Japanese Airborne Radars

Discussions on all aspects of the Japanese Empire, from the capture of Taiwan until the end of the Second World War.
Brady
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 22:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by Brady » 12 Jun 2021 19:31

For navigation?

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 3305
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by fontessa » 13 Jun 2021 01:54

Hello Brady,
Brady wrote:
12 Jun 2021 19:31
For navigation?
Yes. The deviation due to crosswind was calculated from its measurement result. The bombing and torpedo bombing Val, Judy, Kate and Jill were painted 偏流測定線 Drift Measuring Lines on horizontal tails for this purpose.
Zeeks couldn't do this, so they followed the two or three seats airplanes and returned to their aircraft carriers.

偏流測定線.jpg

fontessa
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 3305
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by fontessa » 13 Jun 2021 05:39

Hello Brady,

J1Ni-S could carry 2 bombs up to 250kg. Note these were hung on the fuselage not wings. The 2nd picture shows the details of 250kg land bombs suspension. The bomb rack used was dedicated to each type (weight) of bomb.

月光_爆装1.jpg

月光_爆装2.jpg

fontessa
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

EwenS
Member
Posts: 195
Joined: 04 May 2020 11:37
Location: Scotland

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by EwenS » 13 Jun 2021 12:46

fontessa wrote:
10 Jun 2021 08:57


Westland Whirlwind
In February 1937, a traial was ordered based on specification 37/35. The first prototype flew in October 1938 and was deployed in June 1940. However, due to frequent problems with the Periglin engines, production was discontinued with 112 aircraft.
The 4th picture is Westland Whirlwind.



Westland Whirlwind.jpg


fontessa
That is a very harsh assessment of both the aircraft and the engine.

The Peregrine was a development from the Kestrel engine series and there were, as with everything, teething problems which were worked out and it became a very reliable engine. 16 test and 286 production engines were built through to Jan 1942 for the 2 prototype and 114 production Whirlwinds. So only 58 spare engines were built to support the production fleet over its 3.5 year operational life. Only 4 aircraft were lost through engine failure from the information I have. Yes the Whirlwind lacked the promised high altitude performance, but recent research has suggested that this was due to the propellors and not the engine or airframe. (see The Aviation Historian issue 20).

In 1939 Rolls Royce were developing and/or producing Kestrel variants, Peregrine, Vulture, Exe, Merlin and Griffon engines. The Vulture (planned for the Manchester) was in deep difficulties, Merlin was needed in huge numbers and set to be needed in even greater numbers due to the Vulture. So the victims of the rationalisation became Kestrel (the Master trainer switched to the Bristol Mercury), the Peregrine (Whirlwind production limited) and the Exe (intended for the Barracuda and axed altogether).

At the same time the Whirlwind was controversial. Two engines to to do what a Spitfire & Hurricane could do with one was the view in certain quarters. So the order for 200 was cancelled and then reinstated in part (114) in late 1939. The first production aircraft flew in May 1940 and the last in Dec 1941. It entered squadron service in July 1940, a second was added in Sept 1941 as production numbers grew. They became fighter bombers in 1941. By mid 1943 there were insufficient aircraft remaining operational to keep both squadrons Whirlwind equipped, so 137 switched to Hurricanes in Jume and 263 to Typhoons in Dec. At that stage it still had 16 on hand and was able to put 12 in the air for a flypast of the Westland factory in Jan 1944.

In the 64 months of combat flying that the two squadrons were employed in, 73 aircraft were lost and another 23 returned to Westland for repairs that were never carried out. A loss rate of 1.5 aircraft per month per squadron is not really a bad record considering wartime loss rates generally and the low level nature of the work the Whirlwind was employed in.

Sorry to divert the thread. Back to Japanese airborne radars.

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 3305
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by fontessa » 13 Jun 2021 20:21

Hello EwenS,

Thank you for your comment on my article.
It seems to be the view in Japan that most of the causes of the slump of Whirlwind are attributed to the airframe design.

fontessa

Brady
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 22:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by Brady » 14 Jun 2021 01:11

J1N1-S, interesting that it would have that capability, I wonder if they were ever used operationally with bombs.

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 3305
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by fontessa » 16 Jun 2021 17:09

Hello Brady,
Brady wrote:
14 Jun 2021 01:11
J1N1-S, interesting that it would have that capability, I wonder if they were ever used operationally with bombs.
The below pcture shows the standard equipment for Modified J1N1-R. The sight for downward gun was shooting / bobing sight. This was probably for the bombing mission. I guess if J1N1-S, which did not have a downward gun, would installed a shooting / bombing sight downward for a bombing mission. Perhaps bombs were dropped at the predetermined altitude and speed of the airplane, but it would have been extremely difficult for fighter pilots who could not afford the bombing training to hit the target directly.


月光_照準.jpg

fontessa
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Brady
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 22:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by Brady » 16 Jun 2021 18:04

O-, I see there was a window that they were actually looking through, So they could look down and forward, so they could probably bomb in level flight with this, as opposed to how most fighter-bombers worked which was basically without the benefit of a bombsight By simply diving at the target.

User avatar
fontessa
Member
Posts: 3305
Joined: 25 Mar 2011 16:29
Location: Yokohama, Japan

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by fontessa » 21 Jun 2021 05:30

Hello Brady,
Brady wrote:
29 Apr 2021 22:54
IJA sets:

3) Any idea on when these sets were introduced, and what Planes used them ? Referring to the Taki-1 set's shown below.
Taki-1 was used for several IJA planes. Ki-67 Type4 Heavy Bomber “Hiryu” Peggy was one of them.
IJN ordered Mitsubishi Aircraft Corp, the maker of Peggy, to consider the possibility of refurbishment of her to a torpedo bomber. Peggy Nos.17 and 18 were refurbished to torpedo bombers and tested at Yokosuka Naval Air Group. With the good performances, 100 Peggy after No.161 became torpedo bombers. It is probable that Taki-1 was equipped from this time because night torpedo attack was assumed. Both IJA 7th and 98th Air Regiments were assigined to torpedo bomber units on 22 February 1944. They were moved under the command of IJN, and worked hard on offshore navigation training (which the Army was not good at) and torpedo attack training with Navy instructions. They participated in the Formosa Air Battle in October 1944 as a member of the T-attack force. As you know the result, the IJN and IJA air forces, which were lacking in skill, unfortunately did not produce outstanding results.
The 1st picture shows bombs Peggy could carry. The 2nd picture shows the torpedo carriy configulation. The torpedo, which was not expected at the time of Peggy design, was hung outside the body. Note the narrow bomb bay compared to Betty and Frances. The 3rd picture shows forward antenna. The 4th pictureshows side antenna equipped on both sides). As can be seen from these two figures, the transmitting and receiving antennas were shared.


Ki-67_爆装.jpg

Ki-67_雷装.jpg

Ki-67_Taki1_1.jpg

Ki-67_Taki1_2.jpg


fontessa
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Brady
Member
Posts: 1200
Joined: 10 Jul 2008 22:02
Location: Oregon

Re: Japanese Airborne Radars

Post by Brady » 21 Jun 2021 15:01

Taki-1 sets were first used operationally when ?

Thanks again for this it will be helpful.

Return to “Japan at War 1895-1945”