He 162 "Volksjäger" in IL2 Great Battles?

[Asgar]

34 minutes ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Bur they dropped them when they got a Nene?

Pretty much, the Russians had not much luck producing them. With the MiG-15 they used the RD-45 (Nene)

36 minutes ago, FliegerAD said:

Funny enough, at one time in April 45, the airbases of the Meteor and He 162, Faßberg and Leck, were only 220km (or so) apart.

...though I think the only combat the Meteor had with another manned jet was being bombed by the Ar 234 in Belgium. ?

 

I would love to see the He 162, even if there are more important aircraft.

 

...like the Fw 190A9. ?

 

Never heard about He 162 in Faßberg. I have to look that up. 

[FliegerAD]

I mean Meteors were at Faßberg.

[Asgar]

12 minutes ago, FliegerAD said:

I mean Meteors were at Faßberg.

Oh yeah… right I guess that late in the war Faßberg was already under allied control ?

[Cpt_Siddy]

Adding meteor, even as a collector plane, makes much more sense than adding any other jet at the moment. 

 

It was a plane made in some numbers and we have some data to go on to model it. 

 

Edited May 15, 2022 by Cpt_Siddy

[DeBo238th]

Make both the Meteor and the Lockheed P-80 collector planes. Then the Allies will have comparable aircraft to compete with German Jets.

[Avimimus]

3 hours ago, DeBo238th said:

Make both the Meteor and the Lockheed P-80 collector planes. Then the Allies will have comparable aircraft to compete with German Jets.

 

Throw in a Yak-15 and Mig-9 and you have a 1948 Berlin Airlift scenario... maybe include a Vampire too...

[Cpt_Siddy]

8 hours ago, Avimimus said:

 

Throw in a Yak-15 and Mig-9 and you have a 1948 Berlin Airlift scenario... maybe include a Vampire too...

 

Making one plane is a quite the undertaking. Adding so many out of theater planes will make IL2 go total War Thunder. And we already got DCS for some Mig on Sabre action.

 

P-80 can make SOME sense if Italian theater is added, as it flew recon flights over Italy during WW2. But adding Meteor makes most sense as of having Allied jet near term. 

[CountZero]

P-80 would even be better dogfighter vs 262 but there is no chance we see it in this game, Meteor has good chance but 262 would eat it alive

[Cpt_Siddy]

29 minutes ago, CountZero said:

P-80 would even be better dogfighter vs 262 but there is no chance we see it in this game, Meteor has good chance but 262 would eat it alive

 

None of those planes are what you traditionally call a "dog fighter" 

 

Anyone dogfighting in 262 is asking to get dabbed on. 

[EAF19_Marsh]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

P-80 would even be better dogfighter vs 262 but there is no chance we see it in this game, Meteor has good chance but 262 would eat it alive

Like the P-51 and Tempest? That ate the 262 alive? ?

 

 

[Avimimus]

4 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

Making one plane is a quite the undertaking. Adding so many out of theater planes will make IL2 go total War Thunder. And we already got DCS for some Mig on Sabre action.

 

P-80 can make SOME sense if Italian theater is added, as it flew recon flights over Italy during WW2. But adding Meteor makes most sense as of having Allied jet near term. 

 

Well, I was more thinking about a Berlin Airlift module being a logical direction if one were to decide to add the P-80 and the Meteor... if one is doing two late war jets (only one of which served within a existing module), then why not expand it a bit and get an entire new module?

[Cpt_Siddy]

 

Or just go and do Korea/Formosa and be done with it. 

 

Korea and Formosa will have all the post war goodies and no need to make alt history stuff that will drive a segment of fans up the proverbial wall. 

[JV69badatflyski]

23 hours ago, DeBo238th said:

Make both the Meteor and the Lockheed P-80 collector planes. Then the Allies will have comparable aircraft to compete with German Jets.

Not even Close  Flying the "missingbolt" would be like flying an overloaded C-5 on 2 engines with the roll rate of an aircraft carrier.

 

11 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

P-80 can make SOME sense if Italian theater is added, as it flew recon flights over Italy during WW2. 

Those Were 2 Prototypes, like night and day with the production models. There were more Do-335 flying (before 8th may45) than YP-80's in the whole world. (Not that i wish for a Do-335 )

 

 

7 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

Like the P-51 and Tempest? That ate the 262 alive? ?

 

 

where? on Landings/takeoffs or in hollywood movies? 

[Cpt_Siddy]

6 minutes ago, JV69badatflyski said:

Those Were 2 Prototypes, like night and day with the production models. There were more Do-335 flying (before 8th may45) than YP-80's in the whole world. (Not that i wish for a Do-335 )

 

 

 

 

That was kind of my point... Meteor is only Allied ww2 jet that has any real chance to be added as they have been in operational service for V1 defense. 

[Avimimus]

5 hours ago, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

Or just go and do Korea/Formosa and be done with it. 

 

Korea and Formosa will have all the post war goodies and no need to make alt history stuff that will drive a segment of fans up the proverbial wall. 

 

But then you can't have a Mig-17, La-15, Il-10, Il-28... Vampire, Venom, Saber Mk.5/6, Canberra... etc. An accidental outbreak of war in Europe during Korea gives this much better variety of aircraft in a much better variety of roles.

 

With Korea, after the first few weeks, all you have is U.S. aircraft flying ground attack and rarely meeting a couple of Mig-15/Mig-15Bis (and maybe a Chinese Tu-2 or Mig-9 flying near the border - but in practice, one is encountering only one type of enemy fighter). It is so asymmetric that the most successful bombing done by the North is conducted by U-2VS biplanes...

[BlitzPig_EL]

What we have now is asymmetric, isn't it?  Sure seems that way to me.

I'm so bored seeing Bf109s all the time.

 

The sim needs a change of venue, badly.

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

What we have now is asymmetric, isn't it?  Sure seems that way to me.

I'm so bored seeing Bf109s all the time.

 

The sim needs a change of venue, badly.

 

Well, Bf-109, Fw-190, He-111, Ju-88, and depending on the module Bf-110/Ju-87/Me-262/Hs-129/Mc.202 vs. Mig-15

 

So we're talking four times less diversity in plane types and three times less diversity in roles in Korea. It'd be even worse!

 

P.S. Yes, I doubt I'd be most excited by the Bf-109G1 or G10/AS or Fw-190A4 or A9 in a new module... thankfully though - if they do those variants the only remaining options for Axis fighters would be Italy 1944 - so that at least would be a change - and WWII modules might also contain something new and not seen before (a Tu-2 or a Fw-189). Especially as they are running out of aircraft.

[Alexmarine]

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

With Korea, after the first few weeks, all you have is U.S. aircraft flying ground attack and rarely meeting a couple of Mig-15/Mig-15Bis

 

Tell us that you have no knowledge of the Korean War without telling us you have no knowledge of the Korean War 

[EAF19_Marsh]

8 hours ago, JV69badatflyski said:

Not even Close  Flying the "missingbolt" would be like flying an overloaded C-5 on 2 engines with the roll rate of an aircraft carrier.

 

Those Were 2 Prototypes, like night and day with the production models. There were more Do-335 flying (before 8th may45) than YP-80's in the whole world. (Not that i wish for a Do-335 )

 

 

where? on Landings/takeoffs or in hollywood movies? 

In WW2. Check 262 air-to-air losses and am pretty sure those 2 types were primarily responsible. 

[spudkopf]

On 5/11/2022 at 5:29 AM, LukeFF said:

 

It's a heck of a lot stronger than the argument for the He 162 - it was shooting down buzz bombs over England in the summer of 1944 and then was flying armed recon missions over the Rhineland in the spring of 1945. As much as I love the 162 (since I built the cockpit for it for IL2 1946), the Meteor is far more relevant to the air war. 

And a great cockpit is was too, as it contributed to much of the appeal and joy flying it.

Edited May 16, 2022 by spudkopf

[Avimimus]

9 hours ago, Alexmarine said:

Tell us that you have no knowledge of the Korean War without telling us you have no knowledge of the Korean War 

 

Quite possibly. But... enlighten me - didn't offensive bombing operations by the DPRK largely cease after the first month? Also, weren't there only nine Chinese Tu-2 losses in total?

 

From looking at list of air-combat engagements, for most of the last couple years of the war there are sporadic encounters with Migs and even the number of piston engined fighters shot down is less than one per month for the remaining war.

 

 

  

7 hours ago, EAF19_Marsh said:

In WW2. Check 262 air-to-air losses and am pretty sure those 2 types were primarily responsible. 

 

Hmm.... okay, new argument - the He-162 actually was responsible for about a dozen aircraft going down by the end of the war - when you correctly credit 4/5th He-162 losses to the He-162.

[EAF19_Marsh]

49 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

Quite possibly. But... enlighten me - didn't offensive bombing operations by the DPRK largely cease after the first month? Also, weren't there only nine Chinese Tu-2 losses in total?

 

From looking at list of air-combat engagements, for most of the last couple years of the war there are sporadic encounters with Migs and even the number of piston engined fighters shot down is less than one per month for the remaining war.

 

 

  

 

Hmm.... okay, new argument - the He-162 actually was responsible for about a dozen aircraft going down by the end of the war - when you correctly credit 4/5th He-162 losses to the He-162.

Not an argument, just an observation. The 262 proved vulnerable to other aircraft and likely most few were downed by opposing fighters outside of their landing run.

 

Mind you, what was the loss rate of 109s to non-combat causes? Something horrific. 
 

Were there confirmed losses to He-162s? I thought they were all a bit conjectural. 

Edited May 16, 2022 by EAF19_Marsh