Jump to content

Developer Diary - 284 Discussion


Jason_Williams
 Share

Recommended Posts

Avimimus
39 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

Looks like i was wrong. Escadrila 43 remained on the front and was active all the way to April, with the IAR-80.

 

After your reply showing the extent to which I was misled - I stopped trusting any online sources when it comes to this plane :)

 

If this is correct it means that the earlier IAR-80A is the appropriate aircraft for Kuban 1942-1943! For some reason I'd assumed they'd have been some variant of IAR-81 by that time period.

 

So if this were correct the most useful variants for our existing modules would be the IAR-80B (with 2x13.2mm & 4x7.5mm and increased wingspan), the IAR-81 (with bombs and 6x7.5mm) and, for Kuban, the IAR-80A (with 6x7.5mm but no bombs).

 

...no cannons :) Still interesting variants though. I wonder what excuse we could find for the IAR-81C? Maybe to fight the P-38 (even though we don't have a map for it)??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jaws2002

IAR-80Cs armed with 4 mgs and 2 MG/FF cannons fought along Black Sea and Ploiesti, in 1943. IAR-81C started flying home defense and combat missions in Ukraine late 1943.

 

Found something more interesting in the French IAR-80 book.

IAR-80C with tail number 271, of Escadrila 49, 4th fighter group, burned on "Saki " airfield, in Crimea on 3rd of March 1943, during the retreat from east.

IAR-80C with tail number 278  of the same unit hit on the ground at Eupatoria in Crimea on september 26th 1943.

 

1752503080_20210626_2025492554.thumb.jpg.857a70e238acc3949e2a977841902537.jpg

 

 So there were cannon armed IAR-80Cs on the front line in 1943. The production of the IAR-80C (4x7.92+2xMG/FF) started in September 1942.

 

 

Edited by Jaws2002
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlitzPig_EL

Jaws, happy for you man, I know this means a lot to you.  I always enjoyed the IAR in the old sim and look forward to it here, it's an immediate buy for me.

 

Do you have any good performance data you can share?  I suspect that the IAR 80/81 will be a plane that punches above it's weight in any case, so the raw numbers may not tell the real story of how she will fly in combat.

Edited by BlitzPig_EL
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jaws2002
49 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Do you have any good performance data you can share?

 

 

 

Thank you. I love the little bastard.

 

What performance/ the plane was a dog. 🤣

 

Not much. most sources say maximum speed was 485Km/h at 5000m. The early, four gun iar-80 could get 510Km/h and the iar-81C, when equipped with the dive bombing equipment could reach 465Km/h. 

 

 

 

Edited by Jaws2002
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Avimimus
1 hour ago, Jaws2002 said:

 

 

 

Thank you. I love the little bastard.

 

What performance/ the plane was a dog. 🤣

 

Not much. most sources say maximum speed was 485Km/h at 5000m. The early, four gun iar-80 could get 510Km/h and the iar-81C, when equipped with the dive bombing equipment could reach 465Km/h. 

 

I seem to recall it being light on the controls and having a snappy roll rate in the old Il-2. I honestly found it very enjoyable to fly. One isn't going to catch most other fighters though! At least not if they're smart enough to run away.

 

It should be well matched for the I-16 in anycase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FlyinPinkPanther

Amazing! 

The development team are spoiling us! 

 

I will buy the IAR whenever it becomes available. I became interested reading this thread

Check it out if the plane caught you by surprise. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Juri_JS
8 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

Escadrila 43 of grupul 3 was one of the exceptions and it was retained for the defense of Kerch Straits where it had been stationed for its whole tenure on the front. It participated in the heavy fighting over the Kuban Bridgehead in February-April 1943 before converting to the Bf 109G as part of grupul 9 later that summer.

I wonder on which airfield Escadrila 43 was based, Kerch or Bagerovo?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LuseKofte
On 6/25/2021 at 5:26 PM, 216th_Cat said:

IAR 80/81. Lovely. Thankyou very much. 🍻

Yes! I am not a fighterpilot. In special not a axis fighterpilot. This will be a welcomed addition to a side I seldom visit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FlyingShark
Just now, JLean said:

When I can pre-order it?

2 Weeks, be sure.

 

Have a nice day.

 

:salute:

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IAR-80 looks like a modern russian aerobatic plane. It's an awesome addition to the sim. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, rocho said:

The IAR-80 looks like a modern russian aerobatic plane. It's an awesome addition to the sim. 

True, and very similar to the Hughes H-1...

image.jpeg.e192ea877b0934a5413d61a392e8177c.jpeg

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FlyingShark
1 hour ago, carlosstreet said:

IAR 80/81 a favorite of the old 1946  👍

When it'll be released you can show us what you can do with it here.

 

Have a nice day.

 

:salute:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hien-0_1*

The IAR 80/81 is a great asset (for the Stalingrad Map)!


Personally, I would still wish:
- Hs 123
- I 153
- MC.200
(a must!😇 - all aircraft for existing maps: Moscow, Stalingrad)


Thank you for your great work, keep it up 👍

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG4_Kruger
1 hour ago, Hien-0_1* said:

The IAR 80/81 is a great asset (for the Stalingrad Map)!


Personally, I would still wish:
- Hs 123
- I 153
- MC.200
(a must!😇 - all aircraft for existing maps: Moscow, Stalingrad)


Thank you for your great work, keep it up 👍

Please add:

-Tupolev SB

-Martin B-26 Marauder (flyable)

and

Fieseler Fi-156 Storch

to the List. 🙃

 

The red Side doesn't have a single flyable Bomber 😥

Edited by JG4_Kruger
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, JG4_Kruger said:

Please add:

-Tupolev SB

-Martin B-26 Marauder (flyable)

and

Fieseler Fi-156 Storch

to the List. 🙃

 

Don't forget a Partridge in a Pear Tree.  😉

 

"The red Side doesn't have a single flyable Bomber"

BTW, the Pe-2 and A-20 are bombers.  But I agree that the Germans have the He-111 and the Allies don't have a commensurate medium bomber.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

II./SG.1-MarkWilhelmsson
On 6/25/2021 at 6:49 AM, Jason_Williams said:

I wouldn't call it odd per se, maybe overlooked or somewhat forgotten from a nation us in the West don't know much about. In the first half of the war it was a competitive aircraft.

 

Jason 

 

I will not fly it, but I will buy it out of appreciation for the efforts made by the team. Same with C47.

 

As a the absolute biggest Hs129 fan that exists, I am very excited about the new skins. I just achieved my best AT sortie in the 129 a couple days ago on Wings of Liberty - 8x T34s destroyed in one sortie with Mk103 and still had about 20 rounds of 30mm left 😍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG4_Kruger
12 hours ago, Beebop said:

Don't forget a Partridge in a Pear Tree.  😉

 

"The red Side doesn't have a single flyable Bomber"

BTW, the Pe-2 and A-20 are bombers.  But I agree that the Germans have the He-111 and the Allies don't have a commensurate medium bomber.

BTW the Pe-2 and the A-20 would be classified as Attacker like a Ju-88C or a Do-217J. The A in A-20 says it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BlitzPig_EL

The US Army Air Corps in the years leading up to the United States entry into WW2 used the "A" (attack) designation very loosely as a way to get around some pretty restrictive budget limitations imposed by Congress.  Money for new bombers, and fighters, was very tightly controlled by poorly worded legislation, but there was money available for so called "attack" aircraft. Hence the first "Mustangs" used by the US were typed the A-36.   Our light bombers, A 20 and A 26, got caught up in this nomenclature nonsense as well.  What makes it more confusing is that after WW2 the Air Force re designated the A 26 to B 26, thus leading to some confusion among the uninitiated about what aircraft was being talked about, either the earlier Martin B 26 Marauder or the Douglas A/B 26 Invader...  

 

Fun stuff.

Edited by BlitzPig_EL
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR

Looks fantastic with that tail section reminding me a familiar design. Good job! 
93D8F1DA-681C-435B-BFBD-86F30B1B8953.jpeg.25198979b5a094114df76cf4f58e2942.jpeg

5AEFBE35-82DA-4E9C-8BCD-0D04923C4135.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR
19 minutes ago, jeanba said:

Yes, the tail section was taken from the PZL.

 

I would love to learn more about the design and how it affected it aerodynamically.  Looks right but what the pilots said?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FTC_Burdokva

Excellent news! The IAR-80/81 is a beatifull plane and it's always awesome to see such important but lesser known machines get added. 

 

I have to say, Stalingrad and Kuban continue to shape up as the most varied and complete "sets" now. There are still a few important aircraft missing for those battles but the overall variety of available planes has greatly increased over the past couple of years. Thumbs up!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG1_Wittmann

Always  nice to see a new plane added.   Hoping we get the full range of armament available for the type, ( Unlike what we got with the Neutered A6 Armament ) that will make it useful.    It would be nice if this 3rd party creator could whip  up  models of the 3,   5 series fighters  the Italians made.   The Macchi C205,  Fiat G55,  Reggiane Re2005,    have missed having those in game .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good news. IAR is a masterpiece for the eastern front! I hope it wuold be available soonest!

Have a good job devs!!

 

M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VA_SOLIDKREATE
On 6/25/2021 at 5:31 PM, Fafnir_6 said:

 

I'm so happy for you man!  You've been holding out for so long, hoping for this.  It's great to see someone's dream come true.  For the record, I voted for the IAR in that poll for non-German-axis-aircraft all those years ago and this will be a day-one insta-pre-order for me as well.

 

Cheers and thanks to the team as always,

 

Fafnir_6

 

Yeah me too, I think it's been 7 yrs now?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[-=BP=-]Slegawsky_VR
19 hours ago, jeanba said:

Yes, the tail section was taken from the PZL.

 


Despite losing to PZL, an IAR design team led by Ion Grosucontinued work on fighter designs. He was convinced that the low-wing design of the IAR 24 represented a better design than the PZL gull-wing design, which was often referred to as the "Polish wing". Once again the team studied the new PZL fighter looking to incorporate its best features into a new aircraft, and the result was the IAR 80.


Description: Low-wing monoplane fighter with conventional control surface layout.

  • Fuselage: The fuselage was circular in cross-section, turning to egg-shaped behind the cockpit where it incorporated a ridge-back. The general fuselage layout was based on the Polish PZL P.24

The semi-monocoque tail was copied directly from the P.24. The fuselage from the engine back to the cockpit was new, consisting of a welded steel tube frame covered with duralumin sheeting. The wings were mounted low and were of the same design as those used on the early IAR 24, which had competed with the P.24.”


 

So it is how you used to “take” spare parts in 1939. 
Makes me wonder all licence and copyright was destroyed. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams unpinned this topic

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...