Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: Fish42 on March 13, 2013, 06:46:00 PM
-
Is there a plane from Japan or any of the smaller players in WW2 that HTC could introduce using their current requirements that would arrive with a perk price?
The question was raised in another thread, that asked about the Ki-100 and its need for a perk. I thought about it and the only one I can think off would be the H8K2 flying boat if and even that would only be a small perk price of 2-5 each (because of its 5 x 20mm cannon and 5 x 30cal MGs) to stop it being used as a flying wirble.
Can anyone else think of a plane/tank that would require them?
-
the 4 cannon Ki should get a perk
-
G.55
-
the 4 cannon Ki should get a perk
Why would the 4 cannon bird need perking when the current 2 cannon and 2 large cal MGs are around 20 eny? Was there a engine or wing change?
-
The Jack might qualify. Very low perk though, if at all. More of an La7 with reasonable alt performance than a Spit XIV and not very many of them built. Less than 500 of all variants I think.
-
G.55
:lol
-
INK may be speculating the 4 cannon Ki would go the intial useage route the CHog first did. I'm not sure why that happened and dosen't with the N1K2.
-
INK may be speculating the 4 cannon Ki would go the intial useage route the CHog first did. I'm not sure why that happened and dosen't with the N1K2.
The N1K2 doesn't have Hispanos. I think it's the effect of a clearly superior weapon, rather than the delivery system, that inflates the C-Hog's capabilities.
-
G.55
In midwar.... it might actually warrant a light perk price.
-
Perk the Niki, 2cmex delivers too much pwnage in that bird...............
HL
-
yes the Ki with 4 cannons was updated more then just cannons, I always thought different,
it will be faster..... handle better....over all much more deadly plane....
besides I don't agree with the 20 eny in the first place should be 8 or 10
-
yes the Ki with 4 cannons was updated more then just cannons, I always thought different,
it will be faster..... handle better....over all much more deadly plane....
besides I don't agree with the 20 eny in the first place should be 8 or 10
I don't know. ENY 12 or 15 maybe. But it seems like its not really up to the same level as the La-7.
-
I don't know. ENY 12 or 15 maybe. But it seems like its not really up to the same level as the La-7.
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
only thing LA can do against a well flown KI is run away.....
equal E.... equal sticks...... KI will win 90% of time....if not more
-
:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
only thing LA can do against a well flown KI is run away.....
equal E.... equal sticks...... KI will win 90% of time....if not more
True, but thats not really what I'm basing the ENY off of. In fact, just doing a greater than/less than comparison for ENY doesn't work, since they don't pose an equal threat to all aircraft, even of roughly equal performance.
La-7 is more dangerous to more aircraft, even though the Ki-84 is dangerous to the La-7.
-
Why do you want a Japanese plane that is perked? Just curious as to what difference it makes..
-
Why do you want a Japanese plane that is perked? Just curious as to what difference it makes..
Its not about wanting a perk AC. This question jumping out when I was reading the last few posts of the "Ki-43 is coming" thread where someone mentioned that they hoped the Ki-100 would be added but it would most likely be perked. A few others reply with the question as to why the Ki-100 would be perked. From what I know about the Ki-100 is that its a Ki-61 that was a little slower but had better climb... and was far more reliable, so in my mind it does not warrant a perk price.
This lead to me think about what might be added that would require a perk price... the US/Germany/Brit & Russia all have units that I could see being added that would arrive with a perk price attached but when I think about the Italy/Japan/Aus & all the other small players, a unit does not jump out.
US - a few of the late war monsters and I am sure a tank or 2 that could be perked.
Brits - Meteor & a tank or 2
Germans - He 162 and I am sure there are others.
Russia - I think a few of their LW tank/ Tank destroyers would warrant a perk.
-
Japanese fuel pretty much keeps any of their birds from being perk level on performance. If HTC were to decide to model "almost made it" designs with very limited performance and handling data, the J7W1 would likely be a perk plane, but given that it only flew once before the war ended I don't think they could model it. The A7M2 had seven or eight built and there might be more performance data.
Remaining perk plane options in my opinion:
A-26B - Attack aircraft, American
F7F - Twin engined carrier fighter, American*
F8F - Single engined carrier fighter, American*
He162A - Jet fighter, German
Meteor Mk III, Jet fighter, British
P-63, Singe engined fighter, Russian
*Did not see combat in WWII, but just barely.
There are some other aircraft that might be perkable at a very low level just to control usage, for example:
He177A-5, Heavy bomber, German
Tu-2, Medium bomber, Russian
-
F7F - Twin engined carrier fighter, American*
F8F - Single engined carrier fighter, American*
*Did not see combat in WWII, but just barely.
I don't think these or the super late J7W1 or A7M2 would be added as to the best of my knowledge never seen combat or where not deployed in squad strength which I have always though where 2 requirements for addition to AH.
-
I don't think these or the super late J7W1 or A7M2 would be added as to the best of my knowledge never seen combat or where not deployed in squad strength which I have always though where 2 requirements for addition to AH.
I agree, but I do see the F7F and F8F as marginally viable as they were en route to the combat theater, some even doing combat patrols.
The J7W1 and A7M2 would, to the best of my knowledge, require a lot of educated guesses on Pyro's part as to how to model their performance and handling and as such would really be fantasy aircraft, and therefor completely unsuitable to being added.
-
only thing LA can do against a well flown KI is run away.....
equal E.... equal sticks...... KI will win 90% of time....if not more
Ki84 is one of the most dangerous birds imho.
-
Ki84 is one of the most dangerous birds imho.
we are of the same opinion :salute
thats why I say the 4 cannon KI should have a perk.....
and Tank Ace...what you said last i agree with :aok
-
Ki84 is one of the most dangerous birds imho.
I agree with this too, but I was basing my question on the current eny levels.
So the Ki-84 with more power and better handling would merit a perk price... not a large one though.
-
I agree with this too, but I was basing my question on the current eny levels.
So the Ki-84 with more power and better handling would merit a perk price... not a large one though.
It will still shed bits the moment you exceed 24 knots in a dive and move any control surface 1.5 degrees off centre. Then it will be most of a spinning air frame, accelerating toward the ground at 10 metres per second squared, though as you say, it will still have 4 cannons.
-
the ki-84 is dangerous to my p51-d :cry
-
See Rule #4
-
Do335 Pfiel would also earn a perk value.
-
See Rule #4
-
Do335 Pfiel would also earn a perk value.
I had no idea it was Japanese!
-
See Rule #4
-
Sir, what were you thinking posting this unacceptable racist trash.
Seconded. That kind of crap is not acceptable.
-
Sir, what were you thinking posting this unacceptable racist trash.
Seconded. That kind of crap is not acceptable.
FFS I put in a joke I have heard on american shows/comedy standup 1/2 a dozen times before and get jumped on.
Its not something I have ever heard here in Aus, so is it really that un-PC over there? Which BTW there are many "jokes" on these forums based on nationality yet I never see them pulled up, so why was this?
-
Sir, what were you thinking posting this unacceptable racist trash.
Its not racist, many races can be jewish. So how can you call something made up of a bunch of differenct races a race? Ignore them Fish they are just baiting the waters.
-
Fish,
The origions for the joke or ethnic comment comes from the real fact that when a dollar\Shekel \ruble\denar\farthing\goat\sheep\"bushel of grain" is spent in a jewish community. It will circulate in that community 12 times longer than other communities before it's return to the broader economic community. Thus jewish communities very often are more prosperous than others where ever you find them in the world. From that comes the old sayings about Jews pinching or holding tight to pennys.
You have to wonder if the joke is not on those outside of the jewish community trying to use the saying negatively. In it's simplicity it describes why jewish communities tend to be more economicly successful.
Personaly I'd tend to take it as a compliment based on this simple measurement of success:
He who has the most cash didn't finish last by letting go of his pennys.
-
Do335 Pfiel would also earn a perk value.
This thread was about the smaller powers. While I wouldn't consider Japan "small" in the context of this thread, Germany certainly wasn't. Otherwise He162 would be a clear choice as well.
-
*you know what, this side conversation is rediculous*
-
I can only think of the 4 cannon ki84 though the j2m3 might qualify someday.
-
This thread was about the smaller powers. While I wouldn't consider Japan "small" in the context of this thread, Germany certainly wasn't. Otherwise He162 would be a clear choice as well.
Oh I never said Japan was a small power. "Japan or any of the smaller players" is what I said. the reason I included Japan was it was the only major player I could not think of having a perk plane.
-
the 4 cannon KI was not any faster and probably suffered because of the added weight and modification to the strut to accommodate the bullets and extra cannon - it also never had the power to get high enough to kill bombers so the project focused more energy on a ultra light simple version which would be used for Kamikaze attacks and the standard version which was already deemed good enough for escorting kamikaze pilots - they built them side by side at nakajima.
-
Oh I never said Japan was a small power. "Japan or any of the smaller players" is what I said. the reason I included Japan was it was the only major player I could not think of having a perk plane.
As I noted earlier, the Japanese really didn't have the fuel needed to get perk level performance from their aircraft. The only Japanese unit that saw combat that would be perked, and I would literally be shocked if HTC ever added so questionable a unit, would be the G4M2+Ohka combination.
Well, I guess there might be a perkable Japanese submarine if HTC ever adds submarines. I am not as familiar with submarines.
-
Oh I never said Japan was a small power. "Japan or any of the smaller players" is what I said. the reason I included Japan was it was the only major player I could not think of having a perk plane.
Ok. Can't think of anything that would be perked though.
-
Well, I guess there might be a perkable Japanese submarine if HTC ever adds submarines. I am not as familiar with submarines.
I admit I don't have any idea how to include Submarines in AH gameplay in such a way that different types would have to be perked while others would not.
On the OP topic, no, I can't think of any that I would perk from the start. A Ki-84 with 4x20mm might show as somewhat unbalancing, but I'm sceptical about that.
-
I admit I don't have any idea how to include Submarines in AH gameplay in such a way that different types would have to be perked while others would not.
I'd think crush depth, speed, speed underwater, endurance underwater, torpedo power and torpedo speed would be the determining factors. Get high values in enough of those and it'd need to be perked just to keep usage of other submarines viable.
I don't know if any Japanese subs might meet that level of performance, but I understand they made good submarines.
-
I'd think crush depth, speed, speed underwater, endurance underwater, torpedo power and torpedo speed would be the determining factors.
Yes, in any real "sub" game it would, but it would be difficult to play out the differences in most of those traits in a game of the scale (both distances & time) AH has. But maybe I'm just not thinking creatively enough for that at the moment.
-
the 4 cannon KI was not any faster and probably suffered because of the added weight and modification to the strut to accommodate the bullets and extra cannon - it also never had the power to get high enough to kill bombers so the project focused more energy on a ultra light simple version which would be used for Kamikaze attacks and the standard version which was already deemed good enough for escorting kamikaze pilots - they built them side by side at nakajima.
hmmmmm......thats not what I was told :headscratch:
-
that asked about the Ki-100 and its need for a perk
The myth that just won't die. The Ki-100 was marginally better than a Ki-61. It's top speed is @ 370 mph at alt and in no way would it ever need perking. The two best fighters in WW2 that the Japanese flew are already here; the Ki-84 and the N1K2-J and neither are perked. The J2M would be an interesting addition to the game but it won't be perked either.
LA-7 (including the 3 cannon option), Bf 109K-4, Fw 190D-9, N1K2-J, Ki-84, P-51D. All unperked. A Ki-100 isn't going to be unless HTC models it with lazers and a jet pack.
G.55? mmm, no.
A-26 Intruder? yes I can see that but that's off topic as it's USA.
Can't think of any really not from the smaller countries.
-
hmmmmm......thats not what I was told :headscratch:
KI's are subject to a similar expectation over-estimation in terms of what planes could and could not do - Yak9U - Yak3 comparisons are also equally funky as to really 'how' the 3 is better.
Likewise, the up-gunned 'specialized bomber killer' versions were simply up-gunned and struts and parts were moved around inside the frame, often by simply removing large parts of the internal metal structure, wooden pannels and the likes to force guns in - it was well known that there were large problems in testing with wings folding under g's and at high speed - the version we have is basically the best version.
If anything, Nakajima was adapting the KI 84 or the type 4 model to become lighter with the KI 116 which used the Mitsubishi HA 33 re-designated Ha-112-I engine (1,500HP) and was built in Manchuria - it was slightly slower then the 84, but it was a lot lighter, climbed better, turned and rolled faster than the 84 - it only suffered in range and top speed/altitude.
The KI 84 (KI disamb. frame - Kidouki) of all versions used the HA 45 - 21 (HA disamb. engine - hatsudo ki) which had 1,825 HP.
There are even unarmed tokko tai versions and so on. . . But the 2 cannon KI 84 was widely considered the best.
-
the 4 cannon KI was not any faster and probably suffered because of the added weight and modification to the strut to accommodate the bullets and extra cannon - it also never had the power to get high enough to kill bombers so the project focused more energy on a ultra light simple version which would be used for Kamikaze attacks and the standard version which was already deemed good enough for escorting kamikaze pilots - they built them side by side at nakajima.
Sorry to differ with you my friend but you are proceeding under a false assumption. The 4 cannon Otsu would be slightly lighter and more powerful than Aces High's Ki-84 because the Otsu is not based on our model.
I can write a synopsis later, if needed.
Likewise, the up-gunned 'specialized bomber killer' versions were simply up-gunned and struts and parts were moved around inside the frame, often by simply removing large parts of the internal metal structure, wooden pannels and the likes to force guns in - it was well known that there were large problems in testing with wings folding under g's and at high speed - the version we have is basically the best version.
If anything, Nakajima was adapting the KI 84 or the type 4 model to become lighter with the KI 116 which used the Mitsubishi HA 33 re-designated Ha-112-I engine (1,500HP) and was built in Manchuria - it was slightly slower then the 84, but it was a lot lighter, climbed better, turned and rolled faster than the 84 - it only suffered in range and top speed/altitude.
Be careful not to mix in the 'Emergency Production' solutions which have more to do with being able to make an aircraft at all rather than as a designed performance improvement.
I would suggest focussing on the first four models produced.
Likewise, the up-gunned 'specialized bomber killer' versions were simply up-gunned and struts and parts were moved around inside the frame, often by simply removing large parts of the internal metal structure, wooden pannels and the likes to force guns in - it was well known that there were large problems in testing with wings folding under g's and at high speed - the version we have is basically the best version.
The second best version, imho...
-
Not that, again...
The Ki-84-II engine was unreliable and never made full power. It was de-rated to run exactly at the same power rating as the Ha-45-21. There was no power increase and no speed improvement. Whether there was a weight change is one matter, but your claims about the engines have been covered in other threads and are wrong.
-
A Baka might add a little fun to the mix.
-
Not that, again...
The Ki-84-II engine was unreliable and never made full power. It was de-rated to run exactly at the same power rating as the Ha-45-21. There was no power increase and no speed improvement. Whether there was a weight change is one matter, but your claims about the engines have been covered in other threads and are wrong.
Unless I am mistaken, the Ha-45-21 is the more powerful engine in question. Ours has a Ha-45-18, no?
-
Unless I am mistaken, the Ha-45-21 is the more powerful engine in question. Ours has a Ha-45-18, no?
Krusty doesn't have the cubic capacity to process & comprehend the literature.
-
If Ink gets a 4 cannon KI I'm going to quit. :old:
-
If Ink gets a 4 cannon KI I'm going to quit. :old:
just like the 4 cannon spit any heavier guns are going to impact on performance.
-
:bhead
-
not like the ki-84 isn't a spit 16 in drag already now you want tiffie hitting power? it's crazy I tell you. Perk it!!!
-
just like the 4 cannon spit any heavier guns are going to impact on performance.
From what has been posted here, the Ki-84-I-Otsu weighed a bit less than the Ki-84-I-Ko that we have due to other changes.
-
From what has been posted here, the Ki-84-I-Otsu weighed a bit less than the Ki-84-I-Ko that we have due to other changes.
People seem to prefer making assumptions rather than to actually read the explanations of people who have spent considerable time and resources researching the literature with academic methodology.
By the way I am not requesting the Otsu but rather observing that if we did get it there would be little point in upping the Ki-84 we have now.
not like the ki-84 isn't a spit 16 in drag already now you want tiffie hitting power? it's crazy I tell you. Perk it!!!
Spit dweeb! :old:
If it is out-accelerated by a Spixteen, out-climbed by a Spixteen, out-dived by a Spixteen, out-turned by a Spixteen and the Spixteen isn't perked then on what grounds should the Otsu be perked?
-
Krusty doesn't have the cubic capacity to process & comprehend the literature.
nnnn?
our Ki-84 have Ha-45Toku(limit version of Ha45-21)
-----------------------------------------------------------
if someone want to know Ki84's story.plz read.
Ha45 have problems of Carburetor.
Temperature was different every Cylinder,
it's like a some Cylinder were over heated but, other Cylinder were no problem.
IJA and IJN gave limit to Boost of HA45-21
(IJA called "Ha-45Toku(Toku mean is Special. I think it is like a SE of RADEON xxxx "SE",GeForce xxx "SE")".
It was possible HA45-21 get 500mmHg boost in plan,
but, Ki84 and N1K2-J pilots used until 400mmHg.
Ha45-21 get only 1800HP by 400mmHg.
(2000HP by 500mmHg)
It was like a Jumo213E's Supercharger,Ta152 pilots used only first stage of Supercharger.
but TAIC didn't know such Ha45-21's limit,
and may be you know, Ki84 got excellent max speed in Philippines.
and some sq in japan,they tried cut of limit sometimes.
some pilots reported "we could use 650km/h or 660km/h if engine status was good."
of course this case was not formal.
Nobody know, Ki84 got over 650km/h in Japan exactly....
sorry poor english.
-
excuse me . I want to write story of Ki84-II, too.
Plan "Ki84-II" was changing engine to Ha45-23 or Ha45-25.
Ha45-23 and Ha45-25 are models, change to Fuel injection from Ha45-21's carburetor.
This will resolve Ha45's Knocking problems.
IJA admitted ,
Exactly supply fuel to Engine's piston is most important for normal driving Ki84 without hi octane fuel.
Ki84-II was answer it.
may be Ki84-II will be reliable, but Ki84-II was just plan,
and Ha45-23 and 25 was testing in end of war.
Ha45-23 and 25 was 2000HP.
may be Ki84-II's max speed will be same Ki84-I in phillipines.
But arms will be change from 12.7mm x2 20mmx2 to 20mm x4.
ummm it is little bit lower than Ki84-I's it in phillipines?
sorry poor english.
-
Thanks for the information, pkun.
Your English is good enough to get the data through, and far, far better than the vast majority of our Japanese is.
-
If Ink gets a 4 cannon KI I'm going to quit. :old:
:rofl :aok +1
-
I tell you Ki-84otsu(equip Ho5 20mm x4 type) some information.
Ki-84otsu was produced.
But , Exactly number of produced was not found now.
but, we can estimate by Ki84kou's serial No.
Ki84-otsu was build in oota factory of Nakajima hikouki.
and serial No 101-2759 of Ki84kou were build in same place,too.
but last serial No of ki-84kou was 2676.
2759-2676 is 83.
83 is product No of ki84otsu.
and ,some pictures of ki84otsu is found,now.
we can know Ki84otsu was supplied to front line by this picture.
104sq in Manchuria,fought against USSR in last of war,used ki84-otsu.
and there was picture of Ki84otsu(serial No 3060,first Ki84otsu is 3001) captured by USAAF.
Ki84hei,equip Ho-155 30mm x2 and Ho-5 20mm x2, was build only 2.
These were prototype.
-
I tell you Ki-84otsu(equip Ho5 20mm x4 type) some information.
Ki-84otsu was produced.
But , Exactly number of produced was not found now.
but, we can estimate by Ki84kou's serial No.
Ki84-otsu was build in oota factory of Nakajima hikouki.
and serial No 101-2759 of Ki84kou were build in same place,too.
but last serial No of ki-84kou was 2676.
2759-2676 is 83.
83 is product No of ki84otsu.
and ,some pictures of ki84otsu is found,now.
we can know Ki84otsu was supplied to front line by this picture.
104sq in Manchuria,fought against USSR in last of war,used ki84-otsu.
and there was picture of Ki84otsu(serial No 3060,first Ki84otsu is 3001) captured by USAAF.
Ki84hei,equip Ho-155 30mm x2 and Ho-5 20mm x2, was build only 2.
These were prototype.
Pkun, thank you for the update, do you have a link to the pictures?
Tks
-
Ki84 is one of the most dangerous birds imho.
just keep that ki84 out of Ink's hands and it will not be so deadly :devil
-
not like the ki-84 isn't a spit 16 in drag already now you want tiffie hitting power? it's crazy I tell you. Perk it!!!
Plus the amount of punishment it can take is unreal, its just a socaily acceptable spit 16 :D
-
Pkun, thank you for the update, do you have a link to the pictures?
Tks
OK,I show you.
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84_104.jpg
This is picture is Ki84otsu of 104sq, run away from Manchuria.
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84_3060.jpg
This is picture is Ki84otsu captured by USAAF, serial no 3060.
and I show you ki84kou too.
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84004.jpg
you can distinct kou and otsu by this picture.
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84006.jpg
you can watch 3 ki84otsu on this picture.
front 1 is ki84kou, back 3 are ki84otsu.
(this ki84s ware 104sq)
and, Ki84otsu was different cockpit panel , ki84kou
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84kou_panel.jpg
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84otsu_panel.jpg
up is kou, down is otsu.
and i can show you ki84hei prototype.
http://www.warbirds.jp/p-kun/other/ki84/ki84_hei.jpg
-
and I think ,
it's a OK,no limit version of Ki84 ,get max speed 684km/h, release to AH.
because Real pilot couldn't use second stage of Supercharger on Ta152
,but its possible to AH version of Ta152.
and Ki84Otsu was built more than Ta152.
and, DB605L, used by Bf109K, was such engine with supercharger run on front line?
it's not unfair.
(and it's a famous , pilot of F4U-1C couldn't use Hispano over 10000ft,but its' a no problem on AH)
But, I'm enough current version of ki84 on AH.
because I think, current version of ki84 on AH is very real, it's a closely ki84 in front line .
-
Why no Hispanos over 10k? I did a quick web search here on my phone and failed to find any information on this statement.
-
Why no Hispanos over 10k? I did a quick web search here on my phone and failed to find any information on this statement.
My guess would be because the lubricant the US used to make them work, instead of correcting the breech length like the British, got too cold above 10,000 and jams became too prevalent.
-
Why no Hispanos over 10k? I did a quick web search here on my phone and failed to find any information on this statement.
You can watch Hispano's cover of SpitV,
But ,F4U-1C's don't have such cover.
Yes,F4U-1C don't have anti iced cover for Hispano.
Hispanos of F4U-1C were iced on over 10000ft.
you can read such situation on "Corsair Aces of World WarII",too.
It Book is series of "Osprey Aircraft of the Ace".
(But I have it of Japanese Edition.)
USN used Hispano for aircraft normally,when they got F8F-1B.
May be, SpitVs on Port darwin were same situation when they fought against Zero.
because, G4M1 didn't get big hole on Port darwin,and many of them could return to base.
But this reason is weather of Australia, I think.
-
If the guns didn't have electric heating then its probabley a legtiimate reason for the C-hog's perk. Most I encounter in AH 20k+.
-
Add it. Perk it.
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT-J2-Wj1QEPRxXPC8j9ZdonT8UTh0WDHSn1DrSiFqr6k3Jgqsa)
:D
OK..just add it...it would be fun! :joystick:
-
Either the Gladiator...or the Dewoitine D.520, that fine of example of French engineering!
(Yes, I know....original discussion was Japanese perks....sorry)
-
True, but thats not really what I'm basing the ENY off of. In fact, just doing a greater than/less than comparison for ENY doesn't work, since they don't pose an equal threat to all aircraft, even of roughly equal performance.
La-7 is more dangerous to more aircraft, even though the Ki-84 is dangerous to the La-7.
The KI can't dive....trust me. I know this.
-
and I think ,
it's a OK,no limit version of Ki84 ,get max speed 684km/h, release to AH.
because Real pilot couldn't use second stage of Supercharger on Ta152
,but its possible to AH version of Ta152.
and Ki84Otsu was built more than Ta152.
and, DB605L, used by Bf109K, was such engine with supercharger run on front line?
it's not unfair.
(and it's a famous , pilot of F4U-1C couldn't use Hispano over 10000ft,but its' a no problem on AH)
But, I'm enough current version of ki84 on AH.
because I think, current version of ki84 on AH is very real, it's a closely ki84 in front line .
I like this guy! ^^^^^^
-
I tell you Ki-84otsu(equip Ho5 20mm x4 type) some information.
Ki-84otsu was produced.
But , Exactly number of produced was not found now.
but, we can estimate by Ki84kou's serial No.
Ki84-otsu was build in oota factory of Nakajima hikouki.
and serial No 101-2759 of Ki84kou were build in same place,too.
but last serial No of ki-84kou was 2676.
2759-2676 is 83.
83 is product No of ki84otsu.
and ,some pictures of ki84otsu is found,now.
we can know Ki84otsu was supplied to front line by this picture.
104sq in Manchuria,fought against USSR in last of war,used ki84-otsu.
and there was picture of Ki84otsu(serial No 3060,first Ki84otsu is 3001) captured by USAAF.
Ki84hei,equip Ho-155 30mm x2 and Ho-5 20mm x2, was build only 2.
These were prototype.
Ok... I have GOT to fly one of these OTSU's with the 4 X 20mm....Hi 2Cmex!!!!
-
150 P-51 made 4 x20mm for Britain, we kept 55 cause they were so cool and both the British and the American issues were used till the end of the war! Britain was a small player right? :old:
British ordered 150 aircraft, NA-91/P-51, 41-37320-37469, FD418-FD567.
93 aircraft where shipped to England as Mustang IA
FD438/41-37340 - FD449/41-37351
FD465/41-37367
FD470/41-37372-FD509/41-37411
FD528/41-37430-FD567/41-37469
55 retained by USAAC for Tactical recon variant P-51-1NA, Photo recon later as F-6A.
I'm sure it would be perked.
150>88,
-
and I think ,
it's a OK,no limit version of Ki84 ,get max speed 684km/h, release to AH.
because Real pilot couldn't use second stage of Supercharger on Ta152
,but its possible to AH version of Ta152.
and Ki84Otsu was built more than Ta152.
and, DB605L, used by Bf109K, was such engine with supercharger run on front line?
it's not unfair.
(and it's a famous , pilot of F4U-1C couldn't use Hispano over 10000ft,but its' a no problem on AH)
But, I'm enough current version of ki84 on AH.
because I think, current version of ki84 on AH is very real, it's a closely ki84 in front line .
Sorry, I missed.
I want to say,
"it's unfair."
But, I'm enough current version of ki84 on AH.
My English is very poor...orz
Ki84 dive?
AH's version is real.
IJA 50sq on Burma reported.
"I tried diving bomb to British Destroyer on Kolkata.
But Ki84's nose uped.
I counld continue diving by pushing center stick Fully."
Yes, Ki84 could dive, but continue of dive was difficult, like a AH version.
-
150 P-51 made 4 x20mm for Britain, we kept 55 cause they were so cool and both the British and the American issues were used till the end of the war! Britain was a small player right? :old:
British ordered 150 aircraft, NA-91/P-51, 41-37320-37469, FD418-FD567.
93 aircraft where shipped to England as Mustang IA
FD438/41-37340 - FD449/41-37351
FD465/41-37367
FD470/41-37372-FD509/41-37411
FD528/41-37430-FD567/41-37469
55 retained by USAAC for Tactical recon variant P-51-1NA, Photo recon later as F-6A.
I'm sure it would be perked.
150>88,
Mustang IA, equiped Allison V-1710-81, MaxSpeed 624km/h,,,,
Do you want to use such Mustang on MA?
May be ,it's bad accelleration, middle speed, bad climb, and bad turn.
and in fact,
P-51A(12.7mmx6) joined Battle in Burma.
In first engage to IJA 64Sq equiped Ki-43II,P-51As were losed...
and P-51A was similer P-40.
Mustang IA is like a P-40 equiped Hispanos.
but, I don' hate P-51A, if P-51A join to MA, May be I want to try. :D
-
Sorry, I missed.
I want to say,
"it's unfair."
But, I'm enough current version of ki84 on AH.
My English is very poor...orz
Ki84 dive?
AH's version is real.
IJA 50sq on Burma reported.
"I tried diving bomb to British Destroyer on Kolkata.
But Ki84's nose uped.
I counld continue diving by pushing center stick Fully."
Yes, Ki84 could dive, but continue of dive was difficult, like a AH version.
I don't doubt that the Ki-84 required stick force to keep the nose down in a dive. What I am skeptical of is that it shed control surfaces at about 480 to 500mph.
-
I don't doubt that the Ki-84 required stick force to keep the nose down in a dive. What I am skeptical of is that it shed control surfaces at about 480 to 500mph.
+1
We can send the designs to Wmaker. He and his brethren will redesign it like the F-18 Super Brewster
-
I don't doubt that the Ki-84 required stick force to keep the nose down in a dive. What I am skeptical of is that it shed control surfaces at about 480 to 500mph.
Yasushi Koyama ,designed Ki27,Ki43,Ki44,Ki84, wrote,
"We(especially IJA) were afraid crashed on air.I gave heavy control to Ki84.
and Ki84 is up nose in high speed"
and Ki84 could keep weigh light by these.
because frameworkｓ of the body and other was kept weigh light.
may be you know, Ki84's propeller was shorter than other 2000HP class airplanes.
this reason is same it.
Yasushi Koyama wished just keeping weigh light, I think.
-
pkun,
Do you know of any accounts of the Ki-84 breaking up in the air due to maneuvering?
-
Mustang IA, equiped Allison V-1710-81, MaxSpeed 624km/h,,,,
Do you want to use such Mustang on MA?
May be ,it's bad accelleration, middle speed, bad climb, and bad turn.
but, I don' hate P-51A, if P-51A join to MA, May be I want to try. :D
Sounds perfect
Well.... their were 4 different versions of the early P-51
1st- NA-73/83 620... 8 303's or 4x50cal and 4x303 "MKI"
2nd- NA-91 150 .... 95 "MKIA"<Brit> 55 <USAAF> "P-51-1" 4x 20mm
3rd- NA-97 500 "A36"
4th- NA-99 310 "P-51A" "MKII"
I would like to try too :)
-
pkun,
Do you know of any accounts of the Ki-84 breaking up in the air due to maneuvering?
the KI stays together up till 505 or so......
it has no nose climb in a dive the way the LA does, and it seems to me, that is what the pilot describes, I would rather have it the way he describes.
-
the KI stays together up till 505 or so......
it has no nose climb in a dive the way the LA does, and it seems to me, that is what the pilot describes, I would rather have it the way he describes.
Ditto...no nose up at all right now
-
I think some earlier P-51s would really help the D varient shine and help for some players to validate its current low ENY in the game.
-
I think some earlier P-51s would really help the D varient shine and help for some players to validate its current low ENY in the game.
I don't think anything is needed to validate the P-51D's ENY 5 rating beyond the P-51D in AH.
A P-51A would be a nice addition though.
-
I would give the 51D a 2 eny!
To the OP's ? the P-51-1 <MkIA> fits the bill
P-51A is pretty much the same as the B different engine same 4x50's. The MkI was stickly British < we kept 2 to test> 8x303.
Of the 4 early 51's I would like to see these 2
1. P-51 ...4x20mm <perked>
2. A-36 ...dive brakes 2 x 500lbs and 6 x50's
The P-51 4x20mm Allison, was low numbers and would be perked and was for a small country. :aok
OnTopic,
-
P-51A is pretty much the same as the B different engine same 4x50's.
Don't think you can call it "pretty much the same" when the engine isn't even in the same family. Sure, the armament and views would be similar, though no Malcolm Hood, but the performance would be very different. Much more different than between the P-51B and P-51D.
-
We can send the designs to Wmaker. He and his brethren will redesign it like the F-18 Super Brewster
:cry
You truly aren't the sharpest tool in the shed...
What I find funny is the fact that you seem to have a lot of opinions on how certain planes should be without having any idea or technical knowledge on how they were in real life. :)
I find it rather amusing. :)
-
I don't doubt that the Ki-84 required stick force to keep the nose down in a dive. What I am skeptical of is that it shed control surfaces at about 480 to 500mph.
The ki84 is much more likely to be overmodelled than under.
-
The ki84 is much more likely to be overmodelled than under.
Compared to a real one with all of the quality control issues, sure, but we're supposed to get manufacturing defect free aircraft. In other words, the Ki-84 should only shed its control surfaces at that speed if one built to spec would shed its control surfaces at that speed.
After all, you don't have Ponies popping wings off or Tiffies suffering tail separation do you?
-
It takes an incredible amount of punishment, in fact I would say it is the most durable fighter in game. So is a ki really more durable than a jug??
-
It takes an incredible amount of punishment, in fact I would say it is the most durable fighter in game. So is a ki really more durable than a jug??
The KI does seem durable but I have never seen one behave in survival mode longer than a JUG. Hell, the Brewster lasts almost as long as the JUG if we're using the JUG as the most damage-durable example.
-
The KI does seem durable but I have never seen one behave in survival mode longer than a JUG. Hell, the Brewster lasts almost as long as the JUG if we're using the JUG as the most damage-durable example.
Hellcat and Wildcat are the two fighters that stand out to me for durability. Bf109s do also seem pretty tough. The Ki-84 only really seems tough compared to other Japanese fighters and Spitfires. It is pretty much right in line with things like the P-51, which isn't that surprising for the Japanese fighter built to the highest strength requirements of any Japanese fighter.
-
I am using the jug more as something that was famed for durabilty in real life. I would agree with the f4f as well but I am going from experience of what I am shooting down 84s seem to take a lot more before a wing pops off than anything else. If I get the time I think I will test it.
-
Going by weight there doesn't really seem to be a reason the Ki-84 should be less durable than the F4F. As far as the P-47 goes, I think it is simply so large that it catches a lot of rounds that would miss a smaller fighter like the Ki-84, and that hides its durability. I certainly feel that about the Mossie, which absorbs AA fire and snap shots like a champ, but crumples when somebody has a bead on it. I think the Bf109 seems tough to me because its size causes a lot of rounds to miss by inches or a few feet that would have hit a larger target like the P-47.
-
:cry
You truly aren't the sharpest tool in the shed...
What I find funny is the fact that you seem to have a lot of opinions on how certain planes should be without having any idea or technical knowledge on how they were in real life. :)
I find it rather amusing. :)
I find it fun to see how possessive you are with this turd of a plane. One doesn't need to know a lot about aeronautical engineering to know in game, the Brewster performs classically better than the outcast aircraft it truly was. It was discarded for its lack of performance. I will always doubt the resurrection of a plane by a third party who is so possessive and intimate. I won't ever believe the Fins were able to somehow jettison weight, add guns and suddenly it's awesome. That would presume too many US wartime engineers missed something simple like weights and measures.
You're too easy, lol
-
I find it fun to see how possessive you are with this turd of a plane. One doesn't need to know a lot about aeronautical engineering to know in game, the Brewster performs classically better than the outcast aircraft it truly was. It was discarded for its lack of performance. I will always doubt the resurrection of a plane by a third party who is so possessive and intimate. I won't ever believe the Fins were able to somehow jettison weight, add guns and suddenly it's awesome. That would presume too many US wartime engineers missed something simple like weights and measures.
You're too easy, lol
That isn't what happened though. The version the Finns got was the earlier, light version before a ton, literally, of weight was added to it. Was it Boyington who got angry when it was brought up and said it was a sweet little ship that was ruined by the additional equipment that the navy put on it?
As far as lack of performance goes, the Brewster in AH has that in spades. It can barely break 300mph in level flight.
-
The brew is pretty much a parasite aircraft in aces high, I am always shocked how people complain they are overmodelled? My guess is if they watched the film back they would see they were at a large energy disadvantage to start with.
-
Don't think you can call it "pretty much the same" when the engine isn't even in the same family. Sure, the armament and views would be similar, though no Malcolm Hood, but the performance would be very different. Much more different than between the P-51B and P-51D.
We get the 51A and more with this. In a perfect world we would have all the 51 varients.
(http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/URG/images/a36apache-2.jpg)
But that is off topic
This is on topic :)
(http://img68.imageshack.us/img68/5776/ac21gf3.jpg)
(http://i836.photobucket.com/albums/zz281/Megalodon2/p514x20mmRedWreckerIII_zps10357ac6.jpg)
And would be perked :)
That is all,
-
We get the 51A and more with this.
P-51A and A-36 would both be nice additions. Although the only massively significant versions of the Mustang were the B/C and D, it would still be nice to get such a popular airframe more fleshed out.
In a perfect world we would have all the 51 varients.
Well, yeah, in a perfect world we'd have every version of everything that fought in WWII in the game...
-
P-51A and A-36 would both be nice additions. Although the only massively significant versions of the Mustang were the B/C and D, it would still be nice to get such a popular airframe more fleshed out.
Well, yeah, in a perfect world we'd have every version of everything that fought in WWII in the game...
A36 and P-51 I agree
-
pervert is right, the KI84 is extremely tough, it can take a major beating and still perform, it has surprised me with as much damage it took and still flew away.
I think it is one of, if not the toughest fighter, as far as taking damage goes, it equals the 47, maybe even takes a bit more.
one of the reasons I love it so :aok
-
That isn't what happened though. The version the Finns got was the earlier, light version before a ton, literally, of weight was added to it. Was it Boyington who got angry when it was brought up and said it was a sweet little ship that was ruined by the additional equipment that the navy put on it?
As far as lack of performance goes, the Brewster in AH has that in spades. It can barely break 300mph in level flight.
Karnak...It doesn't have to fly much faster than that when it holds its E better than a HOG and almost as good as a K4 in WEP and can clearly gain speed faster diving than most of the late war planes. Add all that into the fact that it turns almost as well and doubtfully a measurable difference, as the zeke. That doesn't include its total invincibility to compression at any speed I've had it at (500+).
I doubt Boyington was the one that said that...as it was, it was designed from the start to be the Marine Corp/Navy CV aircraft so Boyington, as a designer himself, would have absolutely known it needed all of the heavy add-ons to make it CV worthy. Most of the designers of the day could eyeball weights and measures (READ: Kelly Johnson) and how badly power to weight ratios would be affected.
-
Karnak...It doesn't have to fly much faster than that when it holds its E better than a HOG and almost as good as a K4 in WEP and can clearly gain speed faster diving than most of the late war planes. Add all that into the fact that it turns almost as well and doubtfully a measurable difference, as the zeke. That doesn't include its total invincibility to compression at any speed I've had it at (500+).
The tests I ran of it vs the Fw190D-9 clearly said otherwise. I am sorry, but the behavior you claim it does, it doesn't do.
I doubt Boyington was the one that said that...as it was, it was designed from the start to be the Marine Corp/Navy CV aircraft so Boyington, as a designer himself, would have absolutely known it needed all of the heavy add-ons to make it CV worthy. Most of the designers of the day could eyeball weights and measures (READ: Kelly Johnson) and how badly power to weight ratios would be affected.
http://www.warbirdforum.com/pappy.htm
...I remember asking him about the Brewster Buffalo (Then, Now and Always, my favorite aircraft). I had no sooner finished saying the word 'Buffalo', when he slammed his beer can down on the table, and practicaly snarled, "It was a DOG!" (His emphasis). Then he slowly leaned back in his chair and after a moment quietly said, "But the early models, before they weighed it all down with armorplate, radios and other toejam, they were pretty sweet little ships. Not real fast, but the little diddlys could turn and roll in a phonebooth. Oh yeah--sweet little ship; but some engineer went and diddlyed it up." With that he reached for his beer and was silent again. After that answer, I somehow had the feeling that I had just gotten a glimpse into Boyington's attitude towards life in general.
I can't verify the statement is real or not though, at least not with a two minute google search.
-
Sorry Karnak, I returned from S.korea(not N.Korea :D)now.
pkun,
Do you know of any accounts of the Ki-84 breaking up in the air due to maneuvering?
I never read such report.
But, I know Ki84's elevator was very weak by Ki84 flight manual.
and I know, this report was sent to pyro from busa01.
I don't think Ki84 on AH is over model.
I know break out of Ki84's elevator on AH is easy,
but I understand its reason because Ki84 on AH have Combat trim, and it's easy that we can control elevator trim easy on game.
On real Ki84 was not easy to control trim.
and,,,,
is Ki84 on AH very hard? is it over model?
I don't think so.
For example,
Colonel Neel E. Kearby reported, he shot Ki43II on P38 2 times(9 seconds) on air, but Ki43 was not fired.
(finally, this ki43 was entered to sea without fire.)
this report was written Jan 3rd 1944.
Ki43II was same protect level to Ki84.
Plz know, IJA fighters ,Ki84 and Ki43 and other, were different to IJN fighters.
IJA fighters had protection.
IJN fighters without end of war plane didn't have protection.
-
I prefer to not use combat trim on the Ki-84. I find that it reduces elevator authority too much at speeds over 350mph. I prefer to have to push forward on the stick to keep the nose down in a dive and be able to pull 6 Gs when over 400mph rather than having it dive without needing forward pressure on the stick but not being able to evade or follow aircraft with better elevator authority at speed like Spitfires and P-51s.
As to the IJN protection thing, I thought the N1K2-J had self sealing tanks and pilot armor. I know the A6M series was never very protected. The G4M1 and G4M2 lacked any protection, but the G4M3 added it. The H8K2 also had extensive protection.
-
and,,,,
is Ki84 on AH very hard? is it over model?
I don't think so.
Personally I think it is in some areas, in much the same way as the DR1 was in WW1, if it was as popular as say a p51 in the MA I think people would pick up on it. Its not the decent sticks who fly it that give me this suspicion, but the ones that aren't so good and wasteful of energy in a fight, much like the DR1 the 84 seems to retain more energy than it should, usually in a fighter that turns well it can get nose up quicker but falls back in distance once its nose high, in the KI-84 it gets its nose up quick and keeps going and going and going, this is much the same as the old DR1 fm in WW1 in my opinion and bear in mind I can balance a 190d9 on a pin when maxing it out so that is virtually standing still, no plane gives me as much trouble as the KI.
A poorly flown ki84 (wasteful in terms of energy) can still compete in the vert better and more consistently than a well flown F4U4 with me completely maxed out,
I would say its high speed handling is what makes it unpopular in Aces High, lets face it a lot of the fight is faster until its forced slower ie people don't like to stop and have a 'fair' fight.
-
the brewster origionally was a hot ship and well liked for its excellent handling and maneuverability.
The Buffalo won a competition against the Grumman F4F Wildcat in 1939 to become the U.S. Navy's first monoplane fighter aircraft.
as happens in beuracratic systems like the military a chain of additions was added to the stubby plane until it became a lead sled that was easily dispatched by trained zero pilots the navy brewster faced at the start of the war. it was too sow to run and too heavy to maneuver with the japanese adversaries and it was removed from service as the f4f became available as the frontline fighter of the navy during the begining of the pacific war.
what does shock me though is when flying the i16 and then the brewster... two planes that square off in scenarios...
the brew has the range of a p51 with full gas while the i16 has with drop tanks like 15 minutes. the i16 is a dog and not a succesful fighter even in its front line time period while the drew holds its own in late war settings.
you might say i think the brewster should be gimped but I really think the i16 is overly gimped and should be un nerfed :)
-
Keep in mind that the I-16 was, what, a 1931 or 1932 design? Sure, it had been up engined, but it was way past its prime. When it was introduced it was most likely the best fighter in the world.
-
How about Kyūshū J7W1 Shinden
-
How about Kyūshū J7W1 Shinden
If they had ever gotten the advanced version with the gas turbine off the drawing board maybe.
-
Back to the original question, the only Japanese aircraft I can think of that would have a significant enough impact on the game to deserve perking would the the Ohka flying bomb. It meets the criteria - it was deployed, it saw action in significant strength - and actually sank allied ships.
It would require a significant investment in programming time to bring the Ohka to AH - and your perk points are automatically lost on launch. You would take up a Betty loaded with the Ohka, and then essentially hit a key to bail from the Betty (which then spirals down to crash) and fire the Ohka. You end up in the pilot seat of a flying bomb gliding - you have 3 solid rocket motors available and each will burns at 587 lbs of thrust until expended (they can be triggered all at once or individually). All you have to do now is hit a target, since your perk points are already spent - you have about 3 minutes to live.
-
Note: I do not advocate adding the Ohka to AH.
That said, if I were to do so I would require it to be a two person operation. The G4M2 (we would need an additional model of the G4M) pilot would not pay any perks and is simply responsible for getting the Ohka pilot into range of the target and releasing him. The Ohka player's perks would be refunded if the G4M2 landed with the Ohka still attached and both got a "landed successfully" message. The moment the Ohka is released by the G4M2 pilot the Ohka pilot's perks are doomed.
-
If a Betty pilot lands with a live 1200Kg bomb sticking halfway out of his bomb bay, he ought to get the Ohka pilots perks. :O
-
Set the fuse so that there is no flight time required to arm it, and make it go off of someone sneezes on it. That alone would balance things out, since so few would get off the ground.