KI-44 III in RHS

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

KI-44 III in RHS

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> KI-44 III in RHS

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

KI-44 III in RHS - 6/22/2007 9:29:06 AM

stall84

Posts: 146
Joined: 5/9/2004
From: Macon, GA
Status: offline

I tried pretty earnestly to search the forums... but the search is pretty awful on these forums..

I noticed the KI-44 III variant in RHS is... well... awesome

It seems to out perform in even the KI84 in every catagory...

Im trying to scour the web for info on this Tojo variant.. but cant find anything except that the KI-44 III had a 2000HP engine.

So... whats the deal with this Plane

I mean its available way before the Frank... and outperforms it also... Soo... whats the catch?

And if anyone knows any good links with info on it.. that'd be great also

Cheers!

Post #: 1

RE: KI-44 III in RHS - 6/22/2007 11:10:18 AM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/IJARG/ki44shoki.html

Here's a list of JAAF combat units that flew the Ki-44 during the war. The majority of the 10 Hiko Sentai (abbreviated FR)had a mixed complement during the periods indicated, so the number of Ki-44s on strength at any given time could have varied from 10 or 12 up to 40 or so. In several cases only a few (i.e., 4-7 or so) were on hand and this has been so indicated. In each case below, the unit is followed by the time period during which the unit had at least some Ki-44s on strength, and then by where the Sentai was based at that time.
9th FR: 5/43 - End; Japan (5/43 - 9/43), Manchuria (9/43 - 2/44), China (2/44 - 8/45).
23d FR: 12/44 - End; Japan (12/44 - 8/45) and a detachment on Iwo Jima (12/44 - 2/45).
26th FR: 3/45 - End (only a few); Singapore (3/45 - 6/45), Formosa (6/45 - 8/45).
29th FR: 2/44 - 12/44; Manchuria, Formosa, China, Philippines (2/44 - 12/44).
33d FR: 10/42 - 4/43; China (10/42 - 4/43).
64th FR: 9/43 - c.12/43 (only a few); Burma (9/43 - 12/43).
70th FR: 5/43 - End; Manchuria and Japan (5/43 - 8/45).
87th FR: 11/42 - End; Manchuria and Japan (11/42 - 12/43), NEI, Burma and Malaya (12/43 - 8/45).
104th FR: 9/44 - c.4/45; Manchuria (9/44 - 4/45).
246th FR: 4/43 - End; Japan (4/43 - 10/44), Formosa and Philippines (10/44 - 3/45), Japan (4/45 - 8/45).
47th Independent Flying Squadron: 11/41 - c.10/43 (prototypes only); French Indochina, Malaya and Burma (11/41 - 4/42), Japan (4/42 - 10/43).
1st Field Replacement Flying Unit: 11/44 - End; Singapore (11/44 - 8/45).
Some of the fighter operational training units (Rensei Hikotai) and several school units also had some Ki-44s.

< Message edited by m10bob -- 6/22/2007 11:13:44 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to stall84)

Post #: 2

RE: KI-44 III in RHS - 6/22/2007 12:14:41 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

There are a number of catches with the Ki-44 III - and it was not mass produced at all IRL. It was available to mass produce - which isn't the same thing. It also was unique insofar as it was intended to be used as the fighter component of JAAF (that is ARMY) CARRIER air groups! But while some of the carriers were operating - they did not in the event get the fighter units. Finally - it needs to be said that the entire Ki-44 concept was a technical failure - although it was indeed a fabulous interceptor fighter design - and it was (correctly) selected in preference to the Me-109 or the He-100. It is BECAUSE it was a technical failure that development was arrested just as the III model became available for mass production - and it was not proceeded with.

The basic problem is that the Ki-44 was concieved of before what we regard as the war in the Pacific began. The Japanese did not know about - and did not design it to intercept the B-29. They DID know about the B-17, and they put a number of these aircraft (captured at Clark AFB and Del Monte on Mindinao) into service - flying training missions against them. The Ki-44 WAS designed to intercept and kill B-17 and B-24 class bombers - and it was superb in that application.
But when it encountered the B-29, things went badly wrong:

the B-29 was initially at very high altitude, and performance of the fighter was sufficiently marginal that the only viable attack strategy was a head on intercept; when this was attempted, the fighter encountered very harsh air currents from the high speed bombers and were dangerously thrown out of control - sufficient to cause them to break up, crash or fly into other nearby aircraft.

the amount of fuel severely limited training time for interceptor pilots, and the Ki-44 was not a suitable plane for a novice to fly; that was compounded by the need to fly a mission at maximum altitude vs a very high speed and well armed bomber; the pilot corps was not up to feeding this aircraft in numbers for such missions.

the number of engines required to power the III was severely limited due to plant damage and shortages of critical materials, duraluminum in particular;

In order to address the problem of the high altitude B-29 raids, JAAF turned to a modified Ki-67 ultra heavy interceptor with a very heavy gun. This worked - and an operational squadron was formed - but by that time the B-29s switched tactics - and it never had a chance to intercept at all! But meanwhile the focus of production had shifted away from the Ki-44 - and later concepts never switched back.

In most games these issues will not obtain. And in any case the Ki-44 II was such a fabulous interceptor it should have been produced in much greater numbers - and players have the option to do that. IF they do that their air situation will be actually better in late 1942 than it is at the beginning of the war. IF you want to restrict Ki-44s to historical units - these are without exception properly programmed in all the strictly historical RHS scenarios (ie. all but RHSEOS). Just don't manually upgrade to the Ki-44 - let it happen automatically. In RHSEOS the Japanese are presumed to have put the Me-109E (or a variant of it) into production as an interim interceptor - pending arrival of the Ki-44 II. IF they do that as much as possible - and then if they mass produce the Ki-44 as much as they can - the Japanese can expect air : air exchange rates on the order of 2:1 around the beginning of 1943.

There are a number of technical secrets of the Ki-44. It focused on speed and rate of climb - but not horizontal maneuverabilty (the norm for Japanese fighters). It focused on cannon firepower - using both more and better guns than the Zero did. It had a good power to weight ratio and it accepted high wing loading as the price of a good interceptor. Few other Japanese aircraft possess all these attributes - and none were designed so early - so it is available before any of the others could be.

< Message edited by el cid again -- 6/22/2007 12:28:59 PM >

(in reply to stall84)

Post #: 3

RE: KI-44 III in RHS - 6/22/2007 1:57:41 PM

m10bob

Posts: 8622
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline

Adding to Sid's comments. All aircraft in order to fly must be light. The "Tojo" was a small plane, not mich larger than a Polikorpov I 16, with an engine approx twice the size. It could climb like a rocket,(compared to most), but being light, it was structurally weak, (ergo poor maneuverability which requires strength at the wingroot.)
A good pilot can "feel" his plane and know when it will stall, and when it is approaching a "critical" mechanical fatigue incident.
Further, being very light, it could not handle the occasional .50 cal bullet very well, and at altitude, would tend to "rip" from damage by a shell that large, like a can opener into a spam can, (except a spam can would be maybe 3x's stronger, per square inch..)

_____________________________

(in reply to el cid again)

Post #: 4

RE: KI-44 III in RHS - 6/22/2007 7:40:48 PM

el cid again

Posts: 16922
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

This is indeed modeled in our rating system as well: a Ki-44 has a durability of 12

but a F4U-1 or a P-47 has a durability of 14

and a P-38G has a durability of 18

(in reply to m10bob)

Post #: 5

RE: KI-44 III in RHS - 6/22/2007 11:44:38 PM

stall84

Posts: 146
Joined: 5/9/2004
From: Macon, GA
Status: offline

All very interesting stuff...

And cid.. Im really grateful you have it in RHS..

< Message edited by stall84 -- 6/22/2007 11:54:00 PM >

(in reply to stall84)

Post #: 6

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> Scenario Design >> KI-44 III in RHS

Page: [1]