Jump to content
J5_Baeumer

Black September IV - Flying Circus

Black Septermber IV - Flying Circus  

113 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you prefer to fly this introductory campaign?

    • Central and Entente Teams that DO NOT SWITCH each week.
    • Red and Blue Teams that DO SWITCH sides each week.
    • Pilots (not teams) MAY SWITCH sides on a first come, first served space available basis at the start of each weeks mission. Would help even sides if attendance is unpredictable.
  2. 2. Which side would you prefer to fly? (select all that apply)

    • Both (I may wish to fly different sides different weeks sometimes)
    • Either side (put me where you need me if there are teams/sides)
    • German Preferred
    • German Only (don't select other options)
    • Entente Only (don't select other options)
    • Entente Preferred
  3. 3. Do you plan on flying Black September?



Recommended Posts

On 9/11/2019 at 5:43 AM, BaronVonMyakin said:

Entente bombers have no chance make the second pass to bomb the target if the AA guns stay alive. Besides that, any mistake of target's aproach or another troubles to come and destroy factory from the one pass mean "Take a 20 minutes pause, pilot!" thanks to AAA.

I need to say seeing what happened above factories and airfields, the factories are protected much better as the airfields 😂

 

 

The factories and bridges have normal machine gunners which offer no protection against high speed diving or level bombing attacks  All but the most forward airfields are rocking a full battery of veteran or elite high caliber flak artillery.  Also, remember that you can scare MG crews away from the guns with just a couple of bullets on target - you don't have to eliminate the guns to very effectively suppress their fire.
 

Yes, a single plane is more likely to get chewed up if it sticks around.  A flight working together should be a very different proposition.

Edited by J5_Matthias
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Won't be able to attend today/tonight, but......GO, GO, GO Entente!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice to Airmen Updates Posted - See original post of this thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

Excellent mission. Position of area looked rather unusual. Navigation turned out to be easier than expected. People managed to meet up and have some good fights.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent job from J5/organisers. S!

 

Addition of clouds, plus that low sun really helped immersion. The ability to use clouds to break contact, and try get up-sun of EAs was a very cool change from RoF

 

Ground textures viewed from higher up were a bit meh, perhaps that's just Stalingrad map.

 

Target locations at times were seemed distant but still reasonable. Recons took over an hour there and back, but a lot of that time was going back and forth over the target. Not sure how many passes it should take but possibly there's a more optimal way to do it.

 

Frame rates looked good for me all night even in fights with 10+ aircraft. 

Edited by US103_Baer
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great mission and nice visual environment set to make  ground objects and elevation more visible -  autumn map with winter template. I enjoyed Stalingrad far more than cramped Lapino. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

disgusting server. he cannot pull even 50 players! I am sure that the time delay schedule I was sure of was:

image.png.b8620b47147600c23eb3707eb8794338.png

this is unacceptable. urgently needed to redo the mission. specifically, to leave the minimum necessary entities in the game, reduce the number of icons and not use smokes and bonfires. and further. one friend of mine wrote: "If the sum of the fields and respawn points of tanks in a heavy mission is more than ten - this
can be considered a "shot in the foot" to your server. "He has been programming in IL-2 for a very long time. I wish my post to be read. Maybe in a few years, when we all have quantum computers, we can really enjoy the game of IL -2, but for now, let's have a little. rgr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, I./SG2_Foxmann said:

disgusting server. he cannot pull even 50 players! I am sure that the time delay schedule I was sure of was:

image.png.b8620b47147600c23eb3707eb8794338.png

this is unacceptable. urgently needed to redo the mission. specifically, to leave the minimum necessary entities in the game, reduce the number of icons and not use smokes and bonfires. and further. one friend of mine wrote: "If the sum of the fields and respawn points of tanks in a heavy mission is more than ten - this
can be considered a "shot in the foot" to your server. "He has been programming in IL-2 for a very long time. I wish my post to be read. Maybe in a few years, when we all have quantum computers, we can really enjoy the game of IL -2, but for now, let's have a little. rgr

?

All those assets in bigger or equal quantity are used in TAW server (84 players) without problems  .... especialy statement about smokes and bonfires is not that significant performance waise to the server side.

Edited by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

?

All those assets in bigger or equal quantity are used in TAW server (84 players) without problems  ....

dear pan, and how often have you seen taW bots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

S! Foxmann,

Your posts are being read....our mission builder has been made aware of your earlier posts and suggestions and they have been discussed.....please feel free to private message Matthias through this forum and point him to any data or thread discussions supporting your suggestions....I know he is interested in any kind of way we are able to make servers run more efficiently.    He has been doing this for several years with many complicated missions but we all know there are things we don't know.   I know he will appreciate any data or additional information you are able to provide.

PS thank you to those who expressed their appreciation and enjoyment of yesterday's mission.  

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolutely had a BLAST yesterday! Thank you, thank you, thank you J5 for creating/hosting this! 😄 

 

I was able to livestream the session in its entirety; for those who are interested, you can find it here: 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly had a great time. Yeah, those "Outdated hits" announcements on chat were a bit annoying but I personally saw no issues. Since this is a North American server, could it be that the Europe / Russia players are finally seeing what we in North America have been seeing for years regarding European / Russian based servers? Just asking... certainly not my area of expertise.

 

Thanks again J5!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

J5, if you need to balance sides next week I am more than willing to fly Entente (even though I voted German only in the poll) and I think there are more JG1s willing to do so.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, II./JG1_Vonrd said:

J5, if you need to balance sides next week I am more than willing to fly Entente (even though I voted German only in the poll) and I think there are more JG1s willing to do so.

Indeed! I'll be gone during Week 3, but I would be more than willing to switch during Week 4 if needed!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, I./SG2_Foxmann said:

disgusting server. he cannot pull even 50 players! I am sure that the time delay schedule I was sure of was:

image.png.b8620b47147600c23eb3707eb8794338.png

this is unacceptable. urgently needed to redo the mission. specifically, to leave the minimum necessary entities in the game, reduce the number of icons and not use smokes and bonfires. and further. one friend of mine wrote: "If the sum of the fields and respawn points of tanks in a heavy mission is more than ten - this
can be considered a "shot in the foot" to your server. "He has been programming in IL-2 for a very long time. I wish my post to be read. Maybe in a few years, when we all have quantum computers, we can really enjoy the game of IL -2, but for now, let's have a little. rgr

This makes me feel so nostalgic about BA 2018 (the one where we had to uninstall mods and set no fly zones :) ). Good times (because they are behind us already 😄 ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/12/2019 at 1:05 AM, SeaSerpent said:

Ok, I'll give this a shot.  Sign me up, Entente side.  And Jasta 5, I don't shine shoes anymore.🤣

 

Did you misplace your shine box ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/14/2019 at 4:53 PM, J5_Matthias said:

All but the most forward airfields are rocking a full battery of veteran or elite high caliber flak artillery. 

I have meant it so because there were always fights above the airfields last two missions. My comrades and I didn't see that any planes was shot down by flaks. Moreover we haven't even seen that AAA were shooting at that moments. 

Talking more detailed, that was above Yantar (Lapino) and Spartanovka (Stalingrad).

Just take it not as complaint, Matthias. Maybe there are some bugs with flaks' behaviour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's a funny guy. Amusing, like a clown.

2 hours ago, J5_Klugermann said:

 

Did you misplace your shine box ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, J5_Baeumer said:

 

S! Foxmann,

Your posts are being read....our mission builder has been made aware of your earlier posts and suggestions and they have been discussed.....please feel free to private message Matthias through this forum and point him to any data or thread discussions supporting your suggestions....I know he is interested in any kind of way we are able to make servers run more efficiently.    He has been doing this for several years with many complicated missions but we all know there are things we don't know.   I know he will appreciate any data or additional information you are able to provide.

PS thank you to those who expressed their appreciation and enjoyment of yesterday's mission.  

 

Excellent Baeumer.  Keep the thread free of Russian technical chit chat

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, J5_Klugermann said:

 

Excellent Baeumer.  Keep the thread free of Russian technical chit chat

 

 

I like the Russian technical chit chat.  Need more thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

See Notice to Airmen Update In Original Post.

Week 2 Results

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, JG1_Butzzell said:

I like the Russian technical chit chat.  Need more thank you.

 

технический чат

 

(...you're welcome)

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/13/2019 at 4:28 AM, J5_Baeumer said:

Central squeaks a wins in Week 2, 158 - 161 in a hotly contested and well flown mission.

http://www.jasta5.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=118&p=44278&sid=672bebf2912d2346c408fb2547db853f#p44278

 

image.png.447002b35594c38f029d2da0aa623676.png

 

Damn. One more Photo Recon task would have seen Entente victorious. And we carried out one more but was not counted as yours truly cocked up his landing. The shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Oliver88 said:

 

Damn. One more Photo Recon task would have seen Entente victorious. And we carried out one more but was not counted as yours truly cocked up his landing. The shame.

 

Image result for seppuku gif

  • Haha 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Big thx to all who evened up the teams and created the tight finish!

 

Chin up Oliver, happens to us all, if is a very big word 😁

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, J5_Klugermann said:

 

Excellent Baeumer.  Keep the thread free of Russian technical chit chat


РЕПЕAT ПЛEACE !

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baron vM and 71st.....what was stated was that there is not very strong AA over the FORWARD field on both sides.... it's essentially flak that alerts to enemy aircraft but not much more.  So your observations were correct.

 

The forward fields need to be defended which makes them a good place for pilots and turn n burners who want a lot of action or pilots who show up who aren't really plugged in to command structures and integrated strategic objectives.

Edited by J5_Baeumer
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Notice to Airmen Update - see original post on page 1 for important updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unable to attend I'm afraid, but,...Go entente, Go!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to all for a very enjoyable Black Sept event last night.  My first but not my last with you all I hope :)

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flew the SE5a last night, but no Aldis gunsight (standard sight from 1917) available :(

 

Found the following to support its inclusion, so would humbly request the Aldis is included next time:

 

Early Gunsights - Pt 7

The Aldis Sight - Pt 1

One of the drawbacks of the ring and bead was the need to align the two elements with the target. Whilst this was easy enough with a pivoted gun, a pilot with only a split second to fire in in a dogfight needed something which would give him an immediate point of aim.

In 1915 Martlesham Heath tested an optical sight submitted by the Aldis Brothers of Sparkhill, Birmingham. It consisted of a 559 mm (22 in) metal tube containing lenses giving a magnification of x 3 and a cross-hair aiming mark. The new sight was mounted on the cowling of a Be.2c with a Lewis gun on the upper wing, and firing tests were carried out at ground targets. The sight proved more accurate than the ring and bead, though on one occasion the pilot nearly flew into the ground whilst looking through it! The sight was then tested in air fighting manoeuvres. Magnification of the field of view often made it difficult to locate the target quickly. Another problem was that the front lens was prone to fouling by oil from the engine, and it was also no longer possible to estimate target range by comparing the wingspan with the ring diameter. Hugh Aldis was therefore asked to submit a sight without magnification, but with a circular graticule which could be used for range-finding, and possibly, deflection. A spring-loaded oil flap was fitted, and leather-lined adjustable clamps mounted on short sturdy brackets were supplied.

The modified sight received the highest praise after testing under all conditions of temperature (inert gas had been sealed into the tube) and combat manoeuvres. Martlesham recommended that the Aldis should be the RFC's standard fixed gunsight. As air activity over the front intensified, casualties were reaching serious proportions. The ascendency of the Fokker monopane had been broken, but new German types were being encountered, and if the new sight could give the pilots any advantage, it was decided to rush it into production. An initial order for 200 sights was issued, and the company was told to prepare for further substantial production.

The sight tube contained four hermetically sealed collimating lenses, with a graticule in the form of two concentric circles engraved on a plain glass screen. The outer circle gave the deflection needed for a target plane crossing at 161 km/hr (100 mph), and a small circle gave the gun alignment point. On some later models the outer ring was modified to indicate the wingspan of a Gotha bomber at 183 m (200 yds), and with practice pilots found how to use the circle for other aircraft. The lens system gave unity (no) magnification, and ensured that the ring was always centred on the axis of the sight no matter where the eye was placed. The ideal eye distance from the rubber eyepiece was 127 mm (5 in), which gave a FOV (field of view) of 20 degrees. The anti-oil flap was operated by a cable to the cockpit, where a ring was hooked to a small bracket; when unhooked, the shutter sprang open, giving a clear view. If the shutter was left open, oil fouling would occur, so it became standard practice to fit both Aldis and ring and bead sights. In the first installations the windscreen was cut away in the top right-hand corner, but factory-installed sights passed through a hole drilled in the screen.

The above text and photos were taken from "British Aircraft Armament Vol 2: Guns and Gunsights", R Wallace Clarke.

 

Aldis mounted on an SE.5.jpg

 

Early Gunsights - Pt 8

The Aldis Sight - Pt 2

Production Aldis sights were issued to selected front-line squadrons for operational trials in mid-1916. Pilots found the Aldis superior to the ring and bead, and news of a secret new gunsight soon spread to other squadrons. The Aldis was said to possess almost magical powers, and at a time of high casualties the authorities did nothing to dispel these rumours.

By 1917 the Aldis had become the standard British sight for fixed guns. It was usually mounted on the right side of the engine cowling, with the ring and bead on the left. A smaller version was used on large guns such as the Davis and COW, and a version for anti-aircraft guns had a prism which could be clipped into the field of view, giving a set deflection of 30 degrees. In 1918 the French Aviation Militaire introduced a similar sight manufactured by Chretien, and the German Oigee company produced a very similar optical sight for use on both fixed and free guns. Aldis sights were much sought after by German pilots, who took them from the wreckage of crashed Allied aircraft.

The above text and photos were taken from "British Aircraft Armament Vol.2: Guns and Gunsights", by R Wallace Clarke.

Number 1 Sqn photograph:

Image result for photographs of SE5a squadrons 1918

 

Number 32 Sqn photograph:

Royal_Aircraft_Factory_SE5a.jpg

74 Sqn photograph:

Image result for photographs of SE5a squadrons 1918

92 Sqn Photograph:

Related image

 

6 Sqn AFC (note Kangaroo!) photograph:

Related image

56 Sqn photograph:

Image result for photographs of SE5a squadrons 1918

 

2 Sqn AFC photograph:

P00355.029P00355.029P00355.029Related image

 

24 Sqn:

Related image

 

Thank you for your consideration.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

Edited by 56RAF_Talisman
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, US103_Larner said:

News from the front! Last week's backdated edition and this week's fresh news. 

 

Larner, you should definitely quit your day (pilot) job and do these wonderful things.

 

Also, the news would be better for the german side.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Further to the above regarding Aldis gunsight.

 

Nice picture of an Aldis gunsight on a Camel:

 

IWM caption: "Captain Wilson of No. 28 Squadron RAF by his Sopwith Camel biplane, Florence." Source: IWM (Q 70787)

681512b27099a5fc4af731c7c1dfd6f0.jpg

 

And another one here:

header15.jpg?zoom=1.5625&resize=1523%2C9

Even the Bristol fighter used the Anvis gunsight:

Bristol_Fighter_on_field_of_Agincourt.jp

 

Happy landings all,

 

56RAF_Talisman

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think the issue is whether they were present in reality, more like something's up with the settings when they (J5) built the mission. Turning an option on or off unexpectedly closed them out and they cant go back.

Edited by US103_Talbot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, US103_Talbot said:

I dont think the issue is whether they were present in reality, more like something's up with the settings when they (J5) built the mission. Turning an option on or off unexpectedly closed them out and they cant go back.

Copy that.  Modification options for cockpit light and fuel tank gauge were available for my second mission, but the fuel tank gauge option was not available for my first mission, so something odd seems to be happening.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S! Talisman, glad you are enjoying the Flying Circus community Black September campaign.  The iron gunsights question was discussed earlier....due to gunsights being part of the same package deal with bomb load outs and photo recce equipment etc.   It's an unfortunate necessity the devs decisions force us into.

 

The inconsistent fuel gauge availability is probably a mission build error we will look into.  Thanks for making us aware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still boggles the mind that the devs made the Aldis and the fuel gauge non-standard loadout in the S.E....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May be to represent earlier S.E, it's a 1916 bird and fuel gauge at least is optional in many early British planes. Not sure if it (or Aldis) was standard in Viper variant we actually have.

 

BTW - Did Viper engine completely replace the 4-blade Hispano-Suiza S.Es, or were they produced in parallel? One was a superiority fighter and other an intreceptor.

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

×
×
  • Create New...