carpenoctem1689
Airman 1st Class
- 285
- Sep 10, 2005
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
carpenoctem1689 said:Both aircraft mentioned in the initial question were capable in there own respects. The -84 was overall and excellent aircraft, some specialized with two 20mm and two 30mm cannon for interception of bombers, some with two machine guns and two 20mm cannons. Ine the more lightly armed form, the -84 could hold its own against most allied fighters, including the P-51 mustang. It had good vision from the cockpit, good range, manouverable enough, fast enough for sure, good cieling, it was all around good. But then again so was the -100/-61. It depends on more of what you like. If i could fly any of those two, it would be the Ki-100II.
carpenoctem1689 said:Both the Ki-84 and the Ki-100 were good aircraft and a match for fighters of the era that the british and americans could throw at them, but were simply not good enough as interceptors. The japanese seemed to have some defieciency when it came to making effective interceptors, in terms of armament (for the most part, though some aircraft were armed with 20mm and 30mm cannon) and armor. They all had good range which equaled loitre time for an interceptor, but they couldbt make enough of them, nor train enough pilots to fly them (they used trainers as kamikaze late in the war, and inexperienced pilots and even experienced ones, not to mention aircraft and fuel were burned off in these suicidal fights for there beliefs). Therefore high flying heavy bombers armed to the teeth with good armor to match, were pretty much out of reach to the JAAF and IJNAF. They were working on several projects near the end of the war, but they wouldnt have the pilots nor the fuel, but produciton was still pretty high in underground facilities, built into sides of the mountains. Just like the germans, they had perfectly good planes, but no pilots, fuel, and in the german case ball bearings to get the damn things up against our aircaft.
Well, the MiG-1 and KI-61 both used the He100D's design in thier construction. The radiator on the He100D was retractable, while the MiG-1 and KI-61 were fixed, yet placed in the same location. The KI-61 even had the evaporative cooling system in the early prototypes, but was dropped eventually.I'm not really sure how someone can claim the Ki-61 is a copy of a German plane... except for the engine it has nothing in common with the me109 or the He100. It has a different "airfoil", radiator placement, flight characteristics and is manufactured in a completely different way...its not even the same size. The Kikka is no more a copy of the 262 then the F86 was...
Now if u want to talk copys...lets talk about the B-29 and the Tu-4, now their is a copycat.