What planes will be released in the next 2 months?

[-332FG-Hank_DG]

Hey everyone, I was just wondering if anybody has any ideas on what planes will be released in the next two months. Speculations etc.

[angus26]

I would assume the p-47 and maybe the fw d-9. Seeing as how we got great pictures of the p-47 and all, I’d assume it’s the next on the line. 

[Finkeren]

Most likely the P-47, probably the Fw 190 Dora, probably another set of FC planes. Maybe the Po-2 and 1 or 2 new tanks for TC. That’s the absolute max I see for the coming 2-3 months. I don’t see any maps being ready for at least 4 - 5 months. 

 

As to which tanks and FC planes, it’s anyone’s guess. Logical pairs might be T-34 + PzKw IV and Sopwith Camel + Fokker D. VII.

[ShamrockOneFive]

As everyone else has said, it's a bit tough guessing right now because we don't have the same kind of schedule that we had with Battle of Kuban but it looks like the P-47 (as others have already said) is in the process of being implemented in engine which makes it a likely next candidate. Previous dev updates have also mentioned that the Po-2 may arrive sometime in the fall.

 

Also probably tanks and Flying Circus aircraft are due. We haven't seen any beyond the two that have been released for each title so far... So we'll have to wait and see.

Edited August 4, 2018 by ShamrockOneFive

[Gambit21]

Jug apparently, but "next 2 months" is not guaranteed.

The P-47 is a simple modeling job (external model) relatively speaking, so it was always a good bet that it would come sooner rather than later.

The Mustang on the other hand is a nightmare of an external model ( I speak from authority on that one - took me 8 months on mine) so many subtle compound

shapes etc. The Jug is a tube with wings coming out of it - but cockpits always take tons of time.

 

In any case - can't wait to get my hands on it!

 

Edited August 4, 2018 by Gambit21

[danielprates]

3 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Jug apparently, but "next 2 months" is not guaranteed.

The P-47 is a simple modeling job (external model) relatively speaking, so it was always a good bet that it would come sooner rather than later.

The Mustang on the other hand is a nightmare of an external model ( I speak from authority on that one - took me 8 months on mine) so many subtle compound

shapes etc. The Jug is a tube with wings coming out of it - but cockpits always take tons of time.

 

In any case - can't wait to get my hands on it!

 

 

I am very curious about this! Since I know nothing of the matter. What makes modelling the p51 that much harder than the p47? The "figure" is more varied?

Edited August 5, 2018 by danielprates

[Field-Ops]

The P51 has a lot more curves in areas that you have to get all the angles right. Wings are not traditional shapes, air intake has a lot of geometry to it, canopy angle is a bit awkward. If you've ever 3D modeled you'll know just by looking between the P51 and P47 just how much more attention to detail you have to be to get the p51 right. Not to say the P47 is a cakewalk, but it is a much more general shape like Gambit stated. 

 

But yea, based on what info we got so far it should be P47-D28, then Fw-190D, Po-2 in there somewhere between or after. No info on the next FC planes, no info on the next TC vehicles. 

[sevenless]

I guess P47 in August, Fw190-D9 in September and PO-2 in Oktober.

 

 

 

 

[-TBC-AeroAce]

3 minutes ago, sevenless said:

I guess P47 in August, Fw190-D9 in September and PO-2 in Oktober.

 

 

 

 

 

Kinda does not make sense that you would not the PO2 last as that was the first craft we saw in flying and rendered condition way before the Jug. I think we can be sure it will be one of these next though.

Edited August 5, 2018 by AeroAce

[sevenless]

2 minutes ago, AeroAce said:

 

Kinda does not make sense that you would not the PO2 last as that was the first craft we saw in flying and rendered condition way before the Jug.

 

See DD 196:

 

Quote: "The second aircraft is in development and will be ready this Autumn - Po-2VS Collector Plane, the legendary multipurpose (recon, liaison, ambulance, night bomber, psychological warfare) plane of the Eastern front that will have higher fidelity (4K) textures by default." 

 

[-TBC-AeroAce]

@sevenless Ok cool I did not notice the Autumn bit.

Edited August 5, 2018 by AeroAce

[ShamrockOneFive]

1 hour ago, AeroAce said:

@sevenless Ok cool I did not notice the Autumn bit.

 

It's probably going to take longer because the team building it is not 1CGS but a third party contractor. I'm sure the process is going to be slower. It may also have to do with the "bottleneck" that is the flight model development which I think has to go through one person and who may be building flight model parameters on aircraft in a specific order regardless of which one looks more ready to us.

[Dakpilot]

Also the 'possibility' that new mission types maybe released along with Po-2 like Ju-52, and inclusion in career? (maybe a long shot ?) 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

[Gambit21]

19 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

I am very curious about this! Since I know nothing of the matter. What makes modelling the p51 that much harder than the p47? The "figure" is more varied?

 

Field Ops basically nailed it.

The Mustang has many compound curves, some of them very subtle, like the slight expansion/squaring of the nose/cowling toward the prop, the way the leading edge of the wing interfaces with the fuselage and the gear doors, the curves on the scoop intersects with the fuselage, the wing fairing. I spent weeks and weeks studying that thing, even going to the air museum and getting up close, crawling underneath, taking photos etc. It took all my modeling chops to pull it off. It was for a left side/isometric render for the Museum of Flight, and was being scrutinized by curators, so I had to be dead-nuts on.

Even then, I made one small mistake which only I noticed.

 

I've done the P-51D,  T-28 Trojan, F6F-5 Hellcat and the Zero.

The Mustang was by far the most challenging. The Jug would almost be a rest (external model, not cockpit) compared to any of those.

Cockpits on anything are a PITA and will always be the hold up from a modeling perspective.

Flight modeling and LoD's, are the real time suck.

[angus26]

41 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

I've done the P-51D,  T-28 Trojan, F6F-5 Hellcat and the Zero.

Which was the easiest you have done? 

[JonRedcorn]

2 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

 

Field Ops basically nailed it.

The Mustang has many compound curves, some of them very subtle, like the slight expansion/squaring of the nose/cowling toward the prop, the way the leading edge of the wing interfaces with the fuselage and the gear doors, the curves on the scoop intersects with the fuselage, the wing fairing. I spent weeks and weeks studying that thing, even going to the air museum and getting up close, crawling underneath, taking photos etc. It took all my modeling chops to pull it off. It was for a left side/isometric render for the Museum of Flight, and was being scrutinized by curators, so I had to be dead-nuts on.

Even then, I made one small mistake which only I noticed.

 

I've done the P-51D,  T-28 Trojan, F6F-5 Hellcat and the Zero.

The Mustang was by far the most challenging. The Jug would almost be a rest (external model, not cockpit) compared to any of those.

Cockpits on anything are a PITA and will always be the hold up from a modeling perspective.

Flight modeling and LoD's, are the real time suck.

Modeling is 60% of the reason I can't play old flight sims, the plane models are extremely basic.  I dabbled in modeling when I was a kid and it gave me a decent understanding of how hard it is to create the beautiful models we get today in just about all games. It's the reason we don't see mods in the scope we use to. Well that and flight models and whatnot. That being the other 40% of why I don't play old games like 1946. Who am I kidding if 1946 had vr support I'd absolutely be playing it.

[danielprates]

Yup,  it sure has an unique sillouette.

 

 

[ACG_KaiLae]

Engine modeling of the P-47 though will require something totally new, since there's a control to control turbo speed. IRL if you set it wrong you could damage the engine so getting it right is important.

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, angus26 said:

Which was the easiest you have done? 

 

All take many hours of research and modeling, but in relative terms, from a geometry perspective, the Hellcat.

 

[7.GShAP/Silas]

56 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

 

All take many hours of research and modeling, but in relative terms, from a geometry perspective, the Hellcat.

 

 

 

And your favorite?  To model/research/etc. .

[Gambit21]

20 minutes ago, 7.GShAP/Silas said:

 

 

And your favorite?  To model/research/etc. .

 

Zeke I think.

 

[Godspeed]

On 8/5/2018 at 4:26 PM, Dakpilot said:

Also the 'possibility' that new mission types maybe released along with Po-2 like Ju-52, and inclusion in career? (maybe a long shot ?) 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

 

 

I hope they bring back the old Ju-52 ones too i think they are still missing?

Paratroop & Supply Drop.

[Dutchvdm]

1 hour ago, Godspeed said:

 

 

I hope they bring back the old Ju-52 ones too i think they are still missing?

Paratroop & Supply Drop.

 

No paradrop on the eastern front afaik. Supply drop would be nice indeed.

 

Grt Martijn

[Gambit21]

22 hours ago, JonRedcorn said:

Modeling is 60% of the reason I can't play old flight sims, the plane models are extremely basic.  I dabbled in modeling when I was a kid and it gave me a decent understanding of how hard it is to create the beautiful models we get today in just about all games. It's the reason we don't see mods in the scope we use to. Well that and flight models and whatnot. That being the other 40% of why I don't play old games like 1946. Who am I kidding if 1946 had vr support I'd absolutely be playing it.

 

Yeah, we all become jaded and our baseline expectation are re-set every so often.

I remember the old days of flying the original Flight Simulator/WWI sim, and Jet Fighter off of a floppy on my PC Junior.

The landscape was just primary, colored shapes, and the entire map was a grid that you could see the entity off if you climbed just  a bit.

FPS was in the single digits at times...low single digits at that!

 

My brain filled in the details, and I was just fine with it all.

Now I need high-res displacement maps and realistic shadows, etc etc etc etc.

[danielprates]

My first was "spitfire" for the MSX:

 

https://youtu.be/AGcPY3mJu7Q