I read your previous version and it was well researched and presented. This is even better. Well done!
 
'Kikka' could not become the mainstay of Japanese special attackers.

Compared to the 'Ōka' Model 43 Otsu, which was heading towards production at the end of the war, 'Kikka' was more expensive, required two Ne-20 motors instead of one, and more extensive pilot training due to being closer to an airplane. ('Ōka' Model 43 Otsu only needs basic glider training).

For these reasons, the production of 'Kikka' was only a bridge until 'Ōka' Model 43 Otsu reached major production, and the long-term production plans for 'Kikka' as a special attacker were cancelled by the end of the war.

Although it was Japan's first jet-plane, 'Kikka' was too much like a normal airplane to succeed in the flow of special attackers going unconventional.

Perhaps the fighter and recon models of 'Kikka' would have continued past 'Ouka' Model 43, had the war continued for that time.
 

Attachments

  • kikkaouka2.png
    kikkaouka2.png
    587 KB · Views: 189

Hi, my first article on the development of 'Kikka'. This one is covering the time in which Kikka was unofficially developed as 'Prosperous Country Mk. 2 Weapon (興国二号兵器) by the orders of Vice Admiral Wada alone. As such it is not so picture heavy, because no actual figures of 'Kikka' during this time of early development exist.

Part 2 will cover official development from Jan-Aug 1945. Part 3 is to be variant development from May 1945.
 
Last edited:
Hello, sorry to bring up this forum again... I want to ask about the purpose or role type of the Kikka. As the name of Nakajima "Kikka" didn't have something like a designation number like others like Navy Fighter and Interceptor, which means Kikka has the same role as Kugisho Ōka (I then don't know what MXY7 means) as "Special Attacker," or I can say intended as a "Kamikaze" role historically in our timeline. What I ask is: could Kikka be used as a Navy fighter or interceptor or not (this may be something I don't know about Kikka)?

Also, I'm interested in the name, which comes from Tzoli, "J9K".
Best regards,
 
Last edited:
At the time of development, the Kikka was not equipped with a fixed machine gun, but was planned to carry a single 500 kg or 800 kg bomb under the fuselage, and to launch from land to conduct horizontal bombing and shallow dive bombing against enemy ships. According to one theory, skip bombing using a bomb called "Type 3 25-8 bomb or tentatively designated Type 4 50-8 bomb" was also planned (described in the draft request for the prototype Kikka project).

This aircraft is a attack aircraft intended for anti-ship attacks by bombing. It was not a aircraft designed exclusively for ramming attack from the beginning, like Ohka, but considering the name "flower(花)" that represents a ramming attack aircraft, and considering the war situation at the time, there is an opinion that there was no use other than to use it as a ramming attack aircraft.

In addition, the military wanted to preserve reciprocating engines, which require expensive and high production technology, and use them for air defense interceptors rather than using them for ramming attack aircraft, and if the technical aspects were overcome and mass production was achieved, jet engines, which were cheaper than reciprocating engines and easier to mass-produce, were considered to be the most suitable engines for ramming attack aircraft.

However, Susumu Watanabe, who was in charge of the engine rigging of the Kikka said, "The Kikka was not a ramming attack aircraft, but a attack aircraft that was premised on returning from the beginning," suggesting that the Kikka was not a ramming attack aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Hi,

However, Susumu Watanabe, who was in charge of the engine rigging of the Kikka said, "The Kikka was not a ramming attack aircraft, but a attack aircraft that was premised on returning from the beginning," suggesting that the Kikka was not a ramming attack aircraft.

It would be interesting to know the amount of fuel carried by the aircraft, and the specific fuel consumption of the jet engines.

From the article linked here ...


... it seems that the TR10 engines gave 300 kgf each, but it seems the TR12 yielded a significantly higher sea-level speed and thus must have given noticably more thrust, but the value doesn't appear to be specified in the article.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)
 
Kikka Performance
The following specifications were listed in "Aviation Fan Supplement Pacific War / Japan Navy Aircraft".

Type: Prototype
Primary mission: Coastal anti-ship attack (special attack)
Main Contract: Nakajima Aircraft
First flight August 7, 1945
Crew: 1 pilot
Length: 9.25m
Height: 3.05m
Breadth: 10.00m
Wing area: 13.21㎡
Dry weight 2,300kg
Maximum takeoff weight: 3,550kg (regular) / 4,312kg (overweight)
Fuel load: 725 liters (regular) / 1,450 liters (overload)
Engine: Ishikawajima Ne-20 Axial flow turbojet × 2 units
Thrust: 475 kg (4,655 Newtons)
Estimated maximum speed: 677 km/h (altitude 6,000 m) / 670 km/h (altitude 10,000 m)
Estimated service climb altitude 10,700m
Estimated maximum cruising range: 584 km (altitude 6,000 m) / 899 km (altitude 10,000 m)
Armament: 1 500 kg or 250 kg bomb ×
 
Ne20's specific fuel consumption was 1.5 lb/(lbh).

BMW 003 : 1.4 lb/(lbh). (144kg/kNh)

Data from Turbojet History and Development 1930–1960 Volume 2
 
Last edited:

Attachments

  • large_220410_kikka_02.jpg
    large_220410_kikka_02.jpg
    44.1 KB · Views: 14
  • large_220410_kikka_03.jpg
    large_220410_kikka_03.jpg
    39 KB · Views: 15
  • m194a.jpg
    m194a.jpg
    47.3 KB · Views: 17
  • large_220410_kikka_01.jpg
    large_220410_kikka_01.jpg
    56.1 KB · Views: 18
Last edited:

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom