# N1K2-J & Ki-84 VS F4U-4



## Razgriz1 (Jul 1, 2017)

The three kings of the pacific in terms of performance. I would like to see how well does the best performing Japanese fighters stack up against the ultimate Corsair variant used in WW2 (given that I'm a huge fan of the Corsair).


----------



## airminded88 (Jul 2, 2017)

The P-47N saw operational service in the PTO as far as I recall and that was a force to be reckoned with.
Welcome to the forum.

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## GregP (Jul 2, 2017)

Leaving out the Ki-100, surely a good one. too. I think the Ki-100, Ki-84,and J2M were among the best three for Japan, but it's the poster's thread. Don't forget the USA had the Corsair, the P-51D/K. and the Hellcat (best kill record on the Pacific) plus the FM-2 (surely a good one from the kill ratio! The F8F got there but didn't make combat and the F7F was JUST getting there when it ended, so it also didn't make combat during the war, but WAS flying at the time. I'd say anything that got into the F7F's armament stream was dead (4 x 50-cal plus 4 x 20 mm), but it never got fired in anger in WWII, so it doesn't make the team.

Collectively, the question was answered in the war and we won. Individually, I'd say the pilot would make the difference. All were strong individually. No real losers, here.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Greyman (Jul 2, 2017)

Knowing very little about any of these aircraft I again defer to Brown:

_F4U-1 Corsair_
A mixture of the good, the mediocre, and the bad. It had excellent acceleration, speed, and firepower, and was rugged in construction, but its slow-speed characteristics left much to be desired. Maneuverability was mediocre from the point of view of dogfighting, but it had a good rate of roll that could be used to advantage defensively. In summary, as a fighter the Corsair was a formidable aircraft to introduce to the Pacific theatre, but as a shipboard aircraft it had serious shortcomings.

_Kawanishi N1K2-J George 12_
A high-quality, high-performance fighter that appeared too late and in too few numbers to influence the course of the air war. It was well armed and protected--the Japanese having learned from their combat experience against the Americans.

_Corsair II vs. George 12_
This would bring together two aircraft very similar in performance and handling characteristics. Pilot skill would play a vital role in deciding the winner. Verdict: a critical analysis of all the facets of performance, maneuverability, firepower and ruggedness would probably show the Japanese plane to be at a small--a very small--advantage.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

I can't believe nobody has mentioned:

Reactions: Agree Agree:
2 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

The N1K2-J was the most maneuverable in either the lateral or longitudinal planes.
Its maneuverability was likened to the Zero's only at faster speeds. And Greg is right,
when in good condition and the engine was running correctly, the J2M was an excellent
aircraft with a very good blend of performance & maneuverability. IMO, what made the
Ki.100 such a great plane from the Japanese point of view was its outstanding horizontal
maneuvering capability coupled to an engine that was dependable. A dependable engine
coming out of Japan in 1944/45 was a becoming a rarity.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

Before we go too far here, " Does anyone out there in WW2Aircraft.Netland have
the full or partial *TAIC report/graphs on the N1K2-J*?" I only have the NiK1-J report.

Reactions: Friendly Friendly:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

N1K2-J
Engine: Nakajima Homare 21: 1,975 [email protected]. / 2,050 [email protected] 2,500 ft. / 1,875 hp.
@ 5,900 ft. (military) / 1,675 hp. @ 19,620 ft. (military) using 92 octane plus methanol.

Pilot notes from J2M Raiden and N1K1/2 Shiden/Shiden-Kai Aces, Aircraft of the Aces No.129
From the Author
" The Shiden-Kai was totally different to fly than the Shiden." " There were still problems
with the engine and propeller." " Stall came abruptly."
" Although the Shiden-Kai was a handful near the stall, it was an excellent heavy interceptor
that could exceed the Zero-Sen fighter."
" The performance of the Homare engine continued to be lower than expected."* " Fuel
quality was down to 85 octane* because it was mixed with an oil extract from pine tree
roots - this proved to be very volatile." " Pilots in the front line still claimed that the Shiden-
Kai's performance was good up to 30,000 ft."
" Unlike the J2M Raiden, the N1K2-J had not really been designed for high altitude
interceptions. Indeed, according to Lt Cdr Shiga, the fighter's Hormare 21 engine
suffered significant loss of power above 21,000 ft."

Shiden-Kai vs. VF-17 Hellcats
" Naval aviators from VF-17 also noted that the enemy fighters had excellent climbing
characteristics and superior speed. when confronted with Hellcats on their tails, the
Japanese pilots would snaproll to the left, their automatic combat flaps having saved
them time and time again."

Aircraft Profile 213 Page 16
N1K2-J vs. J2M3m21
"...the Shiden-kai had a nominal maximum (military power) speed advantage of 4 mph.
but it had a much longer range while being more maneuverable and having markedly
superior visibility from the cockpit."


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

F7F:
" The only variant to see action during WW2 turned out to be the -3P variants, which
first arrived in Guam in May, 1945 and forward deployed to Ulithi, Peleliu and Okinawa,
flying operational sorties the last few weeks of the war."
"The F7F-3P entailed the mounting of cameras in the rear fuselage of fifty-eight aircraft."

Flightdeck Friday: F7F Tigercat | Steeljaw Scribe


----------



## drgondog (Jul 2, 2017)

IIRC - the USMC deployed a F-7F Night Fighter Squadron before the war ended.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

You are absolutely right Bill.
" The F7F-1 debuted with its assignment to VMG-911 at MCAS Cherry Point during
the summer of 1944 for aircrew training. VMF(N)-531, home based at MCAS Eagle
Lake, Texas. would receive the first F7F-2Ns and later deployed to Guam in July 1945.
From there the F7Fs were flown to Okinawa, arriving on the last day of the war."
Jeff


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 2, 2017)

The four wing mounted 20mm. Type 99 cannon of the N1K2-J were
very effective. On the other hand 2Lt Alton Frazer was able to land his
F4U-1D No.441 with two fuel dropped tanks still inact, 2/5th of his left
wing shot off a 1.5 ft. by ~8 ft. gash down the left side of the fuselage
right behind the cockpit and the bottom third of the rudder shot away.
This all from a Kawanishi fighter's 20 mm. fire.
This aircraft can be seen at its base after the incident on page 86 of
Aircraft of the Aces No.129.


----------



## Razgriz1 (Jul 2, 2017)

Um, aren't we supposed to discuss the Corsair, not the Tigercat?


----------



## parsifal (Jul 2, 2017)

I would give a mention to the A7M Reppu (code name SAM).

Formal specifications were handed down by the Imperial Japanese Navy in July for a carrier-based aircraft capable of reaching near-400mph speeds, a service ceiling up to 20,000 feet and a combination cannon/machine gun armament. The task for developing the aircraft was given to Mitsubishi with engine selection between a Mitsubishi development (the Ha-43) or a Nakajima type (the Ha-45, to become the Homare series). The airframe was designed around either fitting as both could provide the needed performance specifications. The resulting prototype - recognized as the A7M1 - was first flown on May 6th 1944. Performance from the installed Nakajima Homare 22 series engine (2,000 horsepower) was lacking but the controls and agility proved sound. Three A7M1 prototypes were eventually built.

While the IJN halted development of the A7M in July, Mitsubishi progressed with their Ha-43 engine of 2,200 horsepower and testing of the completed A7M2 system on October 30, 1944 exceeded all expectations to the point that IJN interest in the aircraft was rekindled. Five total A7M2 prototypes were produced and successful testing allowed the IJN to formally adopt the aircraft into service. It was planned that the A7M could also be fielded from land bases under the A7M3 designation (featuring a supercharged Ha-43 engine) as the Japanese carrier force was largely destroyed and thusly limited by this point in the war. One of the prototypes was later lost to an accident.

With serial production granted, lines were retooled for manufacture of the promising fighter. However, a large earthquake in Nagoya disrupted the effort considerably, forcing shutdowns and repairs. The situation was made worse when Allied air superiority had been gained over the Japanese mainland, resulting in a relentless bombing campaign that further shook war-making capabilities and restricted open movement of resources and needed supplies. The principle threat to Japan at this time was the high-flying, four-engined American Boeing B-29 Superfortress capable of out-ranging Japanese defenses. Three more A7M prototypes were lost during American air attacks. Collectively, the strategic bombing campaign and natural disaster doomed the A7M production schedule for Japan officially surrendered on August 15th, 1945, the surrender being recognized on September 2nd. With the end of the war so too came the end of many projects such as the A7M. Thusly, the A6M would never see her successor and the A7M would never experience combat, her remaining airframes and parts being scrapped at war's end.

The A7M was named the "Reppu" by the Japanese, translating to "Strong Gale" while the Allies assigned her the codename of "Sam". In practice, the A7M was comparable in scope, performance and function to the Republic P-47 Thunderbolt, the Vought F4U Corsair and the Grumman F6F Hellcat - Japan's principle fighter foes in the Pacific.

Overall, the A7M shared some visual similarities to the A6M before it. The fuselage was of a long design with the engine set at the front of the design with the cockpit ahead of amidships. The engine was an air-cooled radial type which allowed the requisite horsepower output and performance gains needed in the new carrier fighter while powering a standard three-bladed propeller assembly. The cockpit sat under a glazed three-piece arrangement with the center piece sliding rearwards along rails for entry/exit. The wings were straight appendages, low-mounted along the fuselage underside featuring rounded wingtips. The undercarriage was of the typical "tail dragger" arrangement with single-wheeled main legs retracting under each wing root and a positional tail wheel under the empennage. The tail section was conventional with a short rounded vertical tail fin and a pair of horizontal tailplanes. The undercarriage would have been strengthened to content with the violent forces inherent in carrier operations. Proposed armament for the A7M series would have included 2 x 20mm Type 99 cannons along with 2 x Type 3 heavy machine guns (some sources states 4 x 20mm cannons, all in the wings). The A7M recorded a top speed of 390 miles per hour with a range of 770 miles and service ceiling of 35,700 feet.

As I said, worth mentioning......

Reactions: Like Like:
2 | Informative Informative:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 3, 2017)

WHEN DID THE F8F-1 GET ADDED!!!??? The Bearcat did not become
combat operational during WW2, and neither did the A7M. OK, I'm
over the initial shock now. I have no WEP figures for the George or
Frank using 85 octane pine sap. What I do have is their TAIC reports
with the performance figures (some calculated) using 92 octane and
methanol. Information for the F4U and F8F comes from the Bureau of
Aeronautics, Navy Dept. Airplane Characteristics and Performance
reports dated 1 March 1946 and 1 June 1945 respectively.
The WW2 area Speed numbers look like this:
*N1K2-J (N1K1-J) / Ki.84-1a / F4U-4 / F8F-1*
Altitude / Speed
Meters / mph
S.L.......355 / 362 / 389 / 394
1,000,,,,369 / 379 / 389 / 413
2,000....369 / 389 / 396 / 417
3,000....375 / 389 / 408 / 413
4,000....392 / 388 / 420 / 409
5,000....408 / 414 / 432 / 424
6,000....408 / 426 / 445 / 434
7,000....402 / 426 / 445 / 434
8,000....393 / 416 / 454 / 431
9,000....387 / 403 / 435 / 425
10,000..366 / 387 / 416 / NG
11,000..NG / NG. / 397 / NG
The Bearcat leads this event up to about 3,500, the Corsair takes over from
there up.
Maximum Power WEP (hp.): 2,050 / 2,040 / 2,380 / 2,400
Combat Weight (lb.): 7,717 / 7,940 / 12,420 / 9,334
Wing Loading (lb./ sq. ft.): 30.51 / 35.13 / 39.55 / 38.25
Power Loading (lb./ hp.): 3.764 / 3.892 / 5.218 / 3.889
The Japanese fighters are more maneuverable at lower speeds and altitudes.
Up high in the thin air the Corsairs stronger engine and large wing give it the
advantage at higher speeds.
The Power Loading figures do not give all the answers. The stronger engine
and larger propeller puts the Bearcat in the lead of acceleration. The Corsair
comes in second here with the information I have to date.
*N1K2-J (N1K1-J) / Ki.84-1a / F4U-4 / F8F-1*
Altitude / Climb
S.L.......4400 / 4275 / 3870 / 4570
1,000....4410 / 4350 / 3500 / 4220
2,000....3950 / 3890 / 3455 / 3705
3,000....3680 / 3570 / 3410 / 3290
4,000....3700 / 3590 / 3365 / 3275
5,000....3760 / 3610 / 3320 / 3115
6,000....3340 / 3350 / 2915 / 2665
7,000....2850 / 2870 / 2840 / 2220
8,000....2260 / 2280 / 2380 / 1755
9,000....1700 / 1720 / 1870 / 1325
10,000..1210 / 1175 / 1350 / .-875
11,000...-130 / .-575 /.-860 / .-425
Range on internal fuel (ml.): 670 / 1,025 / 1,005 / 1,140
Armament: 4 x 20 mm. / 2 x 12.7 mm.+2 x 20 mm. / 6 x 0.5 in. / 4 x 0.5 in.
Combat Operational: January 1945 / September 1944 / May 1945
No F8F-1 unit became combat operational before the end of WW2.
The F4U-1D became operational on 3 January 1945 and was the true
contemporary of the N1K2-J. The F4U-1C with 4 x 20 mm became
operational over Okinawa in April 1945. 

Jeff

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## GregP (Jul 4, 2017)

I HATE it when that happens ...


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 4, 2017)

Finished post #15.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Razgriz1 (Jul 7, 2017)

Removed the Bearcat from the title & the original post.


----------



## Greyman (Jul 7, 2017)

GregP said:


> I HATE it when that happens ...



A good habit to get into with a few forums - just before hitting the post/send button, do a quick 'Select All' [Ctrl] + [A] and 'Copy' [Ctrl] + [C].

Then if your post gets eaten you can just paste what you copied into a new message and try again.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 7, 2017)

Thank you for the information Greyman.
I was just reading over this thread and noticed that in post #6 I made reference
to the Ki.100's vertical maneuverability. The Ki.100 did have very good diving
capabilities but it should have read the Ki.100's horizontal maneuverability. I
have made the changes necessary in order to keep my insanity in check.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Elvis (Jul 14, 2017)

GregP said:


> Leaving out the Ki-100, surely a good one. too. I think the Ki-100, Ki-84,and J2M were among the best three for Japan, but it's the poster's thread. Don't forget the USA had the Corsair, the P-51D/K. and the Hellcat (best kill record on the Pacific) *plus the FM-2 (surely a good one from the kill ratio!)* The F8F got there but didn't make combat and the F7F was JUST getting there when it ended, so it also didn't make combat during the war, but WAS flying at the time. I'd say anything that got into the F7F's armament stream was dead (4 x 50-cal plus 4 x 20 mm), but it never got fired in anger in WWII, so it doesn't make the team.
> 
> Collectively, the question was answered in the war and we won. Individually, I'd say the pilot would make the difference. All were strong individually. No real losers, here.


Thank you for including my avatar. I agree, it was a good one too.


----------



## GregP (Jul 15, 2017)

You're welcome. Nothing a bit of extra power wouldn't make a LOT better, huh?

As I said, all were pretty decent; not a loser in there if everything happened to be running right.

In fact, if a Japanese expert, such as Saburo Sakai, were flying an A6M-5 at the war's end, he might have made a very bad day for anyone he encountered, even several at a time. Good thing the war ended when it did instead of later. And too bad it couldn't have happened even earlier.

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 16, 2017)

GregP said:


> In fact, if a Japanese expert, such as _Saburo Sakai, were flying an A6M-5 at the war's end_, he might have made a very bad day for anyone he encountered, even several at a time.
> *You know, its funny you should make that very statement Gregg. Several years ago I read a
> short story about Saburo on the very ending days of the war. Japan had surrendered and the
> armistice would be officially signed very soon. All of Saburo's unit was aware of this, however
> ...

Reactions: Bacon Bacon:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## GregP (Jul 16, 2017)

I met him once in Arizona at the old Doug Champlin Museum in Mesa (Falcon Field) one evening at a talk given by aces (mid 1980s). That museum was the home of the American Fighter Aces Association for a LONG time. What a nice guy he was. I bought a signed print and still have it.

He had been on a ride that afternoon in Bill Hane's P-51D "Ho Hun," and said he never thought in a million years he'd ever fly in a Mustang. Bill didn't give him the tame straight and level familiarization flight, and Saburo seriously enjoyed it. Bill even let him sit in the pilot's seat and start it up. He remarked that the engine sounded and ran silk smooth, among other interesting thoughts.

Reactions: Like Like:
3 | Like List reactions


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 17, 2017)

I also read many years ago that he believed the Zero was the best fighter
in the skies of WW2 until he flew in a Mustang.


----------



## airminded88 (Jul 18, 2017)

Interesting thoughts given the close calls he had during the last stages of the war having Hellcats on his tail.
Ramarkable aviator without any doubts.


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 18, 2017)

One must keep in mind the limited fighter aircraft that Saburo actually
came in contact with or personally flew.


----------



## Glider (Jul 18, 2017)

Reading his book he raved over the Shinden recognising that the day of the Zero was over.


----------



## Clayton Magnet (Jul 20, 2017)

Anyone with specs for the Ki-84? seems to have been forgotten in this discussion.


----------



## CORSNING (Jul 21, 2017)

NAKAJIMA KI.84 PERFORMANCE / TIMELINE - Aircraft Performance - The Great Planes : World War Two Warbirds


----------



## Old Wizard (Jul 22, 2017)




----------



## GregP (Jul 23, 2017)

The Ki 84 is firmly one of the contenders for best Japanese fighter of late war.

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Agree Agree:
1 | Like List reactions


----------



## Greyman (Aug 5, 2017)

Excerpts from 'REPORT ON TRIALS BETWEEN FRANK 1 AND THE SEAFIRE L.F.III AT CLARK FIELD, LUZON - 29/6/45'. I left out the speed/climb comparative trials since the Frank's CSU was failing so the results seemed a bit pointless. The Admiralty indicated a better idea of the Frank's speed/climb could probably be found in TAIC Summary No.22 (versions of which I've seen posted here)

_Maximum rates of turn were tried at 5,000 feet, speed 180 to 160 kts, the Seafire outturning the Frank fairly easily, although the Frank's rate of roll was 25% better.

Although the Frank 1 is not as manoeuvreable as the earlier Japanese fighters, pilots should still take advantage of high speed performance superiority when engaging it in combat.

Trim tabs, elevator only, effective.
Fowler type flaps, 0, 15, 30 degrees.
Climb angle is not steep, and normal in all respects.
Control forces are not heavy.
Handling is good up to 270 mph but is too heavy at 300 mph.
Gentle stall. Clean at 109 mph, landing gear and flaps down, 90 mph.
Vision is poor, due to narrow cockpit and forward position of the pilot's seat._

Reactions: Like Like:
1 | Like List reactions


----------

