Fuji T-1A - Light Attack Jet Fighter For Japanese Tier V PASSED TO DEVELOPMENT (+ my user project)

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

On 20/03/2019 at 18:46, Miki_Hoshii said:

Just be aware the actual T-1 doesn't have a area rule affect, or at the very least isn't as pronounced as depicted in that blueprint. 

 

Source: http://dansa.minim.ne.jp/His-Mil-T1-081-tecnorogy.htm

Thanks!

Is there anywhere I can find info on the pylons because otherwise I cannot model them correctly...

Edited March 24, 2019 by PickleJarOfDeath

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

I'm feeling good today! Anyway, this monstrous Japanese jet trainer and light attacker was submitted to the suggestions forum in late March and was passed to development yesterday. The thing has a crazy op armament not including the gunpods and insane bomb load.

 

Prepare yourselves!

 

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

*drum roll*

Spoiler

1 12.7mm M2 Browning machine gun and the 2 gunpods are 1 12.7mm M3 each. The bomb load is 2 750 lb bombs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'd suggest a 7.0 br and gunpods should be tier 1 mod with the bombs coming as a stock option. I think this will be a really fun aircraft for Japan. I am unsure where it would go in the tree. Before or after the Ki-200? This is due to the handling characteristics from it's light weight. It came after obviously in time so maybe after. I will have more to say later.

 

It should be after the Ki-83 given the attacker role it shares with many of the previous heavy fighters and the light handling characteristics and maneuverability it shares with the Ki-83.

 

My model:

 

 

Edited April 17, 2019 by PickleJarOfDeath

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

So here's the conundrum:

 

The armament is completely underwhelming, particularly for a jet. The flight performance, however, should be very interesting. Just taking a quick look at some info found online, this thing has a 33m/s rate of climb, can go 925km/h, and is insanely light with a light wing loading. It's power to weight ratio appears similar to the G.91, so we could expect a plane that, while not that fast, is still decently quick and should accelerate very well and be highly maneuverable. It has the same amount of thrust as an F-84B, but in an airframe that weighs about one half of the F-84B.

 

Flight performance-wise I'd say at least 8.0, if not higher, though the armament would make any fight difficult.

 

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

21 minutes ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

So here's the conundrum:

 

The armament is completely underwhelming, particularly for a jet. The flight performance, however, should be very interesting. Just taking a quick look at some info found online, this thing has a 33m/s rate of climb, can go 925km/h, and is insanely light with a light wing loading. It's power to weight ratio appears similar to the G.91, so we could expect a plane that, while not that fast, is still decently quick and should accelerate very well and be highly maneuverable. It has the same amount of thrust as an F-84B, but in an airframe that weighs about one half of the F-84B.

 

Flight performance-wise I'd say at least 8.0, if not higher, though the armament would make any fight difficult.

 

Tops 7.7 then. If it weren't for props seeing 7.0 to 7.3 often it would be a little better there. Is the B-57A 7.7 because it's a bomber with similar speed but a high altitude spawn and the T-1A gives me some feeling that it will be better for the attacker role somehow. 7.7 could be appropriate but I'd want to see 7.3 if possible. We need more planes with intermediate battle ratings. The best of 9.0 should move to the well rounded number of 10.0 and further adjustments could be made.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

Viewing spoilers from my phone now. I've made a terrible mistake.

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

1 hour ago, PickleJarOfDeath said:

Viewing spoilers from my phone now. I've made a terrible mistake.

 

The drum roll of spoilers, while clever, might be a bit excessive 

 

As much as I think this would a great flying plane and as much love the Japanese could use in the jet department, I'm still having a hard time agreeing that this plane is the one to add, just because it would be damn near useless. 

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

10 minutes ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

 

The drum roll of spoilers, while clever, might be a bit excessive 

 

As much as I think this would a great flying plane and as much love the Japanese could use in the jet department, I'm still having a hard time agreeing that this plane is the one to add, just because it would be damn near useless. 

No the gimmick is what makes it fun!

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

3 M2 brownings would be usable. They could go with M3s instead for the sake of its competitive viability. 

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

It says that it used specifically the M53-2 Browning, but I haven't been able to find details on that weapon to see what it's fire rate and ammunition capabilities are.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

1 hour ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

It says that it used specifically the M53-2 Browning, but I haven't been able to find details on that weapon to see what it's fire rate and ammunition capabilities are.

oh? Hopefully it's more than just a normal M2 that we see on most american aircraft...

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

Haven't found the answer to that yet, though I'm seeing it carried only 200-220 rounds for that single 12.7mm.

 

Also either 4 x 5" rockets or 14 x 2.75" rockets, or two gun pods or two bombs.

 

http://airwar.ru/enc/attack/t1.html

 

http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/205765/Fudzi-T-1A

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

2 hours ago, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

Haven't found the answer to that yet, though I'm seeing it carried only 200-220 rounds for that single 12.7mm.

 

Also either 4 x 5" rockets or 14 x 2.75" rockets, or two gun pods or two bombs.

 

http://airwar.ru/enc/attack/t1.html

 

http://en.valka.cz/topic/view/205765/Fudzi-T-1A

Yeah, lets disregard historical accuracy. )))))

 

Actually, if someone were to measure the space where the gun was maybe we could have a plausible unhistorical change. 

[Maki3006 2,690]

Holy smokes this thing is going to be useless, It's the Kingfisher all over again. Nice looking plane though.

Edited December 22, 2017 by Maki3006

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

31 minutes ago, Maki3006 said:

Holy smokes this thing is going to be useless, It's the Kingfisher all over again. Nice looking plane though.

Gibhardgibnao

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

I've found two websites so far that say something about 1x 12.7mm machine gun or two cannons but I have not seen any further specification nor source for that information. Perhaps they're just referring to the optional underwing gunpods. Still prowling.

 

http://avia-museum.narod.ru/japan/fuji_hatsutaka.html

 

http://www.tayyareci.com/digerucaklar/japonya/postww2/t1.asp

 

I think this plane's airframe is a lot like an F-86 but with longer fuselage to accommodate two people, as well as a larger wing, sort of like the new F-86F-40 maybe?

Edited December 22, 2017 by xF4LC0NxPUNCHx

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

More links with lots of neat pictures, still nothing on armament.

 

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/airplane/museum/T-1/

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/airplane/museum/T-1/T1.html

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/airplane/museum/T-1/T1-2.html

 

[TLTeo 889]

It could be an ok attacker with two rocket pods I guess?

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

Here is the translation from one of those sources. The 127mm things must be rockets…

 

one 12.7-mm Browning M53-2 machine gun with 200 rounds

  Combat load - 680 kg at 2 suspension points

  2 air-to-air AIM-9 Sidewinder or

  2x 340-kg or 227-kg bombs of napalm tanks, or

  4x 127 mm NUR, or 2 PU 7x70-mm NUR, or

  2 containers with a 12.7-mm cannon.

 

lol had I seen what you said already…

Edited December 23, 2017 by PickleJarOfDeath

[*AceArchangel 909]

Oh boy here I go stirring the pot again... lol

 

I really hope this gets added to the game, Japan would benefit greatly with an Arado of their own!

Now I have to really kick start my grind in the Japanese tree.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

1 hour ago, *AceArchangel said:

Oh boy here I go stirring the pot again... lol

 

I really hope this gets added to the game, Japan would benefit greatly with an Arado of their own!

Now I have to really kick start my grind in the Japanese tree.

But grind what? Should it go before the Sabres? No, that would make that grind suck. Would it go before or after the R2Y2 series? I'd suggest not. I could see it going before OR after the Ki-100 or after the Ki-83 just for the sake of putting something there. If the plane really is maneuverable due to the weight and; has great climb, acceleration, and vertical energy retention; then The heavy line may make sense because of its final aircraft: the light and powerful king of twin engine prop fighters.

Oh and many before it were attack aircraft as well!

[Electrolite_xyz 575]

That`s great i hope we get this plane eventually

[xF4LC0NxPUNCHx 3,605]

On 12/26/2017 at 4:19 AM, PickleJarOfDeath said:

But grind what? Should it go before the Sabres? No, that would make that grind suck. Would it go before or after the R2Y2 series? I'd suggest not. I could see it going before OR after the Ki-100 or after the Ki-83 just for the sake of putting something there. If the plane really is maneuverable due to the weight and; has great climb, acceleration, and vertical energy retention; then The heavy line may make sense because of its final aircraft: the light and powerful king of twin engine prop fighters.

Oh and many before it were attack aircraft as well!

 

I think it fits the "attacker" line better than the "heavy fighter" line, though it seems the attackers are technically Naval planes, at least according to the War Thunder wiki page.

 

Since it's not a naval plane, that means putting it after the Ki-83, which works, though that's an awfully big jump from the 6.0 BR of the Ki-83 to the 8.0 or higher that I imagine the T-1A would receive.

Edited December 29, 2017 by xF4LC0NxPUNCHx

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

On 12/29/2017 at 12:53 PM, xF4LC0NxPUNCHx said:

 

I think it fits the "attacker" line better than the "heavy fighter" line, though it seems the attackers are technically Naval planes, at least according to the War Thunder wiki page.

 

Since it's not a naval plane, that means putting it after the Ki-83, which works, though that's an awfully big jump from the 6.0 BR of the Ki-83 to the 8.0 or higher that I imagine the T-1A would receive.

it has the performance to match some of the better 7.0 aircraft or lower end 8.0 aircraft so somewhere between the 2 battle ratings would be best. Japan 6.0 gets a lot of uptiers and if this thing went to 7.7 or even 7.3 it would probably be ok.

By the way the majority of the heavy fighters are ground attack/interceptor aircraft, however they don't have their ground shells including heat shells and ap.

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

HEIAP rounds that are compatible with the M2 were made in the 70's...

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[PickleJarOfDeath 1,499]

For many US planes, if they have pylons that can carry 500 lb bombs then gunpods with 2 Brownings can be mounted. Given that the US is getting gunpods in the coming update this would be fun (F-82 with 18 guns anyone?). The Fuji T-1A can carry 2 750 lb bombs. If the ability to mount these gunpods is an issue of weight then 2 twin browning gunpods would be a viable addition. This would be far more usable than 2 gunpods with 1 gun each.

The bombs could come stock, the 1x gunpods could be tier 1 mods (ahem unlike the kikka), and the 2x gunpods could be a tier 3 or 4 mod.

[Fireraid233 4,275]

If we get rank 6 planes this plane would be Japan first rank 6 fighter it could carry two sidewinders. After that would be the F1, F104J, F4Ej kai. Of all nationd get respected counters.