Just for Fun/Reference List of Features that could be added to existing Aircraft

[Brano]

Just where does the Speed Increase come from? From around 500 in the 29, to 530 in the 42 and 545 in the 66? A Tailwheel makes 12-25kph, depending on Aircraft, so where does the Rest come from? 

- Delta drevesina,as deficit material,has been replaced by pine in fuselage construction,which was much lighter. Weight has been reduced to 2990kg vs 3160 of series 29.

- Some of the TsAGI recommendations utilized on Yak-1b (modules of nose/engine part of the fuselage) were unified and overtaken,as example air intake of oil radiator,

- Exhausts were changed from 3 large to 4 smaller

- air intake for supecharger has changed the shape from rectangular to oval

- landing light has been removed from the left wing

- bomb racks received better covering reducing drag

- air intake shape for water radiator was reverted back to that of first series

- Windshield has been taken from La-5,with 55mm armored glass and rectangular shape,sliding canopy received aerodynamic fairing at the rear side

- radio mast has been shortened

[Finkeren]

- Delta drevesina,as deficit material,has been replaced by pine in fuselage construction,which was much lighter. Weight has been reduced to 2990kg vs 3160 of series 29.

- Some of the TsAGI recommendations utilized on Yak-1b (modules of nose/engine part of the fuselage) were unified and overtaken,as example air intake of oil radiator,

- Exhausts were changed from 3 large to 4 smaller

- air intake for supecharger has changed the shape from rectangular to oval

- landing light has been removed from the left wing

- bomb racks received better covering reducing drag

- air intake shape for water radiator was reverted back to that of first series

- Windshield has been taken from La-5,with 55mm armored glass and rectangular shape,sliding canopy received aerodynamic fairing at the rear side

- radio mast has been shortened

Brano, right on time

Most of these were for the s. 66, right? How many of the changes were introduced between s. 29 and s. 35?

[Brano]

Its a bit tricky question.Which Zavod do you have in mind? Gorki nr.21 or Tbilisi nr.31 ? For both Zavods they had separate numbering of the series.

According to GKO nomenclature,serial nr. of aircrafts :

Zavod nr.21 Gorki

31 (code for LaGG-3 model) 21 (code for Zavod) X(X) (nr. of series from 1 to 99) Y(Y) (sequence nr. of the aircraft in given series from 1 to 99)

As example,LaGG-3 serial nr 3121357 captured by Finns 11.8.1942 represents aircraft from Gorki, of 35.series,7th in sequence of given series.

 

Zavod nr.31 Tbilisi

31 (code for LaGG-3 model) 31 (code for Zavod) XX (nr. of series from 20 to 72) Y(Y) (sequence nr. of the aircraft in given series from 1 to 99)

 

If we take LaGGs from Gorki,which was a motherplant,then changes in 35.series were as follows:

- main focus to improve take-off and landing performance

- installation of automatic wing slats (first trials on few a/c of 22.series,in serial production since series 34.)

- Pitot tube moved from leading edge of the right wing under it

- change of shape for prop spinner (bit larger)

- water radiator with larger area and larger air intake

- retracting rear wheel (first tried with 28.series). First machines had small cover flaps and when closed,they were "flushed" with the fuselage.Later they were exchanged for bigger ones,that protruded a bit from the fuselage (kind of bulge)

- oil radiator air intake had changed shape and was a bit smaller

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

 

Ju 88:

• Remove frontal MG

Bf 110, He 111, Ju 88:

• Kurssteuerung

 

Done and I think we may get more Advanced Autopilot Controls anyways at some Point. 

 

 

- retracting rear wheel (first tried with 28.series). First machines had small cover flaps and when closed,they were "flushed" with the fuselage.Later they were exchanged for bigger ones,that protruded a bit from the fuselage (kind of bulge)

 

 

 

 

Edited July 12, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 Two things to add not necessarily to the aircraft but to immersion. Oxygen masks for crew and soviet female pilots (not for some namby-pamby SJW nonsense) because its historically accurate. 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

 Two things to add not necessarily to the aircraft but to immersion. Oxygen masks for crew and soviet female pilots (not for some namby-pamby SJW nonsense) because its historically accurate. 

OMG, I wanted to put that in as well at first, but since anything, inclusion and not inclusion (are Women allowed to be killed in Videogames?) are both Sexist and Non-Sexist. It's Schroedingers Sexism I was not sure. 

Of course they shouldn't be Oversexualized but also recognizable as Women with strong female Attributes. 

 

Should there be any Advantages or Disadvantages in Terms of Control Forces, Gunnery etc? I mean the Sexes are the same but also completely different. 

 

It's all so terribly confusing, almost as if there IS no way to do it correctly in the current political Climate and could cause Outrage if a Feminist Blogger didn't like it, so why take the Risk?

Edited July 12, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[6./ZG26_Custard]

 

 

OMG, I wanted to put that in as well at first, but since anything, inclusion and not inclusion (are Women allowed to be killed in Videogames?) are both Sexist and Non-Sexist. It's Schroedingers Sexism I was not sure. Of course they shouldn't be Oversexualized but also recognizable as Women with strong female Attributes. Should there be any Advantages or Disadvantages in Terms of Control Forces, Gunnery etc? I mean the Sexes are the same but also completely different. It's all so terribly confusing, almost as if there IS no way to do it correctly in the current political Climate and could cause Outrage if a Feminist Blogger didn't like it, so why take the Risk?

 

As long as we don't have to add 81 genders with demi-queer pansexual otherkin at the conrtols I'll just settle for strong soviet women to keep the Grrrls involved.

[xvii-Dietrich]

Klause - that Ju-52 needs pontoons.

 

Agreed.   Floats on the Ju 52 would be a brilliant addition.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Agreed.   Floats on the Ju 52 would be a brilliant addition.

We have the g4e, no Floats for that. Only the g5e and others could be put on Floats. There is a Reason I didn't put Floats in. Maybe if we get a g5e or g7e at some Point. 

 

http://www.germanluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/j/Junkers/Ju%2052/Ldv%202052%20Ju%2052.pdf

Edited July 13, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[Gambit21]

Close enough...put pontoons on that gal.

...and a few more ponies.

 

The engine is the only real difference isn't it?

Edited July 13, 2017 by Gambit21

[xvii-Dietrich]

We have the g4e, no Floats for that. Only the g5e and others could be put on Floats. There is a Reason I didn't put Floats in. Maybe if we get a g5e or g7e at some Point. 

 

http://www.germanluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/j/Junkers/Ju%2052/Ldv%202052%20Ju%2052.pdf

 

 

I hadn't appreciated the g4 / g5 distinction. Thanks.

 

Okay, so I now suggest : BMW 132T motors + Floats.  

 

 

I was originally under the impression that there were earlier types on floats too. There were a few in Norway, which were appropriated by the Luftwaffe after the invasion in 1940 (e.g. LINK).

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ EDIT ]  As the g5e is a completely separate aircraft (not an update), I've made a separate case for it.

               Ref: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/31491-ju523m-g5e-w-seaplane/

Edited October 30, 2017 by xvii-Dietrich

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

 

 

I hadn't appreciated the g4 / g5 distinction. Thanks.

 

Okay, so I now suggest : BMW 132T motors + Floats.  

 

 

I was originally under the impression that there were earlier types on floats too. There were a few in Norway, which were appropriated by the Luftwaffe after the invasion in 1940 (e.g. LINK).

As well as complete Winter/De-Icing Equipment and different/waaay more Navigation/Communications Equipment. It's more of a long Range Airliner than our puny g4e.

The 132T basically has a more Powerful Generator because of that. 

 

Reading through the 52 Handbook is a lot of fun and quite absurdly Practical, suggesting for example a Wooden Spoon and Hairdryer tp Warm Up the Oil in Winter and other funny Details. 

But apparently the g4e was expected to carry the "Fensterlaffeten" (Window Guns) and they even account for it in the Loading Data with an allowance for a further 500kg should they be installed. 

 

I hope the Ju-52 will be reviewed at some Point concerning the Engines as well concerning the Gashebelsperranschlag, which the Handbook mentions shouldn't be done for more than 1 Minute on Take-Off apparently expecting Revolutions of up to 2050 around 110kph. 

But they allow for use  of Full Throttle (über Sperranschlag) freely above 2500m and in Emergency above 900m. 

Ingame the Gashebelsperranschlag doesn't Exist or is in permanently open or closed Position. The Correct ingame Mechanic would have been the "Boost Button" but for Reasons I don't understand they didn't implement it that way/correctly. 

And we are running far too high Settings most of the time ingame anyways. 

 

We should be running the Engines between 1700 low and 1850 above 3.5k and expect Speeds around the 180-200 kph Mark in our Config. 

Edited July 13, 2017 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[Yakdriver]

this thread makes me cringe.

Come on guys... "good enuff" / "close enuff" does not exist.

would love to see more variants too, but not as loadouts.
the LaGG-3 and 110G(4) especially.

[InProgress]

are Women allowed to be killed in Videogames?

There are plenty of games where you kill women, where you play as woman and kill men, women aliens etc I don't see why anyone would be angry about it, especially in game that no sjw would play or know it exists. There will be women in new Call of Duty and nobody cry about killing them, they are in battlefield 1 or in any MMO games for years.

Edited July 17, 2017 by InProgress

[Finkeren]

As the resident feminist/SJW here, I'm more than ok with having women in videogames (where historically appropriate) on equal footing with men. Of course women can be killed in video games, that's not a problem at all, why would it be?

[Brano]

Just to come back to LaGG-3 and the question of the retractable rear wheel. There was one allready since I-301 prototype and in fact in all subsequent series up to s.34. The problem was in its reliability. It was not reliable at all ( lots of breakdowns ,mostly leakage in hydraulic circuit). It is mentioned in NII VVS testing of serial aircraft from 7.series (august-sept 41) that the rear wheel has been assambled in fixed deployed position directly in the plant. This method has been used onwards untill s.34.

  As an interesting story,there has been plan to present 50 LaGGs during 1941 1st of May parade over Red Square.Besides the fact that in april only 20 aircrafts has been assembled,they also had lots of defects. The most outstanding one was with hydraulics system leakage. It was possible to mitigate this problem by fixing the rear wheel in deployed position.I guess this detail was not visible from where Stalin stood on tribune 

 The system introduced with s.35 (and also from first series of La-5) was the new one,working on different principle with enough reliability to (re)introduce the retractable tailwheel into serial production.

[RAY-EU]

Drop tanks & from July 1942 Fw190 A-4 R-6 and FW 190A-5 with under-wing WGr 21 rocket-propelled mortar :

 

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-674-7772-13A%2C_Flugzeug_Focke-Wulf_Fw_190%2C_Bewaffnung.jpg

Edited July 17, 2017 by RAY-EU

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Now, to revive this thread as a call to more refinement for what we have: 

 

HS.129

• BK3.7 Gun Pod
• AB250 Bomb Container for SD-2

[LukeFF]

Now, to revive this thread as a call to more refinement for what we have:

 

HS.129

• BK3.7 Gun Pod
• AB250 Bomb Container for SD-2

The BK3.7 was never operational with the Hs 129.

Edited October 30, 2017 by LukeFF

[Feathered_IV]

We need to compile a list of which aircraft were fitted with relief tubes.

[Field-Ops]

Stuvi

Drehlafette He111 turret

Drop Tanks

Fire extinguisher

Beer kegs under spitfire 

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

I would like to see fire protection installed on aircraft that had them.

I don't know any for sure but I would guess multi engine bombers did.

But we'd need additional fuel system control's for that, like emergency shut off and such

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I would like to see fire protection installed on aircraft that had them.

I don't know any for sure but I would guess multi engine bombers did.

But we'd need additional fuel system control's for that, like emergency shut off and such

The Hs 129 and Ju 52 had it, not sure about the A-20 we'll get soon.

 

It's very important since it increases the aircraft's survivability enormously (in my opinion incooperating defensive feautures is more important than offensive).

[A_radek]

Good thread.
 

 

MiG-3

• AM-38 Engine --> Apparently some MiGs were field equipped with Il-2 Engines.

 

 I wonder how it performed at the power delivery it could actually manage before overheating became to much of an issue.  
 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Added Fireextingiusher for HS.129

[Royal_Flight]

This is long-term thinking... but when we get carriers, we need a Seafire mod for the Spitfire.

 

Dead easy modification - the first Seafire was the mk Ib which was basically just a Spit Vb with an arrester hook and strengthened fuselage as well as provision for a drop tank.

Would be a good start towards getting Commonwealth forces represented in the sim and make for a good carrier landing challenge.

[curiousGamblerr]

This is long-term thinking... but when we get carriers, we need a Seafire mod for the Spitfire.

 

Dead easy modification - the first Seafire was the mk Ib which was basically just a Spit Vb with an arrester hook and strengthened fuselage as well as provision for a drop tank.

Would be a good start towards getting Commonwealth forces represented in the sim and make for a good carrier landing challenge.

 

Seafire was my #1 favorite carrier aircraft in the old game, I totally support this!

 

(Of course, the reason was simply that it was the only carrier aircraft my 13 year old self could land on deck reliably...)

[Royal_Flight]

Seafire was my #1 favorite carrier aircraft in the old game, I totally support this!

 

(Of course, the reason was simply that it was the only carrier aircraft my 13 year old self could land on deck reliably...)

The Seafire was notoriously difficult to land on deck... to the extent that, during the invasion of Italy, nearly two-thirds of the total inventory were written off in landing accidents.

 

So if you could reliably land the Seafire at thirteen then you've probably got carrier operations totally nailed, haha.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

- Possibility to select the radio beacon of airfield of choice instead of just being guided to the nearest one.

- Controllable course setter on repeater compasses.

- Controllable radio compass.

- Control over the setting of the altimeter instead of just selecting the altitude of the nearest airfield.

- Possibility to ask for the Morse code to find way to base.

- Working contact altimeter.

- Working dive automation system for planes that had it like the Ju88.

- Option for nose art (would be an interesting feature for people who know the bones about skinning but still want to make their plane recognizable).

- Make the P40 a plane that easily overheats instead of undercools all the time.

 

Have a nice day.

 

Edited December 21, 2017 by FlyingShark