Developer Diary, Part XVII

[ISIDA]

The changes in cockpit were made as a result of reasonable suggestions of users of this forum.

- Changes can be made if the arguments presented and we agree with them.

- Sometimes we must say No.because we are not gods. The decision of refusal is final and not subject to appeal.

[MACADEMIC]

Fantastic new cockpit screens! This is getting more and more exciting!

 

MAC

[StG2_Manfred]

Two new screenshots with some corrections for the instrument board:

 

bf1+.jpg bf2+.jpg

 

 

Just wow, really brilliiant  

[royraiden]

Two new screenshots with some corrections for the instrument board:

 

bf1+.jpg bf2+.jpg

Excellent!Thanks for sharing!

 

The changes in cockpit were made as a result of reasonable suggestions of users of this forum.

- Changes can be made if the arguments presented and we agree with them.

- Sometimes we must say No.because we are not gods. The decision of refusal is final and not subject to appeal.

As had been said before the concerns raised before were not unreasonable,but the attitudes were.Even so you took the feedback for consideration.Thanks.

[Veteran66]

wauu nice

[Caudron431]

Two new screenshots with some corrections for the instrument board:

 

bf1+.jpg bf2+.jpg

Yes, FANTASTIC!

[JtD]

Thanks for the extra screenshots and it feels good to know you could still work on it, much appreciated.

 

Are you now done with it, or is there still a chance for more fixes, like a fixed rpm gauge, the standard temp gauge, yaw/bank indicator and a properly scaled fuel gauge? It would also be nice if the hand written stuff on the bomb fuse box was more in line with standard practice. Biggest issue for me, in addition to the rpm gauge, are still the colours which appear to be giving less contrast than they should.

Edited May 29, 2013 by JtD

[smink1701]

Thanks BS for the updated images.  It's looking great and the gesture shows how much the team is willing to work with and please the community.  Very impressive and I hope the sometimes adversarial atmosphere gives way to more of a team effort.  We are all wanting a GREAT WWII flight sim and I'm confident that the dev team will take us to the promise land.  

[LiLiput]

Thanks for the extra screenshots and it feels good to know you could still work on it, much appreciated.

 

Are you now done with it, or is there still a chance for more fixes, like a fixed rpm gauge, the standard temp gauge, yaw/bank indicator and a properly scaled fuel gauge? It would also be nice if the hand written stuff on the bomb fuse box was more in line with standard practice. Biggest issue for me, in addition to the rpm gauge, are still the colours which appear to be giving less contrast than they should.

 

As LOFT stated here http://forum.il2sturmovik.su/topic/353-obsuzhdenie-17-j-chasti-dnevnikov-razrabotki/page-13 all your suggestions must have some background/evidence, like photos, docs etc. so they can understand what is actually wrong. Otherwise the devs won't fix/change anything.

[JtD]

Providing evidence wouldn't be a problem, such as, for instance, the RPM gauge as used by the Bf 109F-4 according to the handbook. As you can see, no red line. Those lines were drawn by the pilots, or their ground crew, manually to remind the pilot of the limits. Some pilots used several, some none. Those were simple marks either on the glass, or more often on the casing. But to my knowledge, there is no instrument in the Luftwaffe inventory that has a red mark at the 2600 rpm tick as a part of the instrument, and even if there was, the Bf 109F-4 would not have it. It used a DB 601E engine which' rpm limits were 2500 combat at combat power, 2700 at take off/emergency and 2750 maximum. The red line on the instrument is not only wrong, it is misleading.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/drehzahlmesser/gross/Fl20222.gif

I hope I do not have to provide materials to show which engine powered the Bf 109F-4 and what the limits of the engines were, but if that is deemed necessary, I will.

 

Likewise, here's the fuel gauge as used by Bf 109F, note the scaling is different:

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/vorratsmesser/gross/Fl20723Me109F.gif

 

Here's a temperature gauge, which I have seen on the vast majority of photos in particular in the handbooks. Note it was mounted behind a cover as already done, but has a 0-40-80-120-160-200 scale, instead of the 0-50-100-130. I'm not aware of Luftwaffe temperature gauges with that scale that could display two different temperatures, but I could be wrong.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/temperaturanzeigen/gross/Fl20343-5.gif

 

Here's the yaw/bank indicator, the one depicted resembles a pneumatic type, but, afaik, the Bf 109F-4 had an electric type, which looks only slightly different. The two models likely to be used:

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/horizonte/gross/Fl22406.gif

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/horizonte/gross/Fl22407.gif

 

As for the bomb fuse box, "R3" was the handbook designation for the main switch on the bottom right of the auxiliary panel. Therefore, typically, an "R3" could be found, if it was found, in the vicinity of the switch. The box that carries the R3 label in the screenshot was actually the S5 component, and sometimes would carry that designation. S5 being the ZSK 244 A as such. Of course, these labels were manually applied, as were the R5-R8 labels. Different positions and colours can be found and I'm aware the current placement is a copy of a photo of a Bf 109E-4 cockpit. Still, odd to put the R3 label on the S5 component, usually it would be labelled S5 as seen below.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/Schaltkasten/gross/Fl 50869-11.gif

 

And as far as the colours go, my expectations are similar to the panel of this Bf 109G. The cockpit colour is RLM 66 and there's plenty of reference, last but not least in modelling shops that sell it and black for a side by side comparison, if necessary.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/downloads/Bilder/Geratebretter/Original/gross/Me109G/1.jpg

Here's a shot of the cockpit of the restored Canadian Bf 109F-4, cockpit painted in RLM 66. Looks a bit darker, but that could be the lighting. Black's darker, too.

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/walkaround/10132/10132_cockpit1.jpg

 

As I said, providing evidence isn't a problem. The problem is that doing so takes time, which I don't have in abundance. Therefore, I prefer to work when I know my effort's not wasted. Which I don't, because getting one of the green guys to post a "yes please" or "no thanks" is a trick I haven't figured out, yet.

[=FB=LOFT]

Thx

[Zorin]

Told you JtD knows his stuff. Now hopelfuly the fanboys will stay quiet and let the knowledgable guys like him work their ways with the devs and get this thing in a historically correct state. The knowledge is there, they only need to ask for it, prior to going out on a limb and doing it wrong. That will save all parties involved time and nerves.

[Peshka]

The development updates are very good and promise a good game for us. Thank you LOFT and team.

[Bearcat]

Two new screenshots with some corrections for the instrument board:

 

bf1+.jpg bf2+.jpg

 

Whoa!! Oh my stars ad garters.. I can't wait to get my Mustang in a few years...

[Freycinet]

The you go JtD, you repectfully present well-documented information and you get a "thanks" from the lead developer no less, as you wanted. I think that shows how a proper attitude from all parties make things happen much more easily.

 

Now don't demand that they necessarily enact all those changes. They work on a budget, under time pressure and with a list of priorities that doesn't leave space for each and every issue to be solved. That's just reality in the world of private business... Also, BoS is not a single-plane study sim, so a few inaccuracies and simplifications are to be expected. As long as it doesn't descend into Warthunder territory... :-)

Edited May 30, 2013 by Freycinet

[Kling]

Beautiful photos blacksix!!!

[JtD]

Thx

Much appreciated, as I now know the post wasn't a wasted effort.

[Caudron431]

TY JtD: your post is remarkable !
 

[Bearcat]

Told you JtD knows his stuff. Now hopelfuly the fanboys will stay quiet and let the knowledgable guys like him work their ways with the devs and get this thing in a historically correct state. The knowledge is there, they only need to ask for it, prior to going out on a limb and doing it wrong. That will save all parties involved time and nerves.

 

 

That's fanman to you bub....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[hiro]

I like whats going on. Thanks for the updates, and willingness to at least look at informative + backed up factual posts. 

 

When the craziness happened I wanted for it to blow over, lol, before posting. 

 

About the derailment, I think some are carrying baggage from CLOD, others want to troll, others bust out kindergarten / temper tantrum . . .

 

But the devs don't need the drama. But they do need our help. We can only present the facts and let it go. 

 

Its a good thing the moderators are moderate. However if they went old school mIRC and kick banned that wouldn't be too conducive for discussion. Somewhere in the middle.

 

I think everyone can add to the mix. But do they want discord or excessive bitterness? 

 

In regards to the accuracy. I think the game needs a balance. There's a time factor, there's a fun factor, there's a budget, and there is the person that plays. 

 

And the devs have all this balancing act. Let's help them do it properly. 

[=FB=VikS]

Providing evidence wouldn't be a problem, such as, for instance, the RPM gauge as used by the Bf 109F-4 according to the handbook. As you can see, no red line. Those lines were drawn by the pilots, or their ground crew, manually to remind the pilot of the limits. Some pilots used several, some none. Those were simple marks either on the glass, or more often on the casing. But to my knowledge, there is no instrument in the Luftwaffe inventory that has a red mark at the 2600 rpm tick as a part of the instrument, and even if there was, the Bf 109F-4 would not have it. It used a DB 601E engine which' rpm limits were 2500 combat at combat power, 2700 at take off/emergency and 2750 maximum. The red line on the instrument is not only wrong, it is misleading.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/drehzahlmesser/gross/Fl20222.gif

I hope I do not have to provide materials to show which engine powered the Bf 109F-4 and what the limits of the engines were, but if that is deemed necessary, I will.

 

Likewise, here's the fuel gauge as used by Bf 109F, note the scaling is different:

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/vorratsmesser/gross/Fl20723Me109F.gif

 

Here's a temperature gauge, which I have seen on the vast majority of photos in particular in the handbooks. Note it was mounted behind a cover as already done, but has a 0-40-80-120-160-200 scale, instead of the 0-50-100-130. I'm not aware of Luftwaffe temperature gauges with that scale that could display two different temperatures, but I could be wrong.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/temperaturanzeigen/gross/Fl20343-5.gif

 

Here's the yaw/bank indicator, the one depicted resembles a pneumatic type, but, afaik, the Bf 109F-4 had an electric type, which looks only slightly different. The two models likely to be used:

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/horizonte/gross/Fl22406.gif

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/horizonte/gross/Fl22407.gif

 

As for the bomb fuse box, "R3" was the handbook designation for the main switch on the bottom right of the auxiliary panel. Therefore, typically, an "R3" could be found, if it was found, in the vicinity of the switch. The box that carries the R3 label in the screenshot was actually the S5 component, and sometimes would carry that designation. S5 being the ZSK 244 A as such. Of course, these labels were manually applied, as were the R5-R8 labels. Different positions and colours can be found and I'm aware the current placement is a copy of a photo of a Bf 109E-4 cockpit. Still, odd to put the R3 label on the S5 component, usually it would be labelled S5 as seen below.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/instrumente/katalog/Schaltkasten/gross/Fl 50869-11.gif

 

And as far as the colours go, my expectations are similar to the panel of this Bf 109G. The cockpit colour is RLM 66 and there's plenty of reference, last but not least in modelling shops that sell it and black for a side by side comparison, if necessary.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/downloads/Bilder/Geratebretter/Original/gross/Me109G/1.jpg

Here's a shot of the cockpit of the restored Canadian Bf 109F-4, cockpit painted in RLM 66. Looks a bit darker, but that could be the lighting. Black's darker, too.

http://109lair.hobbyvista.com/walkaround/10132/10132_cockpit1.jpg

 

As I said, providing evidence isn't a problem. The problem is that doing so takes time, which I don't have in abundance. Therefore, I prefer to work when I know my effort's not wasted. Which I don't, because getting one of the green guys to post a "yes please" or "no thanks" is a trick I haven't figured out, yet.

 

Next time - please dont make a drama on forum, as sometimes is hard to spot when lots of post around, but contact me directly by PM, and in case if someone else will spot something wrong on screenshots - please do so, as its better to fix it/check it right now - than to spot it after release.

 

Thanks!

[Mac_Messer]

Well to me the cockpit still looks pretty awful although if it can get me up and flying again then I`ll take it.

[FlatSpinMan]

Well, thank you for gracing us with your presence, Mac. We'll all be honoured to have you stoop to our level and fly alongside us.

[=69.GIAP=YSTREB]

FUUUAAAAARRRRKKKK

[Sangria]

Hola, folks!

Here's what I've found on the rus forum (its here http://forum.il2sturmovik.su/)

This seems to be a foot????ge of the game in pre-alpha and on work-in-progress stage, but look how amazing it is! Thou the devs deleted it and keep saying not to watch it, there's ????copy

Edited June 6, 2013 by BlackSix

[royraiden]

Hola, folks!

Here's what I've found on the rus forum (its here http://forum.il2sturmovik.su/)

This seems to be a foot????ge of the game in pre-alpha and on work-in-progress stage, but look how amazing it is! Thou the devs deleted it and keep saying not to watch it, there's ????copy

 

With your link now public I guess it wont last long either.Foul move by whoever did it, but I think it looks superb, specially the pilot animations in cockpit.

Edited June 6, 2013 by BlackSix

[p00d73]

With your link now public I guess it wont last long either.Foul move by whoever did it, but I think it looks superb, specially the pilot animations in cockpit.

 

I didn't pay attention to it the first time, but you're right! They look great.The way the head moves in the cockpit looks good too, more natural than previous IL-2 games.

[BlackSix]

Hola, folks!

Here's what I've found on the rus forum (its here http://forum.il2sturmovik.su/)

This seems to be a foot????ge of the game in pre-alpha and on work-in-progress stage, but look how amazing it is! Thou the devs deleted it and keep saying not to watch it, there's ????copy

 

With your link now public I guess it wont last long either.Foul move by whoever did it, but I think it looks superb, specially the pilot animations in cockpit.

 

I'm sorry but this video is not for public demonstration, I have to remove all links from the forum. Tomorrow will be a detailed explanation in the diaries.

[royraiden]

I'm sorry but this video is not for public demonstration, I have to remove all links from the forum. Tomorrow will be a detailed explanation in the diaries.

Understandable. Its a shame such things happen, but they had happened before and will continue to happen in the future(Im talking about nda breakings in general).

Edited June 6, 2013 by royraiden

[Uufflakke]

I didn't pay attention to it the first time, but you're right! They look great.The way the head moves in the cockpit looks good too, more natural than previous IL-2 games.

 

Have just seen the video.

 

I like the scratches on the canopy glass of the LaGG-3.

 

And no trees popping up anymore in the far distance like good ole IL-2!

Such a big immersion killer.

[DD_Arthur]

I'm sorry but this video is not for public demonstration, I have to remove all links from the forum. Tomorrow will be a detailed explanation in the diaries.

 

 Don't worry BlackSix, I only watched it with my eyes closed and I didn't download it and then upload it to my squad's website for others to watch and discuss. Nope, not at all.   

 

 I expect someone will upload it to YouTube soon.  Tut, tut.  

[Bearcat]

Dagnabbit I missed it!

[CrazySchmidt]

Holy s..t!! that is brilliant!!!

 

I knew these guys were going to deliver.

 

I want it and I want it NOW!!!!!

 

Great work guys, can't wait to get my hands on the finished product.

 

Cheers, CrazySchmidt.

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

weres that video I want to see.  cut the red tape!!!

Edited June 7, 2013 by Mastiff

[150GCT_Veltro]

Video (illegal) is only a test development as LOFT says but it gives us the idea how these guys are working on Stalingrad, fast and well. Il like a lot the work on joy responses. It will be a real pleasure fly these aicrafts.

Edited June 7, 2013 by Veltro

[CrazySchmidt]

weres that video I want to see.  cut the red tape!!!

 

Mate all I can say is that it was everything you have been hoping for in a first look vid, brilliant!!! 

 

I'd post the link, but at this stage I don't want to risk getting banned!!

 

CS. 

[philiped]

I watched it last night and it was pretty impressive. Whilst I found the lighting on the planes and within the cockpits to look rather 'plasticy', the overall graphics were pretty stunning and I love the direction the team is going in. CloD undoubtedly exceeds in the graphical department, but where CloD is at fault with bugs and LoD problems, the gameplay in the video for BoS looked slick and smooth. The graphics were definitely of 2013 standard (maybe a more complex lighting system would boost the game into another dimension), but arguably the best feature was the smoothness of the whole game. The terrain looked pretty good as well (although I think it is hard to mess-up snowy terrain).

[Uufflakke]

@philiped:

I don't know if I read it here or on the Russian site but the Dev team mentioned that for instance lighting of plane and landscape is not good in the leaked video. That could be the reason of the 'plasticy'.

It was just a video to test behaviour of LaGG-3 while landing or so.

To be honest I wasn't impressed by the snow covered landscape, looks like if just one texture has been used. But hey the clip was very very very pre pre pre-alpha and not mentioned for us the audience.

I've never been to Russia in wintertime but hopefully they will change colour of trees from green to greyish brown or a mixture of it as it is to be seen in the video of Update XVIII.

 

We will see.

 

     The only thing we need to have is some

 

[Jason_Williams]

Play nice everyone. I will simply delete messages with personal attacks. Don't care who started it or who is who, just stick to the topic and don't get personal.

 

Jason