Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Squire on October 11, 2015, 11:22:18 PM
-
Whats your opinion on which is the better fighter and why? I am interested.
-
Against each other the ki43 in my opinion.
-
Each other or vs the same Early War opponent like a P-40E, Hurricane, F4F ect.
-
Against each other the Ki-43's better turning ability would make it favourite. Both aircraft can out-turn any other aircraft they come across and are broadly similar in performance terms, so the A6M2's cannons would make it the aircraft to have.
-
Against each other the Ki-43's better turning ability would make it favourite. Both aircraft can out-turn any other aircraft they come across and are broadly similar in performance terms, so the A6M2's cannons would make it the aircraft to have.
Exactly. The gun package of the Ki-43 is near useless to me. I'd rather saddle the enemy with a Zero without cannon just because I know I have the ammo to actually kill the damn thing.
-
If you're a mediocre to good shot, the Ki43 by miles. I flew the Ki43 for tour 181 earlier this year, and whenever I ran into Zeros in a 1v1 they always lost. Same vs other earlier war fighters as mentioned. Even in the MA vs all the late war rides, the Ki43 is incredibly survivable if you maintain good SA - it's very nimble and hard to hit, but if you do get hit, you're usually done, there is no "damage" like the Ki84 for example, not often anyway. I had k/hour in or very close to double digits, and a k/d close to 4 in it, and I'm no super pilot, so if I can do it, anyone can. It's the most underestimated plane in the game IMO, it amazed me how many guys would get into turn fights with it when they had me 1 on 1, or even 2 or 3 on 1.
I think it's a combination of that it frustrates guys, plus it's known to be fragile, so folks go for shots, and then end up not getting them, and pressing that shot into a turn fight without realizing they are getting into one until it's too late.
I'd love to see one of the super-shots in the game, probably Bruv119 I think, fly it for a tour. I'd wager it'd be pretty impressive, and incredibly frustrating to those trying to kill him in it.
In an FSO type scenario where bombers might be targets, I'd reverse that opinion, and say the Zero by miles, due to the extra speed, and absolutely the armament which is pretty decent for such a good turning fighter. Spit5 should be in the discussion/mentioned in terms of the early war ride comparisons like the P40/F4F/Hurri were earlier too, as it'd be my 2nd choice next to the Ki43 if I was going to be fighting turn fights.
I do think though that the bottom line is that when facing any other high rate/radius fighter, the Ki43 will win in a 1 on 1 with the pilots being equal. Just my opinion.
-
The only thing the zero has is guns. The Ki is faster, turnier (it's a word!), and climbier.
-
The only thing the zero has is guns. The Ki is faster, turnier (it's a word!), and climbier.
the zero is blastier :D
-
:rofl
-
If the KI gets on the zekes six, It's over. The zeke may be able to BnZ the KI43 though.
-
Seems to be a mix of opinions which I am not all that surprised by.
-
The zeke may be able to BnZ the KI43 though.
How? The Ki is faster and climbs better.
-
Keep in mind that the Ki-43-II we have in AH is a contemporary of the A6M3 and A6M5 and against those it gets a lot dicier for the Ki-43-II. It is too bad we don't have the Ki-43-I and Ki-43-III. The performance differences are greater than those of some other aircraft we have, such as the Bf109G-2 and Bf109G-6, P-51B and P-51D, P-38J and P-38L or Spitfire Mk VIII and Spitfire Mk XVI.
-
If we're talking fights against its contemporaries, I think it's fair to say the P-40E has a better shot against a Ki-43 than a Zeke. It's not hopelessly outclassed against either, but it has to be flown to its strengths (BnZ) to be effective. I don't personally have much experience flying either plane against early war Hurri's, but unless the Hurri can build up a speed advantage it's going to have a very tough time against either plane. It's probably outmatched against a zeke, but a closer match against the Ki-43.
-
Keep in mind that the Ki-43-II we have in AH is a contemporary of the A6M3 and A6M5
Yes, I am asking re a SEA setup and so its a narrow focus question; A6M2 (specifically) vs Ki-43-II.
-
Yes, I am asking re a SEA setup and so its a narrow focus question; A6M2 (specifically) vs Ki-43-II.
Warloc,
It's all about the guns!!! The 43 is likely the better airframe,especially when you consider you can deploy flaps at 250 mph but it's low ammo count and lack of explosive rounds just doesnt give it the punch to be really successful.
If we had a more finite damage model maybe that would change but as it is I would pick the A6M2 for the cannons and extra ammo.
Something that I cant understand though is why the earlier 43 has a much high flap deployment speed than the later Ki84? If the 84 could drop a notch of flaps at 250 like the 43 can then it would likely need a small perk to control it's use!
YMMV!
:salute
-
Something that I cant understand though is why the earlier 43 has a much high flap deployment speed than the later Ki84? If the 84 could drop a notch of flaps at 250 like the 43 can then it would likely need a small perk to control it's use!
My best guess is that it could, probably even higher, but that the documentation did not survive. My bet is that the 167mph flap setting is the first stage of the landing setting.
The Ki-84 was built to higher strength factors than any other Japanese aircraft. I find the idea that they would have put combat flaps on it that could not be used above 167mph to be absurd.
The Japanese were even more thorough than the Germans were about destroying documents.
-
Ki-43 wins 7 days a week. It can beat the A6m2 in so many ways (As stated above). Ok, the A6 has 2 spudzookas with a few potatoes but its not that scary and it will not save the Zero execpt when in a HO.
-
the A6 has 2 spudzookas with a few potatoes
Honestly that's my assessment of it as well vs the Ki-43.
-
The 2 .50s on the Ki isnt that bad against a paper plane like the Zeke. Ok the Ki isnt exactly an A-10 either but when the 20:s are dry the Zeke has only 2 x 7.7mm left and has lost the advantage in firepower too.
-
The 2 .50s on the Ki isnt that bad against a paper plane like the Zeke. Ok the Ki isnt exactly an A-10 either but when the 20:s are dry the Zeke has only 2 x 7.7mm left and has lost the advantage in firepower too.
I don't know. I've never seen a Zeke suffer 3 fuel leaks and an oil leak and not be on fire - until I did just that to one with a Ki-43.
-
The 2 .50s on the Ki isnt that bad against a paper plane like the Zeke. Ok the Ki isnt exactly an A-10 either but when the 20:s are dry the Zeke has only 2 x 7.7mm left and has lost the advantage in firepower too.
The guns on the Mitsubishi A6M2 are almost identical to the guns on the Messerschmitt Bf-109E-4.
In real life, the Zero's Type 97 7.7mm machine gun was based on a licensed version of a Vickers design, and the Type 99 20mm cannon was based on the Oerlikon FF.
-
Against an A6M2 and against other EW planes are completely different questions. The KI may have the firepower to kill a Zeke but it just doesn't have the firepower to take on American planes unless they're dumb enough to get in a turn fight with it - and even then it's going to take a lot of lead. It was bad enough for the Zekes that way in the Pacific scenario last year and that was with 20mms. Against bombers the KI is going to be absolutely hopeless. And if you're talking about Special Events it generally will be going up against Allied planes, not A6Ms. The P-40s and F4Fs will just dive out of trouble and the KI's popguns will rarely do critical damage before they're out of range.
You also have to figure in performance at altitude given that engagement alts in most events tend to be much higher than typical MA encounters. However I know nothing about the KI-43's performance at 20k +, can anyone speak to that?
-
In this order: The Ki is faster than the F4F at all alts. The P-40C is faster above 10k. P-40E is faster at all alts. Ki climbs much better at all alts.
-
My best guess is that it could, probably even higher, but that the documentation did not survive. My bet is that the 167mph flap setting is the first stage of the landing setting.
The Ki-84 was built to higher strength factors than any other Japanese aircraft. I find the idea that they would have put combat flaps on it that could not be used above 167mph to be absurd.
The Japanese were even more thorough than the Germans were about destroying documents.
I suspect the same!
When the 43 was first released I was somewhat surprized to see the flaps come out at the speed they do. Then I wondered why the later 84 would have a much lower deployment speed.
That said I can only imagine how effective the 84 would be with this higher deployment speed!!!
:salute
-
The KI may have the firepower to kill a Zeke but it just doesn't have the firepower to take on American planes unless they're dumb enough to get in a turn fight with it
Disagree. You do not need 4 x 20mm cannons to soot down or disable (pilot wound, oil, radiator, vert stab) a P-40, F4F, Hurricane, SBD, ect. The Ki-43 is supposed to get in close with its agility and deliver a blow at close range and it can do that. Just because you dont see a mushroom cloud after pulling the trigger doesn't mean you can't do damage.
Vs bombers sure...it lacks a punch especially against a 4 engined model.
...again that's just my own opinion.
-
Disagree. You do not need 4 x 20mm cannons to soot down or disable (pilot wound, oil, radiator, vert stab) a P-40, F4F, Hurricane, SBD, ect. The Ki-43 is supposed to get in close with its agility and deliver a blow at close range and it can do that. Just because you dont see a mushroom cloud after pulling the trigger doesn't mean you can't do damage.
Vs bombers sure...it lacks a punch especially against a 4 engined model.
...again that's just my own opinion.
I share it.
- oldman
-
My best guess is that it could, probably even higher, but that the documentation did not survive. My bet is that the 167mph flap setting is the first stage of the landing setting.
The Ki-84 was built to higher strength factors than any other Japanese aircraft. I find the idea that they would have put combat flaps on it that could not be used above 167mph to be absurd.
The Japanese were even more thorough than the Germans were about destroying documents.
That's not really true, though. Maybe on paper in the earliest stages it was designed to be stronger, but in actual implementation it was nearly a disaster. The best and most reliable and strongest versions were the FIRST off the production lines. As the war continued (and remember, this was already a late-war plane) the quality dropped sharply. Failing landing gear because the metal was so poor that the struts snapped, engines that were bombed out of existence and derated replacement engines that were so poor they often performed a fraction of how they should have, and most pilots had to wonder if they would even get to altitude with the rest of their wing when they scrambled for a sortie. Metal quality, slave-labor-conditions, constant bombing of the production facilities, all resulted in the mid-production-run Ki-84s being bad quality and the end-production ones being worse.
Keep in mind the Ki-100 was no better than the Ki-61 in terms of raw performance but it was far far better than the 1945-era Ki-84s rolling off the lines. It was actually faster, climbed better, and ultimately more reliable to get the pilot TO and FROM the combat than the Ki-84s available at the time.
In AH we have a version with almost no production faults -- an early model, if you will (one of the best). However, in reality the documentation may state the speeds it has because the very metal of the flap surface wasn't capable of sustaining faster speeds, or the lever-actions for the flap deployment or the tracks on which they slide may be so unreliable that putting them out any higher would risk major damage to the airframe.
Maybe on a pristine model, it might have higher speeds, maybe not. I don't think "lack of documentation" is the reason and I think you shouldn't assume the Ki-84 was a stronger or more reliable plane than others at the time. If it were, you'd never have seen Ki-43-IIIs ever get the green light, nor Ki-100s ever take to the skies. They were filling the role that the Ki-84s left wide open.
-
A lot of our planes are far better then they were irl. We have no production flaws modeled.
-
I don't think that anybody who knows about WWII Japanese manufacturing would contest that all but the rarest late production Ki-84s were worse than the early production models. In AH we deal with as designed aircraft, not as built.
That said, the points of failure of the Ki-84 seemed to be the landing gear and engines. I've not read anything suggesting the airframe was significantly below specs.
-
Ki-43 will own the A6M2 - and all it takes are few MG bullets to turn it into a funeral pyre for the A6M driver or the K-43 driver. They are close enough that the pilot will make the difference, but I'd definitely rather start with the Ki