Nerf Japanese planes

[GALWAYLION-live]

He’s old enough to fire a rifle

[skultew1234]

@steelhaze

As expected, the Ki-61 and Ki-100 did not have engine fire protection, and only the fuel tanks were self-sealing.

As I undunderstand here isn’t any mention about automatic fire extinguisher, right?
「自動消火装置」

@steelhaze

As expected, the Ki-61 and Ki-100 did not have engine fire protection, and only the fuel tanks were self-sealing. However, since the self-sealing tank of the model ko was compatible with 7.7mm bullets, the self-sealing of the tank seems to have been further strengthened from the model otsu. Considering the opponent, it can be expected that it is a countermeasure against 12.7mm bullets.
In an interview with a Ki-61 pilot, he said that he heard the sound of bullets hitting the bulletproof plate, but it is not known whether they really hit the bulletproof plate, but there is no doubt that the Ki-61 could withstand more pain than previous Japanese fighter planes.
Would it be fair to say that the bulletproof equipment of the Ki-61 in WarThunder is generally correct? Maybe…

At one English there is said that Ki-61 Hei and others modifications had automatic fire extinguisher system for fuel tanks but now I am starting to think it was just imagination of foreign author because can’t see any proof for it especially in Japanese books. To be honest I don’t understand why army didn’t use extinguishers on their fighters but only on Ki-67. For example Navy used this systems on A6M5, J2M3, A7M, N1K and other planes.
Thank you for help.

P.S. don’t listen people here who didn’t do any reasearch or don’t have any interest in Japanese vehicles but make any statements based on emotions!

[かがり]

Buff the Ki-200 :)

[GALWAYLION-live]

I agree!

[かがり]

I hate that the Ki-200 we have ingame is a Frankenstein kitbash of the J8M1 and Ki-200

Stats of J8M1 but fuselage of the Ki-200

would be godly to recieve both as a foldered tier plane

[Irregular23]

This is just extremely biased, nobody was putting a 5G limit on a frontline fighter halfway through WW2.

The 5G limits were well written in both Ki-44II’s flight manual and maintenance manual.

As well as the Ki-84’s manual:

It’s not that uncommon, early A6M also got a 5G limit, until the structural enhance was done in serial production of A6M2. Ta-152H also has a G limit of 5G.

If we assume a safety factor of 1.8, the plane might still likely be safe below 9G, but not fully guaranteed. But still not a good sign for an aircraft’s structural strength.

[Stielhandgranate]

This might help you become informed.

Battle of 73 Easting

[tester188-psn]

I am not an expert in aerodynamics, but I would like to introduce several sources regarding the Ki-44.

In the design of the Ki-44, the Nakajima Aircraft Company strengthened the rigidity of the main wings as much as possible to improve its dive speed. The structure of both the wings and the fuselage was made exceptionally robust for a Japanese fighter, capable of withstanding dive speeds of 700 to 800 km/h — an extraordinary standard at the time. The second prototype of the Ki-44, completed in April 1940, underwent three months of improvements and 250 hours of test flights at Nakajima Aircraft Industries, during which various design refinements were made. As a result, the aircraft achieved a top speed exceeding 600 km/h and, in a power dive at an altitude of 2,500 meters, recorded a speed of 850 km/h without suffering any damage to the airframe. At that time, the A6M2’s dive speed limit was around 670 km/h, highlighting the exceptional durability of the Ki-44.

Spoiler

“陸軍「隼」戦闘機 : 燦たり,不滅の翼 (第二次世界大戦ブックス ; 別巻6)” Yoshiro Ikari. 1973. pp. 125-127

Some American pilots who actually engaged in dogfights against the Ki-44 reported that its dive speed was high.

The TOJO (Ki-44) also has heavier construction, increased power, and higher diving speed. Variations in tactics have been adopted by Japanese pilots of these planes in accordance with such changes in flying characteristics.

Spoiler

“Report on Japanese fighter tactics” January 1945.
https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/4009733/1/20

Then, why does the Ki-44 pilot’s manual list a lower dive speed limit compared to the lighter A6M?

While Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source, according to the Japanese Wikipedia, the conservative Army Aviation Headquarters at the time did not fully understand the characteristics of a rugged heavy fighter, and therefore provisionally set a dive speed limit for the Ki-44 with a margin of safety, making it not much different from that of the Ki-43.

“Manuals for piloting.” Report No. 1b(11), USSBS Index Section 2. (Ki-46 Dinah, Ki-48-II Lily, Ki-44-II Tojo, Ki-43-II Oscar, Ki-67 Peggy, Ki-86 Cypress)
https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/8318149/1/1
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%BA%8C%E5%BC%8F%E5%8D%98%E5%BA%A7%E6%88%A6%E9%97%98%E6%A9%9F

[Irregular23]

While Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source, according to the Japanese Wikipedia, the conservative Army Aviation Headquarters at the time did not fully understand the characteristics of a rugged heavy fighter, and therefore provisionally set a dive speed limit for the Ki-44 with a margin of safety, making it not much different from that of the Ki-43.

Well I don’t quite understand why IJA would allow Ki-61 to have higher dive speed and G limits in the contemporary piloting manual (late 1943), despite ki-61 been a ‘light fighter’ and ki-44 been a ‘heavy fighter’ according to the IJA.