Mosquito in Bodenplatte?

[Vig]

For some reason I can't explain, I too prefer the look of the Typhoon to the Tempest.

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Why would anyone want a Tiffy when you have a Tempest ? 

 

I see very little to recommend it and while it might have been unusual for the Tempest to be equipped with rockets (RP-3's) it wasn't unheard of. 

 

Tempests didn't use rockets operationally during the war. C'mon, don't go around misinforming people.

[JtD]

If the Typhoon was part of Bodenplatte, I'd have pre-ordered it on the first day.

[Ehret]

40 minutes ago, Vig said:

For some reason I can't explain, I too prefer the look of the Typhoon to the Tempest.

 

Probably similar to the one why some prefer earlier P-51s (A/B/C - especially the A36) and razor-back P-47s.

 

 

Edited May 7, 2018 by Ehret

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

On 5/3/2018 at 11:10 AM, Gambit21 said:

 

Oh...great.

I'll have to choose between playing Star Citizen 4 and trying out the DCS Mossie. Maybe I'll let them both sit and just go see Avengers 17.

 

 

 

Hope we both make it that long.

 

Do senior living facilities have good enough broadband to install/uninstall DCS 300 times?

[56RAF_Roblex]

3 hours ago, JtD said:

If the Typhoon was part of Bodenplatte, I'd have pre-ordered it on the first day.

 

That was what attracted me to the newly announced DCS-Normandy then somewhere along the line the Typhoon got quietly dropped :-(     For me Normandy brings up images of Mossies  and Typhoons then, later, Tempests yet these are planes DCS did not think important.

[Gambit21]

4 hours ago, Space_Ghost said:

 

Hope we both make it that long.

 

Do senior living facilities have good enough broadband to install/uninstall DCS 300 times?

 

More importantly, will they have an antique dealer on staff so that we can obtain of those vintage desk top computers to player it on.

[ShamrockOneFive]

12 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

Why would anyone want a Tiffy when you have a Tempest ? 

 

I see very little to recommend it and while it might have been unusual for the Tempest to be equipped with rockets (RP-3's) it wasn't unheard of.  If the Tempest had a rocket firing load out I would be very surprised if many people would be tempted to splash out for a Typhoon as well, an aircraft that essentially only offers much of the same but in a lower performing and less reliable package than it's bigger, nastier sibling.

 

Don't get me wrong, the Tempest is my absolute favourite aircraft and I'm very glad we're getting the Tempest V. The Typhoon evolved into THE ground attack weapon for the 2nd TAF and perhaps for the Allies in general. I think in many ways it had this reputation before the P-47 and carried it throughout 1944 and 1945. Large numbers of squadrons were equipped with the Typhoon and they provided most of the close air support. If you were a Commonwealth soldier on the ground in 1944 or 1945 and you called in air support... it would likely be a Typhoon that showed up.

 

I'd definitely like to see it.

 

Can we make a case for it as a Collector Plane? That's harder for me. I don't know if everyone will go for it. I suspect if sales are the motive then it will be the Spitfire XIV that may take its place and not the Mosquito (rare but still present on the front) or Typhoon (extremely common on the front, perhaps not as popular).

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

Can we make a case for it as a Collector Plane? That's harder for me. I don't know if everyone will go for it. I suspect if sales are the motive then it will be the Spitfire XIV that may take its place and not the Mosquito (rare but still present on the front) or Typhoon (extremely common on the front, perhaps not as popular).

 

I think we'll see all 3 at some point. They are too iconic and important planes for the RAF for them to not be modeled.

[ShamrockOneFive]

48 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

I think we'll see all 3 at some point. They are too iconic and important planes for the RAF for them to not be modeled.

 

That would be ideal!

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

2 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

Can we make a case for it as a Collector Plane? That's harder for me.

 

Although I'd love to see the Typhoon, I agree that it doesn't fit as a typical Collector Plane. They always fall into the following categories:

1. Refinement of existing type, e.g. Yak-1B, La-5FN, Bf 109 G-6
2. Radical departure from standard planes, e.g. Spitfire, Hs 129, Ju 52

In terms of sales, this probably makes sense. The Typhoon doesn't fit either category. If this pattern is to continue, I'd be less surprised to see a Spitfire XIV or Mosquito. 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Mitthrawnuruodo

[ShamrockOneFive]

22 minutes ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

 

Although I'd love to see the Typhoon, I agree that it doesn't fit as a typical Collector Plane. They always fall into the following categories:

1. Refinement of existing type, e.g. Yak-1B, La-5FN, Bf 109 G-6
2. Radical departure from standard planes, e.g. Spitfire, Hs 129, Ju 52

In terms of sales, this probably makes sense. The Typhoon doesn't fit either category. If this pattern is to continue, I'd be less surprised to see a Spitfire XIV or Mosquito. 

 

Refinement of existing type? You mean from a historical perspective or from a developers perspective? The Typhoon is so close to the Tempest that some early Tempests had most of their fuselages literally pulled from the Typhoon production line. Modeling a Typhoon would be fairly easy compared to doing something all new.

[No.85_Camm]

As I recall (I may be wrong nut), the main difference between the Typhoon and the Tempest were the wings.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

1 hour ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

 

Refinement of existing type? You mean from a historical perspective or from a developers perspective? The Typhoon is so close to the Tempest that some early Tempests had most of their fuselages literally pulled from the Typhoon production line. Modeling a Typhoon would be fairly easy compared to doing something all new.

Historical refinement, usually translating into a slight in-game advantage. The Yak-1B, La-5FN, and Bf 109 G-6 enticed players to make a purchase by offering small improvements over similar existing Great Battles types (Yak-1, La-5, G-4).  

 

With the Typhoon, it's the opposite situation; the Tempest is the improved derivative of the Typhoon. Therefore, some players would perceive the Typhoon as the weaker type. I imagine that sales could suffer.

 

The Spitfire XIV and Mosquito present no such problems because the XIV provides performance increases over the IX and the Mosquito is entirely unique. 

[Field-Ops]

1 minute ago, Mitthrawnuruodo said:

Historical refinement, usually translating into a slight in-game advantage. The Yak-1B, La-5FN, and Bf 109 G-6 enticed players to make a purchase by offering small improvements over similar existing Great Battles types (Yak-1, La-5, G-4).  

 

With the Typhoon, it's the opposite situation; the Tempest is the improved derivative of the Typhoon. Therefore, some players would perceive the Typhoon as the weaker type. I imagine that sales could suffer.

 

The Spitfire XIV and Mosquito present no such problems because the XIV provides performance increases over the IX and the Mosquito is entirely unique. 

If they treat the Tempest as they should and not give it rocket rails then the Typhoon would hold real value as it offers something different. My opinion on it being a Bodenplatte collector isnt so high however. Id much rather see it being in the backbone of a whole new expansion in the West.

[HagarTheHorrible]

Don't get me wrong, the Typhoon is an iconic aircraft, one of my favorites, and if there was a mid war, D day, package then it would be silly not to include it as a core combatant.  

 

Bodenplatte  is a whole different ball game and the combat  environment will be very much less healthy for mid war relics, or end of war, second division, clingons.  If the air combat ,in the West, had been more demanding then it is difficult to think that older types wouldn't have been retired to less dangerous theaters and more capable, younger sibling,  aircraft used instead..  Suggesting the inclusion of a second rater (why don't we have a Hurricane 2 c for that matter)  as an add on collectors plane for a demanding purely late war environment is just "plane" daft,. Especially when we have the fabulous and far more reliable Tempest.

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Don't get me wrong, the Typhoon is an iconic aircraft, one of my favorites, and if there was a mid war, D day, package then it would be silly not to include it as a core combatant.  

 

Bodenplatte  is a whole different ball game and the combat  environment will be very much less healthy for mid war relics, or end of war, second division, clingons.  If the air combat ,in the West, had been more demanding then it is difficult to think that older types wouldn't have been retired to less dangerous theaters and more capable, younger sibling,  aircraft used instead..  Suggesting the inclusion of a second rater (why don't we have a Hurricane 2 c for that matter)  as an add on collectors plane for a demanding purely late war environment is just "plane" daft,. Especially when we have the fabulous and far more reliable Tempest.

 

By that logic, about half of the Soviet planes we have shouldn't be in the game. The plane was there in huge numbers and had a large impact wherever it flew, so of course people want to fly it.

Edited May 8, 2018 by LukeFF

[BOO]

If they stick rockets on the Tempest they may as well give us a series of skins with Japanese cartoon characters on them. I really hope they don't fudge it into a Tiffpest. Id sooner be without the full GA capability and (if I'm honest) be a pestering little thorn in the side of the devs until the Tiffy appears.  

 

In its absence we are still left without an important aircraft of the period that played an important role right through it though. Without it a good chunk of potentially interesting gameplay recreating later war 2nd TAF missions is left to substitutes. There's a lot more to enjoying this sim than just strapping on the best performing aircraft you can. In fact people seem to like being the underdog in sims. And people can argue about the myths and legends surrounding the types effectiveness till the cows come home, the Tiffy was there and the tiffy was a primary GA weapon for the British contingent of the 2nd TAF.

 

In the current planeset if you want to ground pound with an meaningful historic base, you'll need to swap "s" for "z" in a lot of your words .......... or take a spit (truly a second rater in that role).

 

Personally ive never bought a collectors plane for any perceived advantage.  Dev support is the main consideration for me with the aircraft secondary. But a close secondary. I didn't buy the 109G6 for its cannon- I bought it because its a G6 and seeing the lumps and bumps from the pit pleases me. Seeing the extended cannon sleeves on the tiffy would please me.  

 

All this said, and with timescales and deadlines I am still very happy with what is proposed for BoBp. I just hope the Tiffy and the Mossy make it in at some point and the Tiffy isn't just regarded as a lesser Tempest. 

Edited May 8, 2018 by BOO

[MiloMorai]

Recommended reading

 

 

[blitze]

12 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

Don't get me wrong, the Typhoon is an iconic aircraft, one of my favorites, and if there was a mid war, D day, package then it would be silly not to include it as a core combatant.  

 

Bodenplatte  is a whole different ball game and the combat  environment will be very much less healthy for mid war relics, or end of war, second division, clingons.  If the air combat ,in the West, had been more demanding then it is difficult to think that older types wouldn't have been retired to less dangerous theaters and more capable, younger sibling,  aircraft used instead..  Suggesting the inclusion of a second rater (why don't we have a Hurricane 2 c for that matter)  as an add on collectors plane for a demanding purely late war environment is just "plane" daft,. Especially when we have the fabulous and far more reliable Tempest.

 

I thought the Typhoon and Tempest were different beasts.  Typhoon being more suited to Mid to Low altitude and Ground Attack whereas the Tempest with modifications applied to the Typhoon design was more of a higher alt fighter.  Something to do with the differences in the Wing among other things.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

16 minutes ago, blitze said:

 

I thought the Typhoon and Tempest were different beasts.  Typhoon being more suited to Mid to Low altitude and Ground Attack whereas the Tempest with modifications applied to the Typhoon design was more of a higher alt fighter.  Something to do with the differences in the Wing among other things.

No both were low-mid alt low altitude fighters, just that Tempest was much better at it while Typhoon was relegated to ground attack.

[blitze]

Thought the Tempest had it's wing redesigned and the design was similar to the Spitfire due to the guy who did it (did both).  It was a much thinner wing as well to the Typhoon.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

7 minutes ago, blitze said:

Thought the Tempest had it's wing redesigned and the design was similar to the Spitfire due to the guy who did it (did both).  It was a much thinner wing as well to the Typhoon.

And what primarily drives an aircraft performance at altitude is its engine, both used the Sabre IIA and in later production IIB

[blitze]

2 minutes ago, RoflSeal said:

And what primarily drives an aircraft performance at altitude is its engine, both used the Sabre IIA and in later production IIB

 

Engines can be tuned for different alt performance.  Also performance of an aircraft is not solely based on just the engine.  Flight surface designs count for a lot too as do many other things.

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

5 minutes ago, blitze said:

 

Engines can be tuned for different alt performance.  Also performance of an aircraft is not solely based on just the engine.  Flight surface designs count for a lot too as do many other things.

If it is tuned for different alt performance it becomes classed as a different engine, e.g. DB605A(S), V-1650-3/7 which are basically the same engine with different supercharger. V-1650 was offered with conversion kits to convert the engine if required according to the Mustang manual. Typhoon anyway has both a larger wingspan and wing area then Tempest. Tempest had laminar flow wing, which along with the smaller wing dimensions made the aircraft significantly faster.

Edited May 8, 2018 by RoflSeal

[blitze]

" This thin wing could not contain a comparable quantity of fuel to that housed by the Typhoon's wing so a large fuselage tank had to be adopted. This necessitated the introduction of an additional fuselage bay, increasing the overall length by twenty-one inches forward of the c.g. This added length found its inevitable compensation after initial prototype trials in a larger fin and tailplane. The wing area was also increased and an elliptical platform was adopted, presenting a chord sufficient to permit the four Hispano 20 mm cannon to be almost completely buried in the wing. "

 

http://www.aviation-history.com/hawker/typhoon.html

 

Carried less fuel in the Wing to Typhoon but more in the fuselage giving it an extra 200km range over the typhoon.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Alt performance is a function of lift, weight, power and drag. 

 

The must be enough power to overcome drag at the speed that is required to generate enough lift to equal the weight. Hence at the design stage no one thing is more important. 

 

Once an airframe is designed and in production on the other hand, the only thing one can do to get better alt performance is genrally increase engine power. 

[HagarTheHorrible]

What would a Typhoon add that the Tempest doesn't realistically (in the sim) offer other than just being able to park it in the hanger ?

 

The only palpable difference that I can really see is the RP-3 rockets.  For most targets in Il2 the 20mm canon or the two 1000 lb'rs will be more than adequate while, if post combat analysis is anything to go by, and the dev's model the rockets accurately then it's going to offer a very poor return for effort expended (4% by some accounts).  Typhoons did a great job in Europe, apparently not so much as a Tank buster but by harassing and demoralizing the enemy, I suspect the 3D Sprites in Il2 really don't give a sh*t whether they are bombed once or a thousand times they aren't going to lose any sleep worrying about rocket firing Tiffies.

 

That said, if the Dev's do manage to make a workable combined arms with the "Tank Crew" expansion then the Tiffy will be way mega, hunting down human crewed tanks, it would be pretty awesome.

Edited May 8, 2018 by HagarTheHorrible

[=362nd_FS=RoflSeal]

15 minutes ago, AeroAce said:

Alt performance is a function of lift, weight, power and drag. 

 

The must be enough power to overcome drag at the speed that is required to generate enough lift to equal the weight. Hence at the design stage no one thing is more important. 

 

Once an airframe is designed and in production on the other hand, the only thing one can do to get better alt performance is genrally increase engine power. 

The difference in critical altitude between the Tempest and Typhoon with the Sabre IIA at +9lbs in MS gear is 600ft, (5,400 vs 6,100) thanks to the faster Tempest allowing more ram into the air intake, thus keeping higher boost pressure at slightly higher altitude. Now change a DB-605A with an AS and critical altitude for WEP goes from 5,700m to 8,000m, making a Bf-109G with powered by the AS engine a much better high altitude fighter

Edited May 8, 2018 by RoflSeal

[-=PHX=-SuperEtendard]

Would you think the Fw 190 A-8 and Bf 109 G-14 have nothing to add in light of the Fw 190 D-9 and Bf 109 K-4? Their case is quite similar to the Typhoon/Tempest.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

27 minutes ago, -=PHX=-SuperEtendard said:

Would you think the Fw 190 A-8 and Bf 109 G-14 have nothing to add in light of the Fw 190 D-9 and Bf 109 K-4? Their case is quite similar to the Typhoon/Tempest.

The difference is that those are Standard Edition planes. It would be questionable (from a business perspective) to sell the G-14 as a Collector Plane for $19.99. Many players wouldn't be interested because they'd already have the enhanced K-4. 

 

Of course, most enthusiasts on the forum don't think like that. We'll buy other variants because they're interesting thanks to their differences, even if they're not "better" or "unique". However, developers do have to consider the mindset of the average player that won't hand over $19.99 without additional convincing. It's quite likely that this kind of reasoning is used to find feasible Collector Plane candidates. 

[MiloMorai]

1 hour ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

For most targets in Il2 the 20mm canon or the two 1000 lb'rs will be more than adequate while, if post combat analysis is anything to go by, and the dev's model the rockets accurately then it's going to offer a very poor return for effort expended (4% by some accounts).

 

That 4 % was under test conditions. That is no one was shooting at the a/c.

[Gambit21]

Yeah rockets look cool and are fun to fire, but efficacy sucks.

 

[Bladebender]

The Tempest was supposed to replace the Typhoon but never really got the chance to be use for the same task.

After D-day it's high speed and firepower meant it was reassigned as an interceptor, hunting down Me262s and V1 Doodlebugs.

 

The result being that the Typhoon was kept in service for longer than intended, remaining as the primary British single engined ground attack and interdiction aircraft of the Europrean theatre.

 

Look up RB-396 for info on a restoration project.....

 

 

[ShamrockOneFive]

5 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

What would a Typhoon add that the Tempest doesn't realistically (in the sim) offer other than just being able to park it in the hanger ?

 

The only palpable difference that I can really see is the RP-3 rockets.  For most targets in Il2 the 20mm canon or the two 1000 lb'rs will be more than adequate while, if post combat analysis is anything to go by, and the dev's model the rockets accurately then it's going to offer a very poor return for effort expended (4% by some accounts).  Typhoons did a great job in Europe, apparently not so much as a Tank buster but by harassing and demoralizing the enemy, I suspect the 3D Sprites in Il2 really don't give a sh*t whether they are bombed once or a thousand times they aren't going to lose any sleep worrying about rocket firing Tiffies.

 

That said, if the Dev's do manage to make a workable combined arms with the "Tank Crew" expansion then the Tiffy will be way mega, hunting down human crewed tanks, it would be pretty awesome.

 

They are different aircraft to be sure. Having the Typhoon when we have the Tempest is nearly the same as having the I-16 because we have Yak-1. Far from being a rare or oversaturated type, the Typhoon has lots of charm, character, and fundamentally was used for different roles than the Tempests were. Both can do the same tasks, have similar methods of employment so I can see the argument against but it would be a very interesting type to have.

 

I've argued for more Bf109s for the most part (although the G-10 I'm a bit stuck on) and I think I can argue that the Typhoon is sufficiently different and widely used as to warrant being considered. I'm not sure if we'll ever see the Tiffie but I can hope.

[BladeMeister]

On 5/3/2018 at 12:00 PM, Custard said:

 

At their glacial pace of development BoX will have gone to the Pacific and come back to the West before their 262 is released, let alone the Mosquito.

Completely true and they haven't even produced the P47 yet.  I am owed both and have basically given up on them until maybe I build my next rig with enough horsepower to actual use  DCS again.  I am looking at BOBP, CLOD 5.0 and WOTR as my areas of concentration as they become available. I am really just chomping at the bit for the P38 Lightning, but the Mosi would definitely be well received by me!

 

S!Blade<><

Edited May 9, 2018 by BladeMeister

[Taxman]

7 minutes ago, BladeMeister said:

Completely true and they haven't even produced the P47 yet.  I am owed both and have basically given up on them until maybe I build my next rig with enough horsepower to actual use  DCS again.  I am looking at BOBP, CLOD 5.0 and WOTR as my areas of concentration as they become available. I am really just chomping at the bit for the P38 Lightning.

 

S!Blade<><

Same here, and I will be flying a P47 and 262 and I also get a P38 in BOB and must likely be in the Pacific and back again before DCS even releases the 47 or 262.  Oh yea for the 38

[[GDKC]ghostdog688]

Sorry to raise this forum from the depths, but just wanted to add my two cents in, having just found such an interest in the mosquito.

my great-grandfather was part of a two man crewed mosquito during World War Two. He was killed during a night raid on an airfield near Bonn. 

I’ve always been an aircraft enthusiast but ever since I learned this,  I’ve desperately wanted to fly one of these aircrafts in sim. 

Please, developers, look into getting an example of one of these aircraft flying in our sim - they served on station during Bodenplatte so there is historical precedent and a reason for them to have been in theatre.

id happily take it as a collectors plane.

 

many kind regards.

Edited July 12, 2019 by UOAFghostdog688

[Sublime]

On 5/3/2018 at 11:51 AM, 56RAF_Roblex said:

DCS has just confirmed they are going to do one.  That is quite irritating for me as I wanted to wash my hands of the whole DCS WW2 debacle but now I may have to go back.

Oh man I heard that.

Assets pack.  Normandy map.  Then more planes cuz I only have the P51.. Smh.  No not doing it.  Unless they really add a lot more AND they HAVE to do sometbing about damage modelling especially with .50s

And the radios sound way to modern. 

Dont get me wrong I love DCS but

[[GDKC]ghostdog688]

If I had to I’d buy it for DCS but I’m in the same boat as you - I’d prefer the aircraft in a proper WW2 sim with an environment that makes sense!

Edited July 12, 2019 by UOAFghostdog688