Jump to content


Kawasaki KI - 108 (Randy)

KI-108 Randy

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
4 replies to this topic

sendo5 #1 Posted 13 September 2012 - 08:34 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    07-08-2012
http://ww2photo.se/a...kasak/04353.jpg
Kawasaki Ki.108 KAI
Type: High altitude fighter
Service:         Japanese Army Air Force (JAAF)
Crew: 1
Armament: two 20mm Ho-5 cannon under the fuselage
        one 37mm Ho-203 cannon in the nose
Reference: Francillon: 138

Specifications:
Length: 42' 9.75" (13.05 m)
Height: 12' 1.75" (3.7 m)
Wingspan: 56' 11" (17.35 m)
Wing area: 430.555 sq. ft (40 sq. m)
Empty Weight: 11464 lbs (5200 kg)
Loaded Weight: 16755 lbs (7600 kg)

Propulsion:
No. of Engines: 2
Powerplant: Mitsubishi Ha-112-II 14-cylinder radial
Horsepower: 1250 hp each

Performance:
Range (normal): 1367 miles (2200 km)
Cruise Speed: n/a
Max Speed: 373 mph (600 km/h) at 32,810 ft (10000 m)
Climb to/in: n/a
Ceiling:        44,290 ft (13,500 m)

Production: four (2 prototype Ki-108s, 2 Ki-108 KAIs built)
https://www.the-blue..._1944-36571.jpgPosted Image
Posted ImagePosted Image
Posted Imagehttp://img.wp.scn.ru...2/pics/65_3.jpg


The Kawasaki Ki-108 was a twin-engined high-altitude fighter based on the Ki-96 and Ki-102 developments of the Ki-45 Toryu. Kawasaki had been working on the Ki-96, a single seat version of the Ki-45, since the summer of 1942, and so when the Japanese Army issued an operational requirement for a single-seat high-altitude fighter Kawasaki's chief designer, Takeo Doi, suggested that the new aircraft be based on the Ki-96.

The new aircraft required a pressurized cabin. In most aircraft this is achieved by combining a largely airtight cabin with a source of pressurised air. On the Ki-108 Kawasaki attempted to produce a hermetically sealed cabin, with a double-glazed canopy and airtight entrance door, in an attempt to eliminate the need for compressed air, which required engine power to produce.
By the time Kawasaki were ready to being work on the two prototypes for the Ki-108 work on the single-seat Ki-96 had been abandoned in favour of the two-seat Ki-102. The seventh and eighth Ki-102b (ground attack) airframes were taken from the production line during the spring of 1944, and were given the pressure cabin and a modified tail. Both were powered by two turbo-supercharged Mitsubishi Ha-112-II Ru fourteen cylinder radial engines, and were armed with one 37mm Ho-203 cannon and two 20mm Ho-5 cannon (the same as on the Ki-96 and the Ki-102a).

The first prototype was completed in July 1944 and the second in August. Both were used for flight trials, during which one aircraft suffered a pressurization failure when the door blew off. The pilot was able to safely land the aircraft.
The Ki-108 was followed by two prototypes for the Ki-108 KAI, with a longer fuselage and wider and larger wings. Both changes were designed to improve the aircraft's performance at high altitudes. The first Ki-108 KAI was completed in March 1945 and the second in May 1945, way too late to be of any use for the Japanese war effort. Both were used for tests, but these had not been completed by the end of the war. Despite the increase in loaded weight the two Ki-108 KAIs were faster at altitude than the Ki-108s, suggesting that the modified wings and fuselage had been a success.

sweenytodd #2 Posted 13 September 2012 - 09:12 PM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 2 battles
  • 431
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012
Biggest problem I can see with it is the idea of a hermetically sealed cabin, hahaha let my 7.62 get even one hit and that dream is gone.  Obviously this doesn't keep it from being a viable option in game.  I just cant help but think that the designers were absolutely off their nut.

sendo5 #3 Posted 13 September 2012 - 10:49 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    07-08-2012

View Postsweenytodd, on 13 September 2012 - 09:12 PM, said:

Biggest problem I can see with it is the idea of a hermetically sealed cabin, hahaha let my 7.62 get even one hit and that dream is gone.  Obviously this doesn't keep it from being a viable option in game.  I just cant help but think that the designers were absolutely off their nut.
Yes a problem with a pressurised  cabin is the lack of  pressure because of the AP ammo hits. But this is an high-altitude fighter build to fight high-altitude bomber. This solution was made because of the aircompressors was drainig too much power of the main engines.

Edited by sendo5, 13 September 2012 - 10:54 PM.


sweenytodd #4 Posted 14 September 2012 - 03:50 AM

    Senior Master Sergeant

  • Alpha tester
  • 2 battles
  • 431
  • Member since:
    01-26-2012

View Postsendo5, on 13 September 2012 - 10:49 PM, said:

Yes a problem with a pressurised  cabin is the lack of  pressure because of the AP ammo hits. But this is an high-altitude fighter build to fight high-altitude bomber. This solution was made because of the aircompressors was drainig too much power of the main engines.

I kinda thought that might be the reason, and on an aircraft weight is at a premium. Still most high altitude bombers had either escorts for some of the flight or gunners (can't think of any without gunners but I'm really only conversant in American bombers).  Elegant solution to the problem, just not likely to work.

In any case I'd like to see this in game.

sendo5 #5 Posted 14 September 2012 - 01:28 PM

    Senior Airman

  • Closed Beta Tester
  • 0 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    07-08-2012
I find out that an B 29 Superfortress has an pressurised cabin and during an bomb raid or critical situation, the crew switched to oxigen suply and electrical heated jackets. I think that this Jap. Highaltitude fighter has an comparalbe eq. But isntead of pressurised cabin, I think the bigest problem of this aircraft would be the absence of selfsealing fueltanks and no fire extinquisher eq. and lack of solid armor.

Edited by sendo5, 14 September 2012 - 01:29 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users