1. #1
    with the recent influx of jets coming into the game i think it would only be better with the addition of these 2 british jets.

    anyone else like to see these in the game?
    Share this post

  2. #2
    with the recent influx of jets coming into the game i think it would only be better with the addition of these 2 british jets.

    anyone else like to see these in the game?
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Great , excellent news

    although the vampire woud be slow it had excellent behaviour in turns & good guns )

    when your finished them ill be buzzing as getting those will be great

    your to be commended sir

    BTW there is no "sudden" influx , the HE-162 & P-80 & Me-163 have been a long time coming
    Share this post

  4. #4
    necrobaron's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,369
    I think this would be a very good idea. Though I love the P-80,the Meteor was the only Allied jet that saw true operational service in WWII. Of course,if the Meteor and Vampire made it into FB,some people would whine to no end that "another jet" was being added.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    LeadSpitter_'s Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    4,103
    the vampire was past 45 but the meteor should be included it was 100mph slower then the 262 so it wouldnt make a big impact i dont think, also the italians had the first jets in late 30s. Russias i300 is needed as well so all nations have at least 1 jet, japans copy of the 262 would definatly be a instant success in marketing fb for the japanese.


    ----------------------------------------------
    Nakajima Kikka













    -~- Written and Researched by Paul D. Alexander -~-



    August 11, 1945 -- an excellent side-elevation view of the first prototype Kikka; note the strong resemblance to the Me 262.



    The Kikka (Orange Blossom), though a bit smaller than the Messerschmitt Me 262, was clearly inspired by the German jet fighter. Its primary claim to fame is that it was the very first Japanese aircraft to take off under jet power, even if it did so only once. Aside from that, it was yet again a case of too little, too late, since only the one prototype actually flew, although a second one was just a few days short of readiness when Japan capitulated.

    Enthusiastic reports from the Japanese air attaché in Berlin on the development of the Me 262 led the Naval Air Staff, in September of 1944, to instruct Nakajima to design and build a similar aircraft for use as a high-speed attack bomber relying on speed to evade interceptors. The formal requirements included the following: (a) a top speed of 432 mph; (b) a range of 127 statute miles with a 1,102-lb. bombload, or 173 st. miles with a 551-lb. bombload; (c) a landing speed of 92 mph; and (d) a take-off run of just 1,150 feet when using two 992-lb. thrust RATOG bottles under the wings. Additionally, the new jet was to be easily built by semi-skilled labor, and the outer wing panels were to be foldable, enabling the aircraft to be concealed in caves and tunnels.



    Last-minute adjustments are made to the Kikka's starboard engine



    Designers Kazuo Ohno and Kenichi Matsumura created a plane that could be called a 2/3 rd or â¾ th-scale mimic of the Messerschmitt fighter. Whereas the Me 262 had a wingspan of about 40 feet and a length of around 34 feet, the Japanese aircraft was just a bit over 26 â½ feet long with a wingspan of just over 32 â¾ feet. Its wing was nicely swept, but the tail surfaces were not, and all control surfaces were, oddly enough, fabric-covered in an otherwise-all-metal airplane. The canopy was a three-piece sliding type, instead of the Messerschmittâ's three-piece hinged â"coffin-lidâ" arrangement. The twin turbojets were mounted beneath the wings in separate nacelles, allowing, with a minimum of changes, the installation of a variety of engines as they were developed. As it turned out, this feature was quite useful, as engine development fell behind that of the airframe. Initially, the plane was to have been powered by two Campini-type Tsu-11 engines, but these were replaced by a pair of 750-lb. thrust Ne-12 turbojets. But the future of the Navy Special Attacker Kikka (as it was designated) was made uncertain by the failure of the Ne-12 to develop its designed power during ground tests. By a stroke of luck, Engineer Eichi Iwaya of the Navy had obtained detailed photographs of the BMW 003 axial-flow turbojets used in the Me 262, and from those photos the Japanese were able to create a similar engine, designated Ne-20, with a theoretical power output of 1,047 pounds of static thrust. Everyone concerned felt the Ne-20 was perfect for the Kikka, and so the projectâ's pace was speeded up during the summer of 1945.



    The Kikka's Ne-20 turbojet engine



    At this point, a note about the aircraftâ's designation would be in order. Although it was dubbed a "Special Attacker", this writer believes that the Kikka was not actually intended for kamikaze attacks, except in extremis (i.e., if the pilot were wounded or the airplane was damaged, and could not return to base). It seems very foolish to go to the trouble to design a very expensive jet-powered plane and then assign it to one-way missions. The Me 262 was notorious for requiring a skilled pilot to fly it, and even then the pilot, if he had previous experience in aircraft with reciprocating engines, had to unlearn a lot of habits which were all right for flying conventional fighters but which could be fatal in the 262. For example, the Me 262â's throttles could not be â"choppedâ", i.e., quickly brought from high power to a lower-power setting, or shoved forward swiftly, â"balls to the wallâ" as American flying slang put it. Jet throttles had to manipulated carefully and slowly, or else the jet engines would flame out, either from fuel starvation or fuel satiation. Thus, by analogy, only skillful pilots could fly the Kikka. Undoubtedly the Japanese were aware, from reports from their air attaché in Germany, of the unique problems involved in flying a jet as opposed to flying a more conventional aircraft. Thus, the Kikka could not have been intended as a kamikaze aircraft. Indeed, it was intended for other roles besides being a fast attack bomber, as will be seen. The term â"Special Attackerâ" refers, in this writerâ's opinion, to the special way the Kikka was powered (by jets) rather than to its being intended for â"specialâ", i.e., suicide, attacks.



    The Kikka's test pilot and a ground crewman look on as a technician makes sure all systems are 'Go'.



    With its Ne-20 engines installed, the Kikka prototype was given its first ground tests on June 30, 1945. Late in July, it was dismantled and taken to Kisarazu Naval Airfield, where after re-assembly it was flown for the first time on August 7, with Lt. Cdr. Susumu Takaoka as test pilot. The Kikka taxied for a long time before it gained enough speed to lift off the ground; the flight itself lasted just 20 minutes, and the aircraft was never taken above 2000 feet. The slowness with which it gained take-off speed delayed the second flight until August 11, when it attempted to lift off with RATOG bottles beneath the wings. Unfortunately, the rocket bottles were not installed at the correct angle to lift the Kikka off the runway, and after the rockets burned out, the pilot aborted the take-off and crashed into the rough ground beyond the runwayâ's end. The second prototype was almost ready for its own first flight when the war ended on August 15. Eighteen additional prototypes and pre-production examples were left in various stages of construction on that date.

    Aside from the basic attack bomber, there was a projected unarmed two-seat trainer, and the third Kikka was to be the prototype for this variant. An unarmed two-seat reconnaissance version and a cannon-armed single-seat fighter were also under development at the warâ's end. The fighter variant was to have been powered by either a pair of 1,984-lb. thrust Ne-130 or a pair of 1,951-lb. thrust Ne-330 axial-flow turbojets, and armed with a pair of nose-mounted 30mm cannon.


    Type:
    Single-seat twin-jet attack bomber, of all-metal construction with fabric-covered tail surfaces.


    Accommodation:
    Pilot in enclosed cockpit.


    Powerplant:
    Two Ne-20 axial-flow turbojets, rated at 1,047-lb. of static thrust.


    Armament: One 1,102-lb. or 1,764-lb. bomb under the fuselage center section.


    Dimensions, weights, and performance:
    Wingspan: 32 ft. 9 11/16 in.;
    length, 26 ft. 7 7/8 in.;
    height, 9 ft. 8 5/32 in.;
    wing area, 142.083 sq. ft.;
    empty weight, 5,071 lb.;
    loaded weight, 7,716 lb.;
    maximum weight, 8,995 lb.;
    wing loading, 54.3 lb./sq. ft.;
    power loading, 3.7 lb./lb. s. t.;
    maximum speed, 387 mph at sea level, (estimated) 433 mph at 32,810 ft.;
    (estimated) climb to 32,810 ft., 26 minutes;
    (estimated) service ceiling, 39,370 ft.;
    (estimated) range, 586 statute miles


    VIEW MY PAINTSCHEMES HERE
    Share this post

  6. #6
    VW-IceFire's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    13,650
    If someone can do a Meteor MK III that'd be great. I like using the Me-262 as a ground pounder anyways so a British one would be even more fun!

    - IceFire
    Share this post

  7. #7
    If the Meteor's WW2 Operational service of about one year had been with the US,German or Russian Air Force it would have been included by now.

    Same applies to the Spitfire.

    Or am I wrong??

    Regards
    MB_Avro
    Share this post

  8. #8
    VW-IceFire's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    13,650
    No I don't think that has much to do with it. Excluding what was part of the intial lineup of FB aircraft the vast majority of new planes that were talking about here have come from our third party modelers. Alot of time has been spent on the USAAF...which is ok...its great to see them represented with some aircraft of varrying types (indeed they served in many airforces including the RAF) but that was a choice made by the modelers. Unfourtunately less people stepped upto the plane on the RAF aircraft...that doesn't mean that there is no progress. There is now a Mark V Spitfire in the expansion, as well as a IX, XIV and even a XVI, and VIII now apparently in the works or with the possibility of being constructed. So there is the possibility that the Spitfire may catch upto its competitors with a large number of variants available to them. The Tempest is a unknown for flyable at release time but all indications are that it will show up later as a fully flyable, fully armed, tactical and superiority fighter. The Typhoon has a little murkier future but I'm hoping that it gets done. There's even a Lancaster in development.

    As long as the RAF fighters don't get screwed over in the end I'll be very happy. The Meteor only needs a dedicated modeler/texturer/(cockpit designer) and we'd have it in the game. Thats the only thing holding it back.

    - IceFire
    Share this post

  9. #9
    Aaron_GT's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,134
    I don't see that the Vampire was
    too slow. The Vampire I had a top
    speed of 540 mph and the P80A 558mph,
    so they are pretty comparable. It's
    the Meteor that's disappointing with
    regards to speed. But it was first,
    and although there is some debate,
    it may have been in limited service
    before the Me262. It depends what
    you mean by in service, really.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Arcadeace's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,073
    If some are hoping the Meteor will be competitive with the 262, I think they will end up a disappointed if its modeled correctly. In interviews I've seen on the History Channel with former Brit Meteor pilots, they've stated it would not have fared well against any late/post war jets. The Vampire is a different story.

    I'll enjoy the sim more if we just end up with Spits and a Tempest and keep it as close to WWII era as possible. Still, its no big deal to me.

    Share this post