Jump to content


[spoiler] what the Japanese tech tree could look like

Japan Mitsubishi Aichi Kawanishi Kyushu Kawasaki Nakajima Tachikawa Mansyu Rikugun

  • Please log in to reply
275 replies to this topic

J311yfish #1 Posted 24 February 2014 - 04:39 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Member
  • 17582 battles
  • 1,000
  • [343] 343
  • Member since:
    12-13-2013
Aircraft Details(page 5) Premiums (in game) / Alternates Foreign / Captured Production locations / Quantities Allied codenames

Bombers

Designers Designs Airfoils / Engines Climb Rates Armament / Torpedoes Operational locations / Timelines Addendum Torpedo Bombers

*Note: some of the tiers arranged here do not correspond exactly to those in game.  Rather than move lots of aircraft data around and risk losing it, I am just going to leave it as is (for now!)

 

Accountability (tiers approx):

 

Omitted (tiers approx):

 

Sources:

 

Acknowledgements:

 

Older versions:

 

Further refinement:


Edited by J311yfish, 25 June 2017 - 08:42 PM.

Tech tree projects:  JAPAN  /  United Kingdom  /  Sweden  /  Finland (skins/  Italy  /  France  /  Poland  /  China  /  Brazil  /  United States  //  Roadmap

Map proposals:  Panama Canal  /  Great Wall of China  /  Cliffs of Dover  //  Clan:  343 Kokutai  //  Tutorial How to ignore forum posts and signatures


DrSinister #2 Posted 24 February 2014 - 04:45 PM

    High-Tech Medic

  • -Community Ace-
  • 4850 battles
  • 3,944
  • [DRACS] DRACS
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
That pic you are seeing use to be the J4M1, use to be in game.  We do not know when it will return or if it will return and it was classes as a Fighter. IIRC it was the old Tier 7 in the JP line.

Edited by DrSinister, 24 February 2014 - 04:47 PM.


Wolcott #3 Posted 24 February 2014 - 05:08 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 900 battles
  • 343
  • Member since:
    12-30-2012

Any room for the Rikugun Ki-93 heavy fighter? It had two 20 mm cannons and a 57 mm cannon under the fuselage.

 

Ki-93 is below. The above aircraft is a Yokosuka P1Y Ginga.

 

I also made a suggestion about the Nakajima J1N here. Thought it could be a premium, but now I think it should be in the HF line, considering it competed against the A6M2 Zero during trials.

 

Don't forget about the Aichi S1A Denko. Only a paper project, but this aircraft was intended to have a twin cannon turret and four forward-firing cannons (two 20 mm and two 30 mm). The two 30 mm Type 5s used by the Denko are the same upgraded cannons on the tier VIII J7W1 Shinden.


Edited by Wolcott, 24 February 2014 - 05:28 PM.

Brewster - for lasting mastery of the air


zkyz #4 Posted 24 February 2014 - 05:45 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 6660 battles
  • 595
  • [-TNT-] -TNT-
  • Member since:
    05-26-2012

Thank you for the info +1. :great:

 

As a fan of Japanese aircraft I hope WG implement more lines. :kamikaze:



Fuzzybrainlizard #5 Posted 24 February 2014 - 07:25 PM

    Command Chief Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 7316 battles
  • 623
  • [VULCN] VULCN
  • Member since:
    05-01-2013

Another interesting Japanese experimental fighter was the Kayaba "Katsuodori" Ku-4 Ram Jet fighter.  Premium? 

https://hangar47.com/uploads/Katsuodori-6.jpg

 

 


Fuzzybrainlizard

triptyx #6 Posted 24 February 2014 - 07:51 PM

    Flying Llama

  • Community Ace
  • 322 battles
  • 1,622
  • [FLLMA] FLLMA
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postzkyz, on 24 February 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

Thank you for the info +1. :great:

 

As a fan of Japanese aircraft I hope WG implement more lines. :kamikaze:

 

I'll bet you'll see more Japanese aircraft in the future!  There are tons of airplanes and Nations to come.  :)



Demon93IT #7 Posted 24 February 2014 - 08:06 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostJ311yfish, on 24 February 2014 - 04:39 PM, said:

If you look at the image behind the Japanese tech tree, it shows blueprints for a twin-boom pusher-propeller aircraft that is not currently in the game.  The same plane also makes an appearance on one of the loading screens (lower left corner).  I think it is the Mansyu Ki-98 ground attack aircraft (images here, specs here).

 

That led me to thinking about how it might be incorporated into the Japanese tech tree, along with other ground attack aircraft, heavy fighters, etc.  This is what I came up with:  http://i.imgur.com/9ixZr5n.png

 

The goal was to show a chronological progression for both the Army and the Navy, as well as to acknowledge German influence (heavy fighters, jets).

 

I had to leave some out, here are some quick notes about those:

  • Nakajima A2N -- this would be the IJN tier 1, but because other tech trees only have one Tier 1, omitted
  • Mitsubishi J4M -- lost to J7W1, omitted
  • Mitsubishi-Payen Pa.400 -- very unusual prototype, omitted
  • Mitsubishi Ki-200 -- rocket-powered, omitted
  • Rikugun Ki-202 -- rocket powered, omitted

 

These numbered high in production but it was difficult to trace a lineage to fit the tiered structure; they require more research to see how they fit in (or else offered as Premium):

  • Aichi D3
  • Aichi B7A
  • Nakajima J1N 
  • Mitsubishi G4M 

 

I've considered also to add other planes to the Japanese tech tree, i've made a topic in the past(i have to find it though). In any case i can simply copy/paste what i've done.

 

Nakajima(light fighters)

Tier II: Ki-11

Tier III: Ki-27

Tier IV: Ki-43 I

Tier V: Ki-43 III

Tier VI: Ki-44

Tier VII: Ki-84

Tier VIII: Ki-87

Tier IX: //

Tier X: //

 

Kawasaki(light fighters)

Tier II: Ki-10

Tier III: Ki-28

Tier IV: //

Tier V: Ki 60

Tier VI: Ki 61

Tier VII: Ki 100

Tier VIII: Ki-94

Tier IX: //

Tier X: //

 

Mitsubishi(light fighters)

VI)J2M3

VII)J2M5

VIII)J4M

 

Kawanishi(light fighters)

VI)N1K-J

VII)N2K-J

 

Heavy fighters

V: Ki-45(Ki-96 top configuration)

VI: Ki-102

VII: S1A Ki-93(thanks Wolcott for the suggestion, i owe you one :medal:)

VIII: J8N1 Kikka

IX: Ki-201

X: //

 

Now back to the topic. There's a problem with the tier IX and X: they are the half brothers of the 262 so they should be placed where the 262 is(Kikka tier VIII and the KI 201 at tier IX in the HF branch). It would have been easier with the 262 in the LF branch but we have to live with this.

 

As the G4M is concerned it was a medium bomber so i don't think it will be playable, any any other medium/heavy bomber.

 


EDIT: Uhm the presumed speed of the S1A is fairly low(around 580 km/h). It should be placed at tier VI due to the speed and also the armament is comparable to the 410 one. The Ki-93 could be placed at tier VII above the Ki-102 due to the fact that it has the same armament layout(the weapons got improved but both had 1x57 mm plus 2x20 mm). In any case there's a problem for the tier X, nothing new anyway since it's a chronic problem

 


Edited by Demon93IT, 25 February 2014 - 12:20 AM.


Commander_Rasseru #8 Posted 25 February 2014 - 09:03 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 372 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
I like to see a Attack/Bomber tree for the Navy side. If a aircraft is a torpedo bomber? Just exchange the torpedo for bombs to add more aircraft to a tree tier.
Seaplanes would be fun a well. If they can land on water? A good way to break or let other planes crash in the water. :sceptic:
But, seaplanes can be group with attack, bomber, or even a heavy if needed.|

To solve the Tier X problem... This could be done in two ways. 1. Give them a imported US aircraft that the Japanese used after the war. 2. Find the first Japanese aircraft that matches with a 10 tier they made after the war. They reform their air force in 1954, used F-86F Sabres and Lockheed T-33As. I have to do more research on other aircraft.

Demon93IT #9 Posted 25 February 2014 - 10:04 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostCommander_Rasseru, on 25 February 2014 - 09:03 PM, said:

I like to see a Attack/Bomber tree for the Navy side. If a aircraft is a torpedo bomber? Just exchange the torpedo for bombs to add more aircraft to a tree tier.
Seaplanes would be fun a well. If they can land on water? A good way to break or let other planes crash in the water. :sceptic:
But, seaplanes can be group with attack, bomber, or even a heavy if needed.|

To solve the Tier X problem... This could be done in two ways. 1. Give them a imported US aircraft that the Japanese used after the war. 2. Find the first Japanese aircraft that matches with a 10 tier they made after the war. They reform their air force in 1954, used F-86F Sabres and Lockheed T-33As. I have to do more research on other aircraft.

As the attack planes are concerned there are some problems:

1)The development isn't smooth. There are many jumps between the single planes. Here are the planes(with the year of their first flight) used by the IJN as bombers:

-D1A(1934)

-D3A(1938)

-D4Y(1940)

-B7A(1942)

It's quite difficult to make a branch out of the IJN and considering the torpedo bombers won't help. The B5N and the B6N(the two primary torpedo bombers) were usually unarmed so they are useless ingame(ground attacking wasn't their role since they had to fulfill the torpedo bomber and level bomber role)

 

As to solve the tier X issue(also tier IX has issues)
1)I'm trying not to use imported planes, that would be the last resource.

2)Japanese manufacturer essentially stopped developing their own warplanes since the end of WWII. There are some project developed immediately before the nukes but i don't know if they are viable. For example there's a rocket powered fighter, the Mizuno Shinryu. It's more of a what-if plane rather than an actual possibility, counting the fact that the Ki-200(the Japanese version of the Me-163), wasn't exactly successful.

 

EDIT: Here's a video in which there are some of these projects

 

 

 


Edited by Demon93IT, 25 February 2014 - 10:31 PM.


Commander_Rasseru #10 Posted 25 February 2014 - 11:10 PM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 372 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

View PostDemon93IT, on 25 February 2014 - 04:04 PM, said:

As the attack planes are concerned there are some problems:

1)The development isn't smooth. There are many jumps between the single planes. Here are the planes(with the year of their first flight) used by the IJN as bombers:

-D1A(1934)

-D3A(1938)

-D4Y(1940)

-B7A(1942)

It's quite difficult to make a branch out of the IJN and considering the torpedo bombers won't help. The B5N and the B6N(the two primary torpedo bombers) were usually unarmed so they are useless ingame(ground attacking wasn't their role since they had to fulfill the torpedo bomber and level bomber role)

 

As to solve the tier X issue(also tier IX has issues)
1)I'm trying not to use imported planes, that would be the last resource.

2)Japanese manufacturer essentially stopped developing their own warplanes since the end of WWII. There are some project developed immediately before the nukes but i don't know if they are viable. For example there's a rocket powered fighter, the Mizuno Shinryu. It's more of a what-if plane rather than an actual possibility, counting the fact that the Ki-200(the Japanese version of the Me-163), wasn't exactly successful.


Torpedo bombers could take a role as Attack aircraft. The Devs would just have to switch to bombs and add some guns. I don't think all B5N and the B6N were gun-less.

B5N  1 × 7.7 mm Type 92 machine gun in rear dorsal position and later  a 2 × 7.7 Type 97 machine guns in the wings. Also 1x 800kg (1,760lb) bomb or 2 × 250 kg (550 lb) bombs or 6 × 132 kg (293 lb) bombs

B6N Type 92 machine gun in a ventral tunnel at the rear of the cockpit, and a 7.7mm Type 97 machine-gun to the port wing.  Revised tail armament. 7.7 mm (.303 in) Type 92 machine gun and later replaced with one 13 mm Type 2 machine gun. 800 kg (1,760 lb) of bombs (1 x 800kg or 500kg, or 2 x 250kg)

Don't forget Seaplane.... they could be useful for a low or med tier plane. Like the Aichi M6A.



Demon93IT #11 Posted 25 February 2014 - 11:44 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostCommander_Rasseru, on 25 February 2014 - 11:10 PM, said:


Torpedo bombers could take a role as Attack aircraft. The Devs would just have to switch to bombs and add some guns. I don't think all B5N and the B6N were gun-less.

B5N  1 × 7.7 mm Type 92 machine gun in rear dorsal position and later  a 2 × 7.7 Type 97 machine guns in the wings. Also 1x 800kg (1,760lb) bomb or 2 × 250 kg (550 lb) bombs or 6 × 132 kg (293 lb) bombs

B6N Type 92 machine gun in a ventral tunnel at the rear of the cockpit, and a 7.7mm Type 97 machine-gun to the port wing.  Revised tail armament. 7.7 mm (.303 in) Type 92 machine gun and later replaced with one 13 mm Type 2 machine gun. 800 kg (1,760 lb) of bombs (1 x 800kg or 500kg, or 2 x 250kg)

Don't forget Seaplane.... they could be useful for a low or med tier plane. Like the Aichi M6A.

Both B5N and B6N had the possibility to mount bombs but, as i said before, they were the level bombers of the IJN carrier force(role which was covered by the G4M when land bases were available). They weren't supposed to to anything but to bomb the target and come back to the carrier, for this reason their armament was limited(less guns = less weight = better performance).

 

As the seaplanes are concerned the Seiran isn't plausible for this reason: it owes its existence to the I-400. It was specifically designed to be housed inside and to carry missions useful to the sub(scouting and/or attacking ships too far for the sub itself). The only plausible seaplanes are the A6M2-N and the N1K but both had the standard plane variant(the Rufe got derived from the original Zero while the N1K gave birth to the Shiden)



Commander_Rasseru #12 Posted 26 February 2014 - 10:18 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 372 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

View PostDemon93IT, on 25 February 2014 - 05:44 PM, said:

Both B5N and B6N had the possibility to mount bombs but, as i said before, they were the level bombers of the IJN carrier force(role which was covered by the G4M when land bases were available). They weren't supposed to to anything but to bomb the target and come back to the carrier, for this reason their armament was limited(less guns = less weight = better performance).

 

As the seaplanes are concerned the Seiran isn't plausible for this reason: it owes its existence to the I-400. It was specifically designed to be housed inside and to carry missions useful to the sub(scouting and/or attacking ships too far for the sub itself). The only plausible seaplanes are the A6M2-N and the N1K but both had the standard plane variant(the Rufe got derived from the original Zero while the N1K gave birth to the Shiden)


It is up to the player how to use a plane. Not how it was use in real life and history.  Any player can use a plane for any role and the game play shows it.

Could you be more open minded? Yes, the Seiran was design for the the I-400. Doesn't mean you can't fly it at all. The Japanese flew the plane on some missions without being stationed on a sub. Seiran has a training variant with wheel landing gear than the floats. Which makes it plausible to use. No plane should be count out of it plausible. The large recon seaplane would have a less plausible being used by players.



Wolcott #13 Posted 26 February 2014 - 10:45 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 900 battles
  • 343
  • Member since:
    12-30-2012
As much as I love the Seiran, keep it mind that it has no forward armament. All it had was a rear gun and either a bomb or torpedo. =(

Edited by Wolcott, 26 February 2014 - 10:46 AM.

Brewster - for lasting mastery of the air


Demon93IT #14 Posted 26 February 2014 - 10:55 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostCommander_Rasseru, on 26 February 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:


It is up to the player how to use a plane. Not how it was use in real life and history.  Any player can use a plane for any role and the game play shows it.

Could you be more open minded? Yes, the Seiran was design for the the I-400. Doesn't mean you can't fly it at all. The Japanese flew the plane on some missions without being stationed on a sub. Seiran has a training variant with wheel landing gear than the floats. Which makes it plausible to use. No plane should be count out of it plausible. The large recon seaplane would have a less plausible being used by players.


True, it's up to the player how to use their planes. The problem is that they were designed to fulfill a role which isn't ground attacking and it's a common problem to every torpedo bomber.

 

As the Seiran is concerned as Wolcott said it wasn't armed, it had only a machine gun for the gunner. If the recon plane were present as class i would have accepted its presence(as i said i really like the design), having it doing something else thanks but no. Same goes for the trainer variant, was supposed to train not to fight.



Wolcott #15 Posted 26 February 2014 - 11:08 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 900 battles
  • 343
  • Member since:
    12-30-2012
The training variant wouldn't matter anyway, as the Seirans were intended to be launched from the I-400s without their floats attached when they departed for Ulithi Atoll, thereby improving the aircraft's performance.

Brewster - for lasting mastery of the air


Commander_Rasseru #16 Posted 26 February 2014 - 11:13 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 372 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

View PostWolcott, on 26 February 2014 - 04:45 AM, said:

As much as I love the Seiran, keep it mind that it has no forward armament. All it had was a rear gun and either a bomb or torpedo. =(

 

View PostDemon93IT, on 26 February 2014 - 04:55 AM, said:


True, it's up to the player how to use their planes. The problem is that they were designed to fulfill a role which isn't ground attacking and it's a common problem to every torpedo bomber.

 

As the Seiran is concerned as Wolcott said it wasn't armed, it had only a machine gun for the gunner. If the recon plane were present as class i would have accepted its presence(as i said i really like the design), having it doing something else thanks but no. Same goes for the trainer variant, was supposed to train not to fight.

There is a chance that the Devs may add a forward armament. If not this plane? Another plane they might.


Edited by Commander_Rasseru, 26 February 2014 - 11:14 AM.


Demon93IT #17 Posted 26 February 2014 - 11:26 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostCommander_Rasseru, on 26 February 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

 

There is a chance that the Devs may add a forward armament. If not this plane? Another plane they might.


Well then it would become made in WG and it would require the WG tech tree(i'm not joking although it could seem so).

 

Personally i hope not to see things like that, it woud let me think "then i can design a plane on my own and let them implement it"(not that i'm capable of, at least not yet)



Commander_Rasseru #18 Posted 26 February 2014 - 11:31 AM

    Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 372 battles
  • 37
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013

View PostDemon93IT, on 26 February 2014 - 05:26 AM, said:


Well then it would become made in WG and it would require the WG tech tree(i'm not joking although it could seem so).

 

Personally i hope not to see things like that, it woud let me think "then i can design a plane on my own and let them implement it"(not that i'm capable of, at least not yet)


They could say the Japanese had plans to add a armament. But, couldn't because of lack of supplies or to speed production up. This could be true.



Demon93IT #19 Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:03 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Member
  • 0 battles
  • 348
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View PostCommander_Rasseru, on 26 February 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:


They could say the Japanese had plans to add a armament. But, couldn't because of lack of supplies or to speed production up. This could be true.

Technical Air Intelligence has to say something on this one. They were fooled by the Japanese in 1945 but, at the end, they found every Japanese project. Such modifications weren't found so, if TAI hadn't found them, it means that they never existed.



Wolcott #20 Posted 26 February 2014 - 12:05 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 900 battles
  • 343
  • Member since:
    12-30-2012

View PostCommander_Rasseru, on 26 February 2014 - 07:31 PM, said:


They could say the Japanese had plans to add a armament. But, couldn't because of lack of supplies or to speed production up. This could be true.

 

But that would be fantasy and not historical. Simply following what you suggested would be twisting history.


Brewster - for lasting mastery of the air






Also tagged with Japan, Mitsubishi, Aichi, Kawanishi, Kyushu, Kawasaki, Nakajima, Tachikawa, Mansyu, Rikugun

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users