Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Steam Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

KAWASAKI Ki.61/Ki.100 PERFORMANCE / TIMELINE


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#11 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,611 posts
  • Joined 4 Years, 2 Months
  • 184 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 02 April 2017 - 05:47 PM

Kawasaki Ki.61-II Notes: Aircraft of the Aces 114:

 

Page 68: "Subject to the engine operating properly, the Ki.61-II Kai proved to be an

excellent fighter, with an impressive altitude performance. However, ongoing reliability

issues and inadequate numbers prevented the variant from reaching its potential

during the air defense of Japan."



#12 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,611 posts
  • Joined 4 Years, 2 Months
  • 184 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 02 April 2017 - 06:01 PM

Kawasaki Ki.100 Notes: Aircraft of the Aces 114:

 

Page 81: "Most pilots found the new hybrid fighter superior to the Hien in all respects,

and Capt. Hideaki Inayama, who had formerly flown the Ki.44 with the 87th Sentai,

opined that 'the maneuverability of the Ki.100 was the best of the Army's frontline

fighters, with the exception of the Ki.43. Even less experienced pilots could fly it

easily and fight with it'."

Capt. Fumisuke Shono of the 244th Sentai: "In May I switched to the Type 5 fighter.

This was a very good - probably the best - Army fighter. Not only was it fitted with a

more reliable air-cooled engine, but it also had 20 mm. cannon in the fuselage, so

the radius of turn was much less."



#13 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,611 posts
  • Joined 4 Years, 2 Months
  • 184 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 31 May 2017 - 04:03 PM

Ki-44 'Tojo' Aces of World War 2 by Nicholas Millman

 

Page 33: " Hideaki Inayama ended the war with claims for more than five aerial

vicgtories. Following service with the 87th he flew Kawasaki Ki-100 fighters with

the 111th Sentai in the defense of Japan, commenting that Kawasaki's makeshift

hybrid (a radial engine mated to the Ki-61 Hien 'Tony' airframe) had 'the best

maneuverability of all the JAAF's frontline fighters with the exception of the Ki-43,

which meant that pilots with only a little experience could both fly and fight it

easily."



#14 spicmart

spicmart

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Joined 8 Years, 6 Months and 22 Days
  • 1 topics

Posted 25 July 2017 - 04:20 PM

For good's sake I am just unable to imagine how the Ki-100 could take on allied late war fighters on equal terms? It was so much slower than the latest opposition, even a tad slower than the Ki-61 it replaced. Sure it featured superior manoeuvrability and good climb performance but was that good enough to compensate for the really huge speed disadvantage? Going with this logic even the predecessors such as the Ki-43 should be competitive to F6Fs?

And what does it mean it could dive with the P-51, a plane with an aerodynamically much cleaner airframe? I can't believe that it can keep up in dive. But then what does better dive characteristics mean? Even with a more powerful engine it was not faster. It's handling and agility endeared it especially for rookie pilots. A P-51 should be able to engage and disengage at will. Against Hellcats I can imagine that the Ki-100 had the edge as the F6fs were not on the forefront of fighter performance at that time anymore.

Maybe there are dogfight mechanics that I don't know of that give an explanation.

Maybe someone can enlighten me on this as I still tend to the opinion that this might be just an overblown myth surrounding a somehow maverick airplane.



#15 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,611 posts
  • Joined 4 Years, 2 Months
  • 184 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 25 July 2017 - 09:49 PM

For good's sake I am just unable to imagine how the Ki-100 could take on allied late war fighters on equal terms? It was so much slower than the latest opposition, even a tad slower than the Ki-61 it replaced. Sure it featured superior manoeuvrability and good climb performance but was that good enough to compensate for the really huge speed disadvantage? Going with this logic even the predecessors such as the Ki-43 should be competitive to F6Fs?

Maximum speed disadvantage, Yes. combat speed disadvantage, NO. The Ki.100 was fully aerobatic at speeds in

excess of 400 mph. unlike many late war Japanese fighters whose maneuverability began to diminish at speeds

over 330 mph. The Ki.100 also accelerated into a dive very well. And yes, the Ki.43-III was very competitive to the

F6F-5 in many respect; climb, turn, roll rate, acceleration...etc.

 

And what does it mean it could dive with the P-51, a plane with an aerodynamically much cleaner airframe? I can't believe that it can keep up in dive. But then what does better dive characteristics mean?

I believe whoever made that statement should have classified it. Because of the much better overall

maneuverability of the Ki.100 it could enter a dive quicker and once into the dive retained excellent handling

qualities. Given time & distance the Mustang would overhaul it.

 

Even with a more powerful engine it was not faster. It's handling and agility endeared it especially for rookie pilots.

BINGO, that is exactly why the aircraft was so valuable. Pilot skill was rapidly diminishing in Japan making

this an invaluable trait.

 

A P-51 should be able to engage and disengage at will.

As long as the pilot is focused on using his greater speed, yes.

 

Against Hellcats I can imagine that the Ki-100 had the edge as the F6fs were not on the forefront of fighter performance at that time anymore.

In many ways the Hellcat was similar to the Ki.100 in that it was a very forgiving aircraft also. If the F6F-5 kept its

speed way up, it actually had an advantage. The water-injected F6Fs were capable of maximum speeds in excess

of 405 mph.

 

 

Maybe there are dogfight mechanics that I don't know of that give an explanation.

Maybe someone can enlighten me on this as I still tend to the opinion that this might be just an overblown myth surrounding a somehow maverick airplane.

Not really an overblown myth. If any aircraft, including the much vaunted Yak-3, slowed down and played the

Ki.100's game, it was going to be in for the fight of its life.


Edited by CORSNING, 26 July 2017 - 10:44 AM.


#16 spicmart

spicmart

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Joined 8 Years, 6 Months and 22 Days
  • 1 topics

Posted 25 July 2017 - 10:52 PM

Thanks for the explanation, Corsning. Now it becomes a bit clearer for me. But I thought for performing proper aerobatics at high speeds a plane has to be build sturdy enough especially its wings to prevent wing twist and aileron reversal/efficiency loss.

The japanese airplanes though are not especially known for their sturdiness. But what I want to say in the case of the Ki-100 is that it has quite long slender wings (for its size) with a comparably high aspect ratio which were of one-spar construction, a construction method that normally provides less torsional stiffness than two or more spar designs afaik.

So I would conclude for myself that it would not be able to keep its aerobatic prowess up to 400 mph especially when some other late war fighters have their peak agility further down the speed range.



#17 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,611 posts
  • Joined 4 Years, 2 Months
  • 184 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 26 July 2017 - 10:58 AM

I am not a structural engineer but it seems to me any aircraft cleared for

a 528 mph dive limitation would be of rugged construction.

:) Jeff



#18 spicmart

spicmart

    Regular Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 8 posts
  • Joined 8 Years, 6 Months and 22 Days
  • 1 topics

Posted 27 July 2017 - 11:42 PM

Defintitely. 528 mph is an impressive number. Is it from a primary source?



#19 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,611 posts
  • Joined 4 Years, 2 Months
  • 184 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 28 July 2017 - 09:25 AM

The information on the Ki.100 was published in Famous Planes of the World No.23,

Kawasaki Ki.100 'Goshikisen' Army Type 5 Fighter by Bunrin Do Co. Ltd. 1990.

I do not own the book. I can only assume that original military/manufacturer documents

were used.


Edited by CORSNING, 28 July 2017 - 09:26 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users