Tony range

[CapAndGown]

I tried searching for this but I didn't find anything. Can someone tell me when the range on Tony's was upped and why?

[Iridium]

Must have missed that, I have a book stating a range of 684 miles for the Ki-61-Ia 'Tony'. Does that help?[:D]

[stonefoot]

It all really depends on what books and models were used to make the base for the game, I've got books showing anywhere from 373 miles to 1181 miles with a 684 in the middle, with a production of 2500 to 3000 planes of different versions.

[Tristanjohn]

ORIGINAL: Iridium

Must have missed that, I have a book stating a range of 684 miles for the Ki-61-Ia 'Tony'. Does that help?[:D]

That would be the plane's maximum range with 2x 53-gallon drop tanks. Normal range was 373 miles. That should come to a game rating in hexes of approximately 11/5/3.

In actuality the game rates the Ki KAIc (a model I'm not familiar with--I don't know where they get this stuff) as having an endurance of 285/380 miles. That plane in the game is allowed a range in hexes of 19/6/4. Why the 19 hexes is anyone's guess.

The Ki-100 (another model I'm not familiar with), which presumably arrives in 1945, is rated an endurance of 330/440. I'd guess that would come out to around ?/7/5 in game hexes. I'm not sure about the accuracy of that, as it isn't clear what effect the Mitsubishi radial engine had on mileage--it certainly proved to be a performance winner in other respects, though.

[Mike Scholl]

You need a better definition of the question. RANGE is simply how far the A/C can fly point-to-point in normal condition with no additions. TRANSFER RANGE is the distance it cn fly with a maximum overload or fuel and no armament. COMBAT RADIUS is the distance out to which it can fly with a combat load, and allows for 15-30 minutes of "activity" over the target. It is generally about 2/5th's of the planes RANGE, but will vary somewhat with the Mission Profile. A fighter carrying exterior ordnance for a fighter-bomber role will have a reduced COMBAT RADIUS. Bombers generally "traded off" bombload for fuel---the closer the target the heavier the bombload. Mission altitude also effected this. Late in the war B-29's (having discovered Japanese AAA and Fighter defense to be negligible) changed the mission profile to low altitude night bombing..., and found that by avoiding the need to climb to 30,000 feet they can carry twice the bombload to the target. Planes that normally carried torpedos could generally carry a bombload farther (bombs come in various sizes and weights that can be adjusted for the mission, but a torpedo is a torpedo) Planes flying escort missions lost RADIUS because they had to adapt their speed to that of the bombers being escorted rather than the fighters best cruising speed.

The best the game can hope to offer is a decent "average" combat radius for each A/C, and an average "extended range" with reduced bombloads or aditional fuel. It could have offered MISSION PROFILE ranges in addition (the original board game did), but it diesn't. And in spite of varying "models" of planes many of the ranges given are questionable at best.

[castor troy]

ORIGINAL: cap_and_gown

I tried searching for this but I didn't find anything. Can someone tell me when the range on Tony's was upped and why?

I think it was changed with 1.4. I think I remember it was 2/3 previous 1.4 and I never new what to do with them (okay, just for CAP).

[Iridium]

ORIGINAL: Tristanjohn
The Ki-100 (another model I'm not familiar with), which presumably arrives in 1945, is rated an endurance of 330/440. I'd guess that would come out to around ?/7/5 in game hexes. I'm not sure about the accuracy of that, as it isn't clear what effect the Mitsubishi radial engine had on mileage--it certainly proved to be a performance winner in other respects, though.

Well same source states that the Ki-100-II used the Ha-33 radial engine (1500hp), had 3 x20 mm cannon, and 2 12.7 mm MG. Speed of 360 mph, and a range of 1367 miles. Much better I'd say, performance wise it is stated as being head to head with Hellcats, easy for inexperienced pilots to handle and enough ceiling to defend against B-29s. Thats all I've got on those...

[stonefoot]

All my references indicate the Ki-100 using the Ha-112 on the type I and the Ha-112 Ru on the Type II. What's interesting is that everything I'm reading indicates that the Ki-100 and the Ki-84 were an even match with the P51-D and the P47-N. They both came on too late to have any real affect on the outcome.

[Brady]

Ki-100 was inferiour in general preformance wise compared to prety much all other Ki-61 models in some way or another, the radial engine was a lash up done out of nescessisity, it was preporatedly better marginaly in the handeling department though.

The game models the worst preforming Tony made and one not even representing a larger production run:
Notes from the Original OOB posts I made regarding the Tony:

..............

Ki-61 KAIc: Interestingly we have the worst preforming Tony modeled in WiTP, while sources can be a bit confusing as to exactly how many of each type were built the model at hand is not by any streach of the imaganation the Larger or more represenative of the lot. This model started production in January 44. Realy WiTP should have more than one model of Ki-61, the Tony was a very imporatnat Aircraft for Japan, with Over 3,000 being built and of those 1,380 were Ki-61-I, 1,274 were Ki-61-I KAI(various sub models "c" being but one). The Earler one and the one more represenative of the fighting in the New Gunie area The Ki-61-Ib did 368 and climbed much better 16,405 ft in just 5 min 31 sec as aposed to 7 min for the Model we have in the game. The earler model also handeled a bit better. The model we have in the Game also has the wrong Cannon aramement it should have the Ho-5 20mm Cannons Not the Ho-3. The Tony should have two 250 KG Bombs Not the two 60KG bombs it is listed in the game as having.

Ki-100:870/1,367 (Normal/Max), Cruse listed at 249 mph, endurance is at 330

[aletoledo]

Late in the war B-29's (having discovered Japanese AAA and Fighter defense to be negligible) changed the mission profile to low altitude night bombing..., and found that by avoiding the need to climb to 30,000 feet they can carry twice the bombload to the target.

as I remember the principle reason of changing altitude for the b-29s was bombing accuracy. they weren't aware of the jet stream back then and there was a large current flowing over japan. when the bombers dropped from 30,000 their bombs went everywhere but where they aimed at!

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

You need a better definition of the question. RANGE is simply how far the A/C can fly point-to-point in normal condition with no additions. TRANSFER RANGE is the distance it cn fly with a maximum overload or fuel and no armament. COMBAT RADIUS is the distance out to which it can fly with a combat load, and allows for 15-30 minutes of "activity" over the target. It is generally about 2/5th's of the planes RANGE, but will vary somewhat with the Mission Profile. A fighter carrying exterior ordnance for a fighter-bomber role will have a reduced COMBAT RADIUS. Bombers generally "traded off" bombload for fuel---the closer the target the heavier the bombload. Mission altitude also effected this. Late in the war B-29's (having discovered Japanese AAA and Fighter defense to be negligible) changed the mission profile to low altitude night bombing..., and found that by avoiding the need to climb to 30,000 feet they can carry twice the bombload to the target. Planes that normally carried torpedos could generally carry a bombload farther (bombs come in various sizes and weights that can be adjusted for the mission, but a torpedo is a torpedo) Planes flying escort missions lost RADIUS because they had to adapt their speed to that of the bombers being escorted rather than the fighters best cruising speed.

The best the game can hope to offer is a decent "average" combat radius for each A/C, and an average "extended range" with reduced bombloads or aditional fuel. It could have offered MISSION PROFILE ranges in addition (the original board game did), but it diesn't. And in spite of varying "models" of planes many of the ranges given are questionable at best.

Mike:

Do you think the ranges are generally to great or not long enough?

Thanks.