Commander_Rasseru, on 27 March 2014 - 04:05 AM, said:
The Fuji T-1 was very lightly armed, the F-104 it's way outside the limits set. As the T-33 is concerned i don't know, technically it could be added although it wasn't designed to fight
Commander_Rasseru, on 27 March 2014 - 04:05 AM, said:
The Fuji T-1 was very lightly armed, the F-104 it's way outside the limits set. As the T-33 is concerned i don't know, technically it could be added although it wasn't designed to fight
Thank you for looking into post-WW2 jets. I have put them into a timeline to show their relationship to the current tier X's:
Timeline precedent established by game:
Timeline for post-WW2 Japanese jets and related developments:
Given the IL-40P and Gloster Javelin programs active in 1956, it seems to me that the best case could be made for the F-86F built by Mitsubishi under license in 1956 after the Japan Air Self-Defense Force was formed.
However, if this is done for Japan then a similar case could be made for Germany with the F-84F acquired in January 1956 after the Luftwaffe was reformed; yet Germany already has three WW2-era jet lines in game extending to Tier X, some of them from blueprints with zero production. Why then should Japan not get a similar treatment, given there is no shortage of native developments?
North American F-86F Kyokuko (Sunbeam) 「旭光」 |
![]() |
Production | Airframe | Engine | Speed | Armament | Bombs |
28+180 * | F-86F-40 | General Electric J47-GE-27 | 1118 km/h @ _____ *** | 6x12.7mm Browning M3 ** | 2x454kg |
* 28 built by North American; 180 assembled by Mitsubishi
** For reference, the Supermarine Swift in game has a max speed of 1127 km/h at best altitude and the F-86A in game has the same armament
Notes:
-- Used by 29 countries and United Nations
-- Also used for Japan's aerobatic team "Blue Impulse" (like USN Blue Angels, USAF Thunderbirds)
-- Some were given back to the U.S.
-- Added to omitted list:
Edited by J311yfish, 21 June 2014 - 02:08 PM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
I have been thinking about how to fill the lower tiers on the IJN side leading up to the N1K1-J and the J1N1. These are the possibilities:
Option 0: Nothing
-- leave it blank because the A6M is legendary and eclipses everything else in production
Option 1: Dive Bombers
-- You would be giving up the firepower/speed/maneuverability of the A5M or A6M in order to have a tail-gunner, greater payload, and dive brakes.
-- Examples: Aichi D1A, Aichi D3A, Yokosuka D4Y, Aichi B7A
-- barriers to implementation:
Option 2: Torpedo Bombers
-- As with dive bombers above, you would be giving up the firepower/speed/maneuverability of the A5M or A6M in order to have a tail-gunner.
-- Examples: Mitsubishi B5M, Nakajima B5N, Nakajima B6N, Aichi B7A
Option 3: Floatplanes
-- As with dive bombers above, you would be giving up the speed/maneuverability of the A5M or A6M in order to have a tail-gunner (and/or heavier armament for the tier)
-- floatplane lineage could contribute directly to the development of the N1K1-J
-- Examples: Nakajima E8N, Mitsubishi F1M, Nakajima A6M2-N, Kawanishi N1K1
-- barriers to implementation:
Option 4: Flying Boats
-- You would be giving up extreme speed/maneuverability in order to have a tail gunner or multiple gunners, and would be heavily armored, presumably to deliver a bomb payload in a manner similar to ground attack aircraft currently in game, taking the "sky whale" concept to a whole new level
-- Examples: Yokosuka H5Y, Kawanishi H3K, Kawanishi H6K, Kawanishi H8K
Option 5: Recon / Patrol / Observation aircraft
-- You would be giving up firepower and armor for speed.
-- recon aircraft could contribute directly to the development of the J1N1
-- Examples: Mitsubishi C5M, Nakajima C6N, Kyushu Q1W
Option 6: Other fighter prototypes/projects
-- parallel fighters developed as companies competed with each other (Ex. Ki-33)
-- canceled fighter projects
-- modified imports, etc.
Option 7: Some combination of the above
-- such as the "night fighter" variations on any of the above
-- this could contribute directly to the development of the J1N1 dedicated night fighter.
I recognize that most of the aircraft here are going heavily against precedent. My goal here is to get a good look at everything to see how it might fit in. It is really just a sudoku exercise at this point, but there are still some reasonable (or obvious) conclusions to be derived. For instance, a dedicated dive bomber or floatplane progression would probably not arrive before the IJA fighters because there are barriers to implementation. Flying boats are comparable to low-altitude flying fortresses and probably wouldn't even be considered until then if ever. Perhaps another avenue for implementing them would be through alternate battle modes that use AI, but I don't want to speculate about that. Anyway, just to be thorough, here is an interpretation of dive bombers and floatplane progression based on information derived from Francillon and Mikesh.
Dive bombers and floatplanes included:
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
I believe that dive and torpedo bombers would be more than capable of performing a GA role, so long as they are balanced according to their speed and payload. The Japanese very much show the type's weakness in armament, but if they could perform acceptably if they could fill the role of quick-strike aircraft, able to rush in and claim early superiority before enemy fighters can harass them.
Recon aircraft as well, due to the weak (if any) armament, would need to be balanced to have a speed/altitude advantage just to stay alive, much less be effective in a fight.
As for flying boats... No. They are very large, often with four engines, and (correct me if I'm wrong) don't have hard-mounted forward firepower. As such, they fit in with bombers such as the B-17 and JU-188.
I would agree that floatplanes are the most ideal, as they were often conversions of effective fighter aircraft and carried comparable armaments. I would place torpedo and dive bombers next, followed by the few viable recon planes. and leave the boats strait out.
I never said I was good.
Update:
-- Added some detailed notes about dive bombers and floatplanes above.
-- Japanese aircraft used by the Chinese after September 1945 (below).
Source: Communist Chinese Air Power, by Richard M. Bueschel
A Chinese tech tree is being worked on over here.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
This post is reserved for a detailed account of premium aircraft already in-game.
Tier II Premium
Tier III Premium
Tier V Premium
Tier VI Premium
Tier VII Premium
Tier VIII Premium
Edited by J311yfish, 09 November 2016 - 10:08 PM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
J311yfish, on 11 March 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:
Kogiken series:
Mitsubishi-Payen Pa.400:
A7M3:
I will look closer at the other aircraft in your list. If you can recommend sources other than Francillon or Dyer I would be glad to check them out.
When I began this project I had to set several rules for myself in order to have a clear direction. One of the rules was that I was going to give preference to high-production aircraft (those that were actually in the war); yet I have discovered that the tech trees of other countries do not necessarily adhere to that rule. The Russian attack line for example has several IL's that never had more than 10 produced, yet they are there presumably to complete the line and offer an alternate path of progression. Another example is the Bf 109 Z (only one built, but never flown). I could certainly use the that precedent (or the J7W3) to devise any tree I want in the name of fun, but then it becomes deeply subjective and not very useful for making predictions.
I don't know how to account for the "fun factor" but I imagine it would involve identifying different themes and trying to work them into the tree, such as:
-- a fighter line that focuses on speed and rate of climb rather than maneuverability
-- a discernible ground attack line
-- a discernible heavy-fighter line or "night fighter" concept if maps are made to be dark ***
-- a dive bomber line if it becomes relevant
Anyway, I'll leave the "fun factor" to developers because it is their business and I think they've done a great job so far. I'm kind of hooked if you haven't noticed. If nothing else comes of this tech tree adventure then it has certainly been fun just learning about all of the different aircraft.
Seeing that WoT and WoWP are run by the same folks and share a common general plan for the games ( allowing vehicles in game that did not get off paper or out of prototype ) to dismiss an aircraft because it did not fit into the realm of deployed, functioning planes is incorrect as far as this game goes. The JPE-100 in WoT is a prime example of that.
Update 1.4 Public Test patch notes
New Premium and gift planes for developers only:
De Havilland 98 Mosquito FB 26 - China Tier VI Premium heavy fighter
CKB I-7 - Soviet, Tier II gift fighter
Kawasaki Ki-5 - Japan, Tier II gift fighter
Hawker Hurricane IID - Great Britain, Tier V gift ground attack plane
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
This post reserved for detailed comparison of climb rates
Tier I and II
Tier II and III
Tier IV, V, VI
Tier VII, VIII, IX, X
Edited by J311yfish, 16 January 2016 - 01:15 PM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
The current tree is fine for making predictions, but there is room for improvement. I am working on an improved tree to resolve these things:
1. Organization by manufacturer (Mitsubishi, Nakajima, Kawasaki), not Army/Navy by production values.
-- Army/Navy distinction made sense in the beginning to reduce chaos, but if implemented as such it would be the only tree to be organized that way
-- this should better fit the WG tech tree model and should mean more aircraft (including prototypes) in the long run.
2. Tier placement determined by engine takeoff horsepower, not speeds.
-- speeds are superficial indicators that are highly variable by altitude and aerodynamic refinement
-- Kawasaki line engine tier can be accurately determined by the Ki-88 now in game, and the Daimler-Benz engines of the German tree
-- Nakajima line engine tier can be accurately determined by the Ki-43 expected to be in game soon, then compared sideways to Kawasaki
-- this should better fit the WG Tech tree model and should mean more precise placement
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
J311yfish, on 18 June 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:
The current tree is fine for making predictions, but there is room for improvement. I am working on an improved tree to resolve these things:
1. Organization by manufacturer (Mitsubishi, Nakajima, Kawasaki), not Army/Navy by production values.
-- Army/Navy distinction made sense in the beginning to reduce chaos, but if implemented as such it would be the only tree to be organized that way
In a sense, the American fighter lines are organized by Army/Navy, as in the Grumman/Vought line are carrier-based planes, whereas the Curtiss/North American line are land-based planes (but for gameplay purposes the FJ-1 was designated normal fighter even in the days when CBF designation existed).
Yes; that was the main reason for organizing along Army/Navy lines to begin with, along with Francillon's organization, but I am finding that if I follow the French model (that has no choice but to ignore the distinction) then organization by manufacturer (Demon93's method) with minor developments to fill the gaps, it starts to look really good. I think you'll see what I mean ... here is a rough overview:
FIGHTERS
"Mitsubishi" | "Nakajima" | "Kawasaki" | |||
I | Type 91 (05/1928) | ||||
II | A4N (1934) | Ki-11 (04/1935) | Ki-10 (03/1935) | ||
III | A5M (02/1935) | Ki-27 (10/1936) | Ki-28 (~10/1936) | ||
IV | A6M1 (04/1939) | Ki-43 (01/1939) | Yokosuka D4Y1 (12/1940) | ||
V | A6M2 (12/1939) ------------> | Ki-43-III (05/1944+) or Ki-44-I | Ki-60 / Ki-61-I (03/1941) / (12/1941) | ||
VI | A6M5 (1943+) | J2M (03/1942) | Ki-44-I/II (08/1940) (08/1942) | Ki-61-II / Ki-100 (12/1941) / (02/1945) | |
VII | A7M (05/1944) | N1K1/2-J (05/1942) (12/1943) | Ki-84 (04/1943) | Ki-119 (~09/1945) | |
VIII | Kyushu J7W1 (08/1945) <-- | J4M (1943+) | Ki-87 (04/1945) --------------> | Kitsuka (08/1945) | Ki-64 (12/1943) |
IX | Kyushu J7W2 | J8M (1945) | Ki-201 (1945) <---------------- | Yokosuka R2Y2 (1945) | |
X | Kyushu J7W3 | Rikugun Ki-202 (1945) | Variable 2 |
Organized this way it starts to look more like the playable trees of other countries, rather than "fanning out" at VII/VIII. It also comes close to maintaining consistent themes for each line:
Themes
Mitsubishi/Kyushu -- maneuverability, with J2M and J4M emphasis on speed and climb, with primarily Mitsubishi air-cooled engines; primary designer Jiro Horikoshi of Mitsubishi
Nakajima -- maneuverability up to Ki-43, then emphasis on speed, climb, survivability, with primarily Nakajima air-cooled engines; primary designer Yasushi Koyama of Nakajima
Kawasaki/Yokosuka -- German water-cooled engines produced by Kawasaki and Aichi until Ki-61-II; fighter bomber trend continued by Yokosuka; primary designer Takeo Doi of Kawasaki (influenced by Richard Vogt).
Heavy fighters are their own challenge, but by eliminating Army/Navy distinction it is possible to have them together off to the right of Kawasaki (similar in manner to the German tree), and allows a distinction to be made between those that favor large calibers (Heavy I), and those that favor a lighter/faster approach (Heavy II), in order to have everything included:
HEAVY FIGHTERS
Heavy I (heavier) | Heavy II (lighter/faster) | |
I | ||
II | Aichi D1A (1934+) | Ki-30 (02/1937) or Ki-32 (03/1937) |
III | Aichi D3A (12/1937+) | Ki-51 (06/1939) |
IV | Ki-45 (~01/1939) 37mm | J1N1 (05/1941) |
V | Ki-96 (08/1943) 37mm | Ki-46-I/II (11/1939) / (03/1941) |
VI | Ki-102 (03/1944) 37mm/57mm | Ki-46-III/IV (12/1942) (1943-1944) |
VII | Ki-109 (08/1944) * 75mm | J5N1 (07/1944) |
VIII | Rikugun Ki-93 (1945) 57mm/75mm | Ki-83 (11/1944) |
IX | ||
X |
*or Aichi S1A (1945)
In general, those in the Heavy I category have greater armor and armament at the expense of speed; primary designer Takeo Doi of Kawasaki.
In general, those in the Heavy II category are ~30-50 km/h faster at the expense of armor and armament; primary designer Tomio Kubo of Mitsubishi.
For engine/armament details see page 5 and use Control + F to navigate quickly, or use links in the above table and scroll up/down.
This method would also reduce the list of sidelined/alternate/premium/gift planes considerably:
Other thoughts on why this approach makes sense:
Anyway, that's the proof of concept for a full-saturation model and might be closer to what eventually takes shape.
Edited by J311yfish, 18 August 2014 - 01:48 AM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
Big update
-- based on Demon93's model and lessons learned from the French tree, the Japanese tree is now organized by manufacturer and horsepower.
-- all heavy fighters are now included with distinction between those that favor speed (such as Ki-83) and those that favor armament (such as Ki-93).
-- all details on page 5 have been cleaned up and reorganized with spoiler tags and color code for easier navigation.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
Sorry, I just had to point out. The Japanese characters for the F-86-J's nickname, Kyokkou are mistaken. the correct characters are「旭光」.
In addition, the T-1 training craft was designed not only to hold one 12.7mm heavy machine gun for shooting practice, and had the capacity to mount either Sidewinder AAMs, bombs, or gunpods on the wings. though as WG seems adamant on not implementing missiles, the armament on the T-1 would be limited to the guns and 2 750kg bombs.
Also, why does everyone reffer to the Kikka as "Kitsuka"? The 'tsu' in「きっか」is pronounced as a sharp sound after the 'Ki', and not as its own word.
Youimcolo, on 21 June 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:
Sorry, I just had to point out. The Japanese characters for the F-86-J's nickname, Kyokkou are mistaken. the correct characters are「旭光」.
Thank you, will update!
Youimcolo, on 21 June 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:
Also, why does everyone refer to the Kikka as "Kitsuka"? The 'tsu' in「きっか」is pronounced as a sharp sound after the 'Ki', and not as its own word.
Here is what Edwin Dyer says about the Kikka/Kitsuka naming convention -- quote.
He also claims the translation to be not just "Orange Blossom" but rather "Wild Orange Blossom."
He makes a similar case for the Mitsubishi J8M -- quote.
Do you agree with his approach? It is beyond my understanding, but I really hope to learn Japanese someday.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
This post is to explore Kikka/Kitsuka and Ki-201 in detail relative to the Me262, J7W2, and Ki-202 in order to better understand how they might be implemented.
DIMENSIONS
ARMAMENT
MANEUVERABILITY
SPEED / CLIMB
Edited by J311yfish, 22 June 2014 - 06:03 PM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
gunlion, on 23 June 2014 - 09:54 PM, said:
Hey everyone! We apologize for the delay in getting these answers to you; we've taken the top questions from April and May and combined them into one thread:
Question: Are there any plans to add the Beta planes (P-39, P-51 JP, Me 609, J4M1, Me 109 TL, etc.) and nose art that were removed prior to release? Will we eventually see them in upcoming patches?
Answer: Some of them have already been added into the game (like the P-39 in 1.4.0, a USSR LVL6 Premium); some of them will be added in the near future (for example, in 1.6.0); and some of them a little bit later. The same thing with the nose art as well.
...
Q: What are the plans for future GA lines? Or could we get a teaser for the German GAs?
A: There are planes for future GA lines, but we are not ready to tease the details just yet. Sorry!
Q: 75mm guns were mounted or planned for on the B-25G, A-26, Ki-93 and Hs-129, among others. Are there caliber limits placed in WoWP - if so, how large can a cannon be - if not, can these planes be expected to be seen?
A: We have no technical limits for caliber of guns! In reality, 75mm guns were powerful and specialized anti-tank guns. Aircraft armed with such a caliber had very little maneuverability and were not suitable for air combat. The rate of fire of these primary weapons were only what was necessary to take out tanks. We have not introduced these guns as planes equipped with them would be almost defenseless against fighters, and with current ground targets it is better to fight with rapid-fire guns. But with progressive ground-target types, such calibers might possibly be needed--but probably not soon.
^ That essentially means Nakajima J5N1 and/or Aichi S1A for Tier VII, and if Ki-93 is to appear anytime soon it will be the 57mm version.
Edited by J311yfish, 23 June 2014 - 09:25 PM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
J311yfish, on 24 February 2014 - 12:39 PM, said:
Designers / Chronology / Details
Premiums, alternates, gift planes (tiers approx):
Sources:
Acknowledgements:
Older versions:
Love this.. Make it happen please.
"I never worry about action, only inaction". - Winston Churchill
This post is reserved for a detailed examination of the "B" series of IJN aircraft.
This is necessary in part to identify the exact origin of the Nakajima Kikka.
Kusho B3Y1 (1933) -- Navy Type 92 Carrier Attack Bomber
Kusho B4Y1 -- "Jean" (late 1935) -- Navy Type 96 Carrier Attack Bomber
Mitsubishi B5M -- "Mabel" (1937) -- Navy Type 97 Carrier Attack Bomber Model 2
Nakajima B5N -- "Kate" (01/1937, 12/1939) -- Navy Type 97 Carrier Bomber
Nakajima B6N Tenzan (Heavenly Mountain) -- "Jill" (spring 1941+) -- Navy Carrier Attack Bomber
Aichi B7A Ryusei (Shooting Star) -- "Grace" (05/1942+) -- Navy Carrier Attack-Bomber
Nakajima C6N Saiun (Painted Cloud) -- "Myrt" (05/1943+)
Nakajima G8N Renzan (Mountain Range) (10/1944)
Edited by J311yfish, 23 January 2016 - 03:50 PM.
Main tech tree projects: JAPAN • UNITED KINGDOM • UNITED STATES • GERMANY • USSR // aircraft to China
Europe tech tree projects: ITALY • FRANCE • SWEDEN • Finland (skins) • Poland • International // Retired projects: China • Brazil
Historical scenarios: Spanish Civil War (skins) • Invasion of Poland • Winter War • Continuation War // History of World of Warplanes
Map proposals: Panama Canal • Great Wall of China • Cliffs of Dover // Clan: 343 Kokutai // Tutorial: How to ignore forum posts and signatures
0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users