Jump to content
Missionbug

What compromises to the current aircraft fidelity would you accept to go to the Pacific?

Recommended Posts

Okay, Jason always said his dream was the Pacific and in response many here have supported the title on the basis that we would eventually go there, so we are at a point again where the team needs to/has made future plans for development of the series, when/if to the Pacific and what would you accept to get there?

 

What do I mean by that?

 

Jason has already said the reason to postpone was a technical issue, there are not enough of the relevant documents available to build the aircraft to the fidelity of the current plane set so just how much realism can you as the purchaser of these titles settle for to get to your dream location?

 

How much compromise would the team themselves be prepared to accept?

 

A few pertinent things to consider specifically for the Japanese types but might also apply to all:

 

Translation of relevant documents of that particular period in time, is there anyone out there with the linguistic skills and aviation/engineering knowledge in this modern age to actually do what is available?

 

Are there any  individuals with the interest and time to actually do it to a time and cost basis that would be within the budget allowed for the team?

 

How complete are the documents that do exist and will they actually have the information needed even if translated?

 

Most aircraft of the period that are still preserved airworthy or not in museums or aviation collections the world over are a assembly of many components either found at wreck sites or are from many different variants of the same type made to fit, failing that they have been hand crafted by the very few individuals still with the technical attributes to do so.

 

Thoughts guys please.

 

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.:biggrin:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would happily have the startup sequences for all Japanese aircraft to be subtitled on a best guess basis.  I would also be fine with the D3A and B5N etc having a flight model appropriate to their size, but not necessarily guaranteed in their adherence to details that have already been lost to history.  A bit of extrapolation is fine if they just get on with it.

  • Upvote 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to take into account as far as translations goes is that the Japanese language has changed a lot over time.  Buddhist texts from the time before Shinto became the state religion (12th. Century or so) are almost totally undecipherable by modern Japanese speakers, even the written language from the WW2 period can be difficult for  modern Japanese speakers to understand. 

 

I am totally in agreement with Feathered here.  Some extrapolation will be necessary for aircraft that were not extensively tested by the Allies.  We know a lot about the A6M, and Ki 84 because captured examples were extensively test flown by the USAAF during and after the war.  The Val and Kate, not so much, as they did not pose direct threats to Allied aircraft.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

One thing to take into account as far as translations goes is that the Japanese language has changed a lot over time.  Buddhist texts from the time before Shinto became the state religion (12th. Century or so) are almost totally undecipherable by modern Japanese speakers, even the written language from the WW2 period can be difficult for  modern Japanese speakers to understand. 

 

I am totally in agreement with Feathered here.  Some extrapolation will be necessary for aircraft that were not extensively tested by the Allies.  We know a lot about the A6M, and Ki 84 because captured examples were extensively test flown by the USAAF during and after the war.  The Val and Kate, not so much, as they did not pose direct threats to Allied aircraft.

Engineering and technical Japanese is not likely to have changed much at all.  The Japanese language has always  borrowed liberally from the dominant Western technical languages ( English and German ) to express engineering terms in Katakana script as the Japanese were known for enthusiatically copying and refining Western Engineering concepts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None. The attention to detail is this sim's greatest achievement. Good things come to those who wait.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, pfrances said:

None. The attention to detail is this sim's greatest achievement. Good things come to those who wait.

 

You do realize that means we will never have a Pacific expansion don't you?   There simply is no in depth technical info on many Japanese aircraft from the period, and some of their flight test procedures do not match western standards, in example, their high speed numbers were often not given for all out max power (War Emergency Power) and were taken from either max cruise or what we call "military" power, so the top speeds as reported in much of the current literature are not correct.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi chaps,

 

well, I'm a little bit hesitating here - I do understand that some historical data are definitely lost and therefore it is necessary to have some technical approach in referring to

other similar aeroplane. This wouldn't be a problem for me as long as the assumed flight and damage model isn't biased (heavy bomber having a jet fighter behaviour).

 

The other thing is, I don't believe that all of us here on this forum will be as tolerant and make some compromise. If you read what happens when some planes miss some

options like bubble canopy, other gun/canon configurations and not to mention all those disputes about weapons being too strong or too weak - I do think there will be

a lot of people complaining about accuracy. This will be a balancing act.

 

Cheerio

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the general pickiness of the audience, I don't think much compromise is going to be acceptable. A fudged number here or there where needed wouldn't bother me in the slightest if there's a good reason, but we've all seen the threads where people argue viciously for weeks over minor flight modeling details. The only blessing of the lack of documentation would be the relative scarcity of chart wars (and the subsequent impugning of the other side's sources). 

The other thing that keeps coming up is people saying they have supported the series and bought games so that things would go to the Pacific. The logic is not completely unsound, but now, years later, people are feeling 'cheated' after spending all that money. But there were no actual promises made by the dev team, only the suggestion that more resources and time might make the Pacific more viable. Ultimately, we've all gotten what we've paid for here. Any purchases made not for the actual product, but the hope of future products, can't really be held against anyone, regardless of how things go.

Over on the Dev diary thread there was a full blown panic that a single phrase used by Han ("amused and surprised") surely was a coded message that meant that the dreams of the pacific are dead. People around here seem to be living in the future, casting about for runes or entrails to figure out which plane they'll get to fly next, instead of flying one of the planes we have right now.

For the record I still think there's a good chance we'll see the pacific. 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

You do realize that means we will never have a Pacific expansion don't you?   There simply is no in depth technical info on many Japanese aircraft from the period, and some of their flight test procedures do not match western standards, in example, their high speed numbers were often not given for all out max power (War Emergency Power) and were taken from either max cruise or what we call "military" power, so the top speeds as reported in much of the current literature are not correct.

Nah, you can do it. For a long time we were missing data (or maybe still are, if someone recalls, please correct me) for propeller for 190, so they used other design to get as close as possible. 

Same you could do without sacrificing much of attention to detail. 

 

As for lack of info, depends. Depends on an aircraft. Depends on period. Depends how deep you want to get into it. 

 

Flight procedures vary. Same with testing procedures, though engine reliability testing was very similar to U.S. 150-hour test. And while you dont have WEP, there are still data for economy cruising, max continous and rated power. You can extrapolate overboost. Nothing unusual there too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea how many native speakers they have for researching. Japan sources might be a bit reluctant if they are approached by russian people who still have their Kuril islands. Most planes have been tested by the US during or after the war. I am sure its more difficult then getting data about a russian fighter in russia but not impossible.

 

As for the language. Japanese didn't change more then any other language from the 40s to today. Documents for aircraft wouldn't be written in middle-age-japanese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want no compromises... I even expect a small bottle of saki with my purchase.😀 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Oelmann said:

As for the language. Japanese didn't change more then any other language from the 40s to today.

Not true. Japanese language changed quite a bit and became simplified. Some kanji are not in use since then as well, others are not in use since 1980s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_script_reform 

 

1 hour ago, Thad said:

I even expect a small bottle of saki with my purchase.😀 

In the old il-2 I believe there was as a reward a Sake cup after few successful missions. So ... we might see that again :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a japanese GF at one point. She didn't had any problems reading and understanding old texts at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Oelmann said:

Had a japanese GF at one point. She didn't had any problems reading and understanding old texts at all.

If you're aware, could you say it might be like the difference between modern and old English?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't mind a little guess work, how would we even know anyways? Its not like any other sim has modeled them with any detail even close to what we would probably receive anyways. 

 

I would like to see a late war setting as well because the later Japanese aircraft just look so good. But that is just a dream.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, [CPT]milopugdog said:

If you're aware, could you say it might be like the difference between modern and old English?

 

Old English is literally indecipherable to the modern speaker of English.

Middle English can be better read to some degree.

Edited by Leifr
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where data is missing and presumably unattainable, it is perfectly fine for the devs to fill in the blanks to the best of their ability. In fact, I’d say that’s their job.

  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Finkeren said:

Where data is missing and presumably unattainable, it is perfectly fine for the devs to fill in the blanks to the best of their ability. In fact, I’d say that’s their job.

 

Couldn't have said it better myself. There will certainly be a lot of extrapolation going on during the development of the Pacific Theater. I'm perfectly fine with that.

 

There is a common theme that I'm seeing over and over again in this thread. Something along the lines of...

 

"People will be upset over missing details or inaccuracies, and a lot of people won't be willing to make the compromise"

 

I pose the question: If there is no historical data on something, how will people know whether or not something is accurate, or if something is missing?

 

One final thought: It probably won't be a popular opinion, but I am more than willing to pay a higher price for the pacific theater. I think this not only because it would be justified due to the large amount of new technology the team will have to develop, but because I would rather pay a premium fee if that meant that the devs could afford to do more research and produce a more accurate final product, than pay the normal amount and not allow the devs to produce a higher quality product.

Edited by itsthatguy
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Oelmann said:

 

As for the language. Japanese didn't change more then any other language from the 40s to today. 

 

Not my understanding at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Thad said:

I want no compromises... I even expect a small bottle of saki with my purchase.😀 

 

Well, my friend, if you choose a big bottle of sake, then I'm sure you will be very compromise-friendly after some cups... :drink2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's aircraft fidelity compromises you have to worry about, the game itself isn't ready. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is always going to be compromise.  There isn't often a "perfect source" for aircraft performance.

 

Use the best available, usable, sources available, and go for it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recal Oleg saying that he texts are not written in old or new Japanese.   They are written in another style entirely called Technical Japanese, and there are few people left who can read it.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Planes is just one aspect of a more complex problem. I don't really bother about them. I gratefully accept what I get, as I'm not in the capacity to judge how historically correct they are. As to the rest, gameplay overall, the PTO should offer something novel for me to buy in. The PTO simply cannot be another Stalingrad with slightly different planes, it should be a different combat experience, period.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

I recal Oleg saying that he texts are not written in old or new Japanese.   They are written in another style entirely called Technical Japanese, and there are few people left who can read it.  

 

That was it...thanks for the reminder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sniperton said:

Planes is just one aspect of a more complex problem. I don't really bother about them. I gratefully accept what I get, as I'm not in the capacity to judge how historically correct they are. As to the rest, gameplay overall, the PTO should offer something novel for me to buy in. The PTO simply cannot be another Stalingrad with slightly different planes, it should be a different combat experience, period.

 

Carrier operations, floatplane ops, torpedo attacks, and seaborne targets that take realistic evasive actions would be considerably different than anything we have so far.

 

I think the biggest problem with Bodenplatte is that aside from new aircraft and a new map, it offers nothing in terms of gameplay that we don't have now.

Edited by hrafnkolbrandr
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hrafnkolbrandr said:

 

I think the biggest problem with Bodenplatte is that aside from new aircraft and a new map, it offers nothing in terms of gameplay that we don't have now.

 

Exactly.  It's just the Ost Front, with speed and altitude parity for the Allies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hrafnkolbrandr said:

I think the biggest problem with Bodenplatte is that aside from new aircraft and a new map, it offers nothing in terms of gameplay that we don't have now.

 

Bodenplatte may not offer as much in terms of gameplay as the pacific, but it does enhance and add alot to gameplay.

 

The thing I'm most excited for is high speed flight modeling and compressibility / mach tuck, it will add a whole new dynamic to high speed flight and dives. We'll no longer be able to dive with impunity or until our aircraft breaks apart, now we'll have to worry about our controls locking up or reversing and the aircraft tucking in.

 

I experienced this in DCS the other day when flying the D9, my controls locked up and then reversed, then I started to tuck in and I couldnt recover. It was the most incredible flying I have ever experienced, until I crashed into the ground and died lol.

Edited by Legioneod
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have our first jet, no small thing.

We have a fighter bomber (Jug) that can carry 2 1000 bombs plus a belly tank...F me sideways if that isn't adding something to sim.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

Exactly.  It's just the Ost Front, with speed and altitude parity for the Allies.

 

Bah!

Jug, P-38, Mustang, Me262, Tempest - this amounts to more than more Ost Front.

Edited by Gambit21
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, hrafnkolbrandr said:

I think the biggest problem with Bodenplatte is that aside from new aircraft and a new map, it offers nothing in terms of gameplay that we don't have now.

 

It's a formula that is here to stay.  It is very economical.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as they get the Corsair and Hellcat right, I can live with their best estimates based on available documentation for the rest of the stuff. I'll burn a lot of Zeros, but spend just as much time doing carrier ops just for the joy of the deck launches and traps. I like the old straight decks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest thing in BoX will be the systems-simulation. Back in IL-2'46 (and the other franchises) where systems were only rudimentarily simulated, things weren't half bad.

 

There's another great opportunity to deliver some immersion if we're really going to the Pacific some day. I was looking forward to Pacific Fighters back in the day, but the map design was HUGE letdown. I had just recently been to Hawaii and the map looked nothing like the real deal - well, the island of Oahu had about the correct shape, but at the time there had been the Finnish map vor Forgotten Battles and the all out Slovakia map (which, granted, came out later) did show what would and could have been possible.

 

I hope (and I'm having a good feeling with Jason and the team) that this time, the pacific will look like it.

A huge part of the appeal of the pacific (to me, that is) is the idea of manning an airplane on an island right next to some cove that doesn't even have a name, on an airfiled that has been hacked through some palm-plantation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Feathered_IV said:

I recal Oleg saying that he texts are not written in old or new Japanese.   They are written in another style entirely called Technical Japanese, and there are few people left who can read it.  

 

When NASM was restoring the M6A1 Seiran they ran across some component documents they believed might help them as no factory prints exist for the aircraft, but a standard Japanese/English translation, while the translator thought he did a fair job, made little technical sense to the aircraft technicians.  NASM had to find an old factory engineer (several Japanese were involved overall) to finally figure things out.

 

A friend of mine had a Lim-2 (MiG-15UTI) and his manuals were commercially translated in Warsaw from Polish to English.  They made for amusing reading, for instance what we would call "canopy" was translated "awning".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None. Any compromise would be the beginning of an epic and never-ending sh1tstorm, here and on every other il2 forum.

Edited by ruby_monkey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ruby_monkey said:

None. Any compromise would be the beginning of an epic and never-ending sh1tstorm, here and on every other il2 forum.

 

But what material would the detractors cite?  Who would get to choose what is a compromise and what is not?

 

You act as if that doesn't happen around here anyways.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello guys, thanks for the responses so far, appreciated.:drinks:

 

I think the majority of responses indicate that some compromise is certainly acceptable, how much is I suppose another thing, however, considering the age of the aircraft and the difficulty of obtaining good technical documentation I think the development team could take that on board in any discussions they have on the subject going forward.;)

 

It has certainly been some time now since anything official regarding the subject has come from the team, so what of the project I wonder, are the documents still the issue or in the cold light of day have they taken another look and come to the conclusion that technically so much has to be taken onboard that they actually do not have the capability to actually go ahead with the project?

 

Some have clearly stated they have only supported the series so far because of the mention of a Pacific title so they are understandably peeved with the lack of progress, however, as someone stated it was never actually promised, nonetheless it would be good to actually have some confirmation one way or the other from Jason as to what the current position is exactly.

 

Sitting on it and doing apparently nothing only angers those with a real passion for the theater, I am not one of those, however, as I have said elsewhere I am interested in seeing what they could do with it and will support the series wherever it goes providing I have the finances, others it seems possibly not, their patience is wearing thin, maybe it is time for a clear and honest assessment from the team with a statement to clarify their intentions as to where the Pacific stands in the current business model and in the great scheme of things with the modern IL-2 series.

 

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.:biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

who will be expert enough, here, to make a real dissimilarity between reality and the sim ??

 

For japanese planes, of course !😁

Edited by Ploofy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm perfectly fine with compromises so long as the devs feel comfortable with them. That and the fact that they improve things once they get better info. Considering that Pacific is one of Jason's personal interests, I'm certain that if/when we get the Pacific theatre it'll be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ploofy said:

who will be expert enough, here, to make a real dissimilarity between reality and the sim ??

 

For japanese planes, of course !😁

 

Don't worry, there are plenty of "experts" among us...

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×