Best Japanese B-29 'Killer'

[timshatz]

Jumping around on a bunch of posts on this one.

Nicodemus, it is my understanding that the Mig 15 was designed to deal specifically with the B29 as a point interceptor. Hence the 37MM/23MM armament. I have heard (allegorically) that the B29s over North Korea were hammered by the Mig15, the Sabres could not keep them off the bombers. Not a good time for the 29s. After a while of this, the 29s moved to night bombing where the Mig's advantages weren't decisive.

Was that 10,000 sortie rate for the month of July 1945 or was that for the whole war up to July of 45? I ask because the 29 was doing a lot of other missions (bombing Okinawa, Mine Laying, ect) at the same time and not all of the attacks were over mainland Japan. Just curious as to the numbers.

Would give the Me-262 the kudos as the best German "anti-B29" machine. Had the highest speed (rendering the defensive firepower of the B29 next to, if not in fact, useless) and a heavy battery of cannons to make the short time it was in range of a B29 a very dangerous time for the bomber. Speed and firepower seem like the deciding factor on the best bomber killer. Also gives it the speed to outrun the escorts.

 

[Matt308]

Where did we get off track on this thread. Me-262s, MiG-15s, He-280s....

Most of the "most" effective...whatever that means...Japanese fighters against B-29s were last ditch efforts that were a combination of high altitude dives over targets or those who did a tail pursuit with altitude advantage.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but there were rarely Japanese attacks in similar formations nor tactics like in the ETO.

 

[delcyros]

I estimate You hit the nail on it´s head.
Differences are tactics first. With unproper interception tactics even high performance interceptors are worth nothing. I think the IJAF was underestimating the US efforts in heavy bombers a lot and therefore failed
to develop proper tactics.

 

[Gnomey]

True but on the subject of Matt's post the best overall B-29 killer was the Mig-15....

Of the Japanese ones though none where really good at taking down heavy bombers (as is shown by the B-29 loses) and the tactics weren't really in existance (there was always ramming of course). With proper tactics the loses of B-29's I think would not of increased dramatically as the aircraft being used for the most part had to expend a lot of ammo in bring down the B-29 and therefore where in its defensive fire for a fairly long time.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Where did we get off track on this thread. Me-262s, MiG-15s, He-280s....

It all happened when I made a comparison of the Japanese to the Luftwaffe which I think would have been more effective than the Japanese in bringing down the B-29 because they had the aircraft and the tactics to do it.

 

[Matt308]

Ah.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Jumping around on a bunch of posts on this one.

Nicodemus, it is my understanding that the Mig 15 was designed to deal specifically with the B29 as a point interceptor. Hence the 37MM/23MM armament. I have heard (allegorically) that the B29s over North Korea were hammered by the Mig15, the Sabres could not keep them off the bombers. Not a good time for the 29s. After a while of this, the 29s moved to night bombing where the Mig's advantages weren't decisive.

Actually when the B-29s were suffering large daylight losses the first F-86A's were coming to Korea and they were barley able to compete with the Mig, it wasn't until the F-86F came along where the F-86 really dominated.

B-29s in Korea were placed at a disadvantage by some of the tactics used - there were times during night mission where Migs attempted to intercept them but the gunners were told not to fire in fear of giving up a visual position in the sky. Later in the war that changed.

As stated only 16 B-29s were lost to Migs but most of those losses happened during earlier part of the war.

BTW for the benefit of the newer guys (I've mentioned this before), my uncle was a B-29 radio operator and flew during that period, his B-29 was shot down but he survived.

 

[Bullockracing]

On-topic: I would go with the Ki-44 with two 40mm and two 20mm, I think maybe the Ki-44 III KAI? Not sure, but it had the turbocharged engine in it - limited production - but I would love to fly one. Not sure the japanese had an effective B-29 killer in any significant numbers at all...

 

[timshatz]

On-topic: I would go with the Ki-44 with two 40mm and two 20mm, I think maybe the Ki-44 III KAI? Not sure, but it had the turbocharged engine in it - limited production - but I would love to fly one. Not sure the japanese had an effective B-29 killer in any significant numbers at all...

Two 20mm and two 40mm on a single seat fighter?! I'd heard they were two 30mm, but not heard they were 40mm. If that is accurate (and I really don't know for sure), it would make it a very sloppy bird to fly. A lot of weight. Definitely would affect the high altitude performance and probably make it an easy mark for the escorts. IMHO

 

[Glider]

The Ki44 did have a version armed with the 40mm but it was a failure. The ammunition was caseless with a very poor MV and a short range which would have meant the fighter having to get very close and they would have been shot to pieces.

One factor that should be considered is the standard of Jap radar. They certainly had radar but its performance was poor compared to the German and allied designs and the standard of the crews tended to be lower due to the view most leaders had of people who were not in the front line.
If you are going to intercept bombers coming inover the sea then you need good long range radar which the Japanese didn't have in quantity. With a lack of warning they had little chance of getting large formations of fighters in the right place to carry out co-ordinated attacks. Peoples views on this would be appreciated.

I understood that the Raiden was potentially a good B29 attacker but it was spoiled if not ruined by some design weaknesses but mainly very poor production quality controls.

 

[Bullockracing]

Googled "Ki-44 Shoki":

The Model 2 (Ki-44-II) became the major production version of the Shoki, and was built in three separate versions. The Ki-44-IIa was equipped with two fuselage-mounted 7.7-mm machine guns and two 12.7-mm machine guns in the wings. Only a relatively few examples of the IIa version were built. The major production version was the Ki-44-IIb (Model 2B). It carried a quartet of 12.7-mm machine guns, two in the fuselage and two in the wings. The Model 2C was armed with a quartet of 20-mm Ho-3 cannon and was intended primarily as a B-29 interceptor in defense of the Japanese home islands.

The Ki-44-II was first encountered by the Allies in the China, Burma, and Malaya theatres. Shoki fighters were also assigned the task of defending the vital oil fields at Palembang on Sumatra. Later, B-29 crews encountered the Tojo in their early sorties over the Japanese home islands. The Ki-44-IIc was particularly effective against the B-29, and was regarded as the toughest and most troublesome fighter that these bomber crews had to deal with at that stage in the war. Very few other Japanese fighters were capable of reaching the altitude at which the B-29 operated and still possess sufficient performance in order to intercept this bomber.

A few Ki-44-IIc fighters were armed with a pair of 12.7- mm machine guns and a pair of wing-mounted 40-mm Ho-301 cannon in an attempt to provide even more punch against the B-29. However, this cannon had a rather low muzzle velocity and was hence effective only at close ranges. A few other Ki-44-IIc fighters were fitted with a pair of 37-mm Ho-203 cannon with a somewhat higher muzzle velocity. However, both heavy cannon types were only moderately successful and saw only limited action.

The final production version of the Shoki was the Ki-44-III. It was powered by a Nakajima Ha-145 eighteen-cylinder air-cooled radial rated at 2000 hp for takeoff, 1880 hp at 6560 feet, and 1450 hp at 26,245 feet. This engine drove a four-blade propeller and carried a set of thrust-augmentation exhaust stacks. The wing area was increased and the tail surfaces were made larger.
Two versions were produced--the Model 3A (Ki-44-IIIa) with two 20-mm Ho-5 cannon in the wing and two Ho-5 cannon in the engine cowling, and the Model 3B (Ki-44-IIIb) with two 20 mm Ho-5 cannon in the fuselage and two 37-mm Ho-203 cannon in the wings.

 

[timshatz]

Good posts, thanks for the info.

 

[lesofprimus]

Good Google job there Bullock, good info...

 

[Matt308]

He he he

 

[exec228]

Googled "Ki-44 Shoki":
<...>
The Model 2C was armed with a quartet of 20-mm Ho-3 cannon...
<...>

j-aircrafts experts say that syoki never had nor 20mm cannons, neither 40mm.
only 4*12.7 or 2*12.7+2*37.

 

[Twitch]

The reality was that a scant few Japanese interceptors ever made it to the 33,000 foot altutude which B-29s operated at. And they were far faster at that altitude than most of their opponents. Until the fire raids they cruised way above what B-24s and B-17s could.

The Japanese early warning radar was spuradic with lots of holes. By the time B-29s were detected it was impossible to scramble, climb for several minutes and catch them once there.

And BTW the only 2 IJAAF aces named Kobayashi were Hohei with 10 kills and Teruhiko with 5. Tetsuzo Iwamoto led with 66.

 

[Glider]

j-aircrafts experts say that syoki never had nor 20mm cannons, neither 40mm.
only 4*12.7 or 2*12.7+2*37.

Can I ask what J Experts, as I have an article that includes a photo of an operational Ki44, with the pilots sitting in a formal pose in front of the plane which is fitted with the 40mm.

The combinations of armament were as follows

2 x 7.7 + 2 x 12.7 (early production only)
4 x 12.7 (can be considered the normal load)
2 x 12.7 + 2 x 37 (used against B29 with some success)
2 x 12.7 + 2 x 20 (Article contains photo of operational aircraft on home defence)
2 x 12.7 + 2 x 40 (used as ground attack in limited numbers and not a success)

The 4 x 20mm was installed on a prototype but not put into service.

 

[exec228]

so you have photos with clear difference between 37 Ho-203 and 40mm Ho-301? can you show them?
which mark? II-Hei(c)?

2x12.7+2x20mm interesting too. Ho-3? II-Hei?

 

[Glider]

I will see what my son can do with the scanner but I don't have a photo of the Ki44 with the 37mm. At a guess the photo of the 40mm armed plane should come out well but the 20mm is a very small photo in a book.

If it helps the 40mm plane was flown by Major Noboru Okuda who commanded the 47th Sentai.

The 20mm was the Ho5 (type1) but the 37mm was Ho203 (type 3).

According to what I have the MG armed KI44 were known as the Ki44-II-Otsu and the cannon armed planes Ki44-II-Hei Shoki. The majority of the cannon armed planes being armed with the 37mm.

Meanwhile whilst I gather my photo and give you all the details I can, you were going to supply the names of your experts?

 

[exec228]

my mistake: syoki has only 40mm Ho-301, and never 37mm Ho-203.

Return to Faq
Nakajima Ki-44 "Tojo" Pt 2 Threads -40mm approved

damn, jac forum regularly cleansed. that topic was deleted.
however, i found a quote:
alt.games.warbirds - KI-44

The 37mm wing gun appears to be one of those "perpetuated myths" you describe, the mystery being where on earth it originated from.