Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong

Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

castor troy -> Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/6/2010 2:39:39 PM)
Hi Looks like there“s a database error for the Tojo in Scenario 2. The Ki-44-IIb shows up with 40mm cannons which it shouldn“t have. The IIc instead has only four 12.7mm MGs. This means quite some trouble for Allied PBEM players as the IJA gets a real bomber buster (fighter killer too perhaps) in mid 43. Or it means trouble for the IJA if the 40mm cannon is rated in the game like it was in real life - useless against fighters. [image]local://upfiles/13774/4497C216200B4FD4A0E00EBCAA860535.jpg[/image]

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/6/2010 2:46:29 PM)
while there“s this error in the database, it more or less will mean trouble for the IJA as it will probably make the Tojo IIb pretty much "useless" as the 40mm cannon is pure crap. Looked it up with tracker (oh what a wonderful instrument [:D]). I would rate the 40mm cannon even worse than the 12.7mm MGs, not to speak about the 20mm cannons. Pure crap. Why the 40mm has the same effect as the 20mm cannon is beyond me though. I guess it would have an effect a couple of times higher than a 20mm if it hits the target. The only problem you would have is hitting the target, which is reflected in the accuracy and range anyway though. Is the effect rating of the 40mm also a wrong db entry? [image]local://upfiles/13774/724C7CFBF41C48F4AAB81DEC3086F276.jpg[/image]

Athius -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/9/2010 6:00:55 PM)
Intresting point, I would like to the hear the answer on that as well

Andy Mac -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/9/2010 6:22:17 PM)
Is it a scen 2 issue only or a scen 1 and 2 issue. if its just scen 2 its me if its both scen 1 and 2 its the air team [:D][:D]

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/9/2010 7:18:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andy Mac Is it a scen 2 issue only or a scen 1 and 2 issue. if its just scen 2 its me if its both scen 1 and 2 its the air team [:D][:D] don“t know, I“m playing scen 2 so I have to look it up. Do you agree that it“s wrong at least? [&:] edit: it“s also wrong in scen 1, so it“s wrong in scen 1+2

Andy Mac -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/9/2010 7:41:57 PM)
Well in that case its not changing the data as to wheter its right or wrong I have no idea I know pretty much nothing about Japanese aircraft I would ask it in the air thread

vonTirpitz -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/9/2010 7:43:01 PM)
I think the accuracy of the pilot randomly dropping 40mm shells out of the cockpit is at least 3. [:D] Seriously though, do cannons with such low accuracy ratings do better in strafing attacks or does that value affect all accuracy whether it be air-to-air or air-to-ground(sea)?

Cathartes -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/9/2010 8:44:40 PM)
seems the armament may be switched. will make a note of it to the air oob guru.

timtom -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/10/2010 1:18:03 AM)
The CINCPAC-CINCPOA Special Translation #73 dated July 25 1945 of the captured document "Table of Aircraft Designation and Armament, Army Air Headquarters (Secret) #16979, 9 December 1943" indicates that the armament of the Type 2 Single-Seat Fighter Model 2 Otsu aka Ki-44-IIb Tojo was 2 x Ho-103 12.7mm mg (fuselage) & 2 x Ho-301 40mm cannon (wings). 394 -IIb's (serials 1356-1749) were manufactored with the Ho-301's of which an unknown number were supposedly modified in the field to remove or replace the Ho-301's with Ho-103's. The 40mm Ho-301 cannon fired a caseless shell at the relatively high cyclical rate of 400rd/m @ 750ft/sec with an estimated 10 round magazine (by comparison the P-39's 37mm Oldsmobile M4 was 150rd/m @ 2,000ft/sec 30 round mag). IOW a not untypical Japanese eccentricity really rather unsuited for A2A combat.

bklooste -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/10/2010 9:01:38 AM)
But it was used quite effectively fly to 100 yards and let it ripp , remember accuracy = fire rate.

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/10/2010 2:25:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Andy Mac Well in that case its not changing the data as to wheter its right or wrong I have no idea I know pretty much nothing about Japanese aircraft I would ask it in the air thread every source on the internet I“ve found states that the IIb hadn“t 40mm cannons. [&:]

Oddball_France -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/10/2010 3:56:30 PM)
i've found one saying the game is true as it is. Maybe not the best source (wiki has a bad reputation but...), and it's in French, but the article seems complete. take it like you want http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_Ki-44 quote: Un nouveau moteur, le Ki-44-II [modifier] Le Ki-44-IIa [modifier] Grāce ą l'adjonction d'un deuxičme étage au compresseur, les ingénieurs de Nakajima réussirent ą obtenir 1520ch de ce moteur désigné alors Ha-109. Les dimensions similaires permirent de le monter sur la cellule du Ki-44-I donnant naissance ą la famille des Ki-44-II. Le Ki-44-II rentra en production ą l'automne 1942 aprčs que seulement 40 Ki-44-I aient été fabriqués. Ce qui fait de la variante Ki-44-II la premičre 'vraie' version de série. L'armement du -I sera conservé que sur la version -IIa ('a' pour 'ko' : 甲). Ce qui fait que les Ki-44-IIa avaient l'armement du -Ia ou -Ib. Le Ki-44-IIb [modifier] Sur la version -IIb ('b' pour 'otsu' :乙) il ne restait que les deux mitrailleuses Ho-103 de capot, les armes d'ailes n'étaient pas montées. Il n'est pas certain ą ce jour que ce soit pour alléger l'avion ou pour prévoir le montage d'autres armes en unité. Pour lutter contre les bombardiers, des armes lourdes s'imposaient. Un énorme canon de 40mm fut installé en petite série dans les ailes des Ki-44-IIb. Ce canon étrange, le Ho-301, avait la particularité de tirer un projectile de type fusée. Au lieu d'źtre propulsé par l'explosion de poudre, il utilisait la combustion de celle-ci ą travers des trous pour avancer. La faible cadence de tir et la faible vitesse initiale du projectile imposaient de tirer ą quelques dizaines de mčtres de la cible rendant la tāche difficile et trčs périlleuse. Le Ki-44-IIc [modifier] La version -IIc ('c' pour 'hei' : 丙) utilisait un armement plus standard de 4 mitrailleuses Ho-103. Certaines sources occidentales citent l'usage de canons Ho-5 de 20mm, les sources japonaises n'en font pas état. Cette version fut abondamment utilisée au-dessus du Japon.

stuman -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/10/2010 4:40:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Oddball_France i've found one saying the game is true as it is. Maybe not the best source (wiki has a bad reputation but...), and it's in French, but the article seems complete. take it like you want http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_Ki-44 quote: Un nouveau moteur, le Ki-44-II [modifier] Le Ki-44-IIa [modifier] Grāce ą l'adjonction d'un deuxičme étage au compresseur, les ingénieurs de Nakajima réussirent ą obtenir 1520ch de ce moteur désigné alors Ha-109. Les dimensions similaires permirent de le monter sur la cellule du Ki-44-I donnant naissance ą la famille des Ki-44-II. Le Ki-44-II rentra en production ą l'automne 1942 aprčs que seulement 40 Ki-44-I aient été fabriqués. Ce qui fait de la variante Ki-44-II la premičre 'vraie' version de série. L'armement du -I sera conservé que sur la version -IIa ('a' pour 'ko' : 甲). Ce qui fait que les Ki-44-IIa avaient l'armement du -Ia ou -Ib. Le Ki-44-IIb [modifier] Sur la version -IIb ('b' pour 'otsu' :乙) il ne restait que les deux mitrailleuses Ho-103 de capot, les armes d'ailes n'étaient pas montées. Il n'est pas certain ą ce jour que ce soit pour alléger l'avion ou pour prévoir le montage d'autres armes en unité. Pour lutter contre les bombardiers, des armes lourdes s'imposaient. Un énorme canon de 40mm fut installé en petite série dans les ailes des Ki-44-IIb. Ce canon étrange, le Ho-301, avait la particularité de tirer un projectile de type fusée. Au lieu d'źtre propulsé par l'explosion de poudre, il utilisait la combustion de celle-ci ą travers des trous pour avancer. La faible cadence de tir et la faible vitesse initiale du projectile imposaient de tirer ą quelques dizaines de mčtres de la cible rendant la tāche difficile et trčs périlleuse. Le Ki-44-IIc [modifier] La version -IIc ('c' pour 'hei' : 丙) utilisait un armement plus standard de 4 mitrailleuses Ho-103. Certaines sources occidentales citent l'usage de canons Ho-5 de 20mm, les sources japonaises n'en font pas état. Cette version fut abondamment utilisée au-dessus du Japon. Thanks Oddball. According to that article seems like some of the Oscars did use those 40 mms, but also makes it sound like an odd gun .

Oddball_France -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/10/2010 4:46:36 PM)
exactly, which corresponds with the bad stats the gun have in game (range, accuracy...) just one thing, it is also written that the 40mm gun version was a small/short serie.

timtom -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 12:19:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy every source on the internet I“ve found states that the IIb hadn“t 40mm cannons. [&:] 'Cos they're directly or indirectly channeling Francillon, who in turn is channeling the prone-to-errors 1st edition of the 8-volume Japanese language "Encyclopedia of Japanese Aircraft 1900-1945".

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 7:43:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: timtom quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy every source on the internet I“ve found states that the IIb hadn“t 40mm cannons. [&:] 'Cos they're directly or indirectly channeling Francillon, who in turn is channeling the prone-to-errors 1st edition of the 8-volume Japanese language "Encyclopedia of Japanese Aircraft 1900-1945". I see. Thanks for the info, you“re the expert anyway. The only reason why I even brought it up was because I found it more than strange that the Japanese put 40mm aboard a fighter in 42. I was going through the enemy fighters I will have to face in my PBEM in the next two years and the first one I stumbled over was the 40mm cannon armed Tojo, which only made sense to me if they had fielded some sort of fighter late in the war to deal with the heavy bomber threat. Mounting such cannons onto a fighter in mid 42 didn“t make sense to me and therefore I“ve looked it up on the Inet, proving my (wrong) assumption. It still doesn“t make sense to me, but it was a Japanese decision after all. And it gives me an advantage in my PBEM I guess as the II-b seems to be more or less useless due to the cannon armament.

stuman -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 7:53:57 AM)
quote: It still doesn“t make sense to me, but it was a Japanese decision after all. And it gives me an advantage in my PBEM I guess as the II-b seems to be more or less useless due to the cannon armament I must admit that I had not yet checked the stats of the II-b. I will avoid it I think [:)]

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 7:58:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stuman quote: It still doesn“t make sense to me, but it was a Japanese decision after all. And it gives me an advantage in my PBEM I guess as the II-b seems to be more or less useless due to the cannon armament I must admit that I had not yet checked the stats of the II-b. I will avoid it I think [:)] I“m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)]

Fishbed -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 8:53:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy quote: ORIGINAL: timtom quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy every source on the internet I“ve found states that the IIb hadn“t 40mm cannons. [&:] 'Cos they're directly or indirectly channeling Francillon, who in turn is channeling the prone-to-errors 1st edition of the 8-volume Japanese language "Encyclopedia of Japanese Aircraft 1900-1945". I see. Thanks for the info, you“re the expert anyway. The only reason why I even brought it up was because I found it more than strange that the Japanese put 40mm aboard a fighter in 42. I was going through the enemy fighters I will have to face in my PBEM in the next two years and the first one I stumbled over was the 40mm cannon armed Tojo, which only made sense to me if they had fielded some sort of fighter late in the war to deal with the heavy bomber threat. Mounting such cannons onto a fighter in mid 42 didn“t make sense to me and therefore I“ve looked it up on the Inet, proving my (wrong) assumption. It still doesn“t make sense to me, but it was a Japanese decision after all. And it gives me an advantage in my PBEM I guess as the II-b seems to be more or less useless due to the cannon armament. From what I read in the French text, the performance was abysmal anyway: the shell was some uneasy mix between a usual shell and a rocket, with power propelling it through apertures instead of doing it the normal way. Low muzzle velocity, low rate of fire and terrible accuracy which made the attacker fire only when he was no more than a few dozens meters behind the intented target. They say they didn't go far with the experiment anyway.

Rainer79 -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 12:40:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy I“m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)] I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)] BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament.

Rainer79 -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 12:41:30 PM)
Edit: Double post deleted.

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 2:14:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rainer79 quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy I“m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)] I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)] BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament. my bets are on the Tony at the moment, perhaps I should hover the courser over your factories, but I guess it“s too early in our game yet.

String -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 2:24:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy quote: ORIGINAL: Rainer79 quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy I“m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)] I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)] BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament. my bets are on the Tony at the moment, perhaps I should hover the courser over your factories, but I guess it“s too early in our game yet. The Tony, however, has an absolutely horrible service rating :(

castor troy -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 2:29:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: String quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy quote: ORIGINAL: Rainer79 quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy I“m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)] I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)] BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament. my bets are on the Tony at the moment, perhaps I should hover the courser over your factories, but I guess it“s too early in our game yet. The Tony, however, has an absolutely horrible service rating :( just as the Allied ac. 2 or 3 is the norm, while I“ve seen 1 as the norm for Japanese ac so far (as has the Tojo of above“s post). The AVG fighters have a 3, the Warhawk and all other frontline fighters have 2 at the moment and the Lightning has 3. Why advanced (like the Tojo of 44) gets a better service rating (means the best it could have) is a bit beyond me as the more and more faulty material for the Japanese later on should perhaps be reflected by a worse service rating. Surely not reflected by a better service rating than Allied ac IMO. Haven“t really checked later on Allied fighters about their service rating. Perhaps Thunderbolt and Co also all have 1 but I doubt that.

Athius -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (1/11/2010 3:52:46 PM)
Try the ki-45, it was based on the me110, which was one of the best bomber destroyers the germans had. quote: ORIGINAL: Rainer79 quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy I“m sure my opponent will find another IJA fighter for mass production... [;)] I'm quite sure of that as well. [;)] BTW the Dinah fighter variant - despite its other beautiful stats - has a similarly crappy cannon as its main armament.

viberpol -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (8/19/2010 1:24:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vonTirpitz I think the accuracy of the pilot randomly dropping 40mm shells out of the cockpit is at least 3. [:D] Seriously though, do cannons with such low accuracy ratings do better in strafing attacks or does that value affect all accuracy whether it be air-to-air or air-to-ground(sea)? A question for PBEM JFBs that reached that date... How is this Tojo model doing in game terms with it's (seemingly) crappy 40mm cannons? [&:]

PaxMondo -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (8/19/2010 2:27:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: castor troy ... Why advanced (like the Tojo of 44) gets a better service rating (means the best it could have) is a bit beyond me as the more and more faulty material for the Japanese later on should perhaps be reflected by a worse service rating. ... Don't overlook the fact that the IJ a/c were mechanically much simpler than most allied a/c by design intent. This also is why performance, particularly at altitude doesn't match. Things like multi-stage super, multi-stage twin chargers, variable pitch props, fuel injection, etc. were not commonly used on most of the high production models (like Tojo which only had a 2 speed super charger and fixed pitch prop). Also, IJ stuck with air cooled design to a great extent (yes there are a few exceptions and they have the SR to prove it). IJ designers had the technology on most of these items to varying degrees, but chose NOT to use it. The lack of these items GREATLY lowers the maintenance requirements. At the same time, it also impacts performance and so you see the performance delta increase through the war. Frank comes along with multi-stage super and later with H2O/Meth injection and now you have a competitive fighter. You also see the service rating increase. I beleive the SR to be pretty well distributed.

LoBaron -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (8/19/2010 2:29:25 PM)
Hm...wonder what would happen if you strafe PB“s with this baby...

Grfin Zeppelin -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (8/19/2010 4:32:07 PM)
They are decent in strafing attacks but thats it.

viberpol -> RE: Scenario 2 - Ki-44 Tojo wrong (8/19/2010 4:43:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Athius Try the ki-45, it was based on the me110, which was one of the best bomber destroyers the germans had. I did some small tests and IMHO, the best Allied heavy bombers killer is Shinden/George with it's 4 cannons. I think what an JFB need is the best gun value mixed with good accuracy. [:D] Just tested with the Hundred Miles scenario comparing Tojos and Georges against unescorted Liberators, and the latter achieve 15-20 kills while the lighter Tojos get only about 2-5 kills with 10-12 damaged enemy planes. Georges get the outright kills. [X(]

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.828125