PDA

View Full Version : Ki 100 , one of the best fighter in ww2 ?



Boandlgramer
05-22-2004, 12:19 AM
hello,
has anybody more datas about this aircraft ?

thank you



Boandlgramer
http://images.google.de/images?q=tbn:10LP6FCHtuYJ:www.vhts.de/bilder/wappenbayern.jpg
The first Time i saw Chuck Yeager, i shot him down. Petrosillius Zwacklmann ( WW2 Hero ).
***********************
Somebody asked me, what i liked most, my chromium-plated Colt or my Helmet with the 4 Stars. I said : you damn Bastard, none of them, the most important thing in my life is my pink underwear.....a well know WW2 General http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
******************************
Kozhedub: Im Kampfpotential, im Yak-3, in La-7 und K├┬Ąmpfer in La-9 waren dem Bf-109s und dem Fw-190s unbestreitbar ├╝berlegen. Aber, wie sie, egal wie gut die Violine sein kann, viel abh├┬Ąngen vom violinist sagen. Ich glaubte immer Respekt f├╝r einen feindlichen Piloten dessen Fl├┬Ąche ich zu unten verlie├č.

Boandlgramer
05-22-2004, 12:19 AM
hello,
has anybody more datas about this aircraft ?

thank you



Boandlgramer
http://images.google.de/images?q=tbn:10LP6FCHtuYJ:www.vhts.de/bilder/wappenbayern.jpg
The first Time i saw Chuck Yeager, i shot him down. Petrosillius Zwacklmann ( WW2 Hero ).
***********************
Somebody asked me, what i liked most, my chromium-plated Colt or my Helmet with the 4 Stars. I said : you damn Bastard, none of them, the most important thing in my life is my pink underwear.....a well know WW2 General http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
******************************
Kozhedub: Im Kampfpotential, im Yak-3, in La-7 und K├┬Ąmpfer in La-9 waren dem Bf-109s und dem Fw-190s unbestreitbar ├╝berlegen. Aber, wie sie, egal wie gut die Violine sein kann, viel abh├┬Ąngen vom violinist sagen. Ich glaubte immer Respekt f├╝r einen feindlichen Piloten dessen Fl├┬Ąche ich zu unten verlie├č.

woofiedog
05-22-2004, 12:50 AM
The Ki-100 would be a blast to fly in IL2.
It was a Radial Engine equiped Ki-61 which was inline... basicly.
It had some problems from being rushed into service before the End of the War... such as bad Landing Gear, engine life and a few other problems. But was no doubt one of the finest Fighters of WW2.

LEXX_Luthor
05-22-2004, 12:59 AM
interesting new site ---> http://www.wwiitech.net/main/japan/aircraft/index.html

__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A ...in Aces Expansion Pack


"You will still have FB , you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
:
"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Boandlgramer
05-22-2004, 12:59 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by woofiedog:
The Ki-100 would be a blast to fly in IL2.
It was a Radial Engine equiped Ki-61 which was inline... basicly.
It had some problems from being rushed into service before the End of the War... such as bad Landing Gear, engine life and a few other problems. But was no doubt one of the finest Fighters of WW2.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

i have a great book, with Dan Patterson as co-autor :" Cockpit".
with very nice picture of the mustang, yak3 , 190, 109 cockpits, etc. etc.
but with few technical datas.
so i want to ask people here about. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Boandlgramer
http://images.google.de/images?q=tbn:10LP6FCHtuYJ:www.vhts.de/bilder/wappenbayern.jpg
The first Time i saw Chuck Yeager, i shot him down. Petrosillius Zwacklmann ( WW2 Hero ).
***********************
Somebody asked me, what i liked most, my chromium-plated Colt or my Helmet with the 4 Stars. I said : you damn Bastard, none of them, the most important thing in my life is my pink underwear.....a well know WW2 General http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
******************************
Kozhedub: Im Kampfpotential, im Yak-3, in La-7 und K├┬Ąmpfer in La-9 waren dem Bf-109s und dem Fw-190s unbestreitbar ├╝berlegen. Aber, wie sie, egal wie gut die Violine sein kann, viel abh├┬Ąngen vom violinist sagen. Ich glaubte immer Respekt f├╝r einen feindlichen Piloten dessen Fl├┬Ąche ich zu unten verlie├č.

Boandlgramer
05-22-2004, 01:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
interesting new site ---&gt; http://www.wwiitech.net/main/japan/aircraft/index.html

__________________
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/10.gif Flyable Swedish _"Gladiator"_ listed as _J8A_ _...in Aces Expansion Pack_


_"You will still have FB , you will lose _nothing_"_ ~WUAF_Badsight
_"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..."_ ~Bearcat99
_"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age"_ ~ElAurens
:
_"Damn.....Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore_!_"_ ~Oleg_Maddox http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ah, yeah, thanks alot.

Boandlgramer
http://images.google.de/images?q=tbn:10LP6FCHtuYJ:www.vhts.de/bilder/wappenbayern.jpg
The first Time i saw Chuck Yeager, i shot him down. Petrosillius Zwacklmann ( WW2 Hero ).
***********************
Somebody asked me, what i liked most, my chromium-plated Colt or my Helmet with the 4 Stars. I said : you damn Bastard, none of them, the most important thing in my life is my pink underwear.....a well know WW2 General http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
******************************
Kozhedub: Im Kampfpotential, im Yak-3, in La-7 und K├┬Ąmpfer in La-9 waren dem Bf-109s und dem Fw-190s unbestreitbar ├╝berlegen. Aber, wie sie, egal wie gut die Violine sein kann, viel abh├┬Ąngen vom violinist sagen. Ich glaubte immer Respekt f├╝r einen feindlichen Piloten dessen Fl├┬Ąche ich zu unten verlie├č.

Storm_Bird
05-22-2004, 01:08 AM
Sorry, I don't think so. Because all of the Japanese fighter was very easy to damage or distory.

http://http://www.52dby.com/non-cgi/usr/16/16_931_1.jpg

Giganoni
05-22-2004, 02:03 AM
It was a fine aircraft because of its ease of use, and reliability. Performance wise it was not the best Japanese fighter. Still, I have sources that Japanese pilots piloting a Ki-100 considered the common Hellcat an "easy kill". Because of its ease of use a poor pilot could do much better than it could in a more complicated plane. I suppose it could be considered the best Japanese fighter, but since I seriously doubt PF will impliment reliablity factors other Japanese craft will surpass it.

Ruy Horta
05-22-2004, 02:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Boandlgramer:
hello,
has anybody more datas about this aircraft ?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Check the Pacific Fighters forum, plenty of discussion there on the topic. Just look for Ki 100 or something similar.

Ruy Horta

k5054
05-22-2004, 03:27 AM
It might have been OK in 1942, it had only 1500hp and was no better than the Ki-61-II except for the engine reliability. It's impossible for this aircraft to have competed in 1945. The only competitive fighter with anything like that power was Yak-3, which was much smaller and cleaner. The books that say it was a good fighter are wrong, and all derive from a single source which is apparently living in fantasy land.

HARD_Sarge
05-22-2004, 05:56 AM
LOL
what experts, only a 1500 HP engine ? , so what, it don't matter how big the engine is, it matters how much that engine has to carry

by all combat reports, it was a very decent aircraft, which still suffered from the same hassle that all JP planes had, the lack of speed, any body foolish enough to get into a turn fight with it, was in trouble, but by that time of the war, not many Allied pilots were foolish anymore

the Tonies were good divers for JP planes, and that gave the Allies something to worry about, with a Zero or Oscar, you screwed up, you could always dive away, and neither could catch you (plus at speeds over 300 knots, they couldn't turn anymore)

the later JP models, while still not as fast as the Allied planes, could still do better in a fight, could dive, and could turn at higher speeds

HARD_Sarge

woofiedog
05-22-2004, 08:08 AM
K5054 The KI-100 is a late model aircraft. Entering combat in late 44. Apparently the one book you have read is alittle off in it's content.
The KI-100 series of aircraft was one of the finest aircraft made by any country during the War.
The KI-100 was a Radial Engined KI-64. As the KI-64 was powered by an Inline Engine.
I have over 600 books in my collection for my sources.
Maybe you should try picking up one more for to read.

Ruy Horta
05-22-2004, 08:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by woofiedog:

The KI-100 was a Radial Engined KI-64. As the KI-64 was powered by an Inline Engine.

I have over 600 books in my collection for my sources.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Ki 100 was a radial engine variant of the Ki 61 II. The Ki 64 is a radically different twin engine (inline in fuselage) a/c.

According to some Japanese numbers I have seen the Ki 100 was not a radical performer, apart from its abbility to go higher than most other Japanese types. No great speed under 6000m, no special climb under 6000m. Perhaps it turned well, but the Tony was not known as a great turn fighter either (good, but not great).

I'd venture to say that overall it was a competative design, but not a radically superior one.

Ruy Horta

Udidtoo
05-22-2004, 09:25 AM
From what I have read its biggest + besides reliability was that it could still preform decently at extreme alltitude so was valued as a B-29 interceptor.

It doesn't seem to excell in any 1 area but was very capable in them all. Probably a good thing for allied pilots that less than 400ever reached completion

..............................
I always have just enough fuel to arrive at the scene of my crash.

jenikovtaw
05-22-2004, 09:41 AM
WHY? stop with the japanese planes, its not a pacific sim. Wait for PF and stuff.

And yes, according to my little book it is pretty good plane.

http://www.theartofwarfare.net/ftp/graphics/sigs/EXT-jenikovtaw.jpg

horseback
05-22-2004, 10:05 AM
According to Green & Swanborough's Japanese Army Fighters, Pt 1, the first Ki-100 flew in January of 1945. It was developed after Kawasaki had been told by the Imperial Army to fit the Ki-61 airframes they had waiting for Ha-140 engines (license-built DB-601) to the best engine available. This turned out to be the 1500 hp Mitsubishi Ha-112-II.

After studying the engine mounting of an FW-190A sent some time before by their German allies, the Kawasaki design team produced an aircraft that "exceeded the Kawasaki team's most sanguine expectations and it was generally conceded that this improvisation was an improvement on its progenitor. While marginally slower than the Ki-61-II KAI at all altitudes, the Ki-100 was, thanks largely to 628 lb. (285 kg.) reduction in normal loaded weight, more manoeuvrable and offered a better rate of climb up to its operational ceiling. Furthermore, takeoff and landing characteristics were superior. At Yakota, the Ki-100 was matched with a P-51C Mustang which had been captured by Japanese troops in Central China and taken to Japan for evaluation. The Kawasaki fighter was judged slower than the North American fighter,but was adjudged to possess a distinct advantage in maneouvrability and to possess superior diving characteristics. From the results of mock-combat between the two fighters it was concluded that, given pilots of equal ability, the Japanese aircraft should always emerge victorious from a dogfight, but it was admitted that the Mustang pilot could break off combat at will. In so far as the F6F Hellcat was concerned, it was believed that the Ki-100 would best the US Navy fighter on all counts."

Further on in the chapter, they say that "performance of the Ki-100 fell off badly above 23,000 ft. (7000m), the fighter thus being relatively ineffective against the high-flying B-29 Superfortresses..." going on to discuss attempts to add a turbo-supercharger.

By all accounts, at combat speeds below the 6500m level, the Ki-100 was a superb dogfighter with a heavy punch from its two cannon and two 12.7mm MGs when properly flown.

But like the Luftwaffe, the Japanese Imperial Army Air Force did not have the pilots of the necessary quality to deal with their opponents, and suffered at least as badly as a result of poor maintenance.

The Ki-100 did not perform in RL the way it will in PF if properly modelled (i.e., with ideal mechanical operating condition and a competant pilot). It should enjoy good accelleration, excellant pilot field of view, excellant horizontal & vertical maneauverability, and a hell of a punch from its heavy guns. But it will not have an impressive top speed, and its performance at higher altitudes will be much diminished.

cheers

horseback

"Here's your new Mustangs, boys. You can learn to fly'em on the way to the target. Cheers!" -LTCOL Don Blakeslee, 4th FG CO, February 27th, 1944

k5054
05-22-2004, 10:55 AM
I don't know by what magic this a/c will be better than the best fighters of 1942, Spit 9, 109G-2 or FW190A-4. Wing loading 35.8 lb/sqft, power 5.1lb/hp, ordinary. Top speed 360 at 20,000, just a little better than Spitfire 1 and 109E. Don't forget MC202 and the Yaks and Las. In 1945, (yes 1945 Woofie, I read my books) it had to face far better aircraft. Its fabled superiority is a fairy story, propaganda probably. A mustang has 80mph over it.
The -II turbo version had the turbo part-externally mounted and at low-medium alt would have been a draggy dog. The B-29s weren't even up there any more, they opted for lower attack altitudes to get out of the jetstream and gain bombing accuracy.
The only thing this a/c had going for it was that it was more reliable than the other late army a/c.

Korolov
05-22-2004, 11:17 AM
Uh, we're not talking about the Ki-61 "Tony." We're talking about a modification of it's design, the Ki-100 - which didn't see action until 1945.

EDIT: FYI, here is a Tony:

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/IJARG/images/ki61-2.jpg

and here is a Ki-100:

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/IJARG/images/ki100-1.jpg

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

Udidtoo
05-22-2004, 11:20 AM
It sounds as if the authors of the different books we read are much like a lot of this forums member,

They embrace the data that they agree with and disregard or belittle that which they don't.

Say, they would fit right in our little club here. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

..............................
I always have just enough fuel to arrive at the scene of my crash.

Ki_Rin
05-22-2004, 08:45 PM
The early Ki61s suffered from thin wing skinning, limiting the diving ability...
The Ki100s, along with the poor quality of production, were, at least in the ealier runs, slightly off in performance, due to material shortages resulting in many utilizing a large proportion of steel, increasing its weight signifigantly....
Later versions of the Ki100, (Im not sure how many, if any, were actually produced) were (or to be) to use mostly wood in the airframe, again due to material shortages
The Ki100 WAS one of the better IJA fighters, along with the Ki84
Early jp ac were NOT flimsy, however, the thin skinning limited diving speeds, and of course, lack of SS tanks turned many of them into (as the UNofficial IJN moniker for G4M Bettys,) "type 1 flying cigar lighters"
Later designs, such as the Ki84s, were actually in the same league as U.S. fighters, in terms of pilot protection and overall survivability

As an aside, I many times spoke at length with a former RAF mechanic, based in Burma, who primarily worked on RAF Spits, Hurris, Mossies, and Tbolts...he stated that, as they used former IJA airfields, inspecting the abandoned types there, they often found the jp crews had stuffed dried grass into the tires of ac, supposedly due to lack of spares and airstrip conditions holing tires often...Nipponese ingenuity, hehehe

WUAF_Badsight
05-22-2004, 09:03 PM
bet they had to stuff it in really well to hold 3 ton A/C up http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Ki_Rin
05-22-2004, 11:24 PM
Too bad they didnt know about the OTHER kinda grass...maybe the planes coulda gotta higher....... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

"Consequences are for lesser beings; I am Ki-Rin...that is sanction enough"

Saburo_0
05-23-2004, 11:00 AM
if you are looking for info the Ki100 is also known as the Go-shiki-sen or Type 5 Fighter.

Personally I think the Tony will probably be better in PF because it's main drawback was the unreliability of its inline engine & the lack of ground crew trained in proper maintenance of inline engines.