Developer Diary, Part 154 - Discussion

[Finkeren]

Needless to say it will probably be the most effective anti tank weapon in game.

When dropped correctly, which as the DD explains is no easy task, they can be devastating to a tank collumn or any single tank in the drop zone. However, they are strictly a one-shot affair, you don't get second chances.

[Juri_JS]

If the VVS gets the PTAB, will the Luftwaffe get submunition containers like the AB 250 and AB 500?

[US63_SpadLivesMatter]

If the VVS gets the PTAB, will the Luftwaffe get submunition containers like the AB 250 and AB 500?

They'll be disabled on MP maps, and you still won't be able to load 2500's either. =D

Edited March 31, 2017 by hrafnkolbrandr

[JG4_Sputnik]

Every time I read complicated procedures like the "horizontal level bombing", I wonder if it isn't/wasn't much easier to just aim by the guts instead of doing so many estimated guesses and theories, especially in combat and under high pressure.

I wonder how many pilots actually did stuff like "remember a point about 500m in a right angle to the target" you want to hit (and that is moving and firing), I mean come on.

 

There's such a high chance that you either have the 500m wrong guessed, the airspeed is different than it should or the altitude is not correct that you hardly can achieve a better result than throwing them bombs by guts?

I think a lot of those designs were made on office desks and weren't particularly effective outside of training range.

 

I've played Il21946 pretty well without setting up the german ReVi to a correct distance and wingspan of the enemy, never knew about the Il2 1943 gunsight and yet hit my targets. A short burst of your MG and the tracers tell you everything you need to know. 

Rockets however it's different since you only have on shot.

 

Appreciate the info thought, its nice to get educated about stuff like this 

[A-E-Hartmann]

Very good new and DD .  

[senseispcc]

Il2 is impresive and with each development even more so! Thanks.  

[Dakpilot]

Every time I read complicated procedures like the "horizontal level bombing", I wonder if it isn't/wasn't much easier to just aim by the guts instead of doing so many estimated guesses and theories, especially in combat and under high pressure.

I wonder how many pilots actually did stuff like "remember a point about 500m in a right angle to the target" you want to hit (and that is moving and firing), I mean come on.

 

There's such a high chance that you either have the 500m wrong guessed, the airspeed is different than it should or the altitude is not correct that you hardly can achieve a better result than throwing them bombs by guts?

I think a lot of those designs were made on office desks and weren't particularly effective outside of training range.

 

I've played Il21946 pretty well without setting up the german ReVi to a correct distance and wingspan of the enemy, never knew about the Il2 1943 gunsight and yet hit my targets. A short burst of your MG and the tracers tell you everything you need to know. 

Rockets however it's different since you only have on shot.

 

Appreciate the info thought, its nice to get educated about stuff like this 

 

Unfortunately    99% of RL flying relies on accuracy, proficiency and procedures (and skill) rather than by the 'Gut' the successful aces were often not the 'gung ho' characters that are portrayed  today, although many were happy (as today) to have that laid back image promoted

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[unreasonable]

Every time I read complicated procedures like the "horizontal level bombing", I wonder if it isn't/wasn't much easier to just aim by the guts instead of doing so many estimated guesses and theories, especially in combat and under high pressure.

I wonder how many pilots actually did stuff like "remember a point about 500m in a right angle to the target" you want to hit (and that is moving and firing), I mean come on.

 

There's such a high chance that you either have the 500m wrong guessed, the airspeed is different than it should or the altitude is not correct that you hardly can achieve a better result than throwing them bombs by guts?

I think a lot of those designs were made on office desks and weren't particularly effective outside of training range.

 

I've played Il21946 pretty well without setting up the german ReVi to a correct distance and wingspan of the enemy, never knew about the Il2 1943 gunsight and yet hit my targets. A short burst of your MG and the tracers tell you everything you need to know. 

Rockets however it's different since you only have on shot.

 

Appreciate the info thought, its nice to get educated about stuff like this 

 

You may be right that many pilots - like other members of the military - forget their training when under pressure in combat. But it is the one who does not forget who hits the target.

 

Even area weapons need to be placed correctly to be effective, and as Han mentioned when carrying out low altitude level attack - essential for a cluster munition - you cannot see the target during the crucial point of the approach, so tracers cannot help.

 

The point about setting up a Revi (for air-air combat, a different case) correctly is that you do not even need to use tracers - which alert the target to the fact that he is being shot at. The first burst should be hitting, not the second. 

Edited March 31, 2017 by unreasonable

[Cybermat47]

Arguably the definitive version of the Sturmovik... can't wait to fly her

[XQ_Lothar29]

Thanks for new news.

 

I liked it very much, to know for which those lines of the engine hood were used

 

 

I am looking forward to seeing the development of the He129 and P39

 

Very good work pace..

 

But.. 

 

1- I would like to know if they are going to implement rearmamento on land, refueling and repair?

2- Let's get the chat, be modified to smaller space

3- When you give Artificial Intelligence orders, can we still use the trackir, and not stay the still image?

4- Will there be damage to the landing gear, due to failure of the hydraulic system and the wheels falling in mid-flight?By ammunition impacts..

 

 

 

Thx Devs!

 

 

 

Edited March 31, 2017 by Ala13_Lothar29

[HagarTheHorrible]

Any examination of night photographs taken during night bombing in June and July points to the following conclusions:

Of those aircraft recorded as attacking their target, only one in three got within 5 miles [(8 kilometres)].

Over the French ports, the proportion was two in three; over Germany as a whole, the proportion was one in four; over the Ruhr it was only one in ten.

In the full moon, the proportion was two in five; in the new moon it was only one in fifteen. ...

All these figures relate only to aircraft recorded as attacking the target; the proportion of the total sorties which reached within 5 miles is less than one-third. ...

The conclusion seems to follow that only about one-third of aircraft claiming to reach their target actually reached it.[4]

 

Even well trained crews weren't really well trained professionals, they were filling in as best they could, with imperfect equipment, training and motivation. I suspect most pilots were more more than happy with "that'll do" especially as grim reality set in, probably about the same time as they became semi proficient at their job.

[Chief_Mouser]

Just re-read the VV-1 sight instructions again. A nightmare!

 

1. Attacking with rockets from 1500m minimum height? I get a nosebleed above 300m in the Il-2. If I'm up that high methinks that some nasty fighters will be spotting me straight away.

2. Low-level bombing with a 3-5 km straight run-in? Dead from flak before I get halfway to target. Not to mention nasty fighters etc.

 

The only current way to survive in the Il-2 is to avoid being spotted by fighters in the first place and weave all over the shop when attacking anything guarded by flak. Or go in mob-handed and hope that your chums get shot down rather than you.

I will reserve judgment on the new sight until I've tried it out thoroughly, but I think I might be attacking by the seat of my pants method as usual.

 

Cheers.

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

When dropped correctly, which as the DD explains is no easy task, they can be devastating to a tank collumn or any single tank in the drop zone. However, they are strictly a one-shot affair, you don't get second chances.

Well if a tank was easy to destroy, especially from the air,  what use would it be?

 

[Finkeren]

Well if a tank was easy to destroy, especially from the air, what use would it be?

Indeed. Even though PTABs were more effective than either bombs or rockets, destroying a tank from the air was no mean feat.

[unreasonable]

Indeed. Even though PTABs were more effective than either bombs or rockets, destroying a tank from the air was no mean feat.

 

The key is getting a direct top hit where the armour is thin.  PTABs are shaped charge, any top hit will penetrate and probably disable the tank even if it does not explode in a satisfying roar. More small charges better than one big one - they improve your hit chances roughly proportionately to the number of charges.

 

But I agree that it is still hard to do - although there is a good spread along the line of flight, the spread laterally is still very small.  I do not know exactly what it is, but the bomblets will not spread out to the sides very much, so an IL-2 has to fly directly over a tank to get a hit, leaving wind out of the equation. I am sure the overwhelming majority of PTAB attacks hit nothing at all.

[=ARTOA=Bombenleger]

The key is getting a direct top hit where the armour is thin.  PTABs are shaped charge, any top hit will penetrate and probably disable the tank even if it does not explode in a satisfying roar. More small charges better than one big one - they improve your hit chances roughly proportionately to the number of charges.

 

But I agree that it is still hard to do - although there is a good spread along the line of flight, the spread laterally is still very small.  I do not know exactly what it is, but the bomblets will not spread out to the sides very much, so an IL-2 has to fly directly over a tank to get a hit, leaving wind out of the equation. I am sure the overwhelming majority of PTAB attacks hit nothing at all.

In my head im already picturing effective formations to maximise hit chance of IL 2s with PTABS.

 

One way to increase accuracy would be to have 3 IL 2 s in a V shape with the planes flying relatively very close from left to right but with 100m distance forward/backward.

If they then drop simultaneously on command they could cover a roughly 60-100m broad and 700m long strip of ground with their bomblets.

This should take aiming and timing errors somewhat out of the equation.

 

Though im still prepared to be disappointed, because it could be that PTABs will not come with the IL2 1943. 

Edited March 31, 2017 by =ARTOA=Bombenleger

[Fortis_Leader]

Wait, are we getting PTABs in BoK?

 

 

 

Re pilot/soldier performance: Pulling something off from the comfort of your office chair in a sim is one thing. When you've been flying for a few hours in a loud, vibrating, shaking plane in the scorching summer heat, staying in formation with your flight lead, and real people with real functioning brains are trying their very best to both hide from you and kill you, it's probably not quite that easy anymore.

[Tag777]

Well, as for me (fighter pilot) I hope the Spit be an improvement in the VVS aircraft arsenal. It seems that the p-39 will be the last in the list   .

[Max_Damage]

PTAB make a ~20x100 m death line for the enemy tanks.

 

With 100 kg bombs you need to hit a ~3 meter target to destroy a tank.

With PTABs you need to hit a 20x100 m target to kill all tanks. 

 

Go figure :D

http://technicamolodezhi.ru/upload/medialibrary/471/7.jpg

 

 

Also the tailgunner is a much needed improvement!

Edited March 31, 2017 by Max_Damage

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

I could use some german SD2 bombs.

[HagarTheHorrible]

I was given to understand that Il2 bomber flights, much like the American Bomber formations, tended to drop bombs when the flight leader did. I'm not saying it happened all the time, but given the probably very poor ability level and high attrition rate (Catch 22) of the average front line Il2 pilot it was probably about as much as could be expected.

[=/WoVi/=kirumovka]

I wanted to ask aobut the "draw on" crosshair in the il2s...

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Are we getting a seat adjustment system for the IL2 considering we need a correct eye position for a optimal aiming??

Something available like the three ball system on modern planes.

[=EXPEND=Capt_Yorkshire]

looks cool.

[Bullets]

How long roughly would you say till the Spit is finished? 1-2 more weeks to finish FM and then 2 weeks testing?  Roughly a Month?         

 

P.S. (pls don't say two weeks    )

[=ARTOA=Rauchenderkolben]

I am really tempted to order oculus or vive....

 

2nd gen of vr is very far out right?

hey man, I'd advice you to wait until we see the VR support and we'll be able to juge wether it works well to confirm to everybody, that now is a good time to invest into VR for people with a focus on flightsim, especially Il2.

War Thunder is performance wise currently the best/smoothest in VR, a joy to play, good Gui, just the game seriously lacks depth, physical corectness/realism and just feels very arcade, especially if your background are flightsims. But quite refreshing sometimes, especially if your time is limited to like 30 min, call it the "call of duty of VR-flightsims".

Gen2 VR will still take a very long time and it will kinda be like, "ohh wow, Playstation 1 is out now, ahh I'm gonna buy Playstation 3, that one will be good". If you are that type of a person, okaaay, but I'm going to be the guy who enjoys every single Gen of VR, it's really is becomming close to be worth it for everyone.

 

I was within the first people to receive a HTC VIVE, It has been a pain at the beginning due to the absolute lack of content. You basically couldn't do anything with it beside playing Jobsimulator or buying 15min playtime demos for the price of AAA games. With WarThunder (freetoplay) came the first flight game to be fun in VR with good implementation right from the beginning, having still the lead in terms of performance and support. Then came DCS. DCS is wonderfull but it still sometimes has serious problems in terms of performance, especially when clouds are activated on servers and you are flying WWII aircraft (20fps with 980ti). For some reason performance in Jets is better, solid 50-60 fps (probably because you arent that close to the ground most of the time). But hell is it fun on the high populated player servers, since those use low terrain details and no clouds most of the time. DCS has still a long road ahead, updates do take a long time, so not the best horse to bet on for VR if time is a important factor to you. DCS is the only one who has implemented a ZOOM-Feature for VR (IL2 listen carefully, we need that too !) making targets indentifyable at longer ranges (200m). I do have a lot more love for DCS as described and would recommend it already, this text is just already getting way too long, i should just finnally make a video about all of this stuff, since I think it becomes more and more imporant to share and compare. After DCS there was the IL-2 BOS alpha VR support with directx9. i had around 30-50 fps with a 970 upgrading to 980ti, it was 40-55fps. So it really depends on how good the VR performance will be, and if the GUI-system is good to use in VR, we'll see shortly.

 

We are hands down the target group who profits from VR the most at this time guys, there is nothing as much fun in VR as flying airplanes. You'll get sucked into and once you have seen it and performance is fine, you will understand why some people already resigned to continue to play il2 without their VR-heaset after the release of directx 11 and the temporarly shut down of VR-Support. Until now, prices of VR-headsets have dropped remarkably and the used market is full of offers, basically to our advantage since there are a lot of sad faces due not that many amazing games beside flightsims, who surprisingly currently do not do a lot of commercial for their VR-support, so casual gamers do not know about it. Buying used VR-headset has a low risk since the max age of the units is at most a year, so anyone of them still has warranty even without receipt.

 

When VR-support from il2 is out, I will test it and hopefully, finally make a comparision video with WT, IL2 and DCS pro/cons and performance tests, including an overview what to do with them besides flying. hopefully I can find someone in germany close to me with a occulus/OSVR, so we'll be able to spot differences (e.g. ingamevisability) between them. Question could also be, if you own a dedicated flying-seat, would occulus gamers need to change the position of their camera everytime they choose to fly or play desktop games ?

 

I just want you to safe money if things are not ready yet, cause, yes to me it is worth it right now, BUT!, i have spent 1000$ on the goggles plus more on additional hardware upgrades, I knew the risk and I basically did not look at my wallet. I will start recommending to purchase for VR when good performance / solid 60-90 fps are possible with good hardware towards high-end (gtx 980ti/1070/1080) (single-gpu). I did upgrades to my hardware in the past and had to realise that I got only 10fps more out of it at max, not worth the money. If I would have purchased my stuff today, i would probably have been able to safe already 400-500$. Was the flight-experience worth 400-500$ until today ? definitely, NO! more like 100 to 150$ at max for the privilege to be alpha tester and the pain I had to go through. Do i regret it ? No, it's a joy to see VR-flying coming closer and closer to the point of beeing a no brainer and a must have. By now I have developed a detailed vision where I'd like VR for flightsims to go and wich features are useful and wich not. If I had the choise to purchase my VR equipment again, when would that be ? Exactly the day, when I start telling everyone to get into it. That could be by the release of il2-vr support or a little more in the future if things need a couple more updates.

 

Until that day we see the il2 VR update, start exercising your neck today ! don't underestimate having to turn your head to the 180° position left/right/up/down, plus bending your back a lot to be able to track airplanes in dogfights. you are at some serious disadvantage against track-ir users and VR will put a lot of stress on your body wich is intense and unbelievably fun ! You'll find yourself in situations having to strech your neck so far, that you feel your pulse, making it harder to breath, feeling the blood beeing squeezed into your head, makeing you even feel a little dizzy the first times doing that. Get your back and spinal column ready, since field of view is limited in VR, you'll have to turn around right after the part of your hip. You can't turn your eyeballs much to reach a greater angle, but a vr-headset does feel very natural on your head, since the field of view represents a vision as if you'd wear a helmet with goggles. sometimes you'll find your hand pushing against your face additionally to be able to take a better look at your 6. Once in VR, let me tell you, if you want to become a good pilot you'll have to get outside of any comfort zone, especially against those superb pilots you find here in IL2. And boy is it thrilling and exiting ! You'll get a much closer impression on what kind of absolute athletes WWII pilots had to be. VR will bring you many steps closer to feel like one yourself. You'll love it.

Edited March 31, 2017 by =ARTOA=Rauchenderkolben

[Bando]

Thank you Rauchenderkolben for this extensive write up.

Food for thought.

I'm still deciding what to buy and what the reviews of the few players will look like once the VR implementation for this sim is done.

 

Great times ahead....

[Jason_Williams]

Thank you Rauchenderkolben for this extensive write up.

Food for thought.

I'm still deciding what to buy and what the reviews of the few players will look like once the VR implementation for this sim is done.

 

Great times ahead....

 

Final VR for our product is probably a long ways off. This will be our first "official" release of VR support, but as the technology changes we hope to support it. However, it will be done in pieces over time. As mentioned this has been a challenge and the tech needs to mature. We think we've done a good job compared to what's out there though. There will be bugs and not everyone will like it so lets keep our expectations realistic. Also, this will be our last stab at it this year. We have already delayed many important things due to this VR work.

 

Jason

[HagarTheHorrible]

Final VR for our product is probably a long ways off. This will be our first "official" release of VR support, but as the technology changes we hope to support it. However, it will be done in pieces over time. As mentioned this has been a challenge and the tech needs to mature. We think we've done a good job compared to what's out there though. There will be bugs and not everyone will like it so lets keep our expectations realistic. Also, this will be our last stab at it this year. We have already delayed many important things due to this VR work.

 

Jason

Much appreciated.

 

Just to say that as much as I like BoS, I haven't flown it much, if at all since getting VR. I have however now bought both BoM and BoK on the strength of the upcoming VR implementation and the journey ahead.

[sinned]

Thanks Rauch. Your write up is very insightful.

 

I will wait for experts like yourself to make recommendations after vr support release b4 i buy a set.

[ITAF_Rani]

Waiting the Spitfire....

[=38=Tatarenko]

Every time I read complicated procedures like the "horizontal level bombing", I wonder if it isn't/wasn't much easier to just aim by the guts instead of doing so many estimated guesses and theories, especially in combat and under high pressure.

 

(SNIP)

 

Appreciate the info thought, its nice to get educated about stuff like this 

 

There was a technique used by Sturmovik pilots called "bombing on the boot". The idea was that you'd release the bombs when the target passed the tip of your boots resting on the pedals. Obviously they couldn't see the target through the floor but it was a handy guesstimate method that worked for them.

(re Two weeks) lol thats Dcs joke

 

​No, it pre-dates DCS, it's from the original IL-2 and was Oleg Maddox's answer to the perennial question.

Now we just need the PTAB bombs!

Has anything been said reagrding those bombs? will they come with the il2 1943 or will the come later on?

 

First used in combat during the Battle of Kursk, Summer 1943 IIRC, by Lt Col Vitruk in 61 ShAP.

The gun and bombsight? Didn't understand a word of that on first reading - but I really am going to have fun working it out. Looking forward to it. Cheers.

 

The thing that is unclear in the description is that for it to work you have to raise/lower the pilot's head in the cockpit to line up the windscreen mark with the top of the aiming post on the cowling.

[Chief_Mouser]

 

The thing that is unclear in the description is that for it to work you have to raise/lower the pilot's head in the cockpit to line up the windscreen mark with the top of the aiming post on the cowling.

 

Aha. Thanks.

[dburne]

Much appreciated.

 

Just to say that as much as I like BoS, I haven't flown it much, if at all since getting VR. I have however now bought both BoM and BoK on the strength of the upcoming VR implementation and the journey ahead.

 

Ditto here, very much appreciate the implementation that is being done.

I am looking forward to finally getting back into this sim in VR.

[Riderocket]

 

1- I would like to know if they are going to implement rearmamento on land, refueling and repair?

2- Let's get the chat, be modified to smaller space

3- When you give Artificial Intelligence orders, can we still use the trackir, and not stay the still image?

4- Will there be damage to the landing gear, due to failure of the hydraulic system and the wheels falling in mid-flight?By ammunition impacts..

 

 

1. I think refueling and rearming is good, but repairing sounds a bit arcadey don't you think?

 

2.and in ROF you can push C to read chat history, I'd like this implemented also

 

S!

[novicebutdeadly]

Any examination of night photographs taken during night bombing in June and July points to the following conclusions:

Of those aircraft recorded as attacking their target, only one in three got within 5 miles [(8 kilometres)].

Over the French ports, the proportion was two in three; over Germany as a whole, the proportion was one in four; over the Ruhr it was only one in ten.

In the full moon, the proportion was two in five; in the new moon it was only one in fifteen. ...

All these figures relate only to aircraft recorded as attacking the target; the proportion of the total sorties which reached within 5 miles is less than one-third. ...

The conclusion seems to follow that only about one-third of aircraft claiming to reach their target actually reached it.[4]

 

Even well trained crews weren't really well trained professionals, they were filling in as best they could, with imperfect equipment, training and motivation. I suspect most pilots were more more than happy with "that'll do" especially as grim reality set in, probably about the same time as they became semi proficient at their job.

I remeber reading to my surprise in the Book "A higher call" that apparently not all B17's (early on???) had a bomb sight,

 

So if the "lead plane" got it wrong it'll really hurt their hit stats.

Waiting the Spitfire....

LOL This scene will probably be played out a bit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkFkwLNucyM

 

 

Form about 2:40 onwards ;-)

Edited April 2, 2017 by novicebutdeadly

[DD_Arthur]

I remeber reading to my surprise in the Book "A higher call" that apparently not all B17's (early on???) had a bomb sight,

 

So if the "lead plane" got it wrong it'll really hurt their hit stats.

 

 

 

I'm willing to be corrected but wasn't that standard OP for most missions by US strategic bomber forces in the ETO in WW2?  The group dropped when the leader dropped?

 

I'm not quite sure what relevance Hagar's post has to this discussion.  RAF bomber command's short comings in the early years of the war were not about inadequate bombsights but about inadequate navigation.

[HagarTheHorrible]

 

I'm not quite sure what relevance Hagar's post has to this discussion.  RAF bomber command's short comings in the early years of the war were not about inadequate bombsights but about inadequate navigation.

JG4_Sputnik wondered how often most pilots followed the correct procedure for accurate bombing. I was just trying to suggest that most probably didn't and that most airforces realised this and introduced techniques and tactics to maximise the chances of success and this applied even among possibly better trained, experienced, and equipped aircrew.

[Thad]

Well, as for me (fighter pilot) I hope the Spit be an improvement in the VVS aircraft arsenal. It seems that the p-39 will be the last in the list   .

Salutations,

 

I hope they eventually include the P-38 Lightning for any extended Kuban campaigns.

[DD_Arthur]

JG4_Sputnik wondered how often most pilots followed the correct procedure for accurate bombing. I was just trying to suggest that most probably didn't and that most airforces realised this and introduced techniques and tactics to maximise the chances of success and this applied even among possibly better trained, experienced, and equipped aircrew.

 

I understand now Hagar

 

Actually, the early war RAF bomber crews almost always followed the procedures laid down for them by their training techniques and operating procedures.   Unfortunately, these procedures and much of the training proved wholly inadequate for the task at hand.