gorizont написал:

ну и кинсеи пошли помимо вышеуказанных машин на поздние сюсеи, ки-100,  ки-102, а производство их было небеспредельно.

А как раз весной летом 1942 г. появилась модификация Кинсей 51, 1300 л.с. Не так уж плохо... а кроме D3A2 её только на предсерийные E16 ставили. Кстати Вел 2 вообще снимать уже собирались, а тогда бы мотор вообще невостребованным оказался бы (действительно аналогия с АШ-82 годом раньше:)).
Большая мощность однозначно позволяла брать больше топлива или летать лучше. Планер Зеро как раз на М3 укрепляли т.ч. и мотор надо было поменять сразу. Вот Вел сразу 40 км/ч прибавил, и Зеро бы вышел бы на 570 км/ч. А при установке след. серии 6х, 1500 л.с., Зеро бы вышел на 590 км/ч (ни чем он не хуже Ки-100) и совсем не много уступал бы Хелкетам в 1943 г.

gorizont написал:

ни на палубах, ни на береговых аэродромах в первой линии вообще не должно уже было быть - вместо него должны были быть Рэппу и перехватчик от накадзимы.

Что-то про перехватчик Накадзимы кроме Ки-44 на 42-43 гг. ничего не слышал.
А Репа - вообще прикольная история. Вы его размерами не интересовались? Он же ведь Тандерболт почти!!! Садить такой самоль на палубу, надо сильно с головой поссориться. Да и в лифты Унрю он бы не влез.
С его габаритами и массой ничего слабее МК9 его бы не потянуло. Его-то самолет и ждал.

gorizont написал:

только потому и пошел в серию такой паллиатив, как Сиден.

С Сиденом то же интересная тема. Ведь Каваниси пыталась составить конкуренцию Мицубиси с наследником А6. J3K/J6K судя по всему мог круче и раньше А7 получиться, только дали конструкторам по рукам, что б серьёзным дядям не мешали и заставили возиться с сверхнеобходимым Е15 и J1K1, а потом его в J1K2 перекраивать

gorizont написал:

есть большой ТАИК от 1944 года по японской авиации, где довольно подробно описаны все японские движки и их модификации в виде табличных данных

Не подскажите что это такое и где бы его найти/посмотреть? Очень интересно, конечно.

На англ. читаю вроде бы нормально, но в приведенных вами выдержках с форумов ухватить мысль как-то трудно
Ну может еще попытаюсь

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78535
Не подскажите что это такое и где бы его найти/посмотреть?

Japanese Aircraft Performance & Characteristics TAIC Manual #1 ( Technical Air Intelligence Crew )
в сети его в электронном виде нет, похоже, а у меня погиб на внезапно полетевшем харде. я бы сам его скачал.

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78535
А как раз весной летом 1942 г. появилась модификация Кинсей 51, 1300 л.с. Не так уж плохо... а кроме D3A2 её только на предсерийные E16 ставили.

угу. а еще на двухм0торных дина \Ки-46\. салли \Ки-21\ и нэллах \которые G3М\

Отредактированно gorizont (09.06.2009 20:00:17)

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78628
на Салли Кинсеи вроде как не стояли. Их прежние Ха-5 и Ха-6 заменяли на Ха-101 т.е. Касеи.

да,здесь я ошибся.

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78628
На Дину Кинсеи стали ставить с 3-й модификации, т.е. ок. 2 пол. 1943 г.

с декабря 1942

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78628
Нелы летом 1942 г. сняли с производства

модель 23 - по феврал 1943
к машинам, использовавшим кинсеи, нужно добавить транпортники тэбби и тина, а также гидросамолеты е13 джейк и е16 Пол - если мы говорим о кинсеях вообще. кстати, у зеро а6м8 с кинсей 62 макс, скорость была такой же, как и у а6м5 - 571 км\ч

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78643
Это именно Ки-46-III?

да.

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78643
Я только говорю что выбор приоритетов в т.ч. и производственных - не маловажная вещь.

в чем правы-неправы?
ситуация в японском двигателестроении по структуре была фактически одинакова с американской - у первых две ведущих компании- конкурента - накадзима и митсубиси, у вторых - райт и пратт энд уитни плюс меньшие производители рядных двигателей, если брать только тех, кто и разрабатывает, и производит достаточно мощные движки жидкостного охлаждения, то у амов аллисон, а у япов кавасаки и аичи, впрочем и та и другая фактически лишь дорабатывали даймлер бенцоаский 601-ый. так что понят за один аллисон, не больше.
у мицубиси и накадзимы были внутрифирменные стандарты, у каждой, разумеется, свои. в  том английском тексте что я привел, упоминается, что все разработки мицубиси базировались всего лишь на трех типоразмерах цилиндров.
различия начинаются в другой сфере а именно, в отличие от американцев, ведущие японские двигателестроители по совместительству еще и осноные разработчики производители самой авиатехники.

Отредактированно gorizont (09.06.2009 22:42:24)

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78777
А Вы ещё вес сравните. Для полноты картины.

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78777
Ну, если "неэтично" с "Беркетом", сравните с "Хелкетом". Никто не запрещает.

Амеровские истребители тяжелее, а Хелкет опять же меньше.
Мне А7 в качестве палубного истребителя кажется не оптимальным переразмеренным самолетом. N1K3-A ИМХО и то предпочтительнее. И у него было больше шансов оказаться на палубе чам у А7. Еще больше нравится проект J3K/J6K Jinpu (по тем данным которыми располагаю). Палубный вариант этого проекта назывался А8К1 и вполне мог иметь ЛТХ аналогичные Ки-84.

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78777
"Фтопку" такие чертежи

Будут получше, эти выкину

что за звери такие J1K1 и J1K2

Имелись ввиду Е15, N1K1 и его пределки К1-J и К2-J

Отредактированно Aurum (10.06.2009 15:31:22)

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78919
Жаль что этот двигатель в Японии (в отличии от СССР) не получил развития.

А почему жаль-то? Для морской авиации он не очень подходил, а на суше в нем нужды особой не было.

Aurum написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #78914
Мне А7 в качестве палубного истребителя кажется не оптимальным переразмеренным самолетом. N1K3-A ИМХО и то предпочтительнее. И у него было больше шансов оказаться на палубе чам у А7. Еще больше нравится проект J3K/J6K Jinpu (по тем данным которыми располагаю). Палубный вариант этого проекта назывался А8К1 и вполне мог иметь ЛТХ аналогичные Ки-84.

вот кое что по истории созданич рэппу. некоторые аспекты статья проясняет.
взято с того же форума, ссылку на который я давал.
The Design and Development of the Mitsubishi Carrier Fighter Reppu

By Jiro Horikoshi via Martin Caidin

In 1940 the Mitsubishi firm received from the Japanese Navy the preliminary specifications for the 16-Shi carrier fighter which was to replace the Zero. It was intended that the new aircraft, which would not be available in quantity for several years, would become the Navy's standard carrier fighter when the Zero had reached its limit in modification and improvement.

However, in 1940 the Mitsubishi firm was experiencing serious difficulties in the development of the 14-Shi land-based interceptor (J2M Raiden); the company was plagued by a shortage of competent engineering personnel and the lack of a satisfactory engine for the J2M Raiden design. These circumstances delayed the 16-Shi carrier fighter program for at least a year.

With the major problems of the J2M Raiden interceptor solved, the proposed carrier fighter program was again postponed. In the autumn of 1941 I became seriously ill and did not recover until several months had passed. The Navy preferred not to undertake the design project without my active participation.

The first engineering meeting to plan the new fighter was held on 14th April 1942, at the Japanese Naval Air Research and Development Center. In the long interval which had elapsed, the 'plane was renamed the 17-Shi carrier fighter. The lessons of the air war to date played a large part in modifying the original proposals. The naval officers, especially the fighter pilots, present at the meeting, were in high spirits, flushed with the succession of our victories in every theatre of war.

In the light of past experience, I estimated that at least three years would be required to place the new fighter in actual operations. Because of the poverty of our industrial potential, frequent changes in fighter-aircraft types were a luxury we could ill afford, and my activities were always influenced by this situation. I thought it imperative that we concentrate our efforts on the principle of holding aircraft types to a minimum. To utilize to maximum efficiency the nation's limited manpower and personnel, we took special pains with the fighter project to insure an airplane superior in performance to that expected of the enemy three years hence.

It was necessary for me to select an engine which would not only meet the stringent requirements of the fighter 'plane but which also would not become obsolete for several years. That meant an engine with a considerable potential for improvement, and I believed our search was ended with the 2,000-h.p.-class Mitsubishi MK9A. This engine was already being tested in prototype form and would be available soon as the modified Model MK9B. The latter model represented a considerable improvement over the prototype, and featured a supercharger driven by a Fulcan hydraulic coupling. As it could maintain its sea-level horsepower output up to altitudes of 27,000 ft when necessary, the carrier fighter promised to become an excellent interceptor as well.

During the late summer of 1942, we received reports that the Americans had started mass production of a new single-engine fighter capable of very high performance; the aircraft (this was the Chance Vought F4U-I Corsair) reputedly was powered with a 2,000-h.p. Pratt & Whitney Double Wasp engine, and was heavily armed, well armored, and able to outperform the Zero.

It was obvious from the start that we required an engine in the 2,000-h.p. - class for our new fighter design. Despite weight saving, reduction of parasite drag, and unexcelled stability and controllability, without at least 2,000 h.p. it would be impossible to maintain the superiority, which the Zero had established early in the war.

My first major problem in designing the new fighter was, therefore, to convince the Navy that the MK9A or MK9B engine was absolutely essential to our success.

Under high blower speed the MK9B engine (Ha-2.II-II) delivered 1,760 h.p. at 19,700 ft, and 1,700 h.p. at 26,200 ft. At take-off 2,200 h.p. was available. The dry weight was 2,530 lb. With this engine the 17-Shi fighter would weigh 7,260 lb when empty and would carry a useful load of 2,640 lb.

Maximum speed at 26,200 ft was to be approximately 425 m.p.h., and the fighter would touch down at landing at 80 m.p.h. Under full throttle, the 'plane would have 1.1 hours of endurance or, correspondingly, thirty minutes of maximum power for combat in addition to slightly more than two hours for cruising.

Armament would consist of two Type-99-II 20-mm cannon, each with 200 shells, and four Type-3, 13-mm machine-guns, each with 400 rounds of ammunition. This represented an increase in the weight of armament of 198 lb, and a gross increase of 440 lb over the specifications of my original personal project.

Indicative of the Government splits in policy matters which often occurred was the controversy which arose over the performance characteristics prescribed for the Reppu. In support of my proposal to emphasize high speed for the new fighter, the Yokosuka Experimental Air Corps stated that the wing loading should be approximately 30 lb/ft2, a figure much higher than that normally allowed on naval carrier fighter 'planes. The loss in maneuverability was thought to be well worth the additional gain in speed; especially since the new Allied fighters were so fast that Japan's fighter could fight only at the enemy's pleasure.

Opposing this view, the Flight Test Division of the N.A.R.D.C. insisted upon maneuverability at least equal to that of the now obsolescent Zero. To satisfy the adamant demands of both Government centers, we considered the effectiveness of automatic combat flaps, which would allow a sharp turning radius at slow speeds.

Another obstacle arose when the Navy Bureau of Aeronautics ignored my engine preference and selected the Nakajima NK9H (Homare Ha-45-II) engine for the A7M1 Reppu. The Nakajima power unit was selected as preferable to the Mitsubishi product since it had already successfully completed its official tests.

On every possible occasion I voiced strenuous objections to the commanding officers of the Naval Bureau of Aeronautics against what I considered a most unwise decision. I insisted that, in order to serve the Navy's best interests, and to produce a fighter which could be successfully modified to meet a constantly changing air war, we should adopt an engine of greater power than the Homare. My arguments were to the effect that the new fighter should be as small and fast a 'plane as possible, and must if necessary sacrifice some equipment and range to compensate for the bigger and heavier engine.

For months I attempted to persuade the Navy to adopt my point of view. I was convinced that the MK9A engine was superior to the Homare, and supported my arguments by submitting data which compared the computed performance of the new fighter when equipped with either engine. The Mitsubishi power plant yielded several hundred more horsepower than the Nakajima Homare, and promised superior flight performance in every respect.

During the controversial discussions concerning the proposed Reppu fighter, on 6th July 1942, the Mitsubishi Company received the official design requirements for the 17-Shi carrier fighter, A7M1.

The basic specifications called for a single-seat, single-engine monoplane fighter generally superior in flight performance to the then existing aircraft. The 'plane was to be as small as possible to facilitate storage below decks on aircraft carriers.

Engine type was not specified, and the only power requirement stated that we would use 'that engine which shall have completed successfully the official tests by 1st April 1943. (*This figure was too high for a wing area of 332. ft2, and later was reduced to 490 m.p.h., equal to the dive speed limit of the Chance Vought F4U Corsair)

The fighter was to have a maximum speed of at least 397 m.p.h. at 20,000 ft, and to reach a height of 20,000 ft in less than six minutes after take-off. Under normal load conditions flight endurance was to be two and a half hours at 287 m.p.h. at 13.400 ft, allowing for maximum rated power for thirty minutes of combat at 20,000 ft.

Take-off distance under overload condition with the aircraft carrier steaming into the wind at 49 m.p.h. was not to exceed 270 ft; the landing speed was not to exceed 77 m.p.h.

Maneuverability was to be emphasized, and must be equal to that of the A6M3 Zero 32. To eliminate one of the Zero's major difficulties, the diving speed limit must exceed 520 m.p.h. indicated. Wing loading of 30 Ib/ft2 was recommended, with flaps capable of reducing this figure to an equivalent of 24 Ib/ft2 to increase maneuverability in dogfights.

Two Type-99-II 20-mm cannon, each with 200 explosive shells, and two Type-3, 13-mm machine-guns, each with 400 rounds of ammunition, would constitute the armament. In addition to all equipment carried by the Zero, the A7M1 Reppu would also be fitted with a drift computer then in the development stage.

Отредактированно gorizont (10.06.2009 19:31:09)

окончание

Ten test flights were made during the next six weeks. It was evident that, while there was little difference in the 'plane's excellent controllability and stability, the rate of climb, maneuverability, and maximum speed were far superior to the performance of the Homare-powered A7M1. Estimates made by the company's test pilot indicated that the new 'plane could reach a height of 20,000 ft in 6 minutes, and had a maximum speed of 387'5 m.p.h. at 19,000 ft.

These initial reports corroborated to an amazing degree my original performance estimates in the table of analysis dated 15th July, presented to the engineering conference on 30th July. The predicted performance of the MK9A engine was borne out in the new fighter.

An indication of the new Reppu's superior performance was found by comparing the 'plane with other Navy fighters. The only 'planes capable of exceeding 360 m.p.h. at 20,000 ft were the Raiden 23 and Raiden 33 and the prototype of Nakajima's twin-engine J5N1 Tenrai (Heavenly Thunder) (no code-name) interceptor which had begun its test program in July 1944. The Raiden was the only fighter which could climb to 2.0,000 ft in less than seven minutes.

Even the Army's best aircraft were surpassed by the MK9A-powered Reppu. Only two Army 'planes, the Ki 46 Dinah and the Ki 84 Frank fighter, could exceed 360 m.p.h. at 20,000 ft.

As the A7M2 Reppu completed its test flights, the B-29s were already assaulting Japan's cities in terrible and devastating bombings. American troops had swarmed ashore onto the Philippine Islands and severely defeated our forces. Formosa and Okinawa were daily hammered by Allied bombers, and enemy troops had selected Okinawa as their next invasion site. The war situation was critical arid it was only natural that reports of the excellent performance of the Reppu fighter should be joyfully received.

However, time had run out. We had hardly completed flight tests and taken the initial steps preparatory to commencing mass production of the Reppu fighter when on 7th December the Nagoya city district was shattered by a tremendous earthquake. The Superfortresses were bad enough, but this blow of nature following closely upon several particularly damaging bombings wrecked the Nagoya factories beyond any hope of repair. Salvageable machine tools and equipment were pulled from the wreckage and dispersed to factories still operating. Even this emergency step was fruitless; our production lines were in a state of chaos.

On 6th and 15th December we assembled in Yokosuka for an engineering-study meeting of the A7M2 and A7M3-J Reppu fighters. Nature joined in another devastating alliance with the rampaging B-29s and the Tokai district reeled from the shock of a severe earthquake; the greater part of the Oe Airframe Works of the Mitsubishi Combine in Nagoya temporarily suspended all production activities.

Six days later, B-29s made their first attack against the Daiko Engine Works of Mitsubishi in Nagoya and, on 18th December, returned to batter the Oe Airframe Works. The air raids smashed machines and production lines, killed hundreds of workers, and threw the great factories into a wild state of confusion. The New Year brought even worse air attacks; the Daiko Engine Works received the heaviest blows. It was unfortunate that this tremendous engine plant was so badly hit, for it was responsible for the production of the Mitsubishi MK9A engine.

With production of the engines reduced to an insignificant trickle, the anticipated date of the Reppu's entry into combat was indefinitely postponed.

Our entire problem revolved about the production of the MK9A engine; so long as power plants were available, we could solve the assembly operation without too much difficulty. On the assumption that the engine works would soon be functioning again, the Navy ordered full-scale production at the Oe Airframe Works in Nagoya and at the Mitsubishi Nankai Factory in the southern district of Osaka. Every effort was made to resume engine production at Daiko in Nagoya.

Of the several Reppu fighters already completed, the Navy accepted one A7M2 'plane for extensive flight-testing. On 4th February 1945, Lieutenant-Commander Kofukuda flew the No.2 A7M2 to Yokusuka and, by driving himself continually; he completed the official flight-testing program in the exceptionally short period of two months.

Despite the stimulus which the Reppu's outstanding performance imparted to our civilian and military personnel, our best efforts were fruitless. By the time the flight-testing program was complete, the intensity of air raids by the American heavy bomber and carrier 'planes had become unbelievable. Wave after wave of enemy bombers smashed at our factories almost every day and every night. Production in many major plants suffered and in some factories halted altogether.

Our basic trouble was that despite all our heart-breaking efforts the engines simply were not available. The Daiko Engine Works was repeatedly hammered and literally reduced to a graveyard of twisted steel girders and smashed machinery. Engine deliveries for the A7M2 No.3 fighter and subsequent models were reduced to a few assembled units. The assembly factories ground to a standstill and the entire Reppu production program foundered. And still the enemy bombers came.

Emergency meetings of military and civilian groups were held in March and April at Suzuka to find some means of producing the desperately needed fighters. Despite our good intentions and our best efforts, the factories had been: so badly damaged that production was months away. Even the acceptance flights on the second A7M2 fighter could not be completed until May; at the beginning of the year, we had assumed that the first production fighters would be available during the month of April.

By 22nd April the A7M2 No.1 prototype was undergoing accelerated company flight tests at Suzuka, with satisfactory results. The A7M2 No.2 prototype was being flight-tested by the Navy at the Yokosuka Air Base, and completion of the third prototype fighter was expected by the end of the month. We anticipated that the next four prototype 'planes, Nos. 4 to 7, would be available for flight by 25th May.

Lieutenant-Commander Kofukuda had been highly impressed with the performance of the second A7M2 fighter he had flight-tested and he urged the combined military and civilian assemblage at the meeting to assure Reppu production despite the air-raid damage.

"Either as an A-category fighter (carrier or escort) or as a B-category fighter (interceptor)," Kofukuda stated, "the A7M2 is an excellent 'plane in every respect. The comparatively low wing loading and light power loading are a guarantee for excellent performance at high altitude, and I expect this 'plane to outperform any enemy fighters it may encounter.

"In addition to its performance as a fighter, it can accommodate a variety of weapons which will enable it to perform as a ground attack fighter-bomber, as a shipping destroyer, and in other capacities. Its remarkable ease of take-off and landing renders the Reppu especially vital, in view of the large number of inexperienced pilots in our air forces. It is absolutely imperative that this fighter be brought into service at the earliest possible time."

Since December 1944 the Engine Production Works and the Engine Research and Development Unit worked around the clock to increase production and assembly, but their efforts were halted at every turn by the increasing air attacks. The enemy bombers crippled us badly by their repeated assaults against the Suzuka Hangar, where a number of Reppu fighters awaiting assembly were severely damaged.

Misfortune awaited us at every step. On 2nd May the second accepted fighter was badly damaged in a forced landing. The 'plane was being flown to Misawa in Aomori, to which the Air Proving Division of the Yokosuka Experimental Air Corps had dispersed to avoid air attack. A faulty fuel gauge forced the pilot to make a forced landing at Matsushima Air Field, where the fighter was wrecked.

On 19th July the third 'plane was flown to Misawa for its flight tests. In the first week of August heavy enemy bombers wrecked the new base; the third Reppu fighter was so severely hit that it could not be flown.

On 28th July Allied carrier-based bombers and fighters swarmed over Suzuka in a crippling raid which wrecked prototype 'planes Nos. 1 and 5. 'Planes No. 6 and 7 were lightly damaged and, after repairs, were flown with No. 4 'plane to a Mitsubishi factory at Matsumoto.

The Nagoya factories managed to complete the first production Reppu fighter and were rushing completion of other 'planes. But the factory damage had been so great and parts were so scarce that the second production 'plane was never completed at Nagoya. Not a single 'plane was completed at the southern district factories in Osaka.

With completion of the first production fighter, the history of the Reppu came to a close. If we had not been hindered in our development program, mass production could have been accomplished by the middle of 1944-before the Mariana Islands were captured and set up as the operational bases for the enemy B-29s. Hundreds of the Reppu fighters would then have confronted the Allied fighters and bombers.

Vice-Admiral Rikizo Tada, Chief of the Japanese Navy Air Research and Development Centre at the war's end, stated to American naval officers: "The main reason for the rapid fall of Japan was the delay in replacing the Zero fighter. The High Command was lulled into a false sense of security by the early successes of this 'plane, while your Navy, with the sting of early defeat, began production of your Hellcat fighter. It was the Grumman Hellcat which beat Japan. When our High Command finally decided to put into mass production a 'plane to compete with your F6F, it was too late. We ran into serious design and production troubles, then material shortages. In the end, we could not get the new fighters out in quantity."

Vice-Admiral Misao Wada, Chief of the Naval Bureau of Aeronautics, felt even more strongly about the Reppu fighter. In reference to the eighteen months' delay experienced in the development program, he said that “ . . . otherwise the picture might have been different, for the new 'plane was faster and more maneuverable than the Hellcat, and had good protection and heavier firepower."

When I try to remember the difficult time we experienced with the Reppu's wartime development, I am filled with mixed emotions. The unpleasant experiences and episodes have been faded by time, and only the better memories remain. We were pleased that the Navy finally did justice to the Reppu fighter, for such action showed that, despite the stubbornness and shortsightedness of certain high-ranking officials, the history of our naval aviation engineering had not been stained. And there is some small consolation in the fact that we who were responsible for the Reppu produced a fighter equal to any, and superior to most, foreign fighter craft.

Posted by Jim Lansdale

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #79001
Ага. Только Вы "забыли" уточнить - в два раза. 4720 кг A7M2 и 8800 P-47D.

О двух разах речь конечно не идет.
Норм. взлет. масса Корсара и Хелкета ~5660 кг, P-47D 7000 т (макс. 8000, на шарика добавлять еще 800 не стоит).
Вероятно американским летчикам было что возить с собой над океаном, тогда как японские предпочитали "это" оставлять дома 
Беркет легче, уложились в 4400 кг.

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Странно, что он не казался таким конструктору имевшим опыт создания палубного истребителя.

А7 мог казаться Хорикоши самым лучшим на свете, но смею предположить, конструкторы Граммана и Воута так не считали. И в Каваниси вероятно считали что могут поспорить с мнением конструктора, если пытались участвовать в конкурсе.

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

А откуда информация?
а Вас не смущает, что J3K1 требовался тот же МК9А, что и A7M2?

В связи с задержкой МК9А, J6K1 планировался с Хомаре, таким же как и у Ки-84.
Кстати A7M1 то же на Хомаре летал. Скорость была 574 км/ч - отличная стабильность (А6М8 - 573 км/ч)!

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Вы уж, пожалуйста, не изобретайте собственную систему обозначения японских самолётов.

Я вроде не придумываю. В первом случае была описка.
Кстати согласно японской схеме обозначений, Сиден как сухопутный истребитель должен обозначаться J3K1 (впрочем формальность)

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #79001
Во-первых, J3K создавался по ТТЗ 1942 г., как и A7M. Следовательно, и получение готовых конструкций ожидалось примерно в одно время.

Начало проектирования обоих по программе 17-Ши - 14 апр. 1942 г. (как видно из приведенной ув. gorizont статьи). ТАкже как и начало проектирования Ки84 приходится приблизительно на то же время.
А вот получение готовых конструкций по времени сильно не совпадает
(83 самолета Ки84 первой партии проходили войсковые испытания в августе 1943 - марте 1944 года).
Другой пример Сиден был за год переделан из морского Киофу (кстати с заменой двигателя) за 1 год.

Впрочем как хорошо видно их приведеной gorizont статьи, да и не было секретом раньше, задержка программы "репа" имеет причины сугубо внутрифирменного происхождения.

Т.ч. заниматься размножением "нострадамусов" нет необходимости.

Сидоренко Владимир написал:

Доказательства "давания по рукам" есть?

Проект J3/J6 Каваниси был остановлен "вышестоящей инстанцией".

Отредактированно Aurum (11.06.2009 02:34:44)

И-185
Уважаемые.какой мотор копировали для Ки-61? Как думаете это однократно делали самураи?
С уважением С.С.

сан саныч написал:

Оригинальное сообщение #79053
Уважаемые.какой мотор копировали для Ки-61? Как думаете это однократно делали самураи?
С уважением С.С.

копировали - это не вполне верный термин. японцы получили лицензию на производство дб-601 . но - что кавасаки, что аичи дорабатывали его как в плане доработки базового движка, так и в плане разработки его модификаций.