Hawker Typhoon for Bodenplatte please, devs.

[Jabo_68*]

I will be ordering Bodenplatte, but it won't be complete without the Typhoon as far a I'm concerned.

 

The Typhoon played a prominent role in NW. Europe, so I believe it should have be included by default. 

Edited February 19, 2018 by Jabo_68*

[ZachariasX]

I will be ordering Bodenplatte, but it won't be complete without the Typhoon as far a I'm concerned.

An original German Bodenplatte is complete without a Typhoon. See here:

 

 

Typhoons are very optional. In case of Typhoons, you can use holes in your garden as storm cellars same as they do in Oklahoma. But Typhoons are rare on the average in Germany (unlike Hurricanes in the US!), and we don't need to include unrepresentative items.

[Jabo_68*]

An original German Bodenplatte is complete without a Typhoon. See here:

 

 

Typhoons are very optional. In case of Typhoons, you can use holes in your garden as storm cellars same as they do in Oklahoma. But Typhoons are rare on the average in Germany (unlike Hurricanes in the US!), and we don't need to include unrepresentative items.

Is that a no from the devs, then?

[LukeFF]

Is that a no from the devs, then?

Umm...it was a joke.

[Royal_Flight]

I would appreciate a Typhoon as well. The Tempest will be great and I'm hoping it will come with a solid ground attack armament, but in this role it will only be a stand-in for the Typhoon. 

Maybe in future there will be a series of collector planes, or this third-party team will pull something out to expand BoBo from the very fighter-heavy lineup we're getting. 

[BMA_FlyingShark]

I would like to see the Typhoon too in BP but not at the cost of one of the other planes because they all played a significant role in late WWII Europe and they are all interesting planes.

But as a collector plane, I'dd sure buy it.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[RobinRed]

On 2/17/2018 at 5:38 PM, Jabo_68* said:

I will be ordering Bodenplatte, but it won't be complete without the Typhoon as far a I'm concerned.

 

The Typhoon played a prominent role in NW. Europe, so I believe it should have be included by default. 

 

On 3/17/2018 at 8:18 AM, Royal_Flight said:

I would appreciate a Typhoon as well. The Tempest will be great and I'm hoping it will come with a solid ground attack armament, but in this role it will only be a stand-in for the Typhoon. 

Maybe in future there will be a series of collector planes, or this third-party team will pull something out to expand BoBo from the very fighter-heavy lineup we're getting. 

 

The period prior to Bodenplatte must be included before anything else. In particular,  the TYPHOON must be included because of its heroic contribution to the battle of Normandy and destruction of the Panzers at Falaise Gap and at Mortain German counter offensive. To ignore this period is would be a serious error in documenting not only the history but of the sacrifice and immense contribution  of the RAF's 2nd TAF to the war effort

[AndyJWest]

Just now, angreiffer3829 said:

...the TYPHOON must be included ...

 

The Typhoon isn't going to be included. The developers have already stated what the aircraft included are, and the project is in it's last few months of development. Dragging this thread back from the dead isn't going to change any of that.

[Jabo_68*]

4 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

 

The Typhoon isn't going to be included. The developers have already stated what the aircraft included are, and the project is in it's last few months of development. Dragging this thread back from the dead isn't going to change any of that.

Is that an official statement from the devs, as at least adding the Typhoon as a collector plane would, I'm sure,  be quite profitable?

[AndyJWest]

The collector planes included with the Bodenplatte premium edition have already been decided, and sold (and in one case, released), and they don't include the Typhoon. As for any further collector planes to be created after the completion of the Bodenplatte project, the developers have as yet to say anything, though they are clearly aware that there have been quite a few suggestions: Typhoon, Mosquito, Ar 234 and Ta 152 being amongst the more common ones.

[EAF19_Marsh]

The logic makes perfect sense:

- Limited time and resources

- Spit IX late (aka XVI) included

- Winter ‘44 version on the ‘to-do’ list

- XIV not included for now

- RAF needs another high-performance multi-role fighter

- Tempest V is best candidate

- Tiffie and Mossie (and XIV) no doubt considered for future fun

 

You can argue the toss on this, but the team decision made a lot of sense. Nothing is perfect, but if bombs and rockets are included on the Tempest (as the Spit IX rocket logic suggets that these should be), then you have a Tiffie stand-in until time and funding becomes available.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

the Spit IX rocket logic

 

There's nothing really strange about it - we know there were operational Spitfire IXs with rockets, so that's why they were included. As always, it's up to mission designers to decide what to do with them.

[EAF19_Marsh]

 

 

16 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

There's nothing really strange about it - we know there were operational Spitfire IXs with rockets, so that's why they were included. As always, it's up to mission designers to decide what to do with them.

 

We also know that lost of weird things happened on one-off occasions. Does not mean that it was meaningful or worth the cost of modelling. But you get Spits with rockets vs. unlikely, almost unrecorded Luftwaffe engine mods and apparently that is ‘equivalence’.

 

By that logic, you may as well have had beer kegs as a Spit option. But whatever: I know that this topic has been decided and logic is of no interest.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

We also know that lost of weird things happened on one-off occasions.

 

It was an entire squadron (No. 74) that was equipped with rockets. So, there's nothing weird, one-off, or illogical about it.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

[EAF19_Marsh]

10 hours ago, LukeFF said:

It was an entire squadron (No. 74) that was equipped with rockets. So, there's nothing weird, one-off, or illogical about it.

 

What % of the force? For how long? How important to to the wider war effort?

 

Given opportunity cost, these are questions that should be assessed before embarking on any project. By the above criteria, it was very much a one-off or do you think that a fighter present in thousands but in this case only with a single squadron carrying a measly 2 rockets was somehow an important and widely adopted part of 2TAF's repertoire?  It's akin to the 50mm on the 110 / 262: existed, but statistically insignificant.

[sevenless]

11 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

LOL! Ale or Lager?

[Lusekofte]

Never read about the rockets on Spit either, does not make them any less realistic. Norwegian Spit squadrons carried Bombs . They where not trained for using rockets as far as I know.

Brits had these policy in all types. Squadrons flying Blenheim with torpedoes , other with rockets . Not like the US that put everything in one plane as long as it could carry it. 

[Cybermat47]

3 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

What % of the force? For how long? How important to to the wider war effort?

 

Given opportunity cost, these are questions that should be assessed before embarking on any project. By the above criteria, it was very much a one-off or do you think that a fighter present in thousands but in this case only with a single squadron carrying a measly 2 rockets was somehow an important and widely adopted part of 2TAF's repertoire?  It's akin to the 50mm on the 110 / 262: existed, but statistically insignificant.

 

Sorry, but what’s your point?

 

Are you saying that if a piece of equipment wasn’t widespread for a long period of time, and if it didn’t impact the war significantly, it shouldn’t be included in the game? Even if it was there and saw combat?

 

By that logic, the Me-262 shouldn’t be in the game. It was rare, had a short period of service, and had little impact on the war.

Edited May 6, 2019 by Pb_Cybermat47

[EAF19_Marsh]

1 hour ago, Pb_Cybermat47 said:

 

Sorry, but what’s your point?

 

Are you saying that if a piece of equipment wasn’t widespread for a long period of time, and if it didn’t impact the war significantly, it shouldn’t be included in the game? Even if it was there and saw combat?

 

By that logic, the Me-262 shouldn’t be in the game. It was rare, had a short period of service, and had little impact on the war. 

 

Well, you could always scroll up to the post and read it...

 

I was comparing the fact that Spits get rockets (which as a historical occurrence - far more than the number of 262s in service - represents a fraction of a % of operations and hence virtually a non-entity) with providing the Tempest with a rocket option as a Typhoon stand-in. Yes, the Tempest was not operational in this role but it COULD carry them and we don't have a Typhoon for now. So, like 1 squadron carried rockets on their Spits for a while - even if this is a tiny fraction of what the Spit force was doing - then rockets for the Tempest is not entirely unreasonable as a temporary measure.

 

Far from saying that Spits should not have the rocket option (nice to have) I was suggesting that Tempest with rockets might be acceptable for now despite their not having been used.

 

Or not: it is just an opinion ?

 

[LukeFF]

13 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

What % of the force? For how long? How important to to the wider war effort?

 

What all does that matter? The question should be: was this weapon system ever operational? It's then up to the mission designers and server operators to decide whether to include them. Sometimes people act like the devs have foisted these more rare mods on the players and are forcing them to use them. 

[Velxra]

18 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

What % of the force? For how long? How important to to the wider war effort?

 

Given opportunity cost, these are questions that should be assessed before embarking on any project. By the above criteria, it was very much a one-off or do you think that a fighter present in thousands but in this case only with a single squadron carrying a measly 2 rockets was somehow an important and widely adopted part of 2TAF's repertoire?  It's akin to the 50mm on the 110 / 262: existed, but statistically insignificant.

 

From the devs point of view, it was a way of copying already made content of one plane and applying it into another plane. Thus less effort for the same "new" content stamp for multiple planes in another battle pack. I do not agree with it as an acceptable feature in replacement of the Typhoon given as how limited and ultra rare the rocket pod configuration was deployed on the spit fire. I would of greatly preferred new airframe types not already in the game as were used in the war such as the Typhoon. Versus this, copying of existing plane models, altering the stats, and creating a new texture approach as seen across multiple battle packs now.

A new plane or a series of planes would require more leg work, development, and research. And from a profiting point of view, extra work is pointless if the small community will pay the same price for the same content again with different stats and a texture change. No travel costs, no extended personnel costs, no 3D scanning equipment sent to scan a new plane, no cost for preserving a time slot of a collector/museum's time, and no additional research of new plane specs. Instead cut away those first costs by using a computer researcher to gather stats of current plane set upgrades used in production, a coder to apply plane weight/power adjustments, a 3d model artist for slight airframe alterations, and a texture artist to create a new camo texture.

 

Tada the leg work of a "new" plane for half or less the cost of producing a new plane model. This is the true reason why we do not have the Typhoon or any other numerous suggestions of great single prop or multi prop planes as requested over the years. It's more profitable to just copy what they already have and sell it again...

[Cybermat47]

4 minutes ago, Geronimo553 said:

Versus this, copying of existing plane models, altering the stats, and creating a new texture approach as seen across multiple battle packs now.

 

 

You realise that the Bf-109 F-2 was a real thing, right? It’s not some reskinned Bf-109 F-4 created by the devs to save time.

 

All of these games would be ridiculous without these “reskinned” aircraft, because they were the most numerous types of aircraft available.

 

7 minutes ago, Geronimo553 said:

I do not agree with it as an acceptable feature in replacement of the Typhoon given as how limited and ultra rare the rocket pod configuration was deployed on the spit fire.

 

The devs have modeled RP-3 rockets for the Spitfire, which were used by a whole squadron, not the M10 rocket tubes tested on MH477, which is the closest that WWII Spitfires came to having rocket pods.

[Dakpilot]

1 hour ago, Geronimo553 said:

/snip/

 

 

Ever since your thread on drivable vehicles suggestion got a hostile reception, you have been negatively sniping about the game like a spoiled/spiteful little girl,.... 

 

A bit of a repeat performance of when your modable pilot uniforms idea was simarly rejected, just waiting for the full meltdown and enforced cooling period then you will be more reasonable again (hopefully) 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[Dutch2]

Sorry guys but this maybe sounding a bit like @BraveSirRobin but if BoBpl is successful, then there will be another late war series, like Normandy version or the liberation of France series. 

Something is telling me that in this series the Typhoon and Mosquitoes are released, but only if these BoBpl is an success and pre-ordering is the best way to make BoBpl successful. 

 

edit: Think @Jason_Williams must have an very tough job. This guy is only doing his best, sometimes good and sometime you would prefer to have seen something different. I only know all the choices of plane sets are made with future series in his mind, based on his fly sim experience and sure he does have an keen eyesight on that aspect. 

Edited May 7, 2019 by Dutch2

[56RAF_Roblex]

 

Google for photos of typhoons and you will find many photos of them wearing the 'US' code of 56 squadron so I would truly love to have typhoons but...

 

...If the developers were faced with the choice of building a Typhoon or a Tempest then I think they made the logical choice.  The typhoon was designed as a fighter but did not turn out to be as good as it was hoped and became primarily a GA aircraft.  It was good at ground attack but could only operate because the Allies had reasonable air superiority at this point in the war.   In the game it would face equal numbers of Fw190Ds and 109Gs.   The Tempest is a much better fighter plus it can do the same GA job as the Typhoon so it is the obvious choice. 

 

Perhaps they could provide the typhoon later as a collectors plane but even then I am not sure it would turn a profit when people already have the Tempest.    In an ideal world, Jason would have had the resources to build both and in that case putting the typhoon into the Bodenplatte release would have satisfied everyone's sense of authenticity then selling the tempest as a collectors aircraft would satisfied everyone's need for a more powerful fighter-bomber and sold very well.

Edited May 7, 2019 by 56RAF_Roblex

[EAF19_Marsh]

9 hours ago, LukeFF said:

What all does that matter? The question should be: was this weapon system ever operational? It's then up to the mission designers and server operators to decide whether to include them. Sometimes people act like the devs have foisted these more rare mods on the players and are forcing them to use them. 

 

First of all, I am not saying that the rockets are pointless or out of place, just that they were not terribly widespread and hence their absence would not be a huge issue - if they had not been included I doubt there would have been a massive 'Where are the Spt rockets?' thread.

 

Secondly, given limited time / opportunity cost, there are only so many features and aircraft that the team can provide, thus a guiding principle would be that those items which saw most / most important use should be priorities.

 

Thirdly, the underlying point I was making was not concerned with Spitfires and rockets, but rather Tempests and rockets. In the absence of the Typhoon, which was 2TAF's bread-and-butter attack aircraft, I was wondering if the devs release Tempest V with the 8 x rocket option to offer a Typhoon-ish capability until the actual aircraft is built. Tempest was cleared for these but they were never carried ('cos there were loads of Typhoons). The Spit gots its rockets despite their being used in minute numbers; maybe the Tempest get rockets as a stand-in for now?

[Bullets]

Once you have flown the Tempest you wont be asking for a Typhoon anymore  

[CountZero]

They didnt add Typhoon with BoBp, so we can ask to have it with Battle of Normandy

[RedKestrel]

On 5/5/2019 at 6:28 PM, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

I read a pilot's account once where they smuggled some Champagne back to England from France by filling an external fuel tank up with bottles. Once they got up to cruising altitude they heard what they thought were shots. After a brief panic and some maneuvering, the pilot realized that it was the corks popping in the champagne bottles from the pressure difference, and promptly descended.

[=27=Davesteu]

The Typhoon is simply the most important aircraft missing from the BoBP planeset.
Would I change the current BoBP planeset? No
Should the Typhoon be the top priority if the Devs add any BoBP-related collector aircraft other than the very likely B-25? Yes, definitely!

 

 

Regarding the rocket armament of the Tempest:
I'm in favour of rare but deployed modification being included in-game, but only up to a point. One-off and prototype modifications, as well as ones without confirmed usage, I strongly object.
The Tempest was operational with rockets, but only post-war. Including them really wouldn't be accurate timeframe-wise. Removing them again after the hypothetical release of a collector Typhoon could (understandably) result in a massive backlash and shouldn't be considered. Adding rockets to both aircraft would defraud the Typhoon of a unique feature and selling point.
Therefore I think the Tempest shouldn't come with rocket armament.

[LukeFF]

12 hours ago, Geronimo553 said:

Versus this, copying of existing plane models, altering the stats, and creating a new texture approach as seen across multiple battle packs now.

 

No offense, but you are really ignorant of what goes into creating a plane for this series. 

[Heliopause]

On ‎5‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 12:28 AM, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

Shaken not stirred .....

[LuftManu]

After Kuban was released we had a nice La5Fn and a 109 G6. I suggest we should wait because this new theater has a lot of opportunities for collectors aircraft. I think I'm getting them all.

 

PS. I also think it is an important aircraft but I wouldn't like if they changed the actual planeset. 

Edited May 7, 2019 by LF_Gallahad

[EAF19_Marsh]

Just to be totally clear: I think the team perform a magnificent job and that will never satisfy everyone. My point about Tempests and rockets was a pondering based on the - current - lack of Typhoons. I totally support their decisions about the core aircraft set and appreciate their efforts to provide the most interesting and accurate set given their resources.

5 hours ago, =27=Davesteu said:

Therefore I think the Tempest shouldn't come with rocket armament.

 

Perfectly reasonably argument. Personally, I suggest it might be an intermediary step intil the Typhoon arrived. As many said about the 1.98 ata K-4: it is up to the server / player if they want to use it.

2 hours ago, Heliopause said:

 

Shaken not stirred .....

 

The RAF: winning the cool stakes since 1918...

[CountZero]

im in no RP-3 for tempest camp,only beacause if they have them then GA guys will take them all  they can beter use P-38 or P-47 with rockets+bombs for GA when tempest have only pair of 500 or 1000lbs

[Jabo_68*]

Development wise, would it be easy to include the Typhoon, as it is similar to the Tempest?

Edited May 10, 2019 by Jabo_68*
reworded

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

2 hours ago, Jabo_68* said:

Development wise, would it be easy to include the Typhoon, as it is similar to the Tempest?

 

No, the two aircraft have very little in common other than some powerplants and general layout. Design time, research and testing would be the same as for any "from the ground up," new aircraft in the BoX series.

[EAF19_Marsh]

On 5/10/2019 at 11:39 AM, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

No, the two aircraft have very little in common other than some powerplants and general layout. Design time, research and testing would be the same as for any "from the ground up," new aircraft in the BoX series.

 

Also, Jason would have to return to London and be forced to pay off his bar tabs.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

25 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

 

Also, Jason would have to return to London and be forced to pay off his bar tabs.

 

Another obvious obstacle!