Jet Planes

[CUJO_1970]

Hard to imagine anything more yawn inducing than Korea.

 

It makes me sleepy just thinking about it. ?

[Bremspropeller]

Oppan Gangnam Style...

[Alexmarine]

8 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

Oppan Gangnam Style...

 

Il-2: SQUID GAMES ❗❗ 

 

?

[Rjel]

1 hour ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Hard to imagine anything more yawn inducing than Korea.

 

It makes me sleepy just thinking about it. ?

Ask 100 simmers what they like and get 101 different replies. I don't see a Korean map being all that much different than what we fly now. Air to air with many possibilities of dissimilar types engaging. Ground support. Interdiction. The same four seasons as in Europe. Mountainous landscapes to fly over bordered by lowlands and the sea. Sound very similar to what and how we fly now which would likely be the same as it would if we went to the Med, the PTO or God knows where else.

[Vig]

Korea's aircraft are, to me, a lot more interesting than what's left in late-war terrestrial European theaters.  Trouble with Korea, though, is that, without heavy bombers, there is no US incentive to fly at the kind of altitudes that gave the MiG-15s their best performance advantage.  Once again, the problem is the game engine.

Edited January 16, 2022 by Vig

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Hard to imagine anything more yawn inducing than Korea.

 

It makes me sleepy just thinking about it. ?

You dont have to worry, there is no way we get Korean DLC in this game, just in game map of late part of war yould have to be min 500x500km, if you pick any other part of war youll need 1000km+ maps, distances betwen closest mig15vsf86 bases were 350-400km, just all differant versions of F-86 would take 5 UN slots...

 

1 hour ago, Vig said:

Korea's aircraft are, to me, a lot more interesting than what's left in late-war terrestrial European theaters.  Trouble with Korea, though, is that, without heavy bombers, there is no US incentive to fly at the kind of altitudes that gave the MiG-15s their best performance advantage.  Once again, the problem is the game engine.

You would not need B-29s, they flew az night after migs stop them from doing day bombings... problem with it is map size, planset, and naval actions...

[Alexmarine]

5 hours ago, CountZero said:

if you pick any other part of war youll need 1000km+ maps, 

 

Nonsense, it would be like saying that because we have 1944/1945 ETO scenarios in the game we needed the entire western portion of Europe, from England to Switzerland portraied instead of just the Rhineland area

 

5 hours ago, CountZero said:

distances betwen closest mig15vsf86 bases were 350-400km

 

Irrelevant: irrelevant to MP where nobody force mission creators to use historical airfields; irrelevant to SP where no one forces players to create missions with historical airfields; irrelevant to career mode where the entire point is exactly to recreate the historical situation

 

5 hours ago, CountZero said:

just all differant versions of F-86 would take 5 UN slots...

 

 

First: we have the modification system exactly to have more option to a single plane slot, did we got 5/6 Hurricane or just one with half a dozen options?

 

Second: it makes no sense that a Korean War module has for some reason to cover the entire 3 years and 1 month conflict in just one module, it would be like saying that when Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad was launched they had the "obligation" to cover the entire WW2 from 1939 to 1945, and accomodate more than a dozen 109 variants to cover the entire war.

The current modules cover 5-7 months periods, the same can be done with Korea

 

As for the naval component I already pushed that the Korean War module should in any case concentrate on the Western Coast and MiG Alley action, focusing on the USAF interdiction campaign, some naval stuff that can be added as collectors planes (which would also help funding some of the required carrier assets) are USN Corsairs and Royal Navy Seafire/Seafury and Fireflies that operated on the west coast from light carriers. This small pool of naval planes and assets is perfect for a first foray of the game engine into naval action given the small size.

[iFoxRomeo]

A Gloster Meteor I/III with mods for Derwent 37 engines from 1600lbs up to 2400lbs thrust and a P-80A would be great Collector Planes.

 

 

Korea? Hell yeah.

But there are issues, not only with the map.

 

 

Planned Normandy(300kmx340km) projected over Korea:

 

[Eisenfaustus]

4 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

irrelevant to career mode where the entire point is exactly to recreate the historical situation

Extremely relevant as if the historical situation is unsuited for a fun il2 style career that is an important point. 
 

A Lw career in Rhineland is boring enough with all the marching time - that same thing three times worse? No thanks

 

If that is what historically happened - does anybody know how long an average sortie with air combat over Korea was for Sabre/Mig pilots actually was?

[zan64]

1 minute ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Extremely relevant as if the historical situation is unsuited for a fun il2 style career that is an important point. 
 

A Lw career in Rhineland is boring enough with all the marching time - that same thing three times worse? No thanks

 

If that is what historically happened - does anybody know how long an average sortie with air combat over Korea was for Sabre/Mig pilots actually was?

well jets go a lot faster so one would be in the battle much quicker than wwii. korea missions were pretty much the same as wwii but unlike wwii which was one sided korea had no shortage of air opposition for either faction. 20 on 20 jet furballs sound quite fun, but just an opinion

[Trooper117]

13 hours ago, CUJO_1970 said:

Hard to imagine anything more yawn inducing than Korea.

 

Well, if they did make Korea, try to think of the positives... 

1. You would save yourself some money because you wouldn't have to buy it.

2. Because the whole thing makes you sleepy you would get a great nights sleep.

3. You wouldn't have to trawl through any section of the forums that mention Korea as it doesn't interest you.

4. Think of the time you will save by not looking at Korea threads.

5. The time saved will allow you to devote yourself to things you do like.

[Alexmarine]

9 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

 

But there are issues, not only with the map.

 

 

Planned Normandy(300kmx340km) projected over Korea:

 

 

You are actually showing that map is not an issue with Korea, that's exactly what you need for the module I would supported

6 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Extremely relevant as if the historical situation is unsuited for a fun il2 style career that is an important point. 
 

A Lw career in Rhineland is boring enough with all the marching time - that same thing three times worse? No thanks

 

If that is what historically happened - does anybody know how long an average sortie with air combat over Korea was for Sabre/Mig pilots actually was?

 

Everyone is so focused on the distance between the two sides airfields... What are you guys? MP vulchers?

 

Seems like everyone is forgetting that interdiction strikes were mounted along the entire depth of communist owned territory, along with Cherokee strikes that covered the immediate area behind the frontline and close air support strikes that were just above the actual frontline. All with variable time spent in flight.

 

Also, have you guys ever flow some of the bomber career in game already? Some units have missions in excess of one hour of flight time. Rhineland career is also an example of long flight times for all air units involved, the only thing keeping it back is the lack of drop tanks.

3 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Well, if they did make Korea, try to think of the positives... 

1. You would save yourself some money because you wouldn't have to buy it.

2. Because the whole thing makes you sleepy you would get a great nights sleep.

3. You wouldn't have to trawl through any section of the forums that mention Korea as it doesn't interest you.

4. Think of the time you will save by not looking at Korea threads.

5. The time saved will allow you to devote yourself to things you do like.

 

Don't forget the real positive:

 

The first Luftwaffe-free module of the Great Battles series ?

[Cpt_Siddy]

12 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

 

Il-2: SQUID GAMES ❗❗ 

 

 

Sequel to Snakes on the planes. 

[Irishratticus72]

28 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

A Gloster Meteor I/III with mods for Derwent 37 engines from 1600lbs up to 2400lbs thrust and a P-80A would be great Collector Planes.

 

 

Korea? Hell yeah.

But there are issues, not only with the map.

 

 

Planned Normandy(300kmx340km) projected over Korea:

 

Just so you know, Samsung has brought out a smaller Korea, with even more features. 

[Eisenfaustus]

2 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

What are you guys? MP vulchers?

 

2 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

Rhineland career is also an example of long flight times for all air units involved

Just out of curiosity - did you even read the quote you seem to be answering?

[Eisenfaustus]

2 hours ago, zan64 said:

well jets go a lot faster so one would be in the battle much quicker than wwii. korea missions were pretty much the same as wwii but unlike wwii which was one sided korea had no shortage of air opposition for either faction. 20 on 20 jet furballs sound quite fun, but just an opinion

If a sabre cruises 70% faster but has to fly 70% further it takes the same time to reach the target - that’s why I asked for average sortie time. 

In WWII in certain areas at certain times one side had more or less uncontested air supremacy - certainly not during the whole war. In Korea the Allies were clearly superior in the air during the whole Korean War - with a short time of shock when the Mig 15 entered the Battlefield for the first time.

 

And I envy your machine if 20 vs 20 aireal battles with an ongoing war around you doesn’t turn on slomo ^^

[iFoxRomeo]

9 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

If that is what historically happened - does anybody know how long an average sortie with air combat over Korea was for Sabre/Mig pilots actually was?

Sabres overall average sortie time was 1:24h during the war.

 

Gaming experience from DCS in the spoiler:

Spoiler

I have a DCS Server, "Over by Christmas", that's running a Korean style mission with 94% of the real distance between K-13(Suwon) and Antung.

20-25 minutes from K-13 to Antung, then 20-30 minutes in the area, then 20-25 minutes back to K-13. With 120gal droptanks.

 

I have no flight time stats about MiG missions.

But to get an idea. MiGs were not allowed to fly south of Pyongyang - Wonsan line or over the sea.

Antung to Pyongyang: ~170km

Antung to Wonsan: ~290km

The area of operations for the MiG was smaller than the one for the Sabres.

 

 

7 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

You are actually showing that map is not an issue with Korea, that's exactly what you need for the module I would supported

If a Korean Map was made, I would want it to go from coast to coast. But if that's not possible because the surface would be as repetitive as "Bodenplatte", I would take the "Normandy size" also. I see other issues that are bigger than the map size: Historical accuracy! Well actually its not an issue for me, but for the majority here I'd guess.

 

 

13 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

Everyone is so focused on the distance between the two sides airfields... What are you guys? MP vulchers?

Often enough F-86s vulched Antung, but the gun-footage unfortunately "got lost" or was "overexposed" nearly every time a Sabre happened to fly over the North Korean border....

 

1 hour ago, Alexmarine said:

Seems like everyone is forgetting that interdiction strikes were mounted along the entire depth of communist owned territory, along with Cherokee strikes that covered the immediate area behind the frontline and close air support strikes that were just above the actual frontline. All with variable time spent in flight.

Yes, by blue aircraft. But not by red aircraft, after the stalemate(with one exeption). And the "Normady size" map would be the stalemate map.

So the only aircraft for red for this map would be the MiG-15 and the U-2/Po-2(Bedcheck Charlie)

 

[CUJO_1970]

5 hours ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Well, if they did make Korea, try to think of the positives... 

1. You would save yourself some money because you wouldn't have to buy it.

2. Because the whole thing makes you sleepy you would get a great nights sleep.

3. You wouldn't have to trawl through any section of the forums that mention Korea as it doesn't interest you.

4. Think of the time you will save by not looking at Korea threads.

5. The time saved will allow you to devote yourself to things you do like.

These are all great points, thanks.

To be fair this was a jet thread that unfortunately became a Korea thread. Had I known trust me I would have avoided it like the plague.

 

(unless I wanted to take a nap or something)

5 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

Don't forget the real positive:

 

The first Luftwaffe-free module of the Great Battles series ?

Yes, but chock full of whiners still since the biggest demographic will be Yankees. ?

[Jaws2002]

The Mig-15's were sent to Korea to fight the B29's. A Korea expansion of the current game engine can't do B29's the way it was supposed to be done. 

Edited January 16, 2022 by Jaws2002

[szelljr]

I want a MIG15!!!   Punct.   Thread closed. ?

Edited January 16, 2022 by szelljr

[Alexmarine]

30 minutes ago, Jaws2002 said:

The Mig-15's were sent to Korea to fight the B29's. 

 

The MiG-15 were sent to Korea to fight the B-29s. The MiG-15 of course didn't cared and kept shooting down other types of enemy planes from Spring of 1951 to Summer 1953 after driving those Superfortress away 

[Jaws2002]

45 minutes ago, Alexmarine said:

 

The MiG-15 were sent to Korea to fight the B-29s. The MiG-15 of course didn't cared and kept shooting down other types of enemy planes from Spring of 1951 to Summer 1953 after driving those Superfortress away 

 

 

What made you think I don't know that.   I just said that B-29 played a major part in the escalation of the air war over Korea. 

 

[Alexmarine]

[JV69badatflyski]

11 hours ago, iFoxRomeo said:

A Gloster Meteor I/III with mods for Derwent 37 engines from 1600lbs up to 2400lbs thrust and a P-80A would be great Collector Planes.

 

 

Korea? Hell yeah.

But there are issues, not only with the map.

 

YES, Gladly will i see the "meteor" being added to the game, especially if it's modelled based on the RAE evaluation from1946 
great topic about meteor here: 

No P80, only two YP-80 few in ETO and only in italy. There were more Do-335's flying than yp-80's.
Good luck to find aero-data about the Yp-80's.

Edit: Derwent1 only, 2000lbs thrust. Derwent2 was used post war...still with 2000Lbs thrust  (see 1946 RAE evaluation) ans still couldn't get to the manufacturer numbers in climb and speed above 20k Ft
 

Edited January 16, 2022 by JV69badatflyski

[CAFulcrum]

On 1/14/2022 at 9:47 AM, Eisenfaustus said:

I think you mean mig 15…

And I don’t agree on your assessment. 
 

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

 

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. 
 

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

 Yes, I meant the Mig15, sorry.  And I'm talking about planes like the P80 Shooting Star, there is just no way to compete with the Mig15s until you have access to the f86.

 

I have seen the Rhineland personally, yes.  Outside the river it is mostly farmland, scattered forests, concentrated village/town planning structure, at least in the South near the French/Alsace area; at least that was my impression.  It's generally flat and rolling, just like in the sim.  

Edited January 17, 2022 by CAFulcrum
Once again got the aircraft designation wrong XP

[BlitzPig_EL]

As I recall, both the Sea Fury and Corsair bagged Mig 15s.

[Jaws2002]

27 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

As I recall, both the Sea Fury and Corsair bagged Mig 15s.

LA-11 also shot down a sabre, but that didn't change the reality of the new air war.

[BlitzPig_EL]

True Jaws, but it's pretty to think about.

[zan64]

On 1/16/2022 at 11:11 PM, Eisenfaustus said:

If a sabre cruises 70% faster but has to fly 70% further it takes the same time to reach the target - that’s why I asked for average sortie time. 

In WWII in certain areas at certain times one side had more or less uncontested air supremacy - certainly not during the whole war. In Korea the Allies were clearly superior in the air during the whole Korean War - with a short time of shock when the Mig 15 entered the Battlefield for the first time.

 

mig 15 was first encountered april 12 1951 when they overwhelmed a formation of b-29s and and their f-84 escorts, and it can be convincingly argued allies only had a slight edge in kill count during the war. war ended July 1953

 

honestly the ride aint that bad, or any worse than crimea map, probably be in enemy contact within 15-20 min. for dubyadubya-too, we should rarely if ever come into enemy air contact in battle of normandy and battle of boddenplatte campaigns , luftwaffe was done at that point.  so like what i mean is il2 provides great flight experience, which i want to have with a jet, but the only way to ever be realistic is to live in those days, and a realistic sim im afraid wouldnt be "fun" (i would think so but then i play a lot of prepar3d civilian simming)

Edited January 18, 2022 by zan64

[Alexmarine]

11 hours ago, zan64 said:

mig 15 was first encountered april 12 1951 

 

The first combat encounter (resulting in a clash) of soviet MiG was on November 1 1950, when 5 MiGs of the 1st squadron, 28th GIAP led by HSU Major N.V. Stroikov engaged fifteen F-51 Mustang at 12:50 resulting in a Mustang of 18th FBG 67th FBS to be shot down.

 

Later in the day at 14:12 three MiGs of 2nd squadron, 72nd GIAP led by Major A.Z. Bordun engaged twelve F-80 of 49th FBG (unknown squadron), shooting down the Shooting Star of 1st Lt Frank Van Sickle.

 

The first encounter with B-29s happened on November 10 1950 against a group of seven Superfortress of 307th BG on a raid to Uiju, one was lost and one probably damaged.

Edited January 18, 2022 by Alexmarine
Cross-referenced Soviet and US sources

[zan64]

3 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

 

The first combat encounter (resulting in a clash) of soviet MiG was on November 1 1950, when 5 MiGs of the 1st squadron, 28th GIAP led by HSU Major N.V. Stroikov engaged fifteen F-51 Mustang at 12:50 resulting in a Mustang of 18th FBG 67th FBS to be shot down.

 

Later in the day at 14:12 three MiGs of 2nd squadron, 72nd GIAP led by Major A.Z. Bordun engaged four F-80 of 49th FBG (unknown squadron), shooting down one.

 

The first encounter with B-29s happened on November 10 1950 against a group of seven Superfortress of 307th BG on a raid to Uiju, one was lost and one probably damaged.

well im completely wrong and my foolish is before me! i guess im thinking of when they stopped using b-29s

[Alexmarine]

49 minutes ago, zan64 said:

well im completely wrong and my foolish is before me! i guess im thinking of when they stopped using b-29s

 

Indeed April 12 was the "first" Black Thursday for the B-29, after that they waited 6 months before being committed again in October 1951 (resulting in another 14 of them being lost and, from the 28th of the same month to be restricted to night time operations once and for all)

[GrinderX9]

I find ww2 jets very facenating. Would gladly buy a gloster meteor for x3 normal price