The Shoki would have really been nice.

[brady]

Well those 4 12.7mm would be on the later modles not the earler one's,( which had two 7.7 and two 12.7mm) and they are Not 50cal's like on the US planes they have a shorter efective range and reduced hitting power, though they have a higher rof.

 All the reports the I have read are that the Japanese pioltes dident like it do to it's porer handeling trates, it was not a turn fighter in other words. " piolets were critical of it's high landing spead and comparative lack of manuaverabality"p.8, a P51 could outmanuaver a Ki-44.

  Dyring 1942 just a handfull of trials aircraft saw action, 10 were sent to the CBI.

 The Ki-44-II was test flow aganst the Bf 109E-2 a p40E and the Ki 61, while it preformened well aganst the former two the Ki 61:" did better than any of these aircraft".p.9

 It was not untill late 42/ early 43 that the Ki 44 was in service in any real number's.

 The -IIa had the lighter aramement then it switched to the -IIb: two 40mm and two 12.7 mm guns in Augast 43, then in March 44 the -IIC was made with four 12.7mm.

 So in short During 1943:

   You have the Tony which was Faster and climbed

 Ki 84 Ia 392mph,5K Meaters in 5min 54 sec.

 Ki-44-1a 360mph, 5k Meaters in 5min 54 seconds.

 Ki-44-IIb 376mph, 5k meaters in 4min 17 sec.

 Ki-61-1b 368mph 5k in 5min 31 sec.

 ki-61-II KAIa 379mph 5k meaters in 6 min

 So during most of 43 the Tony is fatser climbs better and handels much better and has a better gun package.

 During 44, the Ki-44 can climb rather nicely but that is it's only advantage, it is still out guned by the Tony which is faster still and still handels better and we have the Ki-84 comming on the scean which is much better all around except for climbing. The one clear advantage the Japanese by far and large possess is their handeling abality and since as we progress into the later war perioud the only real advantage the ki 44 has is the climb which looks good compared to the Japanese machines I have listed above but aganst some allied types it would face off aganst it is not enought to realy make a huge differance. It will still have week guns and not be able to turn it's way out of trouble.

[ra]

Ki-44-IIb 376mph, 5k meaters in 4min 17 sec.

I'll take this one.  

And I don't intend to turn my way out of trouble.   The Jap planeset needs a BnZ plane.

ra

[brady]

Visual ade comparing the 12.7mm Ho-103 to the US 50 Cal.:


 
 

[F4UDOA]

Brady,

The Tony we have does not climb all that well.

Also were did you get the quote about a P-51 out manuevering a KI-44?

Also do you have the report or the KI-44, BF109E, Ki-61 test?

I have the TAIC book. I need to check the wing loading but I don't think a P-51 should be able to out maneuver it.

Also 4 .50 cal is not that bad in the MA.

That Japanese 12.7mil is huge. That didn't have good hitting power?

[brady]

At a glance most of the US fighter's that would be set aganst the Ki-44 are about 30 seconds to 1 min slower to alt (5k Meters) than the Ki 44, howeaver their mostly all faster, have better firepower and handle as well if not better than it does.

[brady]

"The Tony we have does not climb all that well."

 No it suck's, thats why I was kinda hoping to see a Ki-61-Ib varient, the Tony we have is the worst climber of them all, I did not list it's climb to 5K Meaters in like 7 min, but it is hard to tell what model we actualy have because of the name snafu with it.

"Also were did you get the quote about a P-51 out manuevering a KI-44? "

 Sry the above Quotes are from Ki-44 Shoki by Buschell, he states that when the P51B came to China to face off aganst the Ki-44 it could easly turn inside it, and the P51's preformance vs the ki-44  tiped the scales back in favore of the Allies in that theater.

"Also do you have the report or the KI-44, BF109E, Ki-61 test? '

 Buschell sights this report and quotes excerpts from it, no hard figurs just the above summery I quoted are given.

"I have the TAIC book. I need to check the wing loading but I don't think a P-51 should be able to out maneuver it. "

 Well acording to the anadotail evidance offerd in my books on and covering the Ki-44 handeling was not it's fortie, and as listed above the P51 could take it.

"Also 4 .50 cal is not that bad in the MA. "

 Well these are not 50 cal rounds like what your thinking, see above pick.

"That Japanese 12.7mil is huge. That didn't have good hitting power"

 Hear Check out this chart on the gun's, it gives a good indacation:

 http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm


 The Ho-103 is realy an excelent weapon, basicaly they took the 50cal and made it more efficient, it's lighter has a higher rof and the ammo is lighter and the whole system is optimised for effective firing at around 400 yards, but in AH the 50 cal is king, so you cant realy compare the two and come up even. the 50 cal hits harder has alomst twice the effective range and the US planes have a ton of ammo for them, they are also generaly much more reselent to fire than their Japanese counterpart's, even if they were the same gun the Japanese would still be at a disavantage do to their generaly weaker airfrmae's. I gues a good idea of the effectivenness of the Ho-103 can be gleaned from tryig to kill stuff with the the Tony's 12.7mm's alone.

[F4UDOA]

Brady,

What do you mean "handle badly"? Remember the Japanese Navy did not like the A6M2 in 1940 because it could not out maneuver the KI-27. Saburu Sakai thought the NIK2-J was a pile of junk.

Likes and dislikes are very subjective. Does it not roll well, stall??

The relative wing loading of the NIK2 and Ki-44 are very close.

NIK2-J 253SQ FT 9040LBS
Wing loading= 35.73

Ki-44 169SQ FT 6100LBS
Wing Loading= 36.09

P-51D  233.19SQ ft 10,100LBS
Wing Loading= 43.31

In fact it says in the TAIC that te TOJO 2 has the highest rate of climb and dive of any Japanese single seat fighter of any Japanese A/C tested except the Jack. Also the it will out maneuver most allied fighters.

[brady]

In short if I had to pick:

 For ealy war 42/43: I would rather see the Early Tony, better over all preformance and 20mm cannon's, MG 151's or Ho-5's.
 As apposed to the 12.7mm and 7.7mm .

 For Mid war 43/44 the Tony is still better except in climb, everything else, guns, handeling and spead are in the Tony favor.

 For 44/45: we have Ki-44 production stoped in January 45 in favore of the Ki-84, and in 44 the Ki 84 is the better plane except in climb, again guns , handeling and spead are in the Ki-84's favor.


 While it would be neat to get the Ki-44, the political situation does not bode well for a ton of Japanes toy's in the offing, at best i think we can expect just a few new rides this year for Japan, so in the since of being realistic I would back just the Ki 84 and a Tony Varient over the ki 44.

[F4UDOA]

Brady,

We keep crossing post.

Thanks for that ballistics chart. I was looking for that for another thread.

I have never read anything from Buschell. I am assuming he is a pilot not a historian. I will look him up. Did he publish any books?

FYI the VMF-123 thought they could outturn the NIK2-J in there F4U-1D's. I have the artical I can send you if your interested.

BTW. Which TAIC book do you have? The page I posted with the climb chart I do not have in my TAIC book. Also I do not have data for the KI-61 II.

[brady]

"What do you mean "handle badly"? Remember the Japanese Navy did not like the A6M2 in 1940 because it could not out maneuver the KI-27."

 Acording to the anadotial evidance all my books are clear on this that in comparasion to all other Japanes fighter's it did not handel manuaver as well as they did, while it could out manuaver a P38 or P40 it could not do the same with a P51 or so they say. The Book's also say that as the war progreased and the Old hands went on, died, or whatever, that new generation of fighter's piolets asigned to to it who did not know better did not complain as much about the handeling issue's.

 "Saburu Sakai thought the NIK2-J was a pile of junk."

   Well he was kinda biased in this regard having lost a lot of friends in the George and the George was built by a company not well respected by many in Japan.

"Likes and dislikes are very subjective. Does it not roll well, stall?? "

 That is true, what I am going on other than the number's posted by me above is anadotail evidance form about 5 different sources that coaberate the same overall impreshion of the aircraft.


"In fact it says in the TAIC that te TOJO 2 has the highest rate of climb and dive of any Japanese single seat fighter of any Japanese A/C tested except the Jack. Also the it will out maneuver most allied fighters.'

 Well it clearly does, if your looking at the lateer model,. If they give us the best climbing model then their's no contest in this dpartment, the early one was no better than the Ki 61 in this regard and clearly inferiour in all other catagories. The Japanese themslefs felt that the Ki44 was obsoleat compared to the Ki 84 and stoped it's production and development in favor of the Ki 84. It's abaility to out manuaver Most Allied fighter's is not in dispute realy, what is more important is the one's it cant outmanuaver namely the P51B, or so the anadotial evidance would sugest. Both the Jack and the Ki-44 lost out to the George and the Ki 84, both were considered inferiour planes compared to the later ones by the Empire.

[ramzey]

this should be placed here too:)

[brady]

"I have never read anything from Buschell. I am assuming he is a pilot not a historian. I will look him up. Did he publish any books? "

 Richard M. Bueschel, he has published several books on Japanese aircraft, Schiffer has his book's in series.

"FYI the VMF-123 thought they could outturn the NIK2-J in there F4U-1D's. I have the artical I can send you if your interested. "

 Yes that should be an interesting read:),bradys5@hotmail.com, and ty:)

"BTW. Which TAIC book do you have? The page I posted with the climb chart I do not have in my TAIC book. Also I do not have data for the KI-61 II."

 I dont have a TAIC book, I have book's that sight their finding's howeaver.

 Ki-61:

 ki 61-Ib wingloading 30.2ib/sq.ft 368mph 5k in 5min 31 sec

 Ki-61-I KAIc wingloading 35.1 lb/sq ft, climb to 5k Meters  7min 366mph

 Ki-61-II KAIa wingloading 38.8lb sq ft. 379mph 5k meaters in 6 min

 I am also fairly certain that their are more variables to consider when assesing manuaverabaility than just wingloading, the Flap system on the George for example.

[Arlo]

http://www.wwiitech.net/main/japan/aircraft/

[Guppy]

Originally posted by brady
Acording to the anadotial evidance all my books are clear on this that in comparasion to all other Japanes fighter's it did not handel manuaver as well as they did, while it could out manuaver a P38 or P40 it could not do the same with a P51 or so they say.

Interesting. Comparative trials of an Allison Mustang against the P-40 concluded that the two were about equal in tight turning, with a slight edge going to the P-40 in a prolonged fight. (Of course, the P-51B's greater power might help it sustain a turn better, although the early Mustangs were lighter.)

As regards "all other Japanese fighters":

"The P-40N would out turn the Tony, which we began to run into in late '43." (Sammy Pierce, 49th FG)

"We never considered trying to turn with a Zero, but with our newly installed maneuvering flaps, it was a different story against the Tony." (PJ Dahl, 475th FG)

[GRUNHERZ]

F4UDOA twice as as much is twice as much and especially so considering the different scales of air power between the USA and Japan the 400 N1K2J not to mention the 1000 similarly performing N1K1J most of which saw combat in WW2, unlike the F4U4B - are far more significant to Japan than a measely limted production run of 200 F4U1C.  Sorry man but you dont have much of case equating the George to Chog...

If you want a nice new Japanese plane why not the Ki84, thousands were built and used all over the pacific and asia and was Japans most significant fighter after the Zero.  It would provide nice use in the MA and in scenarios.