Developer Diary, Part 29

[No105_Swoose]

Google doesn't seem to be my friend today. Does anyone have the specifications for these two marks?

I couldn't find the Series 87 but here's info on the Series 83 and Series 110.  My source is Petlyakov Pe-2 in Action by Hans-Heiri Stapfer (Aircraft Number 181 Squadron Signal Publications.

 

Pe-2 Series 83: In the spring of 1942, a major redesign of the Pe-2's aft defense took place.  Early Pe-2s were equipped with a 7.62mm ShKAS machine gun in a TSS-1 gun mount on the aft canopy.  The 7.62mm machine gun proved ineffective against the German Messerschmitt Bf-109 fighter, which had improved armor protection for the engine and cockpit.  The Pe-2 Series 83 and later variants replaced this mounting with a 12.7mm UBT (Universal'nyi Beresin Turel'nom; Universal Beresin Turret) machine gun.  The heavier weapon was needed to meet an urgent requirement from front-line units for improved protection against Axis fighters engaging Pe-2s from the rear.  In January of 1942, Leonid Selyakov and Andrei Arkhipov at GAZ (State Aviation Factory) 22 in Kazan began converting the Pe-2 to carry the new aft cockpit weapon.  With an overall length of 136.5cm (53.7 inches), the Beresin weapon was larger than the 128cm (50.4 inch) long ShKAS.  This resulted in the deletion of the aft canopy glazing, which Pe-2 crews nicknamed the 'turtle' because of its shape.  The UBT's heavier recoil force required its installation on a stronger mounting of two tube extensions leading from the turret's crash pylon into the upper fuselage.  The Pe-2 Series 83 variant replaced the forward fuselage glazing with two small, slot-shaped windows on both sides.  The nose cone glazing was replaced by a solid metal cap.  Windows were retained on the nose undersurface for bomb-aiming.  The single-hinged starboard access hatch for the nose 12.7mm UBK machine gun replaced the two-hinged doors used on previous Pe-2s.  The combination of front-line modifications and poor production finish dramatically reduced the Pe-2 Series 83's performance over previous Pe-2 variants.  The Pe-2 Series 83 had maximum speed of 488 KmH (303.2 MPH), which was 42 KmH (26.1 MPH) slower that the Pe-2 Series 31 of August of 1941.

 

Pe-2 Series 110: A.M. Izakson became the head of the Petylakov OKB (Opytnoye Konstruktorshkoye Byuro; Experimental Construction Bureau) after Vladimir M. Petylakov's death in a Pe-2 crash on 12 January 1942.  Izakson guided the development of a rear canopy gun turret for later Pe-2 variants.  Installation of the 12.7mm Beresin UBT machine gun on the Pe-2 Series 83's aft canopy was considered an interim solution, since the FT (Frontovoye Trebovaniye; Front Line Request) gun mounting required deletion of the aft canopy glazing. This open canopy section proved uncomfortable for the navigator/gunner in the harsh winter conditions of the Russian Front.  The FT mount's field of fire was 45 degrees to port or starboard and elevation range of +45 degrees to -6 degrees.  The Pe-2 Series 110 was the first variant to incorporate an enclosed aft canopy machine gun turret.  Petlyakov engineer I.I. Toropov developed the VUB-1 turret for the Pe-2's aft canopy section.  The turret was armed with a single, pneumatically loaded 12.7mm Beresin UBT machine gun with 200 rounds of ammunition.  The VUB-1 turret allowed the navigator to slew the machine gun 110 degrees to port and 88 degrees to starboard, move it up to +55 degrees.  This was an improvement over the FT's limited field of fire.  On the negative side, the VUB-1 turret reduced the Pe-2 maximum speed by 8 to 12 KmH ( 5 to 7.5 MPH).  The first Pe-2 Series 110 left the production line in June of 1942 and immediately entered VVS service.

[LukeFF]

Great looking pics. Are all the trees individual or are the bigger woodlots set as a larger single unit? Love the look, wonder about their effect on frame rate?

 

They're individual trees, just like in ROF.

[RAF74_Winger]

     Superb modeling of a beautiful aircraft, it's all looking very promising.

I hope that the full mission builder is as beautiful with the ease and simplicity

of the original il2 FMB then all will be well.

  I never did try the ROF FMB but from what I have been told by others it was

a complete disaster and that could be a killer for mission builders.

 

Great work so far,  ten out of ten!

 

   cheers.

    Ibis

 

 

That's a bit unfair. The ME in RoF can be difficult to use and debugging missions can be problematic if there's a lot of AI. Having said that, the editor is very powerful, and the ability to directly interface programatically with the mission through the dedicated server is a great but underused (at present) facility.

 

W.

[IbisWTE_Ibis]

   Hi Winger,

well as I said I haven't tried it but I am hoping that the FMB for BOS will be

easy enough yet simple enough to be used by most.

      I found the il2 fmb to be simple, effective and powerful to use and I have my fingers crossed for BOS.

 

btw here is a very nice flight of the il2.   best at full screen.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qF9VZSkVZI0

 

cheers

 Ibis.

Edited August 24, 2013 by WTE_IbisIbis

[FuriousMeow]

The RoF FMB is not a complete disaster. In fact, it incorporates so many of the things that so many people have requested that it's complicated because of that very reason. You can't simplify things when so many different demands to create missions exist.

 

It requires effort to learn because they tried to fulfill everyone's requests for the mission output when no one realises to get that output requires a very complex input.

 

EDIT: You edited your post to remove the complete disaster portion, which is fair, but I am not editing mine because it seems that most people miss the forest for the trees. They want so many things and then are taken aback by the complexity required to achieve the end results. This goes for mission building, as well as system performance.

Edited August 24, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[MACADEMIC]

Thanks for continuous updates!

 

 

MAC

[=69.GIAP=YSTREB]

will there be shadow for trees and I don't see any on screenshots?  sorry it was asked

[Rodolphe]

...

 

Google doesn't seem to be my friend today. Does anyone have the specifications for these two marks?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aircraft at Launch: Buyers of the Standard and Premium Editions will get the same base set of 6 aircraft (LaGG-3 (series 29), Bf-109 F-4, IL-2 AM-38 (1942 year's model, single-seat), Ju-87 D-3, Pe-2 (series 87 and 110) and He-111 H-6) with the possibility to earn 2 more aircrafts in the game (Yak-1 and Bf-109 G-2).

 

http://il2sturmovik.com/

 

 

 

...

Edited August 24, 2013 by Rodolphe

[Rodolphe]

...

 

 

Petlyakov engineers decided to build the entire Pe-2 Series 115 rear fuselage from wood.

The shape was identical to the earlier Pe-2 aft fuselage, except for the tail fairing. The earlier conical fairing was replace with a beaver-tail fairing on the new variant.

 

...

 

[ShamrockOneFive]

Interesting stuff! I didn't realize some of the other changes made to the series.

[Freycinet]

Good catch Rodolphe. If they modelled it wrongly this would be early enough to catch it and remodel it. It is a very slight difference, so it shouldn't be a big issue.

[hiro]

Thanks for the updates and waiting for the major one next week (or 2 weeks  ) 

 

PE is looking good and since its a WIP , the release will be better 

 

 

The mission builder isn't so bad, it's addressed in another thread the reasoning for it + hope for improvements on the ROF's ported ME (to BOS), so no need for shennanigans or wine n cheese posts about it

 

 

Guys,

 

It's the same ME as ROF. No time for changes.

 

Jason

 

 

 

 

 

El Aurens,

 

I understand your frustration and I know our ME is not that user friendly, but it is much more powerful than the old IL-2 ME. I hope to marshal the power of the community and those that do understand it to provide guidance and content for others who are not as proficient to begin to use it for BOS until some other solution is viable. That's the only option I have and the sooner we come to grips with it the better off we all will be. We can all work together to slay the dragon. BTW the ROF ME was NEVER intended to be an end-user tool. It is a developer tool and was only released due to pressure from the early ROF community before launch. Due to language issues it was never fully explained what they were getting and everyone had pre-conceived notions about what it would be. So finding fault with something that was never designed for public use is a bit misplaced. I'm glad we at least put it our there at all.

 

Also, the QMB in BOS will have a bit more features than the ROF QMB so you will have a few more options for quick fights which might make things easier for you. And with the current ROF update team has dramatically increased the speed in which missions load hence making testing easier with our ME.

 

Our mission formats can be manipulated by third party tools as Pat Wilson, Andeas Osswalt and Gabby Lazar have demonstrated previously. I also never understood why no one ever made a tool similar to the UQMB for the original IL-2 for ROF. It's certainly possible. A lot is possible with what we provide as a base. I suspect so much untrue crap was spewed about ROF that is simply did not interest talented 3rd Parties to try anything or WWI just does not appeal to the masses as WWII thereby limiting the talent pool. A lot of what you all love so much about the original IL-2 was done by talented 3rd Parties. We hope that spirit will be re-kindled with BOS.

 

Jason

 

[Trooper117]

Understood...

[IIN8II]

Only a few more days!!!!

[DD_Arthur]

Only a few more days!!!!

 

Lol.

[FuriousMeow]

September first and the following days will be interesting around here. Pre-release has never been slated for start of autumn but some time in autumn.

[Feathered_IV]

Hope it isn't like war thunder, where small changes are implemented every couple of days as part of a 3gb+ download. Meaning one spends mord time downloading than ever using the thing.

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

Nothing is happening on Sept 1st. from what ive read the early release will be a while yet, more like early October.

 

Stop getting people excited about the 1st.

[Trooper117]

People are just wishing, that's all... Nothing wrong with that.

If you go over to the RoF forums, exactly the same thing is happening... Normal human beings wishing their lives away waiting for a Fee that was delayed.

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

We dont just dont want people who read these comments, who dont know the details to expect the access to start on the 1st.

 

The 1st was a date pinned to pre-order before to get the rear gunner in the IL2, nothing more.

 

There is no date set yet for the early access, all we know is going to happen sometime in the autumn.

 

Im just as excited as anyone for it to start, but we need to keep our feet on the floor, there might be delays yet.

[Guest deleted@1562]

With Rome Total War 2 and GTA 5 being released soonish, I don't mind waiting.

[=BKHZ=Furbs]

Don't forget ARMA3 too!

[FuriousMeow]

If that's in response to me about the 1st, I never said anything will happen on the first.

[LLv34_Flanker]

S!

 

Comes when devs feel it is ready. Can wait, still got MechWarrior Online and soon GTA V:)

[Trident_109]

Sunday is the 1st. I doubt we'll be getting anything on Sunday.... probably more like mid September - early October.