BDL, tough one 
Starting research a couple of days!!
That’s why I thought I’d use this one for while I was away Dani, give everyone a chance to do their own research 
My vote goes to the Ki - 43 because, and I quote:
The Nakajima Ki-43 Hayabusa (Peregrine Falcon) was numerically the most important fighter used by the Japanese Army Air Force during the Pacific War. It remained in production from the beginning of the Pacific War until its end in August of 1945. In many ways, it was a transitional type, bridging the gap between the lightly-loaded fighter monoplanes of the late 1930s with their fixed undercarriages and open cockpits and the higher-powered heavy fighters of the early 1940s with their retractable undercarriages and enclosed cockpits. Its appearance was a complete surprise to the Allies, and the fighter proved to be superior in performance to most of its opponents during the first year of the Pacific War. Most of the Japanese Army’s aces established the larger part of their scores while flying this airplane.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki43.html
1-0 to the Ki-43 then - is no one else interested in this one, or is everyone reading up on two unknown fighters?
Perhaps both :lol:
The Nakajima Ki-44 Shoki (Demon or Devil-Queller) interceptor was the only interceptor fighter serving with the Japanese Army when the B-29 campaign against Japan began. At that time, it was the fastest-climbing Japanese fighter in service, and was one of the few aircraft capable of reaching the B-29s at the altitudes at which they operated.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/baugher_other/ki44.html
Also good armament, climb rate and speed.
I vote for KI-44.
Im sorry, but after extensive searching in my big books of ww2 aircraft, I just cant come to a conclusion here.
So reluctantly I abstain…
It’s a very difficult choice, but I have to go with the Ki-44, it’s faster, better armed and climbs faster (very important for an interceptor). 2-1 to the Ki-44, I’ll leave this open till tonight to see if anyone else is interested.
From the historical perspective the KI.43 is a clear winner in the fact that it was more widely used and a true backbone of the JAAF with 5,878 units produced.
The KI.44 has clearly superior performance but with only 1,228 made it did not gain noteriety like the Oscar did.
So that’s 2-2 then. I’ll leave it one more night and see if there’s a deciding vote cast. If not, we’ll have to think of a ‘tie-breaker’ to seperate them.
Can anyone think of anyway to seperate these? I was thinking of just a straight comparison of the specs, but if anyone can think of a better tie breaker, I’m all ears.
If it were up to number of kills gained by pilots in the type the Hayabusa would win since straight performance isn’t the whole story…
Very true, but the number built will also affect how many kills they got. We need an easy tie breaker that can’t be affected by how many were built.
I think that would be a pretty fair way to break the tie BDL.
I think that would be a pretty fair way to break the tie BDL.[/quote]
I’m going to give it one more night to see if anyone has any better suggestions, then I think I will use that. The kills achieved idea is alright, as i said, but it is affected by how many were built, so isn’t a fair method.
Ki44 was faster & had better armament - no contest.
Why not simply divide the kills by number of aircraft in Service and voila we get a kill ratio? One with highest wins.
Not a bad plan for the future, but thanks to
Ki44 was faster & had better armament - no contest.
It’s now 3-2 to the Ki-44.
Go go go for the next pair!!!
Will be done tomorrow morning Dani, I’m off to friday night poker night shortly.