Developer Diary, Part 129 - Discussion

[=WH=PangolinWranglin]

How will the smoke be accessed?

 

P.S.- Cursory real life info on the Yak 1B: http://ram-home.com/ram-old/yak-1b.html

Edited July 29, 2016 by =DF=spaceman1999

[Potenz]

I will put my money for the Tante as soon as the preorder is up

[Dakpilot]

How will the smoke be accessed?

 

P.S.- Cursory real life info on the Yak 1B: http://ram-home.com/ram-old/yak-1b.html

 

Thanks, I feel 58 aircraft and 669 sorties between 10 Dec 42 and Jan 43 at Stalingrad gives decent reason for inclusion of Yak 1b in current BoS planeset and will be useful for future

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Brano]

Thus I'm more interested in hearing someone who knows what changes were made to the airframe except for the armament and canopy, if compared to the one we have already. 

With installation of more powerfull PF engine it was clear,that there are only 2 ways how to further improve Yak-1 perforamnce.

 

1.TsAGI start working on aerodynamic improvements  of existing series during july 1942 (project leader A.I.Silman). They modified Yak with serial.nr. 08-68 and did trials during august and september 42

- hermetisation of fuselage = fireproof bulkhead was properly sealed,new plywood bulkhead installed behind armor plate and canvas bulkhead behind water radiator

- openings for MG barrels got additional fairings and openings for burned gases were blinded.

- intersection between fuselage and elevator has been changed

- gaps between wings and ailerons has been reduced to 6mm

+ improved cooling system

With this changes the max speed increased by 23km/h comparing to serial ones,reaching 597km/h

 

2. In paralel Yakovlev OKB prepared modified Yak-1 serial nr.35-60 (still with PA engine) for testing (4.-14.7.1942) with these modifications

- lowered gargot and new ''bubble'' canopy

- front and rear armor glass + armor plate to protect left hand working with throttle

- both ShKAS removed and one UBS installed instead on left (with 200 rounds)

- pneumatic fire system of ShVAK has been replaced with electric

- mechanical/pneumatic fire system for MGs replaced with electro/pneumatic

- new control stick R-1 (copy from messer) installed,which made a life of pilot much easier ,as he didnt have to move his left hand to fire the guns,but was able to hold the stick in right hand and fire at same time while keeping left hand free for throttle

 

Not all of these changes appeared miraculously at Saratov plant at the same time+ other changes were added continuously

from 87.series retractable rear wheel

from 89.series oil shield installed inbetween prop hub and fuselage to prevent oil to splash on windshield

from 99.series lowered gargot,new canopy and change of armament

 

Airplanes with fully implemented changes started to roll out from 111.series (jan.43) untill last 192.series was finished in july 1944

Alltogether 4188 Yak-1b produced + 273 with not all changes implemented (before 111.series)

 

Acording to NII VVS,these were average performance data for 1943 production

 

Max horizontal speed:

ground level .............531 +6/-4 km/h

1st altitude limit ........568 +3/-4 km/h

2nd altitude limit........592 +3/-6 km/h

 

Altitude limits in m

1st............................1700 +175/-225

2nd...........................4100 +60/-250

 

Climb to 5k,min...............5.6 +/- 0.5  

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Brano, thank you for taking your time and sharing this !

[Brano]

You are welcome 

[[CPT]milopugdog]

So, devs, Fw-189. Can you make it happen?

[WokeUpDead]

 

- new control stick R-1 (copy from messer) installed,which made a life of pilot much easier ,as he didnt have to move his left hand to fire the guns,but was able to hold the stick in right hand and fire at same time while keeping left hand free for throttle

 

Wow, it's surprising this change didn't happen earlier.

[FlyingNutcase]

Indeed, a risky development decision putting resources into the '52. I sure hope we can prove it to be a sound decision. I'll get it for sure. Respect to the Boss for giving it the go-ahead.

 

And it looks like my birthday week is going to be a big one, haha; thank you!

[Monostripezebra]

I´ve filed an official bug report half an hour after patch release, even before the b fix, even with a detailed vid later added. Thats why m wondering.. that such a thing so far has not been fixed in the 2.0002b patch, I guess the VR-confusion covered all other issues. 

 

 

 

 

I put in a bug report...hopefully an easy one to roll back!

[ShamrockOneFive]

Has other engine klimov m105Pf. Normal Yak1 has the 105PA. You cant say that the DB605A is the same than DB605D.

 

Nope. Its the 105PA in both the Series 69 and all of the Yak-1B series. This is easy stuff man.

 

Both Yak-1 series 69 and Yak-1"b" or series 111 onwards has the same M-105PF engine.

+ if you are a fan of never-ending FM quarrels,do it in appropriate topic otherwise moderators will eat your lunch :D

 

 

With installation of more powerfull PF engine it was clear,that there are only 2 ways how to further improve Yak-1 perforamnce.

 

1.TsAGI start working on aerodynamic improvements  of existing series during july 1942 (project leader A.I.Silman). They modified Yak with serial.nr. 08-68 and did trials during august and september 42

- hermetisation of fuselage = fireproof bulkhead was properly sealed,new plywood bulkhead installed behind armor plate and canvas bulkhead behind water radiator

- openings for MG barrels got additional fairings and openings for burned gases were blinded.

- intersection between fuselage and elevator has been changed

- gaps between wings and ailerons has been reduced to 6mm

+ improved cooling system

With this changes the max speed increased by 23km/h comparing to serial ones,reaching 597km/h

 

2. In paralel Yakovlev OKB prepared modified Yak-1 serial nr.35-60 (still with PA engine) for testing (4.-14.7.1942) with these modifications

- lowered gargot and new ''bubble'' canopy

- front and rear armor glass + armor plate to protect left hand working with throttle

- both ShKAS removed and one UBS installed instead on left (with 200 rounds)

- pneumatic fire system of ShVAK has been replaced with electric

- mechanical/pneumatic fire system for MGs replaced with electro/pneumatic

- new control stick R-1 (copy from messer) installed,which made a life of pilot much easier ,as he didnt have to move his left hand to fire the guns,but was able to hold the stick in right hand and fire at same time while keeping left hand free for throttle

 

Not all of these changes appeared miraculously at Saratov plant at the same time+ other changes were added continuously

from 87.series retractable rear wheel

from 89.series oil shield installed inbetween prop hub and fuselage to prevent oil to splash on windshield

from 99.series lowered gargot,new canopy and change of armament

 

Airplanes with fully implemented changes started to roll out from 111.series (jan.43) untill last 192.series was finished in july 1944

Alltogether 4188 Yak-1b produced + 273 with not all changes implemented (before 111.series)

 

Acording to NII VVS,these were average performance data for 1943 production

 

Max horizontal speed:

ground level .............531 +6/-4 km/h

1st altitude limit ........568 +3/-4 km/h

2nd altitude limit........592 +3/-6 km/h

 

Altitude limits in m

1st............................1700 +175/-225

2nd...........................4100 +60/-250

 

Climb to 5k,min...............5.6 +/- 0.5  

 

Thanks for this Brando! Excellent info on this model.

 

It's a great addition, it'll be a feisty little fighter, but its not exactly some sort of nightmare uber fighter that a few folks seem to somehow think it is. Another rung in a series of improvements to the Yak series.

 

Still holding out hope that we'll also see a Yak-7/9 show up sometime soon.

[JG13_opcode]

2x as many Yak 9's were built as there were Yak 1's. If any aircraft deserves a spot in an Eastern Front game, it's the Yak-9.

[FTC_Riksen]

Sorry, but you really don't know what you're talking about.

 

Sorry but its you who doesnt know what u r talking about.

 

1.42 ata were there used between Nov 42 to May 43 when they were restricted to 1.3 ata until the problems were sorted out.

 

Reference Nov 42 manual:

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/523-soviet-trials-bf-109g-2-g-4/page-2

 

Im glad the devs are adding more planes and i will certainly support it

 

Cant wait for the Ju52

[7.GShAP/Silas]

I'll be buying both as soon as they are available as well.  Especially the Ju-52. I'd buy a Li-2 straight off too.

 

 

Im not sure if its the right move to make the Ju52.

 

Although I am a big Bomber fan and also like a good Transport plane such as the Ju52, but without click pit I feel this is a bit of a waste. Especially in VR. The fun flying a plane such as this is imho to proper manage the engines, navigate and basically "act" as you were in this time and era flying that plane.

 

BoS/BoM has a strong focus on dogfighting and does that exceptionally well. With its (yet) mediocre in-game map, no flight planning tools, and no click pit I find it hard to enjoy a plane like the Ju52 or even the Pe2 in such a "dogfighty" environment.

 

I'd really like to support the team with buying the Ju52 but I don't think it's the right move to just buy it and pretend I enjoy flying it when there are so many things that imo needed to be added for me to enjoying that plane. I hope the team will add some of those features (even though there will never be a click pit as far as we know), for I can spend my money happily for such beautiful plane.

 

 

There are various third party resources available online made for helping you navigate and learn your environment in BOS/BOM. Or, my personal favorite, get a protractor and hold it up to the screen while looking at your map.  Hey presto, suddenly you're navigating to your heart's content.

 

Personally, I don't like click-pits.  I especially can't imagine being able to react with combat urgency using a click-pit, even with an oculus. Seems more suited for a leisurely civilian flight sim, rather than for dropping vital, life-saving supplies on a tiny zone while one of your engines burns and a fighter is trying to sit on your backside and murder you, yanking and banking the whole way.  Or scrambling for takeoff while bombs and rockets descend upon you while your squadron-mates yell in your ears.  I'd love to see someone manage it!

[216th_Jordan]

I'll be buying both as soon as they are available as well.  Especially the Ju-52. I'd buy a Li-2 straight off too.

 

 

 

 

There are various third party resources available online made for helping you navigate and learn your environment in BOS/BOM. Or, my personal favorite, get a protractor and hold it up to the screen while looking at your map.  Hey presto, suddenly you're navigating to your heart's content.

 

Personally, I don't like click-pits.  I especially can't imagine being able to react with combat urgency using a click-pit, even with an oculus. Seems more suited for a leisurely civilian flight sim, rather than for dropping vital, life-saving supplies on a tiny zone while one of your engines burns and a fighter is trying to sit on your backside and murder you, yanking and banking the whole way.  Or scrambling for takeoff while bombs and rockets descend upon you while your squadron-mates yell in your ears.  I'd love to see someone manage it!

 

Indeed. I also don't see what clickpits do better than assigned buttons. You press a key combination and something happens or you click with a cursor on something and something happens, its essentially the same except the second one takes a lot longer.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Thank you devs this really shows contrary to popular belief that you guys listen to the community!!!!!! Last DD was about DX 11 and now this!!! You guys really come through!!!!!

[SYN_Speck]

Great news, that you're adding the flyable "Tante-Ju!" I really didn't think it would happen. It's great to be surprised sometimes!

 

And I'll be happy to get into the new Yak also.

 

S~

[JG4_Sputnik]

I'll be buying both as soon as they are available as well.  Especially the Ju-52. I'd buy a Li-2 straight off too.

 

 

 

 

There are various third party resources available online made for helping you navigate and learn your environment in BOS/BOM. Or, my personal favorite, get a protractor and hold it up to the screen while looking at your map.  Hey presto, suddenly you're navigating to your heart's content.

 

Personally, I don't like click-pits.  I especially can't imagine being able to react with combat urgency using a click-pit, even with an oculus. Seems more suited for a leisurely civilian flight sim, rather than for dropping vital, life-saving supplies on a tiny zone while one of your engines burns and a fighter is trying to sit on your backside and murder you, yanking and banking the whole way.  Or scrambling for takeoff while bombs and rockets descend upon you while your squadron-mates yell in your ears.  I'd love to see someone manage it!

 

While I respect your oppinion I come to a slightly different conclusion: I think you are right when we talk about a single prop fighter. But the more complicated a plane becomes, the "easyier" it is to just click the button as you would in RL - remind you I'm talking about VR and no mouse, like in DCS 1.4 where you have a dot in front of you and you can point on whatever you want to in seconds, for clicking you can assign a button on your HOTAS. It works exceptionally well. And compared to RL, you wouldn't have all your necessary buttons on just your tips of your fingers either, so HOTAS is also not really realistic for that matter.

 

And what I meant is that the complexer a plane becomes, the "easier" it becomes to manage it without having to assign every single button first to your joystick - "where did I put my "select fuel tank" button again in this plane? Was it for the right engine or the left?" And so on. Whereas in a klickpit you just point at it and well, klick. But as I said, this impact is the stronger the more complex a plane an its cockpit layout becomes.

 

Maybe one could argue that this only applies for modern Jets (like it would be impossible to manage a Mig 21 without klickpit) and not for WW2 machines and I would partly agree - as long as we talk about fighters. Bombers however I feel (again, it's my personal feeling) it would be nice to not first have to map all the buttons to my HOTAS and maybe dubble or even tripple it (for 3 engines). But this discussion is kind of idle since we know that we won't have klickpits. And since we know that, I'm afraid it is a bit a wrong move to put resources into a Ju52 for I think many possible bomber pilots (like myself) are a bit scared off due to the lack of "complexity". Why not make another FW? The A5 maybe? For lesser effort and more income?

 

And as for the navigation - yes I know the awesome online tool for BoS where you can plan your flights (http://il2missionplanner.com/ for everyone who doesn't know already), and I used it fairly well, also made notes, calculations and so on, and it is one of my favourite things to do in a flight combat sim. HOWEVER since I have an Oculus Rift none of this makes sense for me anymore, simply because now I have to have all this stuff digitally and within the game. Like the kneeboard in DCS. And since I have my Oculus I've never touched BoS or my Track IR5 again. It's just too cool to actually sit in a plane rather than starring on a 2D monitor.

 

So I guess that what I'm saying is that I am the main target group for this plane (likes to plan flights, flies more bombers /cargo or ground attack planes than fighters, less "action oriented", willing to learn to proper fly a plane) but I see very little reason to actually buy the plane for actually flying it rather than just supporting the devs. But it makes no sense to "just" support the devs and then still not flying the plane, you know what I mean? I feel that I have to also tell the devs what I would nee to actually ENJOY a plane like the Ju52.

 

So they might understand that I'm not buying it because I hate these kind of planes but BECAUSE I LOVE THEM! Sounds crazy but sums it up quite well. 

Edited July 30, 2016 by JG4_Sputnik

[216th_Jordan]

I can kind of understand your point Sputnik, I just think that programming a clickable cockpit seems to be way beyond resources for now. I don't know how easy or hard it is to do but Devs have already said that it would be a lot of work and thus will not be followed. Don't get me wrong, I would love to have it, but I'm fine with what we have when there are no resources for that. If you are a programmer able to do that, maybe you can contact the devs and try to do it and then propose it to them.

[xvii-Dietrich]

Great news regarding the Ju 52. Thanks Devs!

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Can we take the click pit conversation elsewhere? It is already EXTENSIVELY covered and really not Germaine to the OP.

[707shap_Srbin]

2x as many Yak 9's were built as there were Yak 1's. If any aircraft deserves a spot in an Eastern Front game, it's the Yak-9.

First 8 serial Yak-9's went to 32giap (Kalinin front) only in early february 1943. After Battle of Moskow ended.

[Yakdriver]

the 1B brings back really good memories, be that in WT or 1946.
He is my little Russian Friend.
40-50 bucks for that alone.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Don't give em any ideas

[ShamrockOneFive]

the 1B brings back really good memories, be that in WT or 1946.

He is my little Russian Friend.

40-50 bucks for that alone.

 

Ended up flying more than one Yak-1B campaign in IL-2. Such a great performer although I tended towards the Yak-9 whenever it was available... Only later did I realize how good the 1B really was.

 

Don't give em any ideas

 

Yeah... not too pricey please :D

 

Also, I have a question I haven't been able to find out. Does the Yak-1B have different ailerons? The Yak-1 is a bit of a slow roller and I'm curious if this one will be any different.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I thought, by most accounts here, our Yak 1 is slightly OP in roll rate.

[JtD]

The gaps between wing and ailerons have an impact on overall drag and aileron performance. Brano suggested that the gap was reduced with the Yak-1b, so I'd expect an improved roll rate. Somewhere between indiscernible and a little bit.

[Yakdriver]

screw you guys

 

 

Yeah... not too pricey please :D

my old salary was 75% of what i will make come September - a proper 600Yuro boost - no wife no kids, no rent that sucks up 50% of my income... no other sins than virtual Aviation
i can afford it.

The next step would be to join those able to do giveaways of individual planes, paying back/forth the things i learned from the virtual flight simming community.
After all, CFS3 dragged me away from Mechanics and into IT, and strongly contributed to make me who i am today.

 

 

[Brano]

That pic of NN yak is nice example of things lost in translation. Russian text says July 1943, English says April 1943. Go figure :D

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

40-50 bucks for that alone.

120€

[I./JG1_Baron]

That pic of NN yak is nice example of things lost in translation. Russian text says July 1943, English says April 1943. Go figure :D

 

That pic of NN yak is nice example how beautiful plane it was.

[DeafBee]

If the VR gets really good in this game it might be time to get me a HTC Vive to replace my trusted TrackIr 5.   

 

Now I see the point in having  clickable cockpits as in DCS or CLOD.  

 

I would like to see a test of the VR from someone when its better supported.     

[Brano]

That pic of NN yak is nice example how beautiful plane it was.

That's true as well

[farineli2]

Ok I was wrong with yak. I thought tht has the normal version of klimov105. Now i understand why they caught me with the 190 jejeje that why i was affraid of a better yack.

[ShamrockOneFive]

I thought, by most accounts here, our Yak 1 is slightly OP in roll rate.

 

Really? I don't have evidence either way at the moment (finding a chart for that has proven difficult) but the roll rate was nerfed in early BoS development and I'm guessing that its fairly accurate now. Its definitely on the slower side of things. The LaGG-3 rolls faster and I find the 109 is easier to roll in. With the Yak I supplement the roll with a lot of rudder.

 

The gaps between wing and ailerons have an impact on overall drag and aileron performance. Brano suggested that the gap was reduced with the Yak-1b, so I'd expect an improved roll rate. Somewhere between indiscernible and a little bit.

 

Interesting. Ok, thanks JtD. I'll expect a minor but not dramatic difference to the roll.

 

Ok I was wrong with yak. I thought tht has the normal version of klimov105. Now i understand why they caught me with the 190 jejeje that why i was affraid of a better yack.

 

This is why it pays to do the research and then react later

 

Yeah, the Series 69 Yak-1 is not the same as the Yak-1 in IL-2 1946. This one has far more engine power and is more refined. In contrast (as I said at the start of all of this discussion), the Yak-1B won't be a dramatically better performer. Minor improvements overall plus better visibility and slightly better firepower. It'll be about as dangerous as the Yak-1 we already have. If we get a La-5FN... THEN you should fear

[Obelix]

 

[Danziger]

I've been on holiday in the Colorado rocky mountains and missed the initial post. I have to say this is amazing news. More aircraft as single downloads to fill out the standard BoX packs is going to be sooooooo awesome and I will bet it goes a long way toward getting our plane set as large as old IL2. I can't wait to get into the 1B. It's the classic Yak look with the bubble canopy.

[Venturi]

We're going to need you guys to get behind these two new planes (especially the Ju-52) and show us we didn't waste our time.  The team is trying to be more flexible so please support such initiatives in a big way. Price has not been determined yet.

 

There are a lot of cool things being discussed internally. New theater and more will be revealed in August. I will be in Moscow week of August 8th working on the future with the team.

 

 

Jason

 

[Danziger]

For some reason I was thinking August is still far away. But it starts tomorrow woot! Can't wait for the news!

[SharpeXB]

Can we take the click pit conversation elsewhere? It is already EXTENSIVELY covered and really not Germaine to the OP.

Not much point discussing it elsewhere either. It was already stated at the beginning that this feature would not be included

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?p=1694

 

"13) Can we expect the clickable cockpits?

 

No. We create a simulation of air combat (this includes attacking ground targets). The pilot will only receive critical systems, propeller pitch, boost, altitude control, different mechanization, weapons and more. Procedural training device it will not be, it will be a game simulator. We would like to return to the original idea of the "IL-2 Sturmovik", because we believe that it was great."