A temporary Ki-100 for the CT?

[Arlo]

Specification of Kawasaki Ki-100-Ia Army Type 5 Fighter Model 1a:

One Army Type 4 fourteen-cylinder air-cooled radial (Mitsubishi [Ha-33] 62 or Ha-112-II) rated at 1500 hp for takeoff 1350 hp at 6560 feet and 1250 hp at 19,030 feet.

Performance: Maximum speed 360 mph at 19,685 feet and 332 mph at 32,810 feet. An altitude of 16,405 feet could be attained in 6 minutes. Service ceiling 36,090 feet. Maximum range 1367 miles. Dimensions: Wingspan 34 4 7/16 inches, length 28 feet 11 1/4 inches, height 12 feet 3 5/8 inches, wing area 215.3 square feet.

Weights: 5567 pounds empty, 7705 pounds loaded.

Armament: Two fuselage-mounted 20-mm Ho 5 cannon and two wing- mounted 12.7 mm machine guns.



Specifications (Lavochkin La-5FN)

Type: Single Seat Fighter

Powerplant: One 1,850 hp (1380 kw) Shvetsov M-82FN (Ash-82FN) 14-cylinder radial, air cooled engine.

Performance: Maximum speed 401 mph (647 km/h) at 16,447 ft (5000 m); service ceiling 31,250 ft (9500 m).

Range: 475 miles (765 km) on internal fuel.

Weight: Empty 6,174 lbs (2800 kg) with a maximum take-off weight of 7,409 lbs (3360 kg).

Dimensions: Span 32 ft 2 in (9.80 m); length 28 ft 3 in (8.60 m); height 8 ft 4 in (2.54 m); wing area 188.37 sq ft (17.50 sq m).

Armament: Two 20 mm ShVAK cannon with 200 rounds per gun plus two 220 lbs (100 kg) bombs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

After taking a good look at the Ki-100, it occured to me how well an La-5 would probably skin to look like one. Of course, the La-5 is faster by 40-50 mph and the armament isn't identical - but I think it's probably a better substitute matchup than the Ju-88 is for the Betty.

Discuss?

[brady]

The JU 88 is not a sub for the Betty, that is a fraking BS sub because the CM's can t be convinced to beleave the piolets would maintain their spead for the upcoming event, the JU 88 is in no way considered by me or any of the CT Staf to be a reasionable sub for the Betty.

 I appricate your effort to look for a reasionable sub for the Ki 100 by using the la-5 but I think it is not close enough and it is still a la-5, and a bad sub imo.

[Arlo]

LOL, ok. Anyone else?

[Karnak]

Pushed into using the La-5FN as a sub for a Japanese aircraft I think it makes more sense to compare it to the Ki.84.  The performance of the Ki.84 is much closer.

Also, the Ki.100 is so late in the war as to making a substitution for it pointless.

[Arlo]

Hmmm .... didn't know the Frank was 28 mph faster. The armament for the 1a sounds bout the same. Dunno bout the flight characteristics. The website says it could outclimb and outmaneuver the P-47 and P-51. The website for the 100 claimed it was better than the F6F and equal to the P-51.

I admit that my first instinct was one of aesthetics (even though the La-5's cockpit sits further back and it's cowling is longer). When I see the 84, I see the P-47 as a close approximation in looks. (As did some pilots in the Pacific.) The difference in the armament is greater, though. *ShruG*


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Data

Type:
Single-seat interceptor and fighter-bomber
 
Span: 36' 11" (11.238 metres)Length: 32' 7" (9.92 metres)Height: 11' 1" (3.385 metres)
 
Engines:
In all production models - One 1,900 hp Nakajima Homare Ha-45 Model 11 18-cylinder two-row radial
 
Armament:
(Ki-84-1a)
2 x 20mm Ho-5 cannon in wings, each with 150 rounds
2 x 12.7mm Type 103 machine-guns in upper fuselage, each with 350 rounds

(Ki-84-Ib)
4 x 20mm Ho-5 cannon (2 in wings, 2 in fuselage) each with 150 rounds

(Ki-84-Ic)
2 x 30 mm Ho-105 cannon in wings,  2 x 20 mm Ho-5 cannon in fuselage

(all models)
Two racks under outer wings for bombs or fuel tanks up to 250 kg (550 lbs) each
 
Performance:

Maximum speed 388 mph (624 km/hour)
Initial climb (typical) 3.600 feet (1,100 metres) per minute
Service ceiling 34,450 (10,500 metres)
Range on internal fuel 1,025 miles (1,650 kilometres)
Range with 98-gallon drop tanks 1,815 miles (2,920 kilometres)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As far as having a substitution for such a plane that late in the war is concerned, I suppose that depends on the setting and/or alternate reality we wish to portray. Substitutions are a fact of life for a game that isn't currently modeling any new plane models yet gaps still exist. And subbing doesn't take much to try (or to stop trying, for that matter).

But if you feel it's a better substitution for the 84, then hey, there may be room for some temporary subbing there until (hopefully) the 84 is modeled.

[Karnak]

Arlo,

Also note you're looking at the stats for the slowest of the Ki.84s.  According to Mitsu most Ki.84s were powered by an Ha-45-21 engine that produced 1,990hp and had better altitude performance.  Those Ki.84s could break 390mph, maybe 400mph.

Of course which version HTC adds is very dependant on the data they can get.

[Shane]

hey! it works for me!! i'll take it.

[Arlo]

And here I expected you to volunteer to show everyone how to fly the A6M5, Shane.