Ki-27 vs Ki-43: Why is the Nate tougher?

[IceFire]

In-game I've noticed during some online battles that the Ki-27 is a tougher aircraft DM wise than the Ki-43. This seems anecdotally true for two reasons:

1) Structurally it's easier for me flying a Hawk-81 to de-wing or de-tail a Ki-43 with a short burst hitting with the .50cal nose guns. The Ki-27 stays together despite more punishment.

2) In terms of the components I find more often the Ki-27 can withstand fire and not have a on fire fuel tank or damaged controls whereas the Ki-43 will take a few hits and either a fuel tank will be gone or a control cable will be severed.

Any one has have similar experiences and anyone else figure why? DM bug or historical reality? To my knowledge both aircraft were lightweight and lightly protected in all aspects so I would think the Nate would be even less protected than the Oscar that replaced it...

[PE_Tigar]

I find Nates quite tough too... maybe worth examining by someone who has time and access to the sim's inner workings.

[rakinroll]

It is almost the same with Hurricane vs Spitfire. Hurricane, which earlier tech used fighter, is much more tougher then a Spitfire even if later model.

[JG53Frankyboy]

btw, the Ki-43 had selfsealing tanks, the Ki27 not.

sure the tanks in the wings were much larger than in the Ki-27, much more likely to get hit
and the protection was no european/US standard !!

[Avimimus]

Didn't Hurricanes have a reputation for greater durability than spits?

[JG53Frankyboy]

it had

[JtD]

The in game toughness values seem to be the same for both planes.

I don't know about the construction IRL, but the Ki-43 is known for structural failures while the Ki-27 is not. Well, that is as far as I am concerned. The Ki-43 did not have self sealing fuel tanks, the Ki-43II did get some sort of fuel tank protection.

It could be noted that the Ki-43 is sleeker than the Ki-27, which would make the structure higher stressed.

All in all I wouldn't be surprised if the Ki-27 was a bit tougher, or maybe "less fragile", than the Ki-43 in real life, but I don't think it is that way in game.

[JG53Frankyboy]

at least the Alpine Fighter Collection's Ki-43-I in NZ had a tripple layer of rubber and silk "protection" for its fueltanks. but true, its a very late production Ki-43-I !!

my "concern" about the 43 and 27 in DM comparison is how easy it is to flame the 43 and how difficult the 27. Even when it is very easy to get a fueltank leak and loosing fuel in the 27.

[JtD]

Did the Ki-27 have wing fuel tanks?

Rubber layer isn't self sealing. No Ki-43 fuel tank was self sealing, they were just having different amounts of protection. True, some protection also on I models, that protection was increasing as the war went on.

[JG53Frankyboy]

the "wingtanks" of the 27 reached almost to the strut where the fixed landing gear was attached.

the tanks of the 43 reached well to the strut of its gear.