PDA

View Full Version : Real story about the Frank. Is the Ki 84 overmodeled? NO! Read!



Hptm.Keule
11-25-2004, 02:07 AM
"Forget it - it's a Frank." It is said that this comment was made frequently by USAAF personnel watching radar screens on Okinawa in the closing weeks of the Pacific War. It was customary to watch for a contact to appear and then to scramble P-51 Mustangs to intercept the enemy aircraft. But when the blip was moving so fast that it was inferred to be one of the advanced new Japanese Hayate fighters it would be assumed that the P-51s would stand no chance of catching the intruder.

Generally regarded as the best Japanese fighter of World War Two, the Hayate('Hurricane') was nonetheless not without its problems. Much of its superlative all-round performance stemmed from its extremely advanced direct-injection engine, the Army's first version of the Navy NK9A. Yet this same engine gave constant trouble and demanded skilled maintenance.

T. Koyama designed the Ki-84 to greater strength factors than any previous Japanese warplane - yet poor heat-treatment of high-strength steel had the consequence that the landing gears often snapped. Progressive deterioration in quality control meant that pilots never knew how individual aircraft would perform, whether the brakes would work, and even whether - in attampting to intercept B-29 Superfortresses over Japan - they would be able to climb high enough.

Despite these problems the Hayate was essentially a superb fighter - a captured Ki-84-1a was to outclimb and outmanoeuvre a P-47 Thunderbolt, and a P-51.

The first batches were sent to China, where the 22nd. Sentai, when equipped with the new fighter, were able to fly rings around Chennault's 14th. Air Force.

The 22nd. Sentai was later moved to the Philippines, where problems overtook them, with many accidents and shortages and extremely poor serviceability.

Frequent bombing of the Musashi engine factory, and the desperate need to conserve raw materials (the shortages resulting primarily from the American submarine blockade) led to various projects and prototypes made of wood or steel.

Total production of the Ki-84 reached 3,514.


Acknowledgments

The main source for the above text was Bill Gunston's
"Combat Aircraft of World War II" (Salamander, London 1978).
The data and the drawing of the Ki-84 are reproduced with thanks from the same source.

WWMaxGunz
11-25-2004, 02:43 AM
Funny part... I have yet to read anything from any AVG pilot about being flown rings around.
And the AVG, small as they were, were not wiped out. Please, where would I find more info?

Edit:Add

Okay, looks like Chennault had a later group. First appeance in combat listed at
www.geocities.com/aircraft42/Fighters/nakajimaki84.htm (http://www.geocities.com/aircraft42/Fighters/nakajimaki84.htm)
gives August 1944, 22nd Sentai encounter a large force of the Chinese Composite Wing
with Curtiss P40N fighter cover. Results of ensuing dogfight -- inconclusive but the
Ki84 proved tougher than normal opposition for that stage of the war. Japanese pilots
at the controls perhaps not well trained? Or just too few Ki84's? Or both?
This site lists it as a match for *any* US fighter in the closing stages of the war.

Well, by specs alone the P-80 was real kickazz, the 262's were true kings, the 163's
as angels, early LaGG's advanced for period VVS fighters, etc, etc,... and so are in
the sim where defects and engine troubles are not modelled. That includes the Marine
fighters out of Henderson Field I guess, although a good read of how it was told me
that many times planes went up in bad condition and occasionally fell out of the sky
soon after takeoff -- the aerial part of the defense of the field is a miracle that
will not be portrayed in PF!

So we have the Ki84 also the same. Always working pefectly. For this and the others
it is fine, but not representative of what was.

Will BoB have planes capable of starting out missions with wear, tear and damage state?
Really, I would have liked to play Bouganville like that even to lose my pilot every
few missions at least by option.

JG53Frankyboy
11-25-2004, 03:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Funny part... I have yet to read anything from any AVG pilot about being flown rings around.
And the AVG, small as they were, were not wiped out. Please, where would I find more info? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AVG in 1944 ?
sure not , it remnants were regular USAAF than at this time

Hptm.Keule
11-25-2004, 08:45 AM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">To WWMaxGunz:</span>..."And the AVG, small as they were, were not wiped out. Please, where would I find more info?"

I found this information on this site:
http://www.angelfire.com/fm/compass/Hayate.htm

Regards!
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Fly more!</span>

TooCool_12f
11-25-2004, 04:30 PM
as said by Frankyboy, there was no AVG in 1944 anymore. they were replaced in july 1942 by the 23rd fighter group (regular USAAF)

WWMaxGunz
11-25-2004, 07:22 PM
Been there and more sites as well.
Ran rings around Chennaults' group. P40N escorts.
Chennaults' group unable to reliably destroy them in the air so by policy they
were hunted out and destroyed while on the ground where possible.
Just a bit more description. Also that at least one Hayate fron 22nd Sentai did
get shot down in aerial battle but then Me-262's also got shot down in battle on
occasion and, gasp, they were a lot better than any operational Allied fighter.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hayate on par with the best fighters at the end stage of the war, except the jets.
Yes, that surprised the US as the fight was easier than that.

All the best fighters... close max performance with an edge here and there for
this one or that one, some strong in overall strength of performance. And then
there is weapons, trigger time, flying time and view, also armor and structure.
Hayate very very good overall but not the best everywhere -- nothing was unless
history is specially rewritten. A lot of Mustang fans try, and it was a very
good overall so now Hayate too finding out the Mustang is not alone. It is better
than Yak 9 best model that flew the postwar competition in Italy?

Please, say it is best! We need 20+ pages thread over silliness!

Hptm.Keule
11-26-2004, 10:59 AM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Ki-84!</span>
...just look at the flaps of Hayate and then the way they move out and back and you will uderstand that Ki-84 is exceptional and sole aircraft for close maneuverable fight!..excelent design of the wings...plus his engine...and the armament of Ki-84c...Superb mashine!

What type of flaps these are? The japanese invention called "Butterfly" flaps?
May be some of You know?

R!

JorBR
11-26-2004, 11:25 AM
I still don´t get why the fact Ki-84 being a very good fighter design seems to upset so many ppl around here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

geetarman
11-26-2004, 11:31 AM
Bring 'em on!

Aero_Shodanjo
11-26-2004, 11:32 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JorBR:
I still don´t get why the fact Ki-84 being a very good fighter design seems to upset so many ppl around here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Post power syndrome, perhaps? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

JorBR
11-26-2004, 12:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aero_Shodanjo:
Post power syndrome, perhaps? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It depends on what kind of power you are refering to http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

IIJG69_Kartofe
11-26-2004, 01:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hptm.Keule:
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Ki-84!</span>
...just look at the flaps of Hayate and then the way they move out and back and you will uderstand that Ki-84 is exceptional and sole aircraft for close maneuverable fight!..excelent design of the wings...plus his engine...and the armament of Ki-84c...Superb mashine!

What type of flaps these are? The japanese invention called "Butterfly" flaps?
May be some of You know?

R! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

These are "Fowler" Flaps.

Bull_dog_
11-26-2004, 04:12 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JorBR:
I still don´t get why the fact Ki-84 being a very good fighter design seems to upset so many ppl around here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think most people accept that the Ki is a great design...perhaps the best the Japanese had come up with....what I think really peeves alot of folks, myself included, is that some aircraft (ki to be in that group) are modelled off some afterwar test data that doesn't reflect historical wartime performance....this whole concept seems to be a contradiction based on a sim that was supposed to be historical and it makes null most data that myself and much of the general community has at their fingertips...and we're all supposed to believe that Oleg's data is the best...heck, my sources show the Ki-84 to have fabric Ailerons... doesn't roll like an aircraft with fabric ailerons...maybe that test specimen had ailerons made out of aluminum. All I can find is data that shows the Ki to be a 385-390mph fighter that was agile and had good climb rate...about the same as a -4 corsair and less than the late Mk IX spits...but I keep hearing there is other data around????

To further exasperate the situation, the main late war enemies of the Ki (P-38, P-51 and P-47) have not met published specifiation in many areas...I like the current P-51 (although it is slow and doesn't enjoy the lessened drag penalty of its radiator design) and the D-27 is pretty good after tons and tons of whining, but it sure wasn't that way to start...the trend I have seen most often is to have an aircraft overmodelled and then knock it down from there....seems Oleg does this often, but not the other way around....if a plane starts out neutered, then it is like a root canal w/out novicane to get it brought up to standard. The Lightning is still way off...a good example...the compressibility is way, way off as are a few other aspects such as low speed handling....how bout those Fw's...probably are now getting close after 1 1/2 yrs.

Now the frosting on the cake, all the late war aircraft that would have fought the Ki, F4U-4, Bearcat, Tigercat, P-47N, P-51K, Spitfire Mk XIV are conspicuously missing....I don't think this is an accident but I can't fathom a logical explanation.

The Frank was a great aircraft...no doubt about it. I think it has been brough closer to historical damage model and I have read, but not confirmed, that high altitude performance was corrected to some degree. Enough of my rant...I like fighting against the Ki now, I used to not like it due mainly to insane climb rate and damage modelling. I still don't fly it much and don't fly the La-7 or 109K, or P-63 for the same reasons. The corsair was new and neat, and I think it is getting a governer placed on it right as I write this so I don't know yet if the plane will wind up on my too easy to kill opponents list or not...I'd say something happened to the Spitfire too as it is no longer in that class anymore, but still a good energy fighter.

chris455
11-26-2004, 05:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JorBR:
I still don´t get why the fact Ki-84 being a very good fighter design seems to upset so many ppl around here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I still don't get why so many people around here think it's still so "uber":

Damage model has been adjusted down to realistic levels;

Speed, energy retention more realistic (i.e., less than when intoduced in-game);

but most of all, vertical maneuverability seems to have been toned down enormously.

In short, whats so uber about the Hayate?

It was a very competetive fighter in RL, and it still is. But vs any late war allied model with a competent pilot, it's still anybody's guess.

It should always have been that way, and now it is.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

TAGERT.
11-26-2004, 05:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
Now the frosting on the cake, all the late war aircraft that would have fought the Ki, F4U-4, Bearcat, Tigercat, P-47N, P-51K, Spitfire Mk XIV are conspicuously missing....I don't think this is an accident but I can't fathom a logical explanation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Join the club!

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=26310365&m=9951034342

WUAF_Badsight
11-26-2004, 06:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
what I think really peeves alot of folks, myself included, is that some aircraft (ki to be in that group) are modelled off some afterwar test data that doesn't reflect historical wartime performance..... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
you got proof of that ?

a captured japanese airman said that his Hayate could do 700 True (thats 634 Mph)

you dont have any proof that the hayate couldnt go 427 , but all indications show it far more likely that it could do so

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
this whole concept seems to be a contradiction based on a sim that was supposed to be historical and it makes null most data that myself and much of the general community has at their fingertips.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
wait , i understand , you want the hayate performing as a run down , poorly maintained version so that your factory fresh Mustng can compete ?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
All I can find is data that shows the Ki to be a 385-390mph fighter. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
all you will find on the web is based on 2 sources , all of it

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
Now the frosting on the cake, all the late war aircraft that would have fought the Ki, F4U-4, Bearcat, Tigercat, P-47N, P-51K, Spitfire Mk XIV are conspicuously missing........ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
what ? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif the Tigercat & Bearcat actually fought in WW2 ?
whatever fantasy book you are reading , its best you burn it stright away

the Ki-84 was in production from April 1944
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
that high altitude performance was corrected to some degree. . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
well let me confirm it for you , the Yankwhiners whining paid off http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
I used to not like it due mainly to insane climb rate and damage modelling. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
you got proof that it was off ? or wait , you dont believe a Jap fighter could have good performance ?

just how crappy a climb-rate is a 2000 Hp fighter with low wing loading supposed to have Bull_Dog ?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bull_dog_:
I still don't fly it much and don't fly the La-7 or 109K, or P-63 for the same reasons. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
well here , let me get you a tissue

LuftLuver
11-26-2004, 07:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Aero_Shodanjo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JorBR:
I still don´t get why the fact Ki-84 being a very good fighter design seems to upset so many ppl around here. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Post power syndrome, perhaps? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I will try to do this as humanely as possible:


Goodkn1ght, Ki84.

http://home.att.net/~historyzone/P51h.JPG http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Daiichidoku
11-27-2004, 12:37 AM
Yes, many ppl dislike the Ki84 online...myself included....and also malign it verbally...as I have sometimes

But one must keep in mind the whining is almost all about the Ki841C...even he slightest glacing blows from those 30mms and one can most often expect at least a wing blown off, or even blow up completely, even at extreme range

I never hear ANY whining when ppl are killed by Ki841As or 1Bs, or the server features no Ki841Cs

The Ki84s series is a truly great all round performer, and IMHO very well modelled in FB (the indestructible 1.22 Ki notwithstanding http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif)

The Ki84 1C is a type that IRL would not have been deployed vs fighters, but B 29s


HMMMMMMM biggest noob type pre-PF = Ki84 1C
biggest noob type post-PF = F4U 1C
FB/PF produced by company called...1C

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

k5054
11-27-2004, 03:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>You dont have any proof that the hayate couldnt go 427 , but all indications show it far more likely that it could do so <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you want to base performance in the gane around 'you don't have any proof that it couldn't'?????

Nobody has found the test that says 427mph. Some have speculated that the 427 comes for mestimates made without benefit of a captured example. There is much doubt that the increase in hp from the -11 to the -21 Homare could account for a 10% increase in speed. There is doubt in my mind at least that the Homare could produce 2000hp based on it being the same size as the DB605 and running less boost than the 2 ata required for 2000hp in the 605, which required a massive supercharger to get that boost and could only maintain it for a couple of thousand feet. There is aan alomst total lack of real data. The captured example in the Philipines wasn't performing right, so that test (which I have read in the original, typed up in onionskin copy paper in 1945) isn't satisfactory. Except to say that the RN pilot said his Seafire out-turned the Hayate and the buterfly flaps didn't make much difference. That's all the real evidence we have except for the Nakajima prototype speed, 388mph, and the Army acceptance figure, 392mph. There is no known test resulting in a 427mph figure. FWIW, the RN test estimates top speed with the Homare 21 as 400mph.
Personally, I don't have too much of a problem with 427 as a speed figure. Seems a little high, but not impossible. The problem is that this figure is not a test result. I see no reason why the Frank shouldn't climb very well indeed, with 2000hp and 8000lb, 4000ft/min should be easy, and maybe 4500.

LuftLuver
11-27-2004, 03:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by k5054:
Except to say that the RN pilot said his Seafire out-turned the Hayate and the buterfly flaps didn't make much difference. That's all the real evidence we have.... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quite interesting.

Thanks for posting that.........