# Japanese interceptors/fighters, fav?



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 10, 2005)

It would seem that the mindset here would be ETO aircraft deserve the most discussion, because i see a serious lack of PTO discussions. So in a most likely vein attempt, ill try and discuss some Japanese fighters and interceptors.

Early on in the war, the japanese had few, if any high altitude fighters and interceptors. The vaunted zero, had only a top speed of 332 MPH at 14,390 ft, and with altitude above this, performance slowly decreased. It did not have the amrament to deal with bombers of four engine configuration, and had trouble with twin engine bombers/fighters. It had a meager ceiling of 32,810 ft, rendering it definitly not the best high altitude aircraft. however this can be forgiven, due to the fact its meant as an escort fighter/fighter. 

The Ki-43 was a close resemblance to the zero, being a medium atltitude fighter, and not a high level interceptor. Manoeverability was very good, but armament was a meager two 12.7 mm nose mounted machine guns. it had a top speed of 329 MPH at 13,125 ft, and above that, performance gradually decreased. Its ceiling was slightly improved over the zero, topping out at 36,750 ft. 

The Ki-44 fared a little better in the higher altitude battles that would ensue in the PTO. It had a top speed of 375 MPH at 17,105 ft, an improvement over the A6M, and the Ki-43. It had a ceiling of 36,842 ft, and an armament of four machine guns. Like the previous two aircraft it had a range of over 1000 miles, and could loiter, or escort.

The Ki-84 was an aircraft much more suited to the interceptor role. with a top speed of 390 MPH at 20,131 ft, it could finally put speed and alititude somewhat together. it had a ceiling of 34,540 ft, and again a range of over 1000 miles, giving it loiter and escort ability. With an armament of two 20mm cannon, and two machine guns, it was too lightly armed to truly tackle the large, four engined bombers, like the b-17 and the b-24, and would have trouble with the b-25, b-26. However it still was better than the A6M, sporting 12.7mm Ho-103 machine guns, instead of 7.92mm ones.


----------



## syscom3 (Sep 10, 2005)

Why not include the other fighters that had some potential, like the Raiden or Tony?


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 11, 2005)

i simply ran out of room...it wouldnt let me type anymore...though the raiden would have been one of my favorite choices, even though it was plagued by troubles, mostly engine related.


----------



## evangilder (Sep 11, 2005)

There is a thread for polls, can you please post these into the polls thread? Thanks.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 11, 2005)

Im sorry, im new here today, and i just now noticed the polls board, will do from now on, and i apologize.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 11, 2005)

I tried to post a poll, but it said only moderators could? can i have a little help here?


----------



## Wildcat (Sep 11, 2005)

Well I'm a fan of the Zero so my vote goes to it.


----------



## lesofprimus (Sep 11, 2005)

U can list up to 15 selections for ur poll.........


----------



## JCS (Sep 11, 2005)

Well, the Ki27 is my favorite fighter (Second only to the Bf109), so I voted for "Other before 1944".


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 11, 2005)

I would not go for any of those fighters up there. I am not impressed with really any of the Japanese fighters. The Zero was an overated myth. I do like the Tony and the Raiden though.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 11, 2005)

Tony, Raiden and KI-88


----------



## Glider (Sep 11, 2005)

Ki100 not on the list or the Ki84 if you want one on the list.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 11, 2005)

forgive the lack of options in the poll...im new and just now learning, thanks for the information on my mistakes, and thanks for answering my poll though.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 12, 2005)

No problem you will learn the ropes my friend.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 12, 2005)

J2M Raiden...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 13, 2005)

Of Japenese aircraft I would go with the same CC.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 14, 2005)

Yeah, after doing a bit of reading up on it I found it was a very capable aircraft...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 14, 2005)

The Japanese were very capable of making quality aircraft I think they were just lacking raw materials more than Germany was and they made similar mistakes as the Germans did.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 14, 2005)

Yep, the Raiden was supposed to be in service in late 42/early 43 but due to numourous problems (mainly engine) they werent in frontline service til late 44 at the earliest.


----------



## Jabberwocky (Sep 15, 2005)

What about a N1K2-J Shiden-kai?

1,990 hp engine, 4 20mms and that crazy automatic manuvering system that they put on it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 16, 2005)

Dont know much about a auto maneuvering system. Was it like an auto pilot or something?


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 18, 2005)

It automatically helped the pilot in a manouver, making the force needed on the stick to throw it around less...needed some perfecting though, or so i have heard.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 18, 2005)

Like Pilot Assist Modules and SAS/FPS Computers then.


----------



## lesofprimus (Sep 18, 2005)

I also say the N1K2-J....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 18, 2005)

That is the one I would go with. Really anythign but the Zero. I really am not a fan of it.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Sep 18, 2005)

The zero was a sorry excuse for an interceptor because of its light construction. It had one thing running for it, in the interceptor role, and that was the range, which gave it a long loiter time. Its armament was rather light for interception duties as well, with small machine guns in the nose, and 20mm cannon, one in each wing, carrying only 60-100 rpg, depending on the model. That was far too light for anything with two engines, and a sturdy construction, much less anything with four engines. THe light construction and lack of armor or self sealing tanks was the ultimate demise as an interceptor for the zero. This allowed the zero to be taken down very, very easily by the gunners on bombers, or to the guns of escorts. Therefore i cant see many people, if any, thinking the zero as an interceptor, but its great qualities as a fighter early on cemented its place in my poll.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 19, 2005)

Early it held its own at best.


----------



## syscom3 (Sep 19, 2005)

One of its greatest assetts in the early part of the war, was its incredibly long range. It shocked and disheartened the allies to see fighters operating so far from their bases. On more than one occasion, they figured there were aircraft carriers nearby.

Also having some of the finest pilots in the world at that time, sure didnt hurt.

Deradler.....another interesting tidbit of trivia for the Zero....... it was so maneuverable, that it could also be considered a trainer. Very forgiving to a new pilot, who could master it before he could get into trouble. When the next generation of high performance fighters began to be deployed, the Japanese discovered that their training programs was not up to par, and throwing inexperienced pilots into high performance aircraft was a recipie for disaster. I bet the Luftwaffe had the same issue late in 1944 and early 1945.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 23, 2005)

syscom3 said:


> Deradler.....another interesting tidbit of trivia for the Zero....... it was so maneuverable, that it could also be considered a trainer. Very forgiving to a new pilot, who could master it before he could get into trouble. When the next generation of high performance fighters began to be deployed, the Japanese discovered that their training programs was not up to par, and throwing inexperienced pilots into high performance aircraft was a recipie for disaster. I bet the Luftwaffe had the same issue late in 1944 and early 1945.



Maneuverable to about 275 mph only.


----------

