Ki-84's Most Absurd Feature

[nrshida]

Do keep in mind that most of the test data IIRC comes from post-war testing of captured birds using 100 octane US AvGas. Which the Ki-84 never used. So yeah, of COURSE there's going to be a massive performance difference.

Saxman no offence, but I have studied the Hayate extensively. I can give you the Nakajima serial numbers of the two they tested in the Phillipines including which engines they used if you like. I know what power each engine made and on which petrol.

I am not presently campaigning for more power. I am asking for verification that randomly popping off sets of control surfaces is meant to depict poor manufacture and if it is, I suggest they should not pop off in pairs.

[ReVo]

I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, lost a control surface on a KI-84 to anything but gunfire. Could somebody please explain to me what it takes to do such a thing? 

[RedBull1]

I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever, lost a control surface on a KI-84 to anything but gunfire. Could somebody please explain to me what it takes to do such a thing? 

Exceed 450mph.

[ReVo]

Exceed 450mph.

At which point the KI is so horribly compressed that you will be very lucky to do anything but nosedive into the ground. Explains why it has never happened to me. 

[Karnak]

At which point the KI is so horribly compressed that you will be very lucky to do anything but nosedive into the ground. Explains why it has never happened to me. 

Turn off combat trim.

[ink]

Exceed 450mph.

need to get it up over 500....right around 505 pieces start to shed off

At which point the KI is so horribly compressed that you will be very lucky to do anything but nosedive into the ground. Explains why it has never happened to me. 

its easy to pull out of a dive at 450....or any speed in the KI...just gotta be gentle

but pieces do NOT come off until you are over 500

[pervert]

The ki84 reminds me of my f1 vs dr1 experiences in the ww1 arena, even flown extremely badly it suffers no real energy loss when its time to go vert  in addition to that I would realistically need 3 passes at a ki before I down it, much like say an f4f.

[nrshida]

For me they come off totally by 480 regardless.

[ink]

For me they come off totally by 480 regardless.

 

strange...I have never had pieces come off till 500....maybe you pulled back a bit to hard?

[LCADolby]

Easy fix: Grab yourself a 109..

I mean it's german, and


(Image removed from quote.)







I don't know if you guys have that advert over there, but the Americans will probably get the reference at least

I don't get the reference but the pic is 

[Franz Von Werra]

IN ENGLISH: for gyrene81 since he doesn't seem to understand!
go to training arena, 30k alt 'field' - dive all the planes, TEST...

I did the quick test version with most of the fighter planes, pulled back hard and some planes broke, some not, sometimes compression so it wouldn't but could still do it at speed.
YES there are planes that I COULDNT BREAK THE WINGS... mmmk? <-- English
I'd say 60% did break, and 40% didn't break, this is from probably two years ago tested.
SO UHH, SKIP THE SUPER DUPER SCIENCE!!!
Yes, planes are built differently, but none are from 'reverse engineered UFO super secret technology apparatus'
This said, maybe some planes historically didn't break?

THE IDEA IS THIS... you are at HIGH alt. You have a BOGIE on your SIX.
If you know that your plane can do the pull out thing, and his cant, you MIGHT have the option to... snap his wings!  
Not only save your bacon, but also to get a kill without firing a shot!

 

[Karnak]

Earlier you claimed Spitfire wings didn't break.  That is manifestly false.  Either your test wasn't very good or you didn't do the test you said you did or you lied about Spitfire wings not breaking in AH.

There is no issue with some planes breaking and some not breaking, but if they break when they shouldn't per data, then they ought to be changed.  Doesn't matter if it is an Fw190 or a Spitfire.

[Franz Von Werra]

Karnak I put a '?' after... different from a '!'
my spitfire comment was a 'question'... THANK YOU for answering!
English for you too!   I'll try to word me questions more'r correctly, sowwy!

Some planes compress and can't pull up?
Others can but break wings?
Yes, some shed parts at speed, pulling back or not! Last I tested, Arado-234 and B29 both BREAKS BOTH ELEVATORS from speed alone!!! <--- No '?' , see Karnak?
While were at it... DIVE A STUKA FROM 14k... all three LANDING GEARS BREAK! <--- stuka transforms to a 'two seater F4u!' Won't happen from 13k, need 14k!!!
Stuka looks neat with gear up, shame they didn't make them this way, a prototype or two aside I think.
Oh, and Ta-152... it can reach a speed that the controls do nothing, even throttle back... 600mph? Plane shaking forever and lawn dart from high alt! (again, was 'quick test' and long ago!)

sooo, to get the achievement of 'landing with no elevators'... up a ki84? or Ar234? B29's also?
Use the Ki-84, other two I know cost too much!

Really Nrshida, I agree that it sux, both at same time, no warning! I'm assuming that HTC did their homework, without bias hopefully!
How else for us to get punished for breaking structurally tested speed limits that were printed in the handbooks?

[gyrene81]

here is some engritsch for you Franz...learn the science. just the fact that you think a 190-a8 shouldn't snap the wings off when you haul back on the stick at 500+mph, especially in a high angle dive, tells me you don't know crap. doesn't even matter what altitude you're at, if the airframe hits the critical speed, things start coming off and it gets worse when you apply opposite force with the control surfaces. they're airplanes, not rockets genius.

[Karnak]

The really weird ones from my perspective are the Mosquito Mk VI and Mosquito Mk XVI.  They used the same wing, the stronger wing actually being introduced with the Mk VI, and tail, but the Mk VI loses control surfaces to speed and the Mk XVI does not.