Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: splitatom on December 27, 2007, 11:52:39 AM
-
we need more japanese airplans so we could have the raiden with the 4 20 in the wings and or the adition of 2 upward fireing 20mm also we could have the ki-100 ki-44 shoki also the many japanese bombers like the sally ki-49
also for ground attack the ki-45 toryu and the ki-102
-
We need to use the search button more. ;)
-
shutup i know this has been brouth up before just bringing it up agian so people can talk about it again
-
Originally posted by splitatom
shutup i know this has been brouth up before just bringing it up agian so people can talk about it again
You couldn't bring it up in one of the other threads? I am not trying to be rude...
-
AWESOME, AWESOME idea!
I'll get on it right now!
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
AWESOME, AWESOME idea!
I'll get on it right now!
Nice Approach Scrooge.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Nice Approach Scrooge.
:confused:
-
Why more japanese planes.Most of them have the same gun pack 2 20mm's their are some that have more guns.
Long story short.All japanese planes do is:Turn,compress,and burn.
no more jap planes unless their bombers.
:aok
-
VansCrew obviously needs to read a lot more about Japanese aircraft.
For example, the Ki-44 and J2M are both interceptors with good climbing and diving performance, but average turning capability.
The Japanese fighters we already have do not match his claims, the Ki-61 being quite good at diving and the N1K2-J performing well too. The Ki-84 dives fine as long as you don't overspeed.
As for guns, the Ki-43-II has two 12.7mm guns, the Ki-44-II has four 12.7mm guns, the J2M3 has two 20mm Type 99 Model 1 cannons (as on the A6M2) and two 20mm Type 99 Model 2 cannons (as on the A6M5b and N1K2-J), the J2M3a has four 20mm Type 99 Model 2 cannons (as on the A6M5b and N1K2-J).
And once again, we see that the Japanese fighters in AH do not have identical armaments other than the Ki-61 and Ki-84, and even there the positions of the guns are reversed.
A6M2: two 20mm Type 99 Model 1 cannons and two 7.7mm Type 97 machine guns in the cowl.
A6M5b: two 20mm Type 99 Model 2 cannons and one 7.7mm Type 97 machine gun and one 13.2mm machine gun in the cowl.
Ki-61-I-Tei: two 12.7mm Ho-103 machine guns in the wings and two 20mm Ho-5 cannon in the cowl.
Ki-84-Ia: two 20mm Ho-5 cannon in the wings and two 12.7mm Ho-103 machine guns in the cowl.
Moving on from that, the performance of the different Japanese fighters in AH vary greatly. The A6M can kill Huricanes and Spitfires by turning with them, if the Ki-84 tries that it most likely dies.
-
I'm always up for more planes. Just for a suggestion how about the...
A6M3 (x2 Type 97 7.7mm cowling, 2x Type 99 I 20mm wings) or the...
A6M6c (x1 Type 3 13.2mm cowling, x2 Type 3 13.2mm wings, x2 Type 99 II 20mm wings).
-
Originally posted by VansCrew1
Why more japanese planes.Most of them have the same gun pack 2 20mm's their are some that have more guns.
Long story short.All japanese planes do is:Turn,compress,and burn.
no more jap planes unless their bombers.
:aok
I'd put the Tony up against your B n Z'ing Pee40 anyday of the week. I'm not even a "self-proclaimed hot shot" either.
You've got a lot to learn yet. You'll be decent one day, you aren't capable of it yet.
-
Originally posted by VansCrew1
Why more japanese planes.Most of them have the same gun pack 2 20mm's their are some that have more guns.
Long story short.All japanese planes do is:Turn,compress,and burn.
no more jap planes unless their bombers.
:aok
So, by what your saying we can out 80-90% of the allied planes, Because they have similar gun packages? :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Masherbrum
I'd put the Tony up against your B n Z'ing Pee40 anyday of the week. I'm not even a "self-proclaimed hot shot" either.
You've got a lot to learn yet. You'll be decent one day, you aren't capable of it yet.
I see your Ki-61 and raise you a D3A!
-
Originally posted by AirFlyer
A6M6c (x1 Type 3 13.2mm cowling, x2 Type 3 13.2mm wings, x2 Type 99 II 20mm wings).
A6M5c.
-
Originally posted by DarkglamJG52
A6M5c.
I'm up for either, the A6M6c had a few key diffrences from the 5c such as the much needed self sealing fuel tanks and water/methanol injection boost(WEP). But the 5c was likely built in higher numbers, so give or take on that one.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
I see your Ki-61 and raise you a D3A!
Charlieeeeeeeeee!
-
Originally posted by SpikesX
You couldn't bring it up in one of the other threads? I am not trying to be rude...
2700+ posts?? ....get a life
-
Originally posted by AirFlyer
I'm up for either, the A6M6c had a few key diffrences from the 5c such as the much needed self sealing fuel tanks and water/methanol injection boost(WEP). But the 5c was likely built in higher numbers, so give or take on that one.
H2O/methanol injection? Oh yes, our F4U-1A's+ have that too...
which begs the question:
If the Hogs get the injection, why don't the late 109G's+ have their fancy nas injection?
-
Originally posted by SgtPappy
If the Hogs get the injection, why don't the late 109G's+ have their fancy nas injection?
They do.
-
Originally posted by AirFlyer
I'm up for either, the A6M6c had a few key diffrences from the 5c such as the much needed self sealing fuel tanks and water/methanol injection boost(WEP). But the 5c was likely built in higher numbers, so give or take on that one.
Sounds like a slow, poorly turning zeke with all that extra armament.
-
I doubt one extra gun made much of a difference in weight, depending on how much ammo it had. At best the entire plane probably comes in a 500-600 Ibs. heavier then then A6M5b, thats just a rough estimate on my part though.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
VansCrew obviously needs to read a lot more about Japanese aircraft.
Ki-61-I-Tei: two 12.7mm Ho-103 machine guns in the wings and two 20mm Ho-5 cannon in the cowl.
I think you have this reversed, the 2 12.7mg's are in the cowl.
-
Originally posted by BigPlay
Originally posted by Karnak
VansCrew obviously needs to read a lot more about Japanese aircraft.
Ki-61-I-Tei: two 12.7mm Ho-103 machine guns in the wings and two 20mm Ho-5 cannon in the cowl.
I think you have this reversed, the 2 12.7mg's are in the cowl.
No, in the Ki-61 the 20mm cannons are in the cowl and the 12.7mm machine guns are in the wings.
Grab one offline, go to external view and test it.
-
Karnak is correct.
Off Topic
I've been flying the Ki-84 this month, and it seems as though the weapons it carries are more effective than other Japanese guns. Is this actually the case, or just perception? I thought I'd read somewhere in here that they modelled some of their own weapons off of the Brownings used by the US. Is this true, and if so, which ones?
Not an expert on the Japanese planeset by any means, but after flying the A6Ms and N1K, their guns seem anemic by comparison. I'm curious if it's a case of my poor aim, my worse luck, or if there is a pronounced difference in the MGs and cannons.
-
Originally posted by Motherland
Sounds like a slow, poorly turning zeke with all that extra armament.
A6M3, Type 0 Model 32 was the poor turning Zeke of the lot.
ack-ack
-
hubsonfire,
The IJN Type 99 weapons were based on Oerlikon weapons much like the MG/FF and MG/FFL were.
However, the IJA's Ho-103 12.7mm machine gun and Ho-5 20mm cannon were both developments of the Browning. They were lightened and rechambered for the Japanese rounds, but they are fundamentally Browning designs.
Weight of a small sample of WWII aircraft guns:
UK Hispano Mk II: 50kg 600rpm 880m/sec
US .50 caliber Browning: 29kg 650rpm 880m/sec
IJA Ho-103 12.7mm: 23kg 900rpm 760m/sec (Browning derivitive)
IJA Ho-5 20mm: 37kg 700-850rpm 700-730m/sec (Browning derivitive)
IJN Type 99 Model 1: 23-26kg 520rpm 550-600m/sec
IJN Type 99 Model 2: 34-38kg 490rpm 750m/sec
Luft. MG151/20: 42kg 700rpm 710-800m/sec
VVS ShVAK 20mm: 42kg 800rpm 860m/sec
VVS B-20 20mm: 25kg 800rpm 860m/sec
EDIT: Added RoF and muzzle velocities.
-
Ah, that might well explain it then. Interesting bit on the Type 99s as well.
-
Originally posted by Raptor
I see your Ki-61 and raise you a D3A!
I see your D3A and raise you a B5N!
-
Im starting to really like the Niki. The cannon on the thing is fearsome and it has a good mix of attributes. Ive been meaning to take out a KI-84 cause Ive heard many speak well of it. The Zero is, of course, the Zero, and the KI-67 is, IMOHO, the best bomber in the game.
So I have a lot of enthusiasm for the Japanese plane set. The Betty would be an interesting addition, "I love medium bombers", as long as it was the late war one with self sealing tanks and more squirrels under the hood. The Betty had a huge presence in the war and deserves to be in the game.
-
If/when we get the Betty it will almost certainly be the G4M2 with no self sealing tanks. The protected G4M3 saw almost no combat or saw no combat. I've not been able to tell which.
-
The betty and the TU-2 are must have bombers in my opinion to cover these areas of the planeset. Both are very capable planes and would be used in the MA.
-
Pe-2 would be a better choice than the Tu-2. It was produced in much larger numbers, and with two or three versions would cover most of the war. The Tu-2 is 1944-45 only.
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Pe-2 would be a better choice than the Tu-2. It was produced in much larger numbers, and with two or three versions would cover most of the war. The Tu-2 is 1944-45 only.
Yeah but a lot happened in '44 & '45 and the TU-2 flew a lot and was produced in large quantities. It was also the best Russian bomber in the war.
Many airplanes, or their variants, weren't used until '44 or '45. If this was a criteria we'd have about 1/2 the airplanes that we do. And we have many that made a far less impact then the TU-2 did.
I believe both the Pe-2 and TU-2 belong. I want the TU-2 because it was a far more capable airplane.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Many airplanes, or their variants, weren't used until '44 or '45. If this was a criteria we'd have about 1/2 the airplanes that we do. And we have many that made a far less impact then the TU-2 did.
But you defeated your own arguement. The 44-45 plane set is already well represented, ergo we need more fillers for the mid and especially early war planes.
-
Originally posted by Rich46yo
Yeah but a lot happened in '44 & '45 and the TU-2 flew a lot and was produced in large quantities. It was also the best Russian bomber in the war.
Many airplanes, or their variants, weren't used until '44 or '45. If this was a criteria we'd have about 1/2 the airplanes that we do. And we have many that made a far less impact then the TU-2 did.
I believe both the Pe-2 and TU-2 belong. I want the TU-2 because it was a far more capable airplane.
The Pe-2 also saw heavy use (heavier than the Tu-2 as a matter of fact) in 1944-45. That is why I suggested two or three versions of Pe-2 be added.
-
Originally posted by E25280
But you defeated your own arguement. The 44-45 plane set is already well represented, ergo we need more fillers for the mid and especially early war planes.
But Russian bombers arent represented at all. So why would you want the less capable one? Or, let me put it this way, if we could only get one why wish for the less capable one?
Dont get me wrong, wish for what you want. Myself personaly I probably wouldnt fly the Pe-2 much if at all. And the reason why the late war set is so well represented is because thats what the vast majority of people fly.
The TU-2 would be a winner. Big bombload, fast, and well defended. Also it first flew combat in 1941.
-
Tu-2 first flew in combat in 1944. There is an earlier aircraft called a Tu-2 as well, but it isn't the same thing.
The Pe-2 was one of the great aircraft of WWII and quite capable, if not quite as capable as the Tu-2. I don't know what you are imagining for the Pe-2, but it would do quite well.
As to the Tu-2's defences, three 12.7mm machine guns isn't really "well defended".
-
Originally posted by Karnak
Tu-2 first flew in combat in 1944. There is an earlier aircraft called a Tu-2 as well, but it isn't the same thing.
The Pe-2 was one of the great aircraft of WWII and quite capable, if not quite as capable as the Tu-2. I don't know what you are imagining for the Pe-2, but it would do quite well.
As to the Tu-2's defences, three 12.7mm machine guns isn't really "well defended".
And twin 20mm cannon in the wings. 12.7mm is a big step up from 7.62mm, either way. They called it a lot of things during its career.http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/tu-2.html
-
we could use more jap planes, G4M3, Ki-27, Ki-43, Ki-102, B6N2, D4Y4, J2M5
-
No, in the Ki-61 the 20mm cannons are in the cowl and the 12.7mm machine guns are in the wings.
Grab one offline, go to external view and test it.
[edit] Variants
Ki-61
12 original prototypes.
Ki-61-I
The first production version.
Ki-61-Ia
The second production fighter variant. Most were armed with 2 x 7.7 mm (0.303 in) and 2 x 12.7 mm (0.50 in) machine guns, but some were fitted with a pair of German 20 mm MG 151 cannon instead of wing machine guns.
Ki-61-Ib
Most armed with 4 x 12.7 mm machine guns, but some were fitted with a pair of German 20 mm MG 151 cannon instead of wing machine guns.
Ki-61-I-KAIc
Featured reinforced wings to permit carrying bombs or external fuel tanks, and had a 190 mm (7.5 in) fuselage stretch, a lightened structure, revised rear fuselage, and a fixed tail wheel. Armament comprised 2 x 20 mm cannon in the nose.[15]
Ki-61-I-KAId
Interceptor variant with 2 x 12.7 mm fuselage machine guns and 2 x 30 mm wing cannon.
Ki-61-II
Prototype with 10% greater wing area and a Ha-140 engine with 1,120 kW (1,500 hp) for takeoff; first flight December 1943; eight built.
Ki-61-II-KAI
Pre-production version with the original wing, a 220 mm (8.7 in) fuselage stretch, enlarged rudder, and Ha-140 engine; 30 built.
Ki-61-II-KAIa
Armed with 2 x 12.7 mm machine guns in the wings and 2 x 20 mm cannon in the fuselage.
Ki-61-II-KAIb
Armed with 4 x 20 mm cannon.
Ki-61-III
One prototype only.
A total of 3,159 Ki-61 were built.[16]
It depends on what model your talking about, not all Ki's had cannons in the fuselage and not all had machine guns.
-
Judy Judy Judy.
In events the IJN will always be victimized from late '42 on, until a capable carrier strike plane is added. Grace is too late, and Jill isn't sexy enough. Bring Judy to the game and let her sink some shipping.
(http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijna/d4ypic.gif)
-Sik
-
i fly mostly japanese planes. the a6m5 is my primary fighter. n1kj for ground attack/bomber intercept.
-
It depends on what model your talking about, not all Ki's had cannons in the fuselage and not all had machine guns.
The one we have in the game obviously. Try thinking a little.
-
The one we have in the game obviously. Try thinking a little.
Ok Dad, didn't know anyone from Kentucky were smert az u, that is wher your from right ?
-
Interesting to note..
IJN Type 99 Model 1: 23-26kg 520rpm 550-600m/sec
At roughly 600m/sec that round is very much like the p39's 37mm cannon.It might be worth while getting use to a rapid fire version of that, then learning from the zeke how to set up shots with the p39's cannon.
Hmmm's..worth a look.
-
the oscar plz plz plz plz plz plz plz plz plz plz plz plz :pray :pray :pray :pray :pray
-
I'd be more interested in getting Russian than Japanese planes, but we definately need more of both. I do have to say just wait longer and get the Tu-2 and the Pe-2 at the same time.
-
Wow! I just looked on Wikipedia on the Tu-2 and it is amazing it look at this
Maximum speed: 521 km/h (281 kt, 325 mph)
Range: 2,020 km (1,090 nm, 1,260 mi)
Service ceiling 9,000 m (30,000 ft)
Rate of climb: 8.2 m/s (1,610 ft/min)
Wing loading: 217 kg/m² (45 lb/ft²)
Power/mass: 260 W/kg (0.16 hp/lb)
Armament
Guns:
2× 20 mm (0.79 in) fixed forward-firing ShVAK cannons in the wings
3× 7.62 mm (0.30 in) rear-firing ShKAS machine guns (later replaced by 12.7 mm (0.50 in)Berezin UB machine guns) in the canopy, dorsal and ventral hatches.
Bombs:
Internal 1,500 kg (3300 lb)
External 2,270 kg (5000 lb)