Difference between IL-2 1942 and 1943?

[FlatFaceNinjaCat]

What's the difference between the IL-2 in BoS, and the one in Kuban? Noticed there's cosmetic differences, what else?

[ShamrockOneFive]

I did a pretty detailed breakdown of the differences here: https://stormbirds.blog/2017/06/26/reviewing-the-il-2-model-1943/

 

Generally speaking the Il-2: Model 1943 has a few big differences and a bunch of minor ones. The biggest performance difference is the extra boost on the engine which in some circumstances can give you more power to play with temporarily. At sea level its slightly faster than the Model 1942 and under boost its got just a little bit more. At higher altitudes its performance is slightly degraded with a slower top speed and a slightly longer time to climb.

 

Of course the biggest difference overall is that the rear turret is now a standard feature. It's far less awkward than the field modified ShKAS machine gun available on the Model 1942 and it hits far harder with the UBT 12.7mm heavy machine gun there. There are other differences as well.

 

Summary:

• Faster at sea level, slower at altitude (3000 meters)
• Standard UBT 12.7mm heavy machine gun position
• Available NS-37 anti-tank cannon (better than the Sh37 on the model 1942)
• PTAB anti-armor bomblets available
• Slightly reduced rocket payload
• New sight rings for more accurate bomb placement (see Dev update: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/168-developer-diary/?p=456219)

[216th_Jordan]

The rear gunner has a real compartment and a 12.7mm UBT instead of a 7.62mm ShKas, he is alos better protected by armor. The engine has a higher power than the Model 42 which is pretty slow and clumsy. The armament is largely unchanged, however you can take NS-37 37mm guns that have more penetrating power and shells than on the model 42. Also you can take PTABs, small hollowcharges for destroying armored targets.

 

Shamrock beat me to it!

Edited January 1, 2018 by 216th_Jordan

[Finkeren]

Pretty large difference actually. For one thing the 1943 standardized the rear gunner position (on 1942 model it’s a field mod) and extends the armoured canopy backwards to protect the gunner. The rear gun is opgraded to an UBT heavy machine gun. The larger armoured canopy as well as an armoured plate in the rear fuselage moves the CoG backwards which impedes handling and means that the plane is less maneuverable and “feels” heavier.

 

The standard reflector gunsight is replaced by the unique crosshair-style of later IL-2s. It is a crude sight but can also serve as a reasonable bomb-aimer for tree-top level bombing with GP bombs or PTAB.

 

The armaments options are also changed. You can carry fewer but more powerful rockets and most important of all: you get the PTAB. The PTAB is a sort of cluster bomb consisting of many small shaped charges that are released at low level (~100m) as you fly over an armoured target. They are dropped in bundles of 60 and you can carry 2-4 bundles (120-240 bomblets) they are effective, though unreliable, against any armoured target and soft vehicles but virtually useless against anything else.

 

Hope this clarifies things a bit.

[CanadaOne]

The rear gunner has a real compartment and a 12.7mm UBT instead of a 7.62mm ShKas, he is alos better protected by armor. The engine has a higher power than the Model 42 which is pretty slow and clumsy. The armament is largely unchanged, however you can take NS-37 37mm guns that have more penetrating power and shells than on the model 42. Also you can take PTABs, small hollowcharges for destroying armored targets.

 

Shamrock beat me to it!

 

The 37s on the 43 are more powerful than the 37s on the 42?

 

I didn't know that. Thanks.

[CrazyDuck]

The 37s on the 43 are more powerful than the 37s on the 42?

 

I didn't know that. Thanks.

 

While they are both of the same caliber (37×198), the Sh-37 has significantly lower rate of fire (~180 vs ~250 rpm), less ammo (40 vs 50 rpg) and most importantly from historical point of view - much worse reliability, which was the main reason for it being replaced by NS-37.

[216th_Jordan]

While they are both of the same caliber (37×198), the Sh-37 has significantly lower rate of fire (~180 vs ~250 rpm), less ammo (40 vs 50 rpg) and most importantly from historical point of view - much worse reliability, which was the main reason for it being replaced by NS-37.

 

Also lower muzzle velocity.

Nevermind, muzzle velocity should be equal with ~900 m/s.

Edited January 2, 2018 by 216th_Jordan

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

And Weight. The later cannons are much lighter. I still can't make my mind up to wether I like the 41 or 43  best. I only know it isn't the 42. 

The Swallow Wing Model would be awesome to have at some point as well. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by 6./ZG26_Klaus-Mann

[LukeFF]

The M43 also has a radio compass.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Edited January 2, 2018 by 6./ZG26_Klaus-Mann

[Max_Damage]

1943 overheats like crazy in summer maps. The gunner isnt very good. I dont regret losing rockets. PTAB are a very good addition.

 

People might still prefer il2 1941 because it flies so well.

Edited January 2, 2018 by Max_Damage

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

The M43 also has a radio compass.

And 3 Position Flaps

 

It adds a whole lot of practicality. 

Edited January 2, 2018 by 6./ZG26_Klaus-Mann

[ShamrockOneFive]

And Weight. The later cannons are much lighter. I still can't make my mind up to wether I like the 41 or 43  best. I only know it isn't the 42. 

The Swallow Wing Model would be awesome to have at some point as well. 

 

It's interesting to watch the "progression". The Model 1941 is actually better mostly because it still benefits from the pre-war production lines. Then things get a little desperate and the Model 1942 is pretty good but its a bit lesser than most of the features of the 1941. The 1943 simplifies things but makes a lot of things better again. It's interesting.

 

Not sure how many people notice this but if you pick the 20mm version for 1941 you get the rear armor glass which was later no longer an option because they had to simplify things and armored glass was a hot commodity.

[Boaty-McBoatface]

Not sure how many people notice this but if you pick the 20mm version for 1941 you get the rear armor glass which was later no longer an option because they had to simplify things and armored glass was a hot commodity.

Thank you sir! I was always wondering why only sometimes the glass was there.

 

Another fantastic detail to accuracy in this sim. Always discovering these details it seems.

 

Regards

Edited January 3, 2018 by boaty_McBoatface

[LukeFF]

 

 

Not sure how many people notice this but if you pick the 20mm version for 1941 you get the rear armor glass which was later no longer an option because they had to simplify things and armored glass was a hot commodity.

 

Correct and, as Han noted, their research did not turn up any 1941-production Il-2s that had the transparent glass + 23 mm cannon loadout, hence the way it looks in the game. 

[Mukai]

Sorry to jump in on this, been flying the il2 the past few days and I just assumed the 1942 would be better than the 41, but reading this thread I'm under the impression that the 41 is actually better? Maybe I'm just blinded by the newer shiney planes and discounted the 41 haha

Whats the benefits of the 41 over the 42? What makes it better?

Also when flying the 42 is the rear gun worth it?

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Early Model has Metal Wings and more Armored Glass instead of Plate Armor and Wood. Thus it's lighter and faster. 

[Finkeren]

Sorry to jump in on this, been flying the il2 the past few days and I just assumed the 1942 would be better than the 41, but reading this thread I'm under the impression that the 41 is actually better? Maybe I'm just blinded by the newer shiney planes and discounted the 41 haha

Whats the benefits of the 41 over the 42? What makes it better?

The rear gunner and the ability to carry the Sh-37.

[-SF-Disarray]

I think the 42 is also heavier than the 41, mostly armor being added to important bits, with no significant improvement in engine power. This results in the 42 being both slower and a little harder to kill. The addition of the 37 mm cannons the 42 is a slightly better tank killer than the 41 as well. It is an iterative improvement, not a revolutionary one.

Edited January 3, 2018 by Disarray

[Mukai]

So I guess it's a slight speed and handling improvement for the 41 vs better armor and more moddability for the 42? Thanks for the help guys I won't discount the 41 quite as quick now, the more you know
So is the rear gun on the 42 actually worth taking? 40km/h seems like a big trade off considering the gunner seems to die quite quickly the few times I've used it.

[7.GShAP/Silas]

So I guess it's a slight speed and handling improvement for the 41 vs better armor and more moddability for the 42? Thanks for the help guys I won't discount the 41 quite as quick now, the more you know

So is the rear gun on the 42 actually worth taking? 40km/h seems like a big trade off considering the gunner seems to die quite quickly the few times I've used it.

 

 

The 41 is simply superior to the 42 under any conditions.  The 42 with a "rear gunner" abomination is a deathtrap.  The 43 is heavier but the armor, engine power, P-TABs, gunsight and .50 caliber rear gunner make up for it.

Edited January 3, 2018 by 7.GShAP/Silas

[-SF-Disarray]

The only thing that I don't like about the 43 is the limited rocket rack. The speed and armor are nice but at the cost of half the rocket load it is a little lame. All told, though the three variants of the plane are useful.