icepac
Airman
The big question is whether the testing of Axis aircraft had them simply dumping in better allied fuel.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
it's not so that work, if take a fiat A.74 engine and i use 150 octane fuel i don't get more powerThe big question is whether the testing of Axis aircraft had them simply dumping in better allied fuel.
it's not so that work, if take a fiat A.74 engine and i use 150 octane fuel i don't get more power
It might be argued that Ki 43 have had, in 1942, lower performance and firepower than what the better European fighters had in 1938.
Agreed, Japanese fighters were very rangy and maneuverable, although not that much better than what the Bf 109F or Spitfire V had, presuming all of the fighters compared carry drop tank(s) and fly at same speed and altitude.
Couple of words re the Ki-43 and 44, their very late introduction is IJAAFs fault, the Ki-43 flew in early 1939 BEFORE the Zero, but from what i read among other things IJAAF didn't liked it not being maneuverable enough, so it was redesigned in late 1939 and lightened (which compromised the wing), but IJAAF still didn't liked it until the butterfly flaps were introduced, so finally it was put in production in spring 1941, with deliveries to units from summer. This is ONE YEAR later than the Zero.
If the IJAAF wasn't vaccillating like that, i don't see why the initially redesigned Ki-43 wouldn't have been in production from 1940 and delivered to units say fall 1940. Earlier delivery perhaps means they deal with the wing weakness issues earlier, so by the time the war comes they won't have those repeated wing failures in mid-fight. Also, many more Sentais could be re-equipped with Ki-43s, hence providing tougher opposition to the RAF/USAAF etc. than the obsolete Ki-27.
As it was the Ki-27 production continued until late 1942! Imagine how badly the IJNAF would have fared if they were as shortsighted with the Zero.
Same sort of story with the Ki-44, instead of going full production when it was ready about fall/late 1941, they only built 50 of them until fall 1942, until the Ki-44-II came along. Even couple of hundred Ki-44s built in this period means couple of Ki-44 Sentais (as opposed to just a meagre experimental chutai) available for the early war operations. As i understand the Ki-44 was more than a match for a P-40 or Hurricane, nevermind F2As, H75s etc.
PS: And same vaccilation and repeated redesign plagued the Ki-45, it took almost 3 and half years from prototype to service, whereas even the Ki-43 took merely 2 and half. Again a case of best being the enemy of good enough, the "good enough" initial redesign Ki-45 with Ha-25 engines could have been in production in 1940 even as an interim until the definitive Ki-45 KAI was ready.
The Japanese entered the war (Dec 1941) with a large collection of aircraft that were obsolete/obsolescent on the world stage.
While some western observers knew that the Japanese had small numbers of better aircraft many other observers/planners were of the impression that the Japanese were ever further behind. Hence the shock of Dec 1941/Jan 1942.
A lot of times we read that the Japanese issued specifications for advanced aircraft but sometimes we need to read between the lines.
"In 1936, the Imperial Japanese Army Air Service issued a requirement for a new heavy bomber to replace both the Ki-20 (Army Type 92 Heavy Bomber) and the Ki-1 (Army Type 93 Heavy Bomber).[1] The design called for a crew of at least four, top speed of 400 km/h (250 mph), endurance of at least five hours, and a bombload of 750 kg (1,650 lb). The design parameters were very ambitious, and few twin-engine bombers anywhere in the world could exceed such performance at that time"
Now the highlight part may very well be true but the problem is that every other nation in the world was specifying NEW bomber to go into service 2-4 years in the future to replace the existing bombers of 1936.
The Ki-21 bomber first flew in Dec 1936, was ordered into production Nov 1937 and entered service in Aug 1938.
The Ki-21 of 1938 may not have been bad, but it was certainly not outstanding. Data from Francillon
A lot of countries used older planes, the Japanese were using a large proportion of out of date aircraft and that is out of date when built as opposed to using them 2-3-4 years after they left the factory.The Japanese also did have a wide variety of older obsolescent types like Ki-15, Ki-30, Ki-32 ... many of which remained in service late into the war in some limited capacity. And biplane float planes like the F1M
A lot of countries used older planes, the Japanese were using a large proportion of out of date aircraft and that is out of date when built as opposed to using them 2-3-4 years after they left the factory.
The Ki-27
Entered service in March-April of 1938 which is a couple of months after the Hurricane I showed up. Granted the Hurricane I was pretty basic in the Spring of 1938.
- Empty weight: 1,110 kg (2,447 lb)
- Gross weight: 1,790 kg (3,946 lb)
- Powerplant: 1 × Nakajima Ha-1 Kotobuki Otsu (Ha-1b) 9-cylinder air-cooled radial piston engine, 530 kW (710 hp) for take-off, 582 kW (780 hp) at 2,900 m (9,500 ft)
- Propellers: 2-bladed variable-pitch propeller
- Maximum speed: 470 km/h (290 mph, 250 kn) at 3,500 m (11,500 ft)
- Cruise speed: 350 km/h (220 mph, 190 kn) at 3,500 m (11,500 ft)
- Range: 627 km (390 mi, 339 nmi)
- Ferry range: 1,710 km (1,060 mi, 920 nmi)
- Time to altitude: 5,000 m (16,000 ft) in 5 minutes 22 seconds (3,056 fpm)
- 2 × 7.7 mm (0.303 in) Type 89 machine guns, 500 rounds/gun
Problem for the Japanese is that they built 3,384 of them, Granted the end of production were as trainers.
It's successor, the Ki-43 took a while to develop and the last pre production Ki-43 was completed in Sept 1940 (same month the Hurricane II showed up in service squadron). The Koku Hombu notified Nakajima to shut down the Ki-27 production at Ota and transfer jigs and tools to another plant. Final production approval was granted on Jan 9th 1941 and the Japanese army began accepting Ki-43s in June of 1941 and issued them to the first two squadrons in Aug 1941.
IN the Summer of 1941 the British were building Hurricane IIBs and were starting IICs. They were building Spitfire Vb's and starting Vc's. The US was building P-40Ds. Backing up a year the Japanese were building Ki-27s in several factories when the British were building Spitfire IIs in one factory and were starting construction of the Hurricane II. Curtiss was starting to build P-40Bs.
The Japanese were about 1 year late and were NOT catching up.
The question is not what old aircraft were used, it is about where the leading edge of Japanese aircraft technology was. Which means how fast can you move the older planes down the line the 2nd and 3rd lines/areas.
The Ki-32 bomber was used in first weeks of the Singapore campaign. A plane that was roughly the equal but a bit behind the Fairey Battle. The British had take the Battle out of combat service well over a year earlier.
I hope to investigate other Japanese aircraft in future posts.
And I would counter that unlike the Ki-27, the Gladiator was no longer in production by 1941.
That's cool, Bro. I like, have no idea when they actually stopped building them anyway.I suspect the Japanese might have a harder time switching over a production line. That's not a disagreement, bud.
That's cool, Bro. I like, have no idea when they actually stopped building them anyway.
I get that stuff first hand. I was a production planner/scheduler pre-railroad. I was expecting to be fact-checked on when the Gladiator ceased production.
There seemed to be a muddying of the waters as to old stuff still in service compared to what was in production during the war and then back again.
I got it right?
I am not often any sort of fact-checker around these parts, I am here to learn and sadly have little to teach, especially about Gladdy production. But I'm pretty sure they weren't long for this world against anything in 1941.
I was talking about the Gladiator. I got mixed-up there about the Ki-27 and 43. Carry on.Pretty good guess, but looks like not quite. According to William Green Fighters Volume two, "An improved model, the Ki-27 - KAI, was proposed in 1940, and three aircraft were actually built, but by that time preparations were in hand for the production of the Ki-43 Hayabusa, and the last Ki.27 fighters were delivered in July of that year. A total of 3,386 Ki.27 fighters was (sic) built, including prototypes."
But it looks like I was partly wrong too as the Sea Gladiator production ended in 1940 as well. According to William Green, Fighters volume three:
"The last Gladiator II was delivered to the R.A.F. in April 1940, bringing total production, apart from export machines, to 311 aircraft. Of 311 aircraft. Of these, thirty-eight were modified as interim Sea Gladiators for the Fleet Air Arm, and a further sixty were built from the outset as Sea Gladiators."
So that does make the Gladiator and Sea Gladiator peers of the Ki 27, which looks to me like a better fighter. However, the picture is a bit more nuanced of course since the British were also making plenty of Hurricanes and Spitfires by then, whereas the Ki 27 was built in such large numbers because they didn't have another major fighter type until the Hayabusa which wasn't really ready for full scale production until March of 1941.
We know the Ki-27 was fairly evenly matched with the Hurricane in Malaya etc., but I don't think Ki-27 can hold up to a Spitfire. Ki-43 on the other hand, I would take that bet.