I would love to see what was in the rear fuselage cabin. Lost to history I would imagine.
Ki-83, was it as good as thought?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Admiral Beez
Captain
It's is amazing that Japan, with a much smaller economy and industrial base and limited access to resources could make such superlative aircraft.
Japan's 1939 economy was not much larger than Italy's, but Japan fielded an air force (combined IJA/IJN), navy and army vastly larger and more effective than anything the Italians brought to the field. Only in submarines did the Italians (116 in 1939) have anything in significant greater quantity than Japan (63 in 1941).
Japan's 1939 economy was not much larger than Italy's, but Japan fielded an air force (combined IJA/IJN), navy and army vastly larger and more effective than anything the Italians brought to the field. Only in submarines did the Italians (116 in 1939) have anything in significant greater quantity than Japan (63 in 1941).
Last edited:
It would have been in the same class as the DH 103 Hornet and F7F Tigercat. Faster than the latter and not much slower than the former.
Throw a potential 1945 German Fw 187 in the what-if mix and we have a hell of a quartet.
Anyone know about the aerodynamics of the Japanese engine cowlings? I recall to have read they were the best to compensate for the greater drag of the aircooled radials the Japanese preferred.
Throw a potential 1945 German Fw 187 in the what-if mix and we have a hell of a quartet.
Anyone know about the aerodynamics of the Japanese engine cowlings? I recall to have read they were the best to compensate for the greater drag of the aircooled radials the Japanese preferred.
It's worth noting that in 1942 when Fw was asked to investigate a potential Fw 187 Kampfzerstorer, the calculated maximum speed figure for the DB 605 powered variant was 423 mph, which isn't that much more than the Ki-83. The proposed single-seat high-altitude variant was calculated at 450 mph, a big improvement, but compare that with the production Hornet I, at over 470 mph and you have a lot of work to do to match it. What this does is highlight just how impressive the Hornet's performance was.
Peter Gunn
Master Sergeant
Well, if looks could kill the Ki-83 would be pure mean-ass deadly.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
So would the P-39.
soulezoo
Senior Airman
But only without the nose armor.
GregP
Major
Oops? That's the most feared word in any operating room at any hospital ...
l'Omnivore Sobriquet
Airman 1st Class
Don't we forget that Dornier 335.
So badly dismissed here in this forum (Not worth this ! not worth that !) A good performer overall I should say... among the competition. And proven too.
So a hell of a quintet.
I too like the Do-335 as I thought it was an interesting way to crack the twin engine drag problem. However, remember the mass at either end will make it a very unusual handling plane when pulling or pushing on the stick (in my opinion).
Does anyone have a roll rate comparison of these aircraft? It would be interesting to see how the engineers handled the roll problem of the non centerline twins (especially as compared to the P-38 w/boosted ailerons).
Cheers,
Biff
Biff - please check out the location of the aft engine on the Do 335. It was located closer to the CoG rather than to the rear end, and used a shaft for power transfer.
It had a push-pull-propellers configuration and was not very manoeverable whereas the others were able to take on single-engined fighters.
Any of them could be equipped with boosted ailerons, couldn't they?
Peter Gunn
Master Sergeant
I was always intrigued by the 335 as well, seems like an interesting attempt to solve allied air superiority. Although, to be realistic, it looks like a massive gas hog to me, it may be reasonably fast and I'd be curious about its maneuverability, but also how it would fare v. P-51H and P-47N, let alone the P-80 or Meteor.
Yes, they could be equipped with boosted ailerons. I was just curious if any were or if there were different attempts to solve the problem of a non centerline twin roll rate. Even with boosted ailerons the initial roll rate on twins would be less than on an equivalent SE fighter. There is a lot of mass to get moving (engines and fuel tanks located well outside the centerline. Also you have to stop that mass as well once established in the roll.
Mike previously posted a roll rate comparison chart but if I remember correctly, it covered established roll rate and not initial (say first 90 degrees of roll). And that's were the problem lies for the twin that puts them at a disadvantage in a maneuvering fight.
Cheers,
Biff
The way I see it, the Do-335 was or would have been a bomber destroyer. It might not have initially needed escort but with adaption by the USAAF, I think it would eventually have needed protection. The P51H and P47N would have been able to run with it in the speed department, and with out MW50 the P51BCD should have had parity or a slight speed advantage. However Doolittle unleashing the fighters from the bombers would have diminished its effectiveness in my opine.
Cheers,
Biff
GregP
Major
I have never seen a turn rate (I'm thinking pitch rate) for the Do.335. Then again ,I've never seen a pitch rate of ANY WWII fighter. I'm thinking it might roll well but, being a fighter-bomber and not exactly a lightweight, I'm not too sure how well, either, as I've never seen flight test numbers for the Do. 335.
Neat-looking airplane but, if it were really a great configuration, seems like someone else would have tried one ... and there haven't been many.
The Fokker D.XXII sort of qualifies, but there is a stab and elevator out past the rear prop. The Soviet Union tried one, too, the Moskalev SAM-13 (and earlier I-12 / ANT-23), but it also had a stab and elevator out past the rear prop. Even after we saw the Do 335 after the war ended, there seem to be no more push-pull twins with the props at front and extreme rear. Perhaps it was a dead end after all.
Neat-looking airplane but, if it were really a great configuration, seems like someone else would have tried one ... and there haven't been many.
The Fokker D.XXII sort of qualifies, but there is a stab and elevator out past the rear prop. The Soviet Union tried one, too, the Moskalev SAM-13 (and earlier I-12 / ANT-23), but it also had a stab and elevator out past the rear prop. Even after we saw the Do 335 after the war ended, there seem to be no more push-pull twins with the props at front and extreme rear. Perhaps it was a dead end after all.
Last edited:
Just Schmidt
Senior Airman
I don't know, after the war push-pull twins were kind of made irrelevant by jet aircraft, or at least any new designs could be expected soon to be.
One reason Dornier was given the task was because of quite extensive experience with push-pull arrangements, albeit primarily (or exclusively?) on flying boats.
I've always wondered about the Do 335. It reached trial operation well before the end of the war, but I never saw anything about combat, though allied fighters were ranging wide and far. I haven't seen anything about serious problems following from the lay out, but then again i have very little actual information on the aircraft. Production numbers were pathetic compared to the other late war clutching at straws aircraft, but it does look great on paper, a close to conventional aircraft compared to many of the others. it's like it might have worked, but didn't get the same kind of priority.
Of course it couldn't have changed the course of the war, and it was two engines for one plane. But I can't help thinking what could have been had Dornier gotten the commission a lot earlier, and maybe been asked to design primarily a fighter from the word go.
Thumpalumpacus
Captain
Bear in mind that jets were coming into service, and probably seen as an avenue with much more development potential, which events proved correct.
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 37,937
- Mar 26, 2007
Eto yes but pto? Distance.
Thumpalumpacus
Captain
That's why god built carriers. Bring the base to the fight.
