Also i saw some dude trying to say the spitfire mk IX is under BRed when its power to weight ratio isn’t even that good. It’s not even comparable to the ki-44s bruh. That things engine is tuned for extremely high altitudes. A lot of planes can energy trap a spitfire mk IX if you run for long enough. IMO it’s probably the most balanced spitfire br for br. Unless they were referring to the LF mk IX in which case I agree.
Because p/w is wrong most of the time since it doesn’t take propeller efficiency or drag into account.
Japan has no fast planes. The Ki-44-II is still slow when you compare it to any other nation.
The only Yak-9 at 4.0 is the 9T. Apart from the 37mm gun, it is otherwise identical to the 3.0 one and that’s not a particularly strong plane down there.
3 Likes
This ^ and this:
looks like you made some assumptions without looking at the whole picture.
As stated by @PercussionCap drag plays a key role regarding top speed. So if you have a faster plane and you managed to get an altitude advantage climb rates become irrelevant - it doesn’t matter if your power-to-weight is better or not as the slower aircraft needs to outclimb you (which makes it even slower) in order to dive on you. This does not work if the US plane extends in level flight.
If you put in the F6F-5 vs the Ki-44s in the chart you will find out that the Ki-44s have a way superior P/W ratio - but even the F6F-5 is able to outrun a Ki-44 if you have managed to outclimb it.
run bro. don’t turn with it.
The heavier J2M5, despite appearing very disadvantaged in a p/w chart:
Is on par and then beats the Ki-44-II in climb rate. At 5km it is ahead of the Ki-44 and the latter never catches up. This is a common altitude to exceed in Air RB and despite the J2M5’s fame it’s not that good of a climber.
Here’s the marketplace Mk9 (slightly heavier than tech tree one) and a P-38J. This looks great for the Ki-44 until you realize that the P-38J would have an airspawn (putting it above the Ki-44 for the entire run) and the spitfire makes so much extra power up high that the Ki-44’s only choice is to dive away once the fighting starts, unless the spitfire just throws.
And finally, I alluded to prop efficiency being a factor earlier. And it is. Simply put, the Ki-44 has a subpar propeller.
The P-38’s only looks bad at the end since I got distracted and went a little too slow, it really doesn’t like that.
1 Like
Skill issue lmao. Ki-44-II does not have broken climb-rate there are many things that outclimb it at its br and pretty much every russian, german or soviet plane can just out dive it or out run it. So only question remains why are you dogfighting it with bricks? Like its not even that great of a dogfighter spitfire can take it out in dogfight no problem. Most japanese planes are overtiered asf because people are braindead not because the planes are superb.
1 Like
Ki-27 to 7.0 when
2 Likes
I would like this but I ran out :(
Maybe one day
I dunno why you ignored my point where I said it’s only slightly slower than the La5 and I said it’s the fastest jap plane br for br. You could argue that is actually the j7w, but it’s at least up there.
I don’t have an La-5 to test and I don’t feel like grinding it. In any case it will be faster while less maneuverable, this is normal. It’s also far better armed.
t’s has to do with excess power and power to weight ratio gives a better, more full picture than absolute power. As I already said it’s not directly proportional, since if it was the P47 would have a better climb rate than the p51 at low alts but it doesn’t. But it’s much more genuine to use power to weight ratio. Again yet another person ignoring a key point I made.
Its not. You have 4 50 cals that do a lot of damage it has 2 20mms that also do a lot of damage but with less ammo.
ShVAKs have better range, better damage, higher velocity, the belt is 100% HE. They are somewhat comparable to Ho-5s (but better) and the difference between otherwise identical planes that trade a pair of Ho-103s for Ho-5s is at least one BR step, if not more.
See: Ki-61-I Otsu to Tei or Ki-84 Ko to Otsu
Climb rate charts like those I provided are superior to both since they display the actual performance achieved. By just looking at the p/w charts I don’t think anyone would have said the J2M5 outclimbs the Ki-44-II.
I was strictly talking about climb rate. The yak 3u has a less powerful engine than a p47 but the latter doesn’t outclimb or out run the former. For every case of an inconsistent narrative Power to Weight ratio presents, absolute power will present 10x more. You have to pair reserve planes with the best post war props as these guys have been doing (very unhonest) to finally find inconsistency. I could compare the yak3u to any US prop to debunk the claim that absolute power means anything in this discussion.
True. Climb rate charts are better, than both power to weight and absolute power. But absolute power is by far the least meaningful chart when it comes to climb rate. If I could use climb charts I would have but I don’t know how to, it’s as simple as that.
You have more ammo with the Japanese 50s, it’s up to personal preference but carrying in the K44 is easy to do with only one take off due to its plentiful ammo count. The 4 combined 50s from my experience regularly one-shot planes. They act more like 20mms than 50s tbh. Also, ki44s higher volume (like area) and higher ammo count makes it better at firing targets farther away since you can afford to waste ammo in head ons or making planes react so they bleed speed. At this point tho it’s personal taste but most of the buddies ik would prefer the Ki44s arms.
You have to keep it fast and the nose authority is okay so I find it way less ammo efficient than my darling Ki-43-1. The premium Ki-44-II with 12.7s only in the nose is even worse about this and it’s a pain to get kills quickly.
Way shorter ranged than 20mms, and they do way less damage too. Saved by volume of fire but it’s still not great. All the planes that traded these 12.7s for 20mms are much higher in BR than the original model.
I like them but they have their downsides and comparing BRs of planes with alternative armaments makes this obvious.