Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Zacherof on April 28, 2013, 01:52:51 PM
-
What's the difference between the ki's you all want and the one we have now?
-
You all want?
Can't remember having ever wanted another Ki-61... :headscratch:
:bolt:
-
You all want meaning those who all want it if that makes sense
-
Armament, protection, engine power, cockpit visibility.
What? You thought it would be different for Ki-61s than it is for Bf109s, Fw190s, P-51s and Spitfires?
-
Perhaps he's referencing everything that begins with 'Ki?' If so .... ummmm ...... a lot?
-
I am not an expert on Ki-61s, but I think the Ki-61-II is a very nice looking fighter and I would use it. I am not so fond of the Ki-100.
-
I'm quite familiar with the 84. As for the 61, I fin it a terrible
plane. I'm just wanting to know what do the other variants bring to the table in against the 61-1
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kawasaki_Ki-61
-
Well, I'd like to see the initial Ki-61-I. Depending on the source, its take-off weight would be 750 - 1146lbs (depending on the source) lighter than the Ki-61-Tei we have now while having practically the same power output. It would therefore have more livelier performance.
I am not an expert on Ki-61s, but I think the Ki-61-II is a very nice looking fighter and I would use it. I am not so fond of the Ki-100.
Just wanted to mention that that low back Ki-61-II pictured in the recent thread was a single prototype. The low number of Ki-61-IIs that got produced had a high back:
(http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/jimlong/tony/1tony56f.jpg)
http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/jimlong/tony/tony.htm (http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/jimlong/tony/tony.htm)
-
The ki61 with 2 30mm's would be rather frightining
-
As for the 61, I fin it a terrible plane.
Wow! :bhead
The Ki-61 is a great plane when flown to its strengths. Can dive, turns well, adequate guns, good nose over view. I mean, what else do you need?
-
Granted I haven't dedicated more than 20 sorties to this plane, I found it not to my likeing. Not all that great in the vert(compared to the k4 obiuosly it's not going to be as great.)
-
Unless you compare the Me163 nothing is going to compare to the Bf109K-4 in the vertical, the best Spitfires can merely match it. If you keep up that comparison you're just going to be disappointed by everything. :p
-
I am rather biased when it comes to going vertical. Besides, it's not even German :old:
-
I am rather biased when it comes to going vertical. Besides, it's not even German :old:
But it has a Diamler-Benz engine. (license built)
-
But it has a Diamler-Benz engine. (license built)
touché :salute
-
I absolutely adore the Ki-61, a few times I Flew it in the FSO it was just a gem to fly - almost learned a bit from Kermit long ago on it but I never mastered flying it.
-
What's the difference between the ki's you all want and the one we have now?
Same difference as all those Bf- and Fw- planes you like so much.
-
Same difference as all those Bf- and Fw- planes you like so much.
if you think about it same differince is not really a proper thing to say.
And fine I will dedicated 4 hours to this tweety bird. Tongs seems to do rather well in this bird
-
Do I have to go bush doing so aswell?
-
From what i understand (almost jack sniznit) our ki-61 should dive run and fly much like a p-51 and should turn like a zero at lower speeds.
:headscratch:
Careful what you wish for. :rock
-
If they added the Ki-100 I'd be happy. It isn't my first choicefor next addition but it strikes me as a great bird. From what I've read the Ki-100 was the best overall IJF plane of WW2.
boo
-
If they added the Ki-100 I'd be happy. It isn't my first choicefor next addition but it strikes me as a great bird. From what I've read the Ki-100 was the best overall IJF plane of WW2.
boo
Performance wise, it was not. Reliability is what it had going for it.
-
Yeah, the Japanese couldn't produce the DBs to the exacting German standards, so they had terrible reliability problems.
-
Yeah, the Japanese couldn't produce the DBs to the exacting German standards, so they had terrible reliability problems.
They couldn't produce the Homare engines to the exacting Japanese standards either.... :p
(Drafting your skilled factory workers to act as cannon fodder is not a good idea, but the Japanese did it.)
-
if you think about it same differince is not really a proper thing to say.
And fine I will dedicated 4 hours to this tweety bird. Tongs seems to do rather well in this bird
ok ..here's a tip for you since you like the luft planes and know the luft planes.....
take the 109F... give it 1/4 less turn (with flaps), give it 1/4 less rudder capability, take about 10mph off, remove the ability to climb, add double the dive capability, add another 70,less effective 20mm rounds and you are ready to understand and fly the ki61.. good luck with your four hours... :D :cheers: :salute
-
I like here in the dive, but it's been 2 years since I really "touched" her.
I just didn't like her flaps compared to a hog.
And I hvw alot to learn in the luft planes.
1 country at a time please :old:
-
Granted I haven't dedicated more than 20 sorties to this plane, I found it not to my likeing. Not all that great in the vert(compared to the k4 obiuosly it's not going to be as great.)
When you fly it out of it's comfort zone, you cannot get the full scope of the craft. It is more than capable of hanging with Late War rides in most scenarios. It is going to come down to how well the stick knows what advantages he has and can he seize the opportunity. Comparing a Ki-61 or most Mid-War rides to a K4 is nothing short of asinine. However, if flown properly, you can shoot many K4's down. The Ki-61's have some of the fastest firing cannons in the game and are a dream to fire in deflection shots. You have very good control in dives up to 500 IAS, including rudder. It's turning radius is good and flaps aren't even needed, as long as you pay close attention to the airspeed. If you hang on the prop a lot, you might be disappointed. It is one of the most underrated perk farmers in the game.
Tongs can handle the Ki-61 in most situations with exceptional skill. When I flew it, I rarely went over 6k and ended up on the deck. It is a great plane in capable hands.
-
I generally like to come in at alt, but I shall try this method.
-
Performance wise, it was not. Reliability is what it had going for it.
Overall, performance-wise, it would be better than the Ki-61 currently in game.
-
Overall, performance-wise, it would be better than the Ki-61 currently in game.
Agreed
-
Performance wise, it was not. Reliability is what it had going for it.
The Ki-100 was turner. That's why IJAAF pilots liked it. (Yohei Hinoki...and more)
They said it was like Ki-43-III.
-
Did the 100 have 20's?
-
They couldn't produce the Homare engines to the exacting Japanese standards either.... :p
(Drafting your skilled factory workers to act as cannon fodder is not a good idea, but the Japanese did it.)
True, but even in 1942 they had real problems producing the DB601. The same engine that had been in serial production in Germany since 1937.
-
Did the 100 have 20's?
20's (Ho-5) on the cowl with 200 rpg
12.7's (Ho-103) wing mounted with 250 rpg
The Ki-100 was turner. That's why IJAAF pilots liked it. (Yohei Hinoki...and more)
They said it was like Ki-43-III.
so it's basically a Hayabusa without the extreme low speed maneuverability (due to "butterfly" flaps) that can dive without shedding parts like Ki-84 in this game? :rock
btw, is Ki-84 shedding elevators at @ 450 IAS dive really a built-in-feature in that plane in real life? :headscratch:
... I mean, even 109G-14 with wooden tail in this game can still do extreme dives without shedding its tail off.
-
+1 for super turner
-
20's (Ho-5) on the cowl with 200 rpg
12.7's (Ho-103) wing mounted with 250 rpg
so it's basically a Hayabusa without the extreme low speed maneuverability (due to "butterfly" flaps) that can dive without shedding parts like Ki-84 in this game? :rock
Yep, It was highly rated in vertical maneuverability too.
Also Navy pilots tested the Ki-100, and they had good feeling to it.
But some Army pilots reported it had a sensitive pitch moment at slow speed by shorted nose.
and reported the control surface was too light.
Anyway it would be excellent fighter for furball addicts... :rock
Oh, it's me. :D
-
Yep, It was highly rated in vertical maneuverability too.
Also Navy pilots tested the Ki-100, and they had good feeling to it.
But some Army pilots reported it had a sensitive pitch moment at slow speed by shorted nose.
and reported the control surface was too light.
Anyway it would be excellent fighter for furball addicts... :rock
Oh, it's me. :D
if so I want!!!
-
From what I understand the Ki-100 is simply an improved Ki-61 with a better engine and visibility. The Ki-61 currently outturns most planes and with a better engine would do well in the verticle game. With self sealing fuel tanks and a radial engine it should be more durable and higher speeds and turbo charged better at altitude. All around a great addition to the MA and should be somewhere in the top-10 of next additions. Actually, considering how many Allied birds we have, maybe it is top-5 for next additions.
...but that is just my two cents.
Boo
-
The Ki-100 was an emergency measure after the USAAF destroyed the factory producing the Ha-140 (DB605) in early 1945. The ~270 Ki-61-II-KAI, now without engines, were converted to use the Ha-112 radial engine, creating the Ki-100. The Ki-100 had worse performance than the Ki-61-II-KAI, with a top speed similar to the earlier Ki-61-I-KAI (DB601).