Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Slash27 on November 12, 2005, 12:44:31 AM
-
That is my wish.
-
I thought your wish was for tiny asian twins with huge....nevermind.:)
-
asian twins?
-
Yes, Ki-45!
-
Oh, I thought....:o
Me bad :D
-
perv :rofl
I think Ki45 would perform worse than 110G with worse armament than a 110c. Do we need it? No. They weren't *THAT* common. Would I fly it? Hell yes!
Ki100 performs marginally worse than Ki61. The differences were reliability of the engine, which isn't a factor in AH at all, so we already have that plane (it just looks different and has a few MPH top speed over it).
-
look what i found in the top of the google image results for "Ki-45"....
(http://www.ku.ac.th/AgrInfo/corn/ki1_45.jpg)
what is this world comming to?
-
Originally posted by Slash27
That is my wish.
Just don't understand why everyone wants this aircraft. :huh
The KI-61 KAI we have will out perform the KI-100 in almost every aspect.
A better request my be the RAIDEN. :aok
-
I'm not so sure about that Jester. The only commonly available performance numbers on these two Kawi's are top speeds and service ceilings. The installation of the radial engine reduced weight by a couple of hundred pounds at least (iirc...all my reference materials are unavailable to me at the moment) and increased power by approx 300 hp. This would address the ki-61s main shortcomings imo...climb rate and acceleration. A Hien that would climb in the 3500-4000 fpm range and accelerate like an N1K2 or Ki-84 (just guessing here) sounds like an attractive proposition to me as I've always preferred the handling qualities of the Ki-61 over the N1K. Turn rate would also likely see a modest improvment due to the lower wing loading and additional power. Yes, the increased frontal area reduced top speed by 7mph or so but who cares? It was never very fast to begin with.
In any case it would help fill out a still sparse Japanese planeset and the 3D model of everything aft of the firewall is already there unless they model the later one with the revised canopy.
I do agree with your suggestion of the J2M though. I've been waiting 5 years for that one to show up. Gimme a J2M, a Ki-44, and a G4M (there's just no adequate substitute for Betty in the current lineup) and I could be fairly satisfied with the Japanese planeset.
On the subject of Japanese twins...its been mentioned many times before by Brady and others but the Ki-102 would probably be the most useful, in the MA at least.
Yes Pyro you make me randy. Now make me Randy!! :D
edit: Oh yeah...Howdy fellers! Been away for awhile. Nice to be back.
Slash, Jester
-
Originally posted by Jester
Just don't understand why everyone wants this aircraft. :huh
The KI-61 KAI we have will out perform the KI-100 in almost every aspect.
A better request my be the RAIDEN. :aok
The Ki-100 was immediatley revealed as an exceptional intercepter, one regarded by some as Japan's outstanding fighter aircraft of the Pacific war.
This is from The Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. Granted its probably not the premier reference guide on Japanese figters, but its decent. It claims the K-100 to have a powerplant of Mitsubishi Ha-112-II rated at 1,500 hp. It also claims a top speed of 367 mph vs the Ki-61-Ic's 348 mph top end. Most of the info Ive come across on the Ki-100 has always led me to believe it was one of the better fighters from Japan and much better the the Tony.If you have better references Jester please point me in the right direction. I get frustrated with the conflicting information from my books and from the boards.
DblTrubl, damn good to see you again. Its been a long time since Ive seen that name <>:aok
btw, have you had a chance to fly the ki-84 yet? Great fighter:D
-
Originally posted by Slash27
btw, have you had a chance to fly the ki-84 yet? Great fighter:D
Are you kidding? That was the first thing I did...ok ok I fondled a couple of P-38s too...I'm so weak willed :D And I agree. Sweet ride.
-
Good deal:D
If you are looking for a squad or just want to fly with some guys, look up the Hells Angels in the MA (Rooks) Very laid back group and you are more than welcome.
More tidbits on the Ki-100
Kawasaki Ki-100 Goshiki-sen(Year 5 fighter)
Builder: Kawasaki Kokuki Kogyo K.K.
Type: Interceptor fighter.
In March 1945, Allied aircraft operating over Japan began encountering an exceptionally potent interceptor which appeared in none of their recognition manuals. It was not however, a totally new aircraft, but the most successful improvisation of the war.
As 1944 turned into 1945, the Imperial Japanese Army Air Force and Kawasaki Kokuki Kogyo were faced with a dilemma. They had a good fighter, the Ki-61 Hien(Swallow) whose liquid-cooled engine was both increasingly troublesome and becoming harder to obtain. The last straw was a B-29 raid in January 1945 that completely destroyed the factory making the engines leaving some 275 airframes badly needed by the country standing idle with no engines. Kawasaki was ordered to find a new engine for the Ki-61 as soon as possible. The only available engine with enough power and a reputation for reliability was the Mitsubishi Kinsei, a large-diameter radial engine designed for naval bombers. Fitting this wide engine into the narrow fuselage of the Hien was tricky but after examining an imported FW-190 and consulting the Navy which had just fitted the Kinsei into the D4Y Suisei bomber for similar reasons, the necessary adjustments were made and the first radial-powered Hien flew in February 1945. It had no name, being known only like all IJAAF aircraft by its airframe(kitai) number, Ki-100 and like most Japanese aircraft, Army or Navy by its function and year of introduction, Goshiki-sen, the Year 5 Fighter. (It did not even have an Allied code name having caught the opposition by surprise.)
Almost immediately, engineers and pilots alike realized that they had stumbled into greatness. The Ki-100 was slightly slower than the Hien due to wind resistance from the radial engine, but was lighter and more maneuverable. More important it could be counted on due to the reliablity of the engine. It soon acquired a reputation as the best, most reliable, and easiest to fly of any IJAAF fighter. Even the newest pilots could fly the Goshiki-sen like a pro, and in the hands of a pro it could be deadly. It was superior to the F6F Hellcat and pilots soon regarded the Grumman fighter as an easy kill In the first encounter between Hellcats and Ki-100's, 14 of the Hellcats were shot down without loss to the Japanese. It also proved capable if intercepting B-29's. It even proved itself the equal of the P-51 Mustang, contests between the two aircraft being determined by pilot skill rather than the merits of the aircraft. It was in a Ki-100 that Major Hinoki Yohei, the Douglas Bader of Japan, an ace who kept on flying despite severe injuries, scored his 12th and final kill of the war, downing a Mustang flown by Capt. William Benbow. Not bad for an improvisation.
Ki-100's built from scratch rather than from existing airframes featured an all-round vision bubble hood canopy.
Profile written by: Leon Kay
-
Yeah, sounds like a great plane, light with lots of power, as much like an aerobatic plane as a fighter.
-
(http://www.airventure.de/hendon/hendon04_mof_ki100_02.jpg)
-
sweet......thank you Furby:aok
-
Gorgeous aircraft. I to have mentioned the Ki100 several times as a nice addition to the Japanese Inventory. The Soviet inventory of fighters also could use a few additions such as the Yak3.
We have a nice inventory of allied planes. 109s and 190s also...although an He219 & FW190A4 would be nice. We have more then enough variants of the Spitfire imho as well.
The "Jack" "Tojo" and the Ki100 would round out the Japanese planeset nicely imho.
-
Ki61-I:
1175hp Ha40 (DB knock-off)
Weights: empty 5798lb loaded: 7650lbs
Max Speed: 348mph
initial climb: 2200fpm
ceiling: 32,800ft
range 990-1100 mi.
Ki61-II:
1450hp Ha-140 (DB knock-off)
Weights: empty 6294lb loaded: 8433lbs
Max Speed: 379mph
initial climb: 2200fpm
ceiling: 36,089ft
range 990-1100 mi.
Ki-100:
1450hp Ha-140 (DB knock-off)
Weights: empty 5567lb loaded: 7705lbs
Max Speed: 367mph
initial climb: 3280fpm
ceiling: 37,700ft
range 1200 mi.
As you can see it actually performs WORSE than the Ki61-II. The difference between the I and the II is like the C202 and the C205. Different engine. Initial Ki61-IIs had a larger redesigned wing but they quickly went back to the original wing.
One thing to note, we have a Ki61-I-KAIc. Strange thing is it's a -I (lighter weight) but with a -II 12.7mm loadout (instead of 7mm) and it has a top speed of about 370, like the II. I think AH has a hybrid model going on, or something.
Ki100 would perform WORSE than what we have now, and all the rest is too similar to warrant 2 models that do the same thing and act the same way.
-
Note that Ki-100 speed matches Ki-61-Ic but has much higher rate of climb
Specification of Kawasaki Ki-61-I-KAIc Army Type 3 Fighter Model 1c:
One Army Type 2 twelve-cylinder liquid cooled engine (Kawasaki Ha-40) rated at 1180 hp for takeoff and 1100 hp at 11,480 feet. Performance: Maximum speed 366 mph at 13,980 feet. An altitude of 16,400 feet could be reached in 7 minutes. Service ceiling 32,810 feet. Maximum range 1120 miles.
Dimensions: Wingspan 39 feet 4 7/16 inches, length 29 feet 4 inches, height 12 feet 1 11/16 inches, wing area 215.3 square feet. Weights: 5798 pounds empty, 7650 pounds loaded.
Armament: Two fuselage-mounted 20 mm Ho-5 cannon and two wing-mounted 12.7 mm Type 1 (Ho-103) machine guns and two wing-mounted 12.7 mm Type 1 (Ho-103) machine guns.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki-61.html
-
Ki-61-II had very low production numbers. Ki-100 has the weight of the Ki-61-I & the power of the -II, sounds like a fun plane to fly. I bet wings level & full power it could get to a super low IAS before stalling.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Ki61-I:
1175hp Ha40 (DB knock-off)
Weights: empty 5798lb loaded: 7650lbs
Max Speed: 348mph
initial climb: 2200fpm
ceiling: 32,800ft
range 990-1100 mi.
Ki61-II:
1450hp Ha-140 (DB knock-off)
Weights: empty 6294lb loaded: 8433lbs
Max Speed: 379mph
initial climb: 2200fpm
ceiling: 36,089ft
range 990-1100 mi.
Ki-100:
1450hp Ha-140 (DB knock-off)
Weights: empty 5567lb loaded: 7705lbs
Max Speed: 367mph
initial climb: 3280fpm
ceiling: 37,700ft
range 1200 mi.
As you can see it actually performs WORSE than the Ki61-II. The difference between the I and the II is like the C202 and the C205. Different engine. Initial Ki61-IIs had a larger redesigned wing but they quickly went back to the original wing.
One thing to note, we have a Ki61-I-KAIc. Strange thing is it's a -I (lighter weight) but with a -II 12.7mm loadout (instead of 7mm) and it has a top speed of about 370, like the II. I think AH has a hybrid model going on, or something.
Ki100 would perform WORSE than what we have now, and all the rest is too similar to warrant 2 models that do the same thing and act the same way.
Worse?
By those numbers I see in ki100 a plane with 50% greater climb and 700lbs less weight with the same armament, same wing area, better visibility and no radiator damage possible all that for only being 13mph slower - and I bet thats only an issue at higher altitudes down low the 100 may be just as fast.
So the ki100 would be vastly better than ki61-II in:
Climb
Acceleration
Turn
Low speed handling
High AoA
Damage resitance
They would be equal in firepower.
Ki61-II slightly faster and probably only so at higher alitudes
Ki100 is obviously much betterb than ki61-II, even more so when you consider that the US opponents Japan faced were 70mph faster than even the Ki61-II so the 13mph were irellevant but climb accel and turn were extremely important to the slower japanese fighter...
-
Krusty, the Ki-100 has a radial engine and not the inline DB copy. I also wouldnt use the top speed as the indicator of outperforming another aircraft. I wouldnt say the AH2 Ta-152 outperforms the Ki-84.( the real life versions I really wouldnt have a clue)
-
Originally posted by Slash27
Good deal:D
More tidbits on the Ki-100
It was superior to the F6F Hellcat and pilots soon regarded the Grumman fighter as an easy kill In the first encounter between Hellcats and Ki-100's, 14 of the Hellcats were shot down without loss to the Japanese. It also proved capable if intercepting B-29's. It even proved itself the equal of the P-51 Mustang, contests between the two aircraft being determined by pilot skill rather than the merits of the aircraft.
This claim of shooting down 14 Hellcats without loss has long since been proven false. Never happened. 50% to 70% of all Japanese claims never happened. One historian who researched Japanese claims stated "that they (the Japanese) claimed virtually everything they shot at, and missed most of those to boot". (Barrett Tillman, 2002)
As it actually stands, most surviving Japanese pilots considered the F6F as the BEST American fighter, stating that it was the most feared.
There's a lot of revisionist history surrounding the Ki-100. The fact remains that it offered lack-luster performance, being between 75 and 100 mph slower than the latest USAAF fighters, and generally outclassed by everything else in the Allied fighter inventory.
I too would prefer the JM3 Raiden to the Ki-100, although any addition to the Japanese plane set would be welcome.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Top speed isnt the prime concern.
All ramble about the new spit16 while its top speed is really not that high.
So the ki 100 could be real good eaven when slower. But i find the mid and early war much more interesting, having more than just an a6m2 and a6m5 for the scenarios would be great.
-
at the end of the day the guy wishes that the Ki100 be added. it's his wish irrespective of what anyone's opinion may be. i think it would be a welcome addition to japanese set ups in the sea and ct.
-
Originally posted by Widewing
There's a lot of revisionist history surrounding the Ki-100. The fact remains that it offered lack-luster performance, being between 75 and 100 mph slower than the latest USAAF fighters, and generally outclassed by everything else in the Allied fighter inventory.
I too would prefer the JM3 Raiden to the Ki-100, although any addition to the Japanese plane set would be welcome.
My regards,
Widewing
Well, Im not here trying to revise history by any means. While I very much appreciate and prefer facts over claims, I really just want a new toy for AH2. And to expand on what Storch said, at the end of the day I want as a complete Japanese planeset as possible. Has any other sim ever modelled a Ki-100, Ki-44, or Ki-45? Whether or not an aircraft was out classed or sub par in real life, I enjoy the historic match ups found in the CT and special events more than anything else in AH.
And since I have you here WW, what was the reasons for its lack-luster performance? Was it the actual design of the aircraft or quality issues with engines and such?
And if you have some recomendations on reference books it would be greatly welcomed. I have a shelf full of stuff but I get frustrated with lack of accuracy and conflicting or just plane lack of information in what I have.
-
16k in 7 minutes? That's only 2,200fpm climb, sorry, that's no better than the Ki61. Do the math, 16 / 7 = 2.2 (truncated).
Like I said, the radial engine on the Ki100 was not a performance issue, it was a reliability issue. Less Ki100s were made than Ki61-IIs, and as has been mentioned the Ki61-II was pretty rare. The Ki61-I we have no actually has the light performance of the -I but the top speed and power of the -II, so what does it matter what the Ki100 can do? It won't be lighter. It won't be faster. It won't climb faster (2200fpm) It won't do anything, basically, except be more draggy.
EDIT:Grunherz, you are correct, it has a radial. I copied and pasted, and forgot to change the engine listing (lol) my bad! The other stuff is right though. I don't know where the climb rate my book has came from, the math doesn't add up to that.
-
I dont think limiting a limited plane set because a plane wasnt 'uber-fantastic' is a good course to take. I also wish for the Ki-43. But this is just a wish list and not a demand list. HTC doesnt have a team of 10 guys to work on every ride we or they may want and I realize this. But to have these new planes is my wish.:aok
-
Everywhere I read says that there were four Ki.100s produced for each Ki.61-II
-
Well if there were only 100 Ki61-IIs (more rare than the -I) that means there were only 25 Ki100s.
EDIT: That's just an example, I think there were 140 -IIs, but you get the idea.
-
I think you have your math backwards. Wouldn't that be 400 Ki-100's as per your example?
:)
-
Ki-100 would be nice and I guess relatively easy to do when the Ki-61-I-Tei gets updated as it would reuse much of the Ki-61's model.
I'd rather see the Ki-61-I-Ko or Ki-61-I-Otsu though.
For new Japanese fighters I'd really like to see the Ki-43-I-Hei or Ki-43-II-Ko, Ki-44-II-Otsu and J2M3a Raiden.
-
According to the Joe Baugher web site:
By the time that production was suspended, 374 Model 2s had been built, but 30 of these were destroyed on the ground prior to delivery and 275 were built without engines.
and
A total of 396 Ki-100s were built, including 275 Ki-61-II conversions, 118 Ki-100-Ib production aircraft built from scratch, and three Ki-100-II prototypes.
If you rely on Joe Baugher's, I guess it is hard to exactly differentiate Ki.61-II production numbers from Ki.100 production numbers. It is as easy to say Ki.100 wins 396-99 as it is Ki.61-II wins 374-118, or it is close, Ki.100 in a squeaker 118-99 with 274 shared production victories.
-
Here is a photo comaprison of Ia & Ib Ki.100
(http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/image/foto/1-9-2003-10-55-kawasaki_ki-100-ia_goshiki_of_59th_sentai_flight-line_june_1945.jpg)
(http://www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/image/foto/1-9-2003-10-56-kawasaki_ki-100-ib_goshiki_of_5th_sentai_parked.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Slash27
And since I have you here WW, what was the reasons for its lack-luster performance? Was it the actual design of the aircraft or quality issues with engines and such?
Basically, the Ki-100 was terribly slow when compared to what it had to compete with.
Let's see how it compares to a P-40L of 1942.
Speed
P-40L: 370 mph at 20k
Ki-100: 360 mph at 19.8k
Sea level speed
P-40L: 312 mph
Ki-100: 307 mph
Climb, initial from sea level
P-40L: 3,300 fpm
Ki-100: 3,200 fpm
Time to climb
P-40L: 5.9 minutes to 15k
Ki-100: 6.6 minutes to 16.4k
Very similar performance, except that the P-40L entered service in 1942 and the Ki-100 in 1945.
Facing the Ki-100 was the F6F-5, F4U-1D, F4U-4, P-51D and P-47N.
The slowest of these is the F6F-5, which when tested by TAIC attained 409 mph at 21,600 feet (that's 6 mph less than Grumman claimed). At 20k, the Ki-100 can manage only 349 mph, at 21.6k it will be slower still.
The other American fighters were faster yet. How would the Ki-100 hope to compete? Consider that the A6M5 easily out-climbed the Ki-100 and could turn circles around it, the only advantage of the Ki-100 was in speed, and that advantage was less than 20 mph. By 1945, the Zero was hopelessly out of date. Granted, the Ki-100 was easy to fly, meaning low-time pilots could fly it without difficulty. Handling was excellent, but like the Ki-61, its initial and sustained rate of roll was barely average, degrading from 240 mph on up. Acceleration was poor, especially by late-war standards.
In short, the Ki-100 was a solid fighter for 1942, but by 1945 it was completely out-classed. It could and did score victories. But, so did the Zero.
As to sources, I'd avoid most of the books written by pulp factory authors like Gunston. Joe Baugher uses Francillon as a source and Francillon published more fiction than Stephen King...
Indeed, the utter hogwash of Ki-100s matching the P-51D and P-47N is rediculous in the extreme. That claim of 14 F6Fs shot down for no loss was a complete frabrication, unsupported by Navy records. Yet, author after author repeats this nonsense over and over.
The battle these idiots are referring to occured on July 25th, 1945 over Yokaichi Airfield. 18 Ki-100s bounced a group of 10 Hellcats. The Japanese were at 12,000 feet, the F6Fs were down around 5,000 feet, strafing and rocketing the base. In the ensuing fight, two F6Fs were lost. One in a collision with Captain Tsutae Obara. Both pilots were killed. Ensign Herbert Law's engine was hit by ground fire, causing the windscreen to obscured by engine oil. Unable to see, he evaded long enough to crash-land his Hellcat. IJAAF Warrant Officer Shin Ikuta was shot down and killed by the F6Fs. Low on gas and ammo, the remaining 8 Hellcats returned to their carrier. Japanese pilots claimed 12 F6Fs destroyed. Navy pilots claimed 8 Japanese aircraft shot down or destroyed on the ground. Actual losses were 2 lost and 2 damaged for the Americans. Japanese losses were 2 lost and 3 damaged, one of which crash-landed on Yokaichi field. Several Japanese aircraft were left burning on the field resulting from the Hellcats strafing. Gun camera film revealed that 3 utility aircraft had been set ablaze by the F6Fs, and several more unidentified aircraft were damaged to some extent.
Over time, this engagement has been embellished to inflate the Japanese claims and ignore the fact that two Ki-100s went down and another shot-up Ki-100 was wrecked in a forced landing.
In reality, the Japanese force, nearly twice as large as the American force, attacked with the advantage of altitude. Despite being handed a significant disadvanage, the Navy pilots scored as well or better than the Japanese and were able to disengage at will.
Virtually anything written by Henry Sakaida can be trusted to be generally correct. Watanabe is also reasonably reliable, with Kuroe, Jobo and Izawa somewhat less so. Some of these authors accept Japanese claims on face value, therefore it is essential to compare US records to get an accurate picture. However, all the the above can be relied upon to accurately report Japanese losses. Look for english translations as much of the material by the above authors was published in the Japanese language.
My regards,
Widewing
-
"Speed
P-40L: 370 mph at 20k
Ki-100: 360 mph at 19.8k"
(and other comments)
Considering that the Ki100 saw its first flight (or is that first action?) in Feb 1945, that's far inferior to everything else [it would come up against] in the air.
-
That seems to match my impressions of the Ki-100 pretty well Widewing. The only real strong point I have heard for it is that the engine was reliable at a time when most Japanese engines were anything but reliable. That alone could endear it in the minds of it's pilots I'd think, even if a working Ki-84 would utterly dominate it.
-
regardless of the facts the japanese planeset needs rounding out. the Ki100 would be welcome and used in the CT as well as in the SEA.
-
The Ki43 Hayabusha (Oscar) is the most historically significant Japanese plane not in the plane set. It gets my vote for the next Japanese plane to be added. But hey, I'll fly the Ki100 if they add it. I like the Ki61 we have now and fly it a few times a month with varied success.
We are likely going to be waiting for quite a while to get any of this. The plan, I believe, is to bring all the current models up to AHII standards before attempting any new models. Of course this gives us plenty of time to make our wishes known:D
Magoo
-
After ki-43 of course the Ki-100 (Ki-100 I-Otsu please) be a great addition. In hand of good pilot the Ki-100 would keep most any opponent on toes. Ample web info suggests Japan pilot feel it was better than ki-84.
Yay Ki-100! :aok
EDIT:
...utter hogwash of Ki-100s matching the P-51D and P-47N is rediculous in the extreme.
Yes much debate over Ki-100 actual performance. There data both way. Some common data suggest:
...the Nakajima only had the advantage of top level speed and dive rate up to 496 mph (the Ki100 could then keep diving another 30+ mph faster, however) due to it's streamlined design but the Kawasaki was stronger and more stable at terminal speeds (the Ki 84 also had more trouble with aerobatics especially at high speed than the Ki 100 with it's lighter controls as well as better climbing turns).
This may be closest true statement:
Maybe best isn't the word. Surprisingly effective might be the right phrase. On paper it doesn't shine, but in the air is where it counts.
-
More fuel for the disco inferno. :D
-
All we have 67 years after the fact is data to compare.
Generally the pilots memories or thoughts are not trusted due to the time that has elapsed and sometimes a lack of context to put those memories in.
Generally the Japanese and Russian records are hard to get, either due to the way they were kept or tallied or because of the Cold War, so there numbers cant be trusted.
Generally we don't have two flyable planes today that we could fly to compare. Even if we did that wouldn't be a true account of how that A/C preformed in the field during WW2.
So that leaves us with the United States numbers and A/C test that were done by the Allies after the war.
Anyone going against the Uniteds States "Big Blue Blanket" or AAF in 1945 isn't going to have great K/D ratio, and that's no matter how good the plane is.
And again the testing the Allies did after the war, still isn't going to produce the exact results that the manufacturing country got on the battle field.
Notice above I used a lot of "generally", because I know these conclusions weren't always the case.
So that brings me back to the 67 years latter part, all we have is stats.
We need something to compare right?
I feel the most overrated stat that we use/quote in our game (Aces High) when it comes to the quality of an A/C, is its absolute top speed at Alt stat.
Personally I will take a good turn rate and a respectable climb rate over absolute top speed anyday.
+1 for the Ki-100, the Ki-61-Hei, all the Ki-43's, Ki-44, J2M3a :joystick:
-
+1 for the Ki-100