After flying Syndicate server as He transport we need a Ju 52 now

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Here is a website with alot of photos and some stories of soem JU-52´s  http://www.asisbiz.com/il2/Ju-52/Junkers-Ju-52.html

Edited September 4, 2014 by McKvack

[Potenz]

Well there should be plenty of data availabel. It first flew in 20s with docens of it still flying today. The Lufthansa one D-AQUI does have different engines though, however there are still flying examples with the original license build Pratt and Whitneys.

 

It was also exported to many countries worldwide and saw spread use all over the world so gathering data shouldn't be an issue .

in a museum here in Palomar, Buenos Aires, Argentina there's one of the few 100% German build JU-52, and it's a shame that our goverment doesn't give a shite an it's rotting parked outside

Edited September 12, 2014 by GOAPotenz

[Fenris]

FW200 would also serve to be a superior alternative to the JU-52, it'd actually be defensible, relatively fast, can bomb and supply and it actually looks pretty.

 

As I stated in an earlier post why should the devs spend the time? Sure it was there in large numbers, but it was also so bad it also got shot down in large numbers.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

FW200 would also serve to be a superior alternative to the JU-52, it'd actually be defensible, relatively fast, can bomb and supply and it actually looks pretty.

 

As I stated in an earlier post why should the devs spend the time? Sure it was there in large numbers, but it was also so bad it also got shot down in large numbers.

1st: Fw 200 weren't deployed in high numbers unlike the Ju52 since they were very uncommon and had many flaws. Also lack of short take off and landing characteritics combined with a poor handling on field airstrips made it less ideal for the eastern front.

 

2nd: It's up to the devs to decide what content to be introduced. We as customers can only explain our wishes or recommendations, though devs decide how and when (if ever) to go ahead with it.

Why shouldn't they consider implementing it? Is less variety better to please all those who don't want to fly, ie it can't be ingame since it's not for them?

I know a lot of guys not into the fighter buisness and who'd love to fly bombers and even transport planes only in BoS. It's a different expirience for those seaking it making this sim more special.

 

The Ju 52 is very vulnerable, indeed. Build for civil purpose it had it's weaknesses against any fighter it met. How could this be fun? Well it's the challenge, to survive, to get home safely and landing your probably shot up plane to fullfill the task.

Edited September 12, 2014 by [Jg26]5tuka

[7.GShAP/Silas]

There were more Ju 52s at Stalingrad than Bf 109s. I would buy Ju 52 in a heartbeat, whatever the price.

 

This, absolutely. Name a price and I'd pay it.

 

I've spent my share of time in C-130's, and have a deep affection for the guys who haul the gear and the troopers wherever it needs to go.  One of the things I like most about BOS is that it doesn't let you forget that the 'real' war is down in the snow and the dirt.

Edited September 12, 2014 by Silas

[sallee]

Because I'm such a hardcore crap plane flier I wouldn't normally condescend to address such a load of noob crap plane fliers like you with your uber Ju52s but this seems the right place to demand an Fa330 Bachstelze towed by a donkey. That's hardcore.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

You might love the DFS 230 Lastensegler as well than

 

Those have been towed by Ju52's as well leading us back to the need for having it ingame

[Good991]

Its so fun and i think i like this role more than a bomber.

We could use a real transport aircraft :D

Anyone agree?

i would love it also!!

and tb-3 for russians bouth nations would have a transporter then :D

Edited September 12, 2014 by Good991

[Michael_Wilhelm]

We need this!!

[312_strycekFido]

We need Ju52 for the same reason we have T-34s STuGs and detailed stalingrad in game. It's just important part of the battle. It might be little harder to make than a T-34, but on the bright side, it's useful for entire ww2 in ETO and MTO.

 

Oh and not even a static ground model as a target? come on....

[Ace_Pilto]

Glad to see this thread, we need some Ju-52 action. Even if it's an AI only plane to begin with would be great. It played a key role in the evacuation of Stalingrad and should be present.

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Im really happy and a bit suprised to hear that so many people want this plane

The devs have already noted this so we will see if we get anything in the future :D

[Pharoah]

lol its quite funny..for a combat sim like BOS....there's a huge demand for an unarmed (relatively) cargo plane! lol. 

[Finkeren]

lol its quite funny..for a combat sim like BOS....there's a huge demand for an unarmed (relatively) cargo plane! lol.

Why is that funny? Would it be funny to want a C-47 for a sim centered around D-Day?

[SYN_Bandy]

Yes, I'm definitely in for a Ju-52, and I bet most of my squad will be as well.  Put up a pre-order page!  Many of us have pre-ordered RoF aircraft (at a nicely reduced price to say thank you) so we have confidence in these devs.

 

Speaking of C-47's were the Russians not lend-leased quite a few of those, so maybe that would be a good alternative for a Russian transport.  It then could double in any other theatre coming afterwards!

 

BoS is really going places!

 

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/geust/aircraft_deliveries.htm
 

 

Lend-lease aircraft amounted to 18% of all aircraft in the Soviet air forces, 20% of all bombers, and 16-23% of all fighters (numbers vary depending on calculation methods), and 29% of all naval aircraft. In some AF commands and fronts the proportion of Lend-Lease aircraft was even higher: of the 9.888 fighters delivered to the air defense (PVO) fighter units in 1941-45 6.953 (or over 70%!) were British or American. In the AF of the Karelian front lend-lease aircraft amounted to about two-thirds of all combat aircraft in 1942-43, practically all torpedo bombers of the naval air forces were A-20G Bostons in 1944-45 etc.  Some American aircraft types were simply irreplaceable and very highly appreciated on all levels during the war, e.g. P-39 Airacobra fighters, A-20 Boston and B-25 Mitchell bombers and C-47 transport aircraft.

 

Regardless of Soviet cold-war attempts to forget (or at least diminish) the importance of Lend-lease, the total impact of the Lend-Lease shipment for the Soviet war effort and entire national economy can only be characterized as both dramatic and of decisive importance. The outcome of the war on the East front might well have taken another path without Lend-lease.

 

Edited September 16, 2014 by SYN_Bandy

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

The C-47 (actually renamed to Li-2 at eastern front) would be great to have as well. It was heavily used as a cargo, paradrop, medivac plane and even light bomber at the time the soviet union lacked all of them together. The C-47's service career lasted some bit longer than the Ju 52's, though in terms of service action in WW2 they both are very similar.

lol its quite funny..for a combat sim like BOS....there's a huge demand for an unarmed (relatively) cargo plane! lol. 

I know it's trolling but I guess I'll bite. Combat flight sim doesn't ranslate into fighter and bomber sim, it's called combat for a reason. In real combat many minor aircraft like transport and reconnisance planes contibuted to the overall success of every nation's airforce in combat. Without the upkeep of logistics and information updates of front activities no aircforce could infact function well.

 

The Ju 52 was more than "just a transport plane". It's a classic, for some an all-time love, and served in many different ways adding more possebilities for ingame objectives and gameplay. It even served as a Behelfsbomber (surroogate bomber) during the early war days so maybe it could be implement with a small payload.

Edited September 16, 2014 by [Jg26]5tuka

[Finkeren]

Most of the DC-3s/C-47s in Soviet service were domestically built Li-2s IIRC.

[LukeFF]

Most of the DC-3s/C-47s in Soviet service were domestically built Li-2s IIRC.

 

Correct, they were awarded a license to build them as the PS-84 before the war began. The named changed in 1942 to Li-2.

[Y-29.Silky]

The way that server goes, we'd need a bigger plane..

[Czar66]

I flew one Ju-52 on my FS2004 times and it was suprisingly fun to control, keeping in mind FM differences and ages.

 

Now, taking a combat environment into account. Adding a high value on Ju-52 transport task as needing only one to cap an airfield might bring gameplay value. 

Imagine how juicy would be a slow Ju-52 for VVS and how they would need to be escorted by 109s and 190s for their strategic value. The game would get something to join even more the players.

Ju-52 pilots would get tons of fun even without firing a single bullet. It would be just as fun as dive bombing, taking part on those groups of planes. Add some heavy engine management combined with emergency procedures when one of those 3 engines are hit or on fire, if there were some. 

 

I just got this sim exclusively on combat and I would definetly get the Ju-52, and if it has internal management on routine tasks and emergency, imagine how awesome.

Same goes for the Fw200, but incomparable to Ju-52's mojo.

 

Let the devs make the finest decision. Great work so far. Breathtaking experience. : )

Edited September 16, 2014 by FeliusCzar

[SYN_Bandy]

I could have sworn that the Ju52 had defensive armament, but posts here were saying no.  Maybe not dual gun power turrets, but still better than nothing.  And there could be waist positions as well in the side windows from what I see in photographs, however, that basket looks like it could be A LOT more fun.  Just don't get in the gunner's wicker until it takes off (one of my squadmates was mysteriously killed in the ventral position of a He111 on take off) but looks like it gets lowered anyways?  Don't think it was used operationally, but correct me.

 

 

 

 

 

It's waiting for you, come on in!

Edited September 17, 2014 by SYN_Bandy

[SYN_Bandy]

Junkers Ju 52/3m ge

This was the first version that entered production in large numbers. ...

Defensive armament consisted of: 

·         2 × 0.312 inch (7,92 mm) MG 15 trainable rearward-firing guns in an open dorsal position, 1.050 rounds total 

·         1 × 0.312 inch (7,92 mm) MG 15 trainable rearward-firing gun in a semi-enclosed, semi-retractable ventral 'bathtub' position, 750 rounds

 

Junkers Ju 52/3m g14e

The final production version. This version featured armor protection for the pilot, and had a standard defensive armament of :

1 × 0.51 inch (13 mm) MG 131 in the rear dorsal position

3 × 0.312 inch (7,92 mm) MG 15 each in one of the beam positions

1 in a low-drag copula over the cockpit.

 

Thought so...

Edited September 17, 2014 by SYN_Bandy

[CUJO_1970]

Put me on the list of people that would pay for this airplane.

 

Ju52 is "needed as bread and water!"

[LukeFF]

Thought so...

 

Yes, there's plenty of footage showing Ju 52s fitted with at least a dorsal turret, at least as far back as the invasion of Crete. 

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Thought so...

You don't seem to be wrong here:

Seems like mayn Ju 52's saw field modifications, so I guess the waist gunners are as well. Even saw some pictures of ones with additional armour covering all the side windows.

 

As far as I knwo the upper six o'clock gunner was one of it's production feautures and remeined consitend with all the versions.

Edited September 17, 2014 by [Jg26]5tuka

[Pharoah]

Why is that funny? Would it be funny to want a C-47 for a sim centered around D-Day?

 

I'm not trolling...it is a valid point I've raised. I never heard anyone complain we didn't have the JU52 during the IL2 1946 days, esp when it first came out. BOS is essentially a combat sim - I'm just stating the fact that I find it funny people are after a relatively defenseless a/c to fly, esp if flown online over the front lines knowing there are enemy fighters/heavy fighters around. 

[Feathered_IV]

Can't you see??? Flying a vulnerable aircraft at an enormous disadvantage, knowing there are enemy aircraft actively hunting you and ccomplishing your mission goals and surviving, purely through cunning, good airmanship and good luck is actually FUN. It is difficult, tense and very, very rewarding.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

This and also there are plenty of guys out there who simply can't get into the fighter / Zerstörer buisness but preferr to fly bombers and transport planes ect. By appealing to the whole audience (not only the fighter pilots) this gae could grow better and offer more various and immersive gameplay.

 

Hence the same question could be asked about the ROF spotters or the DCS Huey, still there seem to be plenty of people out there enjoying them and their different gameplay compared to the common warbirds. It's definetly not everyones taste but arguing against it because of different perosnal preferrences (totally neglecting what others may like) seems very out of place here.

[Elem]

Can't you see??? Flying a vulnerable aircraft at an enormous disadvantage, knowing there are enemy aircraft actively hunting you and ccomplishing your mission goals and surviving, purely through cunning, good airmanship and good luck is actually FUN. It is difficult, tense and very, very rewarding.

 Totally right! It's no challenge at all to fly a very much superior fighter against slow, vunerable transports. The greatest challenge is to survive by guile and cunning in those slow, vunerable transports. Bring on the Tante Ju and Li-2.

[Feathered_IV]

That's it. Every time you bring a transport aircraft in safely you are saying to every pew-pew fighter jock, I beat you!

[Pharoah]

Can't you see??? Flying a vulnerable aircraft at an enormous disadvantage, knowing there are enemy aircraft actively hunting you and ccomplishing your mission goals and surviving, purely through cunning, good airmanship and good luck is actually FUN. It is difficult, tense and very, very rewarding.

 

lol I probably should've also mentioned I fly bombers exclusively and WILL be doing runs in a JU52 (or equiv) should one be released. However I also know my virtual life expectancy when flying online. Ah well....good to see I'm not the only one with a virtual death wish!

[Original_Uwe]

lol I probably should've also mentioned I fly bombers exclusively and WILL be doing runs in a JU52 (or equiv) should one be released. However I also know my virtual life expectancy when flying online. Ah well....good to see I'm not the only one with a virtual death wish!

But I've noticed that I tend to live longer as a transport pilot.

As a fighter pilot I'm always getting in the middle of a fight. But if I do my job right as a transport pilot the enemy never find me.

[Pharoah]

But I've noticed that I tend to live longer as a transport pilot.

As a fighter pilot I'm always getting in the middle of a fight. But if I do my job right as a transport pilot the enemy never find me.

 

I've been downed twice on HE-111 transport missions, both by PE-2s so I guess you're lucky. Even in the He-111, I didn't last long. 

[pilotpierre]

I've only tried the HE111 transport missions twice. The first time i got shot down just as I had the Gumrack strip in sight, the second time I managed to land at Rynock while under attack. That was VERY satisfying.

[FlatSpinMan]

I've not done the resupply mission yet as the server was too unbalanced in favour of the LW. It sounds more my pace than being a fighter pilot though.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I think the unbalance is also due to people hopping into Heinkels as gunners falsely being accounted as pilots. There were 10 more LW players on yesterday yet VVS had started vulching them totally until nothing but STukas was left inside the pocket.

Strange enought the odd outnumbering remained throughout the session. I wouldn't count much on the statistics in such a case.

[1.JG77LuckySmile]

The way that server goes, we'd need a bigger plane..

 

That's what we need! All for Condor :D