Japanese jet or rocket Interceptor "Suzuka-24"

Dilandu said:
airman said:
https://sensha-manual.blogspot.com/2017/10/ohka-based-interceptor-fighter.html about Ohka and Suzuka24
Click to expand...
The data is highly dubious - mainly, where exactly Japanese get liquid-fuel rocket engine of sufficient power?
Click to expand...
They did get an Me-163's engine from Germany, and it wouldn't be much of a stretch for someone (probably unofficially) in the IJN to not want to rely solely on the J8M for a rocket fighter and see if a version (scaled down) could be made for the Ohka as a back-up. Since they only got one copy of the engine and had to reverse-engineer it anyway, why not take the opportunity to explore all of your options on how it could be adapted. Speculative, but the time frame for the development for both aircraft does overlap, so it's logical to guess at some point some lateral thinking considered combining aspects of aircraft intended to be powered in the same way, especially if more than a few looked at the Ohka and questioned why it wasn't being used as a fighter too. The experiment probably wasn't a thrilling success, but I'd still be willing to accept that some renegade engineers and airman might have tried it to see if it could be done.
 
Wowness said:
They did get an Me-163's engine from Germany, and it wouldn't be much of a stretch for someone (probably unofficially) in the IJN to not want to rely solely on the J8M for a rocket fighter and see if a version (scaled down) could be made for the Ohka as a back-up. Since they only got one copy of the engine and had to reverse-engineer it anyway, why not take the opportunity to explore all of your options on how it could be adapted.
Click to expand...
Theoretically possible, but the timeframe doesn't feels right.
 
As soon as the KR10 engine was safe to use it was immediately reserved for the Shuusui in both the Army and Navy. It was not possible in early 1945.
 
I don't think focusing on "ball of light" phenomenon will really provide any breakthrough, if the aircraft was found in multiple examples on 3 airfields by the U.S. Army, as they reported, then any evidence will probably come from photos of said airfields and the ohkas they contained. I personally think that the army found anti-ship ohkas with 20mm guns, and the Japanese lied about the purpose of the weapon. Supposedly, the main physical difference was the tail assembly, but like presumably everyone else I haven't seen any photos of such.
 
Dilandu said:
natewillcome4you said:
army found anti-ship ohkas with 20mm guns,
Click to expand...
But for what purpose anti-ship Ohka may be equipped with 20-mm guns? Especially considering that there is no space to put them without removing (or at least significantly reducing in size) the warhead?
Click to expand...
My apologies, I thought there was such a version prototyped, presumably for handling any allied fighter that tried to commit counter-suicide. I looked it up, the suzuka-24 sensha post mentions such a machine but not anywhere else it seems.
 
Isn't that be a rear firing gun to fend off interceptors and fighters?
 
natewillcome4you said:
My apologies, I thought there was such a version prototyped, presumably for handling any allied fighter that tried to commit counter-suicide. I looked it up, the suzuka-24 sensha post mentions such a machine but not anywhere else it seems.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that. For the barely-trained kamikaze pilot, even just evading the interceptor would not be easy. Trying to ward off interceptor by gunfire... would require skills much more advanced, than Japanese were willing to committ to Ohka's missions. Considering the Ohka's extremely limited engine burning time, the best anti-interceptor tactics would be to just press the assault, relying on speed and back armor. By trying to maneuver, Ohka would inevitably lose speed, and became much simpler target.
 
A plane with the characteristics of "Suzuka 24" Oka interceptor was never recovered after the war.

The story of Suzuka 24 is based entirely on unreliable wartime intel with inconclusive "supplementary data", like POW quotes, blurry aerial photos, and vague data about J8M/Ki-200.
 
"The land version used the same warhead than the naval one but it was armed with two Type 3 machine guns of 13 mm with a rate of fire of 800 rpm located between the warhead and the fuel tank, which capacity had been reduced to 300 lt, and a combat range to 200 km. The guns configuration was inspired by the German air to air rocket bomber Sombold So 344 project and its objective was that the Ohka could break its way towards the Allies Task Forces fighting against the defensive fighters to which it was equal in speed. The ‘Otsu’ kept the mechanism to detach the wingtips of the naval version but was not considered a requirement to equip it with accelerator rockets for the terminal dive. It was expected that it would be able to surpass the 900 kph in a 50º dive with the Ne-20 at full throttle."

from https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/japanese-jet-engines-of-wwii.34595/page-2
Describes a Model 43 version
 
Last edited:
"Ouka Model 43 Otsu" is purely a special attacker without any firearms. Despite being jet-powered, it's also very unlikely that it would have been similar in speed to contemporary Allied prop fighters. The suggestion that such a configuration was inspired by a German vehicle is baseless speculation...

1666098661342.png
 
I would presume they are using a Walther engine clone with limited fuel sort of like say a Bachem Ba 349 Natter. Sort of a manned SAM semi-suicide missile cum piloted aircraft. The Walther 109-509 engine really isn't that big or heavy. It's the fuel that takes up all the space.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I would presume they are using a Walther engine clone with limited fuel sort of like say a Bachem Ba 349 Natter. Sort of a manned SAM semi-suicide missile cum piloted aircraft. The Walther 109-509 engine really isn't that big or heavy. It's the fuel that takes up all the space.
Click to expand...

Why not the solid-fuel engine of the original Ohka? It seems to be much more safe bet. If they removed the warhead & installed guns instead, they reduced the launch weight for more than 50%. With some boosters to took off the ground, the solid-fuel Type 4 rockets would be enough to boost Ohka on the interception altitude, from which it could glide toward the target.

Or - if it was launched from carrier plane - they could not bother with additional engines at all.
 
QAZ said:
baseless speculation
Click to expand...
I forgot to put it all in quotation marks, there's a bit of speculative art on the thread of it too. If there probably isn't a "Suzuka-24", and this was only a paper project if it even was a real thing, I wonder what was found at the airfields that wasn't a standard ohka?
 
Dilandu said:
T. A. Gardner said:
I would presume they are using a Walther engine clone with limited fuel sort of like say a Bachem Ba 349 Natter. Sort of a manned SAM semi-suicide missile cum piloted aircraft. The Walther 109-509 engine really isn't that big or heavy. It's the fuel that takes up all the space.
Click to expand...

Why not the solid-fuel engine of the original Ohka? It seems to be much more safe bet. If they removed the warhead & installed guns instead, they reduced the launch weight for more than 50%. With some boosters to took off the ground, the solid-fuel Type 4 rockets would be enough to boost Ohka on the interception altitude, from which it could glide toward the target.

Or - if it was launched from carrier plane - they could not bother with additional engines at all.
Click to expand...
Liquid fuel engines can be throttled and will run longer than solid fuel ones of this period. If you want an interceptor you need several minutes of run time on the motor to get a useful intercept envelope. The Ba 349 is that way. You boost it to altitude on solid fuel then fly downrange on liquid fuel.
Many of the early SAMs used that combination. It is workable for subsonic aircraft as well.

You need like a 20 mile + intercept range to allow for good coverage of the target being defended and to allow several sites to launch against a raid.
 
natewillcome4you said:
QAZ said:
baseless speculation
Click to expand...
I forgot to put it all in quotation marks, there's a bit of speculative art on the thread of it too. If there probably isn't a "Suzuka-24", and this was only a paper project if it even was a real thing, I wonder what was found at the airfields that wasn't a standard ohka?
Click to expand...

Sorry, my last wording was a bit aggressive.

Regarding "photos of Suzuka 24 on airfields": as mentioned in the reports these are merely aerial recon photos, which will be unclear. Assuming scale was correctly measured, it can be said there was "something vaguely Oka-shaped, a bit larger than the US thought an Oka is supposed to be", but that is all.

I have a feeling these objects might have been Akigusa gliders, despite the large difference, but that's my own speculation.


As I previously said, having seen each US report regarding 'Suzuka 24', my opinion is that it's only the result of the perfect storm of cursory data. There is no compelling hard evidence among this, and I think there is little reason to consider it real.

To be clear, I assume it was caused by the conflation of:

- early intel data about the Ōka Mod.11 & Shūsui
- data from a POW who was aware of Shūsui & Ōka Mod.22
- aerial photos of Akigusa or mismeasured Ōka
- ball of fire phenomenon
 
QAZ said:
natewillcome4you said:
QAZ said:
baseless speculation
Click to expand...
I forgot to put it all in quotation marks, there's a bit of speculative art on the thread of it too. If there probably isn't a "Suzuka-24", and this was only a paper project if it even was a real thing, I wonder what was found at the airfields that wasn't a standard ohka?
Click to expand...

Sorry, my last wording was a bit aggressive.

Regarding "photos of Suzuka 24 on airfields": as mentioned in the reports these are merely aerial recon photos, which will be unclear. Assuming scale was correctly measured, it can be said there was "something vaguely Oka-shaped, a bit larger than the US thought an Oka is supposed to be", but that is all.

I have a feeling these objects might have been Akigusa gliders, despite the large difference, but that's my own speculation.


As I previously said, having seen each US report regarding 'Suzuka 24', my opinion is that it's only the result of the perfect storm of cursory data. There is no compelling hard evidence among this, and I think there is little reason to consider it real.

To be clear, I assume it was caused by the conflation of:

- early intel data about the Ōka Mod.11 & Shūsui
- data from a POW who was aware of Shūsui & Ōka Mod.22
- aerial photos of Akigusa or mismeasured Ōka
- ball of fire phenomenon
Click to expand...
You fool, it was aliens.
 
They came all the way across the channel just for that?
 
Dilandu said:
natewillcome4you said:
army found anti-ship ohkas with 20mm guns,
Click to expand...
But for what purpose anti-ship Ohka may be equipped with 20-mm guns? Especially considering that there is no space to put them without removing (or at least significantly reducing in size) the warhead?
Click to expand...
In the book Japanese Special Attack Aircraft & Flying Bombs, it is explained that the Myojo-Kai special attack aircraft was intended to mount 2 20mm guns for rangefinding, due to poor judgement of distance being a significant factor in failed sucide attacks.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom