Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 4:19:51 AM

seydlitz_slith

Posts: 2036
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Danville, IL
Status: offline

I see that this becomes available for Japan in December 1942.

Has anyone actually used this plane in any numbers in their game?

Looking at it, it doesn't have armor, but it has fair maneuver for a twin engine fighter and has a very swift turn of speed for the 42-43 period of the game. Plus, it uses something other than the HA-35 engine that every other good fighter seems to want at this point. With a 391 mph top speed I was thinking that it might well be a very good supplement to my fighting forces than the much slower Oscars. I have had pretty good luck using the early Nicks, so I was thinking that this would be a further extension of that.....maybe a good P-38 killer with it's speed and better MVR (iirc P-38E is about a mvr of 15) plus the range of 15/18 is outstanding.

Thoughts anyone?

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by seydlitz -- 6/9/2011 4:22:02 AM >

Post #: 1

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 4:38:49 AM

crsutton

Posts: 9590
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

I doubt it. I think you will find that the 37mm cannon will not hit anything. Look at the accuracy rating. Basically, you will have a very fast fighter with one rifle caliber MG. The P38 will have it for lunch.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to seydlitz_slith)

Post #: 2

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 5:42:43 AM

Numdydar

Posts: 3211
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline

I actually am using them in my game. Mainly as long range escorts for Betty's and Nell's. I would much rather any CAP shoot at them versus the LBs

I don't really exepct to shoot anything down as the armament is horrible, but as a shield against CAP they work pretty good.

(in reply to crsutton)

Post #: 3

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 6:04:51 AM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Its an ok plane if you don�t give it the job of shooting down stuff.

As a method of support for other airframes it could work wonders. Imagine these planes as high cover for CAP for example.
They wont shoot much down but get the initiative away from the attacker.

Numdydars idea is also pretty good.

As a Japanese player I would spread my factories over quite a number of types in general. I know that the lure
to streamline and simplify AC production is huge as Japanese, but you mostly end up in situations where the
Allied opponent can chose several airframe combinations to counter one single Japanese airframe.
Thats a huge disadvantage in A2A.

Good find Don!

_____________________________

(in reply to seydlitz_slith)

Post #: 4

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 12:24:31 PM

wdolson

Posts: 10398
Joined: 6/28/2006
From: Near Portland, OR
Status: offline

In the real war the fighter version of the Dinah turned out to be a poor fighter. It's sort of like forcing a speed skater to play hockey. Very fast, but can't handle the rest of the job. The airframe was also not properly stressed for carrying guns, so the recoil from the 37 tended to warp the airframe after a short while.

Bill

_____________________________

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer

(in reply to LoBaron)

Post #: 5

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 6:18:21 PM

anarchyintheuk

Posts: 3921
Joined: 5/5/2004
From: Dallas
Status: offline

Gamewise I've never used it. Given the rl failure of the Bf-110 you'd think that would have kept the IJAAF from wasting the resources and the production capacity used on it.

(in reply to wdolson)

Post #: 6

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 7:28:18 PM

Xxzard

Posts: 440
Joined: 9/28/2008
From: Arizona
Status: offline

I like the plane, though I wouldn't expect great results out of the fighter. The Ki-46 III Dinah was in retrospect, one of the best planes made by the Japanese. It had a modern, original design. It was very fast, and excellent for the recon role. Adding a gun probably seemed like a pretty good idea, but the plane is really very small for a two engined aircraft, so there just isn't enough room to carry really adequate armament.

In a game against the AI, the AI deployed a squadron of these along with a squadron of Nicks to the Solomons. The Dinahs didn't fare very well fighter against fighter, but the Nicks actually did quite well, probably due to their high durability and better armament. In fact, losses against the Nick were fairly heavy when the Allies flew marine wildcats and P-40s. So the two engined fighters have some potential, but I'm guessing the poor accuracy of the 37mm that does the 46 IIIb in.

_____________________________

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)

Post #: 7

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 7:34:40 PM

Chickenboy

Posts: 24520
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: San Antonio, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seydlitz

I see that this becomes available for Japan in December 1942.

Has anyone actually used this plane in any numbers in their game?

Looking at it, it doesn't have armor, but it has fair maneuver for a twin engine fighter and has a very swift turn of speed for the 42-43 period of the game. Plus, it uses something other than the HA-35 engine that every other good fighter seems to want at this point. With a 391 mph top speed I was thinking that it might well be a very good supplement to my fighting forces than the much slower Oscars. I have had pretty good luck using the early Nicks, so I was thinking that this would be a further extension of that.....maybe a good P-38 killer with it's speed and better MVR (iirc P-38E is about a mvr of 15) plus the range of 15/18 is outstanding.

Thoughts anyone?

As stated above, it's a terrible airframe for a fighter. I've kept the flight unit that this came in, but 'upgraded' away from it to more conventional fare. In the meantime, you can use the flight unit for training purposes. For goodness sake, don't let it tangle with P-38s. They'll eat you for breakfast (am phase) and lunch (pm phase).

< Message edited by Chickenboy -- 6/9/2011 7:36:39 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to seydlitz_slith)

Post #: 8

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/9/2011 10:21:52 PM

Shark7

Posts: 7937
Joined: 7/24/2007
From: The Big Nowhere
Status: offline

Just FYI...

I once modded in the G6M1 (escort fighter version of the Betty) and used them right along with regular Betty bombers. While the G6M1 was not an ace-maker, I did note that G4M losses were not as heavy. Lots of cases of Allied A/C trying to attack the G6M1 escorts and 'driven off by fire from G6M1'.

In other words, they didn't shoot much of anything down (got a couple of P-26s and P-35s) but they absorbed most of the CAP.

Now obviously, this was early war and over the PI...mid to late war I have no illusion as to what the results would be.

_____________________________

Distant Worlds Fan

'When in doubt...attack!'

(in reply to Chickenboy)

Post #: 9

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/10/2011 9:46:23 AM

herwin

Posts: 6059
Joined: 5/28/2004
From: Sunderland, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

Gamewise I've never used it. Given the rl failure of the Bf-110 you'd think that would have kept the IJAAF from wasting the resources and the production capacity used on it.

Everyone came up with heavy fighter designs. They were useful as bomber interceptors, escort fighters, and in any mission where having two engines was desirable. They were just, like any other design, hard to get right.

_____________________________

Harry Erwin
"For a number to make sense in the game, someone has to calibrate it and program code. There are too many significant numbers that behave non-linearly to expect that. It's just a game. Enjoy it." herwin@btinternet.com

(in reply to anarchyintheuk)

Post #: 10

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/10/2011 6:48:11 PM

seydlitz_slith

Posts: 2036
Joined: 6/16/2002
From: Danville, IL
Status: offline

Good commentary by all.
I plan to use it for a couple of units when it arrives to see how it does. I really don't expect it to shoot down many planes, but then again how many times do you shoot stuff down with Nates or Oscars? The units that I plan to convert have been sitting in the rear training in Nates for the past several months, so the pilots will have general pilot skills in about the 70 range when I convert them.

I think that they would give me the ability to escort Nells and Betties out much closer to their max range, and certainly farther than the zero. If enemy cap kills them but it means that the bombers get through to deliver their torpedoes then I will consider that a worthwhile trade. After all, everyone knows what happens to unescorted Betties when they run into allied carrier cap with no escort.

(in reply to herwin)

Post #: 11

RE: Fighter version of the Ki-46 IIIb Dinah - 6/10/2011 6:55:44 PM

LoBaron

Posts: 4776
Joined: 1/26/2003
From: Vienna, Austria
Status: offline

Don, just be careful when considering escorts for Netties.
You do have a probable penalty on IJN/IJA combo and the cruise speed is far apart.
You could risk it but not with IJN fighter backup IMO. You got two coordination factors against you per default already,
if something else goes wrong theres a high chance of dead bomber pilots.