Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Was your Ki-100 model included in some Il2 1946 mods or mod packs?
I think most flight sim gamers just pull and pull because, otherwise, they cannot keep their opponents in sight / in-screen.
Has anyone seen the US report on their testing?
Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate (Gale) 'Frank' from the right
Here we see a Nakajima Ki-84 Hayate (Gale) 'Frank' that had been captured by the Americans and used as a test aircraft. The K-84 was the best Japanese fighter to see significant service during the Second World War, and Nakajima's last radial powered fighter.www.historyofwar.org
I sometimes read that the Ki-100 was a very good diver which is hard to believe as it is not very aerodynamic nor does it weigh much nor does its engine has too much power.
It were able to keep up in a dive with a P-51 which frankly is ridiculous.
How do you think would a Ki-84 powered with Allied high-quality-fuel have fared against a late-war Spitfire XIV?
Please remember that the F4U-4 and F6F-5 used C series R-2800 engines
Hi Greg,I don't believe the F6F-5 made 410 mph.
I think it was the F6F-6 (population 2).
Either way, the F6F was enough to win in the Pacific.
Cheers.
Have to disagree with this post. The Ta 152 and Spitfire XIV were never true contemporaries of the Ki-48/100. These airplanes (Ta 152 and Spitfire XIV) fought in the ETO and never made an appearance in the PTO during the war. Contemporary in time, sure. Contemporary in combat, no.The Ki-100 has always been a bit of mystery to me. Most literature generally sings its praises, as one of the greatest high performance late war fighters to enter service, however that is juxtaposed with its actual performance numbers. The airplane probably would have been excellent in 1942-43, but its contemporaries in 1945 were the P-47N, Spitfire Mk.XIV, Ta-152, etc. Some of which had an almost 100mph speed advantage
Have to disagree with this post. The Ta 152 and Spitfire XIV were never true contemporaries of the Ki-48/100. These airplanes (Ta 152 and Spitfire XIV) fought in the ETO and never made an appearance in the PTO during the war. Contemporary in time, sure. Contemporary in combat, no.
The P-47N was, as was the P-51D, F6F-5 and P-38. When compared with these the Ki-84 and Ki-100 come out pretty well. They weren't as fast as the fastest Allied planes that fought there but, they were fighting over their home and didn't need to run anywhere. The Ki-84 was fast enough to be ignored by the U.S. forces on radar unless the Ki84(s) were approaching for an attack. Both could mix it up with the aircraft being flown by the Allies and, if well-flown, could hold their own and give back pretty well.
They were definitely the cream of the crop of Japanese WWII fighters when compared with other choices except for the N1K and J2M families.
Actually both aircraft gained about 25 mph in maximum level speed with the C series R-2800 engine, a difference similar to earlier variants (446 and 425 mph respectively).Now when the engine was upgraded in the F4U-4 and XF6F-6, the Corsair gained significantly more speed while the Hellcat did not.
The F6F-5 in clean condition using WEP could honestly touch 400 mph and with wing pylons, belly shackles, and rocket launchers was still good for about 385 mph (per US Navy wartime documents). By comparison the Ki-100 stated speed of 367 mph (Francillon says 360 mph) was most likely attained at the factory in pristine condition and with quality fuels, which by 1945 was a very rare thing to find with Japanese aircraft in general.I do have one Japanese book with 367 mph top speed and pretty god climb ... about on par with the F6F-5, which was its main adversary
Not very aerodynamic? It is easily more streamlined than the P-47, and a P-47 has a great reputation as a good diver. Why not the Ki-84? Facts would indicate it was limited by wing flutter, not by aerodynamic drag. Anything diving with 2,000 hp isn't exactly going to be slow unless it has big dive brakes.I sometimes read that the Ki-100 was a very good diver which is hard to believe as it is not very aerodynamic nor does it weigh much nor does its engine has too much power.
It were able to keep up in a dive with a P-51 which frankly is ridiculous.
Official US Navy testing utilized specialized test equipment and in general found comparable models of the F4U faster than the F6F in most cases by about 20 mph up high and 30 mph down low under all power settings. This had nothing to do with airspeed indicator errors as all of this was taken into account during testing.Hi Dawncaster. At top speed, yes, the F4U is slightly faster using ram air. At normal flying speed, it isn't. If they are flying at 330 mph of less, there is nothing to choose between them, speedwise, and they fly side by side at equal power settings. At absolute top speed, the Corsair is faster, especially once you get to the F4U-4 variant and above. An F4U-1? Not really much faster, if any, except on paper. The guys that fly them today say that, not the William Green, et al books, and certainly not me as personal claim. But I DO believe the pilots today who fly the warbirds.