# Orient's best: Ki-100 vs Ki-84



## Tommy Enfield (Dec 5, 2005)

Hi,


I’ve always been impressed by the achievements of the JAAF Type 4 Ki-84 but I’ve been reading some interesting information regarding the very Last Samurai, the Kawasaki Ki-100, it was received as a blessing by both ground crews and pilots alike.

So it seems that the Ki-100 was most favored by the JAAF so, in your opinion, what would be the best warrior?


----------



## V-1710 (Dec 5, 2005)

The Ki-100 was the Kawasaki Ki-61 Hien with a big radial engine, right?


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 5, 2005)

Yes it was. It was only about three miles per hour slower than the Ki-61, even though it had a large radial. The designers looked at the Fw-190, and how a large radial was moleded to a small airframe so smoothly, and made the transition rather quickly. I believe they used the Ha-104 engine, but thats just an off the top of my head guess, or the Ha-114. Either way they were high powered, in supply and easy to maintain. The previous model, the Ki-61, was built with the Ha-40, liscence copy of the Db-601. The japanese lightened the engine and increased the horsepower somewhat, but always had maintenance troubles. Both fighters, the -61 and the -100 were respectale, but the -100 was overall better even with the incremental lack of speed because it offered better reliability and maintainability. Some -61 airframes were used, and then new ones were built to make the new -100's. The aircraft was a serious threat to P-51'a, and from reports from pilots ive read, it made the Hellcat less of a fearsome opponent.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 5, 2005)

Both aircraft mentioned in the initial question were capable in there own respects. The -84 was overall and excellent aircraft, some specialized with two 20mm and two 30mm cannon for interception of bombers, some with two machine guns and two 20mm cannons. Ine the more lightly armed form, the -84 could hold its own against most allied fighters, including the P-51 mustang. It had good vision from the cockpit, good range, manouverable enough, fast enough for sure, good cieling, it was all around good. But then again so was the -100/-61. It depends on more of what you like. If i could fly any of those two, it would be the Ki-100II.


----------



## book1182 (Dec 5, 2005)

In the bomber interception role I would go with the Ki-100. The Ki-84 engine limited its high altitude performance. I like the Ki-84 down low though where I think it was a better performer. The Ki-100 was probably a plane that was to little to late.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 5, 2005)

Probably? haha it was, they werent in production until after the B-29 raids destroyed the Ha-40 engine stocks and plants. When the B-29's started bombing the pacific it was too little too late. When the battle of midway was over, any victory for the japanese simply prolonged the war and the suffering of the japanese people.

The Ki-84, with the big cannon, two 20mm and two 30mm would be a formidable interceptor, if not against high alitude B-29's, then against Avengers which flew conventional bombing missions at lower altitudes, and against B-25s and other medium bombers. The japenese interceptors usually, if not always lacked the altitude performance if not armor and armament of there european counterparts.


----------



## blue swede (Dec 6, 2005)

I'm voting for the Hein Tony. Was that a development form German technology? 8)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 6, 2005)

From my understanding the Ki-61 "Tony" was influenced off the design of the Bf-109 and the He-100. The Ha-40 engine (later designated to Ha-60) was based off the German DB-601 engine which had been liscenced built in Japan since 1938 by Kawasaki. Early versions of the aircraft were also armed with Germany MG151's.

However the aircraft is not of German technology in reality.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 6, 2005)

Not possible without german technology, but it wasnt based on it. It looks more like an Mc.202 more than anything, but the italians had nothing to do with the collaboration between the german air ministry and japaneese air force production. The japanese saw german technology, and usually adapted it using german technology, or ideas, and fitting them to there own needs. The shushi and the kikka are examples of thise, near copies, though different from the Me-163 rocket interceptor, and the Me-262 jet, though the kikka was a bomber, smaller and had a different fuesalague.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 6, 2005)

Exactly.


----------



## Tommy Enfield (Dec 9, 2005)

So the Ki-100 had the better performance aginst high flying B-29s in comparison with the Ki-84?

I've read that the Hayate was one of the best climbers of the Pacific War, and could reach the normal cruising altitude of the Boeing big bomber in a, relatively, short period of time.


----------



## Tommy Enfield (Dec 9, 2005)

Ground crew really disliked the Ha-40 (Jpanese modified version Daimler Benz 601) for all the plumbing related with the coolant system. The Ha-112 of the Ki-100 was received as a blessing, because it was far more reliable, and was more alike the Japanese combat thinking. The Ha-140 planned for the ill-fated Ki-61 II was plaged with even more problems. The Japanese were always very keen on radials, and the Hien was rather an odd plane.


----------



## Jank (Dec 9, 2005)

"I've read that the Hayate was one of the best climbers of the Pacific War, and could reach the normal cruising altitude of the Boeing big bomber in a, relatively, short period of time."

And then get shot to pieces by sevral escorting American fighters each with 8 .50 bmg machne guns.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Dec 9, 2005)

Jank said:


> "I've read that the Hayate was one of the best climbers of the Pacific War, and could reach the normal cruising altitude of the Boeing big bomber in a, relatively, short period of time."
> 
> And then get shot to pieces by sevral escorting American fighters each with 8 .50 bmg machne guns.



Or by a formation of -29s (Eight .50-cal. machine guns in remote controlled turrets plus two .50-cal. machine guns and one 20mm cannon)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 9, 2005)

Or just not have eneogh fuel to do anything after it got up there to the B-29's.


----------



## Jank (Dec 9, 2005)

They stil had enough fuel to blow up and fall to erth in a pretty fireball reminiscent of the risng sun, only more like the setting sun.


----------



## Chocks away! (Dec 10, 2005)

Ok take it easy there. The Hayate cannot in any way be concidered cannon fodder.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 11, 2005)

Not saying that either


----------



## V-1710 (Dec 13, 2005)

Wasn't the Ha. 60 also used in early versons of the Yokosuka D4Y 'Judy'?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 13, 2005)

Not sure on that but I do not that the Judy was based off the design of the Heinkel He-118 that had been suplied by Germany.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 13, 2005)

Both the Ki-84 and the Ki-100 were good aircraft and a match for fighters of the era that the british and americans could throw at them, but were simply not good enough as interceptors. The japanese seemed to have some defieciency when it came to making effective interceptors, in terms of armament (for the most part, though some aircraft were armed with 20mm and 30mm cannon) and armor. They all had good range which equaled loitre time for an interceptor, but they couldbt make enough of them, nor train enough pilots to fly them (they used trainers as kamikaze late in the war, and inexperienced pilots and even experienced ones, not to mention aircraft and fuel were burned off in these suicidal fights for there beliefs). Therefore high flying heavy bombers armed to the teeth with good armor to match, were pretty much out of reach to the JAAF and IJNAF. They were working on several projects near the end of the war, but they wouldnt have the pilots nor the fuel, but produciton was still pretty high in underground facilities, built into sides of the mountains. Just like the germans, they had perfectly good planes, but no pilots, fuel, and in the german case ball bearings to get the damn things up against our aircaft.


----------



## syscom3 (Dec 13, 2005)

Remember that in 1945, the B29's tended to bomb from middle altitudes. The jetstreams over Japan tended to ruin bombing accuracy.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Dec 13, 2005)

Japanese production standards were also next to nil by that point. While they may have had a number of planes, the lack of materials, skilled labour, and the rate of production all took their toll on quality. It was a pretty mixed bag toward the end.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 13, 2005)

Yeah your right, but they were making planes near the end of the war, under volcanoes, and production was near decent, but production quality was horrible because no skilled labour and lack of materials. 
Also for the B-29 Superfortress raids being at lower to mid altitudes, they were, but at that time the escort fighters (P-51 mustang, P-38 lightning, and P-47 Thunderbolt) the interceptors, by then starved of pilots that had adequate training, starved of fuel, and starved of quality, much less the needed the quanaty, they posed little threat to a large formation of B-29 bombers with hundreds of escorts. The japanese aircraft with such light armor were shredded by machine-gun fire from both bombers and fighters, and there armament was usually inadeqaute to knock down a bomber in a single pass, and if they were lucky, thats all a japanese pilot would get in the first place. So as much as i like the late war JAAF and IJNAF, i cant say they stood much of a chance against the B-29's.


----------



## Lunatic (Dec 18, 2005)

carpenoctem1689 said:


> Both aircraft mentioned in the initial question were capable in there own respects. The -84 was overall and excellent aircraft, some specialized with two 20mm and two 30mm cannon for interception of bombers, some with two machine guns and two 20mm cannons. Ine the more lightly armed form, the -84 could hold its own against most allied fighters, including the P-51 mustang. It had good vision from the cockpit, good range, manouverable enough, fast enough for sure, good cieling, it was all around good. But then again so was the -100/-61. It depends on more of what you like. If i could fly any of those two, it would be the Ki-100II.



The Ki-84 was probably the best Japanese fighter of WWII. However, there is no evidence that any Ic or IIc models ever flew combat missions. Only about 100 were put into production, and how many were finished is a question mark. It seems most likely that if they did see combat, it would have been against the Soviets during the last few days of the war.

The Ki-84 was only a match for the P-51 if the P-51 pilot let it be. It was significantly slower (40mph) and this is a huge deficit in an e-fight which is the only kind of fight the P-51 should be engaging any Japanese fighter in. The P-47N gobbled Franks for lunch.

The Ki-100 was just not fast enough to be a contender. It was fair to excellent in many catagories, but was far too slow (365 mph IIRC) to win in an E-fight with any late model US fighter except perhaps the Hellcat.

The best Japanese fighter of WWII was probably the Frank Ib (Ki-84-Ib - 4 x Ho-5 20mm cannon), followed by the George (N1J-2 - 4 x Type 99-II 20mm cannon). Both were excellent designs, both however lacked a sufficiently powerful/reliable engine.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 18, 2005)

I personally go for the Frank.


----------



## Lunatic (Dec 18, 2005)

carpenoctem1689 said:


> Both the Ki-84 and the Ki-100 were good aircraft and a match for fighters of the era that the british and americans could throw at them, but were simply not good enough as interceptors. The japanese seemed to have some defieciency when it came to making effective interceptors, in terms of armament (for the most part, though some aircraft were armed with 20mm and 30mm cannon) and armor. They all had good range which equaled loitre time for an interceptor, but they couldbt make enough of them, nor train enough pilots to fly them (they used trainers as kamikaze late in the war, and inexperienced pilots and even experienced ones, not to mention aircraft and fuel were burned off in these suicidal fights for there beliefs). Therefore high flying heavy bombers armed to the teeth with good armor to match, were pretty much out of reach to the JAAF and IJNAF. They were working on several projects near the end of the war, but they wouldnt have the pilots nor the fuel, but produciton was still pretty high in underground facilities, built into sides of the mountains. Just like the germans, they had perfectly good planes, but no pilots, fuel, and in the german case ball bearings to get the damn things up against our aircaft.



The USA was generally not able to send "high flying bombers" against Japan. The jet-stream was a new and relatively unknown phenomna back then. The B-29 was built for just such high altitude missions but when it came time to fly them, the jet-stream, which is very strong above that part of the world, made them extremely dangerous to fly. Planes would be blown off course and given the navigation of the time, get lost and have to ditch. As a result, extra fuel was loaded, making the average payload for such missions less than 4000 lbs, which kind of defeated the point. In the end the US decided to conduct a relatively low-altitude night bombing campaign against the Japanese.

The Japanese had a variety of planes capable of intercepting bombers at B-17 altitudes (20-25,000 feet). These included the "Frank" (Ki-84), "George" (N1K-2), "Jack" (J2M - 20mm and 37mm cannon), "Tojo" (Ki-44? - 20mm and 37mm cannon and a 40mm grenade launcher of sorts), and perhaps the "Nick" (Ki-43?) twin engine fighter. All had problems at high altitude however - the Japanese had difficutly with low-pressure fuel systems through the end of the war.

As for armor and armament - the Frank came armed with as much as 2 x 20mm and 2 x 30mm cannon, though there is no evidence the 30mm ever saw action (the Frank Ic and IIc were being held in Manchuria awaiting the "final battle for the Empire" - the US invasion of Japan). However the 4 x Ho-5 version definitely did see service. The Frank sported 13mm of pilot armor to the rear, as well as additional armor for the pilot from the sides. As far as I know, 13mm was the thickest plate on any signle engine fighter of the war. The George and late model Jacks also employed reasonable pilot armor. However, Japanese pilots were known to remove the armor because it was "cowardly".

The Japanese never had decent self-sealing fuel tanks, but self sealing fuel tanks were of little use vs. .50 class guns anyway. The could seal hits from .30 class guns, or fragments from HE rounds, but a direct hit from a .50 put a .5" entry hole and a 6" exit hole in a US self sealing tank (the best), far to big to seal. This is why the P-47N ustilized fuel cells rather than self sealing tanks. If a fuel cell got hit, it leaked but since you had 6 or so on each wing, the loss was minimal. So the key became preventing fires with nitrogent backfilling and CO2 extingishers.

Finally, I'd point out that the Japanes horded something like 20-25 thousand aircraft, mostly relatively late model planes, for the "final battle" which never occured. Many were stationed in Manchuria, while others were placed in caves designed to allow the planes to take off right out the cave mouth. Needless to say, the A-bomb convinced the Emperor to step in and surrender - so these planes never saw combat.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 20, 2005)

I know they had the planes, and i know they had the productoin capacity to make more, including new types like the Kikka, never saw combat but was in production by wars end. They couldnt get many planes in the air when compared to the number they had on the japanese mainland because lack of fuel, and pilots experienced enough to be more than cannon fodder or Kamikaze. The sea of japan, and the entire pacific was crawling with United states submarines, by this time with experienced crews, good tactics and improved torperdoes. The japanese navy ceased to be a threat late in the war, because it didnt have fuel, and it was pretty much gone. The aircraft in manchuria, while they did pose a threat yes, all those masses of planes would eat up the fuel and ammunition reserves, and cause havoc on the ground for maintenance crews. The N1K2-J shiden-kai was horrible for maintenance crews, along with the J2M raiden. The ki-43 a big and relatively slow "heavy fighter" prey for any single engine fighter operating by the time the B-29s were still doing high level bombing in that jetstream you mentioned. The Ki-61, while having armor was again a nightmare for the ground crews, because the Ha-40 engine was unreliable. Therefore, several of the best of the japanese aircraft held in reserve were troublesome and without good pilots. The P-47N and the late model P-51's both D and K, along with the P-38, not to mention the guns on the bombers themselves would have swept the sky of the fighters in weeks. While the japanese had some good aircraft, that cant be argued, by me because i love japenese aircraft, those late war period aircraft, while formidable and substantial in numbers, seemed a bigger threat than they truly were.


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 21, 2005)

Correction on my last post, i meant Ki-44 not Ki-43. Big difference in those aircraft.


----------



## lesofprimus (Dec 21, 2005)

Im glad u corrected urself, cause I was just thinking that u had no idea what u were talking about concerning the -43... lol.

As far as Orients Best, (performance) I still have to go with my Grandpa and say the N1K2-J, ignoring the obvious fuel and maintenence issues... In the hands of a veteran pilot its was as lethal and manouverable as the Corsair...


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 21, 2005)

Yeah id have to agree with your grandpa on that one too. The shiden was an excellent fighter. Fast, durable, robust and well armed and armoured. The range was good too. It, in the hands of a good pilot could match anything thrown at it, army or navy fighter, and it could be a good interceptor as well, and with good range and a radial engine, in a pinch an attack aircraft. It was truly a good aircraft, and its a shame that production standards were so low on the engines and airframes, because that plagued the aircraft for its existence.


----------



## Lunatic (Dec 22, 2005)

The George was a good fighter, but I do not think it was a match for a Corsair. it had a 50 mph speed deficit vs. an F4U-1d, and an 90 mph speed deficit vs. a F4U-4. 50 mph is difficult to beat, but 90 mph is next to impossible.

=S=

Lunatic


----------



## carpenoctem1689 (Dec 22, 2005)

True the corsair holds the advantage in speed and reliability, but the N1K2-J was a fair opponent for anything the allies had, except maybe the latest model P-38, the P-47N and the P-51K. The Hellcat was outclassed by the japanese fighter, and would have had some serious trouble unless the pilots were inexperienced, or numerical superiority was on the side of the allies. The Shiden-kai was fast, manouverable, armed and armoured, and had good range. It was lethal to single engine fighters, and would be a nemisis against medium bombers. It was a great fighter with faults that could have been fixed had time and production quality been possible.


----------



## dobravery (Oct 30, 2007)

All of these aircraft mentioned have enough parity that none really outclass another. You just can't compare max speed without considering altitude as well. These planes performed close enough to which it really was about pilot skill. Aside for a handful of skilled pilots, by the end of the war the typical Japanese pilot had too little experience. Then there's production. Just the Hellcat alone out numbered all the late war Franks, Georges, Jack, and Ki-100's.

My point is that the Japanese produced great planes. When you look at pilots, production, and fuel. . . well. . . it is what it was.

Sorry!!! Super old post.


----------



## Soren (Oct 30, 2007)

The Ki-84 for sure. It was quicker than the US fighters at low altitudes, could turn tighter than any US fighter, featured a roll rate comparable to the Corsair and it packed a punch as-well with 4 x 20mm guns.

However by the time of its introduction there were quality control issues as-well as a huge lack of trained pilots - hence its losses reliability issues. Speed was also too low as altitude increased.

The N1K2J was a superb a/c as-well, possessing some very ingenious features such as automatic flap deployment in tight turns.


----------



## wirtz1014 (Aug 3, 2009)

More info about the Ki-100s. There were only 325 Ki-100s made before the end of the war and their primary mission was to guard Tokyo. Between February and March of 1945, the Ki-61s and Ki-43s they replaced were transferred to Kyushu to become Kamikaze fighters. As an aside, one of the main problems with the Ki-61 was, as people mentioned, its finickiness for fuel. The Japanese only had 92 octane fuel. which the inline engine didn't like. The radials, on the other hand, were less finicky about low-octane fuel. The US captured a Ki-61 and brought it back to Ohio for testing. When they ran the 145 octane fuel in it, they didn't have the running problems the Japanese did. The Ki-61 and the Ki-100 are my favorite fighters of the war. I am currently building a 60" radio control version of the Ki-61 and will build a 100" version of the Ki-100 as my next scale model. 

Tim


----------



## proton45 (Aug 3, 2009)

I'm not really sure how someone can claim the Ki-61 is a copy of a German plane... except for the engine it has nothing in common with the me109 or the He100. It has a different "airfoil", radiator placement, flight characteristics and is manufactured in a completely different way...its not even the same size. The Kikka is no more a copy of the 262 then the F86 was... 

Now if u want to talk copys...lets talk about the B-29 and the Tu-4, now their is a copycat.


----------



## GrauGeist (Aug 3, 2009)

proton45 said:


> I'm not really sure how someone can claim the Ki-61 is a copy of a German plane... except for the engine it has nothing in common with the me109 or the He100. It has a different "airfoil", radiator placement, flight characteristics and is manufactured in a completely different way...its not even the same size. The Kikka is no more a copy of the 262 then the F86 was...
> 
> Now if u want to talk copys...lets talk about the B-29 and the Tu-4, now their is a copycat.


Well, the MiG-1 and KI-61 both used the He100D's design in thier construction. The radiator on the He100D was retractable, while the MiG-1 and KI-61 were fixed, yet placed in the same location. The KI-61 even had the evaporative cooling system in the early prototypes, but was dropped eventually.

No surprise, since both the Russians and Japanese purchased He100Ds...

By the way, The Nakajima J9Y (Kikka) borrowed a little from the Me262, but the KI-201 (Karyu) was a copy.


----------

