Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Hristo on June 24, 2002, 06:09:18 AM
-
What are the numbers on those two ? Deck speed, climb, range, wingloading, any special characteristics, armament etc ?
tnx
-
Ki-100-I 393 Ki-100-I built.
WING LOADING 173.5kg/m^2
POWER LOADING 2.3kg/hp
SPAN LOADING 24.3kg/m^2
MAX SPEED
510km/h/1,000m
567km/h/5,000m
580km/h/6,000m
570km/h/8,000m
535km/h/10,000m
CLIMB TIME
5,000m/6'00"
6,000m/7'26"
8,000m/10'47"
10,000m/20'00"
RANGE
1,400km (Internal Fuel)
2,200km (Internal Fuel with Drop Tank)
ARMAMENT
Ho-103 12.7mm Machine Gun x2 (Wing, 250rds each)
Ho-5 20mm Cannon x2 (Fuselage, 250rds each)
250kg bombs x2
DIVE SPEED LIMIT
850km/h
Yohei Hinoki, one of Japanese Aces has an impression about this plane, but I cannot translate it because my English is pretty bad. :P
In July 16 1945, He has shot down a P-51D of 457th Fighter Squadron. The pilot was Captain John W Benbow.
-
converted to ft,mph
35 lb/sqft is nice - quite nice
870 mph range - ok
but only 317 mph at 3300 ft ?? a bit slow for late war
-
Yes, it is slow.
But Japanse Army Air Force pilots liked this fighter because it turns quickly.
-
deleted
-
;).
Man, this thing is slower than a spit, seems to be slower turner too, and prolly will be perked if introduced (because its rarity in WWII)...and you still want it?...
-
MAX SPEED (mph-ft)
510mph/3,300ft
352mph/16,404ft
360mph/19,685ft
354mph/26,246ft
332mph/32,808ft
CLIMB TIME (ft-time)
16,404ft/6'00"
19,685ft/7'26"
26,246ft/10'47"
32,808ft/20'00"
-
That's not a problem, RAM.
Also, Ki-100 is basically based of Ki-61. so HTC can put it into Aces High easily.
-
but ki84, that might be a different story...
-
Originally posted by Mitsu
That's not a problem, RAM.
Also, Ki-100 is basically based of Ki-61. so HTC can put it into Aces High easily.
Yah, is a ki61 with an engine installation copied from a Fw190 ;) (is true AFAIK :))
But I mean, it was a rare plane in very late war, 1945, is not a good climber, is slow, is a decent turner but nothing of the outter world, and has normal weapons.
Because rarity in WWII prolly would be a perk.
I mean.....why asking for this plane if there are loads of better ones,which would be unperked?. Can't understand it :confused:
I guess you simply love the plane :)
-
More uber Ki-84.
-
it was a rare plane in very late war,
If this plane only produced 50 or 60, I would agree with you. ;)
-
is that 360 mph on the deck for ki84 ? :D
-
Originally posted by Mitsu
More uber Ki-84.
Thankyou.......
I assume the speeds are True Air Speeds not Indicated Air Speeds.
why 3 curves for climb and speed (heavy, light, WEP?)
why the 1946 reference?
Tilt
has no japanese.......
-
Ja, rather than the Ki-100, the Ki-44 Tojo should be suggested for inclusion in AH. It certainly was heavily armed (4 x 20mm & 4 x 12.7mm) and judging from the books I've read it saw a lot of action in the PTO (Rabaul, New Guinea, etc) & CBI
-
Originally posted by Mitsu
If this plane only produced 50 or 60, I would agree with you. ;)
hehehehe Mitsu ;). Frankly, seeing its performance I think the Ki100 not only should NOT be a perk, but a 35 ENY playe :D
But still is very late war...who knows :)
P.S. Hristo, the chart posted above, I think is of the US tests done on a Ki84 using high octanage fuel. In-service with IJAAF the plane was unreliable and had much worse performance because the use of low octane fuels.
-
Gentlemen, gentlemen please settle down :) :)
I consider the Ki-100 a variant of the Ki-61, much like the 190-D is a variant of the 190-A series... except in reverse. With that said, the Ki-100 offers no more performance than a Ki-61-I Hei with 2x12.7mm and 2x20mm.
Yes. Ki-84 is a monster. Its top speed? Well depends on what you read. It used 4 different engines of various power throughout its service life, but the most common was the 1990hp version (Also used in N1K). So top speeds vary from 388mph - 427mph. Personally I think 410-415 mph would be the best range. :p
Ki-44?? Never had 20mm installed in combat as far as I know. Only used 4x12.7mm, 2x12.7mm 2x40mm and 2x12.7mm and 2 x 7.7mm
That is all :)
-
From the original source
-
Part 2
-
Part 3
-
Part 4
-
Butch, you da man!!! :) thanks.
-
Butch, isn't that the TAIC document on the Ki-84?
If so, thats not a measured flight test. Thats the intelligence services "predicted" performance based upon known parameters and alot of guess work. Look at the TAIC data on the N1K2, and then compare it to how it actually performed. They definitely erred on the side of caution.
And the 420+ mph at 21,000ft data is flight test data, but its post war and based upon American 100 octane fuel. Wartime (especially late in the war) Japanese aviation fuel was 86-89 octane and sometimes less, and sometimes was "boosted" or "fortified" with a pine oil extract.
I'd love to see the 420+ Ki84, in fact I've lobbied for it before, but I doubt thats what we would ever see in AH.
-
That doc says right in it that it is an estimate assuming the plane has the shape of an oscar..they didnt even know what it looked like when that document was written..how can you pass it on as "from the source"
lol
-
I meant the orginal source for mitsu data, i realized too late that it was not the correct one btw, as Mitsu japanese book used the TAIC report while mine is from the ATAD.
Since I also have the TAIC report here are the meanings of the curves :
full line : Military power, Normal weight
small doted line : WEP, Normal Weight
large doted line : Military power, overload weight
btw the Frank engine required a minimum octane of 92.
-
"btw the Frank engine required a minimum octane of 92."
That is probably why they suffered so many fires and failures in service since they were running them on less a lot of the time.
J_A_B
-
According to Butch's TAIC document, the 422 mph was achieved in 1944 with 92 octane fuel. Its right there in the lower corner.
-
butch,
do you have any other IJAAF fighters performance graphs on the TAIC, example ki-43, ki-44, ki-45, or ki-61?
I have a book called TAIC Manual, but this book doesn't have the performance graphs of the planes.
thanks.