PDA

View Full Version : Any other Ki-100-I Ko fans?



Doug_Thompson
05-03-2005, 09:34 PM
The Ki-100 is "flyable, ready" in the last patch notice from Oleg, but there seem to be no recent threads about the plane.

Anybody else looking forward to this one? It was basically a happy accident, with a radial engine stuck onto "Tony" airframes after the factory making inline engines was bombed out. To everyone's surprise, it was better than the "Tony" and much, much more reliable.

3.JG51_BigBear
05-03-2005, 09:40 PM
I'm interested in flying it but I don't think it will be that big an improvement over the 61. It won't be any faster than the Ki-61s and any increased manueverability is wasted in my opinion because the 61s already so outclass late war American fighters in turning combat. It will be interesting to see if we pick up some rearward visibility, all depends on the cockpit model I guess. I'll take anything at this point, I just need something new to play with.

han freak solo
05-03-2005, 10:23 PM
I'm looking forward to it. I voted for it on the poll on the PF website a while back. I don't know jack about it technically, but any new pacific aircraft is gonna be needed for this game.

I wish we could also get the <span class="ev_code_RED">George</span>. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

VW-IceFire
05-03-2005, 10:31 PM
I'm looking forward to it. I think the Ki-61 is a real forgotten gem that not many give much credit for.

The Ki-100 will be essentially more of the same but with some interesting twists and well suited for those late war scenario.

I think once everyone realized that the Ki-100 was a Ki-61 improvement rather than the ultra-mega-super Japanese fighter that some had assumed it to be the forums quieted down.

Waldo.Pepper
05-03-2005, 10:39 PM
I guess it will be ok.
But really..
Bah! Army plane! No hook. What good is that!

Badsight.
05-03-2005, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I'm looking forward to it. I think the Ki-61 is a real forgotten gem that not many give much credit for.

The Ki-100 will be essentially more of the same but with some interesting twists and well suited for those late war scenario.

I think once everyone realized that the Ki-100 was a Ki-61 improvement rather than the ultra-mega-super Japanese fighter that some had assumed it to be the forums quieted down. WORD !

shinden1974
05-03-2005, 11:04 PM
I'm definitly looking forward to it. The Ki-100 like most japanese planes reflected the japanese obsession with maneuverability which I would guess leads to the speed problems in common with all japanese planes from excessive parasitic drag. The Ki-100 had an engine comparable to the p-51 in power and was lighter but still much slower. The engine on the George was massive but the plane was no speed demon.

I think the people who try these planes out will find them surprisingly effective, they are slower, but they have a great power to weight ratio, and I'm sure many will appreciate their firepower.

Doug_Thompson
05-03-2005, 11:07 PM
Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
I'm interested in flying it but I don't think it will be that big an improvement over the 61. It won't be any faster than the Ki-61s and any increased manueverability is wasted in my opinion because the 61s already so outclass late war American fighters in turning combat.

According to Francillion, the Ki-100 was very slightly slower than the Ki-61 -- on paper. In the war, the Tony's inline rarely gave the desired performance. The Ki-100 was lighter and more manueverable than the high-altitude version of the Ki-61 it replaced. It might have better acceleration. It was, by all accounts, easy and forgiving to fly.

I imagine it as a sort of Japanese La-7.


It will be interesting to see if we pick up some rearward visibility, all depends on the cockpit model I guess. I'll take anything at this point, I just need something new to play with.

After the initial batch of converted Ki-61 airframes, the Japanese produced purpose-built Ki-100s with a bubble canopy. Let's hope the designers use that one, but I'll still be pleased if they don't.

han freak solo
05-03-2005, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
I guess it will be ok.
But really..
Bah! Army plane! No hook. What good is that!

You can see from my sig what good it is. No hook indeed!

shinden1974
05-03-2005, 11:15 PM
her's an article about it, don't know anything about the source, but it's pretty good reading, everybody and their mother probably knows about it:

http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki100.html#RTFToC1

Doug_Thompson
05-03-2005, 11:17 PM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
... I wish we could also get the <span class="ev_code_RED">George</span>. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Here, here.


Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I'm looking forward to it. I think the Ki-61 is a real forgotten gem that not many give much credit for.

The Ki-61's whole sad story is in a book you've probably seen already, VW-Icefire. It's "Fire in the Sky" by Eric M. Bergerud. He hasn't got the liveliest writing style, but everything's in there about the air war in the Southwest Pacific.

The Ki-61 was a great plane. It was the only plane that Allied pilots couldn't dive away from when things got hot.

It's the support services that failed. The author says in that book somewhere that the Ki-61 was the perfect illustration of everything that was wrong with the Japanese air war, from manufacturing to doctrine to field operations. I highly recommend the book. Just for example, Tonys would be chronically grounded for lack of spare parts, in large part because there was no efforts to salvage parts from inoperable planes. Other aircraft had the same problem, but the Tony suffered most because they were relatively complex.


I think once everyone realized that the Ki-100 was a Ki-61 improvement rather than the ultra-mega-super Japanese fighter that some had assumed it to be the forums quieted down.

I hope you're right -- but predict that the first time a Ki-100 shoot down a Corsair, somebody will throw a fit.

Waldo.Pepper
05-03-2005, 11:20 PM
Looking at the development shots of the plane we are getting it looks like the early Ki-100.

I.E. it looks like it is the one WIHTOUT the bubble top.

Doug_Thompson
05-03-2005, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
Looking at the development shots of the plane we are getting it looks like the early Ki-100.

I.E. it looks like it is the one WIHTOUT the bubble top.

Drat, slightly.

Doug_Thompson
05-03-2005, 11:35 PM
Originally posted by shinden1974:
I'm definitly looking forward to it. The Ki-100 like most japanese planes reflected the japanese obsession with maneuverability which I would guess leads to the speed problems in common with all japanese planes from excessive parasitic drag. The Ki-100 had an engine comparable to the p-51 in power and was lighter but still much slower. The engine on the George was massive but the plane was no speed demon.

The Ki-100 used the only engine available in any quantity -- a simple but rugged bomber engine that everybody thought was too wide and would produce too much drag for a fighter. Instead -- thanks in part to a close study of the FW-190 -- the conversion was a complete success.


I think the people who try these planes out will find them surprisingly effective, they are slower, but they have a great power to weight ratio, and I'm sure many will appreciate their firepower.

I can't deny that I'm also looking forward to the 'scoot' from the good power loading.

LEBillfish
05-04-2005, 12:44 AM
Of late flying as
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v707/Kaytoo/78th/78Fweb.jpg <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Taii Ktu*78th*HikoSentai, 14th Hikodan, 4th Kokugun </span>
I have as often as the server allows flown Ki-61 finding it to be one of the superior planes in the IL2 Series in many ways. As with all things forever you have to give to get....Ever drop the throttle to tighten a turn? Well though I'm betting the Ki-100 will be a real powerhouse, I'd also "guess" some of the fine points of the Ki-61 will be lost.

Ki-43 or Ki-84?.....Most cases except heavy bomber intercept give me the 43, in fact, I could confidently say I've only flown the 84 maybe 6 times since we got it in AEP or before....The 43 a couple hundred just as confidently

.....Ki-61 or Ki-100? Well, though I'm sure I'll try the 100 most of the sport for me is taking a "supposedly" lesser plane and taking the day......Though you never know....But the Ki-61 and the 78th are forever linked...So I'm betting on the 61. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

alert_1
05-04-2005, 04:54 AM
But....isn't Ki100 a '45 plane? How many '45 servers are online?

Feathered_IV
05-04-2005, 04:54 AM
Bah! Army plane! No hook. What good is that!

Yeah, Army planes are for the peasantry. Navy aircraft are for Samurai http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif.

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 05:54 AM
Originally posted by alert_1:
But....isn't Ki100 a '45 plane? How many '45 servers are online?

Oh yes. It is definitely a '45 plane.

As for LEBillfish' praise of the Ki-61, it's all deserved. But I'm still looking forward to the greater HP to weight characteristics.

Aero_Shodanjo
05-04-2005, 06:06 AM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Bah! Army plane! No hook. What good is that!

Yeah, Army planes are for the peasantry. Navy aircraft are for Samurai http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif But in the end it's always the peasants that feed the samurais http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Anyway speaking about the Ki-100, I admit I thought it was - at first - to be a lot faster compared to its predecessor. But since it wasnt, can anyone tell me more about this plane performance data such as climb, turn and roll rate compared to Ki-61?

And btw, for the "samurais" i/e navy boys http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gif I believe that we'll be getting flyable George and Jack soon although they may not be in 4.0.

TgD Thunderbolt56
05-04-2005, 06:36 AM
I'm looking forward to it for the purpose of adding another dimension to the PTO planesets. I too like the Ki-61 (even over the Zero most of the time). In fact, I like to take the Tony when most everyone else is flying the Zero because the enemy pilots will fly with the defensive mindset that they're DF'ing Zeros and start diving and rolling which the Ki-61 does in spades comparatively.

With the disdain the Ki-84 gets and its apparent absence in many servers, the addition of another plane with different qualities should make those PF maps a bit more interesting.


TB

LEBillfish
05-04-2005, 06:59 AM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Bah! Army plane! No hook. What good is that! Yeah, Army planes are for the peasantry. Navy aircraft are for Samurai http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anyone else seeing some confusion on the part of the Carp Chaser?.....Just because you want to play land based Samurai while being a shrimp pirate doesn't make you one....Dai IJAAF!

hawkmeister
05-04-2005, 07:02 AM
I'm looking forward to it muchly. It's real life strengths are lost in this sim, but the large increase in power to weight ratio compared to the Ki-61 will be most welcome. No faster, but should be alot more impressive in the low end.

Any additional Japanese stuff is greatly appreciated!

-Bill

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by Aero_Shodanjo:

Anyway speaking about the Ki-100, I admit I thought it was - at first - to be a lot faster compared to its predecessor. But since it wasnt, can anyone tell me more about this plane performance data such as climb, turn and roll rate compared to Ki-61?


All Francillion said is that performance was improved in every way except for speed, where there was a 5 mph loss.

I'm glad for the American's sake in 1942 that nobody got the idea of fitting a radial on a Tony until '45.

As for land-based peasants, the mainstay Ki-43 was even more of an extreme pilot's plane than the Zero. Everything was sacrificed for responsiveness. As one U.S. ace put it, an experienced P-38 pilot had nothing to fear from an Oscar, but it was the type of plane that would send you home talking to yourself.

3.JG51_BigBear
05-04-2005, 08:24 AM
Originally posted by Doug_Thompson:
I'm glad for the American's sake in 1942 that nobody got the idea of fitting a radial on a Tony until '45.


I doubt it would have made any difference. Allied pilots knew how to handle the more nimble Japanese planes and really after the victory at Midway, the allies stuck it to the Japanese pilots who were getting more and more green. The scary part of the ki-61 wasn't so much its manueverability but its ability to dive with Corsairs and Hellcats. Baring a significant increase in speed, I don't think any improvements to the plane would make it more effective than it was with the inline engine.

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Doug_Thompson:
I'm glad for the American's sake in 1942 that nobody got the idea of fitting a radial on a Tony until '45.


I doubt it would have made any difference. Allied pilots knew how to handle the more nimble Japanese planes and really after the victory at Midway, the allies stuck it to the Japanese pilots who were getting more and more green. The scary part of the ki-61 wasn't so much its manueverability but its ability to dive with Corsairs and Hellcats. Baring a significant increase in speed, I don't think any improvements to the plane would make it more effective than it was with the inline engine. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In game terms or proving ground performance, you're right, but in supply terms there would have been an enormous difference.

The inline was a big bottleneck in Tony production. According to Bergerud, Tony output was only 50 units a month for most of 1943,[Note: this date is corrected. See LEBillfish q.v.] and didn't exceed 100 units a month until November. Even then, many of the aircraft failed inspection because of problems with the inline engine. They were kept in Japan for refurbishing.

The Tony's main theater in 1943[cq] was New Guinea, but the nearest supply depot for Tony spare parts was 1,000 miles away. If a Tony needed a new engine, the plane had to be loaded on a ship and hauled back to occupied Clark Field near Manila.

=====

In fairness, though, I doubt whether the 1,500 hp radial that powered the Ki-100 was available as early as 1942. There probably would have been only 1,200 hp units available at that time. However, the 1943[ed] Tony was a 1,200 hp plane even with an inline. The Ki-100 airframe was an upgraded, high-altitude Tony.

3.JG51_BigBear
05-04-2005, 09:03 AM
I see your point. My next question would be, was there a radial engine that could have been installed on the ki-61 that would have given the aircraft comperable performance to those equipped with the DB copy way before it was actually done?

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 09:07 AM
Originally posted by 3.JG51_BigBear:
I see your point. My next question would be, was there a radial engine that could have been installed on the ki-61 that would have given the aircraft comperable performance to those equipped with the DB copy way before it was actually done?

Looks like your reply came in while I was editing the earlier post. No, it would not have been possible to build a Ki-100 in 1942, as far as I can tell.

I think their were 1,200 hp engines available, though. Later versions of the Zero were getting engines in that category, I believe, but I'll have to check.

LEBillfish
05-04-2005, 09:08 AM
FYI, the Tony did not start to see action till at best July 43....Here is some info I'm collecting as I try and discover info for the 78th HikoSentai....

78th Hiko Sentai Formation:
Mar 1942 to Apr 1943: China, Manchuria
No.68 and No.78 Hiko Sentai were both originally formed in 31 Mar 1942 - formed at Kyojo - China with three chutai from elements of 24 and 33 Hiko Sentai. First aircraft used were Ki-27's, but soon both units were exclusively equipped with the Ki-61 and sent to new Guinea in 1943.

The Army and Navy General Staffs had several meetings and finally the 6th Air Division was established in November 1942 with headquarters in Rabaul. First, the 12th Air Brigade with Hayabusa (Ki-43 Oscar) fighters was sent to the Southern Area (Rabaul, Solomons, New Guinea) but due to high losses the unit was replaced by the 14th Air Brigade consisting of the 68th and 78th Sentais equipped with Kawasaki "Hien" (Ki-61 Tony) fighters. It was a new unit with new airplanes and high expectations were placed on it.

First deliveries of the Hien (as the plane was officially nicknamed in Japan) were made to the 23rd Independent Squadron in February 1943, this outfit serving as a pilot training and conversion unit. In early 1943 Ki-61 Ia's were transfered to the Tokorozawa Army Maintenance School (fewer than 150 of the machines had been delivered at this time). Soon after the 68th Fighter Regiment began conversion training and was quickly followed by the 78th. These units were pushed into combat as a Japanese Army build-up was begun in the Rabaul area and became part of the 4th Air Army.

The delivery of the two unit's machines included flying the aircraft considerable distances as they islandhopped their way south. With the continuing design problems that remained large numbers of the aircraft were lost in transit due to mechanical malfunctions. This relegated the 68th and 78th to a minimal amount of equipment during their early deployment. Soon the 33rd Fighter Regiment would also join them in what could only be called combat and advanced prototype analysis.

The first actual combat operations began just a few months later when the 68th and 78th Sentais were deployed to New Guinea.

Reflecting their revised strategy, the Army decided to strengthen its air forces in the New Guinea area. Earlier, on 18 March, the Army High Command had decided to strengthen its air forces in the South Pacific generally, starting with the replacement of the fighter units in the 6th Air Division. The newly assigned units were the 68th and 78th Sentais of the 14th Air Brigade, which flew the Kawasaki Type 3 "Tony" fighter. These units started arriving in Rabaul in late April, and were duly deployed to New Guinea. On 2 April the Army further decided to dispatch to the New Guinea front, among other units, the 13th Sentai (flying the Kawasaki Type 2 "Toryu" twin-engine fighter) and the 24th Sentai (flying the venerable "Oscar"). These units began arriving in Rabaul in the latter half of May.

Apr 1943 - both units were exclusively equipped with the Ki-61, transferred to Rabaul with 30 fighters (from Manchuria to Japan; then to Truk via aircraft carrier)

Lost Squadron:
68th Hiko Sentai trip from Japan to Truk to Rabaul:
The word at Rabaul was that the Ki-61 fighters would make short work of the American fighters and bombers. As the Ki-61s were rather new airplanes ground crew members had yet to be trained. Also, the radios put into the Tonys were old radios from the Type 97 (Nate) fighters the unit was equipped with previously. However, they did not work well. Also, the new liquid-cooled V-12 engines were unique to the Tony creating new challenges for ground crews to service, who were previous only familiar with radials. Time passed, and the 18th Army in New Guinea became quite impatient. "Where are those Army planes?" is what one heard at Army headquarters. The C.O of the 14th Air Brigade, Colonel Takeo Tateyama decided to send the 68th Sentai ahead and made preparations for them to be ferried to Truk by Army aircraft carriers. It is interesting to note, that the Japanese Army also had their own small transport carriers.

Ki-61 Transported to Truk:
On April 4th, 1943 they left Yokosuka and arrived at Truk on April 10th. The planes were loaded off and stood by waiting for orders. As enemy subs were expected to be in the area between Truk and Rabaul the Fighters were ordered to fly there. The distance was 1200km which was just inside the range of the Tonys. The trip would take approx. three hours at an estimated air speed of 400km/h. Four months earlier this trip was made by 60 Oscars under the guidance of a G4M Betty, and all aircraft had arrived safely.
It had been done before and all the pilots were positive that it could be done by them as well. 3 Dinahs were going to Rabaul anyway and the plan was for the Tonys to tag along. On April 25, 30 Ki-61s took off. However, due to engine trouble and bad weather they decided to turn back. All except one fighter missing landed back on Truk. On April 27th they were giving it a second try. 27 planes were divided in 2 groups and accompanied by one Dinah each, winged their way towards Rabaul. The second group with 14 fighters and one Dinah arrived safely at Rabaul's Vunakanau Aerodrome but as they were welcomed they were surprise that the first group had not arrived yet.
What they later learned was this: The first group was following the Dinah "pathfinder" when one after one dropped out of formation with engine difficulties. The Dinah turned back but lost sight of them. The Tonys' compasses also started to act up and there was no way they could make it to Rabaul. Only two planes made it back to Truk and one landed at Kavieng . Two Fighters went missing, and 8 made crash landings the tiny Nuguria Atoll, 300 km north of Rabaul.

Search For the Lost Squadron:
When the 8th Fleet send a vessel there all they found was only one of the pilots [identity unknown] in bloodstained clothes.
John Douglas adds:
"Kevin Baldwin, who I told about the Nuguria Tonys, three years ago. He has a dive boat, and went to Nuguria to find them a year or two ago. He said that the planes seem to have landed outside the atoll in deep water. They couldn't find any trace of them. The locals remembered the incident. When I told him about one survivor. he agreed with me, but said that the locals had killed the rest, leaving one survivor who was also beaten up by the locals."

78th Hiko Sentai ordered to take a different route:
After this disaster, the C.O of the 14th Air Brigade ordered the 78th Sentai to take a different route. After a 9,000 km trip from Kyushu-Okinawa-Taiwan-Manila-Davao-Menado and New Guinea they finally arrived in Rabaul in June 1943. It had taken them two weeks. This incident was a big shock for the Army. Steps were taken to train their pilots in long-distance trans ocean flying but time and the war situation were against them.

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 09:15 AM
Re: 1943 vs. 1942

Looks like I got my years mixed up. That's what I get for relying on memory. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

So strike what was said earlier, and substitute 1943 -- Tony production didn't exceed 100 a month until November, 1943.

By that time, there were certainly 1,200 hp radials widely available, and possibly some 1,500 hp.

==========

Re: The crashes.

What a waste.

Here's another problem (if I'm remembering correctly this time.) The best SW Pacific base for the Japanese, the one that would come closest to handling the demanding maintenance requirements of the Tony, was Rabaul -- which was put under total Navy administration sometime in '43.

So, in effect, the Army's Tony was sent off to dirt strips in the New Guinea jungle. It was a combination of the most delicate plane and the worst available conditions.

=========

Is there any truth to the story that a squadron of Ki-100s shot down 14 Hellcats near Okinawa without loss?

VW-IceFire
05-04-2005, 11:29 AM
The Ki-100 is apparently slower but I think the speed curve makes it faster at the altitudes of 0-4000m where it achieves maximum speed and power. So while it trades high altitude speed its certainly better at medium altitudes.

Thats what I remember. Firepower is pretty decent...2x20mm cannons on the engine cowling and heavy machine guns in the wings.

Yeah its a 1945 machine but it should be a good counter against over confident Corsair and Mustang pilots. But its definately requiring of a good offensive superior E bounce to achieve kills...like the Ki-61.

JG53Frankyboy
05-04-2005, 11:59 AM
this Okinawa story is most propably a VERY big overclaim - like it was normal http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

nevertheless, the F6F pilots will have a hard time when they have to fight the Ki-100 , there im be pretty sure. sure, in dogfightservers that will seldom happen , few pilots will select the Hellcat than.
but in COOP missions, well, they will sometimes have to http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Loki-PF
05-04-2005, 12:12 PM
Originally posted by Doug_Thompson:

I hope you're right -- but predict that the first time a Ki-100 shoot down a Corsair, somebody will throw a fit.

Corsairs and Hellcats get shot down on a dialy/nightly basis by 61's (I know because I end up flying Axis more than Allied because of balance) so why exactly will there be fit throwing?

BTW Doug, do you ever fly online? If so whats your handle? Do you ever fly for the Red side or are you a dedicated Axis pilot?

goshikisen
05-04-2005, 12:27 PM
A Ki-100 1 Otsu would have been interesting... improved situational awareness.

Anybody had an opportunity to see the Otsu at Hendon? I see that it's had a change in paint scheme since it's move to the new museum.

http://www.airventure.de/hendon/hendon04_mof_ki100_02.jpg

VW-IceFire
05-04-2005, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by Loki-PF:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Doug_Thompson:

I hope you're right -- but predict that the first time a Ki-100 shoot down a Corsair, somebody will throw a fit.

Corsairs and Hellcats get shot down on a dialy/nightly basis by 61's (I know because I end up flying Axis more than Allied because of balance) so why exactly will there be fit throwing?

BTW Doug, do you ever fly online? If so whats your handle? Do you ever fly for the Red side or are you a dedicated Axis pilot? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What server do you tend to fly? I find it hard to find good PTO specific servers.

I already have splashed many Corsair and Hellcat pilots. Most are new pilots in these cases and they tend to overreact and stall the plane trying to get away.

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by Loki-PF:
Corsairs and Hellcats get shot down on a daily/nightly basis by 61's (I know because I end up flying Axis more than Allied because of balance) so why exactly will there be fit throwing?

Yeah, I did go too far.

I'm recalling some very spirited forum comments about the Ki-84 when it came out. There was also quite a discussion about the prospect of adding one of my favorites, the Dornier 335.

The impression was left from the Ki-84 discussion that anything that might kill a late-model American plane, particularly a P-51, was viewed as some kind of heresy by a small but vocal crowd. As for the Dornier 335, I never suspected that it would beat a 'stang in a dogfight, but the idea of a prop plane that simply flies faster than a P-51 upset some people. I assumed, probably wrongly, that Corsairs would have a similar lobby.

Still, I shouldn't have generalized. Other threads surely have some Japanese and German fans who get agitated, too.

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 02:35 PM
BTW Doug, do you ever fly online? If so whats your handle? Do you ever fly for the Red side or are you a dedicated Axis pilot?

Actually, no. So I keep quiet on most topics here unless there's some history I can bring up.

That may change. I very recently upgraded to a machine that can really handle Il-2. My old one was okay for playing around in set-piece dogfights, but got very choppy when there were plenty of planes in the air, even in single-player. Still have only a phone modem, though.

I'll fly Reds if I ever do go online. I have an incurable soft spot for the Russian people, who endured Communism and fought Nazism. Much of the reason I bought Il-2 in the first place and stuck with it was the Russian connection. That must surprise anybody who sees my Dornier avatar, but I have a personal stake in the Do 335. Many people, including me, argued hard for getting it in the game because it's an interesting design. We were promptly accused of trying to give the Germans some sort of "uber" plane. This was particularly ironic, considering my Russian preferences, and I sort of dug in with the Do 335.

Late-model LaGGs are sweet. Something about big radial engines and cannons that have enough ammo.

Japanese are attractive, too. The prospect of flying Ki-61s, 84s and 100s is very tempting.

Some of the old biplanes in this game are a real hoot. The first time I pulled a hard (relatively speaking) vertical manuever in a Gladiator and had my engine chonk out because of lost fuel pressure, I almost laughed out loud. Is there an "antiques" server for these old crates?

I really wish Maddox Games would do a WWI version.

JG52Karaya-X
05-04-2005, 02:36 PM
It would be interesting to know what a Ki61 with a DB605AM or ASM or DB could have been like...

Dunno if an ASM or DB engine would have fit though as both had larger turbochargers fitted to provide better high-alt performance...

Anyway, 1850HP on a Ki61 would have rocked http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Doug_Thompson
05-04-2005, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
It would be interesting to know what a Ki61 with a DB605AM or ASM or DB could have been like...

Dunno if an ASM or DB engine would have fit though as both had larger turbochargers fitted to provide better high-alt performance...

Anyway, 1850HP on a Ki61 would have rocked http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

There were plans for the Ki-100 II with a turbocharger and water-methanol booster, according to Francillion, but not a bigger engine. Apparently, it was quite a chore just to get the 1,500 hp on. The booster was needed for better high-altitude performance. Apparently, the Ki-100 had better performance below 26,000 feet but the Ki-100 II was much better once you entered high-flying B-29 territory.

Oddly, there was a plan to take the Ki-84 and put the smaller, simpler and much more reliable 1,500 powerplant in it. A prototype, the Ki-116, was built and it weighed 1,000 pounds less than a regular Ki-84. It looked very promising, but the war ended.

p1ngu666
05-04-2005, 10:13 PM
Originally posted by goshikisen:
A Ki-100 1 Otsu would have been interesting... improved situational awareness.

Anybody had an opportunity to see the Otsu at Hendon? I see that it's had a change in paint scheme since it's move to the new museum.

http://www.airventure.de/hendon/hendon04_mof_ki100_02.jpg

i took a few pics of it, ill dig them out tomoz if i remmber.

also, be nice to have a decent japanease ride, ki43 is nice, zero varies from ok to dire, ki61 really isnt all that great, and theres the ki84 which is wildly considered a n00b ride.

oh and radials are more draggy than inlines, so u need to make more power.

thats why p51 is close in speed to p47, but is down on power by a fair bit

EnGaurde
05-05-2005, 12:53 AM
The impression was left from the Ki-84 discussion that anything that might kill a late-model American plane, particularly a P-51, was viewed as some kind of heresy by a small but vocal crowd

aaah every now and then i see a post that warms my cold, cynical heart.

there is common sense left in the world.

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


"Kevin Baldwin, who I told about the Nuguria Tonys, three years ago. He has a dive boat, and went to Nuguria to find them a year or two ago. He said that the planes seem to have landed outside the atoll in deep water. They couldn't find any trace of them. The locals remembered the incident. When I told him about one survivor. he agreed with me, but said that the locals had killed the rest, leaving one survivor who was also beaten up by the locals."

granted, the japanese did not treat prisoners well, but what a desparate lonely way to die. Executed by local tribesmen using crude stabbing or blunt crushing weapons, miles from anywhere, alone and most likely injured from crash landings or half drowned if you bailed out.

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

LEXX_Luthor
05-05-2005, 07:02 PM
Many stories on that...

1942, Dutch East Indies campaign ~> http://www.geocities.com/dutcheastindies

Many Britt and Dutch soldier escaped into Borneo and Other jungles, only to be tracked and killed or captured by the locals and handed to the Japanese.

On the other hand, many units of locals withdrew into jungle and gave the Japanese an equally miserable experience. Truly a fascinating war, the Dutch jungle islands--and this nowhere near the well known Guadacanal or The Slot.



The link below is a Fascinating story (partially) reconstructed from diary of Zero pilot Murakami who ran out of fuel over Solomon Sea during Guadacanal escort mission. Pilot was cared for by the locals...read it now...very interesting how the authors tell the story in <span class="ev_code_yellow">deep</span> relation to the larger military events happening on nearby islands like Goodenough for example. The Trobriand Islands this pilot canoed around with the locals are just off our PF New Guinea map. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

~ http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/rdunn/murakami/murakami.htm


This article shows Galer did not shoot down Murakami nor did Murakami die that day. Moreover, Murakami's ultimate demise involved events ranging across the entire breadth of the €œtriangle of conflict.€ Herewith is presented (with due apologies to Paul Harvey) €œthe rest of the story€ of Shigenori Murakami. Only by exploring events from another corner of the €œtriangle€ far removed from Guadalcanal could evidence of Murakami's fate be found and the events surrounding it be put in perspective.

p1ngu666
05-05-2005, 11:08 PM
yep, locals went either side, mostly i think they disliked or hated the japanease.

on a ray mears program i watched 10 allied prisoners escape burma railway, hack thru the jungle for weeks, find a river, make a raft, float abit then it falls apart in rapids and there spotted on the bank by locals... who sell them back the japanease http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
5 of them died in the attempt, all where really bad off, and they where starved... no survival training, so they had hardly any food in a food rich environment http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Aero_Shodanjo
05-06-2005, 01:19 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
yep, locals went either side, mostly i think they disliked or hated the japanease.

on a ray mears program i watched 10 allied prisoners escape burma railway, hack thru the jungle for weeks, find a river, make a raft, float abit then it falls apart in rapids and there spotted on the bank by locals... who sell them back the japanease http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
5 of them died in the attempt, all where really bad off, and they where starved... no survival training, so they had hardly any food in a food rich environment http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

As a member of the "locals' descendant" (well, sort of http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif) there are reasons and backgrounds of why they're turned their back on their European ruler and later - after the Japanese conquered the area - turned their back again and fought the Japanese.

In general, from what Ive learned through history books, there were sentiments that the European considered and treated them as "3rd class citizen". In Dutch East Indies, the Europeans and western people in general (white) were treated as the 1st class. They had all the privileges and such. Next class is for the immigrants that though they had limited privileges compared to the former, but still enjoyed far better living condition compared to the natives. This also reflected in housing arrangement where white people had the luxury to reside in elite areas and have access to entertainment facilities that the natives were forbidden to enter.

So the Japan advance in the Pacific is considered as the "Liberation of Asia" - at first. During that time also the nationalism was on the rise on the region. Those, and several other factors, were the reasons of why most locals helped the Japanese.

But after the Japanese completely conquered the region, the natives were shocked that the Japanese was even worse. They made the natives as their forced labour - romusha - where so many of them died. The exact numbers of those who vanished as romusha still remains unknown but I guess it was between 10.000 to 50.000 victims (on several WWII websites, I feel it's a kind of unfair that western historians only noted the western POWs that died in the Japanese forced labour camp without even a slight hint of far greater number of dead natives in the same period). Ofcourse, during the European rule, there was also a form of forced labour similar to what the Japanese did (we called it "Rodi") but from the books that Ive read, the conditions were still far better.

And the native women also suffered. The Japanese made them into forced prostitute ("Juugun Ianfu" - If Im not mistaken), again, from those WWII websites, the sites only mentioned "western women POWs" that forced to became prostitutes without noticing that natives women in greater number than them were also suffered the same fate.

And so the organized resistance began. From the refusal of the natives to accept Japanese customs (to bow into the rising sun) and beliefs to local guerilla warfare. Most resistance were ended in the tip of the katana, though, since the locals were usually untrained and ill-equipped against an highly trained and far better equipped army.

But nevertheless, the resistances really gave a hard time for the Japanese, especially during that time (1943 - onward) when the imperial army previous success in all fronts began to deteriorate. The Japanese in Dutch East Indies then decided that they need as much supports from the locals so they began to recruit as many locals in their offices and formed an army consisted of natives. This army later will fight the returning Europeans after Japan surrendered. The Japanese also promised independence, a promise that will never come real unless the locals initiated by themself in August 45.

Well, that's just a short history of the region (Dutch East Indies 41-45). Didnt mean to write this much actually and Im really sorry for hijacking this thread http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif .

EnGaurde
05-06-2005, 07:18 AM
oi dont dare apologise.

**** good info that.

always good to read, this stuff is somewhat regional / relative to where i live.

bravo.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

p1ngu666
05-06-2005, 10:04 AM
good read http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif, and i know ppl had reasons for what they did http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

ive heard conditions for natives on burma railway was even worse, like the japanease didnt even bother to feed them anything http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
just work them till they died and then get some more in http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

SeaNorris
05-06-2005, 10:26 AM
My P-51 is the Ki-100's friend http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

JG53Frankyboy
05-12-2005, 04:49 PM
has anybody sources about the ammoloadout of the Ki-100-I ?

Atomic_Marten
05-12-2005, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
has anybody sources about the ammoloadout of the Ki-100-I ?

Here (http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/kasaki100.html) you go

I-Ko version:

MG&Cannons
Wings -- 2x12,7mms (Ho-103)
Nose -- 2x20mms (Ho-5)

Bomb loadout
Up to 500 kg, carried on two underwing hardpoints, rated at 250 kg each. General disposables load consisted of 2 Ӕ 250 kg bombs

VW-IceFire
05-12-2005, 06:12 PM
So basically the Ki-100's bombload is similar to the Ki-61s but the guns are more like the Ki-84-Ia except that they are reversed (20mm in the cowling).

JG53Frankyboy
05-12-2005, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by Atomic_Marten:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
has anybody sources about the ammoloadout of the Ki-100-I ?

Here (http://www.xs4all.nl/~fbonne/warbirds/ww2htmls/kasaki100.html) you go

I-Ko version:

MG&Cannons
Wings -- 2x12,7mms (Ho-103)
Nose -- 2x20mms (Ho-5)

Bomb loadout
Up to 500 kg, carried on two underwing hardpoints, rated at 250 kg each. General disposables load consisted of 2 Ӕ 250 kg bombs </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok, perhaps there was a missunderstanding.........

how much ammo should the guns have . i would estemate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif that 250 rpg would be a little bit to much for the fuselage 20mm canons.

keeping in mind that the ingame Ki84Ib has 150rpg in its fuselage canons ore a Ki61 has 250rpg in its 12,7mm fuselage guns.

shinden1974
05-12-2005, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:

ok, perhaps there was a missunderstanding.........

how much ammo should the guns have . i would estemate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif that 250 rpg would be a little bit to much for the fuselage 20mm canons.

keeping in mind that the ingame Ki84Ib has 150rpg in its fuselage canons ore a Ki61 has 250rpg in its 12,7mm fuselage guns.

The loadout is in the link he gave you, 200 RPG in the 12.7's and 120 RPG in the 20's.

LeadSpitter_
05-13-2005, 03:00 AM
i wish the made the ko and otsu version

razorback and bubble canopy varients. I think we need some more midwar japanese ac most ki-44, george, radien and early war ki21 claude etc for the hawk-82 to matchup against.

Burma and aluetians maps would be excellent.

JG53Frankyboy
05-13-2005, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by shinden1974:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:

ok, perhaps there was a missunderstanding.........

how much ammo should the guns have . i would estemate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif that 250 rpg would be a little bit to much for the fuselage 20mm canons.

keeping in mind that the ingame Ki84Ib has 150rpg in its fuselage canons ore a Ki61 has 250rpg in its 12,7mm fuselage guns.

The loadout is in the link he gave you, 200 RPG in the 12.7's and 120 RPG in the 20's. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok, sry, didnt saw that there was a link behind the "here" http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

well, someone should tell that the maddox team , its not their strong point to have correct ammoloads in new planes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif