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
- - - - -

Ki-83


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Laurelix

Laurelix

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined 3 Months and 30 Days
  • 12 topics

Posted 06 April 2017 - 12:33 AM

Ki-83:

Wing Area: 33.71m2

Empty Weight: 5980kg

Loaded Weight: 8800kg (yes its standard load weight was with full fuel tanks)

Shorter mission: 7300kg

Engine: 2x Ha-211 Ru

Sea Level (Take Off): 2200hp (WEP)

Sea Level: 2000hp (Military)

1000m: 2070hp (Military)

5000m: 1930hp (Military)

6400m: 1930hp (Military)

9500m: 1720hp (Military)

-

Max Speed: (Military / WEP) [8800kg load]

Sea Level: 574km/h / 595km/h (at 7300kg load, 596km/h at WEP)

1000m: 600km/h / 620km/h

2000m: 617km/h / 640km/h

3000m: 631km/h / 655km/h

4000m: 650km/h / 670km/h

5000m: 655km/h / 675km/h

6000m: 671km/h / 695km/h

7000m: 697km/h / 720km/h

8000m: 700km/h / 721km/h

9000m: 704km/h / 727km/h

9500m: 705km/h / 728km/h (at 7300kg load, 745km/h at 9500m at WEP)

-

Rate of Climb: (Military / WEP) [8800kg load]

1000m: 0:47 / 0:42

2000m: 1:35 / 1:24

3000m: 2:24 / 2:08

4000m: 3:17 / 2:54

5000m: 4:15 / 3:48

6000m: 5:17 / 4:42

(Imagine the climb at 7300kg load)

Let me help you:

7300kg load

Time to 1000m: 0:33 at WEP [5964 ft/min]

Time to 6,000m: 3:35 at WEP

Time to 10,000m: 6:58 at WEP

-

Stall Speed: (No flaps)

8800kg: 197km/h

7300kg: 180km/h

-

Turn Rate: (no flaps, 1000m, WEP)

8800kg: 22 sec

7300kg: 18 sec

-

Maximum Safe Dive Limit: 870km/h IAS (Not the rip speed)

-

Armament:

2x 20mm Ho-5 (160 rounds per gun)

2x 30mm Ho-155 (80 rounds per gun)

_______

 

In a 1v1 duel against F7F-1, my money would be on the KI-83 no doubts about it.



#2 Rick65

Rick65

    Registered Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 87 posts
  • Joined 5 Years, 7 Months
  • 1 topics
  • LocationPerth, Western Australia

Posted 06 April 2017 - 05:09 AM

As is often the case the Ki-83 was a lot lighter than it's US equivalent and also had a much smaller wing.

Range is similar, was anything traded off by the Japanese design team to achieve it's superb performance?

The F7F-1 was designed to be carrier capable and eventually operated from carriers, was the same the case for the Ki-83?

The Ki-83 design team was reportedly led by Tomio Kuba who also designed the superbly streamlined Ki-46 which sacrificed protection and offensive ability to achieve it's outstanding performance as a reconnaisance plane but was not a success when modified to be a fighter.



#3 Laurelix

Laurelix

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined 3 Months and 30 Days
  • 12 topics

Posted 06 April 2017 - 11:27 AM

As is often the case the Ki-83 was a lot lighter than it's US equivalent and also had a much smaller wing.

Range is similar, was anything traded off by the Japanese design team to achieve it's superb performance?

The F7F-1 was designed to be carrier capable and eventually operated from carriers, was the same the case for the Ki-83?

The Ki-83 design team was reportedly led by Tomio Kuba who also designed the superbly streamlined Ki-46 which sacrificed protection and offensive ability to achieve it's outstanding performance as a reconnaisance plane but was not a success when modified to be a fighter.

Its rather fragile comparee to F7F. it also is a more draggy airframe and thus cant compete with speed at sea level with F7F. its roll is decent fir heavy fighter but not as great as on F7F



#4 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,549 posts
  • Joined 4 Years and 2 Days
  • 181 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 06 April 2017 - 06:11 PM

Just an FYI, the F7F was not particularly known for its rapid rate of roll.

 

Laurelix, what source was used for military and WEP performance figures

in your first post?


Edited by CORSNING, 06 April 2017 - 06:37 PM.


#5 Laurelix

Laurelix

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined 3 Months and 30 Days
  • 12 topics

Posted 06 April 2017 - 08:15 PM

Just an FYI, the F7F was not particularly known for its rapid rate of roll.

 

Laurelix, what source was used for military and WEP performance figures

in your first post?

The X-Planes of the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy

fkZNiHJ.jpg

Thx to this we know that the plane had 655km/h at 5000m at military power. At 5000m the engines also produce 1930hp each at military power. knowing this you can calculate the speeds at other altitudes by changing air density for each alltitude and the engine output at different alts since you know the CD0 and Prop efficiency by capculating it yourself from the result in the source. As for WEP you just add horsepower to the calculation. Same thing can be done with climb rate. If you know ome thing, you can calculate the rest.



#6 CORSNING

CORSNING

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,549 posts
  • Joined 4 Years and 2 Days
  • 181 topics
  • LocationClyde, Ohio, USA

Posted 06 April 2017 - 08:26 PM

So you are saying that you have calculated all the figures to the best of your 

knowledge? ....and on what basis?


Edited by CORSNING, 06 April 2017 - 08:32 PM.


#7 Laurelix

Laurelix

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 77 posts
  • Joined 3 Months and 30 Days
  • 12 topics

Posted 06 April 2017 - 08:32 PM

So you are saying that you have calculated all the figures to the best of your 

knowledge?

My friend has, yes. Hes excellent at it.

He is able to do the same for every plane if he has suffucient info. its his hobby in spare time.



#8 GregP

GregP

    Forum Guru

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,223 posts
  • Joined 13 Years, 10 Months and 21 Days
  • 222 topics

Posted 06 May 2017 - 03:18 AM

We have had people in here who thought they knew, too. They mostly didn't.

 

It would help if your friend shared his calculations. We have several aeronautical engineers in here.


  • flying kiwi likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users