Author Topic: What about D4Y2 Suisei (Judy)? (Read 1642 times)

Mitsu · « **on:** July 24, 2002, 10:13:40 PM »

We got D3A1 Val in V1.10.
It is interesting plane. unbelievably turnable, and good dive-bombsight.
However, this plane is too old for flying in Main Arena, ineffective, and also it is the "Flying Coffin" like a historical fact (Japanese pilots called it so).

So, we want D4Y2 Judy that is successor aircraft to D3A Val. D4Y series aircraft is IJNAF's carrier-based dive bomber that participated actively from the middle of war to the end. This plane was very beautiful, and high-performance bomber.

D4Y2 (Judy 22)

Dimensions:
Span 11.50m
Length 10.22m
Height 3.74m
Wing area 23.6m^2
Aspect ratio 5.60

Powerplant:
1 x Aichi AE1P Atsuta 32 12-cylinder liquid-cooled vee engine
Takeoff power 1,400hp
Normal power 1,340hp at 1,700m / 1,280hp at 5,000m

Weights:
Empty 2,550kg
Gross 3,750kg
Overload (bombing) 4,115kg
Overload (Recon) 4,623kg

Wing loading 158.898kg/m^2
Power loading 2.681kg/m^2

Performance:
Maximum speed 580km/h at 5,250m
Cruising speed 426km/h at 3,000m
Landing speed 145km/h
Climb to 3,000m in 4 minutes 36 seconds
Climb to 5,000m in 7 minutes 40 seconds
Service ceiling 10,700m
Range 1,463km (normal load at bombing mission)
2,389km (overload at bombing mission)
3,604km (overload at recon mission)

Armament:
2 x fuselage-mounted 7.7mm Type-97 machine-guns
1 x rear-firing flexible 7.92mm Type-1 machine-gun (D4Y2) / 1 x rear-firing flexible 13mm Type-2 machine-gun (D4Y2a)

Bomb-load:
Normal 1 x 250kg bomb in internal fuselage bay and 2 x 30kg bombs one under each wing
Overload 1 x 500kg bomb in internal fuselage bay and 2 x 30kg bombs one under each wing

Also, it is air-cooled engined land-based dive bomber though, D4Y3 would be interesting that can carry more bombs and has longer range. Actually it is used for more sorties than D4Y2 in the late of war. Sadly D4Y3 is also often used for kamikaze attack.

D4Y3 (Judy 33)

Dimensions:
Span 11.50m
Length 10.22m
Height 3.74m
Wing area 23.6m^2
Aspect ratio 5.60

Powerplant:
1 x Mitsubishi MK8P Kinsei 62 14-cylinder air-cooled radial engine
Takeoff power 1,560hp
Normal power 1,360hp at 2,100m / 1,190hp at 5,800m

Weights:
Empty 2,500kg
Gross 3,750kg
Overload (bombing) 4,120kg

Wing loading 158.898kg/m^2
Power loading 2.403kg/m^2

Performance:
Maximum speed 561km/h at 5,900m
Cruising speed 370km/h at 3,000m
Climb to 3,000m in 4 minutes 35 seconds
Climb to 6,000m in 9 minutes 18 seconds
Service ceiling 10,500m
Range 1,520km (normal load at bombing mission)
2,890km (overload at bombing mission)

Armament:
2 x fuselage-mounted 7.7mm Type-97 machine-guns
1 x rear-firing flexible 7.92mm Type-1 machine-gun (D4Y3) / 1 x rear-firing flexible 13mm Type-2 machine-gun (D4Y3a)

Bomb-load:
Normal 1 x 250kg or 1 x 500kg bomb in internal fuselage bay and 2 x 30kg bombs one under each wing
Overload 1 x 500kg bomb in internal fuselage bay and 2 x 250kg bombs one under each wing

I remember that HTC did the poll about next carrier-based dive bomber in the MA in V1.09. HTC selected Val this time, but now please give us Judy.

Mitsu · « **Reply #1 on:** July 24, 2002, 10:15:41 PM »

My favorite pic of Judy #1

Mitsu · « **Reply #2 on:** July 24, 2002, 10:16:29 PM »

My favorite pic of Judy #2

Mathman · « **Reply #3 on:** July 25, 2002, 02:35:53 AM »

This is my favorite picture of a Judy:

Mathman · « **Reply #4 on:** July 25, 2002, 02:37:34 AM »

Seriously though, I would like to see the D4Y here at some point. I would also like to see both the B5N and B6N as well. Then we can do early, mid and late war CV battles. Would be fun.

oboe · « **Reply #5 on:** July 25, 2002, 08:43:33 AM »

Ooh Mathman, that was a good one.

I've always wanted to see more late war Japanese planes, and the D4Y certainly ranks right up there.

Most people seem to want to recreate the 1942 Pacific carrier battles though, and if you calculate the pace at which Japanese planes have been introduced to the game, it may well be a very long time before we see the D4Y in AH.

gofaster · « **Reply #6 on:** July 25, 2002, 12:16:31 PM »

Good one, Mathman!

I'd like to see the Judy brought into the planeset. I think it'd be a good balancer to the TBM in the USN vs IJN battles, and would probably get a lot of use in the MA as well.

Mathman · « **Reply #7 on:** July 25, 2002, 01:12:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by oboe
I've always wanted to see more late war Japanese planes, and the D4Y certainly ranks right up there.

Most people seem to want to recreate the 1942 Pacific carrier battles though, and if you calculate the pace at which Japanese planes have been introduced to the game, it may well be a very long time before we see the D4Y in AH.

I think the problem is that people look at history with a little bit of a skewed view. When they look at the carrier battles of 1944, all they see is the USN wiping the IJN out of the sky and under the sea. This makes them believe that any recreation of a late war CV battle would be a lopsided victory for the USN. What made the battles such lopsided victories by the USN was the lack of adequately trained and experienced pilots and inept commanders (compared to the likes of USN admirals like Mitscher). This is where the tables would/could be turned in a recreation of these battles in AH. The pilots and commanders would be better (they have more time "flying" and can learn from the mistakes of the past much easier).

With competent pilots, the IJN side copuld definitely give the USN side a run for its money and has a very definite chance of coming out victorious.

Either that or I just want to recreate the Battle of the Phillipine Sea (aka Marianas Turkey Shoot).

Seriously, I would love to see the Judy introduced, as well as the Kate and Jill.

Sikboy · « **Reply #8 on:** July 25, 2002, 01:15:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by oboe
Most people seem to want to recreate the 1942 Pacific carrier battles though,

Yeah, the 1942 CV duels were the Pacific Equivalent of the BoB in my opinion. I mean, it's the point in the war when the greatest parity was achieved.

However, with that said, HiTech did mention in the Q&A that with a nice base of early war planes now introduced, they would no longer be as focused on early planes, so who knows, maybe the Judy could show up someday.

-Sikboy

brady · « **Reply #9 on:** July 25, 2002, 06:03:10 PM »

Nice base?!, vomits in bucket, ya if ya like Alled stuff it's a nice base. We have 2 Japanese planes from the early war and what like 4 times that many alleid one's! It is certainly a great start and I by no means intend to po po the work that has been done, but it is very dificult to make a decent set up in the CT with the Japanese plane set we have now, hopefully the tide will turn and geting one new Japanese plane a year will change two at least two:)

The Judy is a nice plane and certainly historicaly revelent, I hope for Mitsu's sake he get's his dream ride.

I howeaver hope to get the ultimate Japanese strike plane from the 44/45 time perioud, and one that the MA gould use as well as the CT. The B7A Rysuei.

Two 20mm Type 99MK 2 cannons in the wings.
One 13mm type 2 Machine gun in the rear.
One 1,764 pound torpedo.
or 1, 764 pounds of bombs.
Manuaverabality equile to that of the A6M fighter.

Preformance:
352mph at 21, 490 ft.
13, 125ft in 6min and 55 sec.

Now with all do respect to Mitsu, Why would you if you could, pick a Judy over a Grace if you were in the hanger and looking at the clipboard. Or rather when you pulled up on that guyes six and were trying to wory him to death with those 7mm bb's, when you could be watching him explode as you pumped him full of 20mm.

Pic, curitsy of Mitsu:

oboe · « **Reply #10 on:** July 25, 2002, 06:30:41 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mathman
I think the problem is that people look at history with a little bit of a skewed view. When they look at the carrier battles of 1944, all they see is the USN wiping the IJN out of the sky and under the sea. This makes them believe that any recreation of a late war CV battle would be a lopsided victory for the USN. What made the battles such lopsided victories by the USN was the lack of adequately trained and experienced pilots and inept commanders (compared to the likes of USN admirals like Mitscher). This is where the tables would/could be turned in a recreation of these battles in AH. The pilots and commanders would be better (they have more time "flying" and can learn from the mistakes of the past much easier).

With competent pilots, the IJN side copuld definitely give the USN side a run for its money and has a very definite chance of coming out victorious.

I think you are absolutely right, Mathman. I think in AH, the full 1944 Japanese planeset could hold its own very well against all comers.

BUG_EAF322 · « **Reply #11 on:** July 25, 2002, 06:43:39 PM »

The japanese avenger nice pics

AdmRose · « **Reply #12 on:** July 26, 2002, 01:50:15 AM »

I don't care what it is! Put it in, and I'll be sure to shoot it out of the sky!

Mitsu · « **Reply #13 on:** July 27, 2002, 05:55:48 AM »

Damn nice photo Math.

whgates3 · « **Reply #14 on:** July 27, 2002, 03:04:10 PM »

I'd love to see the Betty in AH - fast bomber w/ good high alt capability, tordonuts & 20mm in tail and top - attacking a Betty from high 6 you would be facing 6 x 20mm