Wild_Bill_Kelso
Senior Master Sergeant
- 3,231
- Mar 18, 2022
I compare Ki-21, Ki-48, and Ki-49 to Blenheim and Wellington because those aircraft had the most similar role in terms of targets.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
No the west, eventually to the british, look to portugal or belgian bomberBringing in a plane that roughly equals the plane/s your opponents are taking out of service even if they overlap a bit is the point of the thread.
The Japanese were 1- 2 years behind the west.
And the Japanese didn't build anything that was in that catagory, unless we count the G8N. in 1944.I don't think the Stirling or the Manchester were really successful designs either, were they? Of the three, only the Halifax seemed to linger on...
The Blenheim was a 10-14,500lb bomber (going from the MK I to the MK IV) with a 3 man crew.
The Ki-21 I was a 16,500lb bomber with a 5 man crew, went to 21,400lbs in the Ki-21 II
The G3M was a 16,800-17,600lb bomber with a 5-7 man crew.
Not really intended to do the same thing.
Quoting the specs for the Ki-21 IIb (entered service in 1942) is not helping your case.
The Ki-21 was supposed to do the job of the Hampden, Whitley and Wellington.
Bringing in a plane that roughly equals the plane/s your opponents are taking out of service even if they overlap a bit is the point of the thread.
The Japanese were 1- 2 years behind the west.
Hiimho this is not correct, also if the classification like the same they are not in the same category, replying to MikeMeech
And the Japanese didn't build anything that was in that catagory, unless we count the G8N. in 1944.
Hi
The Stirling, Halifax, Manchester and Lancaster were undertaking the same role as the Wellington and used alongside the latter on the same targets during 1942/43.
Mike
Size of the crew helps point to the intended use of the aircraft.I am not certain what weight or number of crew has to do with it precisely, though I share some of your puzzlement as to why some Japanese bombers carried so many crew. It probably does translate to more active use of the defensive guns though.
The Ki-21 I maxed out at 268mph, the Ki-21 II got engines that were significantly more powerful. The IIb got the pedal powered turret with the single 12.7mm machine gun.I quoted Ki-21 stats from Wikipedia, though I am pretty sure all versions were a good bit faster than the Wellington and also look better than Blenheim, Hampden, and Whitley, the latter two of which were basically failed designs.
The Ki-21 had a max bombload of 2200lbs. normal bomb load was 1650lbs. Normal range for the Ki-21 was 1500km, 932 miles.In terms of speed, range, defensive guns, and payload, taken together, Ki-21 already looks better than all of these to me, at least for daytime operations. The only advantage the British planes have is payload, except for the Wellington which also has remarkable range.
Skips the whole point doesn't it? you are concentrating on the British who were flying obsolete junk in the far east in 1941-42. But the British knew this in 1939-40 and for the most part, were contracting out the light/medium bombers to the Americans while the British worked on heavy bombers.Ki-48 and 49 are significantly better than the native designed aircraft the British were flying in the same role in 1941 or 1942. They were at least competitive with the German, Russian, Italian, and American designs in the same period.
The Japanese were not trying to reach the US, British or Soviet manufacturing centers, you are quite right.You understand, I assume, that the Japanese meant something different by 'heavy bomber'. Their situation meant that they could not reach American or British or Soviet manufacturing centers, so their aircraft were designed for different missions.
Whether strategic bombing as we know it, which is so popular here, even really helped that much in the war is a separate debate.
In mid-1942 detachments from 2 Bomber Command Halifax squadrons were sent to Egypt. They were consolidated into 462 squadron in Sept 1942. In March 1944 it moved to Italy and became 614 squadron. Halifax II were operated until March 1945, although some radar equipped Liberator VIII had begun to be received from Aug 1944.Well they were not being used in the tactical war in the Pacific or Mediterranean that I know of, except for the Wellington.
Actually, until the Mosquito, de Havilland only made transport aircraft for the RAF (they did design the DH.77 light fighter, but that was a project done with Gloster, who actually did the production of the prototypes), and the RAF were ambivalent/indifferent about the Mosquito (proposed in 1938) until the SHTF period of 1940. Of course other than performance, the selling point of the Mosquito was it was made mostly out of wood, arguably an anachronistic feature by 1940 in the west (Western Europe, North America). In spite of that, the front fuselages of the Vampire and Venom jet fighters were made out of wood.
So to say that DH caught the RAF's eye as far as combat aircraft wasn't really accurate until 1940, considering that the RAF saw more value in DH up to that point as a potential subcontractor for existing designs (and were running a hub that repaired Hurricanes during the Battle of Britain).
The problem here is that the RAF had Mk I Mosquitoes, capable of almost 390 mph, in service by that fall of 1941. The two stage Merlin variants were online by 1943 (though it took until 1944 with the Mk 30 for there to be a two stage fighter variant). The Ki-46-I was adopted in 1940, which was the same year the Mosquito prototypes first flew. And the -I was barely faster than the Mitsubishi A6M2 Zero. The -II was capable of 373 mph (the originally hoped for top speed), but entered service within a couple of months of the faster Mosquito Mk I.
The -III had a top speed of about 390 mph, and was designed in 1942--the same time that DH and the RAF were toying with two stage Merlins in what would become the Mk IX and XVIs. Again, those Mosquitoes were about 25 mph faster (the late war PR 34/B 35 was even faster, using the uprated engines from the later two stage night fighter variants), and could also fly higher (remember, the Japanese still relied on single stage supercharged engines on the Ki-46 production variants). This is all happening basically concurrently.
Other problem (is you view it as such) is that the RAF and USAAF had PR Spitfires with two stage Merlins capable of 420+ mph (depending on the subvariant of the Merlin fitted), two stage Griffon FR/PR Spitfires capable of over 445 mph (over 450 for the PR 19), and armed F-6s based on the P-51B/D that were capable of over 450 mph on 115/145 fuel and flying light.
Of course, with the single engine, single seaters, you're giving up the range of the Ki-46 in favor of a smaller, faster aircraft (though as mentioned, the two stage Mosquitos and the solo F-82 recon test bed were faster and had similar or better range).
The Ki-46 was a a special purpose aircraft that was adapted to night fighter late in the war.Ok, so the KI-46 is second best when compared to the Mosquito.
The Ki-46 was a a special purpose aircraft that was adapted to night fighter late in the war.
It was a pretty good design but all it had to do was take-off, fly over a target area, take pictures and get the pictures home.
It didn't have to carry bombs, it didn't have to carry guns and so on.
It used a 344 sq ft wing and weighed 10,630lbs to 14,330lbs depending on version/year.
Basically the US could match the early versions with the Lockheed F-4s
The Russians could use PE-2R (?)s with a bit shorter range.
In 1940 the Germans could use Bf 110C-5s but that didn't last long.
None of them built a dedicated recon plane with no other duties.
Ok, so the KI-46 is second best when compared to the Mosquito.
But what about the vast majority of other Allied and Axis nation's twins in comparison?
Also tossing in late/post war types like the P-82 isn't really valid, since it didn't see combat and Japan didn't have the same luxury. However, if we want to go down that rabbit hole, then let's look at a few late war twins Japan had under development like the J5N, KI-96 or most notably, the KI-83.
The B-25 being slow is something of a modern take on things.The B-25 proved to be versatile but it was relatively slow. The Pe-2 was accurate but was also lacking in range. The Ju-88 maybe was the best of these six overall in the early war though certainly not invincible (and it's arguable). All the early war bombers had substantial flaws and limitations. The early B-25s though heavily armed didn't have tail guns for example.
The B-25 being slow is something of a modern take on things.
The Original B-25 with no turret/s was pretty quick, about 320mph?
The late model gun ships with top turret, tail guns, waist guns, package guns on the fuselage sides and so on were still good for in the high 280s. The 1942 versions were good for???
Maybe 300mph depending on mods?
The JU-88 is rather over rated. Paint over the German crosses and compromises get a lot more apparent.
As SR6 suggested, the Lockheed F-4 (based on early mass produced P-38s) was equal in speed and capability (aside from range) to the Ki-46-III, and the F-5 (based on later P-38s) were faster still.
If you want a Japanese recon plane equal to late Mosquitos you'll want the Ki-46-IV, of which only a handful ever got built.
I already mentioned the Ki-83. When tested by the USAAF using US spec fuel post war, it got up to 473 mph, which was roughly equal to the DH Hornet and within about 10 mph of the XP-82/P-82B, and either about the same or within 15 mph of the P-51H (depending on equipment and max power output). However, on IJA spec fuel, speed dropped to 437 mph, basically the same as the P-51B/D on regular WEP (pre 115/145 fuel, which allowed up to 80/81 inHg, which allowed for significant WEP/combat power increases).
Also, the Ki-96 topped out at only 370 mph (in the ball park of the Ki-46-II, which used the same powerplants), and was basically a single seat version of the slightly heavier, slightly slower two seat Ki-102.
Also, the aircraft I mentioned (aside from the Mosquito, which was intended from the start to be a dual role recon/bomber aircraft), things like the F-6, F-4/5 and Spitfires were based on fighters. Also, interestingly, the early Spitfire PR Is were capable of up to 390 mph depending on subvariant.
The Ki-46, as mentioned, was a dedicated PR plane. So to compare it to an Allied aircraft of similar type would be the Hughes XF-11, the Republic XF-12, and the Northrop F-15/RF-61 Reporter (itself based on a two seat escort fighter based on the P-61 night fighters) Which all of them were developed very late war/post war, which meant that they were capable of much higher performance than any Ki-46 variant.