Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Mitsu on June 08, 2004, 08:45:30 PM
-
(http://park1.wakwak.com/~mitsu/ki100.png)
(http://park1.wakwak.com/~mitsu/ki100_59sentai.jpg)
-
ok which variant is that one! :D
-
That is the Ki-100-I-Otsu (which has bubble canopy).
-
That is true. It can be done easier, but the question I'd have is why?
It has a top speed of 336mph. For a 1945 fighter that is useless. AH renders the Ki-100's strongpoint, moot. It was reliable and that meant a lot in 1945 Japan. Here we have perfectly reliable N1K2-Js, which out perfrom the Ki100 in practically every way. The Ki-61 is better in most ways.
I'd like to see a Ki-100 eventually, but it does nothing to address the current imbalance between the 1944/45 US and Japanese aircraft.
AH2 should make adding new aircraft easier and I'd like one of the first to be the Ki-84.
-
Karnak, Ki-100's top speed is 360mph at 19685ft.
BTW I found my very old Ki-100 thread (http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=64188) ...
I posted Ki-100 spec on it. check it out
-
I've read references to the K-100 as Japan's finest fighter type of the war, even better than the Ki-84 or N1K2. I assume it must have made up in maneuverability what it lacked in blazing speed.
-
Why do we want this fighter for Japan? It preformed worse than all the Ki-61's(slower than all of them and climbed worse than some and at best as good as the rest), I would much rather have an Early War Ki-61 Varient. It was also not at all as good as a Ki-84.
A Early model Ki-61, would be easer to do and preform better, and fit scenarious a lot better. The Ki-100 would require almost as much work as a compleatly new Fighter model, in the short run I would rather see a Ki-84.
The Ki-100 is not all on my short term wish list for Japan, it will not help in balance issues in any way.
-
It out-performed Ki-61 every way, also Major Aramaki said after he flew each ZEKE types and Ki-100, "Compared to ZEKE 52, Ki-100 had docile characteristics, it was better aircraft."
-
Mitsu, My Francillion compleatly contradicts your statement, it show compleatly the oppset.
............................. ...
My Short term Wishlist for Japanese planes is:
Judy
Ki-61-Ib
Ki-84
A6M3
The Short term list is inteneded to give the most bang for the buck and make it easer for HTC to do, hince the two varients, both of which would realy help in the CT and in events to adress playbalance issue so common to PAC set ups. The Judy fills the mid to late war atack/dive bomber nich nicely and it's abaility to cary a 500KG bomb for short flights will help again adress playbalance issues. The Ki-84 is simply a must for the MA and will defentaly help in late war PAC set ups for the CT and events.
............................
Long Term would add the :
Betty, Nell, or Ki-21 (any one would do)
Emily
.............................
Eveunatialy:
P1Y1
Ki-44
Grace
Jack
Ect....
............................. ...
Mitsu, it is a cool plane, heck anything Japanese is in my book:). It is just not going to offer anything new preformance wise for Japan, and Japan sorely neads a good preformer or two, all the planes on my short term list are inteneded to give a preformance/capabality boost to the Japanese plane sets for various time frames and set up's.
-
What is Francillion compleatly?
-
Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War by Rene J. Francillon.
He lists preformance stats for all Japanese planes and gives detailed descriptions of their designe and brief descriptions of their operation histories.
When I compare the Ki-100 to the Ki-61 I see that the planes are close preformance wise, with the Ki-100 being slower on avaeage and psoosesing a generaly pore rate of climb (depending on modle your looking at).
The Ki-61-Ib is the best climber of all models.
-
Ki-61-Ib: 5m 31 sec. to 5,000M, 368 MPH @ 15,945 ft.
Ki-61-1 KAIc: 7 min to 5,000M, 366 MPH @ 13,980 ft
Ki-61-II KAIa: 6 min to 5,000M, 379 MPH @ 19,685 ft
Ki-100-I: 6min to 5,000M, 360 MPH @ 19,685 ft
-
It seems you deny Japanese WWII books.
It is obsolete plane at top speed in '45. I agree with that.
But it was TnBer.
IJAAF pilots appreciated the performance of Ki-100.
Do you know how US military reported the first contact of Ki-100? It was the same as N1K2's one.
Also, P-51 pilot said "we could fight against Ki-61 with drop tank having, but should not fight against Ki-100 with DT.
It's very dangerous".
I believe it fits in Aces High, it will be fun fighter.
-
BTW Ki-61-1-Tei's (Ki-61-1-KAIc) top speed is 347mph (other source shows 360mph) at 16400ft (5000m).
-
I dont mean to deny them Mitsu, I do beelave it would be a fun fighter, but as Karnak mentioned reliabality issues are not a factor in AH and in the short term I would rather see Japan get a beter preformer(ki-84), and a simple varient(ki-61-Ib), then later add this plane. The Ki-100 is in a nut shell a beter handeling Ki-61.
You all notice we have the worst preforming Ki-61 in AH presently.
-
Pyro mentioned that they'd want to try and do variants of existing aircraft as well as new aircraft eventually. Wouldn't the Ki100 be a variant of the Ki61 with the addition of the radial engine instead of the DB? I guess it would be easier to model than doing a completely new plane?
-
Come on Brady at least a Ki-43 instead of a Ki-21 for early war variant :D give the IJAAF a fighting chance eh?
-
Mitsu,
The thing that the Japanese planeset simply cannot do anything about right now is speed. Even the Ki-84 won't completely fix that, but it will substatially narrow the gap. The Ki-100 is probably a fun fighter, but it is slower than the N1K2-J and was built in even fewer numbers, all in 1945.
The Ki-84 entered service before the P-51D and was built in huge numbers by Japanese standards. The Ki-84 will actually give the Japanese an aircraft useable in 1944 scenarios that will change the way the USN and USAAF have to fly. Right now they can be incredibly sloppy in their tactics because they have so much of a speed advantage that the Japanese really can't do anything about them.
-
IMHO we need the Ki-44, Ki-43, and Ki-84 before we go for the rare and probably disappointing Ki-100.
The Ki-44 would be my first choice, it would give the Jap planeset a much needed BnZ plane.
ra
-
I used to realy think the Ki-44 was the way to go for an early war climber for Japan, but the Ki-61-Ib actualy out climbs it, for the early war perioud, handels better than it would and has a better gun package, when you get to mid war a bit later your looking at overlap with the Ki-84 and it is way better than a Ki-44.
Dont get me wrong I realy want them all:), I m just trying to be selective in what I lobby for in the short run, so we get some stuff to fill the gaps as quickely and as easly for HTC to do as is posable.
-
I'd still like to see the Ki-44-IIb, with the gun options for the IIc so you could choose an anti-bomber armament or an anti-fighter armament.
Ki-44-Ia:
Wingspan, 31 ft. 1/16 in.;
length, 28 ft. 8 ½ in.;
height, 10 ft. 8 in.;
wing area, 161.458 sq. ft.;
empty weight, 4,286 lb.;
loaded weight, 5,622 lb.;
maximum weight, 6,363 lb.;
wing loading, 34.8 lb./sq. ft.;
power loading, 4.4 lb./hp;
maximum speed, 360 mph at 12,140 ft.;
cruising speed, 249 mph at 13,125 ft.;
climb to 16,405 ft., 5 min. 54 sec.;
service ceiling, 35,500 ft.;
normal range, 575 miles;
maximum range, 1,070 miles.
Ki-44-IIb:
Wingspan, 31 ft. 1/16 in.;
length, 28 ft. 9 7/8 in.;
height, 10 ft. 8 in.;
wing area, 161.458 sq. ft.;
empty weight, 4,643 lb.;
loaded weight, 6,094 lb.;
maximum weight, 6,598 lb.;
wing loading, 37.7 lb./sq. ft.;
power loading, 4 lb./hp;
maximum speed, 376 mph at 17,060 ft.;
cruising speed, 249 mph at 13,125 ft.;
climb to 16,405 ft, 4 min. 17 sec.;
service ceiling, 36,745 ft.;
normal range, 805 miles;
maximum range, 1,056 miles.
-
Originally posted by brady
but as Karnak mentioned reliabality issues are not a factor in AH
I never pointed reliability, and date.
Aces High doesn't have RDP or RPG system.
The date is not important.
Of course IJAAF fan needs Ki-84 first in Aces High 2.
Ki-44 is also great fighter. But it would be Japanese La-5 which has poor ammo (it might turns better though).
-
Originally posted by brady
When I compare the Ki-100 to the Ki-61 I see that the planes are close preformance wise, with the Ki-100 being slower on avaeage and psoosesing a generaly pore rate of climb (depending on modle your looking at).
The Ki-61-Ib is the best climber of all models.
Ki-61-Ib is not best climber.
Ki-61-Ib climbs to 5000m at 5'30", to 8000m at 10'48".
Ki-100-I climbs to 5000m at 6'00", to 8000m at 10'47".
Ki-61 has 30 seconds advantage against Ki-100 at 5000m on the surface.
But you forgot engine power.
Ki-61-Ib has 1175hp engine, Ki-100 has 1500hp.
This advantage gives climb power and acceleration.
This also means Ki-100 gets energy easily.
It can accelerate to the top speed quickly than Ki-61.
it is important factor in combat.
-
This also means Ki-100 gets energy easily.
It can accelerate to the top speed quickly than Ki-61.
it is important factor in combat.
If the Ki-100 won't out climb the Ki-61, then it won't out accelerate it.
ra
-
Dates are important for Scenarious, the CT, and events, placxes whear the Japanese plane set is in real nead of some filling in, this is another reasion the Ki-61-Ib is so apealing, it would realy help.
Mitsu, it is still the better climber to 5,000M, thats like 15 K ft, prety much all combat in AH takes place from 15K down, so its preformance is still better realy, and as ra pointed out:
"If the Ki-100 won't out climb the Ki-61, then it won't out accelerate it. "
-
Climb time data is so important?
then:
N1K2-J - climbs to 6000m 7 minutes 22 seconds.
Ki-100-I - climbs to 6000m 7 minutes 26 seconds.
so Do N1K2 and Ki-100 have almost same acceleration?
-
The Japanese document says Ki-100 out-maneuvered Ki-61 prototype (most light version of Ki-61). Ki-61/Ki-100 pilot and Kawasaki engineer said so too. But you guys deny it. I can't understand it.
-
Originally posted by Mitsu
The Japanese document says Ki-100 out-maneuvered Ki-61 prototype (most light version of Ki-61). Ki-61/Ki-100 pilot and Kawasaki engineer said so too. But you guys deny it. I can't understand it.
The Ki-100 was significantly heavier than the early Ki-61, but had the same wing. How could it out-manuever it?
Perhaps the Ki-100 had a lower wing loading than the later Ki-61's, assuming the radial engine was lighter than the liquid cooled one. They shared the same airframe, so only the engine could account for a weight difference.
ra
-
(http://www.hitechcreations.com/pyro/ki61toon.jpg)
One of answer...
http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=117989
-
Mitsu, I am not readily denying that the Ki-100 did not out manuaver the Ki-61, I beleave I said that it was basicaly a beter handeling Ki-61 up above.
The main argument for not doing a Ki-100 Now imo is that:
It is not realy any better preformance wise than the Ki-61 we have now, and it will requier a lot of work to build about the same as a brand new fighter. That being so I would rather see a Ki-84 added in stead of the Ki-100. The best preforming Ki-61 could be easly added and it would out preform the Ki-100 and be far more usefull in all of AH for events scenarious, and the CT, ect.
Mitsu, did you see the post on the Ki-84 I made, do your figures match those that guy is claming for the Ki-84, he says the Ki-84 could do 415 to 420 MPH?
-
Who GAF about performance. It LOOKS cool...that should be enough!
:D
-
The first new Japanese plane I would like to see is the Regianno2005
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/ah_30_1054696500.jpg)
:D
-
It is a Beautifule plane to be shure.
Errrr...They Are:)
-
Originally posted by ra
The Ki-100 was significantly heavier than the early Ki-61, but had the same wing. How could it out-manuever it?
Perhaps the Ki-100 had a lower wing loading than the later Ki-61's, assuming the radial engine was lighter than the liquid cooled one. They shared the same airframe, so only the engine could account for a weight difference.
ra
Did the CG move with the weight change? That could have some effect I would suppose.
-
Ki-100 removed radiator, ballast weight from Ki-61, and it put lighter air-cooled engine.
Weight distribution is much improved, CG is also moved.
A Ki-61 pilot tested Ki-100, after that, he noticed that its stall speed is very low. He did a lot of maneuvers while flying, but Ki-100 didn't stall.
-
Don't see how the Ki-61 could be heavier than the Ki-100. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't in-line piston engines heavier than radial engines of the same horsepower? And didn't the unreliability of the Ki-61's engine hurt both it's performance and maneuverability?
I'm not as familiar with the Ki-100 as I am with other Japanese aircraft, but wasn't there a second model of that fighter with a birdcage canopy similar to the Zero's and a cut-down rear-fuselage that was simpler to manufacture and offered improved performance?
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Don't see how the Ki-61 could be heavier than the Ki-100. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't in-line piston engines heavier than radial engines of the same horsepower? And didn't the unreliability of the Ki-61's engine hurt both it's performance and maneuverability?
I'm not as familiar with the Ki-100 as I am with other Japanese aircraft, but wasn't there a second model of that fighter with a birdcage canopy similar to the Zero's and a cut-down rear-fuselage that was simpler to manufacture and offered improved performance?
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
Shuckins, read these first...
Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki-61.html#RTFToC1)
Kawasaki Ki-100 (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki100.html#RTFToC1)
-
FDutchman,
Thanks. That pretty much confirmed my suspicions. The Ki-100 was 600 pounds lighter than the Ki-61, so therefore it's handling and maneuverability were significantly better.
By the way, is there actual archival evidence of 14 Hellcats being shot down in one flight by Ki-100s over Okinawa, or is that typical Japanese overclaiming? In all my years of studying Pacific aerial combat, I never ran across any American records of a similar event where a U.S. Naval or Marine Corps squadron suffered a similar loss in a single combat.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
Also Ki-100 had good ammo.
It has 2 Ho-5 20mm cannon on the fuselage, 250rnds each.
You can spray longer than Ki-61-I-Tei! :D
-
Anyway, my interest is how many IJAAF fighters would be added in Aces High II.
Hopefully, I want to listen to Pyro's opinion...
-
God Knows we have waited a little while for some new rides hopefully we can both get what we want Mitsu.
-
OK, Let's wait for surprise news.
-
I can't wait. :D
-
I am going to order a couple more books off that list you gave me a while ago Mogami, helps fill the void:)
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [1] "Shiden & Shidenkai" / "Type 94 Recon Seaplane"
Size: B5 / 163pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0631-0
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [2] "Type 3 Hien & Type 5 Army Fighter" / "Type 99 Light Bomber"
Size: B5 / 159pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0632-9
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [3] "Saiun" / "Type Zero Recon Seaplane"
Size: B5 / 161pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0633-7
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [4] "Raiden" / "Reppuu" / "Type 100 Command Recon"
Size: B5 / 211pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0634-5
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [5] "Zerosen"
Size: B5 / 221pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0635-3
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [6] "Toryu" / "Type 99 Tactical Recon / Assault Plane"
Size: B5 / 181pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0636-1
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [7] "Hayate" / "Type 97 Heavy Bomber / "Type 2 Flying-boat"
Size: B5 / 249pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0637-X
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [8] "P-51 Mustang" / "P-47 Thunderbolt"
Size: B5 / 167pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0638-8
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [9] "F6F Hellcat" / "F4U Corsar"
Size: B5 / 171pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0639-6
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [10] "Messerschmitt Bf 109" / "Focke Wulf FW190"
Size: B5 / 195pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0680-9
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [11] "Suisei" / "Type 99 Carrier Bomber"
Size: B5 / 169pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0681-7
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [12] "Hayabusa" / "Shoki" / "Type 97 Fighter"
Size: B5 / 221pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0682-5
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [13] "Ginga" / "Type 1 Attack Bomber"
Size: B5 / 171pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0683-3
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [14] "Type 97 Carrier Attack Bomber" / "Tenzan"
Size: B5 / 171pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0684-1
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [15] "Hiryu" / "DC-3 & Type Zero Transport"
Size: B5 / 171pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0685-X
Title: Mechanism of Military Aircraft [16] "Type 96 Carrier Fighter" / "Type 0 Observation Seaplane"
Size: B5 / 163pages
ISBN: 4-7698-0686-8
-
I all for adding the Ki-100 and the Ki-84. I'm getting bored with shooting down the the Japanese planes we have now. I would like something new to blast out of the sky with my trusty P-38.
ack-ack
-
Shuckins, I am familiar with a similar story. The story I remember is that a single KI-100 was engaged by alot of F6Fs (at least 8 I think). The F6F pilots were very green, engaging one at a time, and kept spinning their aircrafts. The Ki-100 managed to get away.
IIRC, the Japanese pilot was blind in one eye, and he actually thought the F6Fs were Zeros, and tried to form on them.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Shuckins, I am familiar with a similar story. The story I remember is that a single KI-100 was engaged by alot of F6Fs (at least 8 I think). The F6F pilots were very green, engaging one at a time, and kept spinning their aircrafts. The Ki-100 managed to get away.
IIRC, the Japanese pilot was blind in one eye, and he actually thought the F6Fs were Zeros, and tried to form on them.
really?... I gotta find the source... which one you have?
-
Suntracker and FDutchman,
That sounds suspiciously like the incident involving Saburo Sakai in which he engaged 16 Hellcats off the coast of Iwo Jima. (Talk about a gangbang!)
According to Sakai, who was blind in one eye, the American pilots must have been green because they couldn't hit the side of a barn with their gunnery. Whenever a section made a pass at him he evaded them by going into a fast roll to the left. Sakai said that if they had ever, once, spilled their shells into the area through which he had to fly during that maneuver he would almost certainly have been shot down. In other words, a veteran pilot would have shot him down.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
FDutchman,
Sorry, almost forgot. The source is the book Samurai, authored by Martin Caidin and is a history of Saburo Sakai's wartime experiences as related to Caidin by Sakai himself.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
Sakai was flying an A6M5 in that "fight", not a Ki100.
Sakai was a Navy pilot, not an Army pilot. All "Ki" aircraft are Army and all "LetterNumberLetterNumber" aircraft are Navy.
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
Suntracker and FDutchman,
That sounds suspiciously like the incident involving Saburo Sakai in which he engaged 16 Hellcats off the coast of Iwo Jima. (Talk about a gangbang!)
According to Sakai, who was blind in one eye, the American pilots must have been green because they couldn't hit the side of a barn with their gunnery. Whenever a section made a pass at him he evaded them by going into a fast roll to the left. Sakai said that if they had ever, once, spilled their shells into the area through which he had to fly during that maneuver he would almost certainly have been shot down. In other words, a veteran pilot would have shot him down.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
FDutchman,
Sorry, almost forgot. The source is the book Samurai, authored by Martin Caidin and is a history of Saburo Sakai's wartime experiences as related to Caidin by Sakai himself.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
ahh thought so. Thanks for filling me in Shuckins. I haven't been able to look into that claim about the flight of Ki-100 over Okinawa yet. But me thinks its a discredited story... I will dig up some books at the public library soon.
-
The Ki100 was a newer and improved version of the KI61.
How did it get worse?
-
at dive.
-
The Ki100 was a newer and improved version of the KI61.
How did it get worse?
Not exactly. The Ki100 was not a newer and improved version of the Ki61. Think of it as a Ki61 with a different engine.
What happened was that B-29 strikes had destroyed the factory that produced the engine for the Ki-61-II (which was superior to the Ki-100 in almost every way). So there were several hundred completed Ki-61 airframes sitting around with no engines.
Japan in its desperation for aircraft to defend against the American bomber strikes started looking for ways to get those aircraft into action.
Their solution was to fit a smaller, lighter, and very reliable, but less powerful radial engine which they already had in production to the existing airframes. And the Ki-100 was born.
This produced an aircraft that was very reliable, during a time when production quality and reliability was low throughout the japanese airforce. This plus the extreme manueverability (something the japanese always valued) gave birth to the history that produced what I call the "Ki-100 Myth" that you see in the online sim BBS's.
The Ki-100 was a cobbled together design that was obsolete and outclassed from its first day in service. The Ki-84 and the Ki-61-II were the best that the Japanese Airforce ever produced in WWII.
-
The Frank was the only mass-produced Japanese fighter that could truly measure up to late war U.S. fighters in speed. It was significantly faster than the Ki-100. The only significant advantage that the American fighters had over the Frank was at higher-altitudes.
That is beside the point, as far as the debate over the Ki-100 is concerned. Very little aerial combat in the Pacific theater took place at extremely high altitudes. Most encounters between American and Japanese fighters took place at altitudes of 20,000 feet or less. Most Japanese fighters were designed specifically to perform at their best at these altitudes. That is why the B-29 raids caused Japanese home island defense forces so many insuperable problems.
The Ki-100 should be made a part of the AH plane set for a number of very good reasons:
1. It outperformed the Zero in top speed.
2. It had heavy firepower.
3. It was a sterling performer at altitudes below 20,000 feet, which fits in perfectly with the type of combat flown by the nimrods of AH.
4. The Ki-100 was equipped with armor plating for the pilot and self-sealing fuel-tanks.
5. It also probably inherited the Ki-61's excellent diving ability.
6. The Ki-100 was easy to fly.
Top speed isn't everything, at least to some pilots. There are quite a few people in AH who would appreciate the Ki-100's qualities.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
Their are several good resions to add the Ki-100 and hopefully we will see the Ki-100 in AH some day. Howeaver realisticaly we can not expect to see several Japanese planes added in the short term. What we are likely to see if any are added are one or two at best. Since this is the likely scenario, it would be better imo to lobby for a plane that would fit better over all:
Ki-84: It was better than the KI-100 in prety much every posable way, and had a much wider usage and was in service for a longer perioud of time, as such it would have better usage for Events and for the CT, and Scenarious, and fit in the MA better, so realy the logical choice hear is clear.
.................
The above of course asumes we only get one new Japanese plane in the short term, my second choice would be the Juddy for a truly new model. Then of course a couple varents of fighters we have at present, the A6M3 and the Ki-61-Ib. This would make 4 new toys in all with two new modles and two varents.
-
An even easier Japanese fighter to add would be the A6M8, the final version of the Zeke with top speed of nearly 370 mph. It was said to compete well with the Helcat and give a great deal of trouble to F4F's and Fm2's.
-
Rasker,
The A6M8 was ordered into mass production but none of the aircraft were finished by war's end. Despite improvements in speed, it would still have been more than 50mph slower than the F4U-1D and 40mph slower than the Hellcat at 20,000 feet.
Since it did not enter combat we will not be seeing it in AH.
Regards, Shuckins/Leggern
-
Originally posted by Vermillion
The Ki-100 was a cobbled together design that was obsolete and outclassed from its first day in service. The Ki-84 and the Ki-61-II were the best that the Japanese Airforce ever produced in WWII.
Yeah, the Ki-100 should have been made in '44 at least.
If so, it might replace Ki-43-III and Ki-84 which had poor engine.
-
Mitsu,
The problem is that speed is the single most important performance aspect of a fighter and of the Japanese fighters, only the Ki-84 has it.
That alone, in my book, makes the Ki-84 definitively the best Japanese fighter.
The Ki-100 being no faster than an N1K1-J is doomed to suffer the same fate as all aircraft that go up against an enemy that has a 50mph advantage, The manuverabilty will allow some exceptional pilots to capitalize and do well, but for the bulk of it's pilots it is a death trap as it cannot disengage. Once engaged it must win or die.
-
The most of Japanese fighters are slow but maneuverable.
The Ki-100 would be like heavy but faster and powerful Ki-43 or A6M. That is enough deadly especially in the furball.
The Ki-84 is highest performance fighter of Japan.
I know, This fighter only could counter against P-51H and P-47N at performance.
-
Hi all,
This is an interesting question!
I normally think Francillon was a very reliable author and many books written since his first edition have not done any research they just source Francillon.
But, in this case he screwed up.
I think.
Here we go.
The -THINTS were ongoing and the OSS wanted info on the radial Ki-61. There was no real surviving data so they interviewed engineers again.
They asked what was the top speed of the Ki-61b; 367mph.
What was the top speed of the Ki-61-2; 379mph.
Now, about that radial engined Ki-61(Ki-100), how fast was it? The engineers did not give a number, they said 7mph slower than the Ki-61-2.
Did you see the 2 there? I read that report 3 times before i caught it! Doh!
Francillon subtracted 7mph from the speed of the model 1 not the model 2!
So, the Ki100 did 372mph or so according to the Japanese engineers.
Not a lot better but it is something.
Mike
-
I believe "A" prefixed planes are carrierborne fighters and "N" (as in N1K_) are land-based Naval fighters.
-
Building a planeset?
Simple start with the earliest planes first :) Heck even throw in some f2 bips. :)
The 51's nikis, ect..all the late models - perk em to hell....
Force folks to use the early to mid varients.
I mean, what's the point - If there's a free choice....everyone is gonna fly the "newest, baddest bird" thats out. Chew em up, spit em out - kill,kill,kill!! Where's the romance in that?
I have to take up "uber" planes, just becauses theres so many other "uber" planes coming at you sometimes...add more of the fast and powerful planes...that's all that will be flying.
Since we already have alot of folks in 51's 38s, nikis / la7s and spits.......why add to those peers?
I believe there should be more peers to the hurricane 1, spit 1&5,
109 E /F..... Even it out and perk the late mod rides. More so than they are now.
-
"So, the Ki100 did 372mph or so according to the Japanese engineers. "
Interesting.
-
Alt / Ki 100-I / Ki-100-II (km/h)
1km / 510 / 500
5km / 567 / 560
6km / 580 / 570
8km / 570 / 585
10km / 535 / 565
Time to Height
5km / 6'00" / 6'40"
8km / 11'30" / 11'30"
10km / 20'00" / 20'00"
-
Hi all,
Butch2k,
where did you get those numbers?
Just quoting a modern or near modern source will not convince me.
Read my part about finding out where an author found his data.
Mike
-
Ok... i went to the library and got a book whose title is roughly translated to "Hien, Fly to the Big Sky of Decisive Battle"
ISBN4-7698-0553-5C0095),
On page 369, it says that on July 25, 1944, Major Kobayashi took a flight of 18 Ki100s over Youkaichi City near Kyoto City and battled a flight of F6Fs, shooting down 12 at a loss of one. Can this be confirmed by American sources? Sound like the Okinawa encounter as posted before.
-
holy cow! I want to see it in AH2! :D
(http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/KI-100-I-KO_005.jpg)
(http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/KI-100-I-KO_013.jpg)
(http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/KI-100-I-KO_043.jpg)
(http://www.pacific-fighters.com/ss/Ki-100_Cockpit_012.jpg)
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/71_1085000794_cimg0403.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/71_1085000869_ki100.jpg)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/71_1085000923_kibl6.jpg)
(http://www.airliners.net/photos/big/9/1/9/667919.jpg)
-
Mitsu, I'm with you all the way on this one.
The Ki-100 wasn't the fastest IJAAF plane, but it was by far the best at 19,000+ feet.
At that altitude, it could turn *very* well, even at low speeds, due to its wingspan. It had good acceleration, good climb, and it could turn better than the Ki-61.
It out-classes the 61 in every way, except for low-level climb rate.
However, one thing most of you are forgetting is flight time. To the best of my recollection, the Ki-100 had about the same, if not more, flight time than a P-51D (100% fuel with no extra tanks).
Since most of you are too strange to fly at high altitudes, this will not be much of a factor. But face it: Flying at higher altitudes is more efficient, and makes for better combat.
The Ki-100 would be one of my top rides. It's a great plane that should not be overlooked because of its average speed.