1. #1
    chris455's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,791
    Let's get a few things out of the way first:

    I don't usually fly online;

    I know there were many excellent Japanese AC in WWII, the Ki-84 among them;

    I know that many on these boards have developed an intense admiration for the Ki-84 series.

    Having said that-

    My disbelief has to do with two, and only two, aspects of the Ki-84's modelling, behold:

    1. It's high altitude performance, and;
    2. It's damage modelling

    I beleive that below 21,000 ft the Hayate is modelled VERY accurately. I believe further still that above 21,000ft, it's performance is, well,......overstated. WAY too competetive with the P-47 and other marks that were known for their sterling high-altitude performance.
    I understand this ship had only a single stage mechanical supercharger? Like the P-39 and P-40?
    And it performs so spiritedly at +25,000 ft ?
    If I am wrong about it's engine attributes, I'm more than willing to listen.

    On to the damage modelling.

    This is a plane that in FB has the best self-sealing tanks of any plane, rarely catches fire (and when it does, the fire goes out in a few seconds) almost never explodes, and in my experience, soaks up .50 caliber bullets like a construction worker slaking cold beer at 5:00 O'clock on a Friday afternoon. I have actually seen a Ki-84 take 5 20mm hits from 2 P-38s almost simultaneously (1 in each WING go figure!) and innumerable .50cal rounds at the same time.
    If that affected it's ability to loop, zoom climb, and Chandelle, I was too busy trying get another bead on it to notice.

    This is the aircraft that Thomas B. McGuire described as "lightly built, with it's gas tanks covered with a thin layer of the crudest leak proof material"?

    I KNOW the Ki-84 was built to a much more rugged standard than the Zero. But in FB it gives the Jug a run for it's money in the tough department. This is contrary to what what we know about the Ki84's construction.

    There is something amiss here. I'm not asking for a war, but if name calling and insults get used as a substitute for logical argument, may I thank you in advance for proving my point for me.
    This A/C's damage and high altitude FM is simply not believable.
    S!

    Share this post

  2. #2
    chris455's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,791
    Let's get a few things out of the way first:

    I don't usually fly online;

    I know there were many excellent Japanese AC in WWII, the Ki-84 among them;

    I know that many on these boards have developed an intense admiration for the Ki-84 series.

    Having said that-

    My disbelief has to do with two, and only two, aspects of the Ki-84's modelling, behold:

    1. It's high altitude performance, and;
    2. It's damage modelling

    I beleive that below 21,000 ft the Hayate is modelled VERY accurately. I believe further still that above 21,000ft, it's performance is, well,......overstated. WAY too competetive with the P-47 and other marks that were known for their sterling high-altitude performance.
    I understand this ship had only a single stage mechanical supercharger? Like the P-39 and P-40?
    And it performs so spiritedly at +25,000 ft ?
    If I am wrong about it's engine attributes, I'm more than willing to listen.

    On to the damage modelling.

    This is a plane that in FB has the best self-sealing tanks of any plane, rarely catches fire (and when it does, the fire goes out in a few seconds) almost never explodes, and in my experience, soaks up .50 caliber bullets like a construction worker slaking cold beer at 5:00 O'clock on a Friday afternoon. I have actually seen a Ki-84 take 5 20mm hits from 2 P-38s almost simultaneously (1 in each WING go figure!) and innumerable .50cal rounds at the same time.
    If that affected it's ability to loop, zoom climb, and Chandelle, I was too busy trying get another bead on it to notice.

    This is the aircraft that Thomas B. McGuire described as "lightly built, with it's gas tanks covered with a thin layer of the crudest leak proof material"?

    I KNOW the Ki-84 was built to a much more rugged standard than the Zero. But in FB it gives the Jug a run for it's money in the tough department. This is contrary to what what we know about the Ki84's construction.

    There is something amiss here. I'm not asking for a war, but if name calling and insults get used as a substitute for logical argument, may I thank you in advance for proving my point for me.
    This A/C's damage and high altitude FM is simply not believable.
    S!

    Share this post

  3. #3
    BfHeFwMe's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    1,224
    AI or human, there's a difference, has to be. No AI is good at flying damaged planes, so takes much more damage to activate the modeling. Same with FM's, they simply couldn't compete with your FM restrictions.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    In case you haven't noticed, we fly this sim in the metric system. That means that alot of ppl on this forum doesn't understand your concerns if you talk about 'feet'. And 7km is pretty damn high in this sim.

    All FM's are porked if you go much higher them 5km/15000ft. That means that the FB engine isn't really suited for high fighting.

    1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
    2 For with what judgment ye judge,
    ye shall be judged: and with what
    measure ye mete, it shall be measured
    to you again.



    Share this post

  5. #5
    lrrp22's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    991
    It's high speed handling is much too good at all altitudes. Quite simply, it is modeled with all of the Frank's FM/DM virtues (including a very genereous top speed) but none of its vices.

    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
    Let's get a few things out of the way first:

    I don't usually fly online;

    I know there were many excellent Japanese AC in WWII, the Ki-84 among them;

    I know that many on these boards have developed an intense admiration for the Ki-84 series.

    Having said that-

    My disbelief has to do with two, and only two, aspects of the Ki-84's modelling, behold:

    1. It's high altitude performance, and;
    2. It's damage modelling

    I beleive that below 21,000 ft the Hayate is modelled VERY accurately. I believe further still that above 21,000ft, it's performance is, well,......overstated. WAY too competetive with the P-47 and other marks that were known for their sterling high-altitude performance.
    I understand this ship had only a single stage mechanical supercharger? Like the P-39 and P-40?
    And it performs so spiritedly at +25,000 ft ?
    If I am wrong about it's engine attributes, I'm more than willing to listen.

    On to the damage modelling.

    This is a plane that in FB has the best self-sealing tanks of any plane, rarely catches fire (and when it does, the fire goes out in a few seconds) almost never explodes, and in my experience, soaks up .50 caliber bullets like a construction worker slaking cold beer at 5:00 O'clock on a Friday afternoon. I have actually seen a Ki-84 take 5 20mm hits from 2 P-38s almost simultaneously (1 in each WING go figure!) and innumerable .50cal rounds at the same time.
    If that affected it's ability to loop, zoom climb, and Chandelle, I was too busy trying get another bead on it to notice.

    This is the aircraft that Thomas B. McGuire described as "lightly built, with it's gas tanks covered with a thin layer of the crudest leak proof material"?

    I KNOW the Ki-84 was built to a much more rugged standard than the Zero. But in FB it gives the Jug a run for it's money in the tough department. This is contrary to what what we know about the Ki84's construction.

    There is something amiss here. I'm not asking for a war, but if name calling and insults get used as a substitute for logical argument, may I thank you in advance for proving my point for me.
    This A/C's damage and high altitude FM is simply not believable.
    S!

    http://members.cox.net/miataman1/P47.jpg <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    Share this post

  6. #6
    chris455's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,791
    I apologize Platypus.
    I didn't mean to make it more difficult for people; I should have used metric. My bad.
    S!

    Share this post

  7. #7
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
    I apologize Platypus.
    I didn't mean to make it more difficult for people; I should have used metric. My bad.
    S!

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The opinions of others notwithstanding... it's ok man. Most of the Non-USA can speak multiple languages, whereas most of the USA people can easily use both measurement units.

    This is meaningless and just stated in a 'fun' nature.
    Share this post

  8. #8
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
    This is a plane that in FB has the best self-sealing tanks of any plane,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    not true , false claim



    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by chris455:
    But in FB it gives the Jug a run for it's money in the tough department,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    well here we go again

    the place to test DM is OFFLINE

    online experience is wack

    fact is the KI is eaisly hurt , small hits on the wings wont hurt its climb but reduce itsspeed & RUIN the turning ability
    Share this post

  9. #9
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lrrp22:
    It's high speed handling is much too good at all altitudes. Quite simply, it is modeled with all of the Frank's FM/DM virtues (including a very genereous top speed) but none of its vices. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    & none of the other planes are either ,........ whats your point ??
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Ki is quite silly how can one disagree with that? I imagine the ones that do are the same ones that want to fly the most UBER plane they can to make up for lack of skill OR to collect alot of points. So they will say no the Ki is far from UBER...lol. And why do people keep saying that no other planes have accurate high alt flight models? What sim you playing? I find that high alt performance for most planes is quite good, certainly better then 1.0. The Ki is UBER and therefore will be classified as a n00b plane by most. So those who choose to fly this bird will just have to get use to it. Nothing you say will change the mind of the majority. IMHO
    =S=

    Share this post

Page 1 of 8 123 ... Last ►►