Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
HiPretty 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.
According to the USSBS Nakajima report, the Ki-27 was produced at Nakajima until November 1942! Seems they were built ALONGSIDE Ki-43 and Ki-44 for all that time.I don't know when they stopped making Ki-27s, I kind of doubt they were still making them in 1941 because by then they were making Ki-43. Maybe Sr6 will tell us, or maybe I can find it in one of my new (old) fighter books. I believe the Gladiator was being made until 1940, but then some were being converted to Sea Gladiators after that.
SCORE!According to the USSBS Nakajima report, the Ki-27 was produced at Nakajima until November 1942! Seems they were built ALONGSIDE Ki-43 and Ki-44 for all that time.
From the USSBS data the Ki-27 is Japans primary fighter in production right up the end of 1941. That cannot be said for the Gladiator. Both the Hurricane and the Spitfire first flights were before the Ki-27. They are the Ki-27 contemporaries.Ok I see what you are saying. But I would counter by noting that the Ki-27 was roughly contemporaneous with the Gloster Gladiator right? And yet, I'd say it's a bit better as a fighter wouldn't you?
Ki-43 does come a bit late compared to Spitfire V etc., but that is maybe explainable by the Japanese not yet being in direct combat with a first line power. I think everyone was lagging until they got into the fight 'for realz'
Once Ki-43 is out, it seems to retain quite a bite for longer than you might think it would do. Certainly in 1943 it's still causing some problems for Allied pilots, even in 1944 though it's clearly outclassed by then.
I am going to try a American baseball analogy.Once Ki-43 is out, it seems to retain quite a bite for longer than you might think it would do. Certainly in 1943 it's still causing some problems for Allied pilots, even in 1944 though it's clearly outclassed by then.
I may be mistaken, but I think the later production Ki-27 in the USSBS list would be the trainer variant conversions - in effect the last couple of hundred came off the production line as trainers.
Although, of note, the Ki-79 trainer (a significantly detail modified Ki-27 airframe) was built at the Manchuko plant beginning in January 1943 to meet the need for training aircraft for the IJAAF. Over 1300 airframes built.
Just a small comment on Ki-43 superchargers, there was no Ki-43 with a two-STAGE supercharger, nor for that matter any operational japanese fighter i can think of. Rather, it was a one stage two-SPEED supercharger on the Ha-115 engine (Ki-43-II).
And regarding Ki-43 and A6M performance, two recent Osprey books in the Duel series say that P-47 vs Ki-43 in New Guinea was 19 kills to 10 losses. Even if losing almost 2 Ki-43 for every P-47, that in itself i find amazing that the Ki-43 can do so well against the huge brute that was the P-47. If you are looking at the paper specs, 2000-2300 even 2500 HP vs 1150 HP, 8 HMG vs 2, 100 mph extra speed for the P-47, one wouldn't give the Ki-43 a chance in hell, but it didn't went that way.
Similarily, A6M vs F4U in the Solomons was esentially parity, 129 to 129. That in itself shows how good the Zero was and the pilots flying it.
One item of importance that typically gets ignored in this threads is that fighters exist largely because bombers exist. In this regard the Ki -43 fails. Two .30 cals is pathetic by 1942 standards and even the upgrade to .50 was still inadequate to say the least.
Even the Zero with 2x 20 mm had problems shooting down B—17s.
HiPretty 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.
Hello Wild Bill
I recommend Osprey's B-24 Liberator vs Ki-43 Oscar China and Burma 1943 by Young, Duel 41. I think it's a good booklet. According to it, in 1943 the Ki-43s shot down 31 B-24s, losing 29 a/c themselves, these are real losses, not claims. I was surprised at how effective the Oscars were against heavy bombers. The Japanese developed a working tactic that took into account the weak armament, i.e. repeated head-on attacks. One of the reasons for the efficiency was that, as I recall, the Japanese copied the Italian 12.7 mm ammunition, that is, they had efficient incendiary, HE and AP ammo