Developer Diary 291 - Discussion

[Asgar]

3 minutes ago, I./JG1_Baron said:

 

Swordfish Ju 88, Me 410, He 111 ?

you are absolutely correct ? 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

21 minutes ago, I./JG1_Baron said:

 

Swordfish ?

Bismarck!

[Spaz-505]

Thanks for posting the summary of your flight!.. a great read and a testimony to the realism of the sim!  Nice to see you have some relief from the daily grind to enjoy some of your handy work!  Appreciate the updates on the development side, looking forward to Normandy!!!  Thanks for all you do to continue enhancing and expanding the sim!!!

 

Somewhat out of theatre, I'll throw it out anyways... would love to see it expand into the pacific

[FlyingNutcase]

An engaging read and nice how honest you were about your little piece of "memoir" vs reality.  ?

[Noisemaker]

6 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Driveable jeeps and staff cars confirmed!!  I jest... I know they aren't being made.

 

"Yet".

Once Air Marshall comes into its own, I could imagine jeeps as scouts could come in quite useful.  Plus there are the obvious mods that we could enjoy.

Edited August 27, 2021 by Noisemaker
Internet weirdness causing doubling.

[IckyATLAS]

9 hours ago, Han said:

 

After cutting off the engine and opening the cockpit canopy, the thrill of victory quickly left and a dark feeling of the grave episode of mistaken identity set in – a Willy’s jeep containing the Commissar pulled up.

I suppose that the commissar was dressed in US uniform. So this was a US commissar making sure that you did not say anything bad against capitalizm ?

 

To my knowledge you have a Willy vehicle which had initially the US star on the car front hood but it seems it has been removed (good idea to have a Soviet use), and driver and officer in US uniforms.

 

Having a Soviet Willys with the big red star on the hood and a small red star on the side, and a US Willys with the US circled star on the hood and the corresponding uniforms would be a nice goodie for Santa Claus.

 

 

[BlitzPig_EL]

3 hours ago, I./JG1_Baron said:

 

Swordfish ?

 

B5N

 

[Irishratticus72]

I'm sure Roman will just want to go back to taking his cousin Nico bowling in the future. 

[Alexmarine]

12 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

Bismarck!

 

Channel Dash? With some other ships though...

Edited August 28, 2021 by Alexmarine

[hendrikvanderven]

unbelieveable u choosed the  gleaves class and not the world famous FLOWER  CLASS corvette

[Pict]

20 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

 

Might be fun to captain one for steering only or man a AAA mount. I don't see much more than that, even in fantasy land.

 

What about a PT Boat Commander addon?

 

I reckon that'd be way more fun than a DD and there are already some nice torpedo / patrol boats in game. They could do a couple of simplified player controlled ones like they did with the tanks to see if there's an interest.

[[DTD]Lonestar501]

Really enjoyed the story you shared! Also looking forward to the IAR

[365magamma34]

17 hours ago, 616Sqn_Johnny-Red said:

 

@SCG_FeuerFliegen This sounds very cool, but I've never heard of it before: Is it possible you are mistaken?

 

The only aircraft I know of which could isolate a radiator was the Spitfire IX, and I had assumed that that was for cooling management under normal operating conditions, rather than as an engine survival feature.

 

Any reccomended reading on the subject would be much appreciated ?

109 could do it too. In another famous contemporary simulator there is a model of BF 109 version K, in which this possibility is simulated. You can interrupt the left or right radiator circuit or both if hit. In fact, after a while the disappearance of the vapor trail is also simulated.

 

I am not sure why I have not been flying in 109 for a long time but also With BOS & C. in the G and K models of the 109 there is the possibility of closing the cooling circuits if drilled as it was in reality

 

They talked about it in this topic and it is said that it is not simulated for now the possibility for the 109 g and K to close the cooling circuit

Edited August 28, 2021 by 365magamma34

[BlitzPig_EL]

3 hours ago, hendrikvanderven said:

unbelieveable u choosed the  gleaves class and not the world famous FLOWER  CLASS corvette

 

There were two dozen of the US destroyers of this type taking part in the Normandy landings.  The Flower Class corvettes were out in the Atlantic escorting convoys.  They were dedicated anti submarine assets and would have been wasted if called on for shore bombardment because their armament was so focused on killing submarines, and they are slow by comparison so their ability to get to where they might be needed was not all that good.  The US destroyers were a far better choice, both by the naval leaders of the time, and by the developers here today.

[cardboard_killer]

Considering the mind boggling size of the fleets involved in the landing, I think we all need to remember that there is just a limited time to be spent modeling even common ships. And while I am probably a naval buff as much or more than an aviation buff, I'd prefer planes over ships and boats.

[Avimimus]

On 8/28/2021 at 8:51 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

There were two dozen of the US destroyers of this type taking part in the Normandy landings.  The Flower Class corvettes were out in the Atlantic escorting convoys.  They were dedicated anti submarine assets and would have been wasted if called on for shore bombardment because their armament was so focused on killing submarines, and they are slow by comparison so their ability to get to where they might be needed was not all that good.  The US destroyers were a far better choice, both by the naval leaders of the time, and by the developers here today.

 

I agree. If we were to get a British naval asset - a Motor Gun Boat would be a good choice. They were used to screen the landings, for coastal patrols, and for protecting shipping from German torpedo boats (before, during and after the landing). Since we already have German torpedo boats, it would be good for the Western allies to have one as well.

 

They could also make a good opponent (or nuisance) for German bomber pilots - since they carried a heavy gun armament (e.g. a Fairmile D would have 2x57mm, 4x20mm and 4x.303)!

 

 

 

So the Fairmaile D would probably be the best choice gameplay-wise (as much as I love the brave little Flowers, including HMS Snowflake BlitzPig has a point).

 

 

 

On 8/27/2021 at 10:32 AM, Avimimus said:

Thanks for the updates on the IAR 80/81! I was wondering (as Jason hadn't mentioned it). I'm quite excited to see the progress. Is there any news on the planned variants? My assumption after getting advice from Romanians is that the fact that both the IAR-80 and the IAR-81 are mentioned, combined with the variants confirmed to have been at Moscow and Kerch, means that there would be versions with the short and long wings, and with and without bomb-racks. It'd be nice to have confirmation if this isn't the case - so that we don't get our hopes up. Honestly, I'd be happy to purchase both an IAR-80 and IAR-81 was separate collector planes.

 

Edit - I looked over my notes to try to answer my question about the IAR variants:

 

IAR-80A/IAR-81 Bopi (bomber) both had six machine guns and the short wingspan. The screenshots seem to indicate these variants (Kuban and Stalingrad respectively). That would also explain the IAR-80/81 designation.

 

The IAR-80B had two of the six light machine guns replaced by 13.2mm machine guns and increased wingspan was also at Stalingrad... so that is a plausible additional variant but there is nothing so far to suggest we will get it.

 

See: 

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by Avimimus

[616Sqn_Johnny-Red]

I spotted the Spitfire IX radiator shutdown feature after wondering what the radiator de-icer nozle was for. That was a couple of years ago while I was going over a walk-around modelling guide for skinning. At the time it struck me as a very cute feature but it didn't really think much more about it.

 

I did a rather painful trawl of the internet last night; and found Prien and Rodeike's "Messerschmitt Bf109 F, G and K series". Prien states (p.12 & 14) that the manual isolation valves were kit-based and retrofitted in the field on some Eastern Front F's (some of the inventory of JG51 and JG52), but that the kits (which were very popular) were discontinued and that the feature was never added to production F or incorporated into the G, K (or presumably the previous E).

 

I'm not sure if there's been some misunderstanding here possibly originating from an incomplete quote of Prien's work, as I've stuggled to find any other references to this feature.

 

Ironically I did find through google (as the Il-2 forum search system now seems to be human-proof) a suggestion for isolators for the Bf 109 on the forums here, but I think it still routes back to the Prien's work on the 109; as there is no information provided there which is not listed in his book:

 

 

I think it's also possible that what appears to be a manually controlled valve enabling cold engine starts (isolating the entire radiator circuit) may have also been misinterpretted as representing a different intended feature.

 

If the routine fitting of emergency radiator isolation was a historical reality, it would be great to see it in Il-2, but I'm really struggling to find supporting information in the public domain.

 

***UPDATED INFO***

 

From the same book (p.169) - Prien states that the radiator protection cutoff valves were reinstated on the Kurfurst. 155 pages later ?

 

So no Emils, some Friedrich, no Gustavs, all Kurfurst.

Edited August 28, 2021 by 616Sqn_Johnny-Red
entirely entire

[Jaws2002]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

he screenshots seem to indicate these variants (Kuban and Moscow respectively). That would also explain the IAR-80/81 designation.

 

Easy to distinguish between  IAR-80A and the six guns IAR-81 BOPI (dive bomber), beside the bombing equipment, is the external braces for the horizontal stabilizers, that were introduced in the dive bomber variant. 

[Lusekofte]

Wow. Devs are enjoying their product. 

First time I even thought you guys did that.

To be honest. I have had my most authentic and realistic experience enjoying scripted campaigns and coop. A tremendous potential this game has.

Thanks for the story. And that IAR 80 is a no brainer 

Edited August 28, 2021 by LuseKofte

[Avimimus]

By the way, it may amuse people to know that the 57mm on the Fairmile was equipped with a Molins autoloader - same as the Tse-Tse Mosquito... so we'll definitely see this gun in game (just on an aircraft, not a ship).

[Pict]

19 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Since we already have German torpedo boats, it would be good for the allies to have one as well.

 

We already have allied patrol boats, some fitted with rockets Katusha style and some with turrets T-34 style....lots of nice boats came with Battle of Stalingrad...lest we forget.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Pict

[Cleo9]

The IAR-80 will be a joy to fly !! I will pre-order it the moment it comes out, at full price ? !! Now, if I may say, it would be just great to have, one day, collector planes such as the I-153 or early Yak and LaGG versions... Just dreaming... They would be fun to fly (especially the Chaika) and fight against; from a German perspective, BoM is rather repetitive to play in career mode if you fly, for instance, the Bf109. After a while, you only encounter Mig3s. During the first few missions, I-16s and P40s are around, but not for long, and you never see the Hurricane. It would be great to wrestle against other foes.

Edited August 29, 2021 by Cleo9

[Avimimus]

4 hours ago, Pict said:

We already have allied patrol boats, some fitted with rockets Katusha style and some with turrets T-34 style....lots of nice boats came with Battle of Stalingrad...lest we forget.

 

Corrected. I'm certainly aware of the G5 and the fact that the Soviets were our Allies and decisive in winning the war.

[Startrek66]

On 8/27/2021 at 1:42 PM, [F.Circus]FrangibleCover said:

Any information yet on which versions of the IAR we're getting? I have been assuming only 80A/81A suitable for Stalingrad, but I think we could plausibly see everything from the bone stock IAR 80 to the long wing 81C and late model 80M.

If I'm not mistaken, Iar80 can also be found on Kuban, with Escadrila 43 Grupul 3. 

6 hours ago, Cleo9 said:

The IAR-80 will be a joy to fly !! I will pre-order it the moment it comes out, at full price ? !! Now, if I may say, it would be just great to have, one day, collector planes such as the I-153 or early Yak and LaGG versions... Just dreaming... They would be fun to fly (especially the Chaika) and fight against; from a German perspective, BoM is rather repetitive to play in career mode if you fly, for instance, the Bf109. After a while, you only encounter Mig3s. During the first few missions, I-16s and P40s are around, but not for long, and you never see the Hurricane. It would be great to wrestle against other foes.

And I would also add a Saetta , what do you think?

[Avimimus]

On 8/29/2021 at 12:41 PM, Startrek66 said:

If I'm not mistaken, Iar80 can also be found on Kuban, with Escadrila 43 Grupul 3. 

And I would also add a Saetta , what do you think?

 

After consulting with Jaws2002, the plausible ones are:

Stalingrad - IAR-80B (Increased wingspan fighter upgunned with 13.2mm machine guns)

Stalingrad - IAR-81 (Narrow wingspan diver bomber)

Kuban - IAR-80A (Narrow wingspan fighter)

 

It sounds like the IAR-81C (20mm cannon, and sometimes 2xSC50 with no dive bombing equipment) were in use in Crimea and Ukraine in 1943... but that is a little bit too far west (and a bit late) for Kuban.

 

If I am correct, the screenshots posted would seem to be IAR-80A (Kuban)... the fact that it is listed as IAR80/81 would suggest that we are likely to see the IAR-81 (Stalingrad)... but the IAR-80B (Stalingrad) is presumably less likely, as it would require a new wing... however, it seems possible at least.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Avimimus

[DN308]

Maybe an evidence for what would come after BoN

[ITAF_Rani]

15 hours ago, Startrek66 said:

21 hours ago, Cleo9 said:

 

 

 

15 hours ago, Startrek66 said:

And I would also add a Saetta , what do you think?

A must in planeset BOM

Edited August 30, 2021 by ITAF_Rani

[Pict]

On 8/28/2021 at 3:49 PM, cardboard_killer said:

I'd prefer planes over ships and boats.

 

I feel the same, especially about the one I'm flying...

 

British road signs almost nailed this once...

 

 

but failed on both counts, as is often the case with things governmental...stress on the mental  

Edited August 30, 2021 by Pict

[Jaws2002]

19 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

After consulting with Jaws2002, the plausible ones are:

Moscow - IAR-80B (Increased wingspan fighter upgunned with 13.2mm machine guns)

Moscow - IAR-81 (Narrow wingspan diver bomber)

Kuban - IAR-80A (Narrow wingspan fighter)

 

It sounds like the IAR-81C (20mm cannon, and sometimes 2xSC50 with no dive bombing equipment) were in use in Crimea and Ukraine in 1943... but that is a little bit too far west (and a bit late) for Kuban.

 

If I am correct, the screenshots posted would seem to be IAR-80A (Kuban)... the fact that it is listed as IAR80/81 would suggest that we are likely to see the IAR-81 (Moscow)... but the IAR-80B (Moscow) is presumably less likely, as it would require a new wing... however, it seems possible at least.

 

Romanians didn't fight in battle for Moscow. They were only involved in the south. Moldova, Ukraine, Crimea, Stalingrad, Kuban and then the retreat back to Romania. The fighters also fought against the USAAF raids to Ploiesti. 

 After August 23 1944 they fought against axis in Romania, Hungary, Slovakia and Austria. IAR-80s were active from day one in the east, until the last day of the war in Europe.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Jaws2002

[CountZero]

If they are adding IAR-80/81 i think normal thing would be to add anything it had as posible modifications options, like they did with Hurrican for example, especialy if airplane is not changed mutch from one type to other.

Edited August 30, 2021 by CountZero

[Jaws2002]

Just now, CountZero said:

If they are adding IAR 80/81 i think normal thing would be to add anything it had, like they did with Hurrican for example, especialy if airplane is not changed mutch from one type to other.

 

Agree. The versions could be made with the arming menu. 

 

[Juri_JS]

20 minutes ago, CountZero said:

If they are adding IAR-80/81 i think normal thing would be to add anything it had as posible modifications options, like they did with Hurrican for example, especialy if airplane is not changed mutch from one type to other.

Didn't the wingspan change between the different IAR-80/81 versions?

[Startrek66]

1 hour ago, Juri_JS said:

Didn't the wingspan change between the different IAR-80/81 versions?

IAR 81 did not present substantial structural differences.  The only significant modification concerned the installation of a ventral attack for a bomb, placed in the lower part of the fuselage. 

[Bremspropeller]

7 hours ago, Pict said:

 

I feel the same, especially about the one I'm flying...

 

British road signs almost nailed this once...

 

 

but failed on both counts, as is often the case with things governmental...stress on the mental  

 

So you're not allowed to jump over cars on your motorcycle?

 

What kind of post-apocalyptic dystopian tyranny is that?

[Jaws2002]

2 hours ago, Juri_JS said:

Didn't the wingspan change between the different IAR-80/81 versions?

Yes. Starting with the airframe #201 (IAR-80B) the wingspan increased by half meter.

 

57 minutes ago, Startrek66 said:

IAR 81 did not present substantial structural differences.  The only significant modification concerned the installation of a ventral attack for a bomb, placed in the lower part of the fuselage. 

 There were more modifications as time went on. The airframe was strengthen, the tail got external braces, the second oil radiator was installed in the left wing, the supercharger intake got an external filter, connected to the main gear, the plane got armored windshield, with the thickness being increased multiple times, self sealing fuel tanks, the wings were redesigned and modified multiple times.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Jaws2002

[Startrek66]

35 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

Yes. Starting with the airframe #201 (IAR-80B) the wingspan increased by half meter.

 

 There were more modifications as time went on. The airframe was strengthen, the tail got external braces, the second oil radiator was installed in the left wing, the supercharger intake got an external filter, connected to the main gear, the plane got armored windshield, with the thickness being increased multiple times, self sealing fuel tanks, the wings were redesigned and modified multiple times.

Thank you for the information. I do not have such detailed technical literature and I have based myself on what can be found on Wiki.

[Avimimus]

4 hours ago, Jaws2002 said:

Romanians didn't fight in battle for Moscow. They were only involved in the south. Moldova, Ukraine, Crimea, Stalingrad, Kuban and then the retreat back to Romania. The fighters also fought against the USAAF raids to Ploiesti. 

 After August 23 1944 they fought against axis in Romania, Hungary, Slovakia and Austria. IAR-80s were active from day one in the east, until the last day of the war in Europe.

 

Hello sir & everyone else present.

 

Please allow me to apologise for being a complete idiot. I was thinking of Stalingrad... I was remembering the landscape of Stalingrad... and I was writing Moscow... (because Moscow was the second module released). This is the stupidest possible mistake. I've read histories of both battles. I know both landscapes. I've read about Romanian units... and I still... just exchanged the words. I might have well been saying Los Angeles!

 

I suppose the only mitigating factor to this (and my torpedo boat comment) is that I'm a little star struck by getting the IAR.

Edited August 30, 2021 by Avimimus

[[F.Circus]FrangibleCover]

Later on in the war some of the short wing IARs were updated with MG 151/20s as the IAR.80M, so we could get that even if (justifiably) the long wing IAR is too much work for a single module. They wouldn't belong in any of the single player campaigns that we have so far, but neither do the uparmed Hurricanes or the 20mm Macchi. It would certainly give the type some much-needed punch in multiplayer servers.

[BlitzPig_EL]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

I might have well been saying Los Angeles!

 

 

 

[Pict]

6 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

So you're not allowed to jump over cars on your motorcycle?

 

What kind of post-apocalyptic dystopian tyranny is that?

 

A Brutish one...I mean British  

 

There's an interesting story about how these signs came into being...ok it's not that interesting, but it's a story and it's here https://www.carkeys.co.uk/news/the-surprising-story-behind-britain-s-road-signs

 

They designed their own font out of scratch...called it "transport" in that understated manner  

 

Edited August 30, 2021 by Pict