Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Karnak on June 15, 2000, 02:57:00 PM
-
Ok, the RAF thread's been beaten to death I think (time of death could probably have been called at half its current length, we've been beating a dead horse).
Now, what Japanese aircraft would you like to see in AH? We're getting the A6M5b Zero "Zeke", so what next?
I would love to see a Mitsubishi J2M3 Raiden "Jack" as the next Japanese fighter. Saburo Sakai praised this fighter quite a bit.
I would like to get the Kawanishi H8K2 "Emily" as the first Japanese bomber.
A nice light bomber would be the Aichi B7A2 Ryusei "Grace". All of these aircraft saw real service, and so would not be out of place.
All three of these aircraft have variants that could be introduced later with a minimum amount of work on the 3D files.
Mitsubishi J2M3 Raiden "Jack"
J2M3
Dimensions:
Span 10.80 m
Length 9.95 m
Height 3.95 m
Wing area 20.1 m2
Weights:
Empty 2,460 kg
Loaded 3,435 kg
Wing loading 171.3 kg/m2
Power loading 1.9 kg/hp
Performance:
Maximum speed 317 kt at 5,300 m
Cruising speed 190 kt
Climb to 6,000 m in 6 min 14 sec
Service ceiling 11,700 m
Normal range 1,025 naut miles
Armament:
Two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon and two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 1 cannon (J2M3, J2M5, J2M6 and J2M7)
Four wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon (J2M3a, J2M5a, J2M6a and J2M7a)
External stores: two 60 kg bombs, or two 200 litre drop tanks
Powerplant:
One Mitsubishi MK4R-A Kasei 23a fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radial, rated at 1,800 hp for take-off, 1,575 hp at 1,800 m and 1,410 hp at 4,800 m, driving a four-blade constant-speed metal propeller (J2M2, J2M3, J2M3a, J2M6 and J2M6a)
Accommodation:
Pilot in enclosed cockpit
Description:
Single-seat interceptor fighter. All-metal construction with fabric-covered control surfaces
(http://www.skypoint.com/~jbp/ijna/j2mlat1.gif)
(http://www.iquebec.com/2iemeguerre/avions/images/Image228.jpg)
Kawanishi H8K2 "Emily"
H8K2
Dimensions:
Span 38.00 m
Length 28.13 m
Height 9.15 m
Wing area 160.0 m2
Weights:
Empty 18,380 kg
Loaded 24,500 kg
Maximum 32,500 kg
Wing loading 153.1 kg/m2
Power loading 3.3 kg/hp
Performance:
Maximum speed 252 kt at 5,000 m
Cruising speed 160 kt at 4,000 m
Climb to 5,000 m in 10 min 12 sec
Service ceiling 8,850 m
Maximum range 3,862 naut miles
Armament:
20 mm Type 99 Model 1 cannon in bow, dorsal and tail turrets and two beam hatches, and 7.7 mm Type 92 machine-guns in ventral, port and starboard fuselage sides and cockpit hatches (H8K2, H8K3 and H8K4)
External load: two 800 kg torpedoes, or eight 250 kg bombs, or sixteen 60 kg bombs or depth-charges (H8K1 to H8K4)
Powerplant:
Four Mitsubishi MK4Q Kasei 22 fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radials, rated at 1,850 hp for take-off, 1,680 hp at 2,100 m and 1,540 hp at 5,500 m, driving four-blade metal propellers (H8K2, H8K2-L and H8K3)
Accommodation:
Crew of ten (H8K1 to H8K4). Crew of nine and 29 passengers or 64 troops (H8K2-L)
Description:
Four-engined long-range maritime reconnaissance flying-boat (H8K1 to H8K4) or transport flying-boat (H8K2-L). All-metal construction
(http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/ijna/h8klat1.gif)
(http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/ijna/h8kpic.gif)
Aichi B7A2 Ryusei "Grace"
B7A2
Dimensions:
Span 14.40 m
Length 11.49 m
Height 4.08 m
Wing area 35.4 m2
Weights:
Empty 3,810 kg
Loaded 5,625 kg
Maximum 6,500 kg
Wing loading 158.9 kg/m2
Power loading 3.1 kg/hp
Performance:
Maximum speed 306 kt at 6,550 m
Climb to 4,000 m
in 6 min 55 sec
Service ceiling 11,250 m
Normal range 1,000 naut miles
Maximum range 1,640 naut miles
Armament:
Two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon and one flexible rear-firing 7.92 mm Type 1 machine-gun (B7A1 and early production B7A2).
Two wing-mounted 20 mm Type 99 Model 2 cannon and one flexible rear-firing 13 mm Type 2 machine-gun (late production B7A2).
Bomb-load: one 800 kg torpedo or up to 800 kg of bombs.
Powerplant:
One Nakajima NK9C Homare 12 eighteen-cylinder air-cooled radial, rated at 1,825 hp for take-off, 1,670 hp at 2,400 m and 1,560 hp at 6,550 m, driving a constant-speed four-blade metal propeller (production B7A2)
Accommodation:
Crew of two in tandem enclosed cockpits
Description:
Single-engined carrier-borne torpedo and dive-bomber. All-metal construction with fabric-covered control surfaces
(http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/ijna/b7a2.gif)
(http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/ijna/b7apic.gif)
(http://web.mountain.net/~arringto/pics/B7a-3.GIF)
Most of my info was obtained from this site:
http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/ijna/ijnaf.htm (http://www.skypoint.com/members/jbp/ijna/ijnaf.htm)
What do you guys think of these selections?
Sisu
[This message has been edited by Karnak (edited 06-15-2000).]
-
Piloting the Emily would be awesome(8 250kg bombs!). Good choices, Karnak.
-
Definately good choices. Esecially the "Raiden." As for bombers even a "Peggy" would be a nice change from a "Betty" model.
-Wety
-
I don't care. Anything with speed and cannons. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
This Jack looks interesting.
Personally, my preference goes for the KI84. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
DrSoya
315 (Polish) Squadron "City of Deblin" RAF
Part of Northolt Wing (http://www.raf303.org/northolt)
[This message has been edited by DrSoya (edited 06-15-2000).]
-
I'm a big fan of anything that flew in the pacific.
P-38's Ki43II, f6f, Ki84,P-47,ki44, ki45
G4m, emily, Pby5a, all the flying boats. that stuff rocks
ki-anything
the jack rocks... that stubby fighter would be great to see zooming around in AH.
need an a6m3 22 also
-
All good choices, but I would like to see some ARMY aircraft too. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
(http://canopus.lpi.msk.su/~watson/wwii/ki67.gif)
(http://canopus.lpi.msk.su/~watson/wwii/ki67-d.gif)
Ki-67-I Hiryu. Allied code name Peggy.
Top speed: 333mph at 20,000ft.
Weight: 30,000lbs loaded. Wingloading: 42lbs/sq ft.
Ceiling: 31,000ft.
Range: 2,360 miles.
Armament: 1x20mm dorsal turret, 1x12.7mm nose and side blisters, 2x12.7mm tail turret.
Bombload: 1766lbs of bombs, or 1 aerial torpedo.
Go check out funked's Ki-102 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000535.html) and Ki-44 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/Forum9/HTML/000233.html) threads too.
-
Make me Randy!
(http://www.raf303.org/funked/Ki-102b.jpg)
-
You forgot Ki 61 II Kai and J2M_5_ ;p
-
I like the Emily, but after doing some research today, I think I would prefer the Nakajima P1Y "Frances" or the Ki-57 "Peggy" as a second choice.
The Emily would be a close third (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
Vermillion
**MOL**, Men of Leisure
"Real Men fly Radials, Nancy Boys fly Spitfires"
-
Wow... that Emily would be awesome. Bomber Recon and troop trans. If they could para out that would mean it could be a Jap transport for scenarios, and that with addition of a ju52 would cover that aspect of scenarios for all sides. not to mention we would see the first seaplane in any combat sim. well with the exception of CFS but noone takes that seriously anyways
-
There's always been a prob with japanese planes. None can match american/british iron or the 109 high.
Except one it was produced late in the war from spare tony's.The added radial engines and it gave stangs and b29's fits at high alt.
What was it? the ki 100.It was produced in higher numbers than the f41c too.More of them saw action.
Its younger brother the tony is very similar in shape so programing time would be quicker.It is also the only other japanese plane thats ok at high alt.
If you want a plane that guys will fly as much as 109's or spits this is the plane.A nik2 or ki 84 cant be used in some sits in this game. The fight is just to high for them.
-
Yeah, 330mph at 32k will really show those US fighters a thing or two. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
Anybody new have opinions on these?
I still REALLY want the Emily. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Im not new. But I really like your choices.
Always liked the look of the grace.
-
my vote goes for:
Ki61 "Tony"
Ki43 "Oscar"
"the less i have, the more i gain"
------------------
"RED DACTYL"
"SCREAM'IN PTERODACTYLS"
-
Great choices Karnak!
Been waiting for a IJN flying boat since I first started flying online.
The fighters would all be great to have both for the main furball & scenario's.
-
EMILY! EMILY! EMILY!
-
Ki-84, Ki-84, Ki-84. My vote goes for the Frank.
(http://www.j-aircraft.com/hustad/ki-84-2.jpg)
-
Some info on the J2M Raiden taken from this Site http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/j2m.html#RTFToC2 (http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/j2m.html#RTFToC2)
In February of 1945, an American technical intelligence team discovered a single Raiden abandoned among the trees alongside the Dewey Boulevard on the outskirts of Manila. It was disassembled and transferred to Clark Field, where it was repaired by the Technical Air Intelligence Command (TAIC) and test flown. A senior test pilot attached to TAIC rated the Raiden as being the best Japanese fighter he had flown, offering a good performance, good stability, good stalling characteristics, and good takeoff and landing qualities. It had a steep climbing angle and a rapid climb rate. Handling and control were good, but the ailerons became rather heavy at speeds above 325 mph. Stalling characteristics were exceptional. Even though there was relatively little stall warning, the recovery from the stall was extremely rapid, with very little altitude being lost. There was no tendency to spin, the aircraft being exceptionally stable. The maneuvering flaps were rated as being very effective. On the negative side, the brakes and rudder brake action were poor, the ailerons were heavy which made the maneuverability fall off at high speeds, the mechanical reliability was poor, and the range was short.
The Raiden was available too late and in insufficient numbers to affect the outcome of the war. It is indeed fortunate for the B-29 crews that more of these capable interceptors were not deployed by the Japanese in the last year of the war.
-
Originally posted by ICEWIND:
Some info on the J2M Raiden taken from this Site
Another plane similar to the navy's J2M to consider might be the Army's Nakajima Ki44 'Shoki' (demon) (US: "Tojo") which was built as a successor to the Ki43 (and in some numbers too -1255 were built), appeared in 1942, and couldn't have been more different.
Like the Raiden the Tojo was a climbing and diving (read: BnZ) plane which lacked the extreme manueverability of the Ki43 or the Zero, but had greater flexibility when engaging in combat. Though top level speed was only about 375mph, according to the sources I have this small plane could dive with the best US fighters, and it could outclimb most.
Ki-44-IIC
Powerplant: Nakajima Ha 109 1,520 hp 14 cylinder radial engine
Dimensions: Span 31', Length 28' 8
1/2"
Performance: Speed 375 mph at 17,060'; Climb rate: 4,000' per minnute, time to 16,000' 4.3 minutes; Celing 36,745'; Range 560 miles
Armament: 2 x 12.7mm MG in nose, 2 x 40mm cannon in wings, or 2 x 20mm Cannon in nose and 2 x 20mm Cannon in wings.
The 40mm guns were fitted for B29 interceptions. This plane might be one of the best prop engined climbers of the war...
DB
-
Pyro recently expressed his interest in the H8K "Emily". He called it the "ultimate seaplane". I agree.
<punt>
------------------
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother
Bring the Spitfire F.MkXIVc to Aces High!!!
Sisu
-Karnak
-
Fighters
1) Ki84
2) Ki61
3) J2M3a
4) Ki44
5) Ki43
Twin Engine
1) Ki102
2) Ki45
3) G4M4
4) P1Y
They'd all make nice additions to Aces High. Japanese aircraft are very aesthetically pleasing, but I'd rather have a nice rugged A-20G or Me-410. The Jack had a good initial climb rate for a japanese fighter, 3800ft per minute, but P-47's and P-51's ate it alive in combat.
Sakai praised the Jack against B-29's, but found out "all too late" that it couldn't hold its own with American fighters at bomber altitudes and quickly became a deathtrap. 30k P-51D/P-47D bait (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ...now if we had a Axis vs. Allies setup in the MA the Raiden would be a great boon to the Japanese. However, I think the Ki.84 and Ki.61 would be much better rides in the MA.
The Ki.44 is more of the same. The 40mm's had a remarkably low muzzel velocity, 245 m/s. You'd have to get even closer than with a german 30mm cannon, 150m effective range!
[This message has been edited by Major Tom (edited 04-06-2001).]
-
The little boy in me kneels down every night before his bed and asks God,Please ask Pyro to make me Randy.......
------------------
(http://content.communities.msn.com/isapi/fetch.dll?action=MyPhotos_GetPubPhoto&photoId=nHwD6d60JNIFs2mHfM9ggHF4xY6Gy1uBBOIL0vAzWuZ4VQ!pBhaoFjvmZM4qCFICQ)
[This message has been edited by brady (edited 04-06-2001).]
-
MAKE ME RANDY BABY!!! YEAH!!!
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
Pyro recently expressed his interest in the H8K "Emily". He called it the "ultimate seaplane". I agree.
<punt>
Except that it's a flying ark, err boat.
-
Originally posted by Major Tom:
Sakai praised the Jack against B-29's, but found out "all too late" that it couldn't hold its own with American fighters at bomber altitudes and quickly became a deathtrap. 30k P-51D/P-47D bait (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) ...now if we had a Axis vs. Allies setup in the MA the Raiden would be a great boon to the Japanese. However, I think the Ki.84 and Ki.61 would be much better rides in the MA.
[This message has been edited by Major Tom (edited 04-06-2001).]
You would have to wonder if Jacks being eaten alive by P51s wasnt a by product of grossly declining pilot standards by the end of the war. Interestingly enough, Sakai spoke of a well trained pilot being able to kill P-51s in the Jack (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). Anecdotes are strange things.
I would agree though that the Ki-61 line is the way to go. You have a series of nice planes to be had from the Tony, as well fairly varied assortment of gun packages.
Ki61 -> Ki61 KAI -> Ki-61 II -> Ki-100
I would say the Ki-61 KAI and Ki-100 would make the best additions for Tony variants.
[This message has been edited by -=Silo=- (edited 04-09-2001).]
-
From what I read in his glossed over sci-fi novel style "biography?" Sakai said the Jack simply wasn't able to maneuver with the P-51's at altitude. I imagine that the situation might get a little better down low where the Jack could take the fight vertical.
The Japanese interceptor pilots where given much better training than the bare minimum the kamikaze cannon fodder received. At least as good as the US pilots. It's funny that the US regarded the Jack as a dangerous opponent and the Japanese believed it to be a death trap after their encounters with the venerable P-51D and P-47N.
The main problems with the Jack was its sluggishness at speeds over 300mph and overall lack of maneuverability. The P-51D and P-47 really don’t have those problems.
Most pilots in AH aren't experten. Even the zero can kill a P-51 if the P-51 is cruising at 200mph and has low SA (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif) Hell a good portion of my kills in the 190A5 are of unaware spitfires and misc. other allied aircraft. Lord knows you can’t dogfight most of those allied planes.
The Ki.61/100 is definitely a ride the Japanese aircraft enthusiasts would appreciate. Putting any version of the Ki.84 into AH might even be a better choice as it can out turn and out climb nearly all allied fighters, but it does start to have problems passed 300mph like the Jack. The Ki.61 and 100 don’t have very good high altitude performance and have semi-unremarkable turning performance and those are their main drawbacks. I’d imagine they would be very capable fighters below 20,000 ft though.