PDA

View Full Version : Ki 84



Daiichidoku
09-18-2004, 03:19 AM
Just for fun, two pics of Ki84s variants...
the turbo-supercharged Ki84 (Ki84 II?)
http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=8\


Ki 94 (Japanese TA?)...never heard of it before, just found the pic...appears to be a 84 with extended (and possibly resparred, reskinned, or otherwise strengthened, one would imagine) wings...dunno if this one was even built, let alone flew...
http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=7

http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=1

Daiichidoku
09-18-2004, 03:19 AM
Just for fun, two pics of Ki84s variants...
the turbo-supercharged Ki84 (Ki84 II?)
http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=8\


Ki 94 (Japanese TA?)...never heard of it before, just found the pic...appears to be a 84 with extended (and possibly resparred, reskinned, or otherwise strengthened, one would imagine) wings...dunno if this one was even built, let alone flew...
http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=7

http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=1

SKULLS_CoyMS
09-18-2004, 06:51 AM
same site had this B-17 pic....enough said


<A HREF="http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=3" TARGET=_blank>


http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=3 (http://groups.msn.com/TaoofDaiichidoku/shoebox.msnw?action=ShowPhoto&PhotoID=3</A>)[/url]
http://home.centurytel.net/pooka/skulls_sig-Coy.gif (http://la-famiglia.se/skulls/forum/)

Flying is like sex - I've never had all I wanted but occasionally I've had all I could stand.

VW-IceFire
09-18-2004, 07:02 AM
I think the Ki-84-II's were of a composite wood construction due to scarcity of metal resources at the end of the war.

Nothing to write home about. I think the original models may have been better...not sure on that.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"

p1ngu666
09-18-2004, 07:22 AM
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif @ japanese jug and ta152

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
&lt;123_GWood_JG123&gt;NO SPAM!
&lt;badsight&gt;my name is tracy and pingu is the Antichrist of Combat Flight Simmers
&lt;lexx_luthor&gt;flowers across the land in BoB
&lt;stiglr&gt; Ctrl+F1.

Labienus
09-18-2004, 08:00 AM
KI84-II???? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/52.gif

This is KI87 - high altitude fighter by Nakajima.

KI87 had a problem with superchargers. First concept of it was totaly wrong. They didn't finish to change supercharger for this type wich was for exemple in P47.

horseback
09-18-2004, 12:20 PM
The first picture was not a Frank variant at all -- it was a KI-87, a seperate Nakajima type owing more to the Ki-44 Tojo than the Frank, which was being developed at the same time, and flew over a year sooner.

The second pic looks like the same type, with the artist influenced by the Frank series, but the pointy-er vertical tail again is more Tojo-like, and the squared off wings and stabilizers make it the failed high altitude interceptor.

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

tigertalon
09-18-2004, 02:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I think the Ki-84-II's were of a composite wood construction due to scarcity of metal resources at the end of the war.

Nothing to write home about. I think the original models may have been better...not sure on that.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RAF No 92 Squadron
"Either fight or die"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed, Ice, late models were made out of wood (and the cockpit hood was without bars, made out of only one piece), but designation was not Ki84 but the number was more than 100... Dunno right now, I'll try to find out the right number. (106 or something...)

regards, tt