Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jaegermeister

  1. I have updated the binary files to version 3.101 compatibility and combined the revised last mission with the .zip file for anybody downloading the file.
  2. Read through these, it's a popular subject lately
  3. I feel like it took you longer to type in all those dots than it did for me to look up the ballistic tables on a German Mauser cartridge. 🙄
  4. Ha ha.. Thanks for that Gambit! 😁 I’m sure your upcoming campaign will be a totally different experience, and I have to say I’m really looking forward to it. I said from the get go that this was just a small collection of practice missions and that’s still the case. I had to figure out the Mission Editor somehow and this was the first baby steps. I’m still learning. For anyone that hasn’t played through it, there are missions of various types that I tested; Ground target attack Anti-tank missions Vehicle convoy attack Train attack with Rockets AAA suppression Air intercept Airfield defense Artillery attack Bridge destruction Reconnaissance The way I see it, the more content we can provide with the new BoBP British and American planes, the more people that will be interested in being a part of our new Western Allied team when it’s finished. I can’t wait for the new map, voices and allied “side” to be implemented. That will give me stuff I’m interested in working with for quite some time. I am particularly interested in doing a tactical P38 campaign and as far as I can tell so far, that won’t require stepping on anyone else’s toes. The 370th Fighter group did some great work at Aachen and in the Hurtgen Forest and someone needs to bring that story to virtual reality. I have messaged Jason about it, but he has told us all that he has his hands full and they won’t be taking on any more official projects for now. I don’t really expect to hear back about it any time soon. That’s OK, I will work on it anyway and see where we are at when it actually gets put together. As usual, I will make it for myself to fly anyway and see what happens down the road.
  5. Only when I'm doing 650 kph in a 262 and try to turn into it... 😛
  6. Ha ha, funny you mention that. I did almost exactly that for my first flight in the 262 at 1000 meters. I never did get a shot on the A20 and switched to an easier enemy to see how the guns fired. I thought it was just me acting like a noob, but the A20 was tough to get a shot on.
  7. Just resave your files with the Mission Editor. Under tools. “Convert files in folder to binary” It takes about 4 mouse clicks and 5 minutes Im glad you liked it Roblex, it will only take a little bit of editing in a couple of files to keep it functional. Once the full release is out, or maybe even just the map, the “tows“ line will need to be updated. There is no number designation for BoBP yet Also I appreciate all the feedback from you and Chipwich. It made me realize that not everyone flies these missions the same way, so I changed the way I initiate enemy aircraft and mission goals. In my newer campaign, you do not necessarily have to follow the waypoints to trigger enemy aircraft and the triggers are mostly set off by the AI so it is less critical how the player actually flies the missions. If you want to follow the mission map, you can, but if you don’t you won’t miss all the action either.
  8. You are correct. It will require patience. The manuals and tutorials are a good place to start but I've found them to not be entirely accurate in some areas. I think the ME logic changes with updates to a certain extent. As an example, they just warned us in the last DD... 20. AI gunners fire only at targets selected as 'Engageable' (Mission Editor parameter) You are not alone though. Consider each mission you build as an IQ test where you have to figure out the logic that the ME wants to accomplish a task. Then try reading through the Mission Builder section and read all the manuals to figure out how to execute that particular part, and if you get stuck, you can usually find the answer by searching through the forum here. Eventually you will be able to make it do what you want.
  9. The way I interpret those statements is that you will be able to use the Mission Editor in it’s current form in Flying Circus and Tank Crew, with objects for the maps that apply to those particular conflicts. That means we will be able to build missions and scripted campaigns with both of those titles. The MCU malarkey and timer triggers is oddly enough exactly what everyone was yelling for on the IL2 1946 forums back in the day. Now that we have them, I guess we just have to figure it out. No one said it would be easy, and the devs have warned us all along that they aren’t going to hold our hands while we learn it. i can assure you we can do more now with the available tools than we could in FB/1946. I agree it’s more tedious, but I don’t think it is any harder. It’s just different.
  10. Looks like you saved me the time. I thought I remembered reading something about that. I’m guessing there is some information about this in the flight manual. The P47 had the same issue with the scavenge pump (or fuel return line) and if you didn’t remember to use the correct tank, it would siphon all your fuel overboard. When and if we get drop tanks. Not a priority really with no 6 hour missions I would think.
  11. Actually I'm not so sure this is true. I was just looking for some comments I remember from either Chuck Yeager or Andy Anderson about burning fuel from the 80 gallon tank behind the cockpit and I haven’t found it yet, but what I did find is mention of jettisoning drop tanks when the bombers started their bomb run over target, because they knew the Luftwaffe fighters would attack as soon as the bombers cleared the flak barrage. That would imply that the internal tanks were still full. They had to defend the bombers at full power and then fly 3 hours back home. I’ll keep looking
  12. So... not similar? 😁
  13. Falcon, I’m glad you are enjoying it! I think this one, small and obscure though it is, took 3 months of spare time to complete. It keeps me out of trouble I guess... Sometimes it’s strange how you find out about bits of history. This sim did used to be called “Forgotten Battles”: I was looking up Spitfire MkV aces and wondering what area I could replicate and fly that would have some historical significance related to it. I ran across Corrie Van Vliet DFC, with 12 victories, and mainly because I had never heard of him I started looking into his story. That led me to the story of Kos (Cos) and what you have now. Usually when these things work out, they sort of fall together and tell their own story. I’m just the one looking up the information and translating it in the Mission Editor.
  14. Yeah, I think it just depends on how many files you have. Some take longer than others.
  15. I’m not fluent in German either, but the numbers are the same and converting to metric is pretty easy, and a real life skill you might actually need. Requiem has done a nice job on his Me262 cockpit tutorial. You might want to watch it. Once you learn where the gauges are and what they do, who reads the label anyway? I doubt you need a label to know what the artificial horizon and the compass are.
  16. So yes, you can use either the resave missions in folder tool or the convert to binary in folder tool in the mission editor. They both apparently work. It has been the subject of at least 2 threads in the scripted campaigns section and no one seems to be having any trouble with it.
  17. Who are you referring to? I think we have covered that, and the graphs above give it an even better visual representation. When I referred to adjusting the sight on the Spitfire it just changes the reticle to judge range based on wingspan. You are aware of that feature, right? I don’t use icons with range text when firing. Why would I not adjust my sight to match convergence? here Is convergence information for the FW190 A8 as an interesting comparison. Cowl mounted machine guns and wing mounted cannons. also at 400 meters.
  18. i did something similar. I was trying to get screenshots of burning enemy bombers and fighters with a Spitfire Vb. I set up behind them and discovered the easiest way to set them on fire was with the convergence at 250 meters and shoot them at about 100 to 150 meters. My reflector sight was set to 200 yards. I would fire a short burst of machine gun fire which would hit both wing roots as it was below convergence distance. If it was a twin engine bomber I could kick in a tiny bit of rudder and get one or both engines smoking as well. Once there was a nice fuel leak, a very short burst with the cannons would usually destroy the aircraft by taking off a wing. About 1 in ten times it would burn nicely when the fuel ignited. i discovered that in this way I could regularly kill 4 or 5 fighters or bombers before I ran out of ammo. Now with fighters I try to get under convergence distance and fly to a good position about 100 yards behind, and wait for it to make a turn to get a view of the top or side of the EAC. I get the lead right with the machine guns, then a quick burst of cannon rounds in the wing root or cockpit finishes them. I have been able to take out quite a few 109s with less than 100 .303 rounds after the cannon ammo is gone if I am extremely careful with shot placement. The trick to that is to aim off to one side slightly because one set of guns is going to miss completely in front of a wing while the other one hits the cockpit at close range. In a 109 F or G I would think PK shots are even easier, because you have all the guns in the centerline. I believe that was H-J Marseille’s technique. Get close and wait for them to turn, then aim at the engine or cockpit. It may not work so well in MP, but against the AI, it’s very effective.
  19. It’s important to understand that convergence doesn’t make the guns shoot any flatter, it just changes where in the arc of the bullets trajectory your sight reticle is. The sight is fixed, so you have to adjust the gun instead of the other way around. If you split the difference between the highest and lowest points in the arc within the usable range of the guns, you will have the least amount of variance above or below the sight reticle. When you are shooting at an engine or cockpit about 3 or 4 feet high, 1 foot above or below is still a hit. 3 feet high or low is not.
  20. If the ballistics are modeled correctly, the MG17s would be shooting a 7.92 x 57mm Mauser 181 grain bullet at about 2800 to 2900 FPS. I don’t have the exact dimensions but let’s say the reflector sight is mounted approximately 12 inches above the guns barrels. If you zero the guns at 250 meters, you will be 12 inches low at point blank range, on target at 250 meters, and hitting about a foot low at 400 meters. That will drop to 2 feet low at 450 meters and then 3 feet low at 500 meters. if you zero the guns at 400 meters, you will hit about 8 inches low at 250 meters, on target at 400, 8 inches low at 450 meters, and 18 inches low at 500 meters. vertical sighting at 400 meters appears to give you about half the variance over the usable range of the guns that sighting in at 250 meters would. your horizontal spread is going to be negligible. Basically a foot at 800 meters. i don’t have the ballistics on the cannon shells but the drop will be much more significant since its a heavier shell at a lower velocity. You would be better off using the cannon at under 300 meters to insure hits in the area of the machine gun rounds. Erich Hartmann said his secret to success at shooting down so many enemy fighters was to wait until they filled the windscreen to fire.
  • Create New...