Make B-25 flyable please?

[Monostripezebra]

multicrew B-25 could be a hoot.

 

and a 410 would be superdupernice.

[Royal_Flight]

Agree.

Italy is almost a forgotten theater while it would be really amazing for both the scenary and the planeset, Husky and North Italy first of all.

Just considere Spitfire Mk.VIII instead of Mk.IX, A-36 Apache, BF-109G-10 Erla (probably the most beautifull and elegant 109 never built), FW-190F-8, and off course the italian serie 5 with Macchi 205 and Fiat G-55.

 

I can only imagine how amazing would be for a virtual pilot who whould decide to fly for the ANR, to chose between G-6 Erla, G-14, G-10 Erla, K4, G-55 and 205, but it seems that developers don't understand this.

This is true. Italian Serie 5 fighters as a change from endless 109s and a SM.79 and Do 217, vs Seafire, Firefly, Beaufighter, A-36 and B-25.

That would be ideal.

[Habu]

Agree.

Italy is almost a forgotten theater while it would be really amazing for both the scenary and the planeset, Husky and North Italy first of all.

Just considere Spitfire Mk.VIII instead of Mk.IX, A-36 Apache, BF-109G-10 Erla (probably the most beautifull and elegant 109 never built), FW-190F-8, and off course the italian serie 5 with Macchi 205 and Fiat G-55.

 

I can only imagine how amazing would be for a virtual pilot who whould decide to fly for the ANR, to chose between G-6 Erla, G-14, G-10 Erla, K4, G-55 and 205, but it seems that developers don't understand this.

No sir, Italy would be cool, but Italy with a Sparviero would be better.

[6./ZG26_Loke]

This is the bar we would like to add to our signatures right?

[Asgar]

This is the bar we would like to add to our signatures right?

you misspelled Me 410 there mate...for a ZG26 pilot that's quite embarassing   

[6./ZG26_Loke]

Asgar!

[150GCT_Veltro]

No sir, Italy would be cool, but Italy with a Sparviero would be better.

 

Yes....

 

 

However, sparviero was there too. Sorry for the OT, just a video with them and the others, a mix of ANR options.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=32&v=ZiZUYxuy1DU

Edited November 21, 2017 by 150GCT_Veltro

[Habu]

Thx for the video, even if i can't understand.   

[Tello777]

I would love to be able to fly the B25 with my friends I think it would be a blast. I know that to make it possible it would take lots of time and effort to do it and there should be a profit to make it worth making it. When I go to the movies I spend just on myself like $30 for 2hrs of entertainment so I dont mind paying for good entertainment because I know that there was lots of work behind it. So if people want to fly the B25 they should not mind paying for it.

Just my opinion.  

[Blitzen]

Ditto...and the carrier Hornet while you're at it?

[Yogiflight]

15 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

Ditto...and the carrier Hornet while you're at it?

But a carrier might cost one or two Dollars more

[Lusekofte]

This topic must stand as a monument for community highest wish. We demand justice for US medium bombers. 

[Bremspropeller]

6 hours ago, Blitzen said:

Ditto...and the carrier Hornet while you're at it?

 

To bomb what? Krasnodar?

[Froddi_VR]

Yes more bombers please!

[[CPT]milopugdog]

Well I mean, I think it's fairly likely eventually.

The Ju-52 started AI only, and I'm pretty sure that the Gotha and Handley Page were AI only initially in RoF... Although, I'm curious if the C-47 would come first since it was stated somewhere that the devs wanted to add the Li-2 after the U-2 if everything worked out successfully.

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, [CPT]milopugdog said:

 

The Ju-52 started AI only,

 

No - the Ju-52 was a planned, flyable aircraft.

 

Equating AI only aircraft to “flyable aircraft in process” would be a mistake.

[[CPT]milopugdog]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

 

No - the Ju-52 was a planned, flyable aircraft.

 

Equating AI only aircraft to “flyable aircraft in process” would be a mistake.

 

I think I will have to agree to disagree with you on the Ju-52 thing there,

Here in this dev-blog, it didn't seem to be a planned-future flyable aircraft

Nor does it seem to be that way in the update it was introduced in:

 

Sure, seeing AI only and automatically thinking that it will become flyable could be a misstep, but I said it was fairly likely based on the previous track record of such aircraft.

I digress, I think seeing any sort of these aircraft as flyable planes largely depends on support of the devs on our end. If it seems like a financially stable investment, and there's the man power, it will probably happen.

Edited January 26, 2020 by [CPT]milopugdog

[AndyJWest]

The thing is with developers plans is that they can change. It doesn't really matter much what they intended to do when they made the Ju 52 or the B-25. What matters is convincing them now that making the B-25 flyable will justify the effort involved. I'd like to think that the amount of enthusiasm shown on the forums for that suggestion would be enough to convince them, but they may have to convince the accountants, who tend to be sceptical about such things. The world would be a much simpler place if it wasn't for the men in suits...

[Gambit21]

3 hours ago, [CPT]milopugdog said:

 

I think I will have to agree to disagree with you on the Ju-52 thing there,

Here in this dev-blog, it didn't seem to be a planned-future

 

 

Thanks - I had a different recollection of that.

[Diggun]

It'd be a day 1 purchase for me. Just saying. 

[Lusekofte]

My slightly sarcastic response ti this tread in mind. 
The developers knows we like all planes battling in this era available. In special B 25/26/17/24 , Lancaster, Stirling, short Sunderland, Catalina, JU 188,HE 177, DO 17/217. 
You name it , it has at one point been wished for. They know

[BMA_FlyingShark]

Maybe, if they van pull it off to make the AI-only planes flyable, it will be a good idea to sell them as a separate pack.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[AndyJWest]

2 hours ago, FlyingShark said:

Maybe, if they van pull it off to make the AI-only planes flyable, it will be a good idea to sell them as a separate pack.

 

Have a nice day.

 

 

I don't think anyone has seriously suggested that they should be converted to flyable for free.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

24 minutes ago, AndyJWest said:

I don't think anyone has seriously suggested that they should be converted to flyable for free.

I didn't say that either, I just thought that it would be an idea to sell them as a pack instead of separate releases.

It was just an idea.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[AndyJWest]

28 minutes ago, FlyingShark said:

I didn't say that either, I just thought that it would be an idea to sell them as a pack instead of separate releases.

It was just an idea.

 

Have a nice day.

 

 

Ah, sorry, I misunderstood.

 

I think that a 'pack' would be rather expensive, and from a resources perspective rather difficult. There would be a lot of work involved in such a project, and the time-scale involved would likely drag it out over years. Some might be prepared to pay cash up-front for something like that, but I suspect that initial investment and continued funding would be easier to find if the 'flyables' were released individually. 

[Hueyman]

Up for a flyable B-25 !

[Ribbon]

As soon yaks get released it would be nice to read B25 (collector) preorder announcement!

[Lusekofte]

I would love a B 25 pack, but it need to have levelbomber capabilities. Another groundpounder flying low and get killed is just waste of time in my mind. 
I gladly take a pack of 2 to 3 versions of it. With one of them with glassnose. 
I can take it without turret pit (aigunners only) if need be , but would be very happy to access the glassnose in order to navigate better observe better. 
I would pay for a glass nose pit for the A 20 too. 
heck I would pay for twenty of them and gift 19 if we get it. 

[Ribbon]

34 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I would love a B 25 pack, but it need to have levelbomber capabilities. Another groundpounder flying low and get killed is just waste of time in my mind. 
I gladly take a pack of 2 to 3 versions of it. With one of them with glassnose. 
I can take it without turret pit (aigunners only) if need be , but would be very happy to access the glassnose in order to navigate better observe better. 
I would pay for a glass nose pit for the A 20 too. 
heck I would pay for twenty of them and gift 19 if we get it. 

Glassnose yeah but more important immersion wise is that cockpit and to have copilot by your side!

Ju52 aside it will be first bomber giving feel of bigger plane cos of copilot seat....something that is really missing in this sim since we can't have four engine bombers.

I too really don't care will there be player manned turret positions, make them AI only!

[Bremspropeller]

Frankly asking: How much time do people spend in the gunner-positions anyway?

My time as gunner in two years playing is about single-digit minutes.

 

Wouldn't it be a better business-decision to just model the cockpit and only provide gunner-positions according to demand?

 

48 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I would pay for a glass nose pit for the A 20 too. 

 

You mean an A-20J/K as a mod to the A-20G/H most people like to see?

[Dakpilot]

My ideal would be to have  gunner positions and game improvement to allow numbers of human gunners to join in MP, multi crew a/c on comms would be great (if you can keep ass hats out! ) 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[Lusekofte]

1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

You mean an A-20J/K as a mod to the A-20G/H most people like to see?

Yes I would like a J or K or both or G
I do not demand a pit for the defensive armament. Neither in the one we have. In my opinion devs have done a priority error , a understandable one , I might add. They should have made the bombardier pit instead of the turret pit in my mind. 
A 20 we got are far better defensive by just dogfight than leaving it to the rubbish turret to defend you. 

1 hour ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

too really don't care will there be player manned turret positions, make them AI only!

For my sake also. It is not often you have a human gunner so I would really like it to be ai except from bombardier pit. 
 

45 minutes ago, Dakpilot said:

My ideal would be to have  gunner positions and game improvement to allow numbers of human gunners to join in MP, multi crew a/c on comms would be great (if you can keep ass hats out! ) 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

Yes of course. But my mind is on how to get level bombers. It is hard enough without human gunners. 
I like the full package too. 
problem with bombers are the stigma it brings. 
people believe it is only those who cant dogfight that fly them. Devs believe they are not wanted by enough people. 
My point is, gameplay get less interesting without them. If you do not have them everybody get down low in order to protect target and attack them and those with bombs are nothing more than easy targets. 
look at videos they show fighters shooting down planes that did not know what hit them. That is so called fun for majority. 
For me that is boring as hell

Edited April 6, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Ribbon]

2 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

 

For my sake also. It is not often you have a human gunner so I would really like it to be ai except from bombardier pit. 
 

Yes of course. But my mind is on how to get level bombers. It is hard enough without human gunners. 
I like the full package too. 
problem with bombers are the stigma it brings. 
people believe it is only those who cant dogfight that fly them. Devs believe they are not wanted by enough people. 
My point is, gameplay get less interesting without them. If you do not have them everybody get down low in order to protect target and attack them and those with bombs are nothing more than easy targets. 
look at videos they show fighters shooting down planes that did not know what hit them. That is so called fun for majority. 
For me that is boring as hell

AI gunner is often much more useful than human gunner, it's spotting is flawless and gunnery almost perfect.

My MP gunner is locked for AI only!

 

For bombardier pit ofcourse it's a bomber so it must be player manned, i don't see problem there since all bombers use same bombsight ingame.

 

I see decent number of ppl going bomber role in MP, especially squads, on both sides and more after A20 was released.

B25 is popular bomber so i don't doubt in it's sales success.

It's not just focus on B25 as collector plane sales, having it ingame sure affects overall perspective on game.

You don't want a space sim with only small ships ingame, ppl want to fly bigger ships or at least destroy them.

 

I also think he111 gave huge contribution to this game, even for hardcore fighter pilots being as target.

Btw He111 cockpit made me to buy VR!

 

All other bombers in game have fighter-ish cockpit so having such bomber on allied side will give feel of wider game scope, which is heavily underratted!

 

If we get collector B25, i'll know what to gift for Christmass to my squadmates

 

 

[Blitzen]

"You're not kidding about that either!"

[Ribbon]

29 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

"You're not kidding about that either!"

Out of reaction points!

+1??⬆️?

I hope they won't model chubby copilot, not quite spacey cockpit in there!

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

Out of reaction points!

+1??⬆️?

I hope they won't model chubby copilot, not quite spacey cockpit in there!

B 17 and B 26 is just the same cramped space. 
B 24 was wider

[CountZero]

well be lucky if we get another DLC when BoN is finished, no way there will be push to make airplanes that were up to now deamed not profitable, in next few years. Easy to do east front DLC at best.

[Ribbon]

12 hours ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

B 17 and B 26 is just the same cramped space. 
B 24 was wider

B25/26 cockpit would be more than fine since we can't have this;

Look how low authority ailerons have, that would be an interesting go-around!

[Lusekofte]

47 minutes ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

Look how low authority ailerons have, that would be an interesting go-around!

I was y pit of a c17 and he said that was a very responcive airplane. 
It had a F 15 joystick on a pidestall between the legs. Like a simjoystick without extentions. 
He had flown Hercules before and described it 

like we see inthis video

Edited April 7, 2020 by 216th_LuseKofte

[Ribbon]

17 minutes ago, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I was y pit of a c17 and he said that was a very responcive airplane. 
It had a F 15 joystick on a pidestall between the legs. Like a simjoystick without extentions. 
He had flown Hercules before and described it 

like we see inthis video

Those are Fly-by-wire driven, it's software makes it safer to avoid excessive force on flight surfaces and help pilot to have smooth control and inside plane structural and aerodynamic limits.

Stability is over maneuverability on those big birds.

Anyone knows did B29 used hydraulic driven controls?

From that vid it seems soo, going pure mehanical controls i guess pilot would need to be Popey to fly B29!