PDA

View Full Version : New Thinking on Mauser Armed Ki-61 ..........



LEBillfish
11-11-2006, 03:41 PM
Hi All;

Mr.Jim Long as always is taking Ki-61 technical information to an even further level and has now begun rethinking 151/20 Mauser cannon implimentation into them, of which you can find his latest article here......

http://www.j-aircraft.org/smf/index.php?topic=2246.0

Along with that however goes a request for help, being documentation of known Mauser Cannon equipped Ki-61's & or photo's where in the serial number is known to prove or disprove his theory......

Any help in this regard would be greatly appreciated http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

K2<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

leitmotiv
11-11-2006, 04:18 PM
More from "Our Lady of the Ki-61"---many thanks!

LEBillfish
11-12-2006, 08:25 AM
bump.....If you know of any text, reports, photographs etc. that list any Mauser Armed Ki-61-I with S/N, please respond.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

GerritJ9
11-12-2006, 03:01 PM
Is it possible that the 800 Mausers were an INITIAL batch shipped from Germany, used by KHI for the batch of 400 factory-produced Mauser-armed Ki.61s and that other aircraft were converted in the field as more Mausers became available? Somehow it doesn't make sense to use ALL available Mausers without taking into account the necessity of replacing guns as a result of normal wear and tear plus combat damage. I don't have any information concerning the total quantities of Mausers shipped to Japan (and more importantly, the numbers which actually arrived in Japan) but I think this possibility shouldn't be discounted out of hand.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The KNIL is dead. Long live the KNIL!

LEBillfish
11-12-2006, 07:22 PM
Well, numbers of produced Ki-61-I-Hei were 400, S/N's 3001-3400...What would be more likely is the expectation that replacement parts and ammunition would be being produced by the Japanese or be replaced by the Germans by the time they were needed.....Naturally, the Mauser in the "wing" was not ideal, but a bandaid upgrade, the wings having to be reinforced for the shock, so once the run was over on to the better Tei with cannon in the nose.

However, that all simply guessing on my part.....The point of the article to determine if there were ever really any "field modified" Ki-61, or if they were all factory built.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

VW-IceFire
11-12-2006, 08:16 PM
And so if I'm reading correctly...the Hei were factory built. Some with retracting tailwheels, some without, but they were definitely not field modified Otsu's and Ko's.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/icefire-tempestv.jpg
Find my missions at Flying Legends (http://www.flying-legends.net/php/downloads/downloads.php?cat_id=19) and Mission4Today.com (http://www.mission4today.com).

LEBillfish
11-12-2006, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
And so if I'm reading correctly...the Hei were factory built. Some with retracting tailwheels, some without, but they were definitely not field modified Otsu's and Ko's.

That is what Mr.Long is speculating in contrast to what has always been thought and written, and trying to "disprove" his own belief by trying to locate documented mauser armed Ki-61 that have known S/N's.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

VW-IceFire
11-12-2006, 09:07 PM
Very interesting.

I also realize it's a pipe dream but I wonder why we don't have a Ki-61 Tei. The work would be so little...especially considering that the other variants have so many problems already.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/icefire-tempestv.jpg
Find my missions at Flying Legends (http://www.flying-legends.net/php/downloads/downloads.php?cat_id=19) and Mission4Today.com (http://www.mission4today.com).

GreyFox5
11-12-2006, 09:14 PM
Wow cool link and info! Man its too bad that the allies forced the Japanese to distroy and dismantle all there war material after the war or you could get better info/confirmation on the theroy.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v476/GreyFox5/Il2-009_327X125.jpg
Check your "6" M8 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

LEBillfish
11-12-2006, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
Very interesting.

I also realize it's a pipe dream but I wonder why we don't have a Ki-61 Tei. The work would be so little...especially considering that the other variants have so many problems already.

Actually, it would be a lot......Virtually every aspect was reworked at that version...Including wings, tail, engine position etc........The Tei by far the best of the model I series.....and to some degree due to the problems with the II series and Ha-140. Though deffinately missed due to numbers produced.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

GerritJ9
11-13-2006, 10:34 AM
Didn't the Japanese develop their own 20mm design because they felt (correctly, as it turned out) that a regular supply of new Mausers, spare parts and ammunition couldn't be guaranteed, resulting in the Ho-5? After all, submarine and surface blockade runners had to travel a considerable distance from Japan to German-occupied Europe with steadily increasing risk of being intercepted by Allied forces.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The KNIL is dead. Long live the KNIL!

LEBillfish
11-14-2006, 06:36 PM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
Didn't the Japanese develop their own 20mm design because they felt (correctly, as it turned out) that a regular supply of new Mausers, spare parts and ammunition couldn't be guaranteed, resulting in the Ho-5? After all, submarine and surface blockade runners had to travel a considerable distance from Japan to German-occupied Europe with steadily increasing risk of being intercepted by Allied forces.

Yes, the Ho-5 which is really just another upscaled Browning MG design just like the Ho-103 12.7mm was the intended new weapon from the start....Yet if I understand correctly and just working off of memory here so would need to look into it, it just like the Ho-103 had earlier was having problems with jamming, production and the like......In Kind, from a prototype of the Ki-60, the Japanese already had tried 151/20 Mausers originally in its wing, the newly designed version for that matter (of wing)...

Never the less, The Ki-60 performed poorly partially due to the weight, so on to 4xHo-103's....So I'm guessing, though the Ho-5 was intended, when it was realized that the standard configuration was not enough (4xHo-103) Mausers were either already on the way or were ordered....As they knew they could be adapted to the Ki-61 easily. So a convenient band-aid fix.

WHen opportunity presented itself to redesign the Ki-61, then a better configuration of cannon in the fusalage was utilized again guessing as it would deal with the shock better, and the slower ROF working well needing to be syncronized.....Plust then the added weight of cannons gone from the wing allowed bombs to be mounted more easily.....

So a bandaid fix........All just guessing, yet sounds reasonable.

I'll try and look it up one of these days for an accurate answer.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

Giganoni
11-14-2006, 09:26 PM
Hmm, I doubt they were field modified. For one thing, the logisics of sending their cannons to New Guinea by boat, would be very hazardous. Also, New Guinea was notorious for hazardous front line conditions. Although I'm sure major modifications have been done before, could they have modified the wing and added the covers needed for the mausers under such conditions?

Also to make me feel they were built at the factory is that I have a few photos of Heis being wheeled out of nice, plush, hangars. They have bulges underneath their cannons which I can only assume are meant to catch shell casings for perhaps firing tests (there are pictures of earlier model Hiens with them too. I believe they were to catch empty casings, otherwise I can only see them as ammo pods. Or perhaps still they were just put on to keep dirt from getting into the wing.)

It might be possible that they were field modified in airbases in Japan, but certainly not at the front lines. They were designated Hei for a reason.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v225/giganoni/IL2/giganoni2.jpg

LEBillfish
11-14-2006, 10:26 PM
Perhaps, perhaps not......The trouble is that is how they have been portrayed by authors of all nationalities for some time...Being, some were field fit, some factory......Yet this brings up a point I've made often.

Always check references......I cannot tell you how many times a new author states X was Y way, confirming what has been said all along...Yet if you trace back the ref. trail.....You find many are simply quoting the book before them, which did the one bfore them, which did the one before them, on and on...the first guy getting it wrong.

Hence this project by Mr.Long, to discover the truth by referencing original data......Now even he I believe realizes his theory could be wrong.....Yet will set it straight if possible so we'll finally have a firm, true answer.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

<span class="ev_code_BLACK">"Does this make my Hien look big?"
"I love my Ha-40's"
"She loves teh Swallow"
"Don't call me cho-cho san"
</span>

KIMURA
11-14-2006, 10:50 PM
Originally posted by Giganoni:
Hmm, I doubt they were field modified. For one thing, the logisics of sending their cannons to New Guinea by boat, would be very hazardous. Also, New Guinea was notorious for hazardous front line conditions. Although I'm sure major modifications have been done before, could they have modified the wing and added the covers needed for the mausers under such conditions?

Also to make me feel they were built at the factory is that I have a few photos of Heis being wheeled out of nice, plush, hangars. They have bulges underneath their cannons which I can only assume are meant to catch shell casings for perhaps firing tests (there are pictures of earlier model Hiens with them too. I believe they were to catch empty casings, otherwise I can only see them as ammo pods. Or perhaps still they were just put on to keep dirt from getting into the wing.)


I don't think that's a too tricky business to send the needed modified stuff by ship to the next to unit a/c depot. Why that should be a tricky business? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://mypage.bluewin.ch/a-z/kimura-hei/Ki1.jpg

Giganoni
11-15-2006, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by KIMURA:


I don't think that's a too tricky business to send the needed modified stuff by ship to the next to unit a/c depot. Why that should be a tricky business? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Didn't say tricky, I said hazardous. Its late 1943, U.S. Submarines are prowling, possible air attack could happen as well. I was just saying the doubt of transporting all the cannons to New Guinea Regardless, Japanese Army Air Force Fighter Units and Their Aces 1931-1945 at least states that in December Mauser equipped Ki-61s reached New Guinea. While it is only one source, it does suggest they were not modified, if at all, on the front.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img74.photobucket.com/albums/v225/giganoni/IL2/giganoni2.jpg

GerritJ9
11-15-2006, 05:28 AM
William Green's "Warplanes of the Second World War: Fighters Volume 3" mentions on page 20 that 388 Ki.61-1a and -1bs had their wing guns replaced by 20mm Mauser MG151s but does not indicate whether this was done at the factory or as a field mod by teams of factory service engineers.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

The KNIL is dead. Long live the KNIL!

JG53Frankyboy
11-15-2006, 09:33 AM
Originally posted by GerritJ9:
William Green's "Warplanes of the Second World War: Fighters Volume 3" mentions on page 20 that 388 Ki.61-1a and -1bs had their wing guns replaced by 20mm Mauser MG151s but does not indicate whether this was done at the factory or as a field mod by teams of factory service engineers.

well that reminds me of the very often repeated mistake of the 3 canon armament of the Bf109E-3 or the MG151 cowling guns of the Bf109K-4...........


anyway, in this spot a "propagande" movie is announced ... and the Hiens looks like MG151/20 armed
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7URUUzjCnE

<-sure no fieldmodifications done on a NG airfield.

actually, that Kawasaki build the MG151 armed planes paralell to the "normal" production ones sounds most logical to me. and so the MG151 armed had the same features(except its weapons) than the other armed Hiens of the same time period. - but logical means sure not historical true http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif