Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: 1K3 on September 19, 2004, 12:41:27 AM
-
Discuss...
-
Well it depends how they model it.. The protypes only did 390mph, the cleaned up and reengined production ones did 415 and a pristine USA fueled and tested one did over 420mph and was actually faster than P51D and P47N at its best alt..
Expect a lot of crying if its faster than F4U1D on the deck..
-
I'll be happy as long as they don't give it the 30's like in IL2.
-
I expect it will probably do 392 at its best altitude like the second prototype. In that case it will be a good fighter, but not exceptionally so.
I would love to see HTC try to do a production Ki-84 as flown in Japanese service by extrapolating from the various sources what it's performance would be. Essentially using the difference between the Japanese prototype tests and the US ideal tests based on the Japanese engineer's statements of what a production Ki-84 would do. Say at best altitude you have 392mph in Test A and 424mph in Test B with a stated best for the production model in Japanese service of 415mph. Even using simple relative percentage breakdowns in order to get an idea of acceleration, climb and speeds at other altitudes would more accurately reflect a Japanese service Ki-84 than the second prototype's test results would.
IIRC, in the US tests the Ki-84 was faster than either the P-51D or P-47N up to a bit above the Ki-84's best altitude.
lasersailor184,
I wouldn't worry about the 30mm version. It will not be added. Besides, IL-2:FB's gun modeling is screwy. The Ki-84 with two 20mm and two 30mm seems to have about 50 times the firepower of the Ki-84 with four 20mm cannon given the ease with which I can blow the big six engined German transports into bits with it and can barely kill one with the quad 20mm version.
-
Think of it as a cross between a La-5FN and a Spit9.
The speeds are pretty much comparable to the La-5FN at almost all alt ranges, and being famed as a fighter with one of the most favorable thrust-weight ratio in WW2, its acceleration might even compare with the La-7.
The N1K2 is actually one of the most fast accelerating planes in AH2, between 0~250mph range - this characteristic of JP planes are often overlooked due to their low top speed, but the Ki-84 will finally be a JP plane that has enough top speed to consider the acceleration factor as a serious threat.
I'm not sure of its maneuverability status, but IIRC Mitsu commented that it would be on par with the Spit9, and I'll take his word for it. If we assume that is a optimistic vision it's still pretty impressive - the maneuverability in my own estimation, will be somewhere between the Spit9 and the La5FN/Yak-9U.
The armament, compared to the N1K2, would be probably pretty much weak - two 12.7mm machine guns and two 20mm cannons.
However, the Ho-5 cannons were derived from the Browning M2 50cal design, and its firing rate and accuracy would be impressive. The Ho-5 is mounted on the Ki-61-I - pretty reliable cannon IMO.
...
Compared to the MA where speed is king, it is still about one notch too slow than most of the main contendors(such as the La-7 or the P-51D, Fw190D-9).
However, if the Ki-84 would really accelerate that fast, then it would mean in most cases the Ki-84 would reach higher speeds more quickly than other planes. This is of very great importance in combat - especially low-mid alt combat which is dominant in the MA.
Also, any plane that has some balance between maneuverability and firepower is a lethal plane. In AH1 this was the reason why the Spit9 and the N1K2 was so popular. Eventually, with the coming of AH2, realistic gunnery ruled out the Spit9 and the N1K2 as an influential plane, since they can't lob 500yard shots so easily anymore. The Spit9 and the N1K2 was simply just too slow for AH2.
Now, imagine that the Spit9 receives some upgrades - the power and acceleration of the Lavochkin fighters. A Spit9 that is far faster than it used to be. That, is IMO undeniably a serious threat for many.
Even more profound, is that the Ki-84 can wield combat flaps. A fowler type flap with "combat" position that merely extends straight backwards to increase wing area, but add very low drag.
The fowler flap(coupled with no torque!) is what makes the heavy and titanic sized(its actually bigger than the P-47) P-38L so maneuverable in AH2. Imagine the same efficient flap type that is used by a much more lighter, nimble, single-engined fighter.
......
Like someone mentioned, the Ki-84 will probably become the last plane that holds enough importance to potentially transform MA plane choices and usage numbers. If my estimates are right, the former Spit9 and N1K2 croud will all move over to the Ki-84, and it will form a new "Big4" with the La-7, Fw190D-9, P-51D. I predict about 8~12% usage rates constantly.
It is definately not perk material - with a plane like the La-7 and the P-51D, Fw190D-9 free, frankly no prop plane is perk material(at least, high perk material ranging over 10 perks) in the MA. However, it is a plane with a potential that might bring some alternative fighting styles in the MA.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
......
Like someone mentioned, the Ki-84 will probably become the last plane that holds enough importance to potentially transform MA plane choices and usage numbers. If my estimates are right, the former Spit9 and N1K2 croud will all move over to the Ki-84, and it will form a new "Big4" with the La-7, Fw190D-9, P-51D. I predict about 8~12% usage rates constantly.
It is definately not perk material - with a plane like the La-7 and the P-51D, Fw190D-9 free, frankly no prop plane is perk material(at least, high perk material ranging over 10 perks) in the MA. However, it is a plane with a potential that might bring some alternative fighting styles in the MA.
Yep I would go with that Kweassa, not looking forward to battling streams of Ki-84's in the Hellcat. The way things are rapidly heading, many of the mid-range planes are becoming totally obsolete.
Ki-84 will render another few planes very difficult to survive in f4u-1 109G2/G6 F6-F 205 spit9? tiffie ? will all suddenly have a high use plane that will outurn and outrun them. At least they have a good chance of outturning the Lala.
20-25% of the MA made up of lala's and ki-84's is going to be interesting.
Been looking for a new ride anyway, getting sick of never being able to catch anyone.
-
Originally posted by Redd
At least they have a good chance of outturning the Lala.
Nope. The Lala will outturn all the planes you mentioned, even the F6F.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Nope. The Lala will outturn all the planes you mentioned, even the F6F.
Didn't we have that discussion already in another thread. Anyway my experience in hellcat says it can outturn lala's. It can't e-fight them if the Lala is flown smart- but it can turnfight them.
The Ki-84 will probably outturn the lala fairly easily I would imagine, and will run rings around the hellcat
-
I cannot ever recall being outturned by an La whilst flying an F6F-5.
-
Lala a good turner?
Anyway, at 20K+ the Spit9 first starts it's job.
-
a production model of Ki-84 could run at 410mph (660km/h) with 2000hp engine (from Japanese Army's data).
But this data is Ki-84-I-Otsu's one (20mm*4 model).
I'm very interested how Pyro models AH's Ki-84-I-Ko.
If he considers it has 2000hp engine, that plane's max speed should be around 410mph. and its climb or acceleration performance is also well.
Oh, if so, stronger counter-torque should be considered too. :D
-
Hi Mitsu,
>a production model could run at 410mph (660km/h) with 2000hp engine.
Do you know the boost (manifold pressure) and rpm required for that?
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
I'm looking at details of takeoff and emergency power data...
But here is some HA-45-21 2000hp engine data that production model of Ki-84 had.
1890hp@1800m with 3000rpm/+350mHg
1700hp@6400m with 3000rpm/+350mHg
-
Mitsu,
Hmm. I'd guess I'd recalled 415mph incorrectly.
Can you post documents about the 410mph production Ki-84-I with the Ha-45-21 engine?
-
Hmmm it's pretty hard translation job because my English is too poor!
I need FDutman's help!
-
Anyway I hope that Pyro posts some comments about Aces High Ki-84 for discussion. ;)
-
How come it only makes 410mph at 2000hp, its not a very big plane and not particularly draggy.
One thing I noticed is that Japan still used very thin propellers even on their late war planes, I wonder how much climb and accel they lost because of that on their 2000hp models..
-
Their relatively low speed and low climb rate have to do with the way they were built.
Japanese planes had small props, plus they didn't really consider much technology in their airframes. Also, the engines weren't optimized like, say, a P-51D's.
-
Originally posted by Fruda
Japanese planes had small props, plus they didn't really consider much technology in their airframes. Also, the engines weren't optimized like, say, a P-51D's.
You got anything to back any of that up? At least definitions of it?
For example, the Ki-84 has lamilar flow wings like the P-51. The N1K2-J had automatic combat flaps.
The engines were optimized for different altitudes. Personally I think the P-51's was optimaized for the better altitudes, but that doesn't change the fact that the Japanese engines were also optimized for a given altitude.
Looking at photos of late war Japanese aircraft the props don't look particularly thin to me. They aren't Fw190 thick, but they aren't Spitfire Mk Ia thin either. They seem about like the thinker blades on Mosquitos and P-47s. Further, they have four blades unlike the German props.
The lack of high top end speed isn't found in their designs, as American tests verify, it is found in their low production standards, poor maintainance in the late war and in the poor fuel. Their designs were fine, but what kind of militaristic idiocy causes one to draft ones machine tool specialists and production experts to be conscription infantry? In a industrial war, which WWII was, as an industrial combatant, which Japan was, it is sheer idiocy to deprive your industry of the skilled workers needed to put quality weapons into the hands of your soldiers, sailors and airmen and yet Japan did that too.
-
Their designs were fine, but what kind of militaristic idiocy causes one to draft ones machine tool specialists and production experts to be conscription infantry? In a industrial war, which WWII was, as an industrial combatant, which Japan was, it is sheer idiocy to deprive your industry of the skilled workers needed to put quality weapons into the hands of your soldiers, sailors and airmen and yet Japan did that too.
That's because Japan wasn't an industrial(or rather, "modern") country at heart. The standards and rationale of the moral code of the individual/community facing war(especially one that they cannot win) is vastly different from than those of the West.
If the Japanese were thinking like the Westerners the war would have ended around 1943 or early 1944.
-
I'm not sure how it will be here. But the KI-84 in Brand W had a VERY nasty snap stall.
She was fast, & deadly, but heaven forbid if you pulled it around too hard.
I suspect the F6f at slow speeds will eat it for dinner, along with the 38.
Should make for some interesting times anyway. :)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
the Japanese were thinking like the Westerners the war would have ended around 1943 or early 1944.
I think the German refusal to bow to the obvious kinda demostrates that Japan was not unique in it's stubborness. Frankly, the Japanese surrendered earlier than the Germans did from a national destruction standpoint.
-
If the Germans were thinking like the Japanese, and they had an Island home thousands of miles away from US and Russia and UK, then the war would have ended in 1950 or something. :D
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
If the Germans were thinking like the Japanese, and they had an Island home thousands of miles away from US and Russia and UK, then the war would have ended in 1950 or something. :D
You missed my point. The Germans were westerners that held on even more tenaciously than did the Japanese.
The German's had practically nothing left to surrender. It had all been occupied.
The Japanese still had large portions of the mainland and Japan itself had yet to be invaded. Barring the atomics they were going to go down exactly like the Germans. There was no practical difference between the two nations stubborn refusal to bow to reality and end the pain and suffering by surrendering.
-
how did a thread on the Ki-84 big IF's
turn into why a country surrendered?
I see the new Ki-84 in Aces high running down the P-51D and possibly the La-7 in the short to intermediate range, but if you have enough seperation to start with it will be close wether the Ki-84 will catch the other 2 or not........
I see the Ki-84 fighting the F6f-5 as a draw all coming down to the better pilot of his/her plane.............
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
I see the new Ki-84 in Aces high running down the P-51D and possibly the La-7 in the short to intermediate range, but if you have enough seperation to start with it will be close wether the Ki-84 will catch the other 2 or not........
Only if the Ki-84 dives on the P-51D/La-7 and they don't have anywhere to dive. Flat out both will be faster. Only if the American test data is used will the P-51D be introuble, but the La-7 will still be able to escape.
The problem they will have is that the Ki-84 out manuvers them and isn't all that much slower. It will also have good guns.
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
I see the Ki-84 fighting the F6f-5 as a draw all coming down to the better pilot of his/her plane.............
Only if the Ki-84 pilot consents to fight the F6F-5's game. If the Ki-84 plays it smart it will have the advantage.
-
A minor reality check. When encountering the Ki-84 during WWII, the F6F maintained and 8/1 kill to loss ratio, about the same as the P-38. F4U's didn't fare as well, killing 6 1/2 for each loss. I expect that the AH2 Ki-84 will do better due to the nature of the game. Nonetheless, I view it is not being any better than the AH2 Spitfire Mk.IX, with the exception of a substantially lower critical altitude.
SPeaking of low-level monsters, I'd love to the P-63 and Spitfire Mk.XII introduced.
My regards,
Widewing
-
How fast is this thing on the deck? A lot of it will come down to that..
-
350~360mph or so.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
A minor reality check. When encountering the Ki-84 during WWII, the F6F maintained and 8/1 kill to loss ratio, about the same as the P-38. F4U's didn't fare as well, killing 6 1/2 for each loss. I expect that the AH2 Ki-84 will do better due to the nature of the game. Nonetheless, I view it is not being any better than the AH2 Spitfire Mk.IX, with the exception of a substantially lower critical altitude.
SPeaking of low-level monsters, I'd love to the P-63 and Spitfire Mk.XII introduced.
My regards,
Widewing
Ww2 stats don't bear out in the MA environment.
If the Ki-84 is faster than the F6-F , turns better than the F6-F and has a reasonable set of cannons, it will be deadly for a hellcats - I think that goes without saying.
There's only one advantage the hellcat will have - durability - it's going to need it ;)
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Only if the Ki-84 dives on the P-51D/La-7 and they don't have anywhere to dive. Flat out both will be faster. Only if the American test data is used will the P-51D be introuble, but the La-7 will still be able to escape.
I was basing this on the Ki-84s ability to accelerate fast , more than the P51D, not sure bout the La7, La7 may just run away from the get go, not so with the P51D, Ki-84 will catch it in the short term, if the P51D trys to evade/extend now on the long haul, P51D will walk skip and jump away from the Ki-84 , again provided it has enough seperation at the onset
The problem they will have is that the Ki-84 out manuvers them and isn't all that much slower. It will also have good guns.
Only if the Ki-84 pilot consents to fight the F6F-5's game. If the Ki-84 plays it smart it will have the advantage.
and vice versa, if the F6f-5 pilot consents to the ki-84 pilots fight, he will lose, that is why I said it will come down to the pilot that flys his plane better,
-
Originally posted by Redd
Ww2 stats bear out in the MA environment.
If the Ki-84 is faster than the F6-F , turns better than the F6-F and has a reasonable set of cannons, it will be deadly for a hellcats - I think that goes without saying.
There's only one advantage the hellcat will have - durability - it's going to need it ;)
Redd,
I would not worry much encountering Ki-84s in the Arenas if I was you, most people who will jump at the chance to fly it will not understand the full ability of this plane, your Hellcat is gonna have some tremendous fun :D
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
and vice versa, if the F6f-5 pilot consents to the ki-84 pilots fight, he will lose, that is why I said it will come down to the pilot that flys his plane better,
The plane with the best speed, climb or both can dictate the terms of engagement. That's what makes the Lala, 109s, 190s, P-38 and P-51s such good fighters.
-
sorry GScholz,
I would reply to your post, but I have met too many Lawyers in my lifetime, hence the reason I can not :D
-
I think the Ki84 will look just as burnt as the rest of them when i squeeze the trigger and my 8x50 cal deathrays pings it from prop to tail.
mmm... P47 :)
-
Widewing,
You well know that the pilot quality issues, the aircraft quality issues in some cases and the command and control issues of the late war Japanese are not present here.
It is statements like yours that have people complaining about other aircraft "because everybody knows the F6F slaughtered the Ki-84 and I can't do it in AH which means the Ki-84 is way overmodeled!!! WAAAAA!!!"
When the F6F-5 was shown for the first time players made comments like "It's going to slaughter the A6M5 in AH." I said it would be closer than they made it out to be. IIRC it took about 10 tours for the F6F-5 to have a positive K/D ratio over the A6M5b.
TequilaChaser,
GScholz is exactly correct. The F6F-5 doesn't get the choice about fighting the Ki-84's game. The Ki-84 simply does it. That is the advantage of a faster aircraft.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
TequilaChaser,
GScholz is exactly correct. The F6F-5 doesn't get the choice about fighting the Ki-84's game. The Ki-84 simply does it. That is the advantage of a faster aircraft.
I am not aurging with niether you Karnak or GScholz, and no the Ki-84 does not simply choose the way the fight goes....regardless of speed, climbing ability, turning ability....the fight is dictated by the actions of the pilot, and whether the F6f-5 pilot gives into the Ki-84 pilot's type of fight and vice versa.........with the exception of the Ki-84 pilot trying to pounce on the F6f-5 pilots head with an alt advantage, but it would only take 1 blown pass 2 at most for the E states to equal out, if the F6f-5 pilot knows what he is doing........ if rolls were reversed same would be said for the Ki-84 Pilot.....it wil come down to the Pilot........not every Ki-84 or F6f-5 you come across wil fly in the same manner.....If the pilot knows the abilitys and limitations of his aircraft and where it excels then he can control the fight, regardless if he is the attacker or if he is the defender from the first merge....
just wait til the plane is released to AH2.then we can compare some statistics...yes?
added: btw I do not see how some of you can out right say this Ki-84 for AH2 will be dominate when you do not even know how it is going to perform yet!
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
I am not aurging with niether you Karnak or GScholz, and no the Ki-84 does not simply choose the way the fight goes....regardless of speed, climbing ability, turning ability....the fight is dictated by the actions of the pilot, and whether the F6f-5 pilot gives into the Ki-84 pilot's type of fight and vice versa.........with the exception of the Ki-84 pilot trying to pounce on the F6f-5 pilots head with an alt advantage, but it would only take 1 blown pass 2 at most for the E states to equal out, if the F6f-5 pilot knows what he is doing........ if rolls were reversed same would be said for the Ki-84 Pilot.....it wil come down to the Pilot........not every Ki-84 or F6f-5 you come across wil fly in the same manner.....If the pilot knows the abilitys and limitations of his aircraft and where it excels then he can control the fight, regardless if he is the attacker or if he is the defender from the first merge....
We're not talking about ever encounter. We are talking about the Ki-84 vs F6F when the Ki-84 pilot is flying to the strengths of the Ki-84. I will speak from experience using slow bellybutton Spitfire Mk IX against an F6F. The F6F cannot equalize the E states. If it can't do it against a Spit IX it will not be able to do it against a Ki-84. I am at a loss as to how you think it could, especially after only one or two passes.
As to the idea that the slower aircraft gets a choice, please explain how. La-7s seem to have no problem forcing their fight on my Mossie.
-
btw
I am a devoted Hog flyer, granted I am just an average pilot, but with regards to dominating faster planes that get to control the fight...because they are faster
I seem to be able to control most fights I encounter when flying my slow poke D-Hog against a Tiffy, P-38, P-47, La-7 , P51D, 109G, even Spit IXs and FWs....not all of them but most of them if it is a 1 on 1 fight..and heck sometimes 2 vs me or 3 vs me depending if I am feeling up to the task!
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
just wait til the plane is released to AH2.then we can compare some statistics...yes?
added: btw I do not see how some of you can out right say this Ki-84 for AH2 will be dominate when you do not even know how it is going to perform yet!
I repeat
-
Originally posted by Widewing
A minor reality check. When encountering the Ki-84 during WWII, the F6F maintained and 8/1 kill to loss ratio, about the same as the P-38. F4U's didn't fare as well, killing 6 1/2 for each loss.
You mean claims/loss ratio, right? :)
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
sorry GScholz,
I would reply to your post, but I have met too many Lawyers in my lifetime, hence the reason I can not :D
What are you, a CRIMINAL!?! ;) :D
You may reply all you want, just don't use the information in my post. ;)
>>>
Obviously when looking at kill ratios from real life the tactical advantages are the major contributing factor. Pilot skill only applies if the difference of skill is considerable. Same with aircraft performance.
Command, control and numbers win wars.
One-on-one the fastest or best climbing (to some degree) aircraft dictates the engagement and can choose when to leave. Manoeuvrability helps, but is a secondary attribute at best.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
What are you, a CRIMINAL!?! ;) :D
You may reply all you want, just don't use the information in my post. ;)
>>>
Obviously when looking at kill ratios from real life the tactical advantages are the major contributing factor. Pilot skill only applies if the difference of skill is considerable. Same with aircraft performance.
Command, control and numbers win wars.
One-on-one the fastest or best climbing (to some degree) aircraft dictates the engagement and can choose when to leave. Manoeuvrability helps, but is a secondary attribute at best.
ok GS, I will buy in to that a faster plane can start out with the advantage to dictate the fight, I do not ignore the fact that a faster plane can chose to leave when it desires as well. The key factor is if the pilot recognizes the time is to extend or not. If a 1/2 way good pilot in a F6f-5 comes up against a hohum average ki-84 pilot I would put my money on the F6f-5 pilot, also with the F6f-5 in AH2 keep it around 230 to 300 in a fight and other planes are gonna have a hard time overcoming it, we will have to wait and see how the Ki-84 of AH2 checks out before we know its +'s and -'s, I am not talking about real life matters, I am refering to AH2 standards.......and most people do not give the F6f-5 the respect it truly deserves,
for instance if the F6f-5 engages with speed 300+ verses the Ki-84 near same speed, I could only see this engagement coming down to the pilots ability, if infact the Ki-84 is modeled in relation to the F6fs as in all the other sims out there.........regardless of it being a F6f-5 or -3 model, I have always noticed that these 2 particular planes when flown against each other with near equal talented flight sim pilots most times came down to a draw. giving the victory to either pilot
We do not yet know though, how the Ki-84 is going to perform in AH2......I am going to bet ( 1 cent ) that it will be close to the same
granted, the F6f-5 has no option of trying to run, if it has alt though, and the Ki-84 trys to run, the F6f has great diving speed and in the short range may even catch the Ki-84 and cause him to have to turn/rev/etc...... so although the Ki-84 is the faster plane, the F6f will be the dictating force of this latter scenario
we all have our opinions, and I am not saying anyone here is wrong, I am merely explaining how I view it, and I think it is in the hands of the pilot....
-
In a one-on-one with equal starting advantage it is always up to the pilots. However speed and climb are the two most important factors of air combat when aircraft performance is considered.
Given equality in pilot skill and initial advantage the fastest and/or best climbing aircraft will always hold the advantage.
-
Meyer, of course he refers to US kill claims. It's difficult enough trying to find a definitive number of Ki-84s produced let alone lost in combat, destroyed in transport, on the ground, or to accidents and other causes etc...
All you are left with is Ami claims.
-
Apologies, Karnak.
My source was a bad one, I guess. Thanks for the actual info.
I never would've known that the Ki-84 had Laminar Flow wings if you didn't tell me.
-
Originally posted by Fruda
Apologies, Karnak.
My source was a bad one, I guess. Thanks for the actual info.
I never would've known that the Ki-84 had Laminar Flow wings if you didn't tell me.
No proplem. Sorry if I came on a bit strong.
As I said, the Japanese made plenty of huge, stupid mistakes, but the engineers were quite capable.
Actually, I don't know of any aircraft besides the P-51 and Ki-84 from WWII that had laminar flow wings. I know the Supermarine Spiteful had them, but that was post war.
I'm sure somebody like Widewing will shortly let me know a whole bunch of obvious aircraft I overlooked that also had such wings.
-
Lol @ Spiteful.
Didn't the P-47-D40 have them, too, or did it just have elliptical wings?
-
I don't believe that the P-47 underwent a complete wing change. I know the P-47N or M (I don't recall which) had different wings, but they were still based on the original P-47 wings.
So far as I know either all P-47s had laminar flow wings or none did.
-
Originally posted by TequilaChaser
[B
granted, the F6f-5 has no option of trying to run, if it has alt though, and the Ki-84 trys to run, the F6f has great diving speed and in the short range may even catch the Ki-84 and cause him to have to turn/rev/etc...... so although the Ki-84 is the faster plane, the F6f will be the dictating force of this latter scenario
we all have our opinions, and I am not saying anyone here is wrong, I am merely explaining how I view it, and I think it is in the hands of the pilot.... [/B]
I understand what you are saying TC. But I am relating it to fighting Spitfires. Typical engagment with spit , you can work out in the first couple of maneuvers whether they guy is any good. (often just by the merge).
If the guy is no good I can handle it in the F6-F , If the guy is good , I won't win a close fought turnfight, so have to decide whether to slug it out - or bug out, try to extend etc. Can't gain E on a spit 9 , so it's really just a case of running away if you want to survive.
I am picturing the same types of engagements where running/extending/grabbing E is not an option , so it's a fight to the death.
The only 1 on 1 planes/situations I really fear when flying a F6-F - are a high niki or a high spit. KI-84 could well be worse than both of those.
None of this is a complaint , just calling it the way I see it - gonna be a fun challenge.
-
The Spiteful was partly disappointing.
The laminar flow wings didn't make it that much faster.
Now here's something from above:
"Now, imagine that the Spit9 receives some upgrades - the power and acceleration of the Lavochkin fighters. A Spit9 that is far faster than it used to be. That, is IMO undeniably a serious threat for many. "
Hehe, so would a Spit XIV without a perk tag.
Not to mention the 1943 Mk VIII,- roughly the performance of the XIV (climb and speed), while being nimbler than the Mk IX, as well as being optimized for both low and high alt.
Now that would leave many a pilot in serious trouble....
Anyway, a Spit IX stops being slow at 20K......
-
Frank's Top-Speed:388 or 427mph...):Case Closed? (http://www.j-aircraft.org/bbs/army_config.pl?read=9753)
-
Interesting read Wotan.
The more I think about it the more I hope Pyro tries to model a wartime service Ki-84 and not a prototype Ki-84.
I know the data is not really out there and would have to be fudged a bit, but there is enough data between the US and Japanese tests to make good, educated fudges.
I am also fairly certain that there are already quite a few fudges numbers in AH on aircraft like the N1K2-J, La-7, Ki-67, C.205 and D3A1. I could be wrong, but I don't think all the aircraft in AH have detailed test documentation.
-
There's no need to do a 388mph top speed version. It adds nothing to the game at all.
A Homare - 21 @ 1970hp should have np reaching 427mph. The problem lies in finding accurate source info.
Whatever you do dont believe the hype that just because 100 octane was used that it added some 40mph to the Ki84's top speed.
Read that document Nashwan posted in the 150 avgas thread.
"Depending on the plane it gave an average increase of 5 - 15 mph."
-
As I understand it we used 100 octane to try to simulate the effect of the MW50 that the service Ki-84 used.
According to Mitsu and a post by brady the Ki-84 with the Homare 45-21 had a wartime service top speed of about 410mph. The 427 in the US test could have been due to the meticulous maintainance prior to that test as well as a slight boost from the fuel.
The bottom line is that the 388mph is from the first prototype using a Homare 45-11 and the 392mph is from the second prototype also using a Homare 45-11. Neither prototype had ejector exhaust stacks to gain boost and neither was a clean in line as the production model. There were several hundred service acceptance airframes completed and those may also have been powered by the Homare 45-11. However the vast majority, more than 2,000, were production airframes powered by the Homare 45-21 and with thrust producing ejector exhaust stacks. In addition I understand that the Homare 45-21 used a methanol-water mix as an anti-detonate to achieve higher manifold preasure.
The thread you linked to had a Japanese pilot reporting in interogation that the Ki-84 had a service max speed of 700kph.
At this point, and I will say I have learned a lot more about the Ki-84 in the last couple months, I would say the the US tests are a more accurate example of the service Ki-84 than the Japanese tests on the first two prototypes.
-
Then perhaps, with 390 being the lowest number and 427 being the highest, just choosing a nice, middle point might be best? :D
How about 415? Hehehe..
-
Well nothing has been proven one way or the other. There's a lot of anecdotal and circumstantial evidence that the Ki-84s with a Homare 45-21 with 1970hp (or 2000hp) could reach 427.
But I doubt there's enough to convince HT to model that type of performance.
388mph is the safe bet. Hopefully we will be surprised.
427mph please!!!
Ha-45/11: (1st-speed): 400mm= 45.7" (2nd speed): 250mm= 39.8"
Ha-45/21: (1st-speed): 500mm= 49.6" (2nd-speed): 350mm= 43.7"
My argument is to eventually show that the American test claim of 427mph @ 20,000ft was quite naturally to be expected of a FRANK powered by the Homare Model 21 (and-it W-A-S a Model 21...), if the (older) figure of 388mph was derived from a prototype powered by Homare Model 11, and that it could have hardly done otherwise if the later model engine, in fact, did fully-attain its intended "design-to" power-level, especially @ higher altitudes.
-
Pyro, are you planning to release the Ki-84-I-Otsu with few perks?
4 Ho-5 20mm cannons with 150 rounds each armament would be nice to intercept buffs.
-
Sadly, nearly all MA fights end in the infamous HO, plane type notwithstanding.
She'll be a welcome member of the CT family, IMO
-
Gainsie!!!!!!!
-
Wotan,
I actually do think it has been pretty much proven that the service Ki-84 did well over 400mph at it's best altitude. What has not been proven is exactly how fast it actually was.
Red Tail 444,
Must be you. The great majority of my fights in the MA do not end in an HO by either participant.
-
Originally posted by Wotan
There's no need to do a 388mph top speed version. It adds nothing to the game at all.
A Homare - 21 @ 1970hp should have np reaching 427mph. The problem lies in finding accurate source info.
Whatever you do dont believe the hype that just because 100 octane was used that it added some 40mph to the Ki84's top speed.
Read that document Nashwan posted in the 150 avgas thread.
"Depending on the plane it gave an average increase of 5 - 15 mph."
That is going from 100/130 to 104/150. Not quite the same as going from going from 87 octane, be generous and call it a PN of 68/98, to 100/130 PN fuel.
Keep things easy, say the Homare was limited to 40 in Hg on a PN of 98. At a PN of 130 that should give a MAP limit of 50.75 in Hg. That is roughly a 25% increase in power. Sqrt of 25 is 5, so about 5% increase in speed, or roughly 19-20 mph.
The P-51D only went from 67 in Hg to 72 in Hg on 104/150, about 7.5% good for about 2.7% higher speed. About 12 mph, right in line with Nashwan's posting.
Those are real rough SWAG figures, I haven't taken lower FTH (or ram) at the higher MAP into account. But going to 100/130 should easily be enough to put it in the 405-410 mph range. I doubt the Japanese fuel was even that good, 68/80 - 68/90 was more likely. That would give another 5-10 mph.
If anyone has some decent Homare/Ki-84 performance figures I plug them and see what engine and plane figures come out.
Greg Shaw
-
Hi guys,
If you could sum up the data on the prototype and on its condition and the power settings used, and give me information on which power settings (or levels) were used on the service Ki-84, I could make a fairly reliable estimate how fast the prototype would have gun in service condition.
Do you think you've got enough data for that? I didn't follow all of the posts here.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
HoHun,
Send an email to Mitsu. He is most likely to have that data. brady might as well.
-
Hey Slash!!!!
Karnak,
Respectfully, IMO the MA is the HO capital of the online flight sim universe, which is why I fly in the CT mostly.
-
(AIREVIEW's General View of Japanese Military Aircraft In ThePacific War, Vol.1,pg.320):
Ha-45/11 NK9-B(IJN-nomenclature)
HP(T.O.): 1,800 @ 400mmHg & 2,900rpm
HP(2,000m/6,562-ft): 1,650 @ 250mmHg & same-rpm
HP(5,700m/18,701-ft): 1,460 @ 250mmHg & same-rpm
Ha-45/21 NK9-H(IJN-nomenclature)
HP(T.O.): 2,000 @ 500mmHg & 3,000rpm
HP(1,800m/5,901-ft): 1,860 @ 350mmHg & same-rpm
HP(6,400m/20,997-ft): 1,620 @ 350mmHg & same-rpm
Notes:
1- The Ha-45/21's more-oft quoted T.O.HP is: 1,990, in most other literature - and the less-oft quoted(fully):2,000Hp was more reserved for the "finally-arrived & matured" Ha-45/22, as the very next step, i.e., that the Model 21 was "almost" the Model 22.
-
gwshaw,
Note that the use of 100 octane fuel in the US tests were to try to duplicate the effects of methonal-water injecting to attain higher boost settings. The prototypes did not, as I recall, have methonal-water injection whereas the service Ki-84 did.
Red Tail 444,
I do agree HOs happen more often by far than is desirable, but 90% is a rather huge exageration.
-
karnak
For one fight to end in an HO, by an uninvited guest, it's one too many for me.
I've been grounded for several months, so I hope it's gotten better.
-
Any progress gwshaw/HoHun?
-
Using starting figures of:
Weight - 7955 lbs
Wing Span - 36.87 ft
Wing Area - 226 ft^2
1460 hp @ 18,700 ft
392 mph @ 20,080 ft
P% - 80% (generally a good ballpark figure)
e - .85 (tapered, rounded wingtips, another good ballpark figure)
Pre-production used an exhaust collector ring, so no significant exhaust thrust recovery
Rammed hp @ 20,080 ft works out to:
(392/100)^2 = 15.37
1460 * sqrt (251.3 / (15.37 + 248.76))
1460 * sqrt (251.3 / 264.13)
1460 * sqrt (.9514)
1460 * .975 = 1424 hp
Gives a Cd0 of .0212
349 mph @ SL on 1800 hp
Min drag at 153 mph IAS, and SL climb of almost exactly 5000 fpm @ 1800 hp, just barely under 4000 fpm @ 2 km on 1650 hp, about 2650 fpm @ 5700 m on 1460 hp.
Everything matches the charts Butch2k posted on the other thread pretty closely.
(edit: looks like butch2k's chart is for the /21 engined version, I missed seeing the power figures in the second chart)
I'll use this as a starting point and see what I can work up for the /21 engined versions a little later.
Greg Shaw
-
Crossing posting Butch's chart from the other thread
(http://www.allaboutwarfare.com//files/pictures/tmp/ki84-perfdata2.jpg)
We can see that your max speed figures match up with a Ha-45/11 (388/392mph).
-
Let's count down for Ki-84...
-
Wotan,
That is just the TAIC estimated performance, correct?
Here is the other document posted by Butch. Given the Japanese characters it may be more meaningful.
(http://members.arstechnica.com/x/karnak/Ki84data.bmp)
-
Similar starting assumptions
Weight - 7955 lbs
Wing Span - 36.87 ft
Wing Area - 226 ft^2
1620 hp @ 21,000 ft
P% - 80% (generally a good ballpark figure)
e - .85 (tapered, rounded wingtips, another good ballpark figure)
Slightly cleaned up airframe, so I'll calculate at Cd0 figure of .0210
Call it 150 lbs of exhaust thrust recovery (7.5% of peak TO power, that is the SWAG I typically use)
Give it 2000 ft of ram, matches the 23,000 ft figure in Butch2k's TAIC figures. A bit better than the 1300 ft the prototypes managed.
Use 420 mph as the target speed to calculate charge temp increase for rammed power.
Rammed hp @ 23,000 ft works out to:
(420/100)^2 = 17.64
1620 * sqrt (246.76 / (17.64 + 242.76))
1620 * sqrt (246.76 / 260.4)
1620 * sqrt (.948)
1620 * .973 = 1577 hp
At a Cd0 of .0210 I'm getting a vMax of 441 mph @ 23,000 ft. But, that is a mach number of about .63, which is well into the drag rise area. But the TAIC numbers of 427 sound easily plausible. 427 is doable at a Cd0 of about .0234, about a 10.5% increase in drag. (1140 lbs to 1260 lbs from a Cd0 of .0210 to .0234 @ 427 mph)
I'll work out some other speed/altitude and climb figures later.
Greg Shaw
-
Hi Greg,
>At a Cd0 of .0210 I'm getting a vMax of 441 mph @ 23,000 ft. But, that is a mach number of about .63, which is well into the drag rise area. But the TAIC numbers of 427 sound easily plausible. 427 is doable at a Cd0 of about .0234, about a 10.5% increase in drag. (1140 lbs to 1260 lbs from a Cd0 of .0210 to .0234 @ 427 mph)
Using the power figures you provided, I get a 423 mph figure.
There's some uncertainty margin about it, but I think the unknown factors of the source data currently are greater than the inaccuracies of my calculation :-)
It's worth noting that Karnak's data doesn't give a 7 km full throttle height at full speed but just 6.5 km. That difference alone might shave 6 mph off the top speed.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
HoHun,
Are you adding the 150 lbs exhaust thrust?
Without it I get 422 mph @ 23,000 ft.
These are the complete figures I am using:
wgt - 7955 lbs
wingspan - 36.87 ft
wing area - 226 ft^2
aspect ratio - 6.015
Cd 0 - .0210
atm density ratio - .4806
e - .85
P% - .8
hp - 1577
calculated figures
dynamic press - 219.8205 lb ft^2
Cl - 0.1598
Cd - .0226
Cd 0 drag - 1043.3 lbs
total drag - 1122.3 lbs
thrust - 1121.3 lbs
(that is about a 3 fpm sink rate, reposted to correct mixed condition figures I used originally)
It would be interesting to see where we are differing.
Greg Shaw
-
Hi Greg,
>Are you adding the 150 lbs exhaust thrust?
I'm merely adding 71 lbs because I figure a collector exhaust still gives about 50% of the full thrust.
>It would be interesting to see where we are differing.
The thrust probably our biggest difference :-)
We also differ greatly in our method - I'm using a spreadsheet approximating quite a lot of input variables, which has some advantages as well as some disadvantages.
The important thing at the moment is that despite using completely different methods, we arrive at very similar results :-)
Is the altitude known at which the famous 427 mph were achieved? I didn't follow the thread above closely.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
I don't know the altitude that was at, but I would imagine it was at the full blower altitude of the second stage of the super charger. Looks like 6,400m by Wotan's data.