PDA

View Full Version : Ki-61 Fact and Myth Thread.......



LEBillfish
09-02-2005, 10:09 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Ki.jpg

Hi All;

In that it seems as though the Ki-61 may not be addressed/corrected in this sim (sad in that many actually begin to learn of certain aircraft here)....I have decided to begin a thread wherein facts can be pointed out and myths dispelled on the issues of;

"Ki-61 & the Japanese Army Flying Corps"

My responses will be based from the following literature (still waiting on full versions of some of the Japanese publications)...Yet most of all from the email education I have received from those who are the true experts in the field (and know I am simply a novice myself and learning, so suggest you re-check my responses with credible sources).

Sources:
Roughly quite a few hundred websites, a number of Japanese monographs, De-classified U.S. reports and so on...Plus..a WHOLE LOT of direct answers from Jim Long, Jim Lansdale, Ken Glass, Masa and others who have really helped me more then I can describe....

J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #99-3 Ki-61/100 Serial Numbers, Dates of Assembly & Characteristics
J.I.Long's Airtell Field Notes Japanese Army Fighter "Tony"
J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #86-1 Estimated Assembly Date For A WWII Japanese Aircraft/A Relic of the Air War over New Guinea/Type 3 Fighter Tony # 640
J.I.Long's A PacFront Extra, Cockpit Layout- Type 3 Fighter Model 1
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/ R.E.Cowley (Japanese inline engine comparisons)
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/K.Weeks (Type 3 Fighter Reference Drawings)

R.M.Bueschell's Hein
R.M.Bueschell's Hayabusa
Rene J. Francillon, Aircraft Profile "The Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien" #118
Artur Juszcak, Mitsubishi A6m Zero
T. Januszewski, Mitsubishi A5M Claude, Mushroom Model
Avions #119, Ki-44 Shoki...French
Avions #122, Tateo Kato...French
Aero Detail #29 Hayabusa...
Monografie Lotnicze #5 Hien...Polish
Monografie Lotnicze #48 Ki-43...Polish
Maru Mechanic #43? Nik1/2....Japanese
F.A.O.W #17 Hien...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #19 Army Type 4 Fighter "Hayate"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #21 Army Type 2 Fighter "Toryu"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #27 Type 96 Carrier Fighter, A5M, Nate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #29 Type 97 Fighter... Japanese
F.A.O.W. #32 Type 97 Carrier Torpedo Bomber, B5n, Kate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #33 Type 99 Carrier Dive Bomber, D3A, Val...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 53 Kyofu, Shinden, Shidenkai...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 65 Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #2, Ki-61 & Ki-48...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #6, Ki-45 & Ki-51...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #?, E13A1, Jake...Japanese "Partial"

Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 1...Polish
Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 2....Polish
Peter Scott's Emblems of the Rising Sun (IJAAF Markings)
D.W. Thorpe JAAF Camoflauge & Markings WWII...
ModelArt 533, Camouflage & Markings of the IJA Bombers ....Japanese
ModelArt 272, Camouflage & Markings of IJN Fighters .......Japanese
Robert C. Mikesh, Schiffer Publishing, Japanese Aircraft Equipment 1940-1945
Unknown (Japanese), Japanese Military Aircraft Illustrated...Japanese
Koku Fan, 1974-3

Army Air Force Historical Study #113
Army Air Force Historical Study #116
Aeronotes 3, Deployments & OOBs
Aeronotes 4, New Guinea Area Operations
Shindo Hiriyuki, Japanese Air Operations in New Guinea
Capt. B. Chance Saltzman & T.R. Searle's, Introduction to the United States Air Force
Gary Null's, Weapon of Denial, Air Power & the Battle for New Guinea
Major James A. Barr, Airpower Employment of the 5th Air Force in the WWII SouthWest Pacific Theatre
Maj. T.D.Gann, Fifth Air Force Light & Medium Bomber Operations During 1942 & 1943: Building Doctrine & Forces That Triumphed In the Battle of the Bismark Sea & the Wewak Raid
Maj. Michael E. Fischer, Mission Type Orders in Joint Air Operations (Command and control, New Guinea highlighted)
W.J. English, Performance of B25 Aircraft of 38th Bomb Group During 18 Months of Combat in New Guinea
Major Jonathan B. Wills, How SouthWest Pacific Area Operations Influenced the Royal Austrailian Air Force
Roy S. Weaver Jr., I'm in the Army Now.......New Guinea info
The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy, U.S. Naval Aviation in the Pacific
United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995, Part 5 WWII
David Osborb Scott, Completing the Circle Around Rabaul, The Siezure of the Admiralties, Feb.- May 1944
Mr. James C. Sawruk, Air-to-Air Claims and Credits for Navy and Marine Corps Patrol Type Aircraft During World War II
Master Sgt. Greg Henneman, Capt. Nelson Flack: The rediscovery of a Black Sheep.....Article

H. Sakaida's Aces of the Rising sun
Hata, Izawa, Shores, Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931 - 1945
K. Janowicz's/Kagero 68th Sentai
Waldemar Pajdosz & Andre Zbiegniewski's/Kagero, 3/202 Kokutai
Saburo Hayashi & Alvin D Coox, Kogun, The Japanese Army in the Pacific War
Dainippon Kaiga Publ., Imperial Japanese Army Air Units Battlefield Photograph Collection
Capt. M.K.Rodman's, A War of their Own, Bombers Over the Southwest Pacific
L.McAulay's MacArthur's Eagles: The U. S. Air War over New Guinea, 1943-1944
L.J.Hickey, Warpath Across the Pacific, 345th Bomb Group, "Air Apaches"

Trying to Obtain:
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Revenge of the Red Raiders, 22nd Bomb Group, "Red Raiders"
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Kens Men Against the Empire, 43rd Bomb Group, "Kens Men"
L.J.Hickey, Claringbould, Rampage of the Roarin 20's, 312th Bomb Group, "Roarin 20's"
L.J.Hickey, Tagaya, Saga of the Sun Setters, 38th Bomb Group, "Sun Setters"
Model Art 263 & 428, Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
Maru Mechanic 2 & 37 Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
F.A.O.W. "Blue Series" #98
Watanabe Yohji's, Hien: the Struggle of the Type 3 Fighter
Jiro Kimata's Rikugun Koku Senshi
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 4 Kawasaki
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 5 Nakajima
Gakken Series, No.???? - Ki-61
Gakken Series, No.7 - RABAUL AIR WAR
Gakken Series, No.28 - IJN/IJA/American Bases
Gakken Series, No.52 - Nakajima Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa
Airview #???? Ki-61
MILITARY AIRCRAFT #16, Imperial Japanese Army Aircraft of the Pacific War

LEBillfish
09-02-2005, 10:09 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Ki.jpg

Hi All;

In that it seems as though the Ki-61 may not be addressed/corrected in this sim (sad in that many actually begin to learn of certain aircraft here)....I have decided to begin a thread wherein facts can be pointed out and myths dispelled on the issues of;

"Ki-61 & the Japanese Army Flying Corps"

My responses will be based from the following literature (still waiting on full versions of some of the Japanese publications)...Yet most of all from the email education I have received from those who are the true experts in the field (and know I am simply a novice myself and learning, so suggest you re-check my responses with credible sources).

Sources:
Roughly quite a few hundred websites, a number of Japanese monographs, De-classified U.S. reports and so on...Plus..a WHOLE LOT of direct answers from Jim Long, Jim Lansdale, Ken Glass, Masa and others who have really helped me more then I can describe....

J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #99-3 Ki-61/100 Serial Numbers, Dates of Assembly & Characteristics
J.I.Long's Airtell Field Notes Japanese Army Fighter "Tony"
J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #86-1 Estimated Assembly Date For A WWII Japanese Aircraft/A Relic of the Air War over New Guinea/Type 3 Fighter Tony # 640
J.I.Long's A PacFront Extra, Cockpit Layout- Type 3 Fighter Model 1
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/ R.E.Cowley (Japanese inline engine comparisons)
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/K.Weeks (Type 3 Fighter Reference Drawings)

R.M.Bueschell's Hein
R.M.Bueschell's Hayabusa
Rene J. Francillon, Aircraft Profile "The Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien" #118
Artur Juszcak, Mitsubishi A6m Zero
T. Januszewski, Mitsubishi A5M Claude, Mushroom Model
Avions #119, Ki-44 Shoki...French
Avions #122, Tateo Kato...French
Aero Detail #29 Hayabusa...
Monografie Lotnicze #5 Hien...Polish
Monografie Lotnicze #48 Ki-43...Polish
Maru Mechanic #43? Nik1/2....Japanese
F.A.O.W #17 Hien...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #19 Army Type 4 Fighter "Hayate"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #21 Army Type 2 Fighter "Toryu"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #27 Type 96 Carrier Fighter, A5M, Nate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #29 Type 97 Fighter... Japanese
F.A.O.W. #32 Type 97 Carrier Torpedo Bomber, B5n, Kate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #33 Type 99 Carrier Dive Bomber, D3A, Val...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 53 Kyofu, Shinden, Shidenkai...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 65 Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #2, Ki-61 & Ki-48...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #6, Ki-45 & Ki-51...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #?, E13A1, Jake...Japanese "Partial"

Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 1...Polish
Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 2....Polish
Peter Scott's Emblems of the Rising Sun (IJAAF Markings)
D.W. Thorpe JAAF Camoflauge & Markings WWII...
ModelArt 533, Camouflage & Markings of the IJA Bombers ....Japanese
ModelArt 272, Camouflage & Markings of IJN Fighters .......Japanese
Robert C. Mikesh, Schiffer Publishing, Japanese Aircraft Equipment 1940-1945
Unknown (Japanese), Japanese Military Aircraft Illustrated...Japanese
Koku Fan, 1974-3

Army Air Force Historical Study #113
Army Air Force Historical Study #116
Aeronotes 3, Deployments & OOBs
Aeronotes 4, New Guinea Area Operations
Shindo Hiriyuki, Japanese Air Operations in New Guinea
Capt. B. Chance Saltzman & T.R. Searle's, Introduction to the United States Air Force
Gary Null's, Weapon of Denial, Air Power & the Battle for New Guinea
Major James A. Barr, Airpower Employment of the 5th Air Force in the WWII SouthWest Pacific Theatre
Maj. T.D.Gann, Fifth Air Force Light & Medium Bomber Operations During 1942 & 1943: Building Doctrine & Forces That Triumphed In the Battle of the Bismark Sea & the Wewak Raid
Maj. Michael E. Fischer, Mission Type Orders in Joint Air Operations (Command and control, New Guinea highlighted)
W.J. English, Performance of B25 Aircraft of 38th Bomb Group During 18 Months of Combat in New Guinea
Major Jonathan B. Wills, How SouthWest Pacific Area Operations Influenced the Royal Austrailian Air Force
Roy S. Weaver Jr., I'm in the Army Now.......New Guinea info
The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy, U.S. Naval Aviation in the Pacific
United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995, Part 5 WWII
David Osborb Scott, Completing the Circle Around Rabaul, The Siezure of the Admiralties, Feb.- May 1944
Mr. James C. Sawruk, Air-to-Air Claims and Credits for Navy and Marine Corps Patrol Type Aircraft During World War II
Master Sgt. Greg Henneman, Capt. Nelson Flack: The rediscovery of a Black Sheep.....Article

H. Sakaida's Aces of the Rising sun
Hata, Izawa, Shores, Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931 - 1945
K. Janowicz's/Kagero 68th Sentai
Waldemar Pajdosz & Andre Zbiegniewski's/Kagero, 3/202 Kokutai
Saburo Hayashi & Alvin D Coox, Kogun, The Japanese Army in the Pacific War
Dainippon Kaiga Publ., Imperial Japanese Army Air Units Battlefield Photograph Collection
Capt. M.K.Rodman's, A War of their Own, Bombers Over the Southwest Pacific
L.McAulay's MacArthur's Eagles: The U. S. Air War over New Guinea, 1943-1944
L.J.Hickey, Warpath Across the Pacific, 345th Bomb Group, "Air Apaches"

Trying to Obtain:
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Revenge of the Red Raiders, 22nd Bomb Group, "Red Raiders"
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Kens Men Against the Empire, 43rd Bomb Group, "Kens Men"
L.J.Hickey, Claringbould, Rampage of the Roarin 20's, 312th Bomb Group, "Roarin 20's"
L.J.Hickey, Tagaya, Saga of the Sun Setters, 38th Bomb Group, "Sun Setters"
Model Art 263 & 428, Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
Maru Mechanic 2 & 37 Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
F.A.O.W. "Blue Series" #98
Watanabe Yohji's, Hien: the Struggle of the Type 3 Fighter
Jiro Kimata's Rikugun Koku Senshi
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 4 Kawasaki
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 5 Nakajima
Gakken Series, No.???? - Ki-61
Gakken Series, No.7 - RABAUL AIR WAR
Gakken Series, No.28 - IJN/IJA/American Bases
Gakken Series, No.52 - Nakajima Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa
Airview #???? Ki-61
MILITARY AIRCRAFT #16, Imperial Japanese Army Aircraft of the Pacific War

LEBillfish
09-02-2005, 10:12 AM
My first post will address some errors in the PF Sims current model, these are as folows.....

Possible Bug:
Gear will not manually deploy.....5+x now I have received hits to my wings that resulted in me being unable to lower the landing gear....In kind, "Manual Lowering" would not work (though should not like say a I-16 that requires numerous cranks)....

The Ki-61 had an "Emergency Landing Gear "Uplock" release Lever" which is situated beside the seat on the right side "under" the "Emergency Hydraulic Hand Pump" lever. When pulled, it would manually release the latch holding the gear up and they would simply fall...Momentum or if required wing wagging causing them to swing to the downed position past the toggle 0 point locking.

So in all reality, they should "at least" have the manual option available.

Other issues still.....

Modeling Issues:
No venturi (double black cone on left cowling)...That was only used on 3 planes of the 244th Sentai, and is still debated if it was just a quick fix for a damaged part in the air intake to run various gauges, or used to run a prototype gyroscopic sight.

Trim tabs missing on ALL control surfaces.....This is a minor thing however something that cannot be corrected by skinning and is required for markings.

Pilot "step" missing on left side beside radiator housing....Minor issue "inconsequential".

Navigation lights on wings 3x too big, Navigation light on rudder missing (both can be corrected in skinning except location of actual rudder "light effect".

Landing gear covers are seriously wrong, shape is incorrect particularly at Oleo mark splits.

Accordion Boot overlanding gear shock rod missing (9 section boot covering the bare metal shock rod)....In kind inner cover stop/lift bar missing (arched bar that stopped cover from swinging and made contact with the tire to close)

Gauges and other items are missing from within the cockpit....Inconsequential for play though certain gauges not working (would need to reconfirm this) can affect knowledge of planes condition.

First off, each type of gun used in the wing needed a clearance bulge, yet it was on the upper surface of the wing. Any below is so minimal it would not matter. In kind, the bulge on top for the wing varied in size and location for all 3 types of guns. Also you'll not vents above and below for the gun bays.......Vents can be resolved through skinning, the bulges however cannot. Since we have 3 different models, there is no reason why these clearance bulges cannot be corrected.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Gunbulges.jpg

1b & 1c had retractable tail gear (though not like 1a with closing covers, radiused cutout correct)....However, this was "blocked down"....Once in the field I cannot confirm if this blocking was sometimes deliberately removed, however there are photo's of 1b & 1c with it retracted.

Counterbalance weights under Ailerons missing (believe that is what they are).

Loadout Modeling:

There is no proof and it is believed by most that the Ki-61-1a thru 1c never carried ground attack bombs. Later they however were fitted with Phosphorous "anti-bomber" bombs to be dropped into formations.....However, in that we do not have the 1d thru II series this helps make up for their loadouts....In kind, a 100kg bomb needs to be added if that is the logic.

Ki-61 OFTEN did not carry the racks for external drop tanks. This was "intended" by the factory and even sports markings stating "Install ONLY when drop tanks are to be carried". In the field they were often not mounted. Other times they were left on simply due to the constant need for them. I suggest they be removed from the plane if either a bomb or ext. fuel tank loadout is not selected.

Ki-61 bomb rack (only right side of each is marked)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Untitled-2.jpg
(photoscan copyright R.Lane)

Ki-61 NENRYO RAKKA TANKU KENSUI-KA
RAKKA TANKU SOU-CHAKU-JI NOMI TORI-TSUKE

Ki-61 Drop Tank Suspension Mount
Install only when drop tanks are to be carried

These are some of the markings on the side of each fuel rack.

There is some evidence that sometimes only a single external fuel tank would be utilized, in those cases both fuel racks would be in place however only one droptank on the right side should be in place (compensated for torque).

The Ki-61 thru 1c had various "internal" fuel tanks during it's production run. These varied from 750 liters to 500 liters placed about wings and fuselage....Exact numbers will be given if this is something wished to be addressed and if I can get permission from my "highly qualified" source.

Damage Modeling:

Ki-61-1c had a fire extinguisher system.

Ki-61's had "selectable" tank lever (below prop pitch & Throttle unit) so if one was hit they could switch to others...This included a selector switch for fuel quantity per tank......Now that would be difficult to model in the sim, However, that should mean "All" fuel stores should not run dry if one tank is hit.

Fuel tank "leak absorbing" and "bullet proofing" rapidly improved through the Ki-61-I series. This evolved from 10mm silk felt and 3mm rubber to 9mm top & 6mm sides and bottom rubber to 12mm rubber in the 1a-1c respectively

The pilot seat armor steadily improved from 10mm plate to 16mm head, 12mm body.

Radiator in most 1b (all but 13) and all 1c models had 8mm armor plate protecting them.

Gear, flaps, radiator door were hydraulically actuated though "not sure" if they had "hydraulic fuses (correction by Cephas)" to insure if one was damaged rest would work (doubtful)......All control surfaces were via cable and bell crank.

Windscreen due to cowling design would be doubtful to "Oil up" as it does when the engine is hit....In kind where in the Bf109 had a flat windscreen, the Ki-61 only had a tiny area as such for the optical sight. In either case I'd suspect oil could NOT reach the windscreen upon a hit.

Flight Modeling:
Though the Ki-61 had "trim tabs" on all surfaces, it does not have in flight adjustable trim for the rudder or ailerons....Only the elevator on the Ki-61-1, Ki-61-II, & Ki-100 had in flight adjustment via a small box left of the pilots seat........All three control surfaces Aileron/Rudder/Elevator however had "ground adjustable" tabs.

Max. Speed...These are the generally accepted numbers form the Kawasaki data, JAFC data, U.S. captured example coded JAFC S/N 263 (real S/N 163, so a Ki-61-1-Ko).
Ki-61-1a
Max. Speed = 590 km/hr@5,000m
Cruising Speed = Unknown
Climb = Unknown
Ki-61-1b
Max. Speed = 592 km/hr@4,860m
Cruising Speed = 400 km/hr@4,000m
Climb = 5,000m/5min, 31seconds
Ki-61-1c
Max. Speed = Unknown
Cruising Speed = Unknown
Climb = Unknown
Test results as follows: Only max speed was tested and the conditions of the plane were...
Fully trimmed (no trim on rudder may help)
Radiator closed
Engine Overheat turned off
Altitude 4,860m
Tried various combinations of prop pitch and throttle with 100%pp/110% throttle achieving the highest speed
25-100% fuel had little effect
Ki-61-1b "Otsu" in sim Max. Speed at altiitude = 560km/hr T.A.S. or 32km/hr too slow

nakamura_kenji
09-02-2005, 01:53 PM
hien my favorite plane ^_^ much wonderful information i not see before

LEBillfish guess speed test in game say overheat switch off not test with on also realistc speed not destroy engine. if want i do this? ^_^

LEBillfish slight off but you know good ki-64(kawasaki high alt fighter with two ki-61 engine^_^) drawing blueprint or picture i only have few not good p_q i ask as i plan make 3d model of give parctise make plane for when bob release.

IL2-chuter
09-02-2005, 02:29 PM
I have friends that are national trophy-level modelers (in other words: anal nit-pickers) and they can find all kinds of things wrong with any model in the game (i.e. the 109G-6AS and K-4 right bulge is same size as left, should be smaller, no offset-to-left fins are offset on any aircraft that had that feature as in the Corsair etc.) And then there are the FM's and damage FM's . . . http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif (I'm a pilot). I believe this is because the developers are computer people first, aircraft nuts second (if at all in some cases). Then there are the hardware limitations . . . so I'm very happy with the sim, however improvement in detail, where practical would be nice.

This is still my favorite game, I play it more than all my other games combined and I'm looking forward eagerly to BoB. I'm not looking forward to buying more hardware but that's the nature of the beast, eh?

VW-IceFire
09-02-2005, 05:00 PM
I have to say that some physical details were probably left out because of technical issues, lack of time, or lack of knowledge. They are also harder to correct I imagine.

Some of the FM issues I'm sure we can fix. And manual landing gear...sounds like a bug.

Badsight.
09-02-2005, 05:07 PM
now that is one well researched post BF

JG53Frankyboy
09-02-2005, 05:33 PM
do you read anywhere that the Ki61 had only elevator trimm ?

ore just because that there are trimmtaps you are saying they had none - remember that logic when you are saying the elevator had these tabs , but also trimm.
than why not aileron and rudder too ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

NAFP_supah
09-02-2005, 05:51 PM
Ki-61 did NOT have an ashtray!

VW-IceFire
09-02-2005, 09:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
do you read anywhere that the Ki61 had only elevator trimm ?

ore just because that there are trimmtaps you are saying they had none - remember that logic when you are saying the elevator had these tabs , but also trimm.
than why not aileron and rudder too ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think Billfish is saying that while the aircraft had trimtabs on all surfaces, only the elevator ones were something you could change in flight.

I don't know the answer but if I knew the Ki-61 like I know the Tempest then you'll just have the books and info that tells you if it can or can't. Billfish has done the groundwork and the research...its not the usual assumption = fact that we see from some.

LEBillfish
09-02-2005, 10:37 PM
Only the elevator had "in flight" trim control. Proof of this comes in many forms...

The only trim control in the cockpit is to the left of the pilot being a small box with a dial on it and a crank for the elevator...and in that there are no cables or rods for aileron or rudder trim adjustment.

The reason the elevator however had "trim tabs" was to insure the left and right sides compensated equally (just like ailerons) then to insure optimum cruise speed was trim...Just like the ailerons and rudder.

Ever wonder why "Cruising Speed" is often listed?...As that is the speed (with all other variables set) the plane was to be set up for.

TPN_Cephas
09-03-2005, 08:24 AM
A hydraulic "fuze" is a device that if there is a mass flow of fluid as from a leak it shuts off all flow to the affected area.

A hydraulic "check valve" is a spring mounted poopet valve tha only allows fluid to flow in one direction unseating the poppet, if the fluid tries to reverse flow it seats the poppet cutting off flow.

Check valves are very common all over a hydraulic system to establish correct flow while fuzes are only emergency systems that need to be reset by maintenance personel on the ground.

As for manual gear, I am not aware of any plane in FB+PF that will let you have an emergency extension mode use the alt gear keys. Most every plane with retractable gear has an ermergency free fall or back up powered gear extension mode. In the IL2 series it has been my experience that manual gear control only works for those planes that had a hand operated gear, which is very tedious (unless you bind it to a joystick function that can automate this too). I very much miss not having a real emergency gear option in this game for when I bring home a crippled bird, landing a damaged plane is near as much fun as fighting the enemy.

It would be great to have inop gear and then trying to use emergency gear to drop it, (especially if wing waggling and g-loading to lock in place were modeled) and then perhaps having to land with damaged gear. Although IL2 does support damaged gear landings, once again I just miss that emergency gear extension option.

LEBillfish
09-03-2005, 08:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TPN_Cephas:
A hydraulic "fuze" is a device that if there is a mass flow of fluid as from a leak it shuts off all flow to the affected area. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, kewl, learn something new every day that makes sense and never heard of a hydraulic "fuse"....Will alter above to reflect that (I really need to try and mark up the schematics I have in english)

shinden1974
09-03-2005, 12:14 PM
call them fuse valves, or excess-flow valves...although in operation they are different items in a 'hydraulic fuse' which is more of a system than a part.

They are great at failing in cold weather.

IL2-chuter
09-03-2005, 10:22 PM
After the DC-10 crash in Chicago we put hydraulic fuses on in several locations to prevent that from happenning again the way it did (and that's exactly what we called those parts). I don't think they were used too often back in the day, they tended to use alternate backups in leu of hydraulics, typically.

Oh, and Cephus, if your powered gear won't cycle on its own in FB/Aces/PF due to damage, go ahead and try the manual gear extension key you've mapped . . . you might be surprised. (Note: keep poundin)


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

VW-IceFire
09-03-2005, 10:38 PM
TPN_Cephas, some planes definately do have a manual gear lowering system. The P-51 definately does as do some others but I don't have an extensive list.

Today I noticed the IL-2 does not...or at least not the early versions. I couldn't get it to deploy.

shinden1974
09-04-2005, 01:01 AM
oh...no trash...

http://www.parker.com/ead/cm2.asp?cmid=904&

that's what I get for running my yap as if I know what I'm talking about. Stratoflex makes Hydraulic Fuses. Never really seen one before and confused it with the redundant **** we use here.

spitzfiya
09-04-2005, 01:09 AM
Wow...I dont understand why one would care to know and research all this?

I mean WOW! I thought i was obsessed...seriously how do you find all the time and energy to do this?

Ever just stop and think "This is pointless" to some extent...

I mean...I love IL2 for the combat flying...But I have no urge to nitpick technical aspects of anything, mainly because I was never around in 1940 unlike some of you... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

The secret is to understand you know nothing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

LEBillfish
09-04-2005, 01:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shinden1974:
oh...no trash...

http://www.parker.com/ead/cm2.asp?cmid=904&

that's what I get for running my yap as if I know what I'm talking about. Stratoflex makes Hydraulic Fuses. Never really seen one before and confused it with the redundant **** we use here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Though unsure as I'd need to do more translation I'm betting WWII planes, Japanese most likely never had such a valve. Possible and I'll check but from what I'm seeing I'd find it unlikely and the Parker PDF/site hints that it may be a newer (post 45) development.


and spitzfiya, I'll learn till I die.....woe be to the "unfortunate (that's nice talk for ignoramous) who doesn't http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif You might be surprised how the tiniest detail about the most obscure thing can change your world.

shinden1974
09-04-2005, 01:25 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spitzfiya:
Wow...I dont understand why one would care to know and research all this?

I mean WOW! I thought i was obsessed...seriously how do you find all the time and energy to do this?

Ever just stop and think "This is pointless" to some extent...

I mean...I love IL2 for the combat flying...But I have no urge to nitpick technical aspects of anything, mainly because I was never around in 1940 unlike some of you... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

The secret is to understand you know nothing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because it isn't really nitpicky, not to certain people. For a guy who works airframes and powerplants these details are huge. These details added together make every plane truly unique in this context.

I can understand your lack of interest, what I don't understand is an attempt to get others to share it.

MaxBruder
09-04-2005, 06:21 AM
Learn something everyday, although some people may not the time and where with all to be able to reasearch some of these tidbits they are still interesting and add to the immersion of the game.

LEBillfish
09-04-2005, 09:09 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MaxBruder:
Learn something everyday, although some people may not the time and where with all to be able to reasearch some of these tidbits they are still interesting and add to the immersion of the game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

and that is the point.....If we all focus on our specific interest, then share it, then we all just gained the ability to know it too...WITHOUT all the legwork.

My interest was spawned when a friend asked me to fly with the <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">78th*Sentai</span>. Wanting to know what unit I was representing, I tried to briefly learn of it. However, after being hammered on for repeating (and stating it was) some information on the net to learn more by real experts, I decided to try and learn it correctly......The Ki-61 the only plane they were officially issued, and it at the heart of many of their problems I began to investigate it to understand the 78th further.

However, to be able to read the correct and better literature on the subject I needed to be able to translate Japanese (as in knowing each characters romanji spelling)...So started to learn that....Then when I decided ehh, who cares, I wanted to skin the correct scheme for the 78th. Imagine how frustrating it was to have 99% of the folks out there not even know where the gas cap is to show a spill.....So off it went.

Why am I doing this? As I have found virtually every book and website on the 78th*Hikousentai, Ki-61, and Japanese Army Flying Corps has massive errors. Those errors from work done in the 40's and 50's incorrectly not having the info then repeated over and over in subsequent publications with their new twist.....Soon it was clear....Much of it was simply myth or wrong.

So I'm taking the time to get it right.

ex.
IJA, IJAAF, JAAF, etc. are ALL WRONG. If you want to put an English abreviation to it it should be JAFC.....
"¥œ ¸ ˆªº* =
Nippon Rikugun Koukuutai =
Japan Army Flying Corps

When was the last time you saw it written JAFC? Yet when I pressed the "Experts in Japan", they stated I was correct and figured why bother in debating the "Americanized" translation so many are used to.

Just like saying the U.S.A.A.C. was the U.S.A.F..

It wasn't......So if such a petty thing is so wrong, well you tell me. Ignorance, myths, and falsehoods can either be corrected or perpetuated. They are most often perpetuated by those taking the easy way, and rarely corrected by those struggling to learn the smallest detail.

......Back to Ki-61's.

joeap
09-04-2005, 02:06 PM
Excellent work Billfish. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif I am very impressed.

So the Japanese Army is called Nihon Rikugun, I know the Japanese Navy is the Nihon Kaigun. I assume gun is something to do with arms or force etc....Kai and Rik then sea and land, just extrapolating I don't know any Japanese except a few words like arigato, sayonara, and for this sim banzai! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

TPN_Cephas
09-04-2005, 02:41 PM
well I'll be durned! I have been flying this game since theinitial demo and never used alt gear on a plane that had normal powered gear in emergencies.

VW-IceFire
09-04-2005, 03:15 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spitzfiya:
Wow...I dont understand why one would care to know and research all this?

I mean WOW! I thought i was obsessed...seriously how do you find all the time and energy to do this?

Ever just stop and think "This is pointless" to some extent...

I mean...I love IL2 for the combat flying...But I have no urge to nitpick technical aspects of anything, mainly because I was never around in 1940 unlike some of you... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

The secret is to understand you know nothing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well you know its sort of fun for some of us to become really knowledgeable about certain things. I like to research and become as much of a generalized expert in whatever I'm doing. Job, hobby, work, play, whatever. I can't know it all but I can try.

They say its good for the brain anyways.

LEBillfish
09-04-2005, 05:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
So the Japanese Army is called Nihon Rikugun, I know the Japanese Navy is the Nihon Kaigun. I assume gun is something to do with arms or force etc....Kai and Rik then sea and land, just extrapolating I don't know any Japanese except a few words like arigato, sayonara, and for this sim banzai! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No.....Nippon = Japan, Rikugun = Army, Koukuutai = Flying Corps......Kokugun = Air Army

shinden1974
09-05-2005, 01:44 AM
actually he's probably right, I'm sure Nihon and Nippon are interchangeable as terms for the english 'japan'. I think the suffix -gun means 'team' or similar:

http://www.kanjisite.com/html/start/rhsinfo/r_gunarmy.html

I guess someone who actually speaks the language could be usful here. I don't know, maybe nippon as opposed to nihon is a big deal.

dasstuka
09-05-2005, 03:46 AM
billfish

just out of qurosity who makes a large scale radio controlled ki-61 tony ? would love to build one just for the experince

thanks <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shinden1974:
oh...no trash...

http://www.parker.com/ead/cm2.asp?cmid=904&

that's what I get for running my yap as if I know what I'm talking about. Stratoflex makes Hydraulic Fuses. Never really seen one before and confused it with the redundant **** we use here. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Though unsure as I'd need to do more translation I'm betting WWII planes, Japanese most likely never had such a valve. Possible and I'll check but from what I'm seeing I'd find it unlikely and the Parker PDF/site hints that it may be a newer (post 45) development.


and spitzfiya, I'll learn till I die.....woe be to the "unfortunate (that's nice talk for ignoramous) who doesn't http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif You might be surprised how the tiniest detail about the most obscure thing can change your world. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

joeap
09-05-2005, 04:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by joeap:
So the Japanese Army is called Nihon Rikugun, I know the Japanese Navy is the Nihon Kaigun. I assume gun is something to do with arms or force etc....Kai and Rik then sea and land, just extrapolating I don't know any Japanese except a few words like arigato, sayonara, and for this sim banzai! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No.....Nippon = Japan, Rikugun = Army, Koukuutai = Flying Corps......Kokugun = Air Army </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Like I said I don't know Japanese. I do know the Japanese navy is reffered to as Nihon Kaigun (there is an excellent site on it found here: Japanese Navy (http://www.combinedfleet.com), it has info on the Japanese naval air arm as well as the surfacce and sub fleet).

I assume as shinden1974 Nihon and Nippon are interchangeable, a problem of rendering a Japanese word into English (I know that exists for two other languages I am more familiar with, Greek and Russian). Kaigun does mean navy, and -gun is common to both. Where is nakamura_kenji or another native speaker?

LEBillfish
09-05-2005, 07:24 AM
shinden1974.........she

and dasstuka, don't really know anything about models sorry.

shinden1974
09-05-2005, 09:04 AM
ACtually, think we are really wandering off-topic...my fault, sorry!

I actually had some question about Ki-61 of a more general nature.

I remember some time ago thinking I knew what a K-61-1d (tei model) was as opposed to the previous models, although I pretty much get the idea that there was a big airframe change around 'c', I was pretty wrong about the 'd' I have no idea what seperates it from a 'c'. I guess it would be good to get a list of the variants and the various armaments and changes that fit under each variant?

another question: Did the Hien have the same gas quality problems the other types did? (Hayate and Shiden both posted better performance during tests after they were captured with better fuel) what's the source for what we are usually given about japanese plane specs?

okay that's it for now...

LEBillfish
09-05-2005, 10:37 AM
Really, a,b,c,d...are English speaking naming conventions....However what you are terming "d" was a radical change in many regards.

The English abbreviated "a-c" models were for the most part exactly the same. The primary changes being "wing armament", the b & c having their tailwheel "blocked down" and no closing cover (simply a radius like we see on some 109's and FW)...and the "c" had a fire extinguisher system. Other various minor changes such as armor, fuel tanks, covers for guns, etc. were made, yet nothing worth noting them as "different" planes.

The Type 3, Model I Kai/Tei (some say Hei) or Ki-61-1d (English method)...was to a great degree entirely redesigned. Looking almost exactly like the earlier versions, the first difference you would note would be 19cm added between the cockpit and engine to accommodate the 20mm Ho-5 cannon to replace the Ho-103 MG's that were there (I assume due to longer ammo).

The next major difference you could "see", would be a larger tail section it also made removable. It is my understanding they also considered a wood tail section.....This would also be the first Ki-61 capable of carrying bombs. Past that slight additions of louvers and such would be found on covers and being the first version with a true fixed down tail wheel.

However, internally it was a much different machine. Many systems simplified, and supposedly the problems with the "a-c" version resolved. So in the end really a radical departure from the "a-c" series.

As to fuel issues I'll have to ask my source yet that may be some time (lives on hurricane hit coast)....I'll check my books on it yet cannot recall seeing anything about it. Also, remember "better" fuel as far as cleaner/less impurities is one thing, octane quite another...I do recall it stated that the captured Ki-61's were found to have 92 Octane Fuel in them.......I also found this on j-aircraft.com pertaining to a Ki-84 discussion...

"POW reports indicate that while 92 octane was the standard fuel for many fighter aircraft, they had 95 and 97 octane fuel as well. They also had some captured 100 octane fuel early in the war (don't know if they produced any later). The 87 octane fuel was authorized for use in high performance aircraft only in transfer flights and the like at low rpm."

One13
09-05-2005, 12:44 PM
Sorry to hijack your thread a little but do you have any information on J2M3 ammunition loads?
I see that the ingame version has 60rpg but the information on the net say 200rpg. I would not like to start a campaign to get the ammo load increased without some hard info to back it up.
Unfotunatly all the books I have do not give any figures.
BTW I recently saw a picture of a J2M with 30mm guns in the wings though I have no information on how many were made.

LEBillfish
09-05-2005, 07:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by One13:
Sorry to hijack your thread a little but do you have any information on J2M3 ammunition loads?
I see that the ingame version has 60rpg but the information on the net say 200rpg. I would not like to start a campaign to get the ammo load increased without some hard info to back it up.
Unfotunatly all the books I have do not give any figures.
BTW I recently saw a picture of a J2M with 30mm guns in the wings though I have no information on how many were made. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No idea, sorry....Try a google search yet view the results with skepticism.

nakamura_kenji
09-05-2005, 07:20 PM
the j2m5 think have 2x20mm and 2x30mm

nakamura_kenji
09-09-2005, 08:27 AM
Bump ^_^

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/ki-61_.jpg

in ki-61-I-ko i get 500kph/310mph at sealevel(about 10m) 25% fuel i run until engine cook self

in ki-61-I-ko i get 570kph/354mph at 4500m 25% fuel

in ki-100-I-ko i get 518kph/322mph at sealevel(about 10m) 25% fuel i run until engine cook self with boost

in ki-100-I-ko i get 523kph/324.99mph at 4500m 25% fuel with boost

shinden1974
09-09-2005, 03:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
Bump ^_^

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/ki-61_.jpg

in ki-61-I-ko i get 500kph/310mph at sealevel(about 10m) 25% fuel i run until engine cook self

in ki-61-I-ko i get 570kph/354mph at 4500m 25% fuel

in ki-100-I-ko i get 518kph/322mph at sealevel(about 10m) 25% fuel i run until engine cook self with boost

in ki-100-I-ko i get 523kph/324.99mph at 4500m 25% fuel with boost </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Ki100 seems pretty slow even at it's max speed height of 6000m and supposed speed of 360 mph, I can barely make 325 mph, but my methods probably were not great, I just did a quickie.

nakamura_kenji
09-09-2005, 03:43 PM
think ki-100 meant be better low alt but ki-61 better medium alt. When test i not change prop pitch maybe some able get faster.

all ki-61 i seem get same performance max speed. difference in climb and turning though ki-61-I-ko be best turner and climber otsu,hei not so good turn or climb most like because bit heavier but have better arment. i find ki-100 match mostly hei otsu for turn but acellerate faster to speed

JG53Frankyboy
09-09-2005, 04:13 PM
you engached highblower in the Ki-100 ?

the last time i flew the Ki100, they flew much faster ?

nakamura_kenji
09-09-2005, 04:17 PM
now you mention i didnt &gt;_&lt; do everything except that give me hour so retest with supercharger set correct v_v

shinden1974
09-09-2005, 05:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
you engached highblower in the Ki-100 ?

the last time i flew the Ki100, they flew much faster ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

woops... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

nakamura_kenji
09-09-2005, 06:09 PM
in ki-100-I-ko i get 540kph/335.6mph at 4500m 25% fuel with boost +super charger set at 2

still seem slow maybe i do something wrong

VW-IceFire
09-09-2005, 06:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
in ki-100-I-ko i get 540kph/335.6mph at 4500m 25% fuel with boost +super charger set at 2

still seem slow maybe i do something wrong </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No I think its a bit slow at critical high altitude.

But it seems its harder to get best possible top speed out of planes now so it may be true across the board.

I flew the Ki-100 last night against some pretty good pilots in 1 vs 1 and 2 vs 1 situations and it gave a very good account of itself. Unlike the Zero, I find it just fast enough to get or potentially get a firing solution. I spent quite a bit of time chasing my target which was a Corsair. In one battle, we never properly got shots off at each other because his attacks were nullified by my manueverability and his top speed limited my ability to return fire.

The Corsair can disengage but thats about it. I think the Mustang would fall easier than the Corsair.

nakamura_kenji
09-09-2005, 06:59 PM
yes i have similar fight with p-38L late at low level while ki-61-I-Hei all he able to do was run away really as he soon he try to turn to get firing postion i was able to rapidly close the gap and then out manover on to six again at which point he would run and try again. this last until we both get bored and start run out fuel ^_^

biggest advance over zero with ki-61 and ki-100 is there ability to dive well and that are good in vertical climb where most aicraft i find stall out and fall back down it possible balence ki-61/ki-100 almost hover like top of climb make fighting hellcat corsair in vertical much fun ^_^

redfeathers1948
09-10-2005, 11:21 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gifLEBillfish: A simply superb Technical Analysis of the IL-2 Sturmovik modeling of the Kawasaki Ki-61 fighter of the World War II Imperial Japanese Army. My knowledge of the war my dad fought in as a U.S.Marine has been improved yet again. ~S~

Cadet_Bobo
09-10-2005, 11:30 PM
Kenji, is the pale blue Ki-61 skin on your sig available somewhere...I covet it!

Bobo

nakamura_kenji
09-11-2005, 06:13 AM
sorry my skin i not release public i use someone else template and not sure how contact them i make it only for personel use online. it semi historic as far know there never plane paint like this but i base design on shinsengumi haori and flag they were group samurai that fought in kyoto during japanese revolution

can see haori picture i draw ^_^
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/shinsengumi.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/taiki_akaL.jpg

other version i make for friend can tell each other apart online

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/akira2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/hiroshi1.jpg

sorry i not mean be selfish i just know idea how contact person make template

Cadet_Bobo
09-11-2005, 02:18 PM
Thanks for reply, I appreciate your position.

Bobo

LEBillfish
09-14-2005, 05:04 AM
Cadet Bobo, if you would like any one of the top 3 of the skins shown in the pic below minus the word "Ktu" let me know.....My first attempts at skinning, bottom 2 not mine and only used to show what I am trying to match now...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/78th/78thki61skins1.jpg

Cadet_Bobo
09-14-2005, 05:30 PM
Ja Ja JA! I would like them thank you. Very nice, looks like 78th Sentai markings, and the 149th Shimbu-Tai is very cool too! Can I have that too http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile! I'll PM my e-mail if it's all right.

GerritJ9
09-16-2005, 03:10 PM
LEbillfish, I have to disagree with you about bulges for wing-mounted armament being on upper wing surfaces only. While that may be true of the other two armament variants, there is a photo on page 21 of William Green's "Warplanes of the Second World War: Fighters Volume 3" of a Ki.61 which, according to the caption, was "One of 388 Ki.61-I Hien fighters modified to take wing-mounted Mauser cannon". There are significant bulges on the LOWER wing surfaces in line with the gun muzzles. The upper surfaces cannot be seen in this photo so I can't comment on presence or absence of any bulges there. It would seem clear, however, that the Mauser-armed variant most certainly had those bulges on the lower wing surfaces.

telsono
09-16-2005, 05:22 PM
Here's one of my last builds. Sorry for the quality of the picture, my camera isn't the best.

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a168/telsono/102_0280.jpg

FHsquirl
09-27-2005, 06:16 PM
Hello Ki-61 enthusiasts!

It is refreshing to see that many people have information which I thought I would never find.

I do have some questions, however.

Does anybody have any information about the Ki-61-I's turning radius? This is a piece of information which is very elusive. Airspeed, altitude, radius and time for a 360 turn would be great. I know that the Ki-61-I prototypes were tested against the P-40E, LaGG-3, Me-109 E-3, Ki-43-I and Ki-44, and that the Ki-61-I easily out turned all except the Ki-43-I, but I have been unable to find the exact numbers for the Ki-61-I.

I would also like to know the true loaded weight of the Ki-61-Ib and perhaps other Ki-61's as well. Rene Francillon quotes the loaded weight of the Ki-61-Ib as 6,504 pounds (2,950 kg), but a US report says the loaded weight was 6,982 pounds (3,167 kg). I am inclined to believe the Francillon numbers, as they came from official Japanese documents and reflected the weight of the Ki-61-Ib as it was flown by the Japanese. Does anybody have a way to clear up this confusion?

Finally, I would like to know the stall speeds of the Ki-61-Ib, in power on and power off settings in both "clean" and landing configuration, if possible.

I know that this is a lot to ask, but the whole community would benefit from this information.

Thank you.

nakamura_kenji
09-27-2005, 06:20 PM
not know exact only tell what feel ingame, me anyway find ki-61-I-ko best turn with otsu/hei and ki-100 slightly worse. would not suprised ko not very far away from a6m5 turn.

maybe other no more ^_^

LEBillfish
09-27-2005, 07:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GerritJ9:
LEbillfish, I have to disagree with you about bulges for wing-mounted armament being on upper wing surfaces only. While that may be true of the other two armament variants, there is a photo on page 21 of William Green's "Warplanes of the Second World War: Fighters Volume 3" of a Ki.61 which, according to the caption, was "One of 388 Ki.61-I Hien fighters modified to take wing-mounted Mauser cannon". There are significant bulges on the LOWER wing surfaces in line with the gun muzzles. The upper surfaces cannot be seen in this photo so I can't comment on presence or absence of any bulges there. It would seem clear, however, that the Mauser-armed variant most certainly had those bulges on the lower wing surfaces. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Actually, I bet you are talking about these (photo fragment of one by Jim Lansdale)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/brass1.jpg

That those are for the 151-20 are actually a common myth, what they really are are "Brass Catchers" for the wing guns when over the Home Island....My source on this is an individual who has personally inspected Ki-61's, his response to this very question that any bulge under the wing negligable if at all and would be common to all varients...The real difference in the upper wing bulges.


As to turn radius, ROC, stall speeds and such I'll have to ask about to those teaching me. What I can tell you right off is the loaded weight of a Ki-61-1b/Otsu is stated from Japanese documentation as being 3,616 kg..

HOWEVER, this would actually vairy greatly in that the 1b dependant upon date of manufacture had numerous modest, though weight considering changes to it. Different fuel tank options dramatically changing total volume, armor to the radiator, pilot, and fuel tanks changed....So I suppose if you took the weight of a Ki-61-I-Ko, added the difference in weight of the larger wing guns and ammo (considering less ammo)...then took the greatest volume of fuel tanks, and heaviest armor you could find the max weight a Otsu might of obtained.....Roughly, I'd suggest a varience of maybe 4-600# for fuel, rubber and steel weights.

If you want I can do a bit of math and try and post some numbers.

HotelBushranger
09-27-2005, 08:37 PM
Telsono that's a beauty!

What's the Tony's fighting style? It's my favourite Japanese plane, but I'm still trying to figure out how it works best. I'm thinking its an Energy fighter...

ElAurens
09-27-2005, 09:42 PM
I view the Hien as a jack of all trades, at least in this sim. It is quite good at "energy fighting", helped in this by it's excellent dive speed and energy retention. On the other hand, it is also quite good at the turning fight. While not as maneuverable as an A6M or Ki43, it is far more maneuverable than most of it's Allied adversarys. (The Spit will give it trouble, as will the grossly overmodeled LaGG 3, fortunately the latter never turn up in a proper later war PF server).

LEBillfish
09-27-2005, 09:58 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:
(The Spit will give it trouble, as will the grossly overmodeled LaGG 3, fortunately the latter never turn up in a proper later war PF server). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I'm surprised some "what if" missions have not been made. The Ki-61 was sent to a number of units on the soviet border...naturally by the time Uncle Joe decided to land grab the last few days, they had probably all been pulled home (not sure on that point).......That is why you see the common picture of Ki-43 & 61's with Ski's.

ElAurens
09-28-2005, 05:11 AM
I agree Billfish. The first fighter units of the Chinese Red Army Air Force were made up of captured/abandoned Ki61s. (Very often flown by mercenary Japanese pilots). There is a photo of one in Bueschel's "Kawasaki Ki-61 HIEN In Japanese Army Air Force Service" published by Schiffer. The aircraft is in Nationalist Chinese markings in Peking in November 1945. This was shortly before it was taken over by the Communists. The book claims it was found in northern China, that would be right on Uncle Joe's doorstep.

FHsquirl
09-30-2005, 04:38 PM
"What I can tell you right off is the loaded weight of a Ki-61-1b/Otsu is stated from Japanese documentation as being 3,616 kg.."

That seems way too high to me.

Here is a page from the
US report (http://www.airwarfareforum.com/upld/img2/O-1104455262-C90@hlos.jpg), in which the loaded weight is 3,167 kilograms. And I thought that 3,167 kilograms was high.

LEBillfish
09-30-2005, 05:13 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FHsquirl:
"What I can tell you right off is the loaded weight of a Ki-61-1b/Otsu is stated from Japanese documentation as being 3,616 kg.."

That seems way too high to me.

Here is a page from the
US report (http://www.airwarfareforum.com/upld/img2/O-1104455262-C90@hlos.jpg), in which the loaded weight is 3,167 kilograms. And I thought that 3,167 kilograms was high. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again...Which plane? Ko, Otsu, Hei?...What S/N? That makes a huge difference......ex.

Base weights just by Ko-Hei
2950/3250 Ko
3130/3616 Otsu
listed simply as higher then 1b/otsu..Hei

Now, dependant on S/N a 1b/Otsu could have had
2 190l. wing tanks, +1 170l. center wing tank, +1 200l. fusalage tank, + 2 drop tanks
down to
2 170l. wing, +1 160l. center wing, +2 drop tanks

Armor, oil tanks, etc. all varied greatly too, so a 1b/otsu could have been light or heavy simply dependant on the S/N...

Add to that, most 1c/Hei were Ko or Otsu modified....so S/N tells the tale, yet the question was a 1b.

JG53Frankyboy
10-01-2005, 08:32 AM
saw Ki-61s ever combat over Burma ?
or was that a "pure" Ki-43 and Ki-44 theater ?

just curious because of IanBoys "Imphal-Burma" map project.

with no Ki44 and Ki-43-II as flyable it would look bad for the japanese side in historical aspects so far http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

LEBillfish
10-01-2005, 09:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
saw Ki-61s ever combat over Burma ?
or was that a "pure" Ki-43 and Ki-44 theater ?

just curious because of IanBoys "Imphal-Burma" map project.

with no Ki44 and Ki-43-II as flyable it would look bad for the japanese side in historical aspects so far http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What I'm finding right off is the 50th, 64th, and 204th Hikousentai's were the primary units involved......Briefly the 33rd & 77th were involved yet yanked back and forth to New Guinea.

Planes for these groups were naturally early the Ki-27 & Ki-43-1....Yet the lions share from 43 on were Ki-43-II's, some III's, a very few Ki-44 (Ki-45 there soundly), and toward the end a few Ki-84.

No Ki-61 I can find.

Also, a considerable amount action took place FAR north. Southern operations I'm not that educated on, in fact all of burma operations.

GerritJ9
10-02-2005, 02:59 PM
LEBillfish, the pic in William Green's book does, indeed, show the bulges as in the pic you posted here. The pic, however, is different to yours- a frontal view taken from in front of the port wing, covering the fuselage and starboard wing as well. The Ki.61 is in similar natural metal finish- who knows, it might even be the same aeroplane as in your pic!
Brass would have become valuable towards the end of the war and fitting case catchers would, therefore, make sense. But those bulges do seem rather small to be able to hold all the spent cases.

LEBillfish
10-02-2005, 04:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GerritJ9:
LEBillfish, the pic in William Green's book does, indeed, show the bulges as in the pic you posted here. The pic, however, is different to yours- a frontal view taken from in front of the port wing, covering the fuselage and starboard wing as well. The Ki.61 is in similar natural metal finish- who knows, it might even be the same aeroplane as in your pic!
Brass would have become valuable towards the end of the war and fitting case catchers would, therefore, make sense. But those bulges do seem rather small to be able to hold all the spent cases. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, they would be used in training only (so only minimal rounds fired)...In kind consider it is mostly to not shower those below or the field with the casings. Lastly, though possibly used on Hei versions (there truly due to a limited amount of ammo)...Most you'll see actually have the 7.7 or 12.7 guns.

Waldo.Pepper
10-02-2005, 05:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I agree Billfish. The first fighter units of the Chinese Red Army Air Force were made up of captured/abandoned Ki61s. (Very often flown by mercenary Japanese pilots). There is a photo of one in Bueschel's "Kawasaki Ki-61 HIEN In Japanese Army Air Force Service" published by Schiffer. The aircraft is in Nationalist Chinese markings in Peking in November 1945 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This be the one me thinks!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/WaldoPepper/Hien/ki6116.jpg

HotelBushranger
10-03-2005, 03:33 AM
Billfish, can I have a list of what countries/islands the KI-61 served? That would be a great help http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

LEBillfish
10-03-2005, 09:14 AM
Japan, Manchunko China, Truk, Rabual, New Guinea, Mayalaya, Borneo, Java, Sumatra, Philippines, Formosa, Okinawa.

Also something to consider is the following.....

Those in Northeren China I do not "believe" (don't know) saw any action....Truk was simply a central depot (though I'm sure if attacked would have participated.....and those in Mayalaya, Borneo, Java & Sumatra were for advanced flight training late in the war (however again if encountering the enemy would have fought).....So past that what you tend to see is all Tony action began in Rabual (spreading into the Solomons in actions yet never based there), then New Guinea, yet ALL remnants of those groups were destroyed/disbanded mid-44. Then Tony action quickly took place in the Philippines & Truk, those units (or what was left) recalled to Formosa then Okinawa. Finally Japan.

However, my research pertains to the 78th Hikousentai, to understand them the Ki-61, New Guinea & Nippon Rikugun Koukuutai after.....So am by far no expert on all Ki-61 actions or their units briefly touching on them in my research.

LEBillfish
11-03-2005, 10:49 PM
book list updated....

LEBillfish
11-11-2005, 02:43 PM
bump to form up with 4th Kokugun/5th Airforce thread.....

LEBillfish
11-12-2005, 06:46 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Designers.jpg

Notable People on the Ki-61 project....

Dr. Vogt, primary agent in Germany to purchase the right's to build the DB.601A
Haisasahi Tojo, brother to Premier Hideki Tojo, Kawasaki board of directors
Takeo Doi, Chief Designer
Shin Owada, Co-Designer
Kataoka, Chief Test Pilot, killed in trials

LEBillfish
11-24-2005, 06:22 PM
New Artwork by our own SeaFireLIV added to lead in post......If you're not familiar with his work check it out. It is some of the more original and creative work out there http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

This piece of art and ALL artworks by SeaFireLIV are his sole property and are fully copyrighted and well known as "his" original work.....They may not be reproduced, utilized in any way or distributed without his direct permission.

(adding this picture in the "hopes" hehe he'll grant it for this thread alone as the information contained in this thread is a community effort.......How appropriate his art should be shown here then as part of it)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/Ki.jpg

SkyChimp
11-24-2005, 06:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GerritJ9:
LEBillfish, the pic in William Green's book does, indeed, show the bulges as in the pic you posted here. The pic, however, is different to yours- a frontal view taken from in front of the port wing, covering the fuselage and starboard wing as well. The Ki.61 is in similar natural metal finish- who knows, it might even be the same aeroplane as in your pic!
Brass would have become valuable towards the end of the war and fitting case catchers would, therefore, make sense. But those bulges do seem rather small to be able to hold all the spent cases. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

IIRC, most later Japanese ammunition was loaded in steel, not brass, cases due to the value of brass.

nakamura_kenji
11-24-2005, 06:43 PM
this somehwat link he-100 thread possible dr vogt link between he-100 and kawasaki. know army/navy no like share information(they even differnt gun/amunition &gt;_&lt; ) possible information come third party throw Dr vogt this maybe explain why ki-64 trial similar cooling system he-100.

no proof but possibly link feel

SkyChimp
11-24-2005, 07:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Actually, I bet you are talking about these (photo fragment of one by Jim Lansdale)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/brass1.jpg

That those are for the 151-20 are actually a common myth, what they really are are "Brass Catchers" for the wing guns when over the Home Island....My source on this is an individual who has personally inspected Ki-61's, his response to this very question that any bulge under the wing negligable if at all and would be common to all varients...The real difference in the upper wing bulges.


</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Obviously they are some sort of fairing. Quite possibly brass catchers as you were told. The certainly "appear" to be in the right spot to be covering the ejection ports.

They seem to be far enough back.

http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki61_1.jpg
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki61_2.jpg
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki61_3.jpg

But they seem to have an awfully small capacity. And curiously, this Ki-61 with similiar devices show the fairings are not in line with the muzzle (the ejection shoot was in-line with the muzzle), but rather somewhat to the outside on both wings. Optical illusion??

http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki61_4.jpg

I think the explanation you were given is probably correct, but that phot above is puzzling.

LEBillfish
11-24-2005, 07:19 PM
Heh...not my words hon from the experts that have actually inspected these planes from bot the J-Aircraft forums and ***U BBS....

They're brass catchers, you'll only find them on Akeno Air School planes and those used in testing.

SkyChimp
11-24-2005, 07:23 PM
Don't get me wrong. That may be very well true. I've scoured J-Aircraft and couldn't find the answer.

I'm simply saying that on the above plane they don't appear to be in-line with the muzzle. If they are not in line with the muzzle, they ain't catchin' brass. What could they be on the above plane????

I posted this question at Butch2k's site.

SkyChimp
11-24-2005, 07:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
They're brass catchers, you'll only find them on Akeno Air School planes and those used in testing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Restricting use to just Akeno and test planes wouldn't make any sense. Here is a 244 Sentai plane with the same fairings.

http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki61_5.jpg

These do look in-line with the muzzle.

LEBillfish
11-24-2005, 08:50 PM
Well (nice pic btw)......a 244th plane "unpainted/camouflaged like in this pic would most likely be a new delivery plane..(awful shiney metal too)...or one a new 244th pilot was training in at Akeno then flown out to their base in the eastern defense sector (note it's also a Ko....meaning a very early plane so unworn as it is training and such would continue over the home island). Remember as well, they'd be trained in what Akeno had and as new planes would arrive be issued them flying them out from their to their end base.

The one above with the ski's (one you found puzzling) makes it hard to say what it is as they were all test beds....Meaning, not combat planes. However, those planes were all set up to be tested to fly on the Soviet border.......The concept never took off as the drag induced by the ski's slowed them too much as they'd not retract (actually dumb as it would be easy to make them sit flush to the bottom of the wing.......why they never tried beyond me)

Ask around........this one I'd lay money on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

SkyChimp
11-24-2005, 09:18 PM
The Ki-61 is on a field with other mainland defense planes (note other planes with white bands). Probably not at an Akeno field.

Here's another 244 Sentai plane with fairings:

http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki61_6.jpg

This is M/Sgt Tadao Sumi serving with the 244th at Chofu airfield, November 1944.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The one above with the ski's (one you found puzzling) makes it hard to say what it is as they were all test beds....Meaning, not combat planes. However, those planes were all set up to be tested to fly on the Soviet border.......The concept never took off as the drag induced by the ski's slowed them too much as they'd not retract (actually dumb as it would be easy to make them sit flush to the bottom of the wing.......why they never tried beyond me)

Ask around........this one I'd lay money on
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't have any doubt you are right about that. My interest was the appearance of offset fairings.

BTW, I'm scouring my books for similar fairings on other mainland defense fighters (Ki-44, Ki-84, Ki-100). Haven't found any, though. Seems if the Japanese were saving brass, they'd do it on all their mainland defense fighters. Maybe they did.

SkyChimp
11-24-2005, 09:40 PM
Yep, you're right. Shell catchers. Apparently for training. Not limited to Akeno planes. Not limited to Ki-61. I'd bet Ki-84s used them, too.

http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki44_1.jpg

Waldo.Pepper
11-25-2005, 02:15 AM
Way Way cool on the brass catcher info everyone!

nakamura_kenji
11-25-2005, 02:43 AM
sky equip ki-61 was trial on hokaido island during winter beleive.

ki-61-I-ko -&gt; ki-61-I-otsu -&gt; ki-61-I-hei -&gt; ki61-I-tei/kai (some source call one name other another ???0_0???) -&gt; ki-61-II-kai(tempery name probab protype name) -&gt; ki-61-II-ko(somtime IIa) -&gt; ki-61-II-otsu (IIb) -&gt; ki-61-III(one prototype base on II) -&gt; ki-100-I-ko(sometime Ia) -&gt; ki-100-I-otsu(sometime Ib) -&gt; ki-100-II

ki-61-I-ko

orignal version with ha-40 engine and arm with 2x7.7mm nose 2x12.7mm in wing.

ki-61-I-otsu

second I version arm with 4x12.7mm

ki-61-I-hei

third version 2x12.7mm nose 2xMG151-20 wing

ki-61-I-tei/kai

fourth version 2xho-5 20mm nose 2x12.7mm wing most comman version think. it simple redesign larger tail (wood i think) and better engine area design ease maintence. there also mention ki-61-I-kai bomber kill. mount 2x12.7mm nose and 2xho-155 30mm wing possible that to plane desination are confuse. very little of bomber interceptor version made

ki-61-II-kai

was design use ha-140 1500bhp engine new large wing, biger nose, better cockpit canopy. kai think be temperay name for prototype maybe wrong

ki-61-II-ko/a

first version II this same arament I-tei/kai. large wing was abandon because wing crack prototype testing old ki-61-I use.

ki-61-II-otsu/b

second version most same as II-ko/a except have 4xho-5 20mm mount in wing

ki-61-III

redesign plan before switch produce ki-100 beleive. it much same ki-61-II but teardrop canopy give much better vision rear. only 1, 2 prototype make built out from ki-61-II

ki-100-I-ko/a

poor reliabilty of ha-40 and ha-140 lack of supply mean had plane at factory with no engine lead kawasaki rengine ki-61-II with ha-112 bomber engine. armment was same as ki-61-I-tei/kai.

ki-100-I-otsu/b

far more rare verision almost same as ko/a but have teardrop canopy from ki-61-III

ki-100-II

this final version it redesign have better altitude performance so perform better while intercept b-29, only few prototype build then end of war

i probab make mistake many area but brief explanation of version make

ElAurens
11-25-2005, 03:21 AM
Domo arrigato, nakamura_kenji, for the detailed break down of the Kawasaki fighter types.

Interesting to think about if Kawasaki had used Ha 112 from the beginning on the Ki-61.

nakamura_kenji
11-25-2005, 03:51 AM
beleive engine no exist at start of ki-61 development imagine if kawasaki use radial engine instead inline ha-40 in start design we would no have such nice allround aircraft we have it most like be more agility base like hyabusa. would be incredible hard get similar speed with early radial. ha-112 engine could be implment eariler though think

last paragraph on page
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v492/nakamura_kenji/File0014.jpg

was also version of ki-84 which was rengine with ha-112 engine designation was ki-116 it about be put production before war end, was mean be 500kg lighter than orignal 0_0 ki-84 with ha-45.

SkyChimp
11-25-2005, 08:32 AM
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/ki84_1.jpg

I'm assuming these are catchers on this Ki-84. Most photos show planes without these things.

LEBillfish
11-25-2005, 09:37 AM
Well it would be doubtful you'd ever have them in combat Skychimp as you have pointed out they would not hold all the brass......SO if you find a pic with them in it.....It would be a plane used for training, or one being used at that moment for practice, or a fresh delivery as planes were delivered with all removable parts included (a good example the Ki-61 that had fuel/bomb racks attached yet were supposed to be removed if not in use atm).

SkyChimp
11-25-2005, 02:15 PM
Communicated with Tony Williams, co-author of "Flying Guns of WWII" and he informs me he never heard of steel cased ammo for Japanese aircraft guns. If he hasn't heard of any, it probably wans't used for a/c guns. Probably all brass. No wonder the use of catchers.

nakamura_kenji
11-25-2005, 02:55 PM
kelly ever email oleg about ki-61 remeber old thread maddox section notice many thing wrong with ki-61 you point out

LEBillfish
11-25-2005, 05:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
kelly ever email oleg about ki-61 remeber old thread maddox section notice many thing wrong with ki-61 you point out </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, many times and they obviously got it as you noticed they killed the rudder trim.....However, ignorred the rest.

"In my opinion" the original builder of the Ki-61 model refuses to fix it....His reasons his own, his knew attitude of late well known.....and now that he's onto making a WWI sim, I'd expect to NEVER see the Ki-61 repaired.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

nakamura_kenji
11-25-2005, 06:05 PM
i tempt to say i can fix if get model but doubt much oleg would allow. most big grpahical thing wish fix be bomb and fuel rack p_q

Waldo.Pepper
11-25-2005, 06:11 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
kelly ever email oleg about ki-61 remeber old thread maddox section notice many thing wrong with ki-61 you point out </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, many times and they obviously got it as you noticed they killed the rudder trim.....However, ignorred the rest.

"In my opinion" the original builder of the Ki-61 model refuses to fix it....His reasons his own, his knew attitude of late well known.....and now that he's onto making a WWI sim, I'd expect to NEVER see the Ki-61 repaired.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Would you rather have the Hien you have or none, and be in the same boat with me and my beloved P-61?


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v516/WaldoPepper/More%20Black%20Widow/p61.jpg

LEBillfish
11-26-2005, 05:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
Would you rather have the Hien you have or none, and be in the same boat with me and my beloved P-61? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Rather have?......You obviously missed the point of my post, let me clairify.....

"I want, I want, I want"
*stomps foot on ground*
"Gimme, gimme, gimme"
*flops on belly kicking and slamming her fists on the floor*
"Now, now, now"

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

That clear it up? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEBillfish
11-26-2005, 09:52 AM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Ki-61b.jpg

LEBillfish
01-28-2006, 08:56 PM
Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, Otsu, Hei, problems within the PF simulation;

I'll try and break up each problem by "Plane Model, Damage Model, Flight Model" as follows:

Modeling Issues:
1. No Venturi on left cowling
2. Seat position can be raised (like in A6M planes)
3. Manual trim tabs missing from Ailerons, Elevator, Rudder
4. Pilot step missing
5. Landing Gear covers seriously incorrect.
6. Landing Gear details incorrect.
7. Numerous Gauges/levers not working
8. Wing Gun Bulges
9. Tail Gear was Retractable
10. Bomb Loadouts Incorrect
11. Fuel/Bomb racks were not supposed to be carried unless being used
12. Single Drop tank also utilized
13. Drop Tank size too large
14. Fuel Loadouts varied and not modeled

Damage Modeling Issues:
15. Ki-61-I-Hei/1c had a fire extinguisher system.
16. Hydraulic system improperly modeled
17. Landing gear not manually deploying
18. Landing Gear failure...
19. Fuel should not "leak dry"
20. Fuel tank and fuel leak protection level varied and was advanced
21. Most Otsu and Hei had radiator Armor
22. Pilot seat armor steadily improved over the series
23. Engine failure all too frequent
24. Windscreen oiling should be LESS frequent then ANY other plane here except the P39.

Flight Modeling Issues:
25. Trim at Cruise condition unable to occur.
26. Prop Pitch issues

Detailed explanations:
1E. No venturi on left cowling (double black cone on left cowling)...That was only used on 3 planes of the 244th Sentai, and is still debated if it was just a quick fix for a damaged part in the air intake to run various gauges, or used to run a prototype gyroscopic sight. As you'll note it is ONLY seen in photographs of those 3 planes.......Here is the explanation as best translated from Japanese (hence the poor grammar);

Complete URL for entire explanation including remarks from 244th pilots:
http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~s244f/toso-v.htm (http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/%7Es244f/toso-v.htm)

Venturi tube of Kobayashi squadron lead aircraft 3295
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/phot8.jpg

Venturi tube The gyro meter of the aircraft of today is electric type, but at one time in order to drive the gyro of the bank and turn indicator and the gyro horizon etc., the venturi tube It is the mechanism where in the tube which is connected to the meter, generates the fixed air style regardless of flying speed, turns the pinwheel with that, turns the gyro. As for the venturi tube, in the low-speed chine of the "red dragonfly" and so on there are also some which are installed on the body side where propeller mlast flows, but in the practical machine like 3 type (Ki-61) , usually, being installed by the engine supplemental device (supercharger), it is something which is not visible from outside. However, the attachment the venturi tube outside the body of the cockpit left front, is verified in 3 type (Ki-61) of 244 squadrons by the photograph. This kind of fuselage (use of the Venturi) is not recognized in the other squadron, is thought as the thing perhaps due to 244 squadron individual repairs. In the single-engine machine and the occurring frequently machine of note large horsepower, the vacuum blower or the vacuum blower and the venturi tube were jointly used.

In other words.........Only a select few (3) Ki-61 of the 244th Hikousentai had venturi tubes. It is still debated if it was a repair for a

failed internal to the supercharger venturi, or possibly test for a new gyroscopic sight.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/venturi.gif

Perhaps, for secret retention, the venturi tube itself (the outer part) it is removed, piping has been visible. In addition, Captain Ikuno is visible as hidden the boresight part by the hand. It was not unusual with ground run of the fighter plane, you opened wind prevention, it is normal to set the seat to the higher order position, but, this way you closed and in winter season to glide to the cartridge.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/phot111.jpg

2E. The seat position much like A6M aircraft could be raised for better field of view when taxiing (as even shown in photo above).....This was done through a release lever on the lower left side of the seat (commonly, the seat would be raised when the pilot entered....pressing his back to the rear of the seat he would release the lever and bracing himself slowly lower to an in-flight position.....He would do the opposite upon landing).

Seat lever item 6:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit8.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit10.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Ki61205.jpg
Seat Mechanism & photo showing lowered position:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/seatraise2.jpg
Seat raised position last 2 photo's:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/seatraise1.jpg

3E. Trim tabs missing on ALL control surfaces.....This is a minor thing however something that cannot be corrected by skinning and is required for markings. This aspect would be a nice completion to be able to properly show the aircraft.........A photo nor drawing will not be supplied as they can be seen in EVERY photo and drawing in existence.....The markings themselves a skinning issue yet unable to be added with nothing there.

4E. Pilot "step" missing on left side beside radiator housing....Minor issue "inconsequential".....So will not be pursued however for sake of accuracy is mentioned.

5E. Landing gear covers are seriously wrong, shape is incorrect particularly at Oleo mark splits the best view of their actual shape is when lowered also showing how they fold up vs. what we have in the sim.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/gearcovermarked.jpg

6E. Accordion Boot overlanding gear shock rod missing (9 section boot covering the bare metal shock rod)....In kind inner cover stop/lift bar missing (arched bar that stopped cover from swinging and made contact with the tire to close).......Neither pursued due to inconsequential......for sake of accuracy mentioned.

7E. Gauges and other items are missing from within the cockpit or not working....Though this is common in the series (and understandable due to complexity).....Is mentioned for sake of accuracy and possible future refinement as (ex. Hydraulic pressure) gauge lets you know if that aspect of the plane is working.

8E. First off, each type of gun used in the wing needed a clearance bulge, yet it was on the upper surface of the wing. Any below is so minimal it would not matter. In kind, the bulge on top for the wing varied in size and location for all 3 types of guns. Also you'll note vents above and below for the gun bays.......Vents can be resolved through skinning, the bulges however cannot. Since we have 3 different models, there is no reason why these clearance bulges cannot be corrected.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Gunbulges.jpg

9E. 1b & 1c had retractable tail gear (though not like 1a with closing covers, radiused cutout correct)....However, this was "blocked down" at the factory due to occasional failures....Once in the field I cannot confirm if this blocking was sometimes deliberately removed, however there are photo's of 1b & 1c with it retracted. It was not until the "1d" that tail gear was made fixed/non-retractable.....
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/tailgear.jpg

10E. There is no proof and it is believed by most that the Ki-61-1a thru 1c never carried ground attack bombs, this was a misconception due to confusion with the 1d models before they were fully understood as the wings were not designed to carry such a load as 100 or 250kg bombs till then. In New Guinea however (mid 1943 on) they were fitted with Phosphorous "anti-bomber" bombs to be dropped into formations, this is very much accounted for by 5th air force B25 & 24 crews.....However, in that we do not have the 1d series.... this helps make up for their loadouts....So a 100kg bomb needs to be added if that is the logic......
Phosphorous Anti Bomber bomb and in action:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Phosphorous_Bomb.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Phosphorousbomb.jpg

11E. Ki-61 OFTEN did not carry the racks for external drop tanks. This was "intended" by the factory and even sports markings stating "Install ONLY when drop tanks are to be carried". In the field they were often not mounted. Other times they were left on simply due to the constant need for them. I suggest they be removed from the plane if either a bomb or ext. fuel tank loadout is not selected.
Ki-61 bomb rack (only right side of each is marked)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Untitled-2.jpg
(photoscan copyright R.Lane)

Ki-61 NENRYO RAKKA TANKU KENSUI-KA
RAKKA TANKU SOU-CHAKU-JI NOMI TORI-TSUKE
Ki-61 Drop Tank Suspension Mount
Install only when drop tanks are to be carried
These are some of the markings on the side of each fuel rack.

12E. There is some evidence that sometimes only a single external fuel tank would be utilized, in those cases both fuel racks would be in place however only one droptank on the right side should be in place (compensated for torque).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/singletank.jpg

13E. Drop tank "model" size too large......compare the easy to scale pic below to in the sim.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/zero22_1371866004.jpg

14E. The Ki-61 thru 1c had various "internal" fuel tanks during it's production run. These varied from 750 liters to 500 liters placed about wings and fuselage....Exact numbers are per serial number (source Jim Long, Ki-61 expert)
Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-424
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 421-500
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Fuel Tanks s/n 501-513: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 514-649: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 650-1092: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Fuel Tanks: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.
(note however "unknown" in field conversions of Ko & Otsu Models would be the same as that model not Hei)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/tanks.jpg

Damage Modeling:

15E. Ki-61-1c had a fire extinguisher system. Nuff said it's well documented.

16E. The components that worked off of the hydraulic system were as follows......1. The Flaps, 2. The wing and tail gear, 3. The radiator louver.....The balance worked from very heavy bellcranks and shafts except for the rudder which used a pully system.......This would mean due to the "assumed" lack of fuses if the hydraulic system failed, all 3 on it would...........It also means that damage to the Ailerons or elevator "controls" would be difficult....I can find no account of such failures ever causing a crash (yet not impossible by far).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/controlsurfs.jpg

17E. Gear will not manually deploy (though should not like say a I-16 that requires numerous cranks)....The Ki-61 had an "Emergency Landing Gear "Uplock" release Lever" which is situated beside the seat on the right side "under" the "Emergency Hydraulic Hand Pump" lever. When pulled, it would manually release the latch holding the gear up and they would simply fall...Momentum or if required wing wagging causing them to swing to the downed position past the toggle 0 point locking. So in all reality, they should "at least" have the manual option available.
Note Item 2:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit9.jpg

18E. The landing gear of the Ki-61 was some of the strongest utilized by the JAFC. Based off of A6M designs for carrier duty, the utilized a "toggle" system where in once past the down point would be locked and would require hydraulic motion of the bell crank to move it to an unlocked state......Ki-61 were notorious for flipping over when hitting a bomb crater of flaw in the runway....There are numerous accounts of such, in kind numerous accounts of pilots "deliberately" not lowering gear due to that and terrain/landing conditions. Yet I have not found one account of gear failure. (possible though would almost require the wing being ripped apart).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/gear.jpg

19E. Ki-61's had "selectable" tank lever (below prop pitch & Throttle unit) so if one was hit they could switch to others...This included a selector switch for fuel quantity per tank......Now that would be difficult to model in the sim, However, that should mean "All" fuel stores should not run dry if one tank is hit.
Tank Selector lever see item 9:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit9.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit10.jpg

Fuel Tank Gauge Selector switch, see item 28:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit7.jpg

20E. Fuel tank "leak absorbing" and "bullet proofing" rapidly improved through the Ki-61-I series. This evolved from 10mm silk felt and 3mm rubber to 9mm top & 6mm sides and bottom rubber to 12mm rubber in the 1a-1c respectively . The improvements not only helped resist light caliber rounds, limit leaking when compromised, yet also helped prevent hydroshock blowout.....This is the primary reason fuel tank size over the life of the series steadily decreased.............the plane used in the TAIU tests Initially was the captured 68th Hikousentai at Cape Gloucester coded S/N 263 (uncoded 163) manufactured roughly late April 1943, making it a

Ki-61-I-Ko
The statistics per S/N are as follows:
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-424
Fuel Tank Protection: 3mm Rubber over 10mm silk felt
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 421-500
Fuel Tank Protection: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 501-649: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 650-1092: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Fuel Tank Protection: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides

21E. Radiator in most 1b (all but 13) and all 1c models had 8mm armor plate protecting them. TAIU tests based on coded S/N 263

(uncoded 163) manufactured roughly late April 1943, making it a Ki-61-I-Ko
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-500
Radiator Armor: None
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Radiator Armor s/n 501-513: None
Radiator Armor s/n 514-1092: 8mm plate
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Radiator Armor: 8mm (TAIU measured 9.5mm)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/cooling.jpg

22E. The pilot seat armor steadily improved from 10mm plate to 16mm head, 12mm body. Location of said armor was "head" large triangular piece behind head & shoulders (leather headrest mounted to it)....Body, behind entire seat back. TAIU tests stated that "Armor rarely could stop .50 cal. rounds, and often lower caliber at close range (30-06)....However, their tests were performed with the earliest version of Ki-61-Ko (the 68th Sentai Cape Glouchester captured model)....This plane had the lightest armor of all.
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-500
Pilot Armor: 10mm plates both head & body
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Pilot Armor s/n 501-541: 10mm plates both head & body
Pilot Armor s/n 542-577: 10mm plate head & 12mm body
Pilot Armor s/n 578-1092: 16mm plate head & 12mm body
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Pilot Armor: 16mm plate head, 12mm plate body(TAIU measured 17.5/12.7)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Seat.jpg

23E. Engine failure in the simulation is all too frequent. Though based upon the DB601, the HA-40 was not the same engine however "the basic engine layout" followed many of the same features......Above the aircraft centerline only the crankshaft is in that area, nothing more it even capped by heavy gauge steel plate. At the centerline would be the supercharger at the rear, and the reduction gearing at the front.......From the centerline down at ever increasing degrees the complex & "delicate" mechanism begins.

Unfortunately, EVERY hit to the engine no matter where from either insures it's quick demise or instantly kills it. In fact, even if the wing area of the plane is hit I have had instant engine failure with no damage visible to the engine area no matter the size of the round. This is frankly unrealistic in that the lower area's of the engine are protected from behind by the entire wing area. In kind, hits to the upper area should yield only minor results unless instant loss due to crank devastation with lower area's insuring oil loss and failure. The trouble is the engine no matter the hit location to the plane ALWAYs fails.

In truth EVERY other "upright" V engine should be more susceptible to damage then inverted from usual angles of attack. This being due to the fragile components being mounted above, the wing protecting the most durable..........Tales of engine failure in Ki-61's were primarily due to 2 reasons. 1. Fuel tank solenoid switching failure starving the engine of fuel. 2. Poor air intake filtration initially on resulting in cylinder scoring and oil contamination. I have yet to find accounts of inferior iron or steel.
This means, the Ha-40 engine should be AS durable if not more so then any of their allied counterparts.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/EngineDwg1.jpg

24E. As stated above, critical components of the Ha-40 were in contrast to most other inline engines mounted well below the C.L. of the plane. However as also stated above, virtually ANY hit to the plane results in engine damage, with the resulting smoke and windscreen oiling happening all too often. In truth, the Ki-61 would oil its windscreen LESS than any other plane if at all.

All Radial engined planes should as the venting for cooling runs around the cowling, this would allow seeping oil to be blown back directly at the windscreen. Upright inline engines would less then radial, yet still risk it more dependant on design then inverted as the majority of the pressurized lines and journals are at the top of the engine, so windscreen fowling due to a high cowling hit would be more likely. Next would come those inverted V planes with their oil reservoirs in the engine area. Reservoir damage possible.

The Ha-40 & specifically the Ki-61 however suffers none of these weaknesses. There is NO engine cooling louvering in the nose area except under the plane. The top cover was reinforced, and depended upon snapping tight to fit it even over lapping making a labyrinth seal of sorts over quite a width. All pressurized journals and lines are low (below the wing line) on the engine, all that is above the C.L. is the crank (the heaviest piece and supporting structure of all inline engines)....Lastly, the Ki-61 had 2 oil reservoirs, 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.. The main tank was located behind the pilot in the fuselage, the aux. between his knees behind the insturments. There is no oil reservoir ahead of the windscreen and pressurized lines are all low. Lastly, due to all louvering being under the plane this would result in oil being sucked out underneath.
Essentially.......The Ki-61 windscreen should oil up less then any plane here.
Oil system in general:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/EngineOilSystem.jpg
Component location:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/OilSys.jpg
Aux. oil tank Item 19:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit8.jpg
Main oil tank item 6:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit9.jpg
Engine area showing sealing even into gun compartment:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/GunsDwg2.jpg
Width of top cover sealing surface also showing resulting labarynth seal
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/ki-61-tony-five.jpg

Flight Modeling:
25E. Though the Ki-61 had "trim tabs" on all surfaces, it does not have in flight adjustable trim for the rudder or ailerons....Only the elevator on the Ki-61-1, Ki-61-II, & Ki-100 had in flight adjustment via a small box left of the pilots seat........All three control surfaces Aileron/Rudder/Elevator however had "ground adjustable" tabs.

Unfortunately though the cruise condition for the Ki-61 is listed as Cruising H.P.: 1,040 @ 2,400 R.P.M. @ +240mm/Hg @ 4,200m.(13,780'), Cruising Speed: 400km/hr(249m/h)TAS @ 4,000m(13,124').......This condition can never be met. If throttle or prop pitch are reduced to reduce torque, speed falls off so dramatically that the Ki-61 begins to descend. Adjust elevator trim and it slows more....Essentially, cruise can never be obtained in the Ki-61, and therefor rudder & Aileron trim is never achieved. This makes no sense, as the only time trim can be achieved is in a "falling" condition. Trim should be able to be achieved at stable flight due to the trim tabs.....Yet, never can as variables are not falling into line.

26E. Maximum speed, cruising speed, in fact all speeds are only achieved with P/P set to 100%, anything less and the speed falls off. Though RPM may increase due to less load upon the engine at 100% P/P, that does not nor should mean it is working at it's maximum efficiency....At this time I cannot state what would be the correct prop pitch setting for each condition.......However I seriously doubt 100% is correct.

Applicable statistics based on Kawasaki & Japanese army data...TAIU tests suspect.....(As a side note the plane used in the TAIU tests Initially was the captured 68th Hikousentai at Cape Gloucester coded S/N 263 (uncoded 163) manufactured roughly late April 1943, making it a Ki-61-I-Ko.........Meaning, it was lighter then the Otsu in many regards (except fluid capacities) so should have performed better BUT was a plane still full of bugs. Why it was captured, it was unserviceable by the Japanese (required shipping the engine to the Philippines for repair)).

TAIU Data:
Weight E/L/OL: 5010/6982/7682 pounds (2273/3167/3485 Kg.)
Fuel Capacity Internal: 199 U.S. Gal. (753 liters)

Ki-61 Potential Weight Differences Fuel Carried primarily highlighted. These statistics come from Airtell Research, original source

decoded and translated captured Japanese document. Copyright all information J.I.Long, Airtell Publications & Research.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-424
(TAIU original test plane s/n 263 HOWEVER also had in their possession later 1b & 1c versions)
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor: 10mm plates both head & body
Radiator Armor: None
Fuel Tank Protection: 3mm Rubber over 10mm silk felt
Fire Ext. System: None
Weapons: 2x 7.7mm type 89+500 r/g, 2x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 421-500
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor: 10mm plates both head & body
Radiator Armor: None
Fuel Tank Protection: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
Fire Ext. System: None
Weapons: 2x 7.7mm type 89+500 r/g, 2x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Fuel Tanks s/n 501-513: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 514-649: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 650-1092: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor s/n 501-541: 10mm plates both head & body
Pilot Armor s/n 542-577: 10mm plate head & 12mm body
Pilot Armor s/n 578-1092: 16mm plate head & 12mm body
Radiator Armor s/n 501-513: None
Radiator Armor s/n 514-1092: 8mm plate
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 501-649: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 650-1092: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides
Fire Ext. System: None
Weapons: 4x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Fuel Tanks: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor: 16mm plate head, 12mm plate body(TAIU measured 17.5/12.7)
Radiator Armor: 8mm (TAIU measured 9.5mm)
Fuel Tank Protection: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides
Fire Ext. System: yes
Weapons: 2x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g, 2x Mauser 151/20 120/250 r/g

Plane Weights in Kg (empty/loaded/loaded max.):
1a: 2,210/2,950/3,250
1b: 2,210/3,130/3,616
1c: unlisted (note: same as 1b +20 kg/cannon+2x ammunition weight)

Type 89 MG: 12.7Kg/gun, 7.7mm x 58 SR .024Kg/rd, .008Kg/link, 500 r/g = 16Kg
Type 1 MG Ho-103: 23Kg/gun, 12.7mm x 81SR 82g/rd, 250 r/g = 20.5Kg+link weight
Mauser 151/20 Cannon: 42Kg/gun, 20mm x 82 205g/rd, 120 r/g = 24.6Kg+link weight

92 Octane Fuel (est): 6#/gallon = .286Kg/liter
750l = 214.5Kg
550l = 157.3Kg
500l = 143.0Kg

Ki-61-1a
Weight Empty = 2,210kg
Weight Loaded = 2,950kg
Weight Loaded Max = 3,250kg
Max. Speed = 590 km/hr@5,000m
Cruising Speed = Unknown
Climb = Unknown

Ki-61-1b
Weight Empty = 2,210kg
Weight Loaded = 3,130kg
Weight Loaded Max = 3,616kg
Max. Speed = 592 km/hr@4,860m
Cruising Speed = 400 km/hr@4,000m
Climb = 5,000m/5min, 31seconds

Ki-61-1c
Weight Empty = unlisted
Weight Loaded = unlisted
Weight Loaded Max = unlisted
Max. Speed = Unknown
Cruising Speed = Unknown
Climb = Unknown
**Assumed the only difference between the 1b & 1c would have been weight due to added armor, Mauser cannons, fuel loadouts, fire

extinguisher system....So performance should be between 1b & 1d

Ki-61-1d
Weight Empty = 2,630kg
Weight Loaded = 3,470kg
Weight Loaded Max = unlisted
Max. Speed = 580 km/hr@5,000m
Cruising Speed = unlisted
Climb = unlisted

Next, the documents I've listed (most especially those take from Japanese sources)
I've "tried" to compile some data...HOWEVER, do not take it as correct as much of it I'm simply trying to cross match.

Japanese Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I-Otsu, Type 2 1100HP Engine, Ha-40 (Ha-60-22, joint army/navy designation) Shown
(the "Otsu" or incorrectly 1b was chosen as the performance standard as it was within this designation that

fuel/oil/coolant/armor/armament capacities and degree's were most balanced and to a great degree finalized. Variences from this are assumed to be due to loaded weight differences)

Weight Empty: 2,210kg
Weight Loaded: 3,130kg
Weight Maximum: 3,616
Engine Type: Inverted V12
Displacement: 33.9 liter
Engine Weight to Power Ratio: 0.61kg/HP
Engine H.P. to Displacement Ratio: 32.5H.P./liter
"Designated" H.P.: 1,100
Take Off Rating: 1,175H.P. @ 2,500 R.P.M. @ +330mm/Hg
Rated H.P.: 1,100 @ 2,400 R.P.M. @ +240mm/Hg @ 4,200m.(13,780')
Cruising H.P.: 1,040 @ 2,400 R.P.M. @ +240mm/Hg @ 4,200m.(13,780')
War Emergency Power: 1,080 @ 3,500m.(11,484')
Max. Speed: 500-592km/hr(368m/h) @ 4,860m.(15,946'), 580km/hr(360m/h) @ 8,000m(26,248')
Cruising Speed: 400km/hr(249m/h) @ 4,000m(13,124').
R.O.C.: 5'31" to 5,000m(16,405'), 10'48" to 8,000m(26,248').
Service Ceiling: 11,600m.(38,060')

If these numbers "are" correct since "Time to Climb" as well as "Max. & Cruising Speeds" seem consistant........That would mean though the TAIU vs. in game tests were consistant, they are not with stated rates. This does NOT surprise me as TAIU would NOT have a fresh and in perfect "factory new & tweaked" condition Ki-61 nor would be willing to press it to breaking limits, & 1c would use as my guess the easiest to understand+most reliable source they could find to make the FM. TAIU figures/English easier to understand and translate then Japanese.

However, the reports I listed above have the Japanese factory and combat data contained (plus HOW to fly a Ki-61, it's limits and so on). Between the two my guess the truth.



The above statements based upon the following book lists (as well as some others recently acquired list not updated).....Those not Ki-61

related utilized for comparative purposes, those not technical in nature for annecdotal information.

J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #99-3 Ki-61/100 Serial Numbers, Dates of Assembly & Characteristics
J.I.Long's Airtell Field Notes Japanese Army Fighter "Tony"
J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #86-1 Estimated Assembly Date For A WWII Japanese Aircraft/A Relic of the Air War over New

Guinea/Type 3 Fighter Tony # 640
J.I.Long's A PacFront Extra, Cockpit Layout- Type 3 Fighter Model 1
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/ R.E.Cowley (Japanese inline engine comparisons)
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/K.Weeks (Type 3 Fighter Reference Drawings)

R.M.Bueschell's Hein
R.M.Bueschell's Hayabusa
Rene J. Francillon, Aircraft Profile "The Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien" #118
Artur Juszcak, Mitsubishi A6m Zero
T. Januszewski, Mitsubishi A5M Claude, Mushroom Model
Avions #119, Ki-44 Shoki...French
Avions #122, Tateo Kato...French
Aero Detail #29 Hayabusa...
Monografie Lotnicze #5 Hien...Polish
Monografie Lotnicze #48 Ki-43...Polish
Maru Mechanic #43? Nik1/2....Japanese
F.A.O.W #17 Hien...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #19 Army Type 4 Fighter "Hayate"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #21 Army Type 2 Fighter "Toryu"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #27 Type 96 Carrier Fighter, A5M, Nate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #29 Type 97 Fighter... Japanese
F.A.O.W. #32 Type 97 Carrier Torpedo Bomber, B5n, Kate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #33 Type 99 Carrier Dive Bomber, D3A, Val...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 53 Kyofu, Shinden, Shidenkai...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 61 Navy Interceptor J2M "Raiden"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 65 Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #2, Ki-61 & Ki-48...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #6, Ki-45 & Ki-51...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #?, E13A1, Jake...Japanese "Partial"

Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 1...Polish
Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 2....Polish
Peter Scott's Emblems of the Rising Sun (IJAAF Markings)
D.W. Thorpe JAAF Camoflauge & Markings WWII...
ModelArt 533, Camouflage & Markings of the IJA Bombers ....Japanese
ModelArt 272, Camouflage & Markings of IJN Fighters .......Japanese
Robert C. Mikesh, Schiffer Publishing, Japanese Aircraft Equipment 1940-1945
Unknown (Japanese), Japanese Military Aircraft Illustrated...Japanese
Koku Fan, 1974-3

Army Air Force Historical Study #113
Army Air Force Historical Study #116
Aeronotes 3, Deployments & OOBs
Aeronotes 4, New Guinea Area Operations
Shindo Hiriyuki, Japanese Air Operations in New Guinea
Capt. B. Chance Saltzman & T.R. Searle's, Introduction to the United States Air Force
Gary Null's, Weapon of Denial, Air Power & the Battle for New Guinea
Major James A. Barr, Airpower Employment of the 5th Air Force in the WWII SouthWest Pacific Theatre
Maj. T.D.Gann, Fifth Air Force Light & Medium Bomber Operations During 1942 & 1943: Building Doctrine & Forces That Triumphed In

the Battle of the Bismark Sea & the Wewak Raid
Maj. Michael E. Fischer, Mission Type Orders in Joint Air Operations (Command and control, New Guinea highlighted)
W.J. English, Performance of B25 Aircraft of 38th Bomb Group During 18 Months of Combat in New Guinea
Major Jonathan B. Wills, How SouthWest Pacific Area Operations Influenced the Royal Austrailian Air Force
Roy S. Weaver Jr., I'm in the Army Now.......New Guinea info
The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy, U.S. Naval Aviation in the Pacific
United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995, Part 5 WWII
David Osborb Scott, Completing the Circle Around Rabaul, The Siezure of the Admiralties, Feb.- May 1944
Mr. James C. Sawruk, Air-to-Air Claims and Credits for Navy and Marine Corps Patrol Type Aircraft During World War II
Master Sgt. Greg Henneman, Capt. Nelson Flack: The rediscovery of a Black Sheep.....Article

H. Sakaida's Aces of the Rising sun
Hata, Izawa, Shores, Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931 - 1945
K. Janowicz's/Kagero 68th Sentai
Waldemar Pajdosz & Andre Zbiegniewski's/Kagero, 3/202 Kokutai
Saburo Hayashi & Alvin D Coox, Kogun, The Japanese Army in the Pacific War
Dainippon Kaiga Publ., Imperial Japanese Army Air Units Battlefield Photograph Collection
Capt. M.K.Rodman's, A War of their Own, Bombers Over the Southwest Pacific
L.McAulay's MacArthur's Eagles: The U. S. Air War over New Guinea, 1943-1944
L.J.Hickey, Warpath Across the Pacific, 345th Bomb Group, "Air Apaches"

Trying to Obtain:
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Revenge of the Red Raiders, 22nd Bomb Group, "Red Raiders"
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Kens Men Against the Empire, 43rd Bomb Group, "Kens Men"
L.J.Hickey, Claringbould, Rampage of the Roarin 20's, 312th Bomb Group, "Roarin 20's"
L.J.Hickey, Tagaya, Saga of the Sun Setters, 38th Bomb Group, "Sun Setters"
Model Art 263 & 428, Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
Maru Mechanic 2 & 37 Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
F.A.O.W. "Blue Series" #98
Watanabe Yohji's, Hien: the Struggle of the Type 3 Fighter
Jiro Kimata's Rikugun Koku Senshi
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 4 Kawasaki
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 5 Nakajima
Gakken Series, No.???? - Ki-61
Gakken Series, No.7 - RABAUL AIR WAR
Gakken Series, No.28 - IJN/IJA/American Bases
Gakken Series, No.52 - Nakajima Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa
Airview #???? Ki-61
MILITARY AIRCRAFT #16, Imperial Japanese Army Aircraft of the Pacific War

ElAurens
01-28-2006, 09:53 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Billfish, you have outdone yourself here.

Amazing job. I'm actually stunned at the wealth of details.

Thank you so much.

Now I have two questions.

1. Have you sent this to Oleg?

2. Can I buy you a beer? (You deserve at least that).

S!

LEBillfish
01-28-2006, 11:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:1. Have you sent this to Oleg?

2. Can I buy you a beer? (You deserve at least that).

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. No, not this go round have 4 times....don't have the ambition.......This is for all of you who are interested.

2........a beer?.....you've obviously never seen me drink http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p.s.............little to no credit on any of this goes to me....Virtually all should go to the Messer's. Long, Lansdale, Glass, Dunn, Masa, Summer, and so on from the j-aircraft.com & ***U forums that answered my questions, pointed me in directions, and spent the time posting and emailing me data.

I'm just the Parrot and really need to post picture credits with each of the above....Will try and update that soon.

ElAurens
01-29-2006, 08:52 AM
OK Billfish, several beers then.

My father was in the beer business, so I think I have a little experience in this area.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

VW-IceFire
01-29-2006, 10:57 AM
Not to put you guys off topic here or anything but I've made a post in the Mission Builder forum with some screen shots of my upcoming Ki-61 and Ki-100 campaign.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/50910533/m/3901039404

You guys may not have noticed it there so feel free to have a look. I hope to be done soon...I just have a bit more work to do on it and a few more skins to gather and get permission for.

ElAurens
01-29-2006, 11:13 AM
Thanks for the heads up IceFire!

GerritJ9
01-30-2006, 05:01 AM
Billfish, concerning your remark about lack of evidence concerning inferior iron and steel......... see the relevant chapters in Mr. Suzuki's book "The Romance Of Engines", published by the SAE. Kawasaki investigated the various failures of the Ha-40 during the war and one of the things they discovered was incorrect crankshaft heat treatment. An original Daimler-Benz crankshaft showed correct heat treatment resulting in a martensite structure, but a Kawasaki-made crank showed a troostite structure- definitely a case of inferior steel as used! Mr. Suzuki has devoted several chapters to the Ha-40 and 140, I can definitely recommend reading them. If you don't have the book, PM me and I will scan the relevant pages for you.

LEBillfish
01-30-2006, 07:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GerritJ9:
Billfish, concerning your remark about lack of evidence concerning inferior iron and steel......... see the relevant chapters in Mr. Suzuki's book "The Romance Of Engines", published by the SAE. Kawasaki investigated the various failures of the Ha-40 during the war and one of the things they discovered was incorrect crankshaft heat treatment. An original Daimler-Benz crankshaft showed correct heat treatment resulting in a martensite structure, but a Kawasaki-made crank showed a troostite structure- definitely a case of inferior steel as used! Mr. Suzuki has devoted several chapters to the Ha-40 and 140, I can definitely recommend reading them. If you don't have the book, PM me and I will scan the relevant pages for you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks GerritJ9 I don't have that book and would like to see it.....I'm not familiar with the term "troostite" though......Though I know what a Martensitic structure is relating to the distribution of carbon, I've always heard it used in relation to Austenite(sp?)...Yet normally applied to the hardening of high carbon or carburized steels. I'll look that up so I can learn if it is a term devoted to forgings, perhaps more a result of normalizing or possibly even freezing after quench to learn what it means.

As to the pages I'd love them....Educate me and I'll adjust my post above http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

nakamura_kenji
01-31-2006, 04:40 AM
i prod oleg

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I did read there. However we can't already spend the time for reworking the 3D models, etc... It isn't only about Ki-61 or A6. I speak about many aircraft ... Let say that even 109s already looks old in this sim, because of 5 years old.

So, I copied that pages that to be sure in future modeling when we will come back to PF with new sim.

But now you can write on PF address if the speed, climb or something also with this plane isn't correct and if we are wronmg we may try to find time to correct it... Becasue it doesn't take the time of modellers, but just one programmer.
We are totally busy with new sim. And these add-ons are made third party. we participated only in check and programming of new planes that was done... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

and after i ask about fire extingusher,ect

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Oleg_Maddox

Posted Tue January 31 2006 04:02

Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
much thank you reply. so guess thing be like ki-61-I-hei fire extingusher, emergency gear, drop, oil wind screen. can be fix as no model work only program even oil windscreen just need be make so no happen as often current which ***ume be control by varible in code


Please write more understand - able

Like:

ki-61-I-hei need fire extingusher (this need just one check in a code)
------------------------------

To switch off manual use of drop gear we can't

----------

Oil... I will think.

Whats more?

Please write answer on PF@1c.ru </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

seem get fix if no model work need, can make list so email oleg it, Elaurns/LEBillfish much please right email, oleg have much trouble my english seem i will do if no want but much chance better success if he able to understand it

Oleg_Maddox
01-31-2006, 07:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ElAurens:1. Have you sent this to Oleg?

2. Can I buy you a beer? (You deserve at least that).

S! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

1. No, not this go round have 4 times....don't have the ambition.......This is for all of you who are interested.

2........a beer?.....you've obviously never seen me drink http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p.s.............little to no credit on any of this goes to me....Virtually all should go to the Messer's. Long, Lansdale, Gl***, Dunn, Masa, Summer, and so on from the j-aircraft.com & ***U forums that answered my questions, pointed me in directions, and spent the time posting and emailing me data.

I'm just the Parrot and really need to post picture credits with each of the above....Will try and update that soon. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi,

1. Would be good if you'll send all that you posted to me at PF@1c.ru (I will put this info in our general database and will use now and in future for the development of the next generation simulator (Beginning from BoB)

2. Becasue we aleady can't change 3D models, add or change new weapons, due to too busy schedule with the new sim series, I would ask you to prepare the list of changes that we can invest (maybe now, maybe in the next one add-on)

A. Performace figures, which will include
- our incorrect speeds and what should be changed
- Roll rate
- Dive speeds
- General performace figures, data that can be corected by very small input in a code.

B. To identify for me exact model(s) that had fire extingusher (Only ki-61-I-hei ?)

C. We still can change the oil on the windscreen becasue we know where is Oil tank (I think programmer simply moved this option from other aircraft without change... becasue we had hard time to finish product asap...)

LEBillfish
01-31-2006, 07:21 AM
Actually Kenji I have emailed them often at that address.....Sadly never a reply In any form.As to modeling issues that I do understand

(though my big hard on for that da*n venturi would only take removing that bit of code).....

Performance though falling slightly shy of "factory spec" seems livable too....Yet if one wanted to just address DM & FM it would be as follows "In Brief":

Modeling Issues:
1. No Venturi on left cowling.......SImply remove the code and gone.
2. Seat position can be raised (like in A6M planes).....Difficult ATM, ignorred
3. Manual trim tabs missing from Ailerons, Elevator, Rudder......Difficult ATM, ignorred
4. Pilot step missing........Difficult ATM, ignorred
5. Landing Gear covers seriously incorrect........Difficult ATM, ignorred
6. Landing Gear details incorrect..........Difficult ATM, ignorred
7. Numerous Gauges/levers not working........Difficult ATM, ignorred
8. Wing Gun Bulges..........Difficult ATM, ignorred
9. Tail Gear was Retractable.........Difficult ATM, ignorred
10. Bomb Loadouts Incorrect.........Difficult ATM, ignorred
11. Fuel/Bomb racks were not supposed to be carried unless being used.......SImply adjust due to loadout, no bombs or tanks...poof gone
12. Single Drop tank also utilized.......Simply another option in loadouts.....1 tank removed copying the code and altering it.
13. Drop Tank size too large.........Difficult ATM, ignorred
14. Fuel Loadouts varied and not modeled.......This actually rather complex as we're talking a 250 liter difference....SO weight and so on becomes an issue....Difficult ATM, ignorred.

Damage Modeling Issues:
15. Ki-61-I-Hei/1c ONLY had a fire extinguisher system.
16. ignorred
17. Landing gear not manually deploying...Gear SHOULD BE ABLE to be manually deploed or have that aspect of DM removed.
18. Landing Gear failure...Should be some of the strongest in sim among japanese fighters (ranking equal to carrier duty)
19. Fuel should not "leak dry"....DIfficult to model, though boost current leak arresting a possible fix.
20. Fuel tank and fuel leak protection level varied and was advanced....requires advanced DM modeling.......Ignorred
21. Most Otsu and Hei had radiator Armor....requires advanced DM modeling .......Ignorred
22. Pilot seat armor steadily improved over the series....requires advanced DM modeling.......Ignorred
23. Engine failure all too frequent....needs to be improved, should be no more fragile infact less then any other inline.......No idea as to what this involves
24. Windscreen oiling should be LESS frequent then ANY other plane here except the P39.....SImply remove the DM result.

Flight Modeling Issues:
25. Trim at Cruise condition unable to occur.
26. Prop Pitch issues.....Ignorred no firm data.

LEBillfish
01-31-2006, 07:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Hi,

1. Would be good if you'll send all that you posted to me at PF@1c.ru ..............) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'll send it once more Oleg yet I'm not sure you're getting my emails as I've sent off similar ones 4 times before.....

Kelly

JtD
01-31-2006, 09:06 AM
Yeah, I sometimes wish there was an auto confirmation. 0% confirmed mails make me wonder if I got the adress right...

Good luck, LEBillfish.

GerritJ9
01-31-2006, 02:58 PM
Just keep sending such data to Oleg- I sent some data (scanned from various publications) concerning the top speeds of the various Brewster Buffalo variants (which are all undermodelled as far as top speed is concerned) and did receive a reply from him. So don't give up on him- it will be used sooner or later (though so far nothing has been done about the Buff). If it means it will be used in the next generation- so be it. It will all help to make the next generation even better than this one!

VW-IceFire
01-31-2006, 03:30 PM
My e-mails to the address seem to go through ok. If you guys would like to PM me anything that I can then copy and paste into a new e-mail please let me know.

Xiolablu3
02-02-2006, 03:52 AM
Excellent well thought out post Kelly/LEBillFish.

Its not surprising Oleg replied when you present the facts so well.

Nice one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Treetop64
02-03-2006, 05:23 PM
I learned - the hard way - never fall into having an argument with a woman. Especially one that has her facts as straight as BillFish does. Amazing; her information was complete to the point of attracting the attention of the Master himself.

She had to have been a "successful" Kamikaze pilot in a Ki-61 in her previous life.

Bravo!

LEBillfish
02-03-2006, 07:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Treetop64:
She had to have been a "successful" Kamikaze pilot in a Ki-61 in her previous life.

Bravo! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ki-61's didn't Kamikaze Ships.............

They Taiatari'd Bombers http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Thanks though for the kind words all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

SnapdLikeAMutha
02-07-2006, 01:32 PM
Don't know if this has been mentioned yet (can't be bothered to plow through hundreds of posts to find out, sorry) but I think the engine overheat might be a bit whoopsied. Can climb on 100% throttle, 100% pitch and rads closed, and it doesn't overheat until about 5000m!! And if you open the rads even by one notch (ie to position 2) it doesn't overheat at all on 100& throttle - ever!! That can't be right can it?

LEBillfish
02-07-2006, 02:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SnapdLikeAMutha:
Don't know if this has been mentioned yet (can't be bothered to plow through hundreds of posts to find out, sorry) but I think the engine overheat might be a bit whoopsied. Can climb on 100% throttle, 100% pitch and rads closed, and it doesn't overheat until about 5000m!! And if you open the rads even by one notch (ie to position 2) it doesn't overheat at all on 100& throttle - ever!! That can't be right can it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yep, I'd agree with that.....However, that is something that seems to apply to virtually all aircraft and I think needs to be applied globally. Just a fine point though, I don't believe any aircraft here (though don't know) can in actuallity real life "fully close" off their radiator...The Ki-61 most certainly cannot by far....Though it may be possible on some planes like the I16 and the like.

LEBillfish
02-09-2006, 11:23 AM
Welp.....unfortunately it looks as though either time or "opinion" of the original modeler kept things as they were at first blush......Though possibly just disappointment...Oiling seems WORSE! lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Ah well.......

BTW, it's starting to look as though besides carrying only one drop tank the Ki-61 could also drop from the pods independantly.....as soon as I have some hard data I'll post it.

J_Anonymous
02-10-2006, 06:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GerritJ9:
Billfish, concerning your remark about lack of evidence concerning inferior iron and steel......... see the relevant chapters in Mr. Suzuki's book "The Romance Of Engines", published by the SAE. Kawasaki investigated the various failures of the Ha-40 during the war and one of the things they discovered was incorrect crankshaft heat treatment. An original Daimler-Benz crankshaft showed correct heat treatment resulting in a martensite structure, but a Kawasaki-made crank showed a troostite structure- definitely a case of inferior steel as used! Mr. Suzuki has devoted several chapters to the Ha-40 and 140, I can definitely recommend reading them. If you don't have the book, PM me and I will scan the relevant pages for you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I remember reading an episode in an essay by a famous Japanese author named Shyusaku Endo. He was a dedicated Christian, anti-war, but served in a IJA tank unit during the WW2 (he had no choice...). Toward the end of the war, the quality of cast iron etc. became so poor that when Mr. Endoh hit his tank with a hammer, a chunk of metal broke off. They had to recycle metal in household. They also utilized even the extract of the roots of pine trees as low-grade aircraft fuel because of the shortage of oil (it was called "shaw-con-you", meaning "pine-roots-oil"). Children didn't have shoes even if it snowed. Japanese economy was completely broke long time before 1945 because of the lack of natural resources and enlistment of skilled workers.

LEBillfish
09-07-2006, 01:01 PM
Adding this to the previous quoted page below.....I actually need to collect and update all this info and re-submit along with much posted in other threads and some indepth discussions with J.Long and Gerrit9 on engine bearings.

Hi All;

The following it is my understanding will pertain to the Ki-43, Ki-61, Ki-84, Ki-100 and similar aircraft....For discussion purposes we'll utilize the Ki-61....naturally http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

To the left side of the pilot above the flap/gear control lever bank and behind the elevator trim control you'll note the following control unit on the Ki-61.....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/dropcontrolsm.jpg

This unit was utilized to "energize/arm" the wing mount pylons for release of either external drop tanks, or bombs. In a nutshell, when the pilot determined it was time to drop whatever was on the rack, he would flip the switches on the far left to the red side, at which point the lights inline to the right would light up stating the circut was energized. When ready, the pilot would then press a button upon the stick, and the solenoids within the racks would fire, releasing whatever was mounted to it.

An EXTENSIVE report has been filed by Mr. Jim Long on the j-aircraft.com forum in this thread at my questioning...... http://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.php?topic=902.0 to which should be read by any addressing this issue. Know Mr. Long is most likely the current expert as to the Ki-61 among other planes, his AirTell reports what are utilized to build many of the books and publications all read on the subjects.

This confirms the following which I have presented before in many Ki-61 "bug/error" threads;
1. External ordinance could be dropped either one side at a time, or in unison. Meaning, both bombs or fuel tanks "could be" independantly controlled allowing seperate drops from side to side (though this would most likely mean the left side would be dropped first to compensate for torque)......This allows for 2 targets for example to be bombed vs. the current overkill of 2 bombs.

In the sim however what this would mean though is essentially 2 FMs to accomodate the shift in weight and torque......So, I ask the following;

That the drop tanks or bombs be dropped seperately. First the left side, then the right. That to keep things simple, the FM will not change as it is now, much as though either both or none are in place. The dropping of the ordinance would be performed in exactly the same manner, however instead of just 1 release, the pilot must make 2 to move to the "stores dropped" FM.

2. As pointed out in another thread (which I will repost if requested).....All of the above planes were known to quite routinely fly with just a single drop tank on the right side to compensate for torque...

I'd like to request that as a new option in all the loadouts......HOWEVER, to keep things simple will not request a new additional torque compensating FM be made.

3. The Ki-61 drop tanks are much too large. This has been clearly shown in other threads. However, I realize that is a "modeling" issue...So do not expect its correction.

4. Lastly regarding this aspect of the aircraft, as stated clearly elsewhere as well, if drop tanks or bombs were not carried then the underwing racks were NOT to be mounted (removed when not in use)......This I "assume" would be another simple matter to correct, as if an optional loadout is not selected, then that part of the models code is simply not included.

As a side note once again, the Ki-61-1a through 1c never carried bombs.....However, by having them in the sim it makes up for the lack of the Ki-61-1d or Tei, as to model it would entail some dramatic changes and from the 1d on bombs were carried.

Thanks for your attention 1c and others assisting in the making of this most excellent sim.

K2 / Kelly / Billfish


Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, Otsu, Hei, problems within the PF simulation;

I'll try and break up each problem by "Plane Model, Damage Model, Flight Model" as follows:

Modeling Issues:
1. No Venturi on left cowling
2. Seat position can be raised (like in A6M planes)
3. Manual trim tabs missing from Ailerons, Elevator, Rudder
4. Pilot step missing
5. Landing Gear covers seriously incorrect.
6. Landing Gear details incorrect.
7. Numerous Gauges/levers not working
8. Wing Gun Bulges
9. Tail Gear was Retractable
10. Bomb Loadouts Incorrect
11. Fuel/Bomb racks were not supposed to be carried unless being used
12. Single Drop tank also utilized
13. Drop Tank size too large
14. Fuel Loadouts varied and not modeled

Damage Modeling Issues:
15. Ki-61-I-Hei/1c had a fire extinguisher system.
16. Hydraulic system improperly modeled
17. Landing gear not manually deploying
18. Landing Gear failure...
19. Fuel should not "leak dry"
20. Fuel tank and fuel leak protection level varied and was advanced
21. Most Otsu and Hei had radiator Armor
22. Pilot seat armor steadily improved over the series
23. Engine failure all too frequent
24. Windscreen oiling should be LESS frequent then ANY other plane here except the P39.

Flight Modeling Issues:
25. Trim at Cruise condition unable to occur.
26. Prop Pitch issues

Detailed explanations:
1E. No venturi on left cowling (double black cone on left cowling)...That was only used on 3 planes of the 244th Sentai, and is still debated if it was just a quick fix for a damaged part in the air intake to run various gauges, or used to run a prototype gyroscopic sight. As you'll note it is ONLY seen in photographs of those 3 planes.......Here is the explanation as best translated from Japanese (hence the poor grammar);

Complete URL for entire explanation including remarks from 244th pilots:
http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~s244f/toso-v.htm (http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/%7Es244f/toso-v.htm)

Venturi tube of Kobayashi squadron lead aircraft 3295
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/phot8.jpg

Venturi tube The gyro meter of the aircraft of today is electric type, but at one time in order to drive the gyro of the bank and turn indicator and the gyro horizon etc., the venturi tube It is the mechanism where in the tube which is connected to the meter, generates the fixed air style regardless of flying speed, turns the pinwheel with that, turns the gyro. As for the venturi tube, in the low-speed chine of the "red dragonfly" and so on there are also some which are installed on the body side where propeller mlast flows, but in the practical machine like 3 type (Ki-61) , usually, being installed by the engine supplemental device (supercharger), it is something which is not visible from outside. However, the attachment the venturi tube outside the body of the cockpit left front, is verified in 3 type (Ki-61) of 244 squadrons by the photograph. This kind of fuselage (use of the Venturi) is not recognized in the other squadron, is thought as the thing perhaps due to 244 squadron individual repairs. In the single-engine machine and the occurring frequently machine of note large horsepower, the vacuum blower or the vacuum blower and the venturi tube were jointly used.

In other words.........Only a select few (3) Ki-61 of the 244th Hikousentai had venturi tubes. It is still debated if it was a repair for a

failed internal to the supercharger venturi, or possibly test for a new gyroscopic sight.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/venturi.gif

Perhaps, for secret retention, the venturi tube itself (the outer part) it is removed, piping has been visible. In addition, Captain Ikuno is visible as hidden the boresight part by the hand. It was not unusual with ground run of the fighter plane, you opened wind prevention, it is normal to set the seat to the higher order position, but, this way you closed and in winter season to glide to the cartridge.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/phot111.jpg

2E. The seat position much like A6M aircraft could be raised for better field of view when taxiing (as even shown in photo above).....This was done through a release lever on the lower left side of the seat (commonly, the seat would be raised when the pilot entered....pressing his back to the rear of the seat he would release the lever and bracing himself slowly lower to an in-flight position.....He would do the opposite upon landing).

Seat lever item 6:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit8.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit10.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Ki61205.jpg
Seat Mechanism & photo showing lowered position:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/seatraise2.jpg
Seat raised position last 2 photo's:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/seatraise1.jpg

3E. Trim tabs missing on ALL control surfaces.....This is a minor thing however something that cannot be corrected by skinning and is required for markings. This aspect would be a nice completion to be able to properly show the aircraft.........A photo nor drawing will not be supplied as they can be seen in EVERY photo and drawing in existence.....The markings themselves a skinning issue yet unable to be added with nothing there.

4E. Pilot "step" missing on left side beside radiator housing....Minor issue "inconsequential".....So will not be pursued however for sake of accuracy is mentioned.

5E. Landing gear covers are seriously wrong, shape is incorrect particularly at Oleo mark splits the best view of their actual shape is when lowered also showing how they fold up vs. what we have in the sim.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/gearcovermarked.jpg

6E. Accordion Boot overlanding gear shock rod missing (9 section boot covering the bare metal shock rod)....In kind inner cover stop/lift bar missing (arched bar that stopped cover from swinging and made contact with the tire to close).......Neither pursued due to inconsequential......for sake of accuracy mentioned.

7E. Gauges and other items are missing from within the cockpit or not working....Though this is common in the series (and understandable due to complexity).....Is mentioned for sake of accuracy and possible future refinement as (ex. Hydraulic pressure) gauge lets you know if that aspect of the plane is working.

8E. First off, each type of gun used in the wing needed a clearance bulge, yet it was on the upper surface of the wing. Any below is so minimal it would not matter. In kind, the bulge on top for the wing varied in size and location for all 3 types of guns. Also you'll note vents above and below for the gun bays.......Vents can be resolved through skinning, the bulges however cannot. Since we have 3 different models, there is no reason why these clearance bulges cannot be corrected.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Gunbulges.jpg

9E. 1b & 1c had retractable tail gear (though not like 1a with closing covers, radiused cutout correct)....However, this was "blocked down" at the factory due to occasional failures....Once in the field I cannot confirm if this blocking was sometimes deliberately removed, however there are photo's of 1b & 1c with it retracted. It was not until the "1d" that tail gear was made fixed/non-retractable.....
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/tailgear.jpg

10E. There is no proof and it is believed by most that the Ki-61-1a thru 1c never carried ground attack bombs, this was a misconception due to confusion with the 1d models before they were fully understood as the wings were not designed to carry such a load as 100 or 250kg bombs till then. In New Guinea however (mid 1943 on) they were fitted with Phosphorous "anti-bomber" bombs to be dropped into formations, this is very much accounted for by 5th air force B25 & 24 crews.....However, in that we do not have the 1d series.... this helps make up for their loadouts....So a 100kg bomb needs to be added if that is the logic......
Phosphorous Anti Bomber bomb and in action:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Phosphorous_Bomb.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/arielbomb.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Phosphorousbomb.jpg

11E. Ki-61 OFTEN did not carry the racks for external drop tanks. This was "intended" by the factory and even sports markings stating "Install ONLY when drop tanks are to be carried". In the field they were often not mounted. Other times they were left on simply due to the constant need for them. I suggest they be removed from the plane if either a bomb or ext. fuel tank loadout is not selected.
Ki-61 bomb rack (only right side of each is marked)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Untitled-2.jpg
(photoscan copyright R.Lane)

Ki-61 NENRYO RAKKA TANKU KENSUI-KA
RAKKA TANKU SOU-CHAKU-JI NOMI TORI-TSUKE
Ki-61 Drop Tank Suspension Mount
Install only when drop tanks are to be carried
These are some of the markings on the side of each fuel rack.

12E. There is some evidence that sometimes only a single external fuel tank would be utilized, in those cases both fuel racks would be in place however only one droptank on the right side should be in place (compensated for torque).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/singletank.jpg

13E. Drop tank "model" size too large......compare the easy to scale pic below to in the sim.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/zero22_1371866004.jpg

14E. The Ki-61 thru 1c had various "internal" fuel tanks during it's production run. These varied from 750 liters to 500 liters placed about wings and fuselage....Exact numbers are per serial number (source Jim Long, Ki-61 expert)
Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-424
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 421-500
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Fuel Tanks s/n 501-513: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 514-649: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 650-1092: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Fuel Tanks: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.
(note however "unknown" in field conversions of Ko & Otsu Models would be the same as that model not Hei)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/tanks.jpg

Damage Modeling:

15E. Ki-61-1c had a fire extinguisher system. Nuff said it's well documented.

16E. The components that worked off of the hydraulic system were as follows......1. The Flaps, 2. The wing and tail gear, 3. The radiator louver.....The balance worked from very heavy bellcranks and shafts except for the rudder which used a pully system.......This would mean due to the "assumed" lack of fuses if the hydraulic system failed, all 3 on it would...........It also means that damage to the Ailerons or elevator "controls" would be difficult....I can find no account of such failures ever causing a crash (yet not impossible by far).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/controlsurfs.jpg

17E. Gear will not manually deploy (though should not like say a I-16 that requires numerous cranks)....The Ki-61 had an "Emergency Landing Gear "Uplock" release Lever" which is situated beside the seat on the right side "under" the "Emergency Hydraulic Hand Pump" lever. When pulled, it would manually release the latch holding the gear up and they would simply fall...Momentum or if required wing wagging causing them to swing to the downed position past the toggle 0 point locking. So in all reality, they should "at least" have the manual option available.
Note Item 2:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit9.jpg

18E. The landing gear of the Ki-61 was some of the strongest utilized by the JAFC. Based off of A6M designs for carrier duty, the utilized a "toggle" system where in once past the down point would be locked and would require hydraulic motion of the bell crank to move it to an unlocked state......Ki-61 were notorious for flipping over when hitting a bomb crater of flaw in the runway....There are numerous accounts of such, in kind numerous accounts of pilots "deliberately" not lowering gear due to that and terrain/landing conditions. Yet I have not found one account of gear failure. (possible though would almost require the wing being ripped apart).
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/gear.jpg

19E. Ki-61's had "selectable" tank lever (below prop pitch & Throttle unit) so if one was hit they could switch to others...This included a selector switch for fuel quantity per tank......Now that would be difficult to model in the sim, However, that should mean "All" fuel stores should not run dry if one tank is hit.
Tank Selector lever see item 9:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit9.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit10.jpg

Fuel Tank Gauge Selector switch, see item 28:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit7.jpg

20E. Fuel tank "leak absorbing" and "bullet proofing" rapidly improved through the Ki-61-I series. This evolved from 10mm silk felt and 3mm rubber to 9mm top & 6mm sides and bottom rubber to 12mm rubber in the 1a-1c respectively . The improvements not only helped resist light caliber rounds, limit leaking when compromised, yet also helped prevent hydroshock blowout.....This is the primary reason fuel tank size over the life of the series steadily decreased.............the plane used in the TAIU tests Initially was the captured 68th Hikousentai at Cape Gloucester coded S/N 263 (uncoded 163) manufactured roughly late April 1943, making it a

Ki-61-I-Ko
The statistics per S/N are as follows:
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-424
Fuel Tank Protection: 3mm Rubber over 10mm silk felt
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 421-500
Fuel Tank Protection: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 501-649: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 650-1092: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Fuel Tank Protection: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides

21E. Radiator in most 1b (all but 13) and all 1c models had 8mm armor plate protecting them. TAIU tests based on coded S/N 263

(uncoded 163) manufactured roughly late April 1943, making it a Ki-61-I-Ko
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-500
Radiator Armor: None
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Radiator Armor s/n 501-513: None
Radiator Armor s/n 514-1092: 8mm plate
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Radiator Armor: 8mm (TAIU measured 9.5mm)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/cooling.jpg

22E. The pilot seat armor steadily improved from 10mm plate to 16mm head, 12mm body. Location of said armor was "head" large triangular piece behind head & shoulders (leather headrest mounted to it)....Body, behind entire seat back. TAIU tests stated that "Armor rarely could stop .50 cal. rounds, and often lower caliber at close range (30-06)....However, their tests were performed with the earliest version of Ki-61-Ko (the 68th Sentai Cape Glouchester captured model)....This plane had the lightest armor of all.
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-500
Pilot Armor: 10mm plates both head & body
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Pilot Armor s/n 501-541: 10mm plates both head & body
Pilot Armor s/n 542-577: 10mm plate head & 12mm body
Pilot Armor s/n 578-1092: 16mm plate head & 12mm body
*Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Pilot Armor: 16mm plate head, 12mm plate body(TAIU measured 17.5/12.7)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Seat.jpg

23E. Engine failure in the simulation is all too frequent. Though based upon the DB601, the HA-40 was not the same engine however "the basic engine layout" followed many of the same features......Above the aircraft centerline only the crankshaft is in that area, nothing more it even capped by heavy gauge steel plate. At the centerline would be the supercharger at the rear, and the reduction gearing at the front.......From the centerline down at ever increasing degrees the complex & "delicate" mechanism begins.

Unfortunately, EVERY hit to the engine no matter where from either insures it's quick demise or instantly kills it. In fact, even if the wing area of the plane is hit I have had instant engine failure with no damage visible to the engine area no matter the size of the round. This is frankly unrealistic in that the lower area's of the engine are protected from behind by the entire wing area. In kind, hits to the upper area should yield only minor results unless instant loss due to crank devastation with lower area's insuring oil loss and failure. The trouble is the engine no matter the hit location to the plane ALWAYs fails.

In truth EVERY other "upright" V engine should be more susceptible to damage then inverted from usual angles of attack. This being due to the fragile components being mounted above, the wing protecting the most durable..........Tales of engine failure in Ki-61's were primarily due to 2 reasons. 1. Fuel tank solenoid switching failure starving the engine of fuel. 2. Poor air intake filtration initially on resulting in cylinder scoring and oil contamination. I have yet to find accounts of inferior iron or steel.
This means, the Ha-40 engine should be AS durable if not more so then any of their allied counterparts.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/EngineDwg1.jpg

24E. As stated above, critical components of the Ha-40 were in contrast to most other inline engines mounted well below the C.L. of the plane. However as also stated above, virtually ANY hit to the plane results in engine damage, with the resulting smoke and windscreen oiling happening all too often. In truth, the Ki-61 would oil its windscreen LESS than any other plane if at all.

All Radial engined planes should as the venting for cooling runs around the cowling, this would allow seeping oil to be blown back directly at the windscreen. Upright inline engines would less then radial, yet still risk it more dependant on design then inverted as the majority of the pressurized lines and journals are at the top of the engine, so windscreen fowling due to a high cowling hit would be more likely. Next would come those inverted V planes with their oil reservoirs in the engine area. Reservoir damage possible.

The Ha-40 & specifically the Ki-61 however suffers none of these weaknesses. There is NO engine cooling louvering in the nose area except under the plane. The top cover was reinforced, and depended upon snapping tight to fit it even over lapping making a labyrinth seal of sorts over quite a width. All pressurized journals and lines are low (below the wing line) on the engine, all that is above the C.L. is the crank (the heaviest piece and supporting structure of all inline engines)....Lastly, the Ki-61 had 2 oil reservoirs, 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.. The main tank was located behind the pilot in the fuselage, the aux. between his knees behind the insturments. There is no oil reservoir ahead of the windscreen and pressurized lines are all low. Lastly, due to all louvering being under the plane this would result in oil being sucked out underneath.
Essentially.......The Ki-61 windscreen should oil up less then any plane here.
Oil system in general:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/EngineOilSystem.jpg
Component location:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/OilSys.jpg
Aux. oil tank Item 19:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit8.jpg
Main oil tank item 6:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/Cockpit9.jpg
Engine area showing sealing even into gun compartment:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/GunsDwg2.jpg
Width of top cover sealing surface also showing resulting labarynth seal
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/IL2/ki-61-tony-five.jpg

Flight Modeling:
25E. Though the Ki-61 had "trim tabs" on all surfaces, it does not have in flight adjustable trim for the rudder or ailerons....Only the elevator on the Ki-61-1, Ki-61-II, & Ki-100 had in flight adjustment via a small box left of the pilots seat........All three control surfaces Aileron/Rudder/Elevator however had "ground adjustable" tabs.

Unfortunately though the cruise condition for the Ki-61 is listed as Cruising H.P.: 1,040 @ 2,400 R.P.M. @ +240mm/Hg @ 4,200m.(13,780'), Cruising Speed: 400km/hr(249m/h)TAS @ 4,000m(13,124').......This condition can never be met. If throttle or prop pitch are reduced to reduce torque, speed falls off so dramatically that the Ki-61 begins to descend. Adjust elevator trim and it slows more....Essentially, cruise can never be obtained in the Ki-61, and therefor rudder & Aileron trim is never achieved. This makes no sense, as the only time trim can be achieved is in a "falling" condition. Trim should be able to be achieved at stable flight due to the trim tabs.....Yet, never can as variables are not falling into line.

26E. Maximum speed, cruising speed, in fact all speeds are only achieved with P/P set to 100%, anything less and the speed falls off. Though RPM may increase due to less load upon the engine at 100% P/P, that does not nor should mean it is working at it's maximum efficiency....At this time I cannot state what would be the correct prop pitch setting for each condition.......However I seriously doubt 100% is correct.

Applicable statistics based on Kawasaki & Japanese army data...TAIU tests suspect.....(As a side note the plane used in the TAIU tests Initially was the captured 68th Hikousentai at Cape Gloucester coded S/N 263 (uncoded 163) manufactured roughly late April 1943, making it a Ki-61-I-Ko.........Meaning, it was lighter then the Otsu in many regards (except fluid capacities) so should have performed better BUT was a plane still full of bugs. Why it was captured, it was unserviceable by the Japanese (required shipping the engine to the Philippines for repair)).

TAIU Data:
Weight E/L/OL: 5010/6982/7682 pounds (2273/3167/3485 Kg.)
Fuel Capacity Internal: 199 U.S. Gal. (753 liters)

Ki-61 Potential Weight Differences Fuel Carried primarily highlighted. These statistics come from Airtell Research, original source

decoded and translated captured Japanese document. Copyright all information J.I.Long, Airtell Publications & Research.

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 113-424
(TAIU original test plane s/n 263 HOWEVER also had in their possession later 1b & 1c versions)
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor: 10mm plates both head & body
Radiator Armor: None
Fuel Tank Protection: 3mm Rubber over 10mm silk felt
Fire Ext. System: None
Weapons: 2x 7.7mm type 89+500 r/g, 2x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Ko, coded s/n's 421-500
Fuel Tanks: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor: 10mm plates both head & body
Radiator Armor: None
Fuel Tank Protection: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
Fire Ext. System: None
Weapons: 2x 7.7mm type 89+500 r/g, 2x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Otsu, coded s/n's 501-1092
Fuel Tanks s/n 501-513: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank, 1/200l. fuselage tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 514-649: 2/190l. outer wing tanks, 1/170l. center wing tank.
Fuel Tanks s/n 650-1092: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor s/n 501-541: 10mm plates both head & body
Pilot Armor s/n 542-577: 10mm plate head & 12mm body
Pilot Armor s/n 578-1092: 16mm plate head & 12mm body
Radiator Armor s/n 501-513: None
Radiator Armor s/n 514-1092: 8mm plate
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 501-649: 9mm Rubber top, 6mm sides
Fuel Tank Protection s/n 650-1092: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides
Fire Ext. System: None
Weapons: 4x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g

Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I Hei, coded s/n's 3001-3400
Fuel Tanks: 2/170l. outer wing tanks, 1/160l. center wing tank.
Oil capacity: 28l. main tank, 17l. Aux.
Pilot Armor: 16mm plate head, 12mm plate body(TAIU measured 17.5/12.7)
Radiator Armor: 8mm (TAIU measured 9.5mm)
Fuel Tank Protection: 12mm Rubber top, 12mm sides
Fire Ext. System: yes
Weapons: 2x 12.7mm Ho.103+250 r/g, 2x Mauser 151/20 120/250 r/g

Plane Weights in Kg (empty/loaded/loaded max.):
1a: 2,210/2,950/3,250
1b: 2,210/3,130/3,616
1c: unlisted (note: same as 1b +20 kg/cannon+2x ammunition weight)

Type 89 MG: 12.7Kg/gun, 7.7mm x 58 SR .024Kg/rd, .008Kg/link, 500 r/g = 16Kg
Type 1 MG Ho-103: 23Kg/gun, 12.7mm x 81SR 82g/rd, 250 r/g = 20.5Kg+link weight
Mauser 151/20 Cannon: 42Kg/gun, 20mm x 82 205g/rd, 120 r/g = 24.6Kg+link weight

92 Octane Fuel (est): 6#/gallon = .719Kg/liter
750l = 539.25Kg
550l = 395.45Kg
500l = 359.50Kg

Ki-61-1a
Weight Empty = 2,210kg
Weight Loaded = 2,950kg
Weight Loaded Max = 3,250kg
Max. Speed = 590 km/hr@5,000m
Cruising Speed = Unknown
Climb = Unknown

Ki-61-1b
Weight Empty = 2,210kg
Weight Loaded = 3,130kg
Weight Loaded Max = 3,616kg
Max. Speed = 592 km/hr@4,860m
Cruising Speed = 400 km/hr@4,000m
Climb = 5,000m/5min, 31seconds

Ki-61-1c
Weight Empty = unlisted
Weight Loaded = unlisted
Weight Loaded Max = unlisted
Max. Speed = Unknown
Cruising Speed = Unknown
Climb = Unknown
**Assumed the only difference between the 1b & 1c would have been weight due to added armor, Mauser cannons, fuel loadouts, fire

extinguisher system....So performance should be between 1b & 1d

Ki-61-1d
Weight Empty = 2,630kg
Weight Loaded = 3,470kg
Weight Loaded Max = unlisted
Max. Speed = 580 km/hr@5,000m
Cruising Speed = unlisted
Climb = unlisted

Next, the documents I've listed (most especially those take from Japanese sources)
I've "tried" to compile some data...HOWEVER, do not take it as correct as much of it I'm simply trying to cross match.

Japanese Type 3 Fighter, Ki-61-I-Otsu, Type 2 1100HP Engine, Ha-40 (Ha-60-22, joint army/navy designation) Shown
(the "Otsu" or incorrectly 1b was chosen as the performance standard as it was within this designation that

fuel/oil/coolant/armor/armament capacities and degree's were most balanced and to a great degree finalized. Variences from this are assumed to be due to loaded weight differences)

Weight Empty: 2,210kg
Weight Loaded: 3,130kg
Weight Maximum: 3,616
Engine Type: Inverted V12
Displacement: 33.9 liter
Engine Weight to Power Ratio: 0.61kg/HP
Engine H.P. to Displacement Ratio: 32.5H.P./liter
"Designated" H.P.: 1,100
Take Off Rating: 1,175H.P. @ 2,500 R.P.M. @ +330mm/Hg
Rated H.P.: 1,100 @ 2,400 R.P.M. @ +240mm/Hg @ 4,200m.(13,780')
Cruising H.P.: 1,040 @ 2,400 R.P.M. @ +240mm/Hg @ 4,200m.(13,780')
War Emergency Power: 1,080 @ 3,500m.(11,484')
Max. Speed: 500-592km/hr(368m/h) @ 4,860m.(15,946'), 580km/hr(360m/h) @ 8,000m(26,248')
Cruising Speed: 400km/hr(249m/h) @ 4,000m(13,124').
R.O.C.: 5'31" to 5,000m(16,405'), 10'48" to 8,000m(26,248').
Service Ceiling: 11,600m.(38,060')

If these numbers "are" correct since "Time to Climb" as well as "Max. & Cruising Speeds" seem consistant........That would mean though the TAIU vs. in game tests were consistant, they are not with stated rates. This does NOT surprise me as TAIU would NOT have a fresh and in perfect "factory new & tweaked" condition Ki-61 nor would be willing to press it to breaking limits, & 1c would use as my guess the easiest to understand+most reliable source they could find to make the FM. TAIU figures/English easier to understand and translate then Japanese.

However, the reports I listed above have the Japanese factory and combat data contained (plus HOW to fly a Ki-61, it's limits and so on). Between the two my guess the truth.



The above statements based upon the following book lists (as well as some others recently acquired list not updated).....Those not Ki-61

related utilized for comparative purposes, those not technical in nature for annecdotal information.

J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #99-3 Ki-61/100 Serial Numbers, Dates of Assembly & Characteristics
J.I.Long's Airtell Field Notes Japanese Army Fighter "Tony"
J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #86-1 Estimated Assembly Date For A WWII Japanese Aircraft/A Relic of the Air War over New

Guinea/Type 3 Fighter Tony # 640
J.I.Long's A PacFront Extra, Cockpit Layout- Type 3 Fighter Model 1
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/ R.E.Cowley (Japanese inline engine comparisons)
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/K.Weeks (Type 3 Fighter Reference Drawings)

R.M.Bueschell's Hein
R.M.Bueschell's Hayabusa
Rene J. Francillon, Aircraft Profile "The Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien" #118
Artur Juszcak, Mitsubishi A6m Zero
T. Januszewski, Mitsubishi A5M Claude, Mushroom Model
Avions #119, Ki-44 Shoki...French
Avions #122, Tateo Kato...French
Aero Detail #29 Hayabusa...
Monografie Lotnicze #5 Hien...Polish
Monografie Lotnicze #48 Ki-43...Polish
Maru Mechanic #43? Nik1/2....Japanese
F.A.O.W #17 Hien...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #19 Army Type 4 Fighter "Hayate"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #21 Army Type 2 Fighter "Toryu"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #27 Type 96 Carrier Fighter, A5M, Nate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #29 Type 97 Fighter... Japanese
F.A.O.W. #32 Type 97 Carrier Torpedo Bomber, B5n, Kate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. #33 Type 99 Carrier Dive Bomber, D3A, Val...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 53 Kyofu, Shinden, Shidenkai...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 61 Navy Interceptor J2M "Raiden"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 65 Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #2, Ki-61 & Ki-48...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #6, Ki-45 & Ki-51...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #?, E13A1, Jake...Japanese "Partial"

Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 1...Polish
Fraus, 1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 2....Polish
Peter Scott's Emblems of the Rising Sun (IJAAF Markings)
D.W. Thorpe JAAF Camoflauge & Markings WWII...
ModelArt 533, Camouflage & Markings of the IJA Bombers ....Japanese
ModelArt 272, Camouflage & Markings of IJN Fighters .......Japanese
Robert C. Mikesh, Schiffer Publishing, Japanese Aircraft Equipment 1940-1945
Unknown (Japanese), Japanese Military Aircraft Illustrated...Japanese
Koku Fan, 1974-3

Army Air Force Historical Study #113
Army Air Force Historical Study #116
Aeronotes 3, Deployments & OOBs
Aeronotes 4, New Guinea Area Operations
Shindo Hiriyuki, Japanese Air Operations in New Guinea
Capt. B. Chance Saltzman & T.R. Searle's, Introduction to the United States Air Force
Gary Null's, Weapon of Denial, Air Power & the Battle for New Guinea
Major James A. Barr, Airpower Employment of the 5th Air Force in the WWII SouthWest Pacific Theatre
Maj. T.D.Gann, Fifth Air Force Light & Medium Bomber Operations During 1942 & 1943: Building Doctrine & Forces That Triumphed In

the Battle of the Bismark Sea & the Wewak Raid
Maj. Michael E. Fischer, Mission Type Orders in Joint Air Operations (Command and control, New Guinea highlighted)
W.J. English, Performance of B25 Aircraft of 38th Bomb Group During 18 Months of Combat in New Guinea
Major Jonathan B. Wills, How SouthWest Pacific Area Operations Influenced the Royal Austrailian Air Force
Roy S. Weaver Jr., I'm in the Army Now.......New Guinea info
The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy, U.S. Naval Aviation in the Pacific
United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995, Part 5 WWII
David Osborb Scott, Completing the Circle Around Rabaul, The Siezure of the Admiralties, Feb.- May 1944
Mr. James C. Sawruk, Air-to-Air Claims and Credits for Navy and Marine Corps Patrol Type Aircraft During World War II
Master Sgt. Greg Henneman, Capt. Nelson Flack: The rediscovery of a Black Sheep.....Article

H. Sakaida's Aces of the Rising sun
Hata, Izawa, Shores, Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931 - 1945
K. Janowicz's/Kagero 68th Sentai
Waldemar Pajdosz & Andre Zbiegniewski's/Kagero, 3/202 Kokutai
Saburo Hayashi & Alvin D Coox, Kogun, The Japanese Army in the Pacific War
Dainippon Kaiga Publ., Imperial Japanese Army Air Units Battlefield Photograph Collection
Capt. M.K.Rodman's, A War of their Own, Bombers Over the Southwest Pacific
L.McAulay's MacArthur's Eagles: The U. S. Air War over New Guinea, 1943-1944
L.J.Hickey, Warpath Across the Pacific, 345th Bomb Group, "Air Apaches"

Trying to Obtain:
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Revenge of the Red Raiders, 22nd Bomb Group, "Red Raiders"
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Kens Men Against the Empire, 43rd Bomb Group, "Kens Men"
L.J.Hickey, Claringbould, Rampage of the Roarin 20's, 312th Bomb Group, "Roarin 20's"
L.J.Hickey, Tagaya, Saga of the Sun Setters, 38th Bomb Group, "Sun Setters"
Model Art 263 & 428, Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
Maru Mechanic 2 & 37 Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
F.A.O.W. "Blue Series" #98
Watanabe Yohji's, Hien: the Struggle of the Type 3 Fighter
Jiro Kimata's Rikugun Koku Senshi
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 4 Kawasaki
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 5 Nakajima
Gakken Series, No.???? - Ki-61
Gakken Series, No.7 - RABAUL AIR WAR
Gakken Series, No.28 - IJN/IJA/American Bases
Gakken Series, No.52 - Nakajima Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa
Airview #???? Ki-61
MILITARY AIRCRAFT #16, Imperial Japanese Army Aircraft of the Pacific War

Diablo310th
09-08-2006, 06:06 AM
great post Billfish. I enjoyed every bit of it. Very interesting.

LEBillfish
09-08-2006, 07:04 AM
Well, I need to take this one post which is nothing more then 2 others, and go round up info from other threads, then lay it out in a better fashion.........Why I bumped this as I've started doing that.

leitmotiv
09-08-2006, 09:07 AM
Holy documentation, Batman!

JG53Frankyboy
09-08-2006, 09:19 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
............................15E. Ki-61-1c had a fire extinguisher system. Nuff said it's well documented.

......................... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

wasnt that you who posted in the forums that the Ki-61-Ic got one (for 4 times use) in a patch without documantation in the Readme ?

sure, i never used it so far - so i cant say how sufficent it is when your plane is on fire.....

LEBillfish
09-08-2006, 09:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
............................15E. Ki-61-1c had a fire extinguisher system. Nuff said it's well documented.

......................... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

wasnt that you who posted in the forums that the Ki-61-Ic got one (for 4 times use) in a patch without documantation in the Readme ?

sure, i never used it so far - so i cant say how sufficent it is when your plane is on fire..... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's an old post, what I said above I need to collect all the info from the various threads and update this..........and yes, the fire extinguisher system was updated by Maddox Games to work, though I don't know if it is correct in that it applies to just the engine, or the fuel tanks too as it should.

What I keep trying to tell folks.......If they can fix something within reason, they will.....To rebuild an entire model just not practical, yet many little fixes Maddox games has no problem correcting if you supply documentation.

So of the biggies above, I doubt they can fix (though hope) the bomb/fuel stores drop issue, yet the windscreen oiling issue should be easy....Just turn it off.

MucusG
09-08-2006, 09:30 AM
Superb work LeBillfish

There is one small error I wish to point out. I do this as you are clearly a perfectionist.

You state the weight of fuel as 6lb per gallon which is correct, however your conversion to 0.286kg/L is incorrect. It should be around 0.72 kg per litre (which is for modern avgas - I have no idea if this is the same as WW2 fuel but it will be in the ballpark)

6lb is approx 2.8kg, 1 gallon approx 4 litres, thus 1 litre approx 0.7kg per litre.

Again I do this just to help you improve the quality of your information, not out of petty nit-picking.

Keep up the great work

S`
WTE_MucusG

LEBillfish
09-08-2006, 10:13 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MucusG:
Superb work LeBillfish

There is one small error I wish to point out. I do this as you are clearly a perfectionist.

You state the weight of fuel as 6lb per gallon which is correct, however your conversion to 0.286kg/L is incorrect. It should be around 0.72 kg per litre (which is for modern avgas - I have no idea if this is the same as WW2 fuel but it will be in the ballpark)

6lb is approx 2.8kg, 1 gallon approx 4 litres, thus 1 litre approx 0.7kg per litre.

Again I do this just to help you improve the quality of your information, not out of petty nit-picking.

Keep up the great work

S`
WTE_MucusG </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Noted, recalculated and corrected.........Thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Tater-SW-
09-08-2006, 10:27 AM
There are 3.79 liters in a gallon (.26g/l) Avgas is 6.02lb/gallon. There are 2.2 pounds per kg.

(6.02lb/g)/(2.2lb/kg) = 2.73kg/g

(2.73kg/g)*(.26g/l) = 0.71kg/l

tater

Kaiser_W
09-10-2006, 07:29 PM
I too hav enoticed an issue with the bulges.

the bulge in my pilots pants is clearly too small.

LEBillfish
09-12-2006, 11:34 AM
"Partial" update of reference material (photographs, articles, url's, correspondence not added at this time to be updated):

J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #99-3 Ki-61/100 Serial Numbers, Dates of Assembly & Characteristics
J.I.Long's Airtell Field Notes Japanese Army Fighter "Tony"
J.I.Long's Airtell Research Report #86-1 Estimated Assembly Date For A WWII Japanese Aircraft/A Relic of the Air War over New Guinea/Type 3 Fighter Tony # 640
J.I.Long's A PacFront Extra, Cockpit Layout- Type 3 Fighter Model 1
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/ R.E.Cowley (Japanese inline engine comparisons)
J.I.Long's Airtell Letter Report Correspondence w/K.Weeks (Type 3 Fighter Reference Drawings)

1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 1, Fraus...Polish
1939-45 Fighters & Bombers of the Japanese Air Force Part 2, Fraus....Polish
Aero Detail #24, Nakajima Ki-84 Frank €œHayate€
Aero Detail #29, Nakajima Ki-43 Oscar €œHayabusa€
Aeroplane November 2005, Ki-100 Article
Aircraft Profile #118, The Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien, Rene J. Francillon
Avions #119, Ki-44 Shoki...French
Avions #122, Tateo Kato...French
Bf-109-B-E Selected Views, Author Unknown
Design Details of the Mitsubishi Kensei Engine, W.G.Owens
Emblems of the Rising Sun (IJAAF Markings), Peter Scott
F.A.O.W. # 16 Army Type 2 Fighter "Shoki" Ki-44...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 17 Army Type 3 Fighter "Hien" Ki-61...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 19 Army Type 4 Fighter "Hayate" Ki-84...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 21 Army Type 2 Fighter "Toryu" Ki-45...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 23 Army Type 5 fighter Kawasaki Ki-100€¦Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 27 Type 96 Carrier Fighter A5M...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 29 Type 97 Army Type 97 Fighter Ki-27... Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 32 Type 97 Carrier Torpedo Bomber, B5n, Kate...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 33 Type 99 Carrier Dive Bomber, D3A, Val...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 38 Type 100 Command Recon. Plane, Ki-46€¦..Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 53 Kyofu, Shinden, Shidenkai...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 59 G4M Mitsubishi Betty Type 1 Attack Bomber€¦.Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 61 Navy Interceptor J2M "Raiden"...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 65 Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa...Japanese
F.A.O.W. # 69 Navy Carrier Dive Bomber Suisei D4Y€¦€¦Japanese
€œF€ Gunnery Play, Variants, Crews & Details (Numerous IJA-IJN plane stats)€¦..
He-100 Select Views, author unknown
JAAF Camoflauge & Markings WWII, D.W. Thorpe
Japanese Aircraft Equipment 1940-1945, Robert C. Mikesh, Schiffer Publishing
Japanese Bomber Performance Charts, Author unknown
Japanese Military Aircraft Illustrated, Unknown (Japanese),...Japanese
Kawasaki Ki-61Hein in Japanese Army Air Force Service, R.M.Bueschell
Koku Fan, 1974-3
Maru Mechanic #43 J2M & N1K....Japanese
Maru Mechanic #46, P1Y & G4M€¦..Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #2, Ki-61 & Ki-48...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #6, Ki-45 & Ki-51...Japanese
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #?, E13A1, Jake...Japanese "Partial"
Mechanism of Military Aircraft #?, D3A1...Japanese "Partial"
ModelArt 272, Camouflage & Markings of IJN Fighters .......Japanese
ModelArt 493, Ki-84 Hayate€¦€¦Japanese
ModelArt 533, Camouflage & Markings of the IJA Bombers ....Japanese
Modelling Manual #?. Kawasaki Ki-61 Type 3 Fighter Hein€¦€¦Japanese
Monografie Lotnicze #5 Hien...Polish
Monografie Lotnicze #48 Ki-43...Polish
Monografie Lotnicze #78, North American B-25 Mitchell, K. Janowicz...Polish
Mushroom Model #6103 Yellow Series, Mitsubishi A6m Zero, Artur Juszcak
Mushroom Model #6107 Yellow Series, Mitsubishi A5M Claude, T. Januszewski
Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa in Japanese Army Air Force/RTAF/CAF/IPSF Service, R.M.Bueschell
Profile Publications #160, The Mitsubishi, G3M €œNell€
Romance of Engines, Chapters 36-38 (DB-601 vs. Ha-40)€¦.. Takashi Suzuki
Squadron Signal #34, B-25 Mitchell in Action
Squadron Signal #97, TBD Devastator in Action
Squadron Signal #122, SB2U Vindicator in Action
Squadron Signal #6059, Golden Wings 1941-1945 (USN-USMC Aircraft of WWII), J. Sullivan & D.Lucabaugh
Squadron Signal #6079, Thunderbolt, the Republic P47 Thunderbolt in the Pacific Theater, E.R.McDowell
T.A.I.U. Datasheets # 154A-1 thru 4 & 154A-1 thru 4, Ki-61-I & II
Zentrale fur wissenschaftliches Berichtswesen uber Luftfahrtforschung, Forschungsbericht FB505, 151/20 Mauser Cannon€¦€¦German

3/202 Kokutai, Waldemar Pajdosz & Andre Zbiegniewski's/Kagero
68th Sentai, K. Janowicz's/Kagero
7 December 1941, The Air Force Story, L.R.Arakaki & J.R.Kuborn
A War of their Own, Bombers Over the Southwest Pacific, Capt. M.K.Rodman
Aces of the Rising Sun, H. Sakaida
Air Force (US) Combat Units of WWII, Department of the Air Force, Maurer
Air Power & Warfare, United States Air Force Academy, Col. A.F.Hurley & Maj. R.C. Ehrhart
Air-to-Air Claims and Credits for Navy and Marine Corps Patrol Type Aircraft During World War II (Appendix 4), Mr. James C. Sawruk
Airlift & Airborne Operations in WWII, R.E.Bilstein
Airpower and Maneuver Warfare, M. van Creveld
Airpower in Three Wars, Gen. W.W.Momyer
Airpower Myths and Facts, Col.P.S.Meilinger
Aerial Interdiction, Air Power and the Land Battle in Three American Wars, E. Mark
Aeronotes 3, Deployments & OOBs
Aeronotes 4, New Guinea Area Operations
Airpower Employment of the 5th Air Force in the WWII SouthWest Pacific Theatre, Major James A. Barr
Archie to Sam, a Short Operational History of Ground Based Air Defense, K.P.Werrell
American Airpower Comes of Age Vol. 1, General Henry H. €œHap€ Arnold€s World War II Diaries, Maj.Gen. J.W.Huston
American Airpower Comes of Age Vol. 2, General Henry H. €œHap€ Arnold€s World War II Diaries, Maj.Gen. J.W.Huston
Capt. Nelson Flack: The rediscovery of a Black Sheep (Article), Master Sgt. Greg Henneman
Case Studies in the Achievement of Air Superiority, B.F.Cooling
Case Studies in the Development of Close Air Support, B.F.Cooling
Case Studies in Strategic Bombardment, R.C.Hall
China-Burma-India, AirForce Magazine, March, 2005 (Article)
Combat Chronology 1941-1945 (U.S. Army Air Forces in WWII), K.C.Carter & R.Mueller
Combat Sorties Flown by Fighters in Theatres vs. Japan, by Theatre & by Sortie, Jan.1943-Aug.1945 table
Combat Squadrons of the Air Force in WWII, Department of the Air Force, Maurer
Combat Tactics in the SouthWest Pacific, Capt. T.M. McGuire Jr.
Completing the Circle Around Rabaul, The Siezure of the Admiralties, Feb.- May 1944, David Osborn Scott
Enemy Aircraft Destroyed in European Theatre of Operations by Type of AAF Airplane, Aug.1942-May1945
Fifth Air Force Light & Medium Bomber Operations During 1942 & 1943: Building Doctrine & Forces That Triumphed In the Battle of the Bismark Sea & the Wewak Raid, Maj. T.D.Gann
General Kenny Reports, A Personal History of the Pacific War, G.C.Kenny
Hitting Home, The Air Offensive Against Japan, Daniel L. Haulman
How SouthWest Pacific Area Operations Influenced the Royal Austrailian Air Force, Major Jonathan B. Wills
I'm in the Army Now (New Guinea info), Roy S. Weaver Jr.
Imperial Japanese Army Air Units Battlefield Photograph Collection, Dainippon Kaiga Publ.
Introduction to the United States Air Force, Capt. B. Chance Saltzman & T.R. Searle
Japanese Air Operations in New Guinea, Shindo Hiriyuki
Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931 €" 1945, Hata, Izawa, Shores
Kenneth N. Walker, Airpowers Untempered Crusader, M. Byrd
Kogun, The Japanese Army in the Pacific War, Saburo Hayashi & Alvin D Coox
MacArthur's Eagles: The U. S. Air War over New Guinea, 1943-1944, Lex McAulay
Mission Type Orders in Joint Air Operations (Command and control, New Guinea highlighted), Maj. Michael E. Fischer
Naval Aviation in the Pacific, United States Navy
Osprey Aviation Elite #5, B29 Hunters of the JAAF, K.Takaki & H.Sakaida
Osprey Aircraft of the Aces #13, Japanese Army Air Force Aces 1937-1945, H. Sakaida
Osprey Aircraft of the Aces #22, Imperial Japanese Navy Aces 1937-1945, H. Sakaida
Performance of B25 Aircraft of 38th Bomb Group During 18 Months of Combat in New Guinea, W.J. English
Piercing the Fog, Intelligence and Army Air Forces Operations in World War II, J.F.Kreis
Preemptive Defense, Allied Air Power Versus Hitler€s V-Weapons, 1943€"1945, Adam L. Gruen
Principles of War, Gen. Carl von Clausewitz
Strategic Air Warfare, An Interview with Generals C.E.LeMay, L.W.Johnson, D.A.Burchinal, & J.J. Catton, R.H.Kohn and J.P.Harahan
Strategy for Defeat, The Luftwaffe, 1933-1945, W.MURRAY
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 1, Plans and Early Operations, January 1939 to August 1942
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 2, Europe-Torch to Pointblank, August 1942 to December 1943
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 3, Europe-Argument to VE Day, January 1944 to May 1945
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 4, The Pacific-Guadalcanal to Saipan, August 1942 to July 1944
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 5, The Pacific-Matterhorn to Nagasaki, June 1944 to August 1945
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 6, Men & Planes
The Army Air Forces In World War II, Vol. 7, Services Around the World
The Enlisted Experience, Conversations with Chief Master Sergeants of the Air Force, J.R.Bednarek
The Quest, Haywood Hansell and American Strategic Bombing in World War II, C.Griffith
The Strategic Air War Against Germany & Japan, a Memoir, Maj.Gen. H.S.Hansell Jr.
The United States Strategic Bombing Surveys (European & Pacific War),
They Fought With What They Had, W.D.Edmonds
U.S.A.F. Historical Study #113, The 5th Air Force in the Huon Peninsula Campaign, January to October 1943
U.S.A.F. Historical Study #116, The 5th Air Force in the Huon Peninsula Campaign, Oct. 1943 to Feb. 1944
United States Air Force and its Antecedents Published and Printed Unit Histories, a Bibliography, J.T.Controvich
U.S. Naval Aviation in the Pacific, The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy
United States Naval Aviation 1910-1995, Part 5 WWII
Warpath Across the Pacific, 345th Bomb Group, "Air Apaches", L.J.Hickey
Weapon of Denial, Air Power & the Battle for New Guinea, Gary Null
With Courage, the U.S. Army Air Forces in WWII, Nalty, Shiner, Watson

Trying to Obtain:
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Revenge of the Red Raiders, 22nd Bomb Group, "Red Raiders"
L.J.Hickey, Taylor, Tagaya, Kens Men Against the Empire, 43rd Bomb Group, "Kens Men"
L.J.Hickey, Claringbould, Rampage of the Roarin 20's, 312th Bomb Group, "Roarin 20's"
L.J.Hickey, Tagaya, Saga of the Sun Setters, 38th Bomb Group, "Sun Setters"
Model Art 263 & 428, Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
Maru Mechanic 2 & 37 Ki-61 & Ki-61/Ki-100
F.A.O.W. "Blue Series" #98
Watanabe Yohji's, Hien: the Struggle of the Type 3 Fighter
Jiro Kimata's Rikugun Koku Senshi
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 4 Kawasaki
Nihon Kokuki Soshyu, Vol. 5 Nakajima
Gakken Series, No.???? - Ki-61
Gakken Series, No.7 - RABAUL AIR WAR
Gakken Series, No.28 - IJN/IJA/American Bases
Gakken Series, No.52 - Nakajima Type 1 Fighter, Hayabusa
Airview #???? Ki-61
MILITARY AIRCRAFT #16, Imperial Japanese Army Aircraft of the Pacific War

Texas LongHorn
09-14-2006, 09:30 AM
Dang Billfish... with THAT kind of documentation you could write a book yourself &lt;ggg.&gt; Of course the footnotes would be at least half the book! Keep up the good work, and I still love that avatar by the way. All the best, LongHorn

CeeTee2004
09-18-2006, 04:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spitzfiya:
Wow...I dont understand why one would care to know and research all this?

I mean WOW! I thought i was obsessed...seriously how do you find all the time and energy to do this?

Ever just stop and think "This is pointless" to some extent...

I mean...I love IL2 for the combat flying...But I have no urge to nitpick technical aspects of anything, mainly because I was never around in 1940 unlike some of you... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

The secret is to understand you know nothing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



A-Men...

It€s amazing when you get to see up close how many people are willing to take PC gaming to a ridiculous extreme!!

LEBillfish
09-18-2006, 07:41 PM
PC gaming?..........What does history have to do with PC gaming?....Oh that's right, it turns it into a simulation http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

So tell me, what part of knowledge/education scares you.......or is ignorance bliss?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CeeTee2004:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by spitzfiya:
Wow...I dont understand why one would care to know and research all this?

I mean WOW! I thought i was obsessed...seriously how do you find all the time and energy to do this?

Ever just stop and think "This is pointless" to some extent...

I mean...I love IL2 for the combat flying...But I have no urge to nitpick technical aspects of anything, mainly because I was never around in 1940 unlike some of you... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

The secret is to understand you know nothing! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>



A-Men...

It€s amazing when you get to see up close how many people are willing to take PC gaming to a ridiculous extreme!! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>