Where my KI-43?

[kilo2]

hmmm  i've seen enough of these 3 mentioned to not label them as hangar Queen especially the Brewster.   

Brewster was more a jab at wmaker. I have seen 1 person fly the i-16 and that is jonah. P40s every once in a while.

[Karnak]

Surely thats a typo?

Depends on what your personal threshold for "hangar queen" is.  Last tour the Mossie VI got about 1/10th the kills that the P-51D got.  It got 0.62% of the total kills in the LWA, 1.05% of the total kills by aircraft.

My general feeling is that when somebody is talking about something not being a hangar queen they expect it to break at least two or three percent of the total kills by aircraft.

Top ten by percentage of aircraft kills:
P-51D: 10.47%
La-7: 5.19%
Spitfire Mk XVI: 5.10%
F4U-1A: 4.04%
Fw190D-9: 4.00%
N1K2-J: 3.80%
F6F-5: 3.13%
Fw190A-8: 3.04%
F4U-1D: 2.91%
Bf109K-4: 2.66%

Overall share of the top ten: 44.34%

[Arlo]

Depends on what your personal threshold for "hangar queen" is.  Last tour the Mossie VI got about 1/10th the kills that the P-51D got.  It got 0.62% of the total kills in the LWA, 1.05% of the total kills by aircraft.

My general feeling is that when somebody is talking about something not being a hangar queen they expect it to break at least two or three percent of the total kills by aircraft.

Top ten by percentage of aircraft kills:
P-51D: 10.47%
La-7: 5.19%
Spitfire Mk XVI: 5.10%
F4U-1A: 4.04%
Fw190D-9: 4.00%
N1K2-J: 3.80%
F6F-5: 3.13%
Fw190A-8: 3.04%
F4U-1D: 2.91%
Bf109K-4: 2.66%

Overall share of the top ten: 44.34%

Hate to say but I suspect that a more accurate list may actually be derived from 'deaths in.'

[Karnak]

Hate to say but I suspect that a more accurate list may actually be derived from 'deaths in.'

Maybe, but that would need to be modified by the K/D ratio as well.  Neither is a perfect representation of usage.

[Arlo]

Maybe, but that would need to be modified by the K/D ratio as well.  Neither is a perfect representation of usage.

I've taken planes out of the hanger, circled the field and then landed and took another. Would that be a 'partial hangar queen?'

[Bruv119]

Brewster was more a jab at wmaker. I have seen 1 person fly the i-16 and that is jonah. P40s every once in a while.

mizu is a crazy i16 pilot,    seen surfinn in it a few times. 

I do enjoy flying Japanese aircraft the zeros and the ki-84.   Mainly because you can fly circles around most other rides but the ki-43 would be the absolute nuts for turn fighting  and I would love to use it against brews   

pew pew pew. 

[Tank-Ace]

Some yes, but some, no.  The Ki-43-III would almost certainly see more use than the He111, Pe-2, Sea Hurricane and D.520.  As a last ditch base defender it would 1) get off the ground fast and 2) be able to dodge at least somewhat effectively immediately after getting off the ground.

My K4 can get off the ground about as quickly, and is a much more effective weapon once at combat speed than a Ki-43 would be. Now granted it has a higher effective combat speed, neither one of us would be real likely to do much good. However, while you need a tracking shot, I need a single cannon shell on target; this means that I have a better chance to actually do some harm, since a snap shot is much more likely than a crossing shot.


Your Ki-43 is only good for dominating a single, relativly rare type of fight; low and slow turning. At everything else, its only on par at best, and markedly inferior in most cases.

The fact is that, right now, the Ki-43 is not the most needed addition.

[nrshida]

The fact is that, right now, the Ki-43 is not the most needed addition.

No, that is an opinion.


I'd be in favour of any early or mid war fighter aircraft because it adds diversity and means more aircraft that would stick around and fight. Besides, someone would always specialise in an aircraft regardless of its limitations and that is always a sight to see and a fun experience to fight them.

[Slade]

The fact is that, right now, the Ki-43 is not the most needed addition.

Bite you tong sir! Ki-43 (and may be H E 111) most missing plane this game.

That be said wen AH put out ki-43 it will be done well. 

[Karnak]

Your Ki-43 is only good for dominating a single, relativly rare type of fight; low and slow turning. At everything else, its only on par at best, and markedly inferior in most cases.

Don't state things you don't know.  Why low and slow?  The A6M handles altitude decently, so there is no need to be low there.  As to slow, just because the A6M loses its ability to turn at moderate speeds does not mean the Ki-43 also loses its ability to turn at those speeds.

As to using a Bf109K-4 as a last ditch defender, have fun giving attackers the free kill.  I have successfully defended using the A6M2 because I was able to maneuver very shortly after take off whereas the Bf109K-4 would have simply been a sitting duck.  I will grant that the Ki-43's firepower is not really what I'd want in a defender like that, but used with some skill it could still have effect.

[Tank-Ace]

the Ki-43 isn't the most historical thing we're missing in AH: that would likely be the Panzer III at the moment.

The Ki-43 does not fill the biggest/worst gap in special events, various bombers, and some EW fighters do that.

The Ki-43 is not the best figher we could add based on impact/use in the MA. Most other potential fighters would do more.


Adding the Ki-43 would not make us any more worthy of a 'well done' than adding anything else would, as we've already earned it. AH is the best WWII-era combat sim out there, has one of the best GV aspects, and on top of that, AH is actually run out of passion for simming. I'm sure Hitech isn't wanting for cash.


@ Karnak, essentially every fighter we have with a low wing loading and large wing area looses its ability to turn at higher speeds. IIRC, the Ki-43 lacks hydrolic control surfaces, like the A6M. It was also notoriously fragile.

Based on this, we can safely assume that the Ki-43 will at the very least suffer a significant degredation of turning preformance at higher speeds, if not the near total lack of effectivness that the A6M has. Or possibly, you'll just snap off the wings if you try and turn too tight at high G's.


And it depends on what you call last-ditch. If you mean already capped and vulched, then yeah, the Ki-43 would hold a small advantage over the K4. But even with that advantages, its odds of doing anything effective are essentially nil.

If you're talking "Oh ****! look at the size of that darbar, we only have like 2 mins!" then the K4 is far superior. In 2 mins, I could get almost to 6-8k with a K4. And depending on the situation, that ranges from sufficient all the way up to too high.

[Bruv119]

hell maybe HTC should hire tank-ace he obviously knows far more than everyone else.

why are you comparing a K4 against the ki-43?   

The Japanese set has some of the most interesting and produced planes that AH doesn't have,  the ki-43 also provides EW and scenarios with something the zero shouldn't really be replacing. 

[Ack-Ack]

the Ki-43 isn't the most historical thing we're missing in AH: that would likely be the Panzer III at the moment.

It was the main IJAAF fighter, had the most Allied kills of any other Japanese plane and virtually every single one of the IJAAF aces became aces in the Ki-43.  AH not having the Ki-43 would be like AH not having the P-51, it was that historically significant airplane in the Japanese inventory.

ack-ack

[Mitsu.]

The Ki-43-III will be fit for LWA.

[HighTone]

why are you comparing a K4 against the ki-43?    

Because he is a tank guy and apparently when he does fly, he must have something really fast and made in 1945.

It comes down to individual skill level, and I will say that the Ki-43 is going to frustrate many while flying it and some flying against it. Sure your gonna have your Tank-Aces's BnZ you in there 2000HP cannon rides, but a true competitor and prop plane fanatic will use it to challenge themselves instead of solely relaying on a planes top speed as a crutch.

the Ki-43 isn't the most historical thing we're missing in AH: that would likely be the Panzer III at the moment.

LOL....sure. I forgot that spawn camping...opps sorry GV fighting is the sole reason most play this game. I always thought the tanks were to supplement the AC, give mission and base taking flexability and give something for AC to bomb. Forgot we play "Tankers High"