The Ki48-II-Otsu lacks some issues

A report was recently made, and quickly forwarded to the devs, concerning the incorrect armor values. It seems that will be fixed soon.

I also see the source you added in a comment for the missing dive brakes report. Can I use the images you posted and add them to the report’s “additional files for historical issues” section? I will be sure to give you credit for the photographs.


First four pages are from [日本陸軍航空部隊戦場写真集] ASIN ‏ : ‎ B00GKSWCJI by [大日本絵画] 小川光二

second book is [日本陸軍機全集] 航空ファン イラストレイテッド 1993-4 No.69 (編集)[三井一郎] 出版社 ‏ : ‎ 文林堂


Ok, thanks! Just to clarify, the page containing the photograph of the bombsight (third page of the four given in your post from the Dainippon Kaiga book) is page 38, right?

On a separate, unrelated note, I am beginning to worry, as my issue posts are nearing 9 days old, and they haven’t been acknowledged. I may post something extra after the two-week mark if nothing happens with them…

1 Like

Yes :)


My issues have been found by a moderator. The missing dive brakes report was passed, while the other two have been labeled as “info requested”. If you want to help me respond to the moderator’s comments, please do!

Specifically, do you have any more photographs of the Ki-48-II Otsu carrying the Ki-148 missile, or at least any information regarding what became of its defensive armament? Do you also have any information regarding whether a crewperson was seated in the bombardier’s position during testing?

1 Like

According to a book written by a technical officer of the Japanese Army, who was part of the I-Go guided missile development team, even with the installation of missiles, the number of bomber crew members remained unchanged. Therefore, even if the Ki-48 is equipped with Ki-148 missiles, the crew of the Ki-48 should not be reduced.

Due to the large number of crew members, the Japanese Army hesitated to use the I-Go missile in combat. The crew of the Ki-67, equipped with the I-Go missile, consisted of 8 members. In 1945, it was difficult for the bomber to escape from US early warning radars and interceptor patrols. Further, while exposed to intense anti-aircraft fire, continuing level flight over the enemy fleet, and manually guiding the missile to hit a US aircraft carrier, the conclusion was that the bomber would be lost, and all 8 crew members would die. In contrast, in a Kamikaze attack, a single-seat fighter would result in only one person dying. The accuracy of Kamikaze attacks is 30%, while the I-Go missile has a 70% accuracy rate. To hit an enemy aircraft carrier with one bomb, a Kamikaze attack would cost the lives of 3 pilots, whereas the I-Go missile would result in the sacrifice of 6 crew members.

Reference: Kiyoshi Masumoto, Burning Stratosphere: The Story of Japanese Army Aviation , Shuppan Kyōdō-sha, 1961, p.164.

The above explanation was mentioned in the second half of the book posted here.


Thank you! Is the second paragraph your own translation of the content on the attached picture? If so, can I use it in my issue post?


I’ve made edits to my issues, taking into account your source in the post concerning the missing nose gunner/bombardier. Thanks again!

If you read through what I added and recognize any issues that need addressed, let me know, and I will attempt to remedy them.


The moderator responded to my counterarguments under my issue post concerning the missing nose gunner/bombardier:

I am beginning to see what he/she is saying, and I may drop the attempts to fix these remaining issues through historical issue reports. Instead, I have a suggestion in mind that I will post to the forum on how to effectively merge the Ki-148 carrier with a standard Ki-48-II Otsu.

Before I do this, however, I have a question concerning something the moderator said, namely, concerning the missile guidance system installed on the test Ki-48. Do you have any information regarding this, such as what it was called (if it had a designation) and if it was really the reason the nose MG was removed, as he/she claims?


Based Omar Bradley pic

1 Like

As for the nose gunner, it seems difficult. What about bombsights? In the game, players rely on the naked eye to observe missiles and target ships, but according to Mitsubishi, accuracy was improved by using optical instruments for observation.

Optical sight for I-go missile

  • Use Type 94 air reconnaissance optical sight for ranging.
  • Add a tracking telescope to control the I-go missile.

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Aircraft History. p.600. (Provided by @Lineins)

The Type 94 air reconnaissance optical sight was developed by the Japanese Navy for aerial reconnaissance and was able to measure drift angle, ground speed, distance and speed of target ships. The principle was the same as the prism mechanism of the Type 88 bombsight.


Japan Optical Industries Corporation History, 1960, p.486

Drawings of Type 93 and Type 94 air reconnaissance optical sight


Optical Industry History Editorial Group, History of Japan’s Optical Industry with a Focus on Weapons, 1955, p.320


Interesting. This sight could definitely be used as a bomb sight, but it could also be implemented to zoom into and track the guided missile, making it easier to aim. I still hope to suggest that the standard Type 88 bomb sight be reinstalled upon equipping conventional bombs, but we’ll see…

Concerning the nose gun, upon closer examination of the Ki-48’s in game model, I found a different structure in the nose:

Whatever it is, It is definitely in the way of the nose gun, and I cannot find it in any photos of standard Ki-48s. Thus, I assumed it was the guidance system, or at least something representing it. Does this look familiar to you?

1 Like

more reference added
USNTMJ-200D-0550-0575 Report (1.8 MB)

@tester188 & @ibaraki_Kasen

The remaining issues have been closed. Of the “missing nose gunner/bombardier” report, only the part concerning the missing nose-seated crewperson (who should be there to guide the Ki-148 missile) was passed. The “missing bomb bay doors” report was rejected.

Per the moderator’s recommendation, I have a suggestion I am working on, which I will post to the forum, outlining how these missing features can be implemented without any unhistorical overlap between the Ki-48 for missile testing and a standard Ki-48, allowing both to be accurately represented in game simply by switching loadouts. I will let you know when I get it posted.

In addition, I also have an idea of a suggestion for implementing the Type 94 reconnaissance sight, which could be used to more accurately aim the missile at larger ranges. @tester188, was the Type 94 sight used not only for ranging, but also for tracking the missile, or was a separate telescope used for tracking the missile? Your source seems to suggest the latter, but I’m not sure. If indeed it was a separate telescope, do you have any information on it?


being able to track the missile would help a lot if that’s true.


I was researching books and other information about Ki-148. Specific details regarding the telescope used for maneuvering are not known at this time. BTW, I found information that the Ki-148 had a radio altimeter to maintain its altitude at 30 m.

According to Mitsubishi’s information, the I-go A’s radio altimeter for maintaining altitude did not work well and was removed early on, but according to Kawasaki’s information, the I-go B was equipped with a radio altimeter and successfully maintained its altitude. It was able to detect radio wave reflections from the sea surface at an altitude of 20-30 m and maintain an altitude of 30 m. Some Japanese books explain that the I-go missile was equipped with a radio altimeter.

This primitive sea skimming ability could make it easier to hit enemy players’ ships in games. When I use the Ki-148, it is difficult to judge the altitude when the missile is far from the Ki-48.


This is interesting, and could be an excellent addition. As you say, this would make hitting enemy vessels with the missile much easier. Combined with a telescopic sight for tracking the missile, a Ki-48 could cause havoc among enemy coastal vessels at a range far exceeding their AA capabilities.

  1. Spawn in and aim the missile slightly downward
  2. Launch the missile and let it get close to the water so that the altimeter can take over
  3. Use the telescope to guide the missile to a target using the horizontal guidance controls
  4. Upon reaching a target, nose the missile down into it to kill it (hopefully)
  5. Repeat

I would assume that the altimeter would only work when the player wasn’t using the vertical guidance controls, so that it wouldn’t interfere when attempting to hit land-based units or low-to-the-water vessels such as PT boats.

On a different note, the moderator that assessed my bug reports made available to me a photograph of the missile guidance system in the nose of the Ki-48, confirming it is the structure I found in the asset viewer images above:
Ki-148 operator

Image provided by user skultew1234.


I found testimony from a pilot who tested a Ki-148 missile on a Ki-102 Otsu assault plane.

The pilot testified that the Ki-148 is equipped with a radio altimeter and that a missile operator’s seat was added to the Ki-102 Otsu. Based on the testimony, it can be inferred that if the I-Go guided missile is mounted on the Ki-102 Otsu, the crew would increase to three as a missile operator is added. Additionally, the 57mm Ho-401 cannon occupying the nose space would likely be removed.

Should we consider this as a special variant of the Ki-102 Otsu in War Thunder? Gaijin can earn a large amount of revenue by adding a special Ki-102 Otsu model equipped with missiles to the game as an event vehicle.

I was a member of the Army Aviation Review Division, Flight Test Squadron, and participated in the testing of the I-Go guided missile.

The test was conducted from May to July 1945, based at Yokaichi Airfield and targeting an islet called Oki no Shiraishi on Lake Biwa. The yellow painted I-Go guided missile flew over the azure lake with great momentum powered by the rocket engine, and the radio altimeter equipped on the missile made it fly very low over the lake, so impressive that I will never forget the memory. I tested both I-Go A and B. At first I found it difficult to control, but I gradually got used to it and reached 80% hit rate with I-Go B.

Although the number of times was small, the I-Go B missile was tested by Ki-102. In this case, the nose of the Ki-102 was modified to create a seat for the missile operator. The missile operator sits with his legs thrown out in front of him. The entrance to that seat is on the right side of the nose, but it is very small, so he had to lean his body sideways to get in and out. The pilot’s seat and operator’s seat were separated by a wall, which made the missile operator feel very cramped and alone. My superior test pilot was too large to sit in the cramped missile operator’s seat in the Ki-102, but I was relatively small enough to sit in the operator’s seat and test radio command guidance.
(Translator’s note: Abridged translation)

Kiyoshi Iguchi



Source: Kaikō, February 1988, pp.53-54.
(Veterans Association Bulletin)


It unquestionably requires a more realistic and user-friendly guidance system than the existing external camera on the aircraft. In my opinion, a potential solution could be a system similar to the bomber camera, but with the capability to automatically track the missile’s trajectory from the aircraft, enabling substantial zoom functionality. Indeed, this capability underscores the significance of having a dedicated nose crew, which unquestionably serves this intended purpose.

1 Like

Or add an option to ignore the gyro? That way you can use it like any other MCLOS missile in game.

1 Like