there could be large errors or intentional "game play" tweaks built in to the FM. It just depends on who is doing the modelling and how good their information is.

That being said, we could draw some conclusions on how the Ki-84 might perform in AH by looking at the N1K2-J. From Baughers article on the N1K:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specification of the Kawanishi N1K2-J Shiden Kai:

One Nakajima NK9H Homare 21 eighteen-cylinder air-cooled radial rated at 1990 hp for takeoff, 1825 hp at 5740 feet, 1625 hp at 20,015 feet.

Performance: Maximum speed 369 mph at 19,355 feet, 359 mph at 9840 feet.
Cruising speed 230 mph at 9845 feet, service ceiling 35,300 feet cruising speed 230 mph at 6600 feet.
Climb to 19,685 feet in 7 minutes 22 seconds.
Normal range 1066 miles at 219 mph at 9840 feet, maximum range 1488 miles with 88 Imp. gall. drop tank.

Weights: 5858 pounds empty, 8818 pounds loaded, 10,714 pounds maximum loaded.

Dimensions: wingspan 39 feet 4 7/16 inches, length 30 feet 7 29/32 inches, height 12 feet 11 29/32 inches, wing area 252.95 square feet.

Armament: Four 20-mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon in the wings. Two 551-pound bombs or one 88 Imp. gall. drop tank could be carried externally.

Sources:
Famous Fighters of the Second World War, William Green, Doubleday, 1967.
Warplanes of the Second World War, Volume III, William Green, Doubleday, 1964.
Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War, Rene J. Francillon, Naval Institute Press, 1979.
Japanese Fighter by George! Robert Mikesh, Wings, April 1995.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If we compare the N1K2-J to the Ha-45 model 21 powered Ki-84, (unless I'm mistaken the Ha-45/21 is basically the army version of the same NK9H Homare 21 in the N1K2, please correct me if I'm wrong. In any case, rated power is nearly identical.) we get these numbers:

Power loading(normal loaded weight at SL):
N1K2: 4.43 lb/hp
Ki-84: 3.98 lb/hp

Wing loading:
N1K2: 34.86 lb/sq.ft
Ki-84: 35.19 lb/sq.ft

This suggests that the Ki-84 would climb and accelerate a little better than the N1K (which is no slouch in those categories) while the N1K would have a slight edge in sustained turning ability.

There have been charts posted here recently that showed a SL speed of about 350mph for the Ki-84. If those are accurate, then it is approximately 20mph faster than the N1K2 on the deck, as well as at 20k. I would guess it holds a similar advantage at most altitudes.

So...a cannon armed plane that is 20mph faster than an N1K, climbs and accels better, and turns nearly as well. Sounds yummy!! unless it's on yer 6

[Red Tail 444]

Originally posted by DblTrubl
it's just as possible that there could be large errors or intentional "game play" tweaks built in to the FM. It just depends on who is doing the modelling...

Good point. The AW FM deliberately undermodeled the PJ in the arenas. Since I am too young to have flown in the war, sims are my only "real life" point of reference. As for me, my experience has been the Ki was not a threat in the vertical, but running was not an option, and neither was a TnB affair.

When I saw one, the fight was on!

I wouldn't mind seeing the Ki in here anyway, we need more IJAAF representation, anyway.

Gainsie

[whgates3]

Originally posted by -=Silo=-



Ki-84-Ib had a standard operational range of 1, 053 miles.
A6M2: 1,160 miles.
N1K2-J: 1,066 miles.
----
P-38L: 1,100 miles.
P-47D: 1,030 miles.
P-51D: 1,300 miles.
----

The ranges on the japanese planes comes from Rene Francillion's "Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War"

The American planes I threw in for comparison. That info I grabbed off the web, but they seem good enough to illustrate the point.

The Ki-84 has a powerloading of 4 lbs/hp and I suspect has a cleaner airframe than the N1K2-J (which uses the same engine). The N1K2-J has a powerloading of 4.4 lbs/hp.

-----

Which sim have you flown the Ki-84 in before? Maybe they modelled the 1800hp engine and not the 2000hp

only one of those planes could land on a carrier

[poppysead]

I hear alot about manuverability, The fact is after the f4f4 America realised that the dominant virtue in combat is SPEED, followd closely by alt , dive speed, etc., as soon as the Hellcat was introduced the Japanese navy was all tied up, To think of it now it was actualy rather stupid for the Japanese to continue fielding an older more manuverable (yet slower) aircraft. The tactics bare whitness to the facts. I suppose that if US pilots hadnt boom and zoomed then we'ed be speaking esperonto or somthing by now.Anyway best Jap fighter? probably Ki-84, and I always wonderd why the Japs didnt slap some better landing gear and a tail hook on a couple and use em on carrier's., not trying to tick anybody off but if you wonna test it get online in a Zeke and try fighting, then get in a nik,,, big diffrence if you know how to retain energy. weel mommy's calling gotta go cya.

[-=Silo=-]

Originally posted by poppysead
I hear alot about manuverability, The fact is after the f4f4 America realised that the dominant virtue in combat is SPEED, followd closely by alt , dive speed, etc., as soon as the Hellcat was introduced the Japanese navy was all tied up, To think of it now it was actualy rather stupid for the Japanese to continue fielding an older more manuverable (yet slower) aircraft. The tactics bare whitness to the facts. I suppose that if US pilots hadnt boom and zoomed then we'ed be speaking esperonto or somthing by now.Anyway best Jap fighter? probably Ki-84, and I always wonderd why the Japs didnt slap some better landing gear and a tail hook on a couple and use em on carrier's., not trying to tick anybody off but if you wonna test it get online in a Zeke and try fighting, then get in a nik,,, big diffrence if you know how to retain energy. weel mommy's calling gotta go cya.

Politics is a funny thing isn't it?

The designer of the Zero wanted to [a] Upgrade the engine to get speed = to the Hellcat and also more armor and such, but his request was denied! Push the A7M into service well before the end of the war. Again, he was denied. Beaurocracy at its finest!!

The Japanese Army Air Force did a good job in keeping up with the times. The Ki-43 was developed concurrently with the Ki-44. A turner and a super E fighter.  They also developed the Ki-61. While not as good a performer as the Ki-44, it did have range (which is important for PAC fighting). Then the next big thing was the Ki-84 which was a superb design that combined speed w/ turning ability.

The Army did well pushing new designs. The Navy always seemed a step behind. Though the J2M was a really nice design IMO.

[Mitsu]

I've read my Ki-84 books again...

About Ki-84's impression, Japanese test pilot said "The feeling of this plane is like a Ki-43, which increased engine power".

Also US tested Ki-84 and rated it "Maneuverablity is better than Spitfire".

Attribute some factors of these good ratings to the design of main wings, flaps, and tail.

The Swept-forward wing effected good stall capability.

The "Butterfly" Type Combat Fowler Flaps boosted up Ki-84's maneuverability.

The forwarded horizontal stabilizers generated excellent yaw moment.

I think that these excellent designs are crown of Nakajima's technology which learned from Ki-43 and Ki-44.

I don't know when HTC releases Ki-84, but it will be "Terrible Frank".

sorry for my poor english...

[GRUNHERZ]

Mitsu your english is excellent as opposed to excerrent which is something few native Japanese speakers seem to catch in English.

[Mitsu]

Originally posted by poppysead
I hear alot about manuverability, The fact is after the f4f4 America realised that the dominant virtue in combat is SPEED, followd closely by alt , dive speed, etc...

From middle war to late war, air to air combat tactics goes to
BnZ, but maneuverability is still important in the furball.

[whgates3]

a lot of F4Fs (& P40s, Hurricanes & British Brewsters) were sent to the bottom of the Pacific before B`n Z & Thatch weave tactics were deveolped.  Zeke was the best plane in it's day(unfortunately for the IJN that day ended mid '42)