Warbird Information Exchange

It can't be a Kate, everyone knows they were built from a T-6 center section and a BT-13 empannage with a PW 1340 single row engine!

Sorry Tom, I dont see any features that support it being a Sonia as against a Kate? can you elaborate?

The only similarity I can see is the rollover truss behind the front cockpit, which can be seen clearly in the second image below of the Sonia at the Indonesian Museum, although it seems taller than the example on the wreck?

However there does seem to be a similar structure forming the forward section of the fixed canopy directly behind the cockpit of the Kate model 12?

I cannot identify any other unique similarities? of the wreck and a Sonia, over those identified with a Kate, I guess confirmation of fixed or retractable undercarriage on the wreck would resolve it?

Sonia below (at Indonesian Air Force Museum?






same aircraft as a wreck in 1970's before recovery to the museum



you may be right? Tom given the side comparisons with this picture from YAP? although there is no evidence of a rear gun wind deflector on the Sonia's?

The other wrecks below clearly only show the two seat cockpit conifgurations, unlike the YAP wreck? , and the wing seems thinner and less substantial? and mounted lower in the Sonia than the YAP wreck?



Sonia wartime Wrecks










Sonia centre-section remains in PNG



again compared to the wreck at YAP?


regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

The Kate has a awlfull long canopy. The wreckage in the picture doesn't seem to show it being that long. I could and probably am wrong....but at first glance I thought Val.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

mark your pic, shows well the squared off tail, which i believe it to be a later date modification, probably post war, seized & modified japanese war booty. sonia's tail was more rounded. the forward cockpit is much to short. i believe the kate had 1 elongated crew accomodations for 3 crewmen.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

Tom,

I dont know its reference or source of detail, but the 3-d drawing I had in my first post seems to show 3 distinct seating "tubs" under the canopy? for the 3 crew, which is consistant with the YAP wreck, the Sonia only has two seating "tubs" clearly evident in the Sonia wreck photos, and therefore seems a major difference to the YAP wreck.


Unfortunately my link to the AWM rear photo has expired, it clearly shows the identical wind deflector on the rear cockpit/gun position as existing on the YAP wreck, and not evidenced in any of the Sonia pictures



I think it is very hard to guage canopy lengths and use those to define the identity of the wrecks, (the Fairy Battle fuselage looks completely different when its missing its long glasshouse. - from a personal experience)

The Sonia in the Indonesian Museum has had a modified tail restoration for some reason? but I am not too sure what you mean by the forward cockpit is far too short? as can be seen from the 3-d drawing the cockpit windscreen is located about 1/2 way back from the firewall to the front cockpit "tub" this is consistent with the YAP wreck as well, whereas the Sonia seems to have its windscreen end right on the firewall?

There is a picture of a Sonia fuselage on drums in Lae in Charles Darby's book ,but I cannot find a copy online to link it here? I will try to upload it somewhere and link it for further comparison to the YAP fuselage?

At this stage I still think it is a Kate.

DaveM2 any pics of the wrecks in Russia?

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

Here are a couple more pics, I hope these help some
pic 6


pic 7 Landing gear


pic 8


pic 9


pic10 interior

.

I have been provided with an email from someone who has viewed the forum but is not a member to make his own postings.

that email makes the following "quoted" points in regards to the wreck being a Ki-51 Sonia, with my own comments inserted afterwards.



While I cant comment or refute the issue of the gunring being two piece in the Kate versus one piece in the Sonia, and I am unsure of the source of this technical reference? the wreck's gunring is obviously a single fixed ring, but with a gun trolley that can travel from one side to another and deliver an arch of @ 80 degrees horitzontally, and it would seem the gun pivoted from the top of the trolley so its vertical travel or arc is unrelated to the gunring design itself - I am therefore unable I am unable to correlate the wreck to either the Sonia or Kate gunring installation as described above or confirm the accuracy of the interpretation?




The Sonia as shown in the Indonesian museum has a very "sharp" angled wingscreen frame? the two large side angled panels sweep sharply forward from the moving canopy section, to join a narrow "flat" wingscreen.

Of interest is that the two side angled panels on the Sonia appear to have slightly concave (curving up) frame joins to the fuselage.

The Kate has a rounded front windscreen (as per photo in my first post) and small side angled panels with either straight or convex (curving down) frame joins to the fuselage.

The Wreck has rivet/screw line seemly representing the windscreen assembly? seem to be more consistant with the Kate "round" windscreen than the Sonia angular/flat windscreen at the front location?



The Sonia is 9.21M or 30' 3" long

The Kate is 10.3M or 33' 10" long

ie there is a 1.1M or 3' 7" length difference in favour of the Kate

The Wreck is missing its engine mount, engine and cowl, and its rear fuselage and tail, ie it is only really a forward fuselage section from firewall back, I cannot see how its possible to determine the length of the remaining fuselage length from just the photo, let alone compare it to the equivalent Sonia or Kate section to make such a claim.

The Wreck seems to clearly have 3 cockpit/tub positions, and extends past the third which is fitted with the gun ring.This remains the most important identifiable difference, that the wreck seems to clearly have three cockpit cut-outs/tubs - consistent with the 3-D drawing, rather than two as expected and shown for the Sonia? and therefore is unexplainable as a Sonia?




I understood the Kate was a Torpedo Bomber not a Dive Bomber so I wouldnt expect to find "Dive" Brakes on it in any case? (ie perforated as in SBD etc) but the Kate apparantly has full flaps (or speed flaps - ie top skin and bottom skin), where as the Sonia has a split trailing edge flap, ie only bottom skin.

If the wreck is a Sonia the centre-section trailing edge should extend level with the gun ring? its leading edge should be inline with the firewall.

if the wreck is a Kate the centre-section trailing edge should extend to @ 1/2 way through the third seat position. its leading edge should be set back behind the firewall

Unfortunately the Centre-Section remains on the YAP Wreck seem badly damaged and incomplete.

It seems the remaining structure on the port or LHS consists largely of the structure between the front and rear spar, it is difficult from the photos to confirm how much trailing edge remains intact? to resolve the flap configuration

It appears the front spar on the wreck is in line with the rollover truss or rear of the front cockpit? the 3-D drawings sourced suggests this is consistent with the Kate but not with the Sonia which shows the front spar in line with the back of the windscreen?

The rear spar of the wreck is in line with the end of the second? cockpit/tub this is also consistent with the Kate in the 3-D drawing but not with the Sonia which seems to be in line with the front of the rear cockpit?

However the pic #6 in "armyjunks" post below seems to clearly show the leading edge of the wing commencing some distance behind the firewall?, this is only consistent with the Kate.




The Wreck's wing cord is difficult to ascertain in the photos but it does seem to rise up the fuselage side quite a height, that is consistant with the Kate, and with a wingspan of 15.52M or 50' 11" on the Kate as compared to 12.1M or 39' 8" I would expect the Kate to have a thicker wing cord than the smaller Sonia, this is suggested in the photos and 3-D drawings.

In regard to the YAP wreck being too thick to be a Kate, I think the reverse is true the wing is too thick to be a Sonia when compared with My earlier link of a Sonia Centre-section?

http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/ki-51/but/sonia-front-wide.html

Interestingly photo #7 shows a fully extended u/c leg with wheel and a second u/c leg lying on the ground with an apparant pivot casting and retract ram still in place?

This u/c leg wheel yoke is totally different to the curved/flat leg wheel yoke shown on an upturned Sonia Centre-section on page 13 of Charles Darby's book or the apparant fixed undercarriage mounting seen in the upright Sonia centre-section on the same page?

I remain more convinced this is a Kate forward cockpit wreck than ever before, most of the arguments put to me in email do not seem to be proven? or conclusive?

I dont think the one piece / two piece gunring is conclusive evidence at this time, I am unsure of the source of that technical reference, or the how to interpret that description, as the moveable gun trolley on the solid scarf ring may constitute two pieces in any case?

There are more matches of consistency between the wreck and a Kate, than a Sonia, and in particular the clear 3 place cockpit does not support identification as a Sonia?

Regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

Another feature the wreck shares with a Kate is the small window in the side of the fuselage below canopy beside the second seat. The right side is too torn up to show it, but it's clearly visible on the left side.

The wreck also has the same wing fuel tank layout as the Kate. I think it's pretty obviously a B5N.


SN

Steve,

good spots on both accounts, the fuel tanks are unclear from the 3-d of the Sonia, but they are consistent with those shown in the 3-d of the Kate, and the small window is also consistent with the Kate, as is the entry "handgrip" just below and behind the gun position on the LHS, as seen in pic #1 on page 1 of this thread and clearly shown in the 3-d drawing in the same location.





similarly the 3-d side view shows a gun stay/rest, or rudementary guard against firing at its own tail (or other fixture?) located directly behind the gunring on the top of the fuselage, and this appears to exist in pic #3 on page 1.



I am very confident it is a Kate B5N2 model 12, and certainly not a Sonia.



regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

Mark, Might I ask where the really nice drawings come from?? and thanks everyone for the discussion...

armyjunk

the 3-D drawings are linked from

http://www.airpages.ru

regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"

Mick, I'm not sure about current policy but it seems two wrecks have previously been recovered to Japan from YAP?



http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/d4y/4316/front-view.html

http://www.pacificwrecks.com/aircraft/a6m5/4240.html

As stated by others, the wrecks on YAP have been well documented, this website has some excellent photos apparantly taken in 2005

http://www.missingaircrew.com/Japanese/

including an earlier photo of the Kate - identified as such, showing much more of the starboard wing centre-section does exist.

Interestingly these photos seem to show another engine, with nose ring but without prop, sitting in front of the a/c, as against the more recent ones showing an engine and prop behind the wreck





There are lots of historical (1960s'/1970s) & a few more recent "2005" pics





captioned as "Ki-61"? in 1960's
(or actually the engine of the Judy before it was recovered?)











regards

Mark Pilkington

_________________
20th Century - The Age of Manned Flight
"from Wrights to Armstrong in 66 years -WOW!"