Is this game going to include also British and American planes?

[FlatSpinMan]

Lol@ Venturi.

[SYN_Ricky]

The history of this theater suggests the lend-lease program was expressly required. When the vvs realizes all of their new fighters were being out-performed or out classed by the Luftwaffe opponents, aircraft like the p40, p39, hurricane and some early versions of the spitfire were needed.

 

There have already been polls about this subject, I wouldn't worry about it

 

These guys seem to know what they are doing. And the improvements, even without a functioning trim tab to the fm's are really impressive. I enjoy flying the lagg.

The Russians were quite disappointed with the Hurricane and the Siptfire. They much preferred the P-39 and, at a lesser degree, the P-40.

[Obelix]

P-39 was considered as "luxuous" by soviet pilots because It have a heater for the pilot....

[LukeFF]

The Russians were quite disappointed with the Hurricane and the Siptfire. They much preferred the P-39 and, at a lesser degree, the P-40.

 

Indeed. One Soviet pilot described the Hurricane in Black Cross / Red Star as a plane that was (paraphrased) "a good plane for sightseeing, but we had to fly the plane in much different circumstances."

 

EDIT: here's the exact quote: "It was an excellent aircraft for tourist flights above a picturesque country. But unfortunately we were forced to appraise it from another position."

 

-Mayor Georgiy Zimin, CO 485 IAP.

Edited February 19, 2014 by LukeFF

[Finkeren]

I have an old action comic at home about a British pilot serving as an instructor to VVS pilots on Hurricanes, which are shown as both faster and more maneuverable than the Yak-9.

 

I rolfmao'ed for 5 minutes straight.

 

The comic also featured a squadron of female pilots flying IL-2, who scare off a squad of Bf 109, and where it is claimed that, "every single girl in the squadron is an ace (!)

[Cybermat47]

I have an old action comic at home about a British pilot serving as an instructor to VVS pilots on Hurricanes, which are shown as both faster and more maneuverable than the Yak-9.

I rolfmao'ed for 5 minutes straight.

The comic also featured a squadron of female pilots flying IL-2, who scare off a squad of Bf 109, and where it is claimed that, "every single girl in the squadron is an ace (!)

 

At least Commando Comics, while very outlandish, don't make me ROLFMAO. Well, that one where people from the future possess soldiers from history was a bit weird..

[Emgy]

The Russians were quite disappointed with the Hurricane and the Siptfire. They much preferred the P-39 and, at a lesser degree, the P-40.

Problem was when they got LL Spits in 1943, they got used Mk Vb which was a bit outdated at the time. They didn't get Mk IX until 44.

 

Hurri, also mostly used machines, was just outdated as a fighter. But the USSR needed numbers, the Yak factories had their limits so every Hurri helped stem the tide.

Edited February 19, 2014 by Calvamos

[SYN_Ricky]

Problem was when they got LL Spits in 1943, they got used Mk Vb which was a bit outdated at the time. They didn't get Mk IX until 44.

 

Hurri, also mostly used machines, was just outdated as a fighter. But the USSR needed numbers, the Yak factories had their limits so every Hurri helped stem the tide.

True that. The Russians had to make good with everything they were given, they didn't have the choice.

The RAF turned both the P-38 (the ones they were proposed didn't have superchargers) and P-39 down for it's own use because they didn't meet their criteria, the VVS didn't have the luxury of choice.

[Panzerlang]

While I appreciate and will fly BoS till my equipment falls apart and my eyes go dim, I simply don't understand this position AT ALL.  It totally ignores the state of the art in code and hardware.  Yes, the P-51 was covered very, very well in Chuck Yeager's Air Combat.  So... did that experience satisfy you for 20 YEARS???  I hope that statement was being facetious. 

 

There is no comparison at all with the experience of simulated flight over 8 years ago with Pacific Fighters and what would be achievable today with the BoS engine.  Your statement above would only make sense if there were other flight sims available today that offered state of the art combat in the Pacific, or over France covering D-Day, or any other 'popular' theater. 

 

We need to face facts... the sim genre is as niche as it gets today.  IL2 is NOT some niche player offering an experience the other 'Big' sims aren't offering... there ARE NO OTHER SIMS.  And yes, even though I still have the 5 1/4 inch floppies for CYAC (I keep a lot of old kit in a display case... my original Sinclair ZX-81 I got as a child still draws comments), it's a lot less silly to compare to it the original IL2 engine, reaching it's nadir in the HSFX mod for 1946.  Play BoS for a few hours, then switch over to 1946.  You're not even in the same ballpark.  You simply can't compare the experiences.

 

The op's question is not a bad one at all.  We need to appreciate (and financially support!!) what the Devs are doing right now with BoS, but wondering out loud if we'll get to dive down on an 8th AF bomber stream in an A9 over Germany while covering P-51s try and stop us is hardly out of line.  It's akin to mocking folks who's favorite ride is a Spit, or Pony or Dora, while telling them they've never even heard of your favorite.  Pure elitism, and it'll kill us in the end.  Starving artists can write great poetry only because pen and paper are cheap.  Flight sim development most certainly is not. 

 

What he said ^. If the devs want to score the big dollars they need to do a major theatre that appeals directly to the western allied market, such as the 1943~1944 bombing of the Reich or Pacific battles.

[Emgy]

* reply to Ricky

luckily for them, P-39 was perfect for them! And Bell even did refine and develop it based on VVS feedback. (They did run the engines way beyond safe regimes, have read memoirs say the P-40 engines could last 5-6 sorties in soviet squadrons.)

 

** when I said LL Hurris were mostly used, just referred to initial deliveries in 41. Not sure about later deliveries. 

Edited February 19, 2014 by Calvamos

[=38=Tatarenko]

I think Sicily/ southern Italy is an underappreciated market and offers a lot. German, Italy, RAF (+Com), USA, Brazil etc.

 

Also a great plane list - Messers, Macchi, Fw190, Mustang, Spits, Jugs, Boston, Mitchell etc.

 

Anyway, that would be my preference for something new. Steinhoff and Duncan Smith as good primary sources.

[Frequent_Flyer]

In the grand scheme of things even though most Europeans think of the airwar in WW2 being BoB and possibly the allies bombing the crap out of the Germans from the West, in reality that part was an apetiser for the real war which was in the East of which Stalingrad was the the turning point.

So it's only right that the events of Stalingrad upto the fall of Berlin be highlighted for it's importance.

Most German airmen/soldiers only ever came up against Russians.

Pure propaganda, not only did the Luftwaffe suffer more losses to the Western allies the the lend lease aircraft, in particular the P-39 was the best fighter the VVS could field when it was introduced into VVS service.  The West had a far greater impact on aerial warfare then the Russians.

[=38=Tatarenko]

Can I just clarify to say I would MUCH rather they stayed on the Eastern Front, Kuban and esp Battle of Moscow 41 (though another winter map might be too much). But I'd prefer either of those to heading west. The 1945 Poland/East Germany battles would be awesome too with end of war planes.

[w1tek]

The p39 was not the best in VVS, just compare the characteristics of aircraft- p39, yak-1,7,9,3, la-5, la-7, p-47

[DD_Arthur]

I think Sicily/ southern Italy is an underappreciated market and offers a lot. German, Italy, RAF (+Com), USA, Brazil etc.

 

Also a great plane list - Messers, Macchi, Fw190, Mustang, Spits, Jugs, Boston, Mitchell etc.

 

Anyway, that would be my preference for something new. Steinhoff and Duncan Smith as good primary sources.

 

Operation Husky.  Yes please.  Then we could have the water technology from the RoF channel map and some escort carrier action.

 

I think  Frequent_Flyer is right.  At the time the P39 was the best fighter the Russians could get their hands on.  For a start, they were new - unlike the UK's shipments of clapped out Hurris' and Spits and they were built  and equipped to a much higher standard than soviet made planes.  It doesn't matter how good a theoretical performance a fighter has if its not equipped with a radio, fills the cockpit full of fumes or breaks up in mid-air.

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

We could use an Africa/Med sim though.

 

This would be a great expansion theatre and would require only minor to moderate modification of the preexisting 109 physical/flight models. Field mod those bad-boys over to the G2/trop. and F4/trop. !

Can I just clarify to say I would MUCH rather they stayed on the Eastern Front, Kuban and esp Battle of Moscow 41 (though another winter map might be too much). But I'd prefer either of those to heading west. The 1945 Poland/East Germany battles would be awesome too with end of war planes.

 

Sorry for double posting. This as well - the offensive in to Germany (and the eventual obliteration of the Luftwaffe) would be an interesting period to cover. Shoot, maybe that'd give us an opportunity to see a new and improved Me-262 model.

[Bearcat]

Will thier be other countries planes in this game or is it only russian and german.. like other conflicts of ww2

 

If the sim is successful that is the plan from my understanding. Welcome aboard.

[=69.GIAP=C0NAN]

For my part I would offer that we would all be better served to let them perfect the fundamentals of the sim as much as possible in Stalingrad itself with no attempt to expand for awhile.  I would far rather see a truly exceptional sim on a single map for up to two years than another sim with lots and lots of maps and planes but all based on a baseline sim that is just too flawed to really enjoy. Build it right and then expand.

 

Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.

[w1tek]

Operation Husky.  Yes please.  Then we could have the water technology from the RoF channel map and some escort carrier action.

 

I think  Frequent_Flyer is right.  At the time the P39 was the best fighter the Russians could get their hands on.  For a start, they were new - unlike the UK's shipments of clapped out Hurris' and Spits and they were built  and equipped to a much higher standard than soviet made planes.  It doesn't matter how good a theoretical performance a fighter has if its not equipped with a radio, fills the cockpit full of fumes or breaks up in mid-air.

perhaps you're right, but I think la5 was no worse than p39N, la5 had the better rate of climb than P 39N , Cobra has made ​​a qualitative and was more comfortable and faster than la5, but cobra easily entered into a tailspin...

[LLv44_Mprhead]

I believe that in terms of pure aircraft performance, many soviet fighters were as good as p-39 or better. What gives p-39 an edge is radio equipment and quality of materials used.

[DD_fruitbat]

And pilot workload being reduced due to automated systems.

[Mac_Messer]

The history of this theater suggests the lend-lease program was expressly required. When the vvs realizes all of their new fighters were being out-performed or out classed by the Luftwaffe opponents, aircraft like the p40, p39, hurricane and some early versions of the spitfire were needed.

 

There have already been polls about this subject, I wouldn't worry about it

 

These guys seem to know what they are doing. And the improvements, even without a functioning trim tab to the fm's are really impressive. I enjoy flying the lagg.

Lend lease fighters are a different bunch. Much more versatile but much less durable (well maybe the P40 is a tough airplane). Therefore, a P39 is much less of a specialist plane than say a Yak9. In mp mode LL planes are used mostly as escort cover (besides the A20G which is even better than IL2) and as such they do a good job, though still fairly outclassed by the FW190 and Bf109G2.

So bring em on, LW will happily shoot them down

[Volkoff]

I would rather get a 1943 lend lease version of the P-39, on a 1943 map, instead of a P-39D in 1942. I would like to get a Hurricaine on a Barbarossa, Crimea, or Moscow map. As for BOS, I think that the P-40 would be a good alternative to the LaGG-3, when we are moving out of the I-16 and we don't have Yak-1s or La-5s at our disposal.   MJ 

Edited February 20, 2014 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

[Frequent_Flyer]

perhaps you're right, but I think la5 was no worse than p39N, la5 had the better rate of climb than P 39N , Cobra has made ​​a qualitative and was more comfortable and faster than la5, but cobra easily entered into a tailspin...

I will let history speak, since I have never flown a P-39 or any of the VVS aircraft:

 

5 of Russia's top 10 aces of all time scored the vast majority of their kills in a P-39. The number 2 Ace Alexander Pokryshin . twice hero of the Soviet Union was denied a third such honor because Stalin believed it would glorify an   American made aircraft. Over 120 soviet airmen became an ace flying the P-39 many refused to transition back to Soviet aircraft as did Pokoryshin. Rechkalov, the 4th highest scoring Soviet Ace preferred the P-39 to the Soviet aircraft. The reasons were many and varied, the quality, reliability, firepower, going from no radio to a 2 way radio ( it still confounds me to this day the VVS never put 2 way radio's in all of their fighters)

To pass over the incredible contribution the P-39 made to the VVS, is simple an attempt  to rewrite history, as Stalin did.

[Frequent_Flyer]

Lend lease fighters are a different bunch. Much more versatile but much less durable (well maybe the P40 is a tough airplane). Therefore, a P39 is much less of a specialist plane than say a Yak9. In mp mode LL planes are used mostly as escort cover (besides the A20G which is even better than IL2) and as such they do a good job, though still fairly outclassed by the FW190 and Bf109G2.

So bring em on, LW will happily shoot them down

You are a bit misinformed, the P-40 could out turn any LW or VVS aircraft and was treated like the Americans treated the Zero, don't turn fight, low and slow was a no go. As far as durabilitythe VVS aircraft compared to the P-39 and P-40 were disposable.

[LukeFF]

You are a bit misinformed, the P-40 could out turn any LW or VVS aircraft and was treated like the Americans treated the Zero, don't turn fight, low and slow was a no go. 

 

Indeed. One Luftwaffe pilot was quoted as saying that turning with a P-40 was tantamount to suicide.

[Hunin]

You are a bit misinformed, the P-40 could out turn any LW or VVS aircraft and was treated like the Americans treated the Zero, don't turn fight, low and slow was a no go. As far as durabilitythe VVS aircraft compared to the P-39 and P-40 were disposable.

 

Indeed. One Luftwaffe pilot was quoted as saying that turning with a P-40 was tantamount to suicide.

 

I'm sorry but the facts don't exactly support that notion.

Several Russian designs tested with lower turn times than the P-40 and the wing-, power- and liftloading characteristics between say the Yaks, La-5s, 109s and P-40E support that conclusion aswell.

Even selecting favourable data for comparison, we are talking about 0.5-2.0 seconds of relative advantage over the F-4 and about the same disadvantage to the later Yak-1s.

Taking engine performance ( read power loading ) and pilot ability into the equation I don't think that saying the P-40 ( a greatly underrated aircraft imho ) outturned everything on the eastern front hits the nail on the head.

Edited February 21, 2014 by Hunin

[Volkoff]

I wonder  if the tests used  to compare  the P-40 to other  VVS planes take common VVS modifications to the P-40 into account, such as removing the wing guns? A stripped down VVS P-40 may have rolled faster, accelerated better, turned better, and climbed better than the P-40 would, as when first  delivered to the VVS. Not to say that the stripped down VVS P-40 was necessarily on a par with the Yak-1, in all matters, if any matters, but that it was likely better than the American configured version, in a number of ways.  MJ

Edited February 21, 2014 by =69.GIAP=MIKHA

[LukeFF]

Taking engine performance ( read power loading ) and pilot ability into the equation I don't think that saying the P-40 ( a greatly underrated aircraft imho ) outturned everything on the eastern front hits the nail on the head.

 

I never said that it out-turned Soviet designs - just that Bf 109 pilots were warned to not engage in turn-fighting with P-40s.

[Venturi]

The major limitation to the lend lease aircraft the soviets flew was that there were simply no spare parts or engines to be had, and that the soviets flew them "hot" at all times, burning up the engines whilst doing so. Amateurs talk tactics, professionals discuss logistics.

[Hunin]

I never said that it out-turned Soviet designs - just that Bf 109 pilots were warned to not engage in turn-fighting with P-40s.

 

I took your reply of "indeed" to Frequent Flyer as you indicating agreement with the sentence you quoted. My apologies.

 

As for LHQ discouraging it's pilots from turnfighting - if such a thing occured ( I don't have reason to doubt it at face value ) - I would wager it was in reference to the B/C; variants far less numerous in VSS service but better turners than both the Fs and early LaGGs/Yaks ( Sovjet testing indicates 18 seconds flat for those, around a second faster than early Yaks and slightly slower than the P-39D-2 ).

Edited February 21, 2014 by Hunin

[LukeFF]

The major limitation to the lend lease aircraft the soviets flew was that there were simply no spare parts or engines to be had, and that the soviets flew them "hot" at all times, burning up the engines whilst doing so. 

 

What's the source for that? I highly doubt the Allies would have sent all that military aid without any spare parts whatsoever. 

[Venturi]

It's my experience that those who question without searching for the evidence themselves are highly unlikely to be convinced, no matter the quality or volume of evidence gathered for them. Regardless,

 

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-40/

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk

 

Etc.

 

What's the source for that? I highly doubt the Allies would have sent all that military aid without any spare parts whatsoever.

[LukeFF]

Here's the quote I was referring to, in regards to the P-40. Page 57, BC/RS Volume 2:

 

As had been noted by the British in North Africa during [1941], the Tomahawk was hopelessly inferior to the Bf 109 F. Nevertheless, a skilled pilot could overcome its inferior speed and climbing performance by utilizing its excellent maneuverability. Kapitan Petr Pilyutov, a 154 IAP ace, stated that the Tomahawk "is able to twist around its own tail. With this plane one can turn in on any Messerschmitt." A German fighter ace once described a turning combat with P-40s as "tantamount to suicide."

 

It's my experience that those who question without searching for the evidence themselves are highly unlikely to be convinced, no matter the quality or volume of evidence gathered for them. Regardless,

http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/english/articles/romanenko/p-40/

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtiss_P-40_Warhawk
 

 

It's my experience that I just came home from work, it's nearly 1am, I'm tired, and so I don't exactly feel like doing an internet search on Lend-Lease supply deliveries right now. 

[Venturi]

By the bye, over 190 combat sorties flown by p40s took place in the skies over Stalingrad, apparently all concluding in aerial combat...

[Frequent_Flyer]

I'm sorry but the facts don't exactly support that notion.

Several Russian designs tested with lower turn times than the P-40 and the wing-, power- and liftloading characteristics between say the Yaks, La-5s, 109s and P-40E support that conclusion aswell.

Even selecting favourable data for comparison, we are talking about 0.5-2.0 seconds of relative advantage over the F-4 and about the same disadvantage to the later Yak-1s.

Taking engine performance ( read power loading ) and pilot ability into the equation I don't think that saying the P-40 ( a greatly underrated aircraft imho ) outturned everything on the eastern front hits the nail on the head.

I will always defer to the pilots, in this case the VVS, who flew the lend lease aircraft( P-40 and P-39) and the Soviet aircraft. Their experience against a common adversary, comparing the two in real live combat . I will never believe a Soviet performance chart, and an aircraft tested by someone not trained to get the most out of that aircraft, is suspect as well. Aerial combat rarely  took place  without one party having an advantage in height, speed or the element of surprise. The Zero and the 109 were very maneuverable at slow speeds, and not good when they had to compete against the much faster US aircraft. The US aircraft routinely out maneuvered the LW and JAF in a dive, neither could keep up with them in speed and maneuverability .  Many 109's became lawn darts when they tried.

[Klabo44]

For my part I would offer that we would all be better served to let them perfect the fundamentals of the sim as much as possible in Stalingrad itself with no attempt to expand for awhile. I would far rather see a truly exceptional sim on a single map for up to two years than another sim with lots and lots of maps and planes but all based on a baseline sim that is just too flawed to really enjoy. Build it right and then expand.

 

Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.

+1

Thank you

[[JG2]R7_Blackadder]

For my part I would offer that we would all be better served to let them perfect the fundamentals of the sim as much as possible in Stalingrad itself with no attempt to expand for awhile.  I would far rather see a truly exceptional sim on a single map for up to two years than another sim with lots and lots of maps and planes but all based on a baseline sim that is just too flawed to really enjoy. Build it right and then expand.

 

Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.Multi-thread. Multi-thread.

 

I'm with you, apart for the 2 yrs. About one year from now I'd like to read about possible expansions from Stalingrad theater and maybe get to Mediterranean, as old IL-2 did with the Eastern Front. Those speaking about commercial reasons for another old-fashoned setting should remember that.

[Capt_Hook]

I'm with you, apart for the 2 yrs. About one year from now I'd like to read about possible expansions from Stalingrad theater and maybe get to Mediterranean, as old IL-2 did with the Eastern Front. Those speaking about commercial reasons for another old-fashoned setting should remember that.

Yeah, a year would be on the extreme end... Six to nine months would be better. I want to see this sim survive, and that means the developers need to eat. Even wildly successful pc titles make most of their sales in the first weeks after release.