Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

703 Excellent

About Mitthrawnuruodo

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

2324 profile views
  1. In addition to that, there are the G-6/AS or G-14/AS variants that were used in fairly significant numbers. If we go down the rabbit hole of 109 variants, I'd also be interested in the pressurized fighters and GM-1 installations, among other things. There is no shortage of material remaining in the E, F, and G series.
  2. That's totally wrong. The Hs 129 was used extensively in many places, including the Kuban. With few exceptions, the aircraft types and modifications featured in Il-2 GB saw service in significant numbers.
  3. If you're convinced that something is wrong, you need to be more specific. It's difficult to meaningfully respond to vague feelings. You know they do spend time on the forum. However, there is no guarantee that every complaint will be read, understood, agreed with, and acted on.
  4. The Mosquito had significant advantages that aren't apparent in games. Besides the four Hispano cannon, our variant can carry an additional crewman and internal bombs. Different purposes require different design decisions, so I wouldn't say that one was generally better.
  5. There's more to it than "balance". The A-6 and G-6 Late are low-hanging fruit in terms of development difficulty because they're very similar to earlier work. Creating new aircraft like the Beaufighter or A-20G instead would probably require sacrifices elsewhere. Although we could make do with only the A-5, A-8, and G-6 (early), it would leave a big gap in 109 and 190 development. By the same logic, we could say that we "don't need" another Spitfire IX or P-38. When modeling the Luftwaffe, we don't have the luxury of multiple single-seat fighter lines to choose from. If
  6. No, the CPU and GPU are totally inadequate for a good experience. In fact, they don't even meet the published minimum system requirements. You'd end up with an uncomfortable slideshow on the lowest settings.
  7. The A-3's lower standard weight has two significant benefits - lower induced drag and lower inertia. At low speeds, these negate the A-8's power advantage. As speeds increase, induced drag vanishes while parasitic drag grows for both aircraft. At some point, the A-8 accelerates faster thanks to its additional power/thrust for overcoming drag. If this explanation is correct, the A-3 and A-8 should be fairly even if operated at equal weights and power settings.
  8. Without further information, I wouldn't assume that this FM scheme slows down development or causes bugs. If anything, it could be easier because there is only one FM to develop instead of two. As others have said, the main advantage is that you (should) never see AI doing things that are impossible for the player. Unfortunately, this kind of UFO behaviour is all too common in other games.
  9. You're not the first to question the Tempest's turning abilities. See this thread for some relevant discussions. Note that the Tempest actually has a lower wing loading than the K-4. The K-4 is heavier than the earlier 109 variants, so it loses some turn performance. The question is therefore somewhat nuanced.
  10. I think seaplanes would fit in almost as well as the other 'odd' aircraft in the series, namely the Ju 52 and U-2. BOK features just about everything you need to set up various historical seaplane missions. On the Axis side, Do 24 and Ju 52 seaplanes served as transports in the Kuban airlift and performed air-sea rescue duties. Forward bases were in the Kerch area, so the Kuban map would be sufficient. Several other types may have operated in the area, including the He 59, Ar 196, Fw 58, and BV 138. Granted, the units involved were small, so it's hard to justify any dev
  11. I get what you're trying to say, but it's not clear because just about every part falls into one or more recognized aircraft systems, e.g., flap damage is damage to the flight control system and engine damage is damage to the propulsion system. "Systems" is an extremely broad category. I have to agree with @DD_Arthur here. We can't really conclude anything without knowing what systems respondents have in mind.
  12. I don't think that's very surprising. If the simulation runs at 50 Hz (a reasonable rate), it cannot correctly process events that are less than 20 ms apart since the delay is shorter than the game update cycle. What are you trying to accomplish with these short timers?
  13. Perhaps something like an AN-M58 SAP bomb listed as having 160 lb of explosive filling? Just speculating here. Telling the public the actual weight of TNT could be more meaningful than "500 lb bomb (of which most is metal)". However, I have no idea whether such bombs were used in the area.
  • Create New...