Jet Planes

[Dragon1-1]

P-80 would be a sweet collector aircraft for the Italian front. They weren't used much in WWII, but it was a really nice jet. Of course, that would require us to have the Italian front in the first place. Which we should get, because it's a very interesting piece of history that severely overlooked. I believe Wings of Prey, of all things, had an Italian campaign, but besides that, it hardly gets any coverage outside a handful of books and movies (virtually all focused on Monte Cassino, admittedly a really impressive battle, but hardly the only thing that happened there). Well, that and a Sabaton song or two.  

Edited January 9, 2022 by Dragon1-1

[Ribbon]

No jets please!

Heavy/medium bombers, torpedo bombers, MTO, PTO....so much more important content missing from the ww2 game.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Can't really argue with =VARP=Ribbon here.  I'd say the Meteor has a place, and leave the kerosene burners alone otherwise.  The sim does need more of the "work a day" planes of WW2, before any paper napkin drawing exotica.

 

A flyable US or RAF medium bomber is really needed, urgently, to flesh out what we have already. That along with the Mosquito, 410, and C47 that are already in the pipeline would really give us a well rounded set of aircraft for the theaters and mission types we have in the sim currently.

 

As for what's next?  We all have our preferences, and have voiced them repeatedly, so I'll just wait and see what comes in the future, and go from there.

[zan64]

i would enjoy meteor as a collector plane, just so we can get some jet combat on multi

[Trooper117]

As to Korea, no one else is doing a bona fide Korean theatre properly, with proper maps and a wide selection of aircraft and ground assets.

It would be a coup and a feather in the cap for Jason and crew to pull that one off.

(Don't count DCS as they have a couple of really nice aircraft of the period but jack all else).

[Alexmarine]

19 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

As to Korea, no one else is doing a bona fide Korean theatre properly, with proper maps and a wide selection of aircraft and ground assets.

It would be a coup and a feather in the cap for Jason and crew to pull that one off.

(Don't count DCS as they have a couple of really nice aircraft of the period but jack all else).

 

Technically their Sabre is not even a Korea one, it's a USAFE nuclear-capable Sabre with early Sidewinders adaptors (no idea from where those came tbh)

 

Agree with you on all other premises though 

[JamesJninFS]

Personally for me Korea would be my number one pick for a new theater if going off of personal preference alone. Not just because of some jet v jet fights, but also the clashing of modern (for the 50's) and old designs always fascinated me, On the more practical side though I'd question how feasible the map would be, I'm not sure how Korea compares to the size of other IL-2 maps, but I would assume it would be on the large end of what the team's done. Plus it would potentially need to span a entire three year war, not just a couple of months like the all other maps. Also I see issues with aircraft selection on the North Korean side, as they didn't use many types, maybe just enough aircraft to fill out all five slots, but nothing more than that.

[Vig]

Korea would be fine; if bomber formations, the MTO, the Battle of Britain, the Battle of France, and the Pacific are out, there is really nowhere else to go except Finland (which is also fine by me).  I could get behind a F-84 or a Finnish Brewster.  The Meteor would be nice if they were winding up development and wanted to give us something to balance the Me 262.  But cranking out wunderwaffen, prototypes, and last-minute improvisations would be unseemly.  This has been a good series, that's not the way to go out.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Vig

[Alexmarine]

45 minutes ago, JamesJninFS said:

Also I see issues with aircraft selection on the North Korean side, as they didn't use many types, maybe just enough aircraft to fill out all five slots, but nothing more than that.

 

MiG-15

Yak-9P

La-9/11

Il-10

Tu-2

(Yak-11/Po-2)

 

No need to cover the entire war, our current modules cover 5-7 months periods, do the same there and it's fine, add more stuff with collector's plane

Edited January 11, 2022 by Alexmarine

[CountZero]

meteor is only other ww2 jet that fits game maps so i expect that one to be next jet, dont expect any more german jets.

[zan64]

 i mean mig alley was near the western half of the china-north korea border, so would need to make a map of most of korea, at 2/3 of korea to account for the allied air bases in the south, and additional border region of china.... korea was quite deforested at this time and rural so might be doable! 

[=EXPEND=CG_Justin]

I would buy Korea. My question would be what the N. Korean plane set looks like.

[Alexmarine]

1 hour ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

I would buy Korea. My question would be what the N. Korean plane set looks like.

 

On 1/11/2022 at 9:41 PM, Alexmarine said:

 

MiG-15

Yak-9P

La-9/11

Il-10

Tu-2

(Yak-11/Po-2)

 

No need to cover the entire war, our current modules cover 5-7 months periods, do the same there and it's fine, add more stuff with collector's plane

 

Red side will be a shared NK/Chinese/Soviet set

 

Expanding on it a Blue side can be:

F-86A

F-80C

F-84E

B-26B/C Invader

F-51D-25

 

Setting the module to the winter 1951/1952 period covering mainly the Korean western coast (MiG alley)

 

Expand blu set with a later USN light carrier pack (F4U-4 Corsair and AD-4 Skyraider) and a RN light carrier pack (Sea Fury or Seafire and Fireflies)

Edited January 13, 2022 by Alexmarine

[453=SGII_Wotan]

From what I have read the TA152 H did see active service, Willi Reschke rings a bell. I have never read of the salamander being in actual combat.

I have read of one report of a DO335 running away from Tempests.

 

The sim needs to maintain its historical flavor (opinion)

 

Wotan

[=EXPEND=CG_Justin]

46 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

 

Expand blu set with a later USN light carrier pack (F4U-4 Corsair and AD-4 Skyraider) and a RN light carrier pack (Sea Fury or Seafire and Fireflies)

 

 

If we are going to have carrier aircraft, why not the F9F Panther as well?

[Alexmarine]

4 minutes ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

 

If we are going to have carrier aircraft, why not the F9F Panther as well?

 

Western coast saw mainly the light carriers operating given the shallow waters and the proximity to chinese held coast (while the fleet carriers covered the eastern coast), concentrating on the light carriers first also meant less work and no immediate need of complex catapult system modelling. Of course this can be changed as needed, I also like the Panthers and the Banshees and definitely want to see them fly in a modern sim 

[BlitzPig_EL]

The first air kill in Korea by the USAF was an F-82 Twin Mustang shooting down a Yak 9.  The original North Korean Air Force was essentially wiped out very early on, as was their army, which forced the hand of the Soviets and Red Chinese to enter the war.

[Diggun]

Just now, BlitzPig_EL said:

F-82 Twin Mustang

I've got an original Night Recognition sheet for an F-82 on my living room wall. I'll try and take a photo later if I remember. It's six hilariously black rectangles with some very faint exhaust trails....

[Cpt_Siddy]

Sure is War Thunder here.  

 

But yeah, Meteor is only reasonable addition to existing maps. P-80 if Italy is a thing but considering the brisk phase of development that quality model needs, Meteor is obviously the low hanging fruit in here. 

[Alexmarine]

3 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

 

 

Red side will be a shared NK/Chinese/Soviet set

 

Expanding on it a Blue side can be:

F-86A

F-80C

F-84E

B-26B/C Invader

F-51D-25

 

Setting the module to the winter 1951/1952 period covering mainly the Korean western coast (MiG alley)

 

Expand blu set with a later USN light carrier pack (F4U-4 Corsair and AD-4 Skyraider) and a RN light carrier pack (Sea Fury or Seafire and Fireflies)

 

Have to correct myself: seems no Skyraider operated from the USN light carriers, so only USMC Corsairs for them

[zan64]

i would die flight-sim happy with that plane set. but for the here and now, i think meteor though must be a secret plane with V-1 assets

[Avimimus]

7 hours ago, =EXPEND=CG_Justin said:

I would buy Korea. My question would be what the N. Korean plane set looks like.

 

Very limited:

- Mig-15 and Mig-15 Bis

- Il-10 (used up early in the war)

- A few piston engined fighters (La-9, Yak-9U or P)

Note: One could also simulate a Chinese Tu-2 (a few were shot down at the edge of Korean airspace) or Mig-9 (considered for deployment but not used) if one was desperate for variety.

 

The DPRK's air-force was very effective at the start of the war, but then ceased to do anything other than night attacks (sometimes with biplanes) and harassing NATO/UN forces with the Mig-15. The game would essentially take the form of U.S. aircraft attacking ground targets with very rare interactions with a handful of Mig-15. This is why doing a European scenario allows for so much more diversity.

 

So I would go with something like the following:

 

Europe (1948-1955):

Mig-17A

La-15

Mig-9

Sabre Mk.5 (or the definitive CL-13 Mk.6 Sabre)

de Havilland Venom FB.1

de Havilland Vampire FB.5 (armoured ground attack version)

F-84F

Il-10M

Canberra B.Mk2 (or Canberra B(I).6 intruder of ~1954)

Il-28

 

Korea (1950-1953):

Mig-15

Mig-15 Bis/SB

La-9?

F-86A

F-86F

F-84G

F-80

Meteor F.8 (RAAF)

AD-4 Skyraider (USMC)

F-51? F-82E?

Il-10? Tu-2?

 

With maybe the Yak-15 or F-82E as collector aircraft...

 

Note: A number of the aircraft could be used in both Europe and Korea (e.g. F-84F, F-84G, Il-10, Meteor F.8, F-86)

Edited January 13, 2022 by Avimimus

[Voidhunger]

5 hours ago, IISG2_Wotan said:

From what I have read the TA152 H did see active service, Willi Reschke rings a bell. I have never read of the salamander being in actual combat.

I have read of one report of a DO335 running away from Tempests.

 

The sim needs to maintain its historical flavor (opinion)

 

Wotan

Heinhel was in combat in JG1 in April 1945 according the book from Robert Forsyth - He162 Volksjager units

[Alexmarine]

55 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 This is why doing a European scenario allows for so much more diversity.

 

Every single European scenario from 1950 to 1989 be like:

[BlitzPig_EL]

Precisely.

 

Let's stick to WW2.   There are lots of areas that could, and should, be covered by the sim before we even think of getting to Korea.

[40plus]

21 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Precisely.

 

Let's stick to WW2.   There are lots of areas that could, and should, be covered by the sim before we even think of getting to Korea.

This.

 

My interest in this title ends when it leaves the historical European/African theater of Operations (WW1/2).

 

 

Edited January 13, 2022 by 40plus

[Trooper117]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Precisely.

 

Let's stick to WW2.   There are lots of areas that could, and should, be covered by the sim before we even think of getting to Korea.

 

However, when the developers state they would like to do it, you know it's something they have in the wings. (be sure)

[Furni]

I’m happy to stay in WW2, Korea would be a favourite of mine but can’t see that happening just yet, like it’s been said already plenty for WW1 and WW2 to do first.

 

Not keen of the 1946 + ‘what if’ scenario though

[Ribbon]

2 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

 

Every single European scenario from 1950 to 1989 be like:

 

Fell 1m near the tank...tank survives?

....or in score; one building destroyed ?

[Alexmarine]

4 minutes ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

 

Fell 1m near the tank...tank survives?

....or in score; one building destroyed ?

 

Back in my day you only needed a fully loaded P-47 

 

(Don't mind that this was when the P-47 was still made of glass and an AA piece disintegrated my ride as soon as I had committed the warcrime...)

[Ribbon]

2 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

 

Back in my day you only needed a fully loaded P-47 

 

(Don't mind that this was when the P-47 was still made of glass and an AA piece disintegrated my ride as soon as I had committed the warcrime...)

And some were complaining about .50cal ??

[Alexmarine]

1 minute ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

And some were complaining about .50cal ??

 

Ah, didn't had the time to use the .50s in that particular sortie, be sure that the kill count would have been twice those numbers if I did 

[JamesJninFS]

I don't see a 46 scenario happening, if the Pacific is a struggle then I can only imagine how much of a pain it would be to work out how to model aircraft that were never built or flew. And while personally I'm not completely opposed to the idea like others here, I also would rather see Korea be made if we're gonna advance IL-2 beyond 1945. Some types like the IL-10 & A-26 could be modified for use in WW2 campaigns, if not immediately then as a collector aircraft down the line. While others like the F-80 could still be useful in community made alt-history WW2 missions and campaigns.

[Rjel]

1 hour ago, JamesJninFS said:

I don't see a 46 scenario happening, if the Pacific is a struggle then I can only imagine how much of a pain it would be to work out how to model aircraft that were never built or flew. And while personally I'm not completely opposed to the idea like others here, I also would rather see Korea be made if we're gonna advance IL-2 beyond 1945. Some types like the IL-10 & A-26 could be modified for use in WW2 campaigns, if not immediately then as a collector aircraft down the line. While others like the F-80 could still be useful in community made alt-history WW2 missions and campaigns.

I don't think they'd even need to consider trying to model any paper airplanes because of the rapid influx of jet fighters toward the end of WWII and the year or so afterwards. Neither would they have to focus on Allies vs Axis. With the rapid deterioration of trust between the East and West, there would be enough aircraft models for several maps. But, that's just me thinking out loud. Like I mentioned earlier, I like the what ifs in history. 

[453=SGII_Wotan]

7 hours ago, Voidhunger said:

Heinhel was in combat in JG1 in April 1945 according the book from Robert Forsyth - He162 Volksjager units

Any evidence of the pilots names themselves, I never knew the HE 162 flew in combat, I thought it was the ME 262 and the ME 163 rocket fighter

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

34 minutes ago, IISG2_Wotan said:

Any evidence of the pilots names themselves, I never knew the HE 162 flew in combat, I thought it was the ME 262 and the ME 163 rocket fighter

It flew in very limited numbers, I seem to recall there were 115’ish in service. It was supposed to be a Volksjager but it’s slow speed handling was terrible so it ended up with mostly seasoned pilots at the controls. I’ve only read of one confirmed kill. This is from memory so I will defer to any better authority who presents sources.

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, II/JG17_HerrMurf said:

It flew in very limited numbers, I seem to recall there were 115’ish in service. It was supposed to be a Volksjager but it’s slow speed handling was terrible so it ended up with mostly seasoned pilots at the controls. I’ve only read of one confirmed kill. This is from memory so I will defer to any better authority who presents sources.

 

That's pretty much what happened - a fair number were built but few saw actual combat, given their very late introduction into the conflict.

 

On a side note, years ago I was able to visit one of the manufacturing sites for the He 162 at Hinterbruhl in Austria - it's way, way below ground. Quite the neat experience.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seegrotte

[CAFulcrum]

Targetware had a Korean module.  Jet to jet is sort of fun, very fast high-g fights starting at medium to high altitude and winding up in the weeds.  A lot of prop planes -- advanced Yaks, P82, Corsair, etc.  Then a number of disappointing and helpless american jets that get eaten for breakfast by the mig17, then the f86 which is more or less at parity.  The big problem is that the landscape would be totally new, and have to be fairly large to contain the radius and speed of jet aircraft.  Korea has a pretty complex geography compared to the rolling plains of farmland and trees in Europe.

[Eisenfaustus]

1 hour ago, CAFulcrum said:

Then a number of disappointing and helpless american jets that get eaten for breakfast by the mig17

I think you mean mig 15…

And I don’t agree on your assessment. 
 

1 hour ago, CAFulcrum said:

The big problem is that the landscape would be totally new

Like Kuban was, like Rhineland was, like Normandy will be…

 

1 hour ago, CAFulcrum said:

and have to be fairly large to contain the radius and speed of jet aircraft

Our current map size would be more then sufficient to have jet on jet combat. 
 

How far soviet and allied air bases were from each other I don’t know though. 
 

1 hour ago, CAFulcrum said:

Korea has a pretty complex geography compared to the rolling plains of farmland and trees in Europe.

What rolling plains? Have you ever seen the Rhineland? Or Normandy? Or Southern England?

[Alexmarine]

41 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

 

How far soviet and allied air bases were from each other I don’t know though. 

 

 

Probably around 250km between them (at most). This isn't an issue in any case given that nobody will force MP servers or people wanting to play in Quick Missions to use the historical distances. Even for careers there are tools to avoid long flights (air start, being able to quit a mission as long as is a success, etc.)