Slitherine

quote:

Only one prototype ever made a single successful flight, on August 7th 1945 (I think). A second test-flight was begun a few days later but was aborted due to engine failure at start-up. No further attempts were made and the single operational plane was destroyed soon after (I think a 2nd prototype may have been seen by US personnel in a hanger somewhere but I am not sure).

quote:

I was fielding +400 in CAP,

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Every thing I see says that it never got out of the development stage and did not fly. What was your source? I may be reading internet crap. The National Air and Space Museum has an intact body of a Ki-201 without engines and missing a lot of other parts. I saw it years ago when you could visit the restoration workship in Silver Hill MD. It was warehoused there with no plans to restore it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rustysi

quote:

I was fielding +400 in CAP,

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

Use SR 4/5 aircraft all the time ... yes it isn't as easy or flexible as SR1 aircraft, but certainly doable. If you can't use them, then you need to practice. Just like the allies and the B29 ... there are certain things you can do with them and certain things you do not want to do. But certainly most competent allied players learn how to use the B29 quite effectively. Ditto IJ players. You need to learn how to use SR4/5 planes. Far too many of the late model planes that are very competitive with the the late model allied fighter are high SR (if for no other reason than they were almost all wet-meth injection engines).

Ki201 ... point defense really for home islands. Generally don't build them as I build the J7W instead and you know i hate to duplicate roles for fighter. J7W almost as fast, same armament, but half the cost (or less, see below).

Instead I might build the Ki83 for long range escort role or the Ki94 Frank II.

Yes, to get the Ki201 into early '45 where it can actually contribute takes a LOT of focus. And since it uses a unique engine, the cost is really, really high as you need to dedicate several precious engine factories as well to it.

EDIT: I did do a game where I skipped Frank and went for the Ki201 instead. '44 was tough with only the Tojo, but when the Ki201 came on line it was the real deal. Stopped 4E's cold. Now, I was fielding +400 in CAP, so I was 1:1 in AC in the air with the allied raids. IIRC I was building 12/day initially.

quote:

And of course, they are not special as a night fighter. You've got to be able to protect against low level night bombing which is just frightfully effective.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Personally, I believe that in RL, the Ki-201 would have been a complete botch-up and waste of time of dwindling resources, as it was for the IJAAF and IJNAF. Please remember that their previous attempts to produce and develop an in-line engine fighter, the Ki-61 'Tony', even when they had full blueprints and also two Daimler Benz engines to work from (exported via submarine from Germany) and they could still not produce a reliable properly built equivalent, or service it. A pity as the Tony, if it had ever been fully realised with a properly working and reliable inline DB engine, would have been very successful - as it was, it was the first (and, I think, only) early-generation Japanese fighter to carry any form of armour plate or protection, as the more powerful and streamlined DB-licenced engine allowed it to do, despite it being the last of the 'first generation' of WWII Japanese fighters.
That was the mess the Japanese made when they had two working models fo engines and proper blue prints. Amazing how they managed to get as far with the Ki-201 as they did, when they had nothing more than a few photographs of the Me262 including its engines and not much else to go on, as the submarine from Germany that was supposed to be carrying proper plans got lost and never arrived.

Re the test-flight, it is listed down in one of my reference books upstairs. However there is not much to go on. Also it refers to the Najajima J9Y Kikka and the Ki-201, my mistake. Both were virtually identical to the Me262 alhtouhg the Kikka was slightly smaller.
The entry is as follows : '1 flyable prototype. First flight of roughly 17 minutes carried out 7th August 1945 at the Kisarazu Naval Base, undercarriage not retracted. Second test-flight of 11th August aborted due to rocket-booster failure during take-off run. Prototype destroyed by engineers approx. date 15th August 1945. Second prototype under construction at the time of Japan's surrender, seized and examined by US air-technicians but not completed. Believed broken up by early 1946 in US.'

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Personally, I believe that in RL, the Ki-201 would have been a complete botch-up and waste of time of dwindling resources, as it was for the IJAAF and IJNAF. Please remember that their previous attempts to produce and develop an in-line engine fighter, the Ki-61 'Tony', even when they had full blueprints and also two Daimler Benz engines to work from (exported via submarine from Germany) and they could still not produce a reliable properly built equivalent, or service it. A pity as the Tony, if it had ever been fully realised with a properly working and reliable inline DB engine, would have been very successful - as it was, it was the first (and, I think, only) early-generation Japanese fighter to carry any form of armour plate or protection, as the more powerful and streamlined DB-licenced engine allowed it to do, despite it being the last of the 'first generation' of WWII Japanese fighters.
That was the mess the Japanese made when they had two working models fo engines and proper blue prints. Amazing how they managed to get as far with the Ki-201 as they did, when they had nothing more than a few photographs of the Me262 including its engines and not much else to go on, as the submarine from Germany that was supposed to be carrying proper plans got lost and never arrived.

Re the test-flight, it is listed down in one of my reference books upstairs. However there is not much to go on. Also it refers to the Najajima J9Y Kikka and the Ki-201, my mistake. Both were virtually identical to the Me262 alhtouhg the Kikka was slightly smaller.
The entry is as follows : '1 flyable prototype. First flight of roughly 17 minutes carried out 7th August 1945 at the Kisarazu Naval Base, undercarriage not retracted. Second test-flight of 11th August aborted due to rocket-booster failure during take-off run. Prototype destroyed by engineers approx. date 15th August 1945. Second prototype under construction at the time of Japan's surrender, seized and examined by US air-technicians but not completed. Believed broken up by early 1946 in US.'

When I was a kid Planes of Fame in Chino had a complete Kikka. It now belongs to the Smithsonian. I believe it had been test flown after the war. The Me-262 had a wingspan of 41 1/2 ft and the Kikka had a wingspan of 32 ft 10 in. So the Kikka was significantly smaller.

Bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Pax, is this vs the AI or versus a human opponent? I am pretty confident as an Allied player that I can hunt high service planes down and hold them on the ground. Allies just have way to many bombers. I tried to use the early P38 with its service rating of 4 as a front line fighter but found it to be useless vs a good opponent. In a real late war situation with the Allies threatening the HI, the Japanese player needs aircraft that he can put up in the air fast. Not that it will help him much.

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Personally, I believe that in RL, the Ki-201 would have been a complete botch-up and waste of time of dwindling resources, as it was for the IJAAF and IJNAF. Please remember that their previous attempts to produce and develop an in-line engine fighter, the Ki-61 'Tony', even when they had full blueprints and also two Daimler Benz engines to work from (exported via submarine from Germany) and they could still not produce a reliable properly built equivalent, or service it. A pity as the Tony, if it had ever been fully realised with a properly working and reliable inline DB engine, would have been very successful - as it was, it was the first (and, I think, only) early-generation Japanese fighter to carry any form of armour plate or protection, as the more powerful and streamlined DB-licenced engine allowed it to do, despite it being the last of the 'first generation' of WWII Japanese fighters.
That was the mess the Japanese made when they had two working models fo engines and proper blue prints. Amazing how they managed to get as far with the Ki-201 as they did, when they had nothing more than a few photographs of the Me262 including its engines and not much else to go on, as the submarine from Germany that was supposed to be carrying proper plans got lost and never arrived.

Re the test-flight, it is listed down in one of my reference books upstairs. However there is not much to go on. Also it refers to the Najajima J9Y Kikka and the Ki-201, my mistake. Both were virtually identical to the Me262 alhtouhg the Kikka was slightly smaller.
The entry is as follows : '1 flyable prototype. First flight of roughly 17 minutes carried out 7th August 1945 at the Kisarazu Naval Base, undercarriage not retracted. Second test-flight of 11th August aborted due to rocket-booster failure during take-off run. Prototype destroyed by engineers approx. date 15th August 1945. Second prototype under construction at the time of Japan's surrender, seized and examined by US air-technicians but not completed. Believed broken up by early 1946 in US.'

When I was a kid Planes of Fame in Chino had a complete Kikka. It now belongs to the Smithsonian. I believe it had been test flown after the war. The Me-262 had a wingspan of 41 1/2 ft and the Kikka had a wingspan of 32 ft 10 in. So the Kikka was significantly smaller.

Bill

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Personally, I believe that in RL, the Ki-201 would have been a complete botch-up and waste of time of dwindling resources, as it was for the IJAAF and IJNAF. Please remember that their previous attempts to produce and develop an in-line engine fighter, the Ki-61 'Tony', even when they had full blueprints and also two Daimler Benz engines to work from (exported via submarine from Germany) and they could still not produce a reliable properly built equivalent, or service it. A pity as the Tony, if it had ever been fully realised with a properly working and reliable inline DB engine, would have been very successful - as it was, it was the first (and, I think, only) early-generation Japanese fighter to carry any form of armour plate or protection, as the more powerful and streamlined DB-licenced engine allowed it to do, despite it being the last of the 'first generation' of WWII Japanese fighters.
That was the mess the Japanese made when they had two working models fo engines and proper blue prints. Amazing how they managed to get as far with the Ki-201 as they did, when they had nothing more than a few photographs of the Me262 including its engines and not much else to go on, as the submarine from Germany that was supposed to be carrying proper plans got lost and never arrived.

Re the test-flight, it is listed down in one of my reference books upstairs. However there is not much to go on. Also it refers to the Najajima J9Y Kikka and the Ki-201, my mistake. Both were virtually identical to the Me262 alhtouhg the Kikka was slightly smaller.
The entry is as follows : '1 flyable prototype. First flight of roughly 17 minutes carried out 7th August 1945 at the Kisarazu Naval Base, undercarriage not retracted. Second test-flight of 11th August aborted due to rocket-booster failure during take-off run. Prototype destroyed by engineers approx. date 15th August 1945. Second prototype under construction at the time of Japan's surrender, seized and examined by US air-technicians but not completed. Believed broken up by early 1946 in US.'

When I was a kid Planes of Fame in Chino had a complete Kikka. It now belongs to the Smithsonian. I believe it had been test flown after the war. The Me-262 had a wingspan of 41 1/2 ft and the Kikka had a wingspan of 32 ft 10 in. So the Kikka was significantly smaller.

Bill

I think my problem here is that I was thinking the K201 and Kikka were the same plane. Oops! The K-201 did not fly and was a prototype derivative of the Kikka which did fly for about 20 minutes. Bill, the Kikka that I saw at the Air and Space storage facility at Silver Hill Maryland was probably the one you mentioned and not a K-201. But the one they have has no engines or the engines are in separate storage. You can no longer tour the Silver Hill facility like you used to. Before the new museum was built in Dulles, you could sign up for a guided group tour of the warehouses and restoration workshops at Silver Hill. It was one of my favorite places to go. They just have tons on non restored aircraft and parts packed together. So many that the odds of any getting restored are fairly slim. They really only work on a few projects any year and most projects take multiple years to complete. The best thing was you got to go see the workshops and could talk to the craftsmen as they worked on the aircraft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: wdolson

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Personally, I believe that in RL, the Ki-201 would have been a complete botch-up and waste of time of dwindling resources, as it was for the IJAAF and IJNAF. Please remember that their previous attempts to produce and develop an in-line engine fighter, the Ki-61 'Tony', even when they had full blueprints and also two Daimler Benz engines to work from (exported via submarine from Germany) and they could still not produce a reliable properly built equivalent, or service it. A pity as the Tony, if it had ever been fully realised with a properly working and reliable inline DB engine, would have been very successful - as it was, it was the first (and, I think, only) early-generation Japanese fighter to carry any form of armour plate or protection, as the more powerful and streamlined DB-licenced engine allowed it to do, despite it being the last of the 'first generation' of WWII Japanese fighters.
That was the mess the Japanese made when they had two working models fo engines and proper blue prints. Amazing how they managed to get as far with the Ki-201 as they did, when they had nothing more than a few photographs of the Me262 including its engines and not much else to go on, as the submarine from Germany that was supposed to be carrying proper plans got lost and never arrived.

Re the test-flight, it is listed down in one of my reference books upstairs. However there is not much to go on. Also it refers to the Najajima J9Y Kikka and the Ki-201, my mistake. Both were virtually identical to the Me262 alhtouhg the Kikka was slightly smaller.
The entry is as follows : '1 flyable prototype. First flight of roughly 17 minutes carried out 7th August 1945 at the Kisarazu Naval Base, undercarriage not retracted. Second test-flight of 11th August aborted due to rocket-booster failure during take-off run. Prototype destroyed by engineers approx. date 15th August 1945. Second prototype under construction at the time of Japan's surrender, seized and examined by US air-technicians but not completed. Believed broken up by early 1946 in US.'

When I was a kid Planes of Fame in Chino had a complete Kikka. It now belongs to the Smithsonian. I believe it had been test flown after the war. The Me-262 had a wingspan of 41 1/2 ft and the Kikka had a wingspan of 32 ft 10 in. So the Kikka was significantly smaller.

Bill

I think my problem here is that I was thinking the K201 and Kikka were the same plane. Oops! The K-201 did not fly and was a prototype derivative of the Kikka which did fly for about 20 minutes. Bill, the Kikka that I saw at the Air and Space storage facility at Silver Hill Maryland was probably the one you mentioned and not a K-201. But the one they have has no engines or the engines are in separate storage. You can no longer tour the Silver Hill facility like you used to. Before the new museum was built in Dulles, you could sign up for a guided group tour of the warehouses and restoration workshops at Silver Hill. It was one of my favorite places to go. They just have tons on non restored aircraft and parts packed together. So many that the odds of any getting restored are fairly slim. They really only work on a few projects any year and most projects take multiple years to complete. The best thing was you got to go see the workshops and could talk to the craftsmen as they worked on the aircraft.

The Kikka fuselage in the restoration hangar at Udvar-Hazy/Dulles is just the fuselage. To my recollection, it does not even have a canopy. It's just a fuselage, perhaps with rear stabilizers or perhaps not. No wings and no engines. From the Air and Space website, it sounds like Silver Hill has been or is already closed, with all of the things moved to Udvar-Hazy. I thought I had a picture of the Kikka, but I've switched phones twice since then apparently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

Here it is. Did not know that they had a storage display there. I have to go out and see it. Many of my old friends are out there. From the various photos it actually looks like they are doing some work on it. Not sure it a full restoration is in the works though but they apparently have at least one engine on display.