Ki48IIb or c

[wolf217800]

Why would anyone change their production to either versions of this plane? They have the same flying stats as the "a" version with half the bombload. Opinions please.

[treespider]

ORIGINAL: wolf217800

Why would anyone change their production to either versions of this plane? They have the same flying stats as the "a" version with half the bombload. Opinions please.

Well the "b" & "c" are DB's vs the "a" being a LB, which should theoretically make them more accurate...

[wolf217800]

Yes they are DB's but their 2x100kb loads are worthless. So being more accurate with less does not seem to be a good reason to build them. Anything else I might be missing?

[SuluSea]

With PDU on---I turn off all production of Ki-48s and chose the Ki-21 line as IMO better upgrade path, distance , bombload and durability..... I just can't see wasting the HI (including 2 engines) and risking good pilots on such a small bombload. Japan gets the Ki-49 series quickly and the 9/42 upgrade has needed armor.

[wolf217800]

This would be a good strategy unless the number of bombs is a factor in whether you hit or not. Ki48's in the ASW role would be a benefit if they do. I can't see myself taking Ki21/49's off the ground/airfield bombing to train and then be used in this role. While the Sonia is useless for anything except training pilots.

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

With PDU on---I turn off all production of Ki-48s and chose the Ki-21 line as IMO better upgrade path, distance , bombload and durability..... I just can't see wasting the HI (including 2 engines) and risking good pilots on such a small bombload. Japan gets the Ki-49 series quickly and the 9/42 upgrade has needed armor.

[Puhis]

ORIGINAL: wolf217800

Yes they are DB's but their 2x100kb loads are worthless. So being more accurate with less does not seem to be a good reason to build them. Anything else I might be missing?

I'm playing PDU off, so I do produce them. Not many but some. Although DB model have reduced bomb load, it does seem to hit more than LB version. At the moment I only have one DB units flying in China, bombing airfield. I think DB model is equally "good" as LB model. That means, not very good... [;)]

[SuluSea]

ORIGINAL: wolf217800

This would be a good strategy unless the number of bombs is a factor in whether you hit or not. Ki48's in the ASW role would be a benefit if they do. I can't see myself taking Ki21/49's off the ground/airfield bombing to train and then be used in this role. While the Sonia is useless for anything except training pilots.

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

With PDU on---I turn off all production of Ki-48s and chose the Ki-21 line as IMO better upgrade path, distance , bombload and durability..... I just can't see wasting the HI (including 2 engines) and risking good pilots on such a small bombload. Japan gets the Ki-49 series quickly and the 9/42 upgrade has needed armor.

Hi Wolf, with PDU on my post wasn't to suggest you take Ki-21's or Ki-49's off the front lines to train or use in ASW roles early.

As the war moves on and the airforce sees improved planes starting with the Ki-49 series after enough are built the Ki-21's will find themselves doing ASW/low sea search roles. Eventually the Ki-49-la will get the bulk of that duty. IIRC the Ki-49-la is the only IJA bomber with MAD (in 6/44 when the radar appears) so the plan is to use them in ASW/low sea search roles to hunt subs .

There's any number of ways to run industry but for me the cost of building a Ki-48 for the punch it delivers (including potential kaimikaze use) is just not worth it. It also puts a bigger strain on your Ha-35 engines and being a popular engine it's needed for many other aircraft.

I'm not suggesting this is the way everyone should do it or the correct way but throwing out thought that this is the path I chose.. [:)]

[Empire101]

ORIGINAL: SuluSea

It also puts a bigger strain on your Ha-35 engines and being a popular engine it's needed for many other aircraft.

That a very good point!!

[GreyJoy]

Ki48b seems to be usefull imho. It's the only armoured bomber that Japan gets before 9/42 (when the Helens IIa comes online) and you already have a factory producing the Ki-48a (so no need to spend HI, mpw and supplies to change it).
 
It's true that it has less than half bombload than the Sally or the Helen, but it has decent range and in backwaters it can be used in many roles (ASW platform, airfield bombings in China etc).
In the first months of war Japan is always short of Sallies and Helens and, if you don't wanna spend too many HI and supplies to bump the Sally production early on (with the problems related to the mitsubishi engines too), the Lily is a fair alternative imho.
 
Personally i produce, in mid 42, 80 Helens Ia, 40 Sallies IIb and 40 Lily IIb (which is proving to be more durable than the Sally or the Helen, with far less pilot lost due to flak) and i feel these numbers are ok

[wolf217800]

Thank you all for your replies. They give food for thought. I have concluded that while the Ki48IIa is a useful bomber until the Ki49 with armour comes out, the DB version is just not worth the expense. I am currently building 300 Ha35 engines just to keep up with production and I intend in 9/42 to convert to the new Helen thus freeing up 68 engines for other uses. Thanks again.

[Shark7]

Also, compare the speeds of the airframes. Speed is a big factor in anything air for WiTP:AE. A faster airframe will have fewer losses overall.

[SuluSea]

Good thread guys! [:)]

I always try to keep an open mind in possible improvements and try to contribute to get some group think going.



I have 6 R&D factories researching the Ki-49-IIa and hope to have them in late June/early July at the latest. I'm still a believer Ki-48-Ib isn't worth building but I'm going to upgrade the existing factory and produce a maximum of 60 Ki-48-IIa's for use against airfields and later ASW/ sea search. I still think I can spend 72 HI better but it's worth a look , if nothing else you see a nice paint job. [:)][;)]