Kawasaki Ki-61 "Tony" Part 2

Tony id

Posted By: Gordon Clarke <gordonc@adf-serials.com>
Date: Sunday, 20 January 2002, at 5:20 p.m.

On the 10/6/44 a F/L Baker from 78 Sqn RAAF shot down a Tony Ki-61 near Japen Is. Anyone able to identify the unit this Tony belonged to? I believe it was based at Babo.

For those interested this was the last Japanese fighter shot down by the RAAF in the New Guinea campaign.

Re: Tony id

Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Sunday, 20 January 2002, at 6:35 p.m.

In Response To: Tony id (Gordon Clarke)

I somewhat doubt you are really looking for a "Tony".

On 31 May 44, the 7th Air Div had only two operational Tonys from 68 F on strength. These were probably replacement a/c that never got to Hollandia in time to be destroyed.

As of 7 June 44 3d Air Attack Force (23d AF) JNAF had 13 Zeros, 18 type 1 Army fighters and 7 Suisei of 503 Ku on strength. "Judy" was still being misidentified as "Tony" at this point. In addition 1st Air Fleet was sending in reinforcements. As of 10 June 523 Ku with Suisei was at Wasile with 17 aircraft of which 12 were operational.

Your boy (Tony) may be a girl (Judy).

If so, 503, 523 Ku or possibly 153 Ku may be the units involved. I don't have loss data at hands. No indication of Japanese fighter loss on this date.

Re: Tony id

Posted By: Gordon Clarke <gordonc@adf-serials.com>
Date: Thursday, 24 January 2002, at 4:56 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Tony id (richard dunn)

Excuse my ignorance but is 68 F, 68 Sentai? Whereabouts were those 2 Tonys based on 31 May 44?

Wasile was quite a distance from Japen Is, though I must see if the combat report narrows down how close it was to Japen Is. Any other Judys any closer? Whereabouts were 503 and 153 Ku based?

Seems that everything was misidentified for the poor Judy, Kates and now Tonys! :)

Pity about not having Japanese fighter losses on that date. You've let me down Rick, I expected you would come through with all the details right down to the Japanese pilots names, the time of their last meal before take off and their girlfriends names. ;-)

Re: Tony id

Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Thursday, 24 January 2002, at 7:22 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Tony id (Gordon Clarke)

Keep your expectations in check!! I do what I can to help.:)

As to "F". Prior to WW2 the official Japanese abbreviation for Flying Regiment (Hiko Rentai) was FR. By 1939, this had changed to "Hiko Sentai." Most of these "Regiments" lost their airfield Battalions and were then much smaller organizations. The official abbreviation for these Sentai was F. I work with a lot of captured documents and have found that despite the official change many Japanese operational records continued to use FR throughout WW2. After WW2 Japanese historians adopted the official designation in most of their writings. I have used FR in some writings (see Ki 43 armament article on this web-site). Some of my fellow historians have been trying to standardize terminology and seem to think F is the better useage. I know this explanation is "more than you really wanted to know" but thought it was worth discussing.

Don't know the exact base of the Tonys. Most of the 7th Air Division was at Menado, Halmahera I., Ambon, Liang, and Namlea during this period. Remember, however, the only Army fighters subordinated to the Navy were the type 1 fighters of 24 F. They were at Kau on 31 May and moved to Sorong the following day. A Zero from Sorong flew a recce over Biak on 30 May at dusk. 153 was at Babo in early June (and probably on 31 May). They also used Sorong as an operating base.

A lone aircraft was quite possibly on a recce mission and might have been far from its base.

Re: Tony id

Posted By: Gordon Clarke <gordonc@adf-serials.com>
Date: Wednesday, 30 January 2002, at 5:14 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Tony id (richard dunn)

I don't have any record of Judy unit 153. Any idea of when formed and the tail code?

503 formed 2nd half of 1943 with code EB- (backwards E).
523 formed Nov 1943 with code kanji char for "hawk", I have them at the Marianas Feb 1944. So they must have moved to New Guinea area in April or May of that year.

I agree with your final comment, the Judy was most probably on a recce flight.

Re: Tony id

Posted By: richard dunn <rdunn@rhsmith.umd.edu>
Date: Wednesday, 30 January 2002, at 8:04 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Tony id (Gordon Clarke)

The movement of the 1st Air Fleet units from the Marianas to the southwest area was in connection with the Biak invasion (may 27th) and KON operation.

On March 1st 1944 the operational strength of 153 was two type 100 HQ recon a/c and two type 2 shipboard recon a/c. No J1N1 operational at that time.

S311 was the fighter unit subordinated to 153 Air in May 44.

On June 8th a report from Babo stated that 153 had available there six Zeros and no "Comets" [Suisei]. No other type was mentioned.

Perhaps someone else can help with markings.

Re: Tony id

Posted By: Larry <Hldeziv@aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, 30 January 2002, at 7:06 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Tony id (Gordon Clarke)

153 Kokutai
(FPO Designation: Se-115)

Formed 1 January 1944 at Shinchiku NAS/2.4 mi NW of Shinchiku city (today: Hsin-chu)/NW Formosa or possibly in Japan with an initial allowance of 24 Nakajima J1N1 Type 2 reconnaissance planes (IRVING). Personnel table of allowances issued 1 Jan 44 called for 61 officers and warrant officers, and 560 petty officers and men.

I have 3 pages of details on this Kôkûtai and all aircraft references are to it's Reconnaissance Hikôtai 102 equipped with the J1N1 during 1944. T-102 re-equipped with MYRTs in late 1944 or early 1945. The Kôkûtai also had some fighter Hikôtai attached to it, but these flew A6Ms, of course.


RE: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling"

Posted By: Tony Di Stefano <asd978@stargate.net>
Date: Monday, 31 December 2001, at 11:43 p.m.

Anyone know what the best way to get the "mottled" effect over natural metal on a KI-61? In particular I'm doing a 1/72 DML Ki-61 244 Sentai Capt Kobayashi.

Re: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling"

Posted By: Mike Rybak <mj_rybak@yahoo.com>
Date: Wednesday, 2 January 2002, at 3:01 p.m.

In Response To: RE: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling" (Tony Di Stefano)

First paint the model overall bare metal, using whatever paints you prefere.

If you have a good airbrush, and a steady hand, you could freehand paint the mottle. If not, I would suggest a stencil approach. Photocopy the drawings from the instructions, and reduce or enlarge as needed so that they are the same size as the actual model. Carefully cut out the green areas from the drawing. Attach the stencil to the model with tiny pieces of Silly Putty, or Blu-Tack poster adhesive. The idea is that the stencil is held just a tiny bit above the surface of the model, so the edge of the green is a little bit soft.

Re: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling"

Posted By: Carlos Sempere
Date: Friday, 4 January 2002, at 2:11 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling" (Mike Rybak)

Is there any way for brush users? (Yeah, I guess I can't call myelf a serious modeler while I'm at college. I can only build 1/72 or smaller and hang them wheels up from the ceiling, no room to spray either...)

Re: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling"

Posted By: Don Marsh <marsh44@fuse.net>
Date: Friday, 4 January 2002, at 9:01 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Japanese Ki-61 "mottling" (Carlos Sempere)

Try dry-brushing. For mottling, I use a Q-tip. Actually, I twirl cotton around the tip of a toothpick and make my own Q-tip. That way I ccan control the diameter of the "splotch" exactly. Get some paint on the tip, then blot it off on a pice of paper until you have the desired consistency (as dry as possible but still able to make a mark). Work building up the darker areas by going over them several times to achive the darkness you want rather than trying to cover in the first past. This produces nice soft edges and the exact pattern you want.

For the more "squiggly" type of camo pattern, actually use a brush rather than a Q-tip. Use a small, old brush with fairly stiff bristles. Trim the hairs short to stiffen the action. Load the brush with paint, blot or scrub nearly all of the paint off on a rag or paper to get to a dry-brush state. Scrub in the desired serpentine pattern, building up the darkness slowly.

These proceedures take awhile but produce very effective scale results.

244FR Web Site Muddy Dispersal Pic

Posted By: Carl Dennis <carl.d@tesco.net>
Date: Wednesday, 19 December 2001, at 10:21 a.m.

Take a look at the photo on the following page of the 244FR web site.

http://www5b.biglobe.ne.jp/~s244f/minami.htm

It shows an aerial view of the squadron's Ki-61s parked on grass with quite a lot of what looks like muddy ground within the dispersal area. Could this be the cause of the dirty tails?


Speaking of 244th Tails

Posted By: Ryan Boerema <ryann1k2j@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001, at 4:41 p.m.

I asked this in the discussion below, but I think it got lost in all the mud-slinging. (Oh, don't I think I'm clever!) I've seen depictions of headquarters company 244th Tonys with blue tails and blue noses, but never in the Japanese publications I have (same with blue-tailed 248th Sentai Oscars). Does anyone in the rival mud vs. paint factions know?

Re: Speaking of 244th Tails

Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Saturday, 15 December 2001, at 4:36 a.m.

In Response To: Speaking of 244th Tails (Ryan Boerema)

A "modern" explanation of the unit markings would be welcome!

In the meantime according to one older and trusted source the 244th Sentai was also known as "Tsubakuro" or "Konoe" Butai and included a "Shinten Seiku Tai" air-to-air ramming Chutai. The same source attributes the red tail colour to this particular Chutai and the "Sentai leader's formation" only.

Colours of the Sentai tail marking are reported as white with yellow star and "4" for the 1st Chutai, red with red or yellow star and "4" for the 2nd Chutai and yellow with red star and "4" for the 3rd Chutai. Sentai Hombu marking was all white. However, this source warns that these "colors are not certain, because there are many explanation of Chutai colors about this Sentai's mark".

"Cheat" stripes on fuselages are described as white for the 1st Chutai, red for the 2nd and yellow for the 3rd but there is no mention of Sentai Hombu.

Osprey 13 and Model Art 329 corroborate this. The former shows both blue and white fuselage stripes with the red tails for Kobayashi's 3295 and 3024.

All these sources depict and/or describe the spinners as being deep brown.

Re: Speaking of 244th Tails

Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Sunday, 16 December 2001, at 6:39 a.m.

In Response To: Re: Speaking of 244th Tails (Nick Millman)

The source is a translation of the invaluable Model Art 225 of January 1984.

Incidentally, in the interests of balanced reporting and fair-play, this publication also depicts Ki-61 No.10 of the 244th Sentai which features in the "Mud vs Paint" debate here.
It is described as having "black or greenish-black underside, covering rising-sun flag and Sentai's mark".

Re: Speaking of 244th Tails

Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001, at 5:39 p.m.

In Response To: Speaking of 244th Tails (Ryan Boerema)

You ask, "I've seen depictions of headquarters company 244th Tonys with blue tails and blue noses, but never in the Japanese publications I have (same with blue-tailed 248th Sentai Oscars). Does anyone in the rival mud vs. paint factions know?"

Most, if not all, documented sources, state that the original No.244 F marking was a red tail. Later camouflage schemes carried the famous [4<] marking. Monochrome photos do not reveal that the background colors of the Tony tails was. If it were not the camouflage color, then, in all likelyhood, it was red.

BTW: I doubt that No.248 F tails were any color but the ground color of the mainframe with the [2 4 8] of Vs being applied in the hiko chutai color.


HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (2) *PIC*

Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 9 December 2001, at 6:57 a.m.

2. "This one is a Ki-61 of No. 244 FR Shimbu-tai unit, flown by S/Sgt. Matsumi Nakano. Note the two damaged and one kill, ... all by rammings. I chose this angle so you could see all the gunports are sealed over. If these prove popular, I will have more on this unit to show."

Art: (c) 2001 by James Holloway

Editors note: Picture at http://www.j-aircraft.com/jiml/ki-61_244fr_jh_b.jpg

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (2)

Posted By: James Holloway <bobwimple@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 9 December 2001, at 5:41 p.m.

In Response To: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (2) *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)

Sirs, I would like to thank Uchida Katsuhiro for introducing me to Historian T. Sakurai, for providing me confirmation on the kill marks for this plane. I was able to read the new Osprey book on the B29 Killers and find it's mistaken when it says the 244th ramming unit when into combat fully armed. I have at least three A/C where the gunports are all sealed over. It might have been a personal choice.

HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) *PIC*

Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 9 December 2001, at 6:51 a.m.

James HOLLOWAY has completed four paintings to share with us in time for the Holidays.

1. "A Tony from No. 244 Hiko Sentai, in what appears to be a hastily-applied night fighter camouflage. This might be a Shimbu-tai plane, I couldn't show gunports or gunsite because all photos I examined had maintenance crew all over them. I hope to have more info on it soon."

Art: (c) 2001 James Holloway

Editors note: Picture at http://www.j-aircraft.com/jiml/ki-61_244fr_jh_a.jpg

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1)

Posted By: James Holloway <bobwimple@aol.com>
Date: Sunday, 9 December 2001, at 5:52 p.m.

In Response To: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)

Sirs, just a note to say this is definitly a quick nightfighter scheme and not leaking oil or mud thrown up by propeller wash. There are about six planes of this unit and I was able to see very good closeups of several of these, including #10 that I was able to see from several angles. This paint was slapped on to obscure the lower portions of the plane. A Japanese author had said this was done in black, but based on the photos ,and because they were starting to go to the dk green overall scheme, I thought dk green more accurate.I am now working on #88, a plane a lot of you will be familiar with that had this scheme also.

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1)

Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Tuesday, 11 December 2001, at 1:21 p.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (James Holloway)

Beautiful painting but I think it is slush thrown up by the wheels - look at the ground in the photographs.

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1)

Posted By: Elephtheriou George <arawasi_g@hotmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, 11 December 2001, at 3:48 p.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (Nick Millman)

although in the beginning I thought too that these were dirt, oil or whatever, in Koku Fan Illustrated #80 there are some photos of different planes with quite the same "camouflage" pattern, on various ground.
Furthermore, in one of the photo captions, the man who took these photos, Sunkichi Kikuchi, says that these Hiens were painted black for night missions.

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1)

Posted By: Don Marsh <marsh44@fuse.net>
Date: Tuesday, 11 December 2001, at 6:28 p.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (Elephtheriou George)

I have several good photos of one of these a/c and I must agree with Nick. The spray pattern and "muddy-like" texture is quite clear in the photos; the random back-spray spattering on the lower sides of the cowling; denser coverage as one proceeds tward the rear of the a/c. Maybe the other a/c have the same pattern because they operated at under the same sloppy conditions and is not intentional camo. But what is clear from the photos I have is that the the spray pattern on the rear of the fuselage is something that has been kicked up from beneath the plane by the prop. Even the direction of the spray's texture is arcing from beneath the a/c's wing roots.

On the other hand, I also have a photo of another Ki-61 from this group (244 FR) that does appear to have been painted in a rather sloppy, but intentional pattern, that may be a nightfighter scheme. This a/c's "painting pattern" and texture is definitely not the same as that mentioned above.

I would be glad to supply scans of the pics if someone wants to post them so everyone can decide for themselves.

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1)

Posted By: James Holloway <bobwimple@aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, 12 December 2001, at 2:36 a.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (Don Marsh)

Sirs, in defense of these being a nightfighter scheme and not oil or slush I offer this: Besides Japanese authors stating it is cammo, only the six or eight planes of this unit were affected by this, other planes of the Sentai are not dirtied, there are shots of these others in the same shot. There are photos of planes taking off in the same series and there is no spray, the planes are bunkered on the edge of the tarmac, so there was no long taxiing over muddy fields. The landing gears and doors are clean, on some A/C the bottoms of the fusalauge are clean. On none of the A/C are the tops of the wings dirtied or tail surfaces apart from a few specs. Even the tail gear doors are clean except for a few drips on #10.If the prop was blowing whatever across the plane why does it just suddenly stop? The effect of the splatter is similar to a rush job with a rag or large brush or an idustrial airbrush with the nozzel on full open. I dont know where you are seeing chunky paint, in all closeup shots the finish is very smooth and even. Only areas covered by the defense bandages and hinomaru on the bottom wings ,plus the Sentai markings are covered. That the Japanese would not cover their Sentai markings is not true, there are photos of Ki 100 from the 244th that has the Tail emblem half obscured in exactly the same way. I used to illustrate U.S.Army manuals the the Lance Missle System and was able to watch vehicle being serviced and painted, quick obscuring of the white stars and serials with a n airbrush produced similar effects. The effect on the A/C can be easily done with a large airbrush being shot from below. The only part I disagree with is that I think it is painted with a dk green instead of black.

Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1)

Posted By: Don Marsh <marsh44@fuse.net>
Date: Wednesday, 12 December 2001, at 1:20 p.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (James Holloway)

I hold both your art and research in esteem. All your points are quite cogent indeed, and so do not feel a need to refute to most of your excellent points. But there are a few items that I would like to comment on. . .

You wrote: "The effect of the splatter is similar to a rush job with a rag or large brush or an industrial airbrush with the nozzle on full open."I suppose I could envision a mop being used to achieve this effect. But the strokes would have to be consistently upwards from a superior vantage point, which, as an artist yourself, versed in the use of tools such as brushes et al, makes no sense at all. The "nozzle on full open" argument seems most likely to me, but why? What a waste of valuable paint, an unnecessary mess and poor application results. This is not to say that is isn't possible, it obviously is. I'm just trying to get my mind around the rationale. Also, spraying and a/c from the vantage point of a foot or two off the ground seems like it would be very difficult and inefficient to me.

You wrote: "I don't know where you are seeing chunky paint, in all close-up shots the finish is very smooth and even."I can't agree with you on this point. To me, the paint looks more like tar than paint. The area that I think best shows this is on the lower vertical fin area just above the horizontal stabilizer. There is a definite texture (to my eye) that is most disernable there (closest and least oblique to the camera and). Also, look at the drips; this is the thickest paint I've ever seen in my life.

You wrote: "That the Japanese would not cover their Sentai markings is not true, there are photos of Ki 100 from the 244th that has the Tail emblem half obscured in exactly the same way."I'm sure one may find some examples of this, but knowing what the unit emblems meant to the units and that these had the value of much more than just identification markings, this action would be highly unlikely. But I guess if you're going to paint your plane with a garden hose, one can't be too accurate with the application.

You wrote: "I used to illustrate U.S.Army manuals the the Lance Missile System and was able to watch vehicle being serviced and painted, quick obscuring of the white stars and serials with an airbrush produced similar effects. The effect on the A/C can be easily done with a large airbrush being shot from below.Were these modern a/c? (I am assuming so)...If so, consider how much larger these a/c are than the diminutive Ki-61, and how high modern a/c sit upon there tricycle l/g, as opposed to the low to the ground tail draggers of yesteryear. The vantage point in human scale would below the a/c as opposed to most WWII a/c.

You wrote: "The only part I disagree with is that I think it is painted with a dk green instead of black." I totally agree with you on this point. If this is paint, then it seems to me to be a dark, "dirty" color of green or brown, though as we all know, such things are difficult to discern from old b&w photographs.

I hope you don't feel that I'm being unnecessarily argumentative or disrespectful. I Thank you sincerely for your response, the additional information, and your continued valuable research.

No-one asked me, but....

Posted By: Ryan Boerema <ryann1k2j@aol.com>
Date: Wednesday, 12 December 2001, at 3:21 p.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (Don Marsh)

The surrounding Tonys without spray may not have flown that day, or just taxied elsewhere. No spray around landing gear, oil cooler or tail wheel? Wouldn't those be the most important areas to clean up, particularly during a quick turn around (never know when the Hellcats/B-29s are coming back,) i.e. the areas where mud -- if, indeed it is mud -- could do the most damage? And one would want to see the aircraft number on the gear doors.
And while we're on the subject of 244th tails, are the blue tails I've seen illustrated -- though not in the Japanese publications I own -- genuine? They're shore purty.
Finally, could anyone clear up which version of the Ki-61 had the extended nose. I thought it was the "Kai-C" but those ilustrated in Osprey's "B-29 Hunters...." as well as other pub.s, show the "Kai-C" with both the long and short nose.

Re: No-one asked me, but....

Posted By: Mark L. Shannon <Shingend@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001, at 1:49 p.m.

In Response To: No-one asked me, but.... (Ryan Boerema)

On the question of the long-noses on Ki-61's, the problem comes from the designation. I thought current belief was that the ko-otsu-hei-tei designations were not necessarily WWII Japanese in origin. Some references split the 120 Ki-61's with Mauser armament as a separate sub-designation, others do not, so some researchers call the long-nosed Hien Ki-61-I hei (c) and others the Ki-61-I tei(d). And somewhere in there is a Ki-61-I-KAI.

Re: No-one asked me, but....

Posted By: Ryan Boerema <ryann1k2j@aol.com>
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001, at 4:50 p.m.

In Response To: Re: No-one asked me, but.... (Mark L. Shannon)

So, if I understand rightly, not only are Osprey, Aircam, et al indiscriminate about what they apply the term Ki-61 Kai-C to, long or short nosed Tonys, it may not even be the correct designation for the long noses. (At least they don't call them Doras.) I'm wondering now what they do think Ki-61 Kai-C refers to. Armament?

Re: No-one asked me, but....

Posted By: Jim Broshot <jbroshot@fidnet.com>
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001, at 9:33 p.m.

In Response To: Re: No-one asked me, but.... (Ryan Boerema)

Green and Swanborough in WW2 AIRCRAFT FACT FILES JAPANESE ARMY FIGHTERS Part 1 identify the following for the Ki.61-I-KAI-hei

2x 20mm Ho-5 cannon in the nose
2x 12.7mm Ho-103 mgs in the wings

overall length extended by 7.5inches to advance the engine firewall so that the Ho-5 cannon did not "obtruded" into the cockpit (which also gave space for small auxiliary fuel tank).

removable rear fuselage

retractable tailwheel replaced by fixed unit

Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!" *PIC*

Posted By: James F. Lansdale <LRAJIM@aol.com>
Date: Tuesday, 11 December 2001, at 7:44 p.m.

In Response To: Re: HOLLOWAY Holiday Painting 244FR (1) (Nick Millman)

That No.244 Hiko Sentai had hastily applied camouflage to the lower surfaces and tails on some of its Tonys has been exquisitely documented by the wartime camera work of Shunkichi KIKUCHI. Please refer to Bunrindo's Koku-Fan Illustrated No.80, p.p.71-97.

These spectacularly clear photos (often two to a page) taken by KIKUCHI-san show several Kawasaki Ki-61 Tonys assigned to No.244 FR in this unusual"dirty tail" finish.

That this is a hastily applied finish is beyond a doubt (complete with paint dripping down).

That this is NOT mud from the ground is evidenced by several photos of Tonys Nos.14 and 10 which have "dirty tails" but "clean underwear" (no mud on the landing gear or covers)!

See below for an excellent view of No.10's "dirty tail!"

I am not sure about the color of this finish, but I do not think it was black.

Photo credit: (c) Shunkichi Kikuchi/Bunrindo, Koku-Fan Illustrated No.80, p.81.

Editors note: Picture at http://www.j-aircraft.com/jiml/ki-61_244fr_dirtytail.jpg

Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!"

Posted By: JC Carbonel <jean-christophe.carbonel@laposte.fr>
Date: Wednesday, 19 December 2001, at 8:28 a.m.

In Response To: Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!" *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)

I will try to add my "sauce" to this muddy problem :

Like everyone else on this BBS I find no reason for such an strange use of paint . However I see many points that I find hard to reconcily with the "mud" hypothesis.

1- on the "front-side" photo : the undersurface "darkened" area has an outward "splotched" limit but an inward linear limit . How can mud projections do that (or do they use mud-masks in the IJAF like we use airbrush masks on our models ?)

2- on the "tail" photo and the "front side" photo it is obvious that the dark splash on the Hinomaru reaches its apogee around the level of the rear horizontal surfaces. How can the same splash "rebound" and muddy the tail ???

3- on the "tail" photo : the tail area does give the impression of being thrown from side of the aircraft more than from the front . If it was thrown from the front how comes there is no "shadow effect" where the tail would be protected by the horizontal surfaces?

4- on the "tail" photo and the tail wheel doors are clean . How comes ??

I am at loss to explain it but my feeling is that
- whatever was splashed on the tail had a different source (upper and to the side of the machine ) than what was splashed at hinomaru level on the fuselage.
- the wing undersurface appears to have been protected from the splash by something on its inner section.

Re: My one cent

Posted By: Antonio Veiga <aveiga@airtel.net>
Date: Friday, 14 December 2001, at 2:57 p.m.

In Response To: Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!" *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)

I couldn´t resist to give you a suggestion

"From the very begining the inline-engine cooling and hydraulic systems leaked.It was as if Japanese designers couldn´t keep liquids under control in an aircraft.Starting with built-in leaks, and faced with further combat damage, the ground crews almost gave up."

(Source : "Kawasaki Ki-61 HIEN in Japenese Army Air Force Service" by Richard M. Bueschel)

Could this be an oil spill case?

Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!"

Posted By: Nick Millman
Date: Thursday, 13 December 2001, at 1:16 p.m.

In Response To: Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!" *PIC* (James F. Lansdale)

Oh dear! What did I start here!

I'm with Micah on this one.

Mud is light reflective and can't be matt? Hmm, come and look at my car!

Re:No.244 FR "Dirty Tails!"