Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Krusty on October 19, 2010, 09:42:46 PM
-
I added a P.S. in the Betty torp thread... This is the other post I wanted to make!
I ran across a very interesting article on the Ki-43 and the variants and their weapons.
I had always read there was the 2x 7mm, later the mixed 7mm/12.7mm, and then finally the 2x12.7mm loadouts. That may be inaccurate. There may only have ever really been the mixed loadout.
http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/rdunn/nakajima_ki43arm.htm
The one odd fish with 2x 12.7mm was captured. The 2x7mms were often relegated to training and non-combat sorties. While the guns were easily interchangable, it seems by far throughout the improvements, they kept the one weaker-yet-reliable 7mm gun and the one likely-to-blow-up-when-fired 12.7mm "cannon" (yes, like the Breda SAFATs and the MG131s it had HE, AP, solid, etc all in a mixed belt and was a small-caliber cannon rather than a machine gun! I didn't realize that).
In the off chance that HTC might pull a two-fer and be working on a much-needed Ki-43, I thought this really might drive some of the discussion about the configuration of the craft.
P.S. I don't know who the guy is that wrote this (Richard L. Dunn), but very interesting nonetheless!
-
Nice link Krusty.
-
Considering that if HTC introduces Ki-43-I -variant, basically everyone will be using the 2x12.7mm setup anyway. So game wise it really is kind of moot. Interesting history nonetheless. It is good info regarding special events now that CMs have the ability to disable different weapon loadouts for AvA and Special Events. This is good evidence that the 2x12.7 setup should available right from the start of the war.
Here's another link by the same author: http://www.warbirdforum.com/rdunn43.htm (http://www.warbirdforum.com/rdunn43.htm)
And some more: http://www.warbirdforum.com/jaafmgs.htm (http://www.warbirdforum.com/jaafmgs.htm)
Some general stuff on the plane: http://www.warbirdforum.com/hayabusa.htm (http://www.warbirdforum.com/hayabusa.htm)
Considering the numbers built and the long and significant service of the Ki-43 I really really hope that when the plane gets introduced all three major variants get added.
-
http://park1.wakwak.com/~mitsu/ki43.avi (http://park1.wakwak.com/~mitsu/ki43.avi)
Interesting but very poor quality film posted originally by Mitsu. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,118228.0.html (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,118228.0.html))
Very cool Japanese wartime propaganda film featuring Ki-43s and Ki-21s: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BXo-jWcGnw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BXo-jWcGnw)
-
What's most likely to happen?
we get one-size-fit-all Ki-43 and ignore its evolution or we get 3 variants from 1941 (ki-43-I), 1942-43 (ki-43-II) and 1944 (ki-43-III)?
-
Considering that if HTC introduces Ki-43-I -variant, basically everyone will be using the 2x12.7mm setup anyway. So game wise it really is kind of moot. Interesting history nonetheless. It is good info regarding special events now that CMs have the ability to disable different weapon loadouts for AvA and Special Events. This is good evidence that the 2x12.7 setup should available right from the start of the war.
I think the point to take away from the article is that there was no "three variants" -- they used the same mixed armament throughout the lifespan of the airframe, even on newly-made planes (based on tail codes) in later years they still had 1 of each gun.
That implies that there ought NOT be a 2x7mm or a 2x12.7mm option if/when the plane is included in AH, as they were not used in front line units and were rare 1-off examples respectively.
-
Krusty,
That document seems entirely focused on the Ki-43-I and even there admits that at least a few twin 12.7mm gunned examples saw combat. The only reference I saw in my quick skim to the Ki-43-II was a reference about a sentai beginning to equip with them. There was no mention of the Ki-43-III at all.
I think you are reaching for a negative conclusion to apply to Ki-43s beyond the Ki-43-I.
-
D'oh! I see what you mean now! He's referring to Ki-43-Ia, -Ib, -Ic, but that doesn't count -IIa, etc...
My bad!
EDIT: No, wait a second... He surely must have been talking about all the Ki-43 versions as well. The Ki-43-II was well in use by 1942 and 1943. Also a quick (non-thorough) google search suggests they had the same setup but with minor changes, bombs, radios, different exhausts, etc. Only major difference is the Ki-43-III with the upgraded engine, and even that doesn't suggest armament changes until the Ki-43-IIIb which had 20mm guns.
Surely it does stand that regardless of which -I, -II, -III the main armament would still be the mixed option.
-
I'd have to see supporting evidence of that.
My understanding of the Ki-43's armament has long been that the single 12.7mm and single 7.7mm armament was the most common for the -I and that two 12.7mm guns were, by far, the most common factory issued armament for the -II. I believe the -III was mostly armed with two 12.7mm as well, but some -III were armed with two 20mm cannons.
I would need to see specific documentation countering that, which the link in your opening post does not. No armament changes are required for the -II to carry two 12.7mm guns as even some combat examples of the -I did that.
-
<sigh>
It really won't get much clearer that this...
"ABSTRACT
Popular works on World War Two history, such as Dr. Rene J. Francillon’s tome Japanese Aircraft of the Pacific War, generally state that the Japanese Nakajima Type 1 Model 1 fighter (Ki 43-I), Hayabusa, was produced successively in three versions ko, otsu, and hei (Ki 43-IA, -IB, and –IC) armed, respectively with 2x7.7 mm machine guns; 1x7.7.mm machine gun and 1x12.7mm machine cannon; and 2x12.7 mm machine cannon. It is generally reported that the version with two 12.7 mm machine cannon (Ki 43-IC) was the major production version.
This paper presents evidence that while the twin 7.7mm version and twin 12.7mm version were introduced prior to the mixed armament version, the latter was introduced very early in the production run (prior to the outbreak of the Pacific War), was undoubtedly the major version of this aircraft to see action, and examples of operational aircraft with the alternative armaments are both relatively rare and may well have been retrofits. However, due to the ready inter-changeability of the two weapons types and absent direct evidence, the exact number of production types and retrofits could not be determined."
As I was before, now, I'm talking about the Ki-43-I and Ki-43-I only. So basically all three loadouts saw service from very early on. All should be included in AH. Most people will obviously use the 2x12.7mm setup in the MA as Ki-43 is handicapped enough as far as armament goes. Ok, if CMs want to disable the 2x12.7mm setup in early-war events, they of course can. I hope very few will though as, like I said, Ki-43 is handicapped enough when it comes to armament. So as far as AH goes I consider this to be a rather moot point. You can include the other loadouts but they will see very very little use.
Of course Pyro could determine that the 2x12.7mm loadout is too rare to be included but we have to remember that only 96 37mm armed Il-2s were produced... If it was my call (and looking at the loadouts on other aircraft) I'd include it.
-
I concur with Wm on the numerical piece. I do not recall the numbers of Ostwinds built, by I have also heard the numbers were low on that as well.
Bottom line, the Ki-43 will be a great addition to the plane set. It was personally my favorite ride in "Pacific Fighters". I however, do not think that it will be very competitive in the MAs. The weak gun package alone will require plenty of tailing, counting on non-furball fights. The "assist" plane from hades I suppose. Could end up as a hanger queen? :headscratch: just saying.....
-
<sigh>
It really won't get much clearer that this...
No, it won't get much clearer.... Let me spell it out for you...
"was undoubtedly the major version of this aircraft to see action, and examples of operational aircraft with the alternative armaments are both relatively rare and may well have been retrofits."
OPERATIONAL .... 2x7mm in training craft, non front line craft... few if any can be found with the 2x 12.7mm option (the ONE example found and cited was a rare plane belonging to no standard squadron).
For the same reason we don't have 20mm on the F6F-5, and the same reason we don't have 500 rounds per gun on the P-47s, and the same reason we limit the ord on the P-47M, a Ki-43 in-game should not have the twin-gun options.
Because we model what was actually USED in Aces High, not "what could have been"...
-
Krusty,
The entire article, and hence the entire portion you just quoted, refers to the Ki-43-I and nothing beyond. It does not refer to the Ki-43-II or Ki-43-III in any way.
When it says "was undoubtedly the major version of this aircraft to see action" the aircraft in question is the Ki-43-I, not the Ki-443-II or Ki-43-III.
-
No, it won't get much clearer.... Let me spell it out for you...
<sigh> With that remark I referred to the fact that the whole article was talking about Ki-43-I -subvariants alone.
"was undoubtedly the major version of this aircraft to see action, and examples of operational aircraft with the alternative armaments are both relatively rare and may well have been retrofits."
...and before that it says: This paper presents evidence that while the twin 7.7mm version and twin 12.7mm version were introduced prior to the mixed armament version, the latter was introduced very early in the production run (prior to the outbreak of the Pacific War),
So what I gather from the whole sentence is that the author is suggesting that the examples he mentions could have been retrofits but that they were originally produced aswell.
For the same reason we don't have 20mm on the F6F-5, and the same reason we don't have 500 rounds per gun on the P-47s, and the same reason we limit the ord on the P-47M, a Ki-43 in-game should not have the twin-gun options.
I'm guessing that by "twin-gun options" you are talking about the 2x12.7mm loadout? Anyway, the original article you liked to does say that Ki-43-I weren't produced with 2x12.7mm MG armament. It provides evidence that they were rare. 3xB-20 armament for the La-7 was rare. It is in the game. Il-2 with 2xNS-37 was rare but we have that in the game aswell.
Because we model what was actually USED in Aces High, not "what could have been"...
I'm glad that you aren't doing any flight modelling for Aces High. I'm very glad that HTC/pyro is though.
-
Um, the subject of this thread? It should either be "fewer options" or "less firepower". In English you can have "fewer" numbered items, or "less" of some mass of stuff.
Sorry. Carry on.
-
Ki43-I were not mass producted with 12.7mm x2 and 7.7mm x2.
Ki43-I were mass producted only 7.7mm and 12.7mm.
Ki43-II and Ki43-III had 12.7mm x2.
and ki43-IIIotsu(have 20mmx2) were not mass producted, becuase IJA have plan using Ki43 for kamikaze.
I sad Ki43 was not selected...
if ki43 was selected, I write some data of ki43.
(ki43's data on wikipedia is terrible.)
-
Hopefully the Ki-43 is added sooner rather than later though. A Ki-43-I with the single 12.7mm and single 7.7mm gun and a Ki-43-II with two 12.7mm guns and some protection at the same time would be ideal. The Ki-43-III seems more of a luxury than a necessity.
-
The Ki-43-III seems more of a luxury than a necessity.
But its almost 30 mph faster than ki-43-ii, and the best thing about it is you still get to keep its legendary manuverability :aok
The III would make an acceptable perk farming plane in late MA and I think it should have the same ENY rating as spit 1.
For mark I and II the eny rating should be higher than spit 1.
-
I want Ki-43-II.
because Ki-43-II was produced most a lot in ki-43 series.(about 3500)
but I think HTC notice it's a difficult decide Ki-43-II's flight model.
because many people don't know, Ki-43-II have 3 types.
it's a ,
having exclusive tank(1943may-oct) ,
having standard tank and 1 ejector exhaust stack(1943 oct-1944),
having standard tank and 3 ejector exhaust stacks(late ver).
thay had different performance each. especially max speed.
after 2types Ki43-II and -III 's protection is same level to Ki84.
I think it's a easy releace ki-43-III(about 1100 built!).
and I worry, ho-103(ki-43's machine canon) having HE is set low damage.
(Browning don't have HE.)
ho-103's HE was powerful.
1943 December,1 USAAF B24x58(No308group and No7 group )with P38Jx15 attacked to Rangoon.
Ki-43-II(64sq, 204sq)x50 Ki-45x4 attacked against this group.
B24x10 were shot down by ack and Ki-43-II, and 10 had damege (thay were total loss on the base)
but, Ho-103 on Ki61 is weak on MA....
sorry poor english.
-
If there were 1,100 Ki-43-IIIs built, I would say we should get all three major versions. Whether the two Ho-5 20mm cannon loadout should be available for the Ki-43-III is another story. I am inclined to say it should, but I can see valid reasons not to include it.
I am not so sure on the Ho-103 damage though. I have always found the two Ho-103s on the Ki-84 to be quite capable of killing things after I run out of Ho-5 ammo. Certainly, they are vastly superior to the quad of .303s my Mossie is left with after running out of 20mm ammo.
You're English is not perfect, true, but you are quite easy to understand nonetheless and your contribution to the thread is appreciated.
-
If there's indeed clear proof that Ki-43-I wasn't produced with 2xHo-103s, then it of course shouldn't have them in the game. the article in the original post talked about the loadout as if was indeed produced even if the numbers were small.
If there were 1,100 Ki-43-IIIs built, I would say we should get all three major versions. Whether the two Ho-5 20mm cannon loadout should be available for the Ki-43-III is another story. I am inclined to say it should, but I can see valid reasons not to include it.
Largely because of the production numbers, I've been wanting to see all three variants for a while now. IMO all three major variants should be included due to the type's importance to the IJAAF. There were only two prototypes built with the 2xHo-5 setup. Those prototypes were quite different from the regular IIIs. The nose had to be lengthened by 200mm to make the cannons fit and the combat flaps were replaced with regular split flaps.