Avro Lancaster collector's plane!?

[216th_LuseKofte 3701]

I like a Lancaster sim like the B 17 that once where. Combined with the fsx b17

If I gonna fly a bomber as important as the Lanc 

i want full fidelity. No easy peasy makedo fictional bombaim device. 

I want full mission planning, access to all stations on plane, the lot

nothing witch this brand can provide

[Poochnboo 452]

Oh no.....I'm not getting sucked into THIS conversation, again! Oh wait......I'm here! Dammit, got me again!

[Trooper117 2576]

As much as I love the Lancaster, this is just another useless thread about something we are not going to get.

[fubar_2_niner 31]

A quick question if I may ?

What current aircraft offers nine firing positions ? Asking because there in the keymapping section there are nine firing position options 

 

Best regards.

 

fubar

Edited July 8, 2019 by fubar_2_niner

[Feathered_IV 6953]

On ‎7‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 8:19 PM, fubar_2_niner said:

A quick question if I may ?

What current aircraft offers nine firing positions ? Asking because there in the keymapping section there are nine firing position options 

 

Best regards.

 

fubar

 

T-35 confirmed! 

 

 

[Avimimus 615]

I think that still only has five or six (same as the He-111) :p Same goes for the Felixstowe flyingboat if I recall? Maybe it is a programmer just preparing excess capability (like Il-2 1946 allowing eight engines). It is often nice to have in case requirements change... I'm still frustrated by X-plane only coding for eight engines (I have a 10 engined aircraft partially complete, along with a couple that have even more engines - all based on historical proposals).

[Superflyer 19]

The Collector aircraft being developed and offered should also suit the scenarios and war venues that are 
in or expecitve BOX. The Lancaster would and other 4-Mot would still fit to BOB, but overall, the collector
aircraft should fit. I would rather a TB-3, DB-3 prefer, fits on BOM,BOS, possibly Finnish venue, possibly 
Halchin Gol ......

[Motherbrain 763]

Yes I'd love a Lancaster (or just more bombers in general). No I don't think it should be added for the usual reasons. Resources, cost, optimization, setting etc.

Its a shame the sim has been set up the way it is, but in the end you have to face the music. At least for now...

 

Maybe someday as an AI only plane.

 

 

@BraveSirRobin Strongly disagree with that sentiment. "Yah flight simulators. You sit in a chair, pull on a plastic stick, and pretend to shoot at things, and spend lots of money, so much fun"... I mean c'mon man, lighten up a little 😉 Flying bombers is enjoyable for some people. Particularly in single player campaigns.

Edited October 20, 2019 by Motherbrain

[Avimimus 615]

As we're probably never going to get it... I thought this thread might be as good as any for an appreciation club... and I had to post this somewhere:

 

Anyone else recognised the maneuver being described immediately?

[=gRiJ=Roman- 668]

It would be a nice addition from 1942 to 1945. It fits perfectly in the time frame.

Is it feasible? That is another matter?

But the British deserve to have a bomber of their own too.

Edited September 7, 2020 by =gRiJ=Roman-

[Avimimus 615]

2 hours ago, =gRiJ=Roman- said:

But the British deserve to have a bomber of their own too.

 

We'll have an intruder/fighter-bomber (Mosquito FB.VI) and we'll have an important tactical fighter bomber (Typhoon Mk.I)... so I actually feel like the Commonwealth will be much better represented then in almost all past simulations (Battle of Britain based games excepted - although those usually didn't have allied bombers - at least prior to 'cliffs'). So I'm pretty happy!

 

The addition of the Wellington would add a night-bomber and coastal command aircraft that would be slow enough for the Ju-88C6 to catch. The addition of the Il-4 would give a similar target in the east. However, the Wellington was increasingly relegated to secondary theatres and roles by 1943. The Lancaster would better fit the time frame.

 

Another option would be the Boston III or Boston IV... which would be easy to add given that they are very similar to our current A-20 variant. They would be good complement as part of a 1942 "Operation Jubilee" pack - with the Spit IXc (early), Typhoon (early), Mustang Mk.I (cannon armed P-51), Bf-109F (done), Fw-190A4, Do-217E! That isn't a full plane list... but there are 1942-1943 planes missing from the East which could be added (e.g. Il-4, Fw-189, Bf-110G (late), Ju-87D5) along with a small map.

 

That said, the Boston isn't a particularly British design... so the Wellington or Lancaster would still be attractive. Of course, many of these aircraft could be AI planes. There would be a real benefit to having an AI Lancaster, Wellington or Beaufighter! Part of me also wants a '45 East module first.

 

In any case - I'm pretty happy to have the Mosquito and Typhoon - I don't feel like the Commonwealth is being ignored - which is something we got used to with a lot of previous developers.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Avimimus

[Heliopause 901]

Start with the Manchester. Two engined plane should fit the game at this point 😀

 

 

[Trooper117 2576]

Only a couple of hundred built, had it's production terminated a year later due to instability and engine unreliability... it was grounded twice during that time because of those problems.

Nah, the dev's aren't going to waste time on this one...

[216th_LuseKofte 3701]

I would love to fly Lanc’s , C 47, B24/17 

But I am no longer sure I wish to do so in this game. 
I would love to have it in FS 2020 or Micropose bomber sim. 
It is the flight and or interaction between crew. Both not very complex in this sim. 
I rather have a mefium bomber like B 26 or a Wellington. Latter will not have a meaningful purpose since well it was basically costal command latewar. 

[SidtheGit 13]

I understand that this is a poll on what is a hypothetical subject. However, I am responding on the basis that IF it were possible to recreate and fly large aircraft in GBS then my vote is No to the Lancaster. I would rather see four engined aircraft like the Halifax and Stirling that could fulfill the roles depicted in the D Day aircraft picture attached. I believe the Halifax in particular as a bomber and glider tug in the same mission would be much more interesting. The Albermarle as a troop carrier and glider tug is also an interesting project, but it's limited use wouldn't be viable perhaps for the GBS developers. I am hoping that the inclusion of gliders is something the developers would consider as their use in Normandy was pivotal in some actions.

Edited September 9, 2020 by SidtheGit

[Avimimus 615]

If do like the idea of pitching the Halifax as a glider tug - although glider operations would only appear for a few days out of a campaign... so modelling them might be hard to justify. It would give us a target for the Ju-88C6 though!

 

The Halifax is similar in importance to the Lancaster. Much as the B-24 was to the B-17. The Lancaster is better known though and there are more preserved examples... so it is easier to see it as not entirely impossible to pitch as a viable product... but in a fair world where everyone had an equally deep knowledge of these two aircraft - I agree that there is no particular reason not to do a Halifax instead of a Lancaster.

 

If I was going to get a flyable glider in the sim - I'd probably prioritise a pre-war German training glider (launched from a hill or by winch)...

 

P.S. The Albemarle is an aircraft I'd completely overlooked in my reading! So thanks for pointing it out!

[BraveSirRobin 2418]

40 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

If I was going to get a flyable glider in the sim - I'd probably prioritise a pre-war German training glider (launched from a hill or by winch)...

 

Instead of a glider that was used in Normandy or during Market Garden?  Not that we’re ever getting gliders, but really?

[Avimimus 615]

32 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Instead of a glider that was used in Normandy or during Market Garden?  Not that we’re ever getting gliders, but really?

 

No cockpit to model... just a stick and peddles... which means it could be made flyable a lot more cheaply. It would also have better forward/downward visibility... and it give the Germans a training aircraft that was built to the tune of about 10,000 examples... so, yes, there are some reasons people would favour a DFS SG 38 Schulgleiter over a troop glider.

[BraveSirRobin 2418]

2 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

No cockpit to model... just a stick and peddles... which means it could be made flyable a lot more cheaply. It would also have better forward/downward visibility... and it give the Germans a training aircraft that was built to the tune of about 10,000 examples... so, yes, there are some reasons people would favour a DFS SG 38 Schulgleiter over a troop glider.

You know that this is a COMBAT flight sim, right?

[Avimimus 615]

44 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

You know that this is a COMBAT flight sim, right?

 

1. Training for combat is part of combat

2. We have recon missions and transport aircraft in the sim. This is a WWII/WWI sim... and recon and transport are a part of that (e.g. The Ju-52 is an important part of telling the story of Stalingrad).

[BraveSirRobin 2418]

Just now, Avimimus said:

 

1. Training for combat is part of combat

2. We have recon missions and transport aircraft in the sim. This is a WWII/WWI sim... and recon and transport are a part of that (e.g. The Ju-52 is an important part of telling the story of Stalingrad).

Training for a combat aircraft that doesn’t exist in the game?  Not sure that makes a lot of sense.  Also, there is no need for training aircraft when we can fly the real deal without any fear of crashing and/or dying.  Training aircraft are only needed to prevent noobs from crashing desperately needed combat aircraft.  That isn’t an issue here.

[DFLion 292]

Recently I made a special 'Dambuster's' mission on the Rheinland map. East of the German towns of Meschede and Winterberg are the three major dam sites with their reservoirs, very well landscaped on the map with all the surrounding hills, rivers, towns and villages. I then downloaded a scenic add on which places the three major dams, the Mohne, Eder and Sorpe at the head of each reservoir.

I then flew a Ju88 over the route of each dam attack made by the Lancaster's. I must say it was very realistic and quite amazing to simulate the attack on each dam and you did feel what those RAF crews must have experienced.

After this experience I would really like to have a flyable Lancaster in the game, not only for the 'Dam Buster mission', the Lancaster was involved in many other missions both daylight and night time during Normandy then onto Belgium,  Holland and Germany. Of course I would like to see the B17 and B24 in the game, particularly the B24 as my father flew one during WWII in the Pacific. Recently one of my father's friends passed away, (he was 98) he was a Lancaster pilot and flew 34 missions over Europe and survived along with his crew. He graphically told me about being hit by flak and attacked by night fighters and surviving. He said the Lancaster was joy to fly and you could trim the aircraft to fly hands off, it was very stable.

DFLion

A pic of a very good Lancaster model on my Microsoft Flight Simulator- hope this will help to wet our appetites?

DFLion

[Missionbug 436]

5 hours ago, DFLion said:

 I then downloaded a scenic add on which places the three major dams, the Mohne, Eder and Sorpe at the head of each reservoir.

 

 

 

 

WOW, has someone actually managed to put together a 3d model for one of the great Battles modules DFLion?

 

I am intrigued, this I have to see, please show us where the link is.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[DD_Crash 201]

On 9/9/2020 at 8:30 AM, SidtheGit said:

I understand that this is a poll on what is a hypothetical subject. However, I am responding on the basis that IF it were possible to recreate and fly large aircraft in GBS then my vote is No to the Lancaster. I would rather see four engined aircraft like the Halifax and Stirling that could fulfill the roles depicted in the D Day aircraft picture attached. I believe the Halifax in particular as a bomber and glider tug in the same mission would be much more interesting. The Albermarle as a troop carrier and glider tug is also an interesting project, but it's limited use wouldn't be viable perhaps for the GBS developers. I am hoping that the inclusion of gliders is something the developers would consider as their use in Normandy was pivotal in some actions.

Sid made a couple of D-Day missions for 1946 HSFX using the flyable German glider mod and it was great fun. I added some Halifax "tugs" to improve the effect. They didnt actually pull the glider as the mission started with the gliders release and it was quite a challenge to land in a small field in the dark.

[Lemsip 601]

On 9/10/2020 at 7:32 PM, Missionbug said:

 

 

WOW, has someone actually managed to put together a 3d model for one of the great Battles modules DFLion?

 

I am intrigued, this I have to see, please show us where the link is.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

 

The dam mod: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/14803-the-groups-sharing-corner/page/9/?tab=comments#comment-950949

[Missionbug 436]

1 hour ago, Lemsip said:

 

The dam mod: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/14803-the-groups-sharing-corner/page/9/?tab=comments#comment-950949

 

 

Thank you very much for that Lemsip, I will take a look at the link.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[VA_SOLIDKREATE 2226]

I think a B-24J-55-CO is entirely possible as well. It has 6 gunners. You can take it down to 4 if they only turn on the nose and upper ventral gunner when necessary. They same can be done with the B-17G-40-BO. With that one the nose gunner would be inactive if the player is using the bomb site ( V key ). Because the nose gunner is also the Bombardier. Waist gunners ca be deactivated until the enemy is abeam.

 

 

[Avimimus 615]

6 minutes ago, VA_SOLIDKREATE said:

I think a B-24J-55-CO is entirely possible as well. It has 6 gunners. You can take it down to 4 if they only turn on the nose and upper ventral gunner when necessary. They same can be done with the B-17G-40-BO. With that one the nose gunner would be inactive if the player is using the bomb site ( V key ). Because the nose gunner is also the Bombardier. Waist gunners ca be deactivated until the enemy is abeam.

 

Formation density is also an issue though... they tended to fly in formations where you'd have 24-36 aircraft all within 0.50 cal range of each other...

[VA_SOLIDKREATE 2226]

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Formation density is also an issue though... they tended to fly in formations where you'd have 24-36 aircraft all within 0.50 cal range of each other...

 

 

Maybe AI we can escort then? Or is that also math heavy for the engine?

[Avimimus 615]

 

Just now, VA_SOLIDKREATE said:

Maybe AI we can escort then? Or is that also math heavy for the engine?

 

I think the gunners are the biggest problem (and it also limits the number of active anti-aircraft guns currently in missions and the ability to add big ships e.g. for the channel dash). Systems modelling might also be an issue based on a comment by Jason. I'm sure they could simplify an AI aircraft, but I'm not sure they want to and there is still the damage model. I think there may be a trade-off between fidelity and quantity in this case. They could probably optimise the gunners - but they could also go the other way and give us more realistic AI gunners that are more complex instead... lots of trade-offs and quite a bit of expense if they have to rewrite the code. Anyway, it is apparently complicated. It would be fascinating if they wrote a development update describing what the challenges are (but that might just be me being a huge nerd). Also, I should add that I wasn't that excited about the idea of a B-17... but when I got into the Fw-190A8 cockpit I suddenly missed them a lot more than I thought... so I'd enjoy them too.

 

Part of the reason why the Lancaster and Halifax are plausible is that they have so few gunners (1-3 gunners) and also flew in looser formations, usually at night (where a mission maker can simulate a large number of aircraft through spawning and despawning them)... and at least a few daytime raids were done with a small number of aircraft.

 

Anyway, there are plenty of twin engined bombers which are historically numerically important and missing (e.g. Wellington, Il-4, Do-217E, Ju-188)... so there is lots they could add while keeping to lower altitude tactical combat and away from the heavy bombers.

[DN308 209]

I would like the Lancaster as much as the other heavies like B-24 and 17

[JG7_X-Man 488]

This topic is mute! If we can't get the B-17 and B-24 because of game limitations, why do we thing we will get the Lancaster?

[ww2fighter20 71]

21 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

This topic is mute! If we can't get the B-17 and B-24 because of game limitations, why do we thing we will get the Lancaster?

Compared to the B24 and B17 it has much less turrets and was flying in much smaller formations, it was also used as an daylight bomber in late 1944/1945 and the devs already received an 3d model along with documentation by Loki_v2 in 2019 (3d model likely needs extra work and more documentation but it's better then starting from scratch), the game engine also can handle 4 engine aircraft (Sikorsky S-22 from Rise of Flight).

 

An mayor problem would be most lancasters where based north of London which we don't have on either the Bodenplatte or the Normandy map, I like to add that this didn't stop aircraft like the Yak9T and La5FN to be created for the game considering neither where operational on Kuban/Stalingrad/Moscow in the battle's timeframe.

[Avimimus 615]

Just saw this for the first time - thought I'd share:

 

[WildWilly 26]

Ok you know that the Lancaster was mainly a nightbomber ... i guesd in notmandy was once a day raid neat cean?  And in fact...if a yes for lsncadtet u have to add noghtfighters an complete different maps  btw i don t like the role lancaster played. If to chose i would take t b17 or b24

[216th_Cat 1052]

'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

[DD_Arthur 2737]

15 hours ago, 216th_Cat said:

'Twas brillig and the slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

 

On 12/7/2020 at 12:08 PM, WildWilly said:

 ... i guesd in notmandy was once a day raid neat cean?  

 

The further off from England the nearer is to France—
Then turn not pale, beloved snail, but come and join the dance.

[CanadaOne 1976]

On 11/12/2020 at 1:54 PM, JG7_X-Man said:

This topic is mute!

 

 

And yet here we speak.

 

On 11/12/2020 at 1:54 PM, JG7_X-Man said:

If we can't get the B-17 and B-24 because of game limitations, why do we thing we will get the Lancaster?

 

We are dreamers by nature. 

[Trooper117 2576]

Jesus... is this still going?

How many more times... (sounds of slapping the back of naughty children's legs)