PDA

View Full Version : The KI-84 Uber? Ban it off servers? Jane`s Book of WWII Fighters says THAT`S HOW IT WAS in R/L!



SeaFireLIV
04-09-2004, 08:18 PM
I`ve been reading a lot here about people wanting to ban the KI-84c (and its kin), because it was too good. There`s even been suggestions that it is totally inaccurate in its performance. Well, I was browsing my Jane`s Aircraft of WWII and read this, please take the time to read...


Qoute:
`When the ki-84 entered combat over China in the summer of 1944 Allied fighter pilots immediately recognised the new enemy as an equal if flown by a MODERATELY trained pilot. It was regarded as the finest of all Japanese fighters, able to handle any Allied fighter or intercept the high flying B-29.

In spite of a troublesome engine and gear prone to buckle, the KI-84 was loved by its pilots whether as a fighter or fighter bomber. When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!

In spite of all the problems, most due to poor manufacturing, when Hayate unites moved to the Philippines they gave American Navy and Army pilots the most serious opposition of the Camapaign.

It retained sterling manoeuvrability whilest gaining the performance nneded to meet the Allies on an equal basis. From the beginning, armament was what it should have been for a modern fighter: four 12.7 mm mgs or two 12.7 mm guns plus two 20mm cannon and two 30mm cannon.
By any standards such a potent variety of weapons made this aircraft LETHAL in even brief encounters.`

End quote.

This puts all the whines I`ve heard into perspective. The KI-84 is UBER in FB because... THAT`S HOW IT REALLY WAS. Even `noob` (moderately trained) pilots did well in it.
Banning it off servers because it`s `UBER` would be wrong. This plane was real, it existed. The Americans had to face it and fight it in real life. They had to beat it not Ban it.
I`m happy to take on a `better` plane than mine if that`s how it was, not complain, but FIGHT it, using superior TEAM tactics.
All you could do is maybe limit the numbers...

Just thought I`d say my two pennies and maybe enlighten some people in the process.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg

SeaFireLIV
04-09-2004, 08:18 PM
I`ve been reading a lot here about people wanting to ban the KI-84c (and its kin), because it was too good. There`s even been suggestions that it is totally inaccurate in its performance. Well, I was browsing my Jane`s Aircraft of WWII and read this, please take the time to read...


Qoute:
`When the ki-84 entered combat over China in the summer of 1944 Allied fighter pilots immediately recognised the new enemy as an equal if flown by a MODERATELY trained pilot. It was regarded as the finest of all Japanese fighters, able to handle any Allied fighter or intercept the high flying B-29.

In spite of a troublesome engine and gear prone to buckle, the KI-84 was loved by its pilots whether as a fighter or fighter bomber. When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!

In spite of all the problems, most due to poor manufacturing, when Hayate unites moved to the Philippines they gave American Navy and Army pilots the most serious opposition of the Camapaign.

It retained sterling manoeuvrability whilest gaining the performance nneded to meet the Allies on an equal basis. From the beginning, armament was what it should have been for a modern fighter: four 12.7 mm mgs or two 12.7 mm guns plus two 20mm cannon and two 30mm cannon.
By any standards such a potent variety of weapons made this aircraft LETHAL in even brief encounters.`

End quote.

This puts all the whines I`ve heard into perspective. The KI-84 is UBER in FB because... THAT`S HOW IT REALLY WAS. Even `noob` (moderately trained) pilots did well in it.
Banning it off servers because it`s `UBER` would be wrong. This plane was real, it existed. The Americans had to face it and fight it in real life. They had to beat it not Ban it.
I`m happy to take on a `better` plane than mine if that`s how it was, not complain, but FIGHT it, using superior TEAM tactics.
All you could do is maybe limit the numbers...

Just thought I`d say my two pennies and maybe enlighten some people in the process.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg

DuxCorvan
04-09-2004, 08:24 PM
Agreed. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

But I hate it anyway... when I'm not inside. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

WUAF_Badsight
04-09-2004, 08:31 PM
while its a great all rounder in FB its far from unbeatable

most of the complaining about it seems to come from American plane fans

its not the best plane at anything & is beaten in all areas by different planes

ucanfly
04-09-2004, 08:37 PM
Most of the complaints center around the DM of the KI-84c of which your quote says nothing.

WUAF_Badsight
04-09-2004, 08:39 PM
no ...... they were all "its too fast , its too fast" to begin with

then switched to "its too tuff , its too tuff"

if they flew it in combat they would see how its affected by hits

PlaneEater
04-09-2004, 08:41 PM
Most of the whining comes from Slammin's server where people take off by themselves and expect to be able to take any plane and beat any other plane in a 1v1 fight.

You can't win alone, especially when you're facing a very good plane, especially in slash-and-kill aircraft like most American and German planes were.

Two, three, even five buddies are how you win. And you don't gripe and moan about 'kill stealing'. When somebody--anybody--on your side shoots the bad guy down, YOU WIN! Why? HE'S DEAD AND YOU AREN'T!

Hard concept to grasp, huh?

Bearcat99
04-09-2004, 10:07 PM
Nice Seafire....very nice....

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

LEXX_Luthor
04-09-2004, 10:34 PM
Nice PlaneEater....very nice....

Still, high altitude performance of Ki~84 might (or might not) could be trimmed slightly. But most of the Whiners are sea level dogfighters, so... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
04-09-2004, 10:59 PM
I've read the same stuff...

I think some serious DM testing had put the Ki-84 into a higher realm than it probably should be (over the P-47 and over the FW190 I think) so that may be a bit of a problem but its definately right that the plane was better protected than most Japanese planes of the period, it was a deadly aircraft, and it was the equal or better of everything that it flew against.

A serious contender that came too late to change the course of the war and in too few numbers with not enough experienced pilots.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/tmv-sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

Slammin_
04-09-2004, 11:00 PM
KI-84C=Death Machine - under all circumstances I've run into, both with, and against it.

The remaining Ki models are not banned here.

I love that plane! But gotta at least attempt play balance too.

sukebeboy
04-09-2004, 11:26 PM
What can I say? We may not be great at coming up with new ideas, but we sure can improve on other's designs. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.visual-care.com/anime.gif

LW_lcarp
04-09-2004, 11:27 PM
The LA drivers think its overmodeled cause now there is somehting that can turn with them on the Axis side

"If winning isnt everything why do they keep score"
Vince Lombardi

WUAF_Co_Hero
04-09-2004, 11:35 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LW_lcarp:
The LA drivers think its overmodeled cause now there is somehting that can turn with them on the Axis side

"If winning isnt everything why do they keep score"
Vince Lombardi<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, the G-2 and earlier are all capable of outturning the La at low speeds.

Build a man a fire, keep him warm for a day...

Set a man on fire, keep him warm for the rest of his life.

BS87
04-10-2004, 12:03 AM
I have no problem shooting down any of the Ki's.. just have ot land the hits on those shakey bastages http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. The only complaint i might have is that the C was not fielded very much, but there is no way to restrict a certain number of planes so =/

Sharx66
04-10-2004, 12:33 AM
It may have been that good. The difference is that it wasn't present in all battles as opposed in most df servers online.

Korolov
04-10-2004, 12:46 AM
The Ki-84 is übr!!!! Ban it off all servers!!!

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/34.gif

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/newsig1.jpg

WhiskeyRiver
04-10-2004, 01:47 AM
Which version had 2x12.7mm, 2x20mm's and 2x30mm's?

To kill me you've got to hit the heart Ramon--Clint Eastwood

S 8
04-10-2004, 02:25 AM
I´m not an ace flyer in this game nor am I the worst but I don´t find it to be hard to shoot it down. I was in a 109G2 last night and I was hanging on his tail without any problem.As said before but can´t be said to much,it´s all up to the pilot,and then it dosen´t matter which AC he flies.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/113_1080237361_supersig2.jpg

pinche_bolillo
04-10-2004, 03:00 AM
while it is a subject for debate whether or not any Ki-84Ics ever saw action or even went into production. that would not be grounds to exclude it from the plane set. since there are other a/c in this game that also never saw any production and were only proto types, or saw very limited production. in the book "flying guns WW II" by tony williams he states that the japanese experimented with 30mm armament on the ki 84. and doubts that any made it to production.

too fast and climbs too well, no doubt in my mind it is not fair that we have a plane modeled on american data and is 40 mph faster at altitude than what the japanese data suggests. while american a/c cannot be modeled on this same data is a valid complaint of many people, myself included.

too tuff, for those of you that think its damage model is just right, maybe you should look at how many 50 cal, 20mm, and 30mm rds this plane can take. it takes more mk 108s to bring down a Ki-84 than it does a P-47. I have hit Ki-84s on the fuselage with 4-5 30mm mk 108s and have still watched turn pretty well. it is no tougher than an La-7 though. both these planes seem to turn better the more you shoot them, up till they finally break that is.

I still have no real problem letting ki-84Ics in my game though. I wish more people used them, it would make it much easier for me to get kills if they did. just take a K-4 if your tired of the ki-84Ic threat, or take a ki-84Ic.

anybody who thinks that their favorte plane is under modeled while the a/c they hate are over modeled and they even have proof to back it up, well forget it. accept the plane set and it will make life easier. my favorite a/c in real life is also the most laim a/c in this game. I never use it. I mainly use a 109 and the only plane I dislike more than the 109 series is the spitfire series. if spits were the uber noober plane in this game, guess what I would be using a spitfire.

forget the idea of collecting data to prove that plane x is over modeled and plane y is under modeled. it rarely works like that. whom ever designs the game usually models the a/c the way they see fit and they will not usually change this.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/230_1081512293_bolillo_loco.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
04-10-2004, 03:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pinche_bolillo:

too fast and climbs too well, no doubt in my mind it is not fair that we have a plane modeled on american data and is 40 mph faster at altitude than what the japanese data suggests.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

most web sites are quoting francillion

its speed is accurate

its what it could do

as for its DM ...... its wack how much speed & tuning it looses after wing hits

Osirisx9
04-10-2004, 03:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pinche_bolillo:

too fast and climbs too well, no doubt in my mind it is not fair that we have a plane modeled on american data and is 40 mph faster at altitude than what the japanese data suggests.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

most web sites are quoting francillion

its speed is accurate

its what it could do

as for its DM ...... its wack how much speed & tuning it looses after wing hits<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I used to hate that d@mn freak plane.... I still think it is a feak but its a good thing that the p-63 has 60 37mm rounds sitting in its snout. I finally learned how to handle that 37mm cannon and 60 37mm rounds is more than enough to bring down a Ki-84 and go hunt more victims. Now I thank all the Ki-84 drivers for putting me in a position to where I needed to learn to master the P-63 quirks and cannon. A rookie or average jock in a Ki-84 is no match against the P-63. In fact I find that the only way that I get shot down by a Ki-84 is if it sneaks up on my six. If I see him before he sinks any rounds in me I'll beat him. This goes for those Ki-84 masters too. So leave the Ki-84 in ... It just helps to make you master your bird.

Osiris_X9

dahdah
04-10-2004, 05:00 AM
http://www.allaboutwarfare.com/files/pictures/tmp/ki84-perfdata1.jpg
http://www.allaboutwarfare.com/files/pictures/tmp/ki84-perfdata2.jpg

thanks to Butch2k who posted this info in ORR.

SeaFireLIV
04-10-2004, 05:09 AM
I was reading that book then suddenly came upon the KI-84 description and I thought, `Now I understand what the whines were about!`

It was funny, because the complaints in the Forum kind of reflected the descriptions of the KI-84 in the book. It was like seeing people react today in a way that Allied pilots would LIKE to have reacted if it were possible to BAN planes in reality in WWII.

So complaints about an aircraft`s performance (too good or too bad) does not have to mean that it is inaccurate. We must always consider this. Now the 109-Z is a completely different story...

Sorry about the spelling mistakes, it was late when I posted it.
Edit: Just seen the ORR post and I notice Beacat99 pretty much said it all and in more detail anyway http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif)
SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg

[This message was edited by SeaFireLIV on Sat April 10 2004 at 04:39 AM.]

jseyerle
04-10-2004, 05:38 AM
People should stop complaining.
I frequently kill Ki84s in all variants of the p51 and also Spitfires. The only time it is lethal is when it is on your tail.

I have found if you are trying to tailshoot a ki84 you will waste most all your ammo. It took a 4 second burst from p51 at &lt; 200 to kill.

Then I started aiming my shots at the cockpit and engine areas.

Big surprise. A couple rounds and it is either smoking or on fire.

There is the trick for the dreaded ki84.

lil_labbit
04-10-2004, 06:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sukebeboy:
What can I say? We may not be great at coming up with new ideas, but we sure can improve on other's designs. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://www.visual-care.com/anime.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL - now that's senseless violence... (hope it's not a sig though http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif - they are 30k max 400x200 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif)

Sortof fits in nicely with the ban this ban that planes going on at the moment http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Annoying too with all the flashing going on LOL I like it http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/59.gif

http://members.home.nl/lil.labbit/lilseesya.jpg
Night is better than Day

jensenpark
04-10-2004, 06:23 AM
Seafire:

Curious if it says anything else about the engine problems...was it a crippling problem that really affected performance, or short engine life, or something else?

http://www.unicover.com/images/G6A876.JPG

SeaFireLIV
04-10-2004, 06:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jensenpark:

Curious if it says anything else about the engine problems...was it a crippling problem that really affected performance, or short engine life, or something else?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, it doesn`t say anything about that, or about it`s armour (if any). I doubt it would have been crippling or if it was it must have been every now and then, otherwise they`d never have fought as well as they did. I`m hoping to find more details on WWII aircraft by buying a couple more books or maybe check the library. I need more information!

chris455
04-10-2004, 06:52 AM
As far as it's armor goes, Thomas B. McGuire stated that "The pilot was well protected with 1/2" of armor......................fuel tanks were coverd with a relativley inneffectual coating"

Butch2Ks data changes things somewhat for me.

It looks like compelling evidence that given 92 octane fuel, wartime (i.e. Japanese service) Hayates could indeed hit 427mph @ 20,000.

The document is dated March 45. It was intended for use by Allied military units in assessing the performance of the Frank. If such performance had been acheived only under special circumstances, I believe the docment would note that.

It almost certainly reflects wartime capabilities in a serviceable aircraft.

http://members.cox.net/miataman1/P47.jpg

ZG77_Nagual
04-10-2004, 08:08 AM
When I was a kid I saved up my allowance and, one volume at a time, bought this five or six volume set of janes ww2 fighters books. I remember building a model of the ki84 and determining that it was the best prop fighter of the war. I figured it's true counterpart was the f8f bearcat - the true culmination of Grumman's wonderful fleet of radial boat-landers.

I ban the version with the 30mm guns just because people tend to stand it on it's tail and shoot you down from a kilometer away. They are great planes - I like the p39 against them if I feel the need to win - the p38 is more fun however.

dahdah
04-10-2004, 08:15 AM
I quote from RM Buechel's Ki-84 book.

The most serious problem facing the Hayate was the total unreliability of its power plant. Low oil pressure and high operating temperatures continually caused trouble. The greatest fear of a hayate pilot was engine overhaeting. One moment things would be humming, and then suddenly the oil temperature would go up over 85+C as the oil cooler would stop functioning. In 5 or 10 minutes you could see trouble as a thin stream of black smoke came out of the exhausts. as the Ha-45 heated up the smoke would turn white, and then thick and black smoke as the engine frooze. The sequence took 10 to 15 minutes and chances were that the pilot was too far away from his base to make it back. ...... In combat, if a Hayate was flown upside down, the oil pressure dropped to zero (my note: the R2800 had a simular problem) and the engine was sure to freeze. The problem was still under inveztigation at the 1st Air tech lab at tachikawa when the war ended.

Fuel pressure drops were also a problem. Later Ha-45/21, a model that offered a slight improvement. It wasn't until the Ha-45/23 was available with its low prssure fuel injection system that the problem was partially solved.

TheAirMarshal
04-10-2004, 08:38 AM
Ban the jets too.

Hawgdog
04-10-2004, 09:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PlaneEater:
When somebody--_anybody_--on your side shoots the bad guy down, YOU WIN! Why? HE'S DEAD AND YOU AREN'T!

Hard concept to grasp, huh?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have no idea....been flying for a looonnngg time here and its rare to find even squad units who understand that concept.

http://img5.photobucket.com/albums/v22/HawgDog/sharkdog.gif
When you get to Hell, tell 'em HawgDog sent you!

VMF-214_HaVoK
04-10-2004, 09:31 AM
The Ki is banned from most servers not because its Uber. It is because every point***** in the game flys it. And it can become pretty lame when teams become unbalanced and all are in Kis. The Ki dont bother me too much I just fly above them when I can and flying in nonarcade settings helps alot also in dealing with them. People fly the Ki for one reason and one reason only IMO and they are the same people that flown the Hurricane in 1.0 and the same people that flown the LA-7. And I think we all know what that reason is...dont we http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
=S=
http://www.vmf-214.net/

http://www.flightjournal.com/fj/images/hellcat_head_short.jpg

DaBallz
04-10-2004, 09:53 AM
There was a problem in testing all Axis planes
in the US. We did not have avaitaion gas of
low enough grade to properly test those aircraft
in a real world enviorment.

As I have read they were fed 110/130 or 115/145.
Both fuels were of greater detonation resistance
than any fuels produced by any Axis powers (in quantity).

To put it in perspective, 115/145 would have given
greater anti detonation resistance than any
fuel available to the Japanese, even with methanol.

What you get with higher octane/performance number fuel
is it allows you to run more boost and to survive
higher tempratures, especially under boost.

More boost means more power, that simple.

be fore the armchair engineers jump on this
I will qualify my statement by saying that
an increase in octane/PN rating alone does not
make for more power. The oppasite is true.

But in the presence of more boost you get additional
power, and higher octane/PN fuel will allow
you to survive higher temps and longer periods
under boost.

Yes, the fuel could have and likely did skew the
tests on Axis planes.

Da...

MosDef_99th
04-10-2004, 11:59 AM
I don't have a problem with its performance, no question it can be lethal in the right hands.

But....anybody who's read any literature about the Pacific air war realize that while Japanese aircraft were great aerodynamically, they were so fragile and suspect to enemy fire that they were often called "lighters" cause they burned/exploded so easily.

So please tell me how "having more armour protection than typical Japanese aircraft" equates to be as tough or tougher than a Thunderbolt or FW190? Shouldn't that make the DM maybe a little better than average, at best?
Shouldn't it?

And what Havok said about the server makeup is true. Quite often you'll see rooms with 70% 109Z's and KI-c's; freakin 30mm blast-fests. But then maybe its just the servers I inhabit.

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/DAR/BUC-01.jpg

Bull_dog_
04-10-2004, 12:11 PM
I think there are a few reasons people react so strongly to the Ki-84... i'll try to explain.

I have many books as most do on aircraft and I'll take some info from "Encyclopedia Weapons of World War II"....

Ki-84 quote "Best of all Japanese fighters available in quantity during the last year of the war" ... "not only possessed a reasonable performance but (unusual among Japanese aircraft) carried a powerful armament capable of knocking down the heavily armmed and armoured American bombers."

Performance: max speed 392mph @ 20,079ft; climb to 5000meters @ 5.9 minutes; max take off weight 3890Kg.

By contrast:
P-38 L 414mph @25,000 ft; climb 7 min. to 6,095 meters; weight max 9798kg

P-39N 399mph @2955meters (that is fast folks!) climb to 4570 meters in 3.8 minusts (that is real fast!) weight 3720kg max

P-40N-20 378mph @ 3200meters; climb to 4570meters in 6.7minutes' weight 5171kg

P-51D Mustang 437mph @ 7620 meters; climb to 30,000 ft(9145meters) in 13 minutes; weight 5262kg max

P-47D-25 428mph @ 9145meters; climb to 6095 meters in 9 minutes; weight 8800kg max

Now this is the kind of data/information that I use to form most of my opinions on and I'm many others do also... I see contradictions in how the "relative" (I stress relative as the operative word) performance of the Ki-84 is in this game compared to other aircraft.

Many folks have presented flight data that is different from that which I have available to me... I see this in almost every case where people argue flight characteristics!

According to the best information I have... the US fighters are significantly faster at high altitudes and the lightning can outclimb the Ki-84... the mustang is difficult to tell given the data... and will you look at the P-39N... looks like some Uber plane... very fast and climbs like a squirrel with its tail on fire.

I think this is the source of the conflict and it has occurred to me that maybe it is not just the Ki being overmodelled (imho) in some aspects that are at fault... its contemporary enemies like the P-51 are slow in this game... I've never been able to acheive the stated statistics in that aircraft.. and the energy modelling in the dive are very poor in this game so heavy aircraft can't exploit that strength as well as in real life IMHO

I don't think the Ki was some sort of super plane in 1944-45... I think it shocked the crap out of US pilots though because they were used to fighting much less capable aircraft. Relatively speaking, given the information at my finger tips, I feel the Ki is too fast at altitude, climbs too well, damage modelling way too tough, dive characteristics too aggressive. But as I said before, maybe the P-51,47 and 38 are not well modelled on speed and dive so it gives me that sensation as a Ki tracks me down from 8000 meters to sea level while I fly my P-47 in a sustained shallow dive... that just didn't happen in real life... I couldn't keep the thing off my tail so I tried to lose it...it killed me over my base at 500 meters.

You can now see why I think the way I do... and there is data to show otherwise too... so the Ki fans will cry foul and the anti-ki crowd will cry foul too!

Somehow, I doubt the ki would have dominated the skies over Japan if the war had continued...especially up high... and down low they would be contending with Corsairs, Hellcats and Bearcats... A great aircraft no doubt...dominant??? Well rate of climb is average, speed is on the slow side for that timeframe and it was very agile with good firepower.

Imagine trying to fly a Spitfire Mk I against a Fw-190 A1...about the same speed difference as the Mustang and the Ki in the info I have

So who is right and who is wrong... we may never know http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/35.gif But the debate is intersting http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/53.gif

SkyChimp
04-10-2004, 12:37 PM
A lot of people are going to have heartburn over Japanese fighter performance in PF if they are modeled to their highest published numbers. The J2M, N1K2J were both 400 mph+ fighters. And the J2M had an initial climb rate of 4,600 fpm.

I suggest anyone interested buy the reprint of the TAIC manual. Print quality is not very good, but it's got the numbers people want to see:

http://www.aeroplanebooks.com/maloney.jpg

Regards,
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg

AcesHigh_AVG
04-10-2004, 12:46 PM
I used to think the KI was uber until I flew it in combat and realized it sucks. Give me the P38 any day!

jensenpark
04-10-2004, 12:52 PM
How much should the engine reliablity (or lack of it I guess) be taken into account in the modelling?
Great plane, deserves its performance, but in light of the engine problems, was it that good? Is it modelled in the game on a perfectly working plane, with prime octane fuel available (both which may not be be realistic?)
Not knocking it, but would like an informed opinion...maybe Skychimp or someone can shed a bit of light?

http://www.corsair-web.com/thistler/rtfoxint.jpg
Buzz Beurling flying his last sortie over Malta, Oct.24, 1942

SeaFireLIV
04-10-2004, 01:05 PM
I think all planes are designed on perfect factory settings?

I remember in the readme of one patch that spark plugs failure were removed. I hadn`t even noticed it.

IMHO, I would actually PREFER historical failures in aircraft. It would be no problem to me if I had to restart an engine 3 or 4 times because of cold weather, or dodgy mechanics. I wouldn`t mind if my engine quit suddenly due to historical unreliability. Sure, it would be a pain, but I would enjoy the realism of it. It would also put some `weakness` to aircraft that performed in a manner too good for reality.

Of course we have thousands of forum whines on aircraft FMs, imagine the whines when people found that THEIR `Red Baron ` aircraft actually had an engine failure weakness without being involved in combat? It would start the whining a fresh!

Still, I would prefer aircraft failures in FB.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg

Bull_dog_
04-10-2004, 01:40 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SkyChimp:
A lot of people are going to have heartburn over Japanese fighter performance in PF if they are modeled to their highest published numbers. The J2M, N1K2J were both 400 mph+ fighters. And the J2M had an initial climb rate of 4,600 fpm.

I suggest anyone interested buy the reprint of the TAIC manual. Print quality is not very good, but it's got the numbers people want to see:

http://www.aeroplanebooks.com/maloney.jpg

_Regards,_
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is my point exactly...seems like everywhere you turn, someone can produce a book, chart or reference that contradicts some other reference... I have no information that says any single engined fighter the Japanese produced ever exceeded 400mph in level flight...the poof someone produces some chart that says three of them did viola!

Just give me a Mustang that can go 437mph and .50's that can kill, a Jug that can outdive other single engined aircraft and a P-38 with similar accuracy to the UBS along with as little torque as possible in the FM and super slow speed stall characteristics that it really had and lastly a Ki-84 that has damage modelling to go with its lack of armor and poor self sealing tanks and I'll leave this debate for good.... until then... every reference I have shows the Ki to be a sub 400mph aircraft with average climb ability and performance drop over 20,000 ft...

this whole debate would be alot worse if MP could airstart at 30,000ft! Wouldn't it be cool if we had an online map with a 30,000 ft. mountaing and airbases every 5000 ft up the mountain to allow for different altitudes to start on?

Jetbuff
04-10-2004, 01:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hawgdog:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by PlaneEater:
When somebody--_anybody_--on your side shoots the bad guy down, YOU WIN! Why? HE'S DEAD AND YOU AREN'T!

Hard concept to grasp, huh?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have no idea....been flying for a looonnngg time here and its rare to find even squad units who understand that concept.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe you haven't been looking in the right places Hawgdog? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://members.rogers.com/teemaz/sig.jpg

lrrp22
04-10-2004, 07:17 PM
There it is again- P-51H and P-47N. Does anyone really think the Ki-84 could "EASILY" best a P-51H? The Ki-84's ONLY advantage would be low speed turning, The P-51H would hold every other advantage in spades!

Please! That's obviously not only a misquote but an exaggerated misquote at that.

Look at the numbers- even a P-51D at conservative factory boost settings (as modeled in FB) would give the best-performing Frank all it could handle as long as it kept its speed up. At the kinds of boost levels being used over Japan in 1945 (80" HG vs. FB's 67") the P-51D would have been much faster at lower altitudes than the Frank's best numbers.

Let's be realistic here: a Frank in prime working order would take a back seat to no fighter, but it was *not* somekind of super plane. Even at 427 mph@20,000 ft., which is a best case scenario, the Frank was only *very* slightly faster (2 mph) than a stock P-51D at that altitude. At 10,000 ft, according to Butch's chart, the Mustang was 10-20 mph faster than the Frank. At any given altitude, the Frank would have better slow speed handling and a sustained climb advantage while the Mustang would have the advantage at high speed maneuver and dive capabilities.

Whichever pilot best fought to his aircraft's advantages would win the fight. In no way would the Ki-84 dominate the P-51D.



<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I`ve been reading a lot here about people wanting to ban the KI-84c (and its kin), because it was too good. There`s even been suggestions that it is totally inaccurate in its performance. Well, I was browsing my Jane`s Aircraft of WWII and read this, please take the time to read...


Qoute:
`When the ki-84 entered combat over China in the summer of 1944 Allied fighter pilots immediately recognised the new enemy as an equal if flown by a MODERATELY trained pilot. It was regarded as the finest of all Japanese fighters, able to handle any Allied fighter or intercept the high flying B-29.

In spite of a troublesome engine and gear prone to buckle, the KI-84 was loved by its pilots whether as a fighter or fighter bomber. When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!

In spite of all the problems, most due to poor manufacturing, when Hayate unites moved to the Philippines they gave American Navy and Army pilots the most serious opposition of the Camapaign.

It retained sterling manoeuvrability whilest gaining the performance nneded to meet the Allies on an equal basis. From the beginning, armament was what it should have been for a modern fighter: four 12.7 mm mgs or two 12.7 mm guns plus two 20mm cannon and two 30mm cannon.
By any standards such a potent variety of weapons made this aircraft LETHAL in even brief encounters.`

End quote.

This puts all the whines I`ve heard into perspective. The KI-84 is UBER in FB because... THAT`S HOW IT REALLY WAS. Even `noob` (moderately trained) pilots did well in it.
Banning it off servers because it`s `UBER` would be wrong. This plane was real, it existed. The Americans had to face it and fight it in real life. They had to beat it not Ban it.
I`m happy to take on a `better` plane than mine if that`s how it was, not complain, but FIGHT it, using superior TEAM tactics.
All you could do is maybe limit the numbers...

Just thought I`d say my two pennies and maybe enlighten some people in the process.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[This message was edited by lrrp22 on Sat April 10 2004 at 09:15 PM.]

[This message was edited by lrrp22 on Sat April 10 2004 at 09:18 PM.]

pinche_bolillo
04-10-2004, 07:58 PM
here is my problem with the data provided. I have a book with the title TAIC manual also. My book was written by Edward T. Maloney isbn # 0915464032 and, on page 133-134 the frank can be found. My book has the exact same performance figures as those posted by somebody before, but here is the difference. In my book under "GENERAL DATA" mine is not blank like that which is posted earlier. here is what my book states

GENERAL DATA

Normal fighter weight, fuel capacity, dimensions area, military and take-off power are all documentary values. Drag analysis is based on areas and dimensions and the assumption that the plane will have lines similar to OSCAR. Dimensions given are similar to those of OSCAR and it is quite certain this plane is of Nakajima desing. Performanc figures should be takens as estimates but they do give an idications of the expected performance of new japanese fighters.

so it is obvious that this data is pure speculation by the taic and that they lacked sufficiant data about the Ki-84 before they filed the report. they even used values for the OSCAR to calculate performance. most likely because they OSCAR is a known more familiar a/c.

there is plenty of data out there on american a/c which is much higher than what is printed in popular general reference books, that have been printed during the period covering 1945 - the mid 1990s.

P-38 for example........Vee's For Victory! The story of the Allison V-1710 aircraft engine 1929-1948 by Daniel D. Whitney. isbn 0764305611

P-38J/L

360 mph sea level
382 mph @ 10,000 ft
408 mph @ 20,000 ft
418 mph @ 27,000 ft
414 mph @ 30,000 ft

climb in 5 minutes 17,800 ft
climb to 20,000 ft 6.2 minutes
climb to 25,000 ft 8.7 minutes
climb to 30,000 ft 12.2 minutes

P-38J/L

operational weight 16,200 lbs
hp 1,600 WER engine rpm 3,000
356 mph @ sea level
436 mph @ 30,000 ft
climb in 5 minutes 18,700 ft
time to climb to 30,000 ft 8.7

P-38L
operational weight 16,200 lbs
1,725 hp WER engine rpm 3,200
364 mph @ sea level
448 mph @ 30,000 rpm
climb in 5 minutes 21,600 ft
climb to 30,000 ft 7.2 minutes

the book "the P-38 Lightning" written by warren bodie also backs up the max speed figure for a P-38L running @ 1,725 hp, bodie states that max speed was 443 mph.

incase you did not know the 1,725 hp rating for the F-30s (111/113) was approved by allison and lockheed.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/230_1081512293_bolillo_loco.jpg

SkyChimp
04-10-2004, 08:06 PM
I agree. The Ki-84 was good under ideal circumstances. But it was no P-51H or P-47N.

I've seen the following:

Japanese Aircraft Of The Pacific War
"This speed exceeded that of the NA P-51D-25-NA Mustang and Republic P-47D-35-RA Thunderbolt at teh same altitude by 3 mph and 22 mph respectively."

Fighting Aircraft Of WWII
"Despite this, the Ki-84 was potentially superb, a captured -Ia out-climbing and outmanuevering a P-51H and P-47N"

Aero-Detail #24 NAKAJIMA Ki-84 "FRANK"
"...faster than the P-51K and P-47N."

So, which was it?

Aero-Detail states the plane tested at Wright against these American planes was fueled with 130 PN fuel.

Regards,
http://members.cox.net/us.fighters/wildsig.jpg

_VR_ScorpionWorm
04-10-2004, 09:03 PM
Nice point, although banning it is a bit of a question for some servers. I havnt read any post(dont have time, just responding for now), I think it should be banned regarding plane sets and period. I wouldnt mind flying against it or flying it(although I dont really like it), but I would like to see it gone from any era in which it doesnt belong. There are a few servers that have plane sets WarCloudsTOH is awesome but I can only be there for a while due to the same maps. I would like to set up a DF map and send it to them but I dont know where to begin. Back to point, I dont like it when its not in a historical era. Dont ban it just keep it in the Pacific era. I have only seen a few DF servers that have Pacific maps. My two cents.

"We went like this, He went like that, I said to Hollywood 'Where'd he go?', Hollywood said, 'Where'd WHO go'-TOPGUN

Mr0blongo
04-10-2004, 09:08 PM
The point is in real life to fly a Ki84 first u need to get the fuel http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif, then find a 15 years old pilot with his katana, put him in the cockpit... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif... take off (if u can find a runway without holes), while in air face the 50 USA planes flying over u base http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif. It can be a great plane, no doubts, and maybe is unfair here cos its not in realistic conditions, in games u always play with even teams and both sides with ideal conditions. That make the technical superior planes be too good.

Is like putting a King Tiger against a Sherman in flat, dry terrain, the Sherman have no chance.

RAF74_Buzzsaw
04-10-2004, 11:23 PM
Salute

This is excellent material provided by Butch. He should be thanked.

What I immediately notice is that the fuel that is used is 92 octane. So the issue of whether or not the aircraft could perform up to the test standards with the fuel the Japanese were receiveing at their depots is a definite question.

Methanol/Water mixture is also required.

The other issue is how long WEP and Military power can be used for. It's unclear to me whether or not the 1 listed under Min. in the "Climb-Ceiling" chart is indicative of how long WEP can be used for. Probably not, but if Butch has any information on this it would be helpful.

I would also be interested in the comments made by the test pilots in regards to the aircraft's handling.

It is also clear from the climb and speed charts that this aircraft's performance went south FAST after the 20,000 ft peak.

The existing FORGOTTEN BATTLES Frank could use some tuning to align it more correctly with these results.

BlitzPig_DDT
04-10-2004, 11:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr0blongo:
It can be a great plane, no doubts, and maybe is unfair here cos its not in realistic conditions, in games u always play with even teams and both sides with ideal conditions. That make the technical superior planes be too good.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, the problem is that everyone wants to fly like they used to fly VVS back with the suckass FMs of IL2. That is to say, jam throttle full forward, pull back all the way on the stick and shoot when something is in front of your face.

So when a few people come along who have spent the time learning how to be effective in E fighting, or at least plain old basic BnZ, the unwashed find an opponent they don't know how (&lt;- key bit there) to deal with. So suddenly it's "über".

Unfortunately, nobody bothers to actually apply any thought to the situation to determine what happened, if the planes in question are realistic, what the plane that spanked them is really capable of here, or how to deal with them. As if that wasn't enough, they refuse to accept that their conception could be wrong and won't bother to apply helpful info given to them on how to beat said plane.

I've mentioned countless times how to beat both the "Most Wanted Props". People still spout off the same crap though. Including people I've spoken to directly.

==================================
The Blitz Pigs - Not a squad, a Movement!

Come and spam on our front porch.

http://www.blitzpigs.com

Giganoni
04-12-2004, 03:14 AM
Hehehe..I think in the game I would take a ki-84 a or b over the p-51s and p-47s because I like to dogfight on the deck and manuverable planes. Regardless people have problems with its speed and armor. Well, I think it was a reasonably fast plane, maybe it was faster that a p-51 in combat in low alt. As for it being too tough? I don't know..is 13mm armor and 75mm glass weak or tough? Wouldn't it be tougher to take down with .50 cals than cannons?

Besides, the ki-84 wasn't the best Japanese plane, the ki-100 Goshikisen was. Why? because it had one of the most reliable engines Japan made, so it almost always ran as well as it could. Plus it ate hellcats for breakfast! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

TheGozr
04-12-2004, 03:28 AM
ScorpionWorm1
SEND IT TO SPARX.

-GOZR
http://www.french.themotorhead.com/themotorhead_fighters/images/pix/il2fbtmhlogosmall.jpg &lt;--Competition Level IL2fb here (http://www.french.themotorhead.com/forgotten-battles/)

LeadSpitter_
04-12-2004, 03:41 AM
Im sorry theres a huge difference in an aircraft which has great accelaration and great firepower then an aircraft with a ridiculous damage model, unrealistic accelaration, unrealistic flight characteristic and energy bleed thats why its banned in many servers and I certainly do not blame them for doing so.

And the way oleg models things he stated previously 120 mix = 10% trottle
wep = 10% more throttle
supercharger 1-2 at 3000,-6000m = 10 each

the us aircraft engines seem to be set on cruise where they will not pass 3000rpms.

they dont have richmix under 3000m

the water injectors are engauged at 100 trottle.

The la7 is another great plane which has a great power to weight ratio but it seems to accelarate beyond what it should to 5000m. The problem is witht he gravity of the game as many know by the wrong glide slopes of all aircraft with engines off.

I have no problem with the la7 because its controls surfaces are slowed down but the ki84 seems to manuever better then the p40 faster roll then the 190 and it has a stronger damage model then a 190 and p47.

Hopefully things will be more realistic when the patch comes, it should be a really tough opponent but one that can be shotdown in one pass its a shame luthier did a fantastic job with the modeland the cockpit buts its a ufo in fb

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt

[This message was edited by LeadSpitter_ on Mon April 12 2004 at 02:52 AM.]

WUAF_Badsight
04-12-2004, 03:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LeadSpitter_:

it should be a really tough opponent but one that can be shotdown in one pass
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

why do you think that ?

if that happens then the p-51 should also be able to be destroyed in one pass

as it is now it has a delicate DM

it looses a lot of speed & loads of turning ability after its hit

why should it get any worse ?!?!?!?

LeadSpitter_
04-12-2004, 04:08 AM
yes all aircraft badsight even from 2 mg131 2 .50 or 8 .303

http://www.geocities.com/leadspittersig/LSIG.txt

VF-2_John_Banks
04-12-2004, 04:13 AM
As somebody already mentioned, the P-63 Kingcobra is the "best" US plane, when it comes to battle the KI84. Although the P-38 is also able to outturn it with combat or full flaps.
The P-63 is faster tha nanything else at sealevel, except maybe the 109Z. The only damn thing aboutthe KI is it's DM. I usually have to put 6-7 37mm rounds into a KI, before it crashes or falls apart. That's a bit fishy IMO.
The most dangerous enemy in the sky is the A6M5 i think. It is fast enough to hang you your six for a while and turns much better than the KI. If you don't fly a Yak-3, you shouldn't turn with a Zero for more than 180?. If there is no P-63 available, take the P-39. Not as fast as the P-63 though, but still able to beat the crap outta a KI.

Black Sheep
04-12-2004, 04:52 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:

It would start the whining a fresh!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Somedays, it seems that's all that's posted in these forums, whine after whine after whine.... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

As for banning the Ki84c... as others have said, I suspect the majority of the complaints come from pilots who expect to be able to take off, alone, and down any other plane out there in single combat.

Occasionally, you come across a pair working together who absolutely own the dogfight server their on... if any of you fit into the description in the paragraph above, you might like to think on why this is.

---------------------------------------------------------
http://mysite.freeserve.com/ilsigs/Spitfire.jpg
---------------------------------------------------------
Per Ardua ad Astra

KIMURA
04-12-2004, 04:59 AM
John Banks, I guess that's not a question of the KI-84 DM, but rather a question of the 37mm.
IMHO the gun-calibres are porked better said the damage they can do.

And one thing I would suggest, adressed to Oleg. Please align the "introduced into action"-thing - neither the Ki-84-Ib nor the Ic is a 1944 a/c (as well as the P-51B isn't
a 1942 plane ) http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

SeaFireLIV
04-12-2004, 05:11 AM
AMAZING.

It seems everyone has `proof` from books with claims and counterclaims. If I believe all of the evidence then I`d have to say that in real life the Ki-84 was mediocre, at best only just holding its own AND that it was a great fighter taking on American planes with an ease and besting them.

I guess it`s just like everything else. We can believe one person`s evidence and change the FB aircraft or believe someone else and have it that way. The truth is EVERYONE will be BIASED somehow and we CAN never get a totally accurate picture unless we went back in time and personally catalogued and recorded every single flight and battle involving the Ki-84 using approved scientist`s methods (And what`s an approved scientist method, eh? Another raging debate on that one, so it still wouldn`t solve it).

To me it really becomes not a historical accuracy debate, but a `How I personally want it to be in my world` debate. If that`s the case it becomes a personal thing and becomes immediately disqualified from the whole effort to make the KI-84 accurate.


Who to believe? It`s impossible to tell. I hold my own judgement.


It`s up to the Man imself who created the sim, anyone else with a difference in opinion or view will need to make a flight sim as good and be prepared to take the flak from just as knowledgeable people who`ll use reams of evidence to tell him he`s wrong!

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
04-12-2004, 05:17 AM
i feel a new SeaFireLIV cartoon in the works

Hawgdog
04-12-2004, 05:47 AM
yeah pumpkins

I was in a server last night that had banned the C, yet allowed the 109Z, saying it wasn't as uber as the Ki-c when asked......oh yeah, tactical brilliance at work again.
But, they didnt' take out the two cannon yaks or the cannon Lagg (by the way, the cannon lagg is a bit more uber in all respects than the Ki) I'm surprised it isnt flown more.

http://img5.photobucket.com/albums/v22/HawgDog/sharkdog.gif
When you get to Hell, tell 'em HawgDog sent you!

Maple_Tiger
04-12-2004, 06:38 AM
Isn't the KI-84's controls suppose to get heavy at high speeds? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif

I could be wronge but i think the KI-84 has been toned down a little already. I notice it dosen't climb like a rocket nor accelerate like one.



The only way i would know for shure is if i still had version 1.22.


I would rather see the BF109Z gone from most servers, this thing is true UFO lol.

Capt. 361stMapleTiger.
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid111/p4fbef9c52b2ab68dd35e758df0a97453/f90e644d.jpg
Proud member of the FBAA and Nutty Philosohpy Club.

HayateKid
04-12-2004, 08:49 AM
Wow. my favorite thread. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

and i've already been thinking of changing my name to DoraKid or G6ASKid since the past week, I've been forced to fly german planes instead because the hayate is nowhere to be found.

"First learn stand, then learn fly. Nature rule, Daniel San, not mine." - Mr. Miyagi

Bearcat99
04-12-2004, 09:27 AM
People who cry and groan about stuff like this have no competitive heart and basically want a sutuation where they always have the upperhand. The whole historical accuracy thing is moot too. Most people who cry about that usually want the time period when thier plane was the top dog..... you know the guys who want a 44 server but DONT want the Frank in it..... I can see the plane not being wanted in a server that is say a 41 or 42 server..... I just like to have fun. I dont mind getting shot down.. I get more pi$$ed off when I stall out into the fround or crsh into my target.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE>http://www.jodavidsmeyer.com/combat/bookstore/tuskegeebondposter.jpg (http://tuskegeeairmen.org/airmen/who.html)[/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>vflyer@comcast.net [/list]<UL TYPE=SQUARE>99thPursuit Squadron IL2 Forgotten Battles (http://www.geocities.com/rt_bearcat)[/list]
UDQMG (http://www.uberdemon.com/index2.html) | HYPERLOBBY (http://hyperfighter.jinak.cz/) | IL2 Manager (http://www.checksix-fr.com/bibliotheque/detail_fichier.php?ID=1353) | MUDMOVERS (http://www.mudmovers.com/)

Rammjaeger
02-06-2006, 08:09 AM
In the IJA fighter campaign I could actually outrun the F4U Corsair with the Ki-84b. I wonder how realistic that is.

jds1978
02-06-2006, 08:19 AM
if it appeared in real life combat than it should be featured in the servers....

yesterday in WC Red pretty much shut down the ME262's by using real life tactics....kill them on the ground or on landing

the Frank is not invincible

Xiolablu3
02-06-2006, 08:28 AM
Spitfires do very very well against Ki84As and b's on the historical servers I play on.

Not very hard to bring them down in a Spitfire, if your first few shots dont break them up then the .303 will set them on fire quite easily.

The only complaint I could imagine is against the Ki84C of which very ery few were ever fielded and if they were, they were for bringing down B29's.

BaronUnderpants
02-06-2006, 08:38 AM
Ki84 to tough??......All Japanese planes takes less damage then any other nations ac, we all know that.

Granted, Ki84 takes more, as it should, beeing a latewar ac, but taking more damage than P-47??.....Not in the world im flying in anyways.

The most gripe iv heard has to do with the 2x30 mm cannons and how accurate and easy to use they where.

I myselfe have gotten to the piont where i consider anything bigger than 20 mm beeing a waste of space/weight and ammo on anything smaller than B-17.

But to be fair in that respect, if u ban Ki84-C on basis of its 30 mm cannons the 108 equipped Bf 109 should be banned to. (sadly that isnt possible http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif )

EPP_Gibbs
02-06-2006, 09:21 AM
Upon encountering Ki-84's for the first time, a flight of Mustangs got treated very roughly losing two, for no reply. The US leader reported to Claire Chennault saying "It's definitely a new type, I don't know if we can beat these guys in the air"

Chennault replied, "Then don't fight them in the air, get them on the ground"..which they duly did.

(any dispute of the above will mean I draw a heavy sigh and have to trudge off and find the book, chapter, and page, where I read it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

The Ki-84 was well armoured for a Japanese fighter, I guess if that's modelled correctly it means it's harder to get a PK from the direct 6. However the fuel tanks flame up quite nicely, as usual for a Japanese plane, and wings saw off, etc.

Armour usually means harder to kill the pilot, the engine, or the fuel tanks, not the plane structure. Wings, tails, and control surfaces, can be shot off just the same, armour or not.

BlitzPig_DDT
02-06-2006, 09:34 AM
Anybody catch the date of the initial post in this thread? Looks like we have a forum archeologist among us. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

That said, this gives me a great excuse to dig up an old post of my own -
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m.../621101053#621101053 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/621101053/r/621101053#621101053)

I'll take the time to repost the post to correct some typo's, but the thread (linked above) is a good read anyway. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BlitzPig_DDT:

For best effect, grab a copy of Sammy Hagar's I Can't Drive 55, play it while you read, and sing these lyrics in your head along with the music.

Ode to the Ki -

One hand on the throttle, and one on the stick, hey!

Well, he has too much E, I can't pass, no!
So I tried my best n00bie move
Well, baby, 30 mike-mikes come and touched my groove again!

Gonna write me up a long winded whine
Post my rant at U.B.I.
Show my n00b-ness, all that jive
I can't fly, with K.I.s! Oh no!
Uh!

So I went down as victim number 24, hey!
Yeah you know then I said, "Boy, just one more...
We're gonna throw your *** outta this joint"
Typed to him in chat, said, "You get my point?"
He said Waahh!, Waah Waah!

Gonna write me up a long winded whine
Post my rant at U.B.I.
Show my n00b-ness, all that jive
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
Oh, yea!
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
Uh!

-solo-

When I fly that fast, you know it's hard to steer.
And I can't get my plane anywhere near.
What used to take two minutes now takes all day. Huh!
It took me 16 tries to get him with an L.A.

Gonna write me up a long winded whine
Post my rant at U.B.I.
Show my n00b-ness, all that jive
I can't fly, with K.I.s!
No, no no,
I can't fly...
(I can't fly with K.I.s!)
I can't fly...
(I can't fly with K.I.s!)
I can't fly with K.I.s! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

HarlockGN
02-06-2006, 09:42 AM
After having been away from the forums for about a year and lurking for a bit of time before deciding to step in I can say i'm definately deluded...
Once upon a time as soon as an axis pilot complained about some bird's performance there were a bunch of blue vultures diving down on him screaming "luftwhiner! Luftwhiner!"
Now i see the same vultures whining just as much (or worse) since some of the planes they thought were due to have an "instantwin" button in the cockpit due to their biased information are not up to their standards, or as soon as a blue plane is (still according to their biased information) even slightly overmodelled.
Well, i'll let you know a big secret. For every piece of information you can produce to prove your opinion, someone else can produce an exactly opposite piece of information proving you're wrong. Unless you have a time machine and can go back to 1940-45 to test the planes yourself, there's no way you can prove your data is more accurate than Oleg's or than anyone else's, so you might as well stop whining and begin using your keyboard to actually fly.
If you don't like how the sim is balanced and this causes you so much frustration, the solution is simple: Go play CFS3 and make your own planes, so you can down them with a single gaze and you'll go to sleep happy every night.

Again, i'm deluded, but not by the sim. Balanced or not, as real as it gets or not, this has provided me years of incredible fun, like no other game ever did, and even if years passed Oleg is STILL providing us with new content, like the much awaited Macchi.
What i'm deluded by is the community (or at least a part of it).
Whre has the supposed maturity of the flight simulation community gone?
Are we virtual pilots or silly 12 years old drama queens?
This kind of discussions seem to come directly from an RTS's or an FPS's forums, sure not from the boards of a WW2's flight simulator.
Really, get a grip. If you can't stand your favourite plane being what YOU always thought it was, or if you can't stand your opponent having some advantage over you 1vs1 due to his plane's performance, maybe you should go back playing Quake and good riddance.

SeaFireLIV
02-06-2006, 09:57 AM
wow. This is a little old.

Well, yes. Anyway, the original point still stands and is still valid.

RegRag1977
02-06-2006, 10:07 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gifRed whiner team tactics:

1)Ban what you can't beat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

2)Whine loud and long to have axis A/C undermodelled http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Because allied won the war, the red whiners always want to win in the end... As if there was a red "win-in-the-end" waranty http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Chuck_Older
02-06-2006, 10:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by EPP_Gibbs:
Upon encountering Ki-84's for the first time, a flight of Mustangs got treated very roughly losing two, for no reply. The US leader reported to Claire Chennault saying "It's definitely a new type, I don't know if we can beat these guys in the air"

Chennault replied, "Then don't fight them in the air, get them on the ground"..which they duly did.

(any dispute of the above will mean I draw a heavy sigh and have to trudge off and find the book, chapter, and page, where I read it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

The Ki-84 was well armoured for a Japanese fighter, I guess if that's modelled correctly it means it's harder to get a PK from the direct 6. However the fuel tanks flame up quite nicely, as usual for a Japanese plane, and wings saw off, etc.

Armour usually means harder to kill the pilot, the engine, or the fuel tanks, not the plane structure. Wings, tails, and control surfaces, can be shot off just the same, armour or not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I beleive that pilot was Tex Hill


....but wow is this thread old

Chuck_Older
02-06-2006, 10:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gifRed whiner team tactics:

1)Ban what you can't beat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

2)Whine loud and long to have axis A/C undermodelled http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Because allied won the war, the red whiners always want to win in the end... As if there was a red "win-in-the-end" waranty http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

while you yourself are completey impartial and an unbiased judge of things in the sim, of course http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

still an old yeller thread though

lowfighter
02-06-2006, 11:19 AM
I love ki84b/hate ki84c. Online most ki flyers are riding 84c(don't know why, the 84b can do all job + you get a bit more immersion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

Kuna15
02-06-2006, 11:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The KI-84 Uber? Ban it off servers? Jane`s Book of WWII Fighters says THAT`S HOW IT WAS in R/L! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see someone has dig up this.

Anyway ME262 was also awesome irl, but it is banned due to balance of gameplay.
Rightfully so if I may add, this is a game and it is supposed to be fun for all sides.

Either that or do not ban anything except most dubious ones like I185, MiG3U, Bf109Z...

EPP_Gibbs
02-06-2006, 01:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by EPP_Gibbs:
Upon encountering Ki-84's for the first time, a flight of Mustangs got treated very roughly losing two, for no reply. The US leader reported to Claire Chennault saying "It's definitely a new type, I don't know if we can beat these guys in the air" Chennault replied, "Then don't fight them in the air, get them on the ground"..which they duly did.

(any dispute of the above will mean I draw a heavy sigh and have to trudge off and find the book, chapter, and page, where I read it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )

The Ki-84 was well armoured for a Japanese fighter, I guess if that's modelled correctly it means it's harder to get a PK from the direct 6. However the fuel tanks flame up quite nicely, as usual for a Japanese plane, and wings saw off, etc.

Armour usually means harder to kill the pilot, the engine, or the fuel tanks, not the plane structure. Wings, tails, and control surfaces, can be shot off just the same, armour or not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I beleive that pilot was Tex Hill


....but wow is this thread old </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Chuck

Yes, it was Hill...I went and found the book after all! It's quoted in 'Fighting Firsts', quite an interesting book about the combat debuts of fighter A/C from WW1 and WW2.

I wasn't quite correct either. It was three 'Stangs hit. One was lost, with the injured pilot bailing out and returning safely. The other two, although damaged, made it back to base. The Ki-84's appear to have S&B'd them, then roped them up into a stall, and as the zoom-climbing Mustangs stalled out, the Ki-84's flipped over very quickly and were on them. Hill was diving away at speed and being overhauled by a Ki-84...Obviously an overmodelled one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

RegRag1977
02-06-2006, 01:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Chuck_Older:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gifRed whiner team tactics:

1)Ban what you can't beat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

2)Whine loud and long to have axis A/C undermodelled http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Because allied won the war, the red whiners always want to win in the end... As if there was a red "win-in-the-end" waranty http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

while you yourself are completey impartial and an unbiased judge of things in the sim, of course http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

still an old yeller thread though </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And who is objective enough? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Though i may be not impartial, that does not mean everything i say is biased...

Didn't mean to be impartial http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif, i played the red vs blue game all people around here knows http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
It's so funny http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Guess it's a kind of tradition down here!

VW-IceFire
02-06-2006, 03:04 PM
Wow...this is old.

The Ki-84 was a bit uber when it initially arrived...but now its ailerons and elevators get heavy at speed and the aircraft isn't made of concrete. So its all good to fight...definately was uber in real life...when the engine wasn't malfunctioning and the landing gear wasn't threatening to break.

horseback
02-06-2006, 04:42 PM
...and the pilots engaging them weren't thinking it was an old Oscar...

cheers

horseback

TgD Thunderbolt56
02-06-2006, 05:03 PM
I think the Ki84 is a great neutralizer for the IJA pilots. Like the 30mm German planes, though, I think the 30mm version of the Ki84 should be strongly limited in its application by server admins.

Only when going against B-25's or AI heavies (A-20 not included because it goes down easily enough with 20mm) should it be included in online planesets. The standard Ki84b is plenty strong to duel with even the F4U-1c. Afterall there's no aspect that can yet neutralize proper tactics, situational awareness and being in position to dictate the terms of engagement...regardless of your mount.



TB

Grey_Mouser67
02-06-2006, 05:23 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I`ve been reading a lot here about people wanting to ban the KI-84c (and its kin), because it was too good. There`s even been suggestions that it is totally inaccurate in its performance. Well, I was browsing my Jane`s Aircraft of WWII and read this, please take the time to read...


Qoute:
`When the ki-84 entered combat over China in the summer of 1944 Allied fighter pilots immediately recognised the new enemy as an equal if flown by a MODERATELY trained pilot. It was regarded as the finest of all Japanese fighters, able to handle any Allied fighter or intercept the high flying B-29.

In spite of a troublesome engine and gear prone to buckle, the KI-84 was loved by its pilots whether as a fighter or fighter bomber. When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!

In spite of all the problems, most due to poor manufacturing, when Hayate unites moved to the Philippines they gave American Navy and Army pilots the most serious opposition of the Camapaign.

It retained sterling manoeuvrability whilest gaining the performance nneded to meet the Allies on an equal basis. From the beginning, armament was what it should have been for a modern fighter: four 12.7 mm mgs or two 12.7 mm guns plus two 20mm cannon and two 30mm cannon.
By any standards such a potent variety of weapons made this aircraft LETHAL in even brief encounters.`

End quote.

This puts all the whines I`ve heard into perspective. The KI-84 is UBER in FB because... THAT`S HOW IT REALLY WAS. Even `noob` (moderately trained) pilots did well in it.
Banning it off servers because it`s `UBER` would be wrong. This plane was real, it existed. The Americans had to face it and fight it in real life. They had to beat it not Ban it.
I`m happy to take on a `better` plane than mine if that`s how it was, not complain, but FIGHT it, using superior TEAM tactics.
All you could do is maybe limit the numbers...

Just thought I`d say my two pennies and maybe enlighten some people in the process.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SeaFire...I didn't read through all the posts, but I think you are making the mistake of finding one article, words taken out of context, to back your own preconceived reality....

To offer you a counter perspective...from the pages of Flight Journal, the subject: a captured P-51C Mustang named Evalina:

"Maj. Yasuhiko Kuroe-a famous personality in the 64th Sentai that had first dueled with the Mustang-was ordered to test-fly the aircraft and wring out its secrets. He was the top Army ace among the academy graduates and the ideal man for the job. He was the first JAAF pilot to shoot down the stealthy RAF Mosquito."

"Kuroe returned to Japan from Burma in January 1944. He became a test pilot for the Army Flight Inspection Department and evaluated air-to-air rockets and high-altitude, twin-engine interceptors to be used against B-29's. While flying an experimental Ki-102 fighter, he claimed two Superfortresses shot down. Before the War ended, he recorded 51 aerial victories in his logbook."

"In his report, Kuroe noted that the Mustang had a better turning performance than the Ki-84 Frank and that it had superior climbing power and dive speed and a magnificent direction finder. The .50-caliber guns were found to be much better than the Japanese 12.7mm guns.

Maj. Yohei Hinoki came face to face with the Mustang at Akeno Fighter School when Maj. Kuroe paid a visit. Though he now had a wooden leg, Hinoki was still flying, and he was still bitter toward the sleek machine. He was invited to test fly Evalina, and the experience simply took his breath away. "It was made for a pilot!" he told this author in 1980. "It handled beautifully, was finely engineeered, nicely designed, very fast, and it was tight. It did not leak oil!"

"The Army GHQ ordered Kuroe to train pilots at each base and use the P-51 in mock dogfightts. He flew against the Frank, the Ki-61 Tony, the Ki-44 Tojo, and the superb Ki-100 Goshikisen. In one memorable match, Kuroe was pitted against Capt. Teruhiko Kobayashi, the 24-yar-old CO of the 244th Sentai. Kpbayashi flew head-on into Kuroe's path, which unnerved him. The young captain had twice intentionally rammed B-29's; he was an ace with three B-29's and two Hellcats shot down."


For every account, there is a counter account. When examining the preformance of the Ki-84 ingame...it flys at 427mph. This is not its war time performance...but rather based on an after war aircraft with guns and ammo removed, holes pluged, surfaces waxed, and running on 150 Octane fuel. That, combined with its original damage model, that has since been corrected is what gives people the most heartburn.

By contrast, the F4U-1D Corsair flies at 420mph which is 5 mph or 8km/hr under its real life, war time numbers...I wonder how fast the Corsair would have flown with guns and ammo removed and the same treatment given to draggy parts! Imagine if it did not wobble! I never tested climb rates on either aircraft and in terms of turning circle, I find nothing objectionable about the Frank. I do, however, wonder about its rate of roll...I am under the understanding that it had fabric covered ailerons...maybe an expert can comment and provide correct historical info on that...fabric would preclude it from its rate of roll at anything except fairly low speed.

The ingame plane is excellent, but not representative of what flew during WWII for Japan. Anyways, I find the Frank on lots of servers and it really is unstoppable in the hands of a good pilot against any and all US aircraft except the P-38L Late and the P-51 Mustang...but those aircraft have to be careful for sure!

Sergio_101
02-06-2006, 05:33 PM
I know a elderly ex USAF reserve pilot
who flew P-51Hs out of Otiss AB Masachusettes.
He has tried FB, says the wobble thing is a joke.

Said that both the P-51H and P-51D shook, vibrated
and slowed down noticably when firing at ground
targets, but it was easy to keep the bead
on the target. But he also feels the stall
model is to forgiving for all the planes he tried.
He asked that no personal information be posted here.
So take it as hearsay.

Oh, while I am at it, he said all the guns
tended to cap at the same time. In this respect
Oleg seems to have it right. But he also said
in a "fraction of a second they desynschonised
in chaotic fashion"
In other words thay all had a different firing rate.
In this respect Oleg seems to have it wrong.

Sergio.

VW-IceFire
02-06-2006, 06:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sergio_101:
I know a elderly ex USAF reserve pilot
who flew P-51Hs out of Otiss AB Masachusettes.
He has tried FB, says the wobble thing is a joke.

Said that both the P-51H and P-51D shook, vibrated
and slowed down noticably when firing at ground
targets, but it was easy to keep the bead
on the target. But he also feels the stall
model is to forgiving for all the planes he tried.
He asked that no personal information be posted here.
So take it as hearsay.

Oh, while I am at it, he said all the guns
tended to cap at the same time. In this respect
Oleg seems to have it right. But he also said
in a "fraction of a second they desynschonised
in chaotic fashion"
In other words thay all had a different firing rate.
In this respect Oleg seems to have it wrong.

Sergio. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Makes sense. I'm glad to have someone who flew the things weigh in on it. I've asked a number of pilots about the "wobble" issue and they have all said it sounded rediculous to them. But of course those folks fly civil aircraft so its validating to hear from a vet. Even if the name is undisclosed...I respect that in the utmost.

The guns firing at different rates makes sense to me. This is normal...no two guns are going to fire at exactly the same rate. But in a computerized simulation where every CPU cycle is important...obviously that may not be quite in reach yet. But I think the logical and sensible solution is to visually desync the tracers so we have the desired effect without the added CPU cycles. Which I understand is being done. Thanks to Oleg!

As for the Ki-84...usually when you do find them online you don't see many good pilots knowing what to do with them. So you can usually take advantage of their inexperience.

SeaFireLIV
02-06-2006, 06:42 PM
I hate it when someone regurgitates a post I made absolute ages ago. As I said before my point still stands. Whom do i believe? Janes book of WWII aircraft or Grey_Mouser67 account?

I have to believe something and i`d rather believe what I`ve read out of a book. Besides, with me, i don`t worship Japanese aircraft and have always and will always be an Allied fighter jock. I suspect that you, Grey_Mouser67, are a P51 or Allied flyer too. this means that your account will most likely be chosen because it`s what you want to hear.

I chose an aircraft and an account from a known historical reference book that does not suit me or my Allied preference.

I always try to be fair to both sides.

Grey_Mouser67
02-06-2006, 08:21 PM
It is an old post...sorry, didn't see the date...thought it was something that popped up recently with all the debate...

Still, I have the Janes book, and my post wasn't my quote...it was something that the author took from an interview with a Japanese pilot and some notes out of the log book.

Nevermind...point is old and mute. S!

ps...check your deductive reasoning...while Japanese planes are my least favorite, I fly lots of Blue planes...mostly Fw's though hardly ever Japanese...once in awhile a Ki43 is a hoot! You can find my stats on Spit vs 109..I fly mostly red there, but occassionally blue...Zeke vs Wildcat...red side only there...and UK Dedicated 1 and 2...both blue and red depending on my mood!

UberPickle
02-06-2006, 08:39 PM
THe Ki-84C Feels like an uberplane. Flys like a dream and has a cement jaw. Lovely plane, but beatable. Just remember to adjust your convergance distances so that you might have a shot at the cockpit from behind since the wings can kinda take a beating.

Loki-PF
02-06-2006, 08:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I`ve been reading a lot here about people wanting to ban the KI-84c (and its kin), because it was too good. There`s even been suggestions that it is totally inaccurate in its performance. Well, I was browsing my Jane`s Aircraft of WWII and read this, please take the time to read...


Qoute:
`When the ki-84 entered combat over China in the summer of 1944 Allied fighter pilots immediately recognised the new enemy as an equal if flown by a MODERATELY trained pilot. It was regarded as the finest of all Japanese fighters, able to handle any Allied fighter or intercept the high flying B-29.

In spite of a troublesome engine and gear prone to buckle, the KI-84 was loved by its pilots whether as a fighter or fighter bomber. When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!

In spite of all the problems, most due to poor manufacturing, when Hayate unites moved to the Philippines they gave American Navy and Army pilots the most serious opposition of the Camapaign.

It retained sterling manoeuvrability whilest gaining the performance nneded to meet the Allies on an equal basis. From the beginning, armament was what it should have been for a modern fighter: four 12.7 mm mgs or two 12.7 mm guns plus two 20mm cannon and two 30mm cannon.
By any standards such a potent variety of weapons made this aircraft LETHAL in even brief encounters.`

End quote.

This puts all the whines I`ve heard into perspective. The KI-84 is UBER in FB because... THAT`S HOW IT REALLY WAS. Even `noob` (moderately trained) pilots did well in it.
Banning it off servers because it`s `UBER` would be wrong. This plane was real, it existed. The Americans had to face it and fight it in real life. They had to beat it not Ban it.
I`m happy to take on a `better` plane than mine if that`s how it was, not complain, but FIGHT it, using superior TEAM tactics.
All you could do is maybe limit the numbers...

Just thought I`d say my two pennies and maybe enlighten some people in the process.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SeaFire,

Do you fly online at all, or are you mostly a single player kinda guy? When I get time to fly online I almost exclusively fly at the most popular PTO server on Hyperlobby "Zeke vs Wildcat". I don't ever recall seeing you on the roster on Red or Blue? Do you fly with a different name?

The reason I'm asking is that I'm primarily a Blue (Japanese) pilot but occasionally will fly Red for balance reasons. I can't recall anyone yelling for the KI-84 to be banned? I fly it on a regular basis and have had many a good scrap with American planes some I win, some I loose, but point being that when I win no one has ever whined about the fact that I was in a KI-84. The worst I've gotten is "~S~ Lucky shot!" (which is usually true!)

Ao where are you getting your information about this plane being banned? Am I missing some cool PTO servers? Or are you just being sensationalistic and trying to get some attention? Do tell.

BigKahuna_GS
02-06-2006, 10:13 PM
S!

The more late war japanese planes the better and I hope the George will be included in the pay for add-on. I look forward to some intense competition.

Having said that I think the Ki84 has been modeled in it's most optomistic form and overly optomistic in some areas.

But my dissapointment isnt with how the Ki84 is or is not modeled. My dissapoinment is with current modeling of the Hellcat, Corsair and lack of late war varients of allied aircraft that were important in the PTO.

In Pacific Fighters--the PTO late war scenario the Ki84 is the best performing plane. The Ki84 can out-turn, out-climb, out-accelerate and it's maximum speed is faster than the best Navy fighter the Corsair. The Hellcat is inferior in every way possible.

Now with the addition of another late war Japanese fighter the J2M3 Raiden with speed comparable to the Hellcat & Corsair and superior firepower the PTO late war plane set is out of balance for US Navy.

What would help is for the Corsair to have the correct maximum speed at sea level & alt, have the emergency rated take off power of 2800rpm. The Corsair was a very fast plane but the Ki84 catches it fairly easy on the deck in AEP/PF because it is modeled too slow. Both the Corsair & Hellcat need more power on take off--the emergency 2800rpm take off setting could help with this.

F4U-1 sea level speed should be at least 366mph TAS 60"Hg or 377mph TAS slightly over-boosted at 65"Hg. (see below doc)
Emergency take off power - 2800rpm/1850hp

Where are these US aircraft ?:

Over-boosted Corsair
F4U-4
P47N
P51D-20NA at 80" Hg over-boosted on grade 115/145 fuel similar too the Mustang Mark III

They would more than competetive with any late war axis a/c.


_______________________________________________
Seafire-When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!
_______________________________________________



Ahem--a slight over statement.
As Oleg would say put this book down and never open again.

Here is an early war 43' Corsair doing 435mph at 18,000ft over-boosted only 5" Hg. Although the "Special Finish" (wax job/sanding & filling joints) is probably not representative of combat Corsairs in the PTO, it does show the Corsair's potential. Also many Corsair Sqns ran overboosted.

Wasn't the Ki84 also in "Special Finish" mode for it's US speed tests ? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Early war 43' Corsair doing 435mph with 5"MAP increase.
http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/28b60700.gif (http://web.infoave.net/%7Ehowardds/28b60700.gif)

http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/28b60700.gif

http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/id105.htm (http://web.infoave.net/%7Ehowardds/id105.htm)

http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/id105.htm


The F4U-4 and P51D over-boosted to "80" MAP
would have held several advantages over the Ki84 in real life reguardless if they are in this sim or not.

F4U-4 --384mph at sea level, 464 at alt
http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/2b18f6f0.gif (http://web.infoave.net/%7Ehowardds/2b18f6f0.gif)

http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/2b18f6f0.gif

F4U-4--5000fpm sea level climb rate
http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/2b98f6f0.gif (http://web.infoave.net/%7Ehowardds/2b98f6f0.gif)

http://web.infoave.net/~howardds/2b98f6f0.gif

If you Ki84 jocks are truely interested in fair play and competition--at least tell Oleg to have the Corsair & Hellcat flying to US Navy official specs.

I sure would like to see an over-boosted Corsair or F4U-4 added to the PTO plane set.

__

Badsight.
02-06-2006, 10:42 PM
a Captured Japanese Airman said his Hayate went 700 to his interogators . . . .

but at any case there is nothing wrong with the A & B models , the C is overkill for DF rooms

Badsight.
02-06-2006, 10:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by 609IAP_Kahuna:
The Ki84 , it's maximum speed is faster than the best Navy fighter the Corsair. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
wrong , not at Alt is isnt

lrrp22
02-06-2006, 10:50 PM
SeaFire,

This legend of the 427 mph Ki-84 'easily' besting the P-51D or H and P-47D or N (it changes depending on source)is built on a January-February 1945 intelligence estimate prepared before the Allies even posessed a Frank. Those exact numbers claimed to be from a 1946 U.S. 'test' match *exactly* the estimated performance curves published in the March, 1945 Tactical Air Intelligence Center manual. Jane's, like several other sources, are simply repeating (and embellishing) the same bad information year after year. You'll notice that no source document or work-cited is ever given for these claims.

Again, these are not tested performance numbers. They are not Japanese test numbers, and they are not '1946' U.S. numbers either. Depending on which source is re-telling the tale, the 'souped-up' Ki-84 goes from being 2 mph faster than a P-51D at 20,000 ft to 'Easily bested' the P-51H and P-47N. Even a coursery look at P-51H numbers shows that it was vastly superior in all performance aspects, even over the generous 427 mph TAIC intelligence estimates.

The Fleet Air Arm felt that the SeaFire LF III was fully the equal of the Frank it was flown against in the Phillipines during May of 1945 (although that particular Ki-84 was having some CSP problems), while Mustang pilots of the VII Fighter Command claimed a 40 mph speed advantage over the Franks they faced over Japan in 1945.

Seriously, it is time to put this legend of the Uber Frank to bed. It was an excellent fighter, especiialy considering the circumstances under which it was produced, but it was nowhere near the dominant player that post-war secondary sources have made it out to be.

LRRP

Loki-PF
02-06-2006, 10:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lrrp22:
SeaFire,

This legend of the 427 mph Ki-84 'easily' besting the P-51D or H and P-47D or N (it changes depending on source)is built on a January-February 1945 intelligence estimate prepared before the Allies even posessed a Frank.
LRRP </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah but it makes him feel better.... He can come here and do a little Ameribashing, then he can go down to the pub and feel better about himself!

Badsight.
02-06-2006, 11:01 PM
that chip on your shoulder must wear you down at times Loki-PF
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lrrp22:
Again, these are not tested performance numbers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>you dont know that is true - you & Skychimp went thru this in detail in 2004

that last printing was done after the Hayate had ben evaluated

what is proven is that the Brits managed to get 400mph out of an inferior condition model with an CSU unit that wasnt working

PLUS :

the japanese aircraft board memebers showed that the extra 20Mph was entirely believeable for the -21 Hayate

the myth to lay to bed IS : that the Hayate wasnt capable of over 400 Mph

fordfan25
02-06-2006, 11:43 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
I`ve been reading a lot here about people wanting to ban the KI-84c (and its kin), because it was too good. There`s even been suggestions that it is totally inaccurate in its performance. Well, I was browsing my Jane`s Aircraft of WWII and read this, please take the time to read...


Qoute:
`When the ki-84 entered combat over China in the summer of 1944 Allied fighter pilots immediately recognised the new enemy as an equal if flown by a MODERATELY trained pilot. It was regarded as the finest of all Japanese fighters, able to handle any Allied fighter or intercept the high flying B-29.

In spite of a troublesome engine and gear prone to buckle, the KI-84 was loved by its pilots whether as a fighter or fighter bomber. When Allied pilots had a chance to test one they found out why: it EASILY bested the P-51H and the P-47N!

In spite of all the problems, most due to poor manufacturing, when Hayate unites moved to the Philippines they gave American Navy and Army pilots the most serious opposition of the Camapaign.

It retained sterling manoeuvrability whilest gaining the performance nneded to meet the Allies on an equal basis. From the beginning, armament was what it should have been for a modern fighter: four 12.7 mm mgs or two 12.7 mm guns plus two 20mm cannon and two 30mm cannon.
By any standards such a potent variety of weapons made this aircraft LETHAL in even brief encounters.`

End quote.

This puts all the whines I`ve heard into perspective. The KI-84 is UBER in FB because... THAT`S HOW IT REALLY WAS. Even `noob` (moderately trained) pilots did well in it.
Banning it off servers because it`s `UBER` would be wrong. This plane was real, it existed. The Americans had to face it and fight it in real life. They had to beat it not Ban it.
I`m happy to take on a `better` plane than mine if that`s how it was, not complain, but FIGHT it, using superior TEAM tactics.
All you could do is maybe limit the numbers...

Just thought I`d say my two pennies and maybe enlighten some people in the process.

SeaFireLIV...

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v31/SeaFireLIV/spitfpetite.jpg
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i dont think it is over moddled i just honstly feel the corsair is under moddled in DM,motor over heat and DM,dive rate and stabilty as well as the accelaration rate to a lesser degree.not to mentune that we dont have the -4 sair to even things out as in RL http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

GR142-Pipper
02-06-2006, 11:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by pinche_bolillo:
while it is a subject for debate whether or not any Ki-84Ics ever saw action or even went into production. that would not be grounds to exclude it from the plane set. since there are other a/c in this game that also never saw any production and were only proto types, or saw very limited production. in the book "flying guns WW II" by tony williams he states that the japanese experimented with 30mm armament on the ki 84. and doubts that any made it to production.

too fast and climbs too well, no doubt in my mind it is not fair that we have a plane modeled on american data and is 40 mph faster at altitude than what the japanese data suggests. while american a/c cannot be modeled on this same data is a valid complaint of many people, myself included.

too tuff, for those of you that think its damage model is just right, maybe you should look at how many 50 cal, 20mm, and 30mm rds this plane can take. it takes more mk 108s to bring down a Ki-84 than it does a P-47. I have hit Ki-84s on the fuselage with 4-5 30mm mk 108s and have still watched turn pretty well. it is no tougher than an La-7 though. both these planes seem to turn better the more you shoot them, up till they finally break that is.

I still have no real problem letting ki-84Ics in my game though. I wish more people used them, it would make it much easier for me to get kills if they did. just take a K-4 if your tired of the ki-84Ic threat, or take a ki-84Ic.

anybody who thinks that their favorte plane is under modeled while the a/c they hate are over modeled and they even have proof to back it up, well forget it. accept the plane set and it will make life easier. my favorite a/c in real life is also the most laim a/c in this game. I never use it. I mainly use a 109 and the only plane I dislike more than the 109 series is the spitfire series. if spits were the uber noober plane in this game, guess what I would be using a spitfire.

forget the idea of collecting data to prove that plane x is over modeled and plane y is under modeled. it rarely works like that. whom ever designs the game usually models the a/c the way they see fit and they will not usually change this.

http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/230_1081512293_bolillo_loco.jpg </div></BLOCKQUOTE>For the most part I agree with you...especially about the ability of the Ki-84 in this game to sustain multiple heavy caliber hits. The Ki-84 is tough but it's certainly beatable. You just have to be on your game to do it.

GR142-Pipper

lrrp22
02-07-2006, 12:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Badsight.:
that chip on your shoulder must wear you down at times Loki-PF
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lrrp22:
Again, these are not tested performance numbers. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>you dont know that is true - you & Skychimp went thru this in detail in 2004

that last printing was done after the Hayate had ben evaluated

what is proven is that the Brits managed to get 400mph out of an inferior condition model with an CSU unit that wasnt working

PLUS :

the japanese aircraft board memebers showed that the extra 20Mph was entirely believeable for the -21 Hayate

the myth to lay to bed IS : that the Hayate wasnt capable of over 400 Mph </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yeah, we did go through this- but the fact is that the TAIC manual states that all data is estimated unless specifically stated otherwise. No such statement appears with the Ki-84 data, period. The last revision *was* published after the capture of Clark Field and the first Frank airframe, but just days or weeks after. Further, the TAIC manual states that all estimates give every benefit of the doubt to the estimated enemy aircraft performance. It is best-case estimated data.

Also, the FAA did not get 400 mph out of the Frank with the malfunctioning CSP. Quite the contrary. The report clearly states that if the airplane was in good running condition, *then* they estimated it could attain 400 mph maximum level speed.

The member of the j-aircraft.com that championed the 427 mph Frank did the same thing the TAIC did- he calculated perfomance by granting every imaginable benefit to every aspect of engine/airframe performance. Although in his case, he started with a speed number and then tried to derive calculations to justify it instead of the other way around. Besides that, nobody was able to explain how an engine of the Ha-45's displacement and boost was able to produce the suppossed 2,000+ HP claimed for it.

I have no problem with 400+ mph Franks being a historical reality. In good condition, the airplane should definitely be capable of 400+ mph. What I do have a problem with is the claim that the TAIC estimates of early 1945 reflect accurate test performance derived from a 1946 fly-off between a Ki-84 and a P-51D/H and P-47D/N. It just didn't happen that way. What probably did happen was that someone took those TAIC numbers, compared them to the stock P-51D and P-47D numbers and declared that the Ki-84 had a 2 mph advantage over the P-51D at 20,000 feet and 20 mph advantage over the P-47D. Somehow in the re-tellings, that observation turned into the claim that a Ki-84 was able to dominate a P-51H and P-47N in a 1946 fly-off. Survey-type and general reference WWII aviation books are full of unsubstantiated claims like that.


LRRP

GR142-Pipper
02-07-2006, 12:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Hawgdog:
yeah pumpkins

I was in a server last night that had banned the C, yet allowed the 109Z, saying it wasn't as uber as the Ki-c when asked......oh yeah, tactical brilliance at work again.
But, they didnt' take out the two cannon yaks or the cannon Lagg (by the way, the cannon lagg is a bit more uber in all respects than the Ki) I'm surprised it isnt flown more. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> As an aside to the this thread's focus on the Ki-84, the LaGG series has been migrated to since the Yak-3's FM has been oversensitized since the 4.01 release. Now, out of the blue (pardon the pun), the LaGG series is being scrutenized because it's just too effective against the blue team. And guess what happened? In the very next patch LaGG's will receive an additional 650 lbs of weight while the 109 is to receive yet further turning capabilities. The P-51/47/F4U can go patch after patch with no improvements or have their performances downgraded while the LaGG will receive immediate corrective action when the plane was virtually ignored from day one. Is the LaGG deserving of correction? Probably. However the timing and the rapidity of the correction is certainly noteworthy. I'm sure it's just coincidence (riiiiiiight).

GR142-Pipper

Max.Power
02-07-2006, 01:17 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Loki-PF:
Yeah but it makes him feel better.... He can come here and do a little Ameribashing, then he can go down to the pub and feel better about himself! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How is it that Seafire did any America-bashing, and how is it that his quote of Jane's performance information and description warrants this kind of stupid, smug hostility?

WOLFMondo
02-07-2006, 02:00 AM
Why does every thread have to turn into a red/ameriwhine?

Pinker15
02-07-2006, 02:03 AM
Someone before said that Ki 84 or 109 G2 can turn down low with La. Im not sure about La5 but against La7 cannot. La7 is better turner than Ki84 and dont stall like Ki so that japanese plane is not so uber. Even SpitIX can succesfully do turnfight against Ki84.

TheGozr
02-07-2006, 03:22 AM
Ki84C is banned from server because his canon create lags nothing more, ki aircrafts are not too good.
End of story thx.

AFJ_Locust
02-07-2006, 03:37 AM
Look we see this all the time

I dont fly open pit anymore, but the squadron I fly with maintains AFJ Dedicated Server.

When we had KI84c in the plane list this ac was flown by more than 50% of the players ALL THE TIME,The other 30% were flying LA7X3 or YAKx3...
20% were flying other AC

I belive now that they have removed the KI84C,LA7x3,Yakx3,I85m71 and other simular type ac

The server is alot more fun for all involved that fly there

Personaly I think they should remove all mk108 fireing ac, since historicaly that ammo was for Shooting down Bombers not fighters just like ki841c was desighned for.....

Dogfights are alot more fun when one triger pull dosent blow your ac into small particals http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Also as Bollilo said not many if any ki84c made it too the war........

SeaFireLIV
02-07-2006, 04:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Loki-PF:

Yeah but it makes him feel better.... He can come here and do a little Ameribashing, then he can go down to the pub and feel better about himself! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Makes me feel better??? Doing artwork makes me feel better. chatting up a beautiful woman makes me feel better. Not reading inane rubbish like your comment makes me feel better.

oooh. now you jerks are really beginning to annoy me. this thread was made in APRIL 2004!! Nearly TWO YEARS AGO WHEN EVERYONE WAS CONSTANTLY WHINING THAT THIS PLANE WAS UBER AND WAS BANNING THEM!!!

Since then the dust has settled, other planes have taken the whining/banning/whatever spot. My basic point still stands about planes that if they were UBER in real life should not be banned, but the particular points about the KI-84c (and its kin) is not so applicable any more.

Please read everything carefully, including dates of posting before I get really angry.

Also, why you`re in America (or wherever), demanding I give you an explanation chances are that i`m in merry England fast asleep cos it`s night time here and I can`t give an instant response to some of the more impatient comments like the one above! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

FluffyDucks
02-07-2006, 04:26 AM
Absolutely agreed Locust, in fact I propose that ALL cannon firing aircraft are banned as one hit from them is game over for most fighters and that would not be nice now would it???
It isnt fair that someone can get a gun solution on me and then actually cause me damage even though I am an UBER ACE and frankly the cheating swine should not be allowed to fire mgs either their job is to be shot down by me so that I can prove my ACENESS and bask in the glory of being a wonder pilot. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

mynameisroland
02-07-2006, 04:29 AM
This thread is crazy its got a bunch of US plane fans chasing their tails round in circles over nothing. No one here has put up a serious argument that the Ki 84 was better in WW2 than late war US types. No one here on the thread has argued this either. The Ki84 was a good fighter and it is a good fighter in IL2. It is not and was not unbeatable.

As Xiola pointed out earlier, on UKD1 and especially UKD2 I have absolutely no problem fighting Ki 84 a's and b's in either the Spitfire VIII, IXE or in the Corsair and heck occasionally even in the P38 (GreyMouser67, Xiola and IceFire can attest to this and they dont have many problems either). They go down as easy as the next plane and they are very very flammable. When I fire my cannons/ .50 cals at the Ki84 you can bet that I never think "Dang this airplane is a tough as a Fw 190" because in 4.02 to think that you must be talking bollocks.

This has just turned in to a whine fest, Ki84 is nothing special in IL2 there are half a dozen far more uber aircraft that we never see threads debating their ingame and real life performance.

Cheers

nakamura_kenji
02-07-2006, 04:38 AM
glad noone 1c/3rd part model ki-87 or ki-116(ki-84 fit with ha-112) would real start whine &gt;_&lt;

prefer ki-61-I-hei maybe slow compare ki-84 but dance beutiful in sky feel achivment when get kill ^_^

mynameisroland
02-07-2006, 04:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Loki-PF:
Yeah but it makes him feel better.... He can come here and do a little Ameribashing, then he can go down to the pub and feel better about himself! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

How do you wake up in the morning ? You must be so paranoid that every one hates you and is out to get you and more specifically America that living as a functional adult must be extremely difficult.