Flying Tigers campaign while waiting for Pacific?

[nalecondra]

Would anyone else be interested in this? Or has this been discussed before?

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

I'd love one, but someone far more clever than I would have to find a way to fudge it together on the Kuban map, and we don't have any aircraft that are suitable to use for the IJAAF aircraft that the Tigers flew against.

[nalecondra]

I'd love one, but someone far more clever than I would have to find a way to fudge it together on the Kuban map, and we don't have any aircraft that are suitable to use for the IJAAF aircraft that the Tigers flew against.

I really meant for the devs as a lead-up to the Pacific battles. It would be a way to develop Japanese planes without having to do carrier and warship development.

[Heliopause]

Sounds like a good idea!

[GarandM1]

I just need to have an A6M, I don't care how I get it!

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

Actually Nakajima KI-27 "Nate" and KI-43 "Oscar" for the fighters and Mitsubishi KI-21 "Sally" twin engine bombers since the Flying Tigers were fighting the Japanese Army Air force. The Japanese Navy used the A6M. 

[BRADYS555]

Actually Nakajima KI-27 "Nate" and KI-43 "Oscar" for the fighters and Mitsubishi KI-21 "Sally" twin engine bombers since the Flying Tigers were fighting the Japanese Army Air force. The Japanese Navy used the A6M. 

 

Ya No IJN in Burma, and the P40 Variant the Tigers used was a different beast entirely from the one we have in game performance and handling wise.

 

Ki-48 was also a common type in theater

 

Though I do think the First Wing in service that had the Ki-44 did see some action over Burma, so it might make for a fun "collector" plane 

 

Brewster's For the Allies as well though would be fun and Hurricanes, Blenheim's too

 

The Bulk of the IJA Air in Burma was fighter wise the Ki 27 initially, The Tigers lost more planes themselves do to lack of training and or familiarity with the type than they did from enemy contact as I recall.

 

..................

 

So to make a viable match up you would need:

 

H 81 variant

Brewster

Hurricane

Blenheim

Lysander "collector"

 

Ki-43

Ki-27

Ki-48

Ki-44 "collector"

 

Depends on how early or late u want to go, above is basically the initial set up, later on the number and variety of planes, particularly for the allies increases dramatically, this theater is a personal favorites of mine and I think despite their being no  IJN fighter present in theater, at all, it would be a tone of fun. Shores "bloody Shambles" trilogy makes for interesting reading on this theater.

Edited January 17, 2018 by BRADYS555

[GarandM1]

Good point, thanks for clearing that up! Really, I'd take literally any Japanese plane at this point.

[TP_Silk]

Sorry guys - I know some of you are desperate to get out that way, but I'm much more a fan of the current plan and Bodenplatte for now. Devs have said that the main stopper is not so much the ships and carriers, but the true and accurate portrayal and development of the actual Japanese aircraft. You're asking for the impossible just now.

[[N.O.G.F]_Cathal_Brugha]

One can always hope though

[Ribbon]

Wouldn't that delay PTO even furter?

[BRADYS555]

Wouldn't that delay PTO even furter?

The CBI, at least “Burma”, would probably be done after whatever PTO option they go for largely, imo, because of the popularity of the PTO.

 

The zero is to iconic I think not to do first,

 

A6M2

D3A

B5N

G4M

 

These planes almost certainly must be modeled first from a marketing perspective

 

Of course the Indian Ocean raids by the IJN could I suppose create a reason to include IJN aircraft they hit Madras

 

Ryujo did operate off Burma so this might be enough to rationalise the presence of IJN aircraft early in a Burma “battle of” game

Edited January 17, 2018 by BRADYS555

[GarandM1]

Sorry guys - I know some of you are desperate to get out that way, but I'm much more a fan of the current plan and Bodenplatte for now. Devs have said that the main stopper is not so much the ships and carriers, but the true and accurate portrayal and development of the actual Japanese aircraft. You're asking for the impossible just now.

 

I do not doubt that is the case, but it doesn't make the wait for the Pacific any less difficult. I am pumped for BoBP, but the Pacific is where my main interest is. I really hope we do get to see it one day.

[Gambit21]

What Silk said.

PTO guy myself - but 9th TAC stuff is a close second.

[Royal_Flight]

This is the problem.

I get the appeal and I'm a big fan of trying to make decisions where possible that can add potential to the series as a whole. This idea offers multiple ways to make efficiencies - an iconic theatre using existing assets (P-40), a way to add Japanese aircraft in a theatre that makes sense (as opposed to introducing aircraft that initially need to be flown over Crimea or Stalingrad), and a map and plane set that would provide new potential directions for expansion (China/Burma/India theatre and New Guinea).

A full China/Burma/India (CBI) theatre would be great. And the 'forgotten theatre' has never been tackled in a flight sim before so this could be a unique selling point as well as a way to break new ground.

In addition, with Japanese Army Air Force aircraft in-game, it would be more straightforward to move next to New Guinea, adding another well-known theatre and allowing US and Australian forces to have a release, after CBI featuring predominantly the UK. These are also both over land so allowing the devs more time to work on integrating carriers to BoX.

 

But... the JAAF aircraft don't fit a future carrier scenario, the Allies would need new aircraft too and there would need to be a new map made with a collection of theatre-appropriate assets as well. At this point it's basically a full new release, for something that was originally intended as an interim measure.

 

Not that it's necessarily a bad thing, I'd rather the devs take the time required to do the Far Eastern theatre properly than rush it, but time would need to be taken and it would push back everything else.

One of the attractions for me to the Pacific is carrier operations, and I'd hope some day to see the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Navy featured.

I would enjoy a proper CBI release but that would push back my hope of flying a Seafire or Barracuda off an Illustrious-class carrier even further than it already has been with the delays to BoMidway.

There's also the question of what timeframe such a release would be set, as the available aircraft would be vastly different - starting with Ki-27s fighting Brewster Buffaloes and Hurricanes and ending with Ki-84s and Spitfire mk VIIIs. Also the C-47 would be just as essential here as the Ju 52 is to Stalingrad.

 

A third-party map could go some of the way towards solving this in the meantime, as BoBo will provide a few aircraft that could be used in these theatres, albeit sometimes requiring some imagination.

The Japanese planeset issue though.

[ShamrockOneFive]

The CBI theatre is very interesting indeed. It goes way beyond just the Flying Tigers which everyone is interested in but later the Tigers get rolled into the USAAF structure that begins to form there and there are plenty of aircraft and air battles that I've read about more recently that are almost entirely forgotten. Truly a forgotten part of the conflict compared to other areas.

 

The key problem here is the same one at Midway and as some of the others have pointed out - aircraft references for Japanese airplanes are hard. Much harder to get than German, Russian, Italian, British and American. Many issues for that and I don't think its insurmountable but it does mean that the team needs more time to do the research.

 

Still excited for Midway, Okinawa, and whatever else they have planned in the future but I think the smart move was definitely for Bodenplatte.

[BRADYS555]

Something to consider about the CBI, the Royal Navy had aircraft carriers operating out of Ceylon and the IJN did sorti KB into the Indian Ocean so as I noted above there could be some argument for including a coastal map of Burma and with that you have a more flexible match up possible.

 

All the allied planes I listed above could be modeled for the east front maps we have now, the Brewster could be a colectors plane, the Blenheim would need be new built howeaver or perhaps an early B 25.

 

But again it comes down to modeling a few core Japanese planes.

[ShamrockOneFive]

Something to consider about the CBI, the Royal Navy had aircraft carriers operating out of Ceylon and the IJN did sorti KB into the Indian Ocean so as I noted above there could be some argument for including a coastal map of Burma and with that you have a more flexible match up possible.

 

All the allied planes I listed above could be modeled for the east front maps we have now, the Brewster could be a colectors plane, the Blenheim would need be new built howeaver or perhaps an early B 25.

 

But again it comes down to modeling a few core Japanese planes.

 

Are you talking about the BPF? That was the only time RN carriers were operating in the Pacific theatre to my knowledge and they were late 1944... but happy to be corrected.

[Hirachi]

Will need a C-46 Commando if we going do the CBT

 

[Oubaas]

If we had China/India/Burma, we could fly "The Hump". We'd need the C-39, C-46, C-47, C-54, C-87, C-109, and others. And really good icing modeling in the sim.

 

I'd like to try flying a load of gasoline in a C-109. Imagine landing with a huge load of high octane AVGAS at an airfield with 6,000 feet elevation. And imagine the icing in the C-87!

 

But to do it justice, you'd end up in the situation of having to develop Japanese aircraft. And a whole lot of other stuff. And the map would be enormous. Especially if you did the full story and went for the B-29.

 

But I'd like to fly some rescues in the L-5 Sentinel.

 

However, with all the development that would be necessary to make it happen, I don't think we'll see it, much as I'd love it.

[BRADYS555]

Are you talking about the BPF? That was the only time RN carriers were operating in the Pacific theatre to my knowledge and they were late 1944... but happy to be corrected.

I am referring to 1942 and the Indian Ocean raid by the IJN, they sank Hermies and :

 

March: “Operation C” - The Raids in the Indian Ocean:

Vice Admiral Nagumo's Carrier Striking Force (less KAGA) departs Staring Bay with CarDiv 1's AKAGI, CarDiv 3's SORYU and HIRYU, CarDiv 5's SHOKAKU and ZUIKAKU, BatDiv 3's KONGO, HARUNA, HIEI and KIRISHIMA, Crudiv 8's TONE and CHIKUMA, and DesRon 1's light cruiser ABUKUMA, DesDiv 17's URAKAZE, ISOKAZE, TANIKAZE and HAMAKAZE, DesDiv 18's KASUMI, SHIRANUHI, ARARE and KAGERO, DesDiv 4's MAIKAZE and HAGIKAZE, CarDiv 5's AKIGUMO and fleet oiler SHINKOKU MARU and heads to the Indian Ocean via the Timor Sea.

4 April 1942:

At 1930, a Catalina of the 413th Canadian Squadron sights KdB and reports it as 360 miles SE of the southernmost point of Ceylon. Three fighters each are launched from AKAGI, SORYU, SHOKAKU, ZUIKAKU, and six from HIRYU in a concerted effort to shoot it down before it can transmit details. It is forced into the sea, and six survivors of the nine crew are rescued by destroyer ISOKAZE.

5 April 1942:

The Striking Force attacks Colombo, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka). At 1100, 127 of the "Kido Butai's" aircraft led by Cdr Fuchida attack the British naval base. AKAGI contributes 17 “Kate” and six “Zeke” with no loss sustained. They wreck the base's facilities, destroy 31 aircraft (six Swordfish, 21 Hurricane, four Fulmar) and sink destroyer HMS TENEDOS and armed merchant cruiser HMS HECTOR. 55 RN personnel are killed at Colombo (TENEDOS 33, HECTOR three, LUCIA two, TRUSTY one, BALTA one, FAA aircrew and ground crew 12, and an "Albacore" crew from INDOMITABLE three).

A TONE floatplane finds Vice Admiral (later Admiral of the Fleet, Sir) James Somerville's (former CO of HMS WARSPITE) British Eastern Fleet's cruisers HMS CORNWALL and HMS DORSETSHIRE at sea - without air cover. Between 1638-1700, 53 Aichi D3A1 "Val" dive-bombers from AKAGI (17), HIRYU (18) and SORYU (18) sink both ships. 424 RN personnel are killed (DORSETSHIRE 234, CORNWALL 190). After the attack, the Striking Force withdraws to the SE and searches unsuccessfully for the rest of Somerville's fleet. All “Val” aircraft return safely to their carriers.

9 April 1942:

At 0900, the Striking Force launches 91 B5N2 “Kate” level bombers and 41 Mitsubishi A6M2 “Zeke” fighters led by Commander Fuchida to attack the British naval base at Trincomalee, Ceylon. They find the harbor almost empty, but destroy merchant ship SAGAING and the four aircraft she was carrying, and damage monitor EREBUS. They also seriously damage the dockyard and the RAF station at China Bay, shoot down nine planes and destroy at least 14 aircraft on the ground.

HARUNA launches one E8N2 “Dave” floatplane that at 1055, spots an enemy carrier 65 miles south of the base. At noon, the Striking Force launches 85 D3A1“Val”, escorted by three A6M2 “Zeke”, of which AKAGI contributes 17 “Val” and three “Zeke”. They attack from 1335-1402 and sink old light carrier HMS HERMES and Australian destroyer HMAS VAMPIRE. Nagumo's aircraft also find and sink corvette HMS HOLLYHOCK, oilers ATHELSTANE and BRITISH SERGEANT and Norwegian merchant ship NORVIKEN.

At 1230 strikes are being recovered, when at 1350, without any lookouts' warning, AKAGI is straddled by bombs off the starboard bow and port quarter from RAF 18th Squadron's nine Blenheim IVs based in Colombo, Ceylon. All bombs miss but so sudden and unexpected is the attack that only a few AA shots is fired upon the attackers. This incident in fact, is the first time “Kido Butai” has been attacked since the start of the war.

 

From the TROMS at combined fleet . Com

 

For HMS Indomitable:

 

 

March Diverted on passage to Java and took second batch of Hurricanes to Ceylon to

reinforce existing air defence resources. Re-embarked own aircraft.

Passage to Addu Atoll for flying training and work-up for operations.

31st Assigned to Force A in Eastern Fleet with HM Battleship WARSPITE, HM Aircraft

Carrier ILLUSTRIOUS, HM Cruiser CORNWALL, HM Cruiser ENTERPRISE and HM

Cruiser EMERALD.

Joined Fleet south of Ceylon and took part in unsuccessful search for Japanese

aircraft carrier force reported as bound for an attack on Ceylon.

 

April

5th Sailed with Force A to intercept Japanese ships without success.

(Note: HMS CORNWALL and HMS DORSETSHIRE which had detached earlier were

sunk by Japanese aircraft whilst on passage to Ceylon. For more details see OPERATION

PACIFIC by E Walker and ENGAGE THE ENEMY MORE CLOSELY by C Barnett).

 

The British planed to Manoeuver into a position to launch a night attack with swordfish against KdB

Edited January 18, 2018 by BRADYS555

[DressedWings]

Ya No IJN in Burma, and the P40 Variant the Tigers used was a different beast entirely from the one we have in game performance and handling wise.

 

 

The AVG used P-40Es as the conflict went on.

[BRADYS555]

The AVG used P-40Es as the conflict went on.

According to America’s 100,000 the AVG got 100 H81’s, Dec 20 is thier first combat, in January 50 P 40E’s are aloted, shipment by sea starts in February most arrive by June.

 

Howeaver some P 40E’s trickle in March

 

In April thier are 36 of all types of P40 available

 

The AVG is disbanded in July

 

However in the late spring other units drive in theater with the P40 some of them British/Commonwealth

 

The only point being that for the first 3 to 4 months of the war those 100 H81’s were basically it and in the next two months P40E started to trickle in

[Hauksbee]

Everybody seems to feel that it would be simple to slip their own personal wish list to the head of the line. Check out this video from Youtube. It shows (in Jason's own words) the difficulty of doing anything. He's got one top-notch programmer who expects to spend a full year building the code for carrier landings. It is next to impossible to get authentic info on Japanese cockpits. He needs more modelers...but...they have to be trained in the 'house style' by the Top Brass. That means going to Russia for training. Also, the Top Brass do not have good English skills. So better that new modelers have good Russian. How many are these? On top of which, all these things cost money and 1C Games will not increase its budget, which is linked to sales. So if we want our wish lists granted, let's all buy multiple copies. Check out the link. Listen for yourselves.

 

 

Edited January 18, 2018 by Hauksbee

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

The whole idea above as much as it close to my heart - after all years ago I've presented this: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21489-il-2-sturmovik-battle-burma-idea-future-expansion/ - is nice, but it hits the same wall as every other idea revolving around far east - it requires Japanese aircraft. This was one of the reasons to drop Midway and cash BoBp. Now how far the issue with materials and translations was real and could be solved now is a different story, as its much harder to provide refunds instead of just backing off from statements (contrary to what user above me said, its not next to impossible however). For one I know that its much easier to find documentation on Japanese Army aircraft, than on Navy ones. Most of Japanese Army flight and technical manuals were translated by ATIS and can be found in Australian facilities such as Australian War Memorial. So there is a thing for Aussies - anyone interested in PTO can reserve some time, take a ride and check what Australian archives have.  

Burma however means you dont have to develop aircraft carriers, airfields are in relatively close proximity in any 1943-1944 scenario and map doesnt have to be any larger than Kuban is. 

 

Plus Burma is just a beautiful place to visit. But thats a different story. 

[Royal_Flight]

I have to say, my interest in a 'Battle of Burma' release would be proportional to how close the final version is to your proposal. I came across the linked thread a while ago, before the indefinite Midway hiatus and thought then (and still do) that it would be an awesome release.

 

The risk is that it doesn't carry the 'star power' of a well-known action like Midway, especially given the relative obscurity of Burma.

But there are a lot of positives.

 

The planeset could be based around conversions of some of the existing BoBo aircraft, at least for the Allies.

Spitfire IX could be built into the mk VIII, P-51A from P-51D, Thunderbolt mk II from the P-47D... by the time we move towards a new release I expect the AI B-25 to be made flyable as well.

Also we should (ideally) finally have the Li-2 which could form the basis of the Dakota for transport flights over the Hump.

There's also the Kittyhawk, and was the A-20 used over Burma as well?

This could make for a relatively easy start to the Far East, especially if the JAAF aircraft are easier to find documents for.

 

Didn't know they were kept at the Australian War Memorial museum. Offtopic, I visited there once and found it to be excellent and well worth the visit.

[DressedWings]

According to America’s 100,000 the AVG got 100 H81’s, Dec 20 is thier first combat, in January 50 P 40E’s are aloted, shipment by sea starts in February most arrive by June.

 

Howeaver some P 40E’s trickle in March

 

In April thier are 36 of all types of P40 available

 

The AVG is disbanded in July

 

However in the late spring other units drive in theater with the P40 some of them British/Commonwealth

 

The only point being that for the first 3 to 4 months of the war those 100 H81’s were basically it and in the next two months P40E started to trickle in

 

The "Tomahawk MkIIb" (the P-40 variant that the AVG got from British slated lines) is closest to the USAAF P-40C.

 

The speed difference is within 10mph between the C and E, however the P-40E was heavier and could be loaded heavier. I'm not saying its easy to model things, especially with in depth flight models but I don't think they are "different beasts".

 

Even then, there are still plenty of "missions" during the period when the AVG and Chinese forces used P-40Es. 

[BRADYS555]

My preference for the early war match up in Burma is largely do to the relative Competitiveness of the Japanese aircraft in the first 6 months of the war in Burma.

 

Apart from the ki 44 the Oscar is all you really get in one form or another for the next few years, the ki 27, while fun and interesting, is not Competitive realy even at the beginning.

 

I would think if we did get Burma at some point they would add the H81A3 and the early p40 variants if they do an early plane set.

 

 

Something to consider, the Flying Tigers are very iconic and would imo be a good selling point.

 

Most folks in the states don’t think of them as mercenary’s.

 

The Brewster is imo one plane that should be modeled as a get ahead task, it was on USN carriers at the beginning of the war they flew over the DEI and Singapore and Burma, and Finland.

Edited January 18, 2018 by BRADYS555

[Hirachi]

If we go late war will need the Ki-84 and the Ki-61 

 

Nakajima Ki.84 "Hayate" (translation: "Gale"; allied codename "Frank") units in the China Theatre
(including Manchuria, Formosa and Korea) in 1944-45 Notes:

1. The company colours are in the order HQ / 1st / 2nd / 3rd Chutais.
2. Airframe colours are various shades of dark green, dark brown, or unpainted. Undersides light grey or unpainted.
3. The markings for the 29th Sentai (China and Formosa) are not confirmed.
4. Aircraft numbers were often marked on fin or rudder.
5. There were often variations in markings within the Sentai.
6. Some of these units also served in other areas eg. Burma, Japan, East Indies or the Philippines.

 

The Profiles: 

1. 22nd (China):  The spinner and river (supporting the Royal Chrysanthemum) were in Company colours, red-white-blue-yellow. There were many variations.
2. 22nd late war:  Design replaced by numbers, likely for simplicity. Disbanded in Korea.
3. 25th (China):  HQ=red and blue band, then white-red-yellow; this Sentai also had Oscars. Disbanded in Korea.
4. 50th (Formosa):  Blue-red-yellow-white. Previously had a lightning flash on their Oscars. Disbanded in Korea.
5. 85th (China-Korea):  Blue-white-red-yellow. Disbanded in Korea.
6. 104th (Manchuria-China):  Fin tip in Company colours, sometimes with a rudder stripe - white-red-yellow-blue. White wingtips on camouflaged aircraft. Disbanded in Korea.
7. 24th Dokuritsu Chutai (Independent Company) (Formosa):  White flash. Disbanded on Formosa.
8. 9th (Manchuria-China):  Blue-white-red-yellow. Disbanded in China.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Simba

[TotalFreakUK]

The reason why Midway has been postponed is because finding accurate research information for the Japanese aircraft has been so difficult to obtain, so therefore the same would apply for a Burma/China campaign too

[BRADYS555]

The reason why Midway has been postponed is because finding accurate research information for the Japanese aircraft has been so difficult to obtain, so therefore the same would apply for a Burma/China campaign too

Well as noted above I think that given the potential appeal of Midway or say Guadalcanal that Burma whike certainly fun to think about Will likely be someways off, they’re gonna pretty much half to model the core IJN plane set first.

 

Burma however in some ways would be far simpler also as noted above you wouldn’t have to model any ships or aircraft carriers, as I mentioned above they could be included depending on how they build the map, or added at a later date, but this would require them to make a choice between a core Imperial Japanese army plane set or a core IJN plane set.

 

Burma would again be simpler in the sense that pretty much all of the Allied planes could be modelled as add-ons to the existing game with the exception of the Blenheim and possibly the Lysander.

 

On the west coast of the United States there is a flying Oscar and a flying zero, not that that’s necessarily much help if any...

 

Modelling The ki 44 might Be tricky and the ki 48, But again I suppose it all comes down to finding the data they need

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

My preference for the early war match up in Burma is largely do to the relative Competitiveness of the Japanese aircraft in the first 6 months of the war in Burma.

In initial set of operations in Malaya and Burma you would have 70+ % of units equipped with Ki-27s, since there were only two Sentais at the outbreak of the war equipped with Ki-43s. There was only a one small unit equipped with Ki-44-Is = 47. Dokuritsu Chutai, with 9 of those. 

On the other side you would see P-40s, Hurricanes, Mohawks and bunch of other aircraft. I'm not entirely sure it would be that much fun, particularly as all Japanese aircraft at given period used telescopic gunsights which in maneuvering combat are very bad. 

 

Period of relative balance was definitely 1943 and you could use Spitfire Vs we already have, plus Japanese had more "appealing" Ki-43-II, Ki-44-IIs and others. 

 

 

 

Modelling The ki 44 might Be tricky and the ki 48, But again I suppose it all comes down to finding the data they need

For the first one there is Pilots Handbook, Maintance manual and few other side documents available with relative ease. In regard to Ki-48 its manual is available online - Manual for operating Type 99 (Models 1 and 2), twin-engined light bomber, published by Tokorozawa Army Air Maintenance school, October 1944. Report No. 15n http://dl.ndl.go.jp/info:ndljp/pid/8815754 

Manuals for engines are available online as well. 

[BRADYS555]

I am aware of the numbers of IJA aircraft in theater but my assumption was that in game terms that would be irrelevant, take the 202 for example, it’s a collector plane, thier were I beleave “2” in theater, which is why I suggested the ki 44 be offered as a collector plane.

 

In 43 the performance diferances in allied aircraft will start to eclipse all but the ki 44, and whike the ki 43 will still be a joy to fly it’s Anaemic Armament will make bringing down allied mid war fighters much harder.

 

If they do do Burma at some point I suspect they will lead with the AVG angle and then widen the scope to include mid and late war scenarios

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

Again, I dont mind Ki-44. Just saying it was rare and it's equipment would cause some trouble.

 

On the contrary, 1943 was the year of the static frontline and relative parity. Burma was deemed by most high ranking officers as secondary front and until 1944 high perfomance Allies fighters were rarely seen. On the other hand it was a common thing to spot a Hurricane, Moahawk or P-40 with a number of Spitfire Vs delivered in late 1943. Japanese by the end of monsoon period switched to the newest types and models of their aircraft, heck, even Thai Air Force got into flying Ki-43-IIs. Plus, Ki-43-II has better armament than Ki-43-I and it wasnt that anemic as some may see it - old Il-2 did really poor job as it never bothered with modelling Ho-103 with actual ammunition.

 

AVG is fine but you need a decent land campaign to follow in a proper expansion and airfields in a relative proximity. And for that nothing beats 1944 Kohima and Imphal campaign. 1943 Arakan campaign is ok as well. 

[BRADYS555]

Well the ki 43 l b and c had better guns basically the same as the ll, and they did fire a mixed chain. But I think as noted above target would likely start early and play it out by adding later maps and plane sets, possibly even developing into a true CBI “battle” with a China map at some point and include Russian aircraft.

 

The land battles I don’t think realy play into this game to much except as a sorta back ground to the air game.

 

The IJA Air Force in Burma did do well historically howeaver, I would like to see any thing Japanese done it’s fun just tossing ideas around.

[BlitzPig_EL]

As a Curtiss Hawk kind of guy, I would love to see the AVG done properly, however, there is a reason the AVG has not been treated in depth in the IL2 world before, that is the current political climate between mainland (Communist) China, and Taiwan (Nationalist China).   With the mainland being by far the bigger market, and the fact that they would never allow aircraft wearing the White Sun of Nationalist China, it simply won't ever be done.

 

Sad really.

 

RAF Hawk 75s in Burma would be a lot of fun though...

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

 

 

Well the ki 43 l b and c had better guns basically the same as the ll, and they did fire a mixed chain.

No such thing as Ib, Ic and Ia: https://www.warbirdforum.com/rdunn43a.htm

You would find 90+ % of Ki-43-Is armed with one 12.7 mm gun and one 7.7 mm gun, with only a number of models armed with two 12.7 mm Ho-103s, like in 64th Sentai.

 

 

 

The IJA Air Force in Burma did do well historically howeaver, I would like to see any thing Japanese done it’s fun just tossing ideas around.

Thats true, even in 1944 they managed to mount an offensive, surround Kohima and Imphal and pose a real threat to India. Probably the best theater of war for the Japanese. 

 

 

 

As a Curtiss Hawk kind of guy, I would love to see the AVG done properly, however, there is a reason the AVG has not been treated in depth in the IL2 world before, that is the current political climate between mainland (Communist) China, and Taiwan (Nationalist China). 

P-40 is mandatory, but looking at RAF and USAAF OoB for January 1943 I can say that most common fighters were Hurricanes IIb and IIc, with an addition of Moahawk IVs, P-40s and Beaufighters. Most common bombers were Blenheims, B-24s, Wellingtons and B-25s. This did not substantially change as the time passed. OoB for June 1943 indicates arrival of Vultee Vengeance, Catalina and only in December you would find first Spitfire's Vc, P-38s and P-51As. Thus my opinion that 1943 was a year of relative parity of both sides.

[BRADYS555]

Quoting the link above, well that is interesting, all my references to date suggest the a b c approach, I sopose in game we could just have the three weapons packages as options. But what if the bomb option associated with the later production machines ?

 

 

 

examples of other versions of the Ki 43-I were found. However, even if these aircraft were produced with two 7.7mm or two 12.7mm guns and not modified in the field, their serial numbers are out of sequence with the commonly accepted history of this aircraft. The production sequence: A (2x7.7) -B (1x7.7 and 1x12.7) - C (2x12.7) clearly did not occur.

 

Based on the evidence marshaled in this study (which admittedly does not take into account all units equipped with this aircraft much less present direct evidence as to each aircraft) the main operational version of the Ki 43-I was equipped with one 7.7mm machine gun and one 12.7mm machine cannon. This version was in operation in Indo-China and Malaya early in the War; in Burma in late 1942; and, in the Southeast Area from late 1942 to mid-1943. A captured aircraft in China confirms the version with two 12.7mm machine cannon but reinforces the impression that this configuration was limited to a small number of early production aircraft. While versions with two 7.7mm machine guns existed, they were likely retrofitted aircraft relegated to non-combat roles.

 

...............

 

The Hawk 75 would be fun yes...

 

...............

 

Well we can always make our own nationalists skins Think of them as the Swastika of the East

Edited January 20, 2018 by BRADYS555

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

I'm not entirely sure it would be that much fun, particularly as all Japanese aircraft at given period used telescopic gunsights which in maneuvering combat are very bad.

 

If they don't have magnification (which I think you told me about this earlier but I cant remember now) they would be more like a  small field of view reflex sight, you can be a bit misaligned with the telescopic tube, but still the crosshairs would point to where the bullets are going, in the recent video the devs published we can see the A-20's gunner telescopic sights and look rather nice. I think we got kinda scared about them with IL-2 1946 or WT's implementations which weren't good. They would be better than common iron sights.

 

 

Plus, Ki-43-II has better armament than Ki-43-I and it wasnt that anemic as some may see it - old Il-2 did really poor job as it never bothered with modelling Ho-103 with actual ammunition.

 

How does the Ho-103 compare to the Bredas for example? Or is it closer to say the Soviet UB in energy and rate of fire? IIRC they had explosive rounds as well.

Edited January 20, 2018 by -=PHX=-SuperEtendard

[BRADYS555]

If they don't have magnification (which I think you told me about this earlier but I cant remember now) they would be more like a small field of view reflex sight, you can be a bit misaligned with the telescopic tube, but still the crosshairs would point to where the bullets are going, in the recent video the devs published we can see the A-20's gunner telescopic sights and look rather nice. I think we got kinda scared about them with IL-2 1946 or WT's implementations which weren't good. They would be better than common iron sights.

 

 

 

How does the Ho-103 compare to the Bredas for example? Or is it closer to say the Soviet UB in energy and rate of fire? IIRC they had explosive rounds as well.

The Ho- 103 was the better weapon see below, and toward the bottom compare the ki 43 with its contemporarys

 

http://www.quarryhs.co.uk/WW2guneffect.htm

Edited January 20, 2018 by BRADYS555