The Flyable Four Engine Bomber Topic

[IckyATLAS]

This thread is to keep alive our aspiration to fly at least one of the the B17, B24, and Avro Lancaster bombers in this game.

Jason has stated long ago that contrary to what many said there is no game engine limitation to have such planes but it is a matter of budget.

So these planes should be collector planes with maybe a special higher price.

If you are like me and want to push this plane on top of the list then we have to keep this topic on top of the list by posting on this topic to keep it alive and and on top.

Edited May 18, 2022 by IckyATLAS

[tattywelshie]

Definitely $50 plus for a heavy I’d say. Who’s to say though that’s even enough? I’ve no idea what sort of issues there would be with modelling a heavy bomber so can’t really comment with any degree of authority on this. I take it the turret modelling would be difficult to do? As well as obviously double the amount of work for engines etc. I imagine it would require employing new people to take the project on which obviously isn’t cheap. I’d be more than happy to pay a bit extra for other bits (like a more advanced career mode), to help fund it, but again, not sure this would bring enough in.

[zan64]

what would one do with these aircraft in BoS? you can simulate the 10 hour flight (or whatever time) at altitude in formation of flying to berlin from england and back better in either 1946 or fsx/p3d 

[CountZero]

39 minutes ago, zan64 said:

what would one do with these aircraft in BoS? you can simulate the 10 hour flight (or whatever time) at altitude in formation of flying to berlin from england and back better in either 1946 or fsx/p3d 

i bet its mostly about fighter players getting target to shoot at then bomber players geting historic big bomber formations, targets or  bombsights, not many wold fly them, alot would just need AI version they would shoot at and complain how gunners are to good, you get that without buying collector airplane so it would fail as there would not be many players who would buy it.

 

It would have to be first build as AI only as part of DLC, so most ppl pay for it development, and then only maybe full build as collector plane with big price tag bomber only players would have to pay for it.

Spoiler

ppl wont it so they can do this :

 

 

not this:

 

 

 

 

Edited May 18, 2022 by CountZero

[AEthelraedUnraed]

Although the Devs have certainly said that it's (as always) a question of time and money, I don't think there's any "if enough people say they want to pay X, we can build this plane"-amount. I'm sure the Devs have an excellent idea of at which price they should market a module to maximise their profits, and a much better idea at that than any of us do.

 

(I'd sure love a 4-engined bomber though, even if it's AI only)

Edited May 18, 2022 by AEthelraedUnraed

[tattywelshie]

6 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Although the Devs have certainly said that it's (as always) a question of time and money, I don't think there's any "if enough people say they want to pay X, we can build this plane"-amount. I'm sure the Devs have an excellent idea of at which price they should market a module to maximise their profits, and a much better idea at that than any of us do.

 

(I'd sure love a 4-engined bomber though, even if it's AI only)

Yeah this is the thing isn’t it, we have no idea how much it would cost to make a heavy. I agree, AI would be a great start and would make a lot of people happy, and give the sim as well another string to its bow.

[CountZero]

1 minute ago, tattywelshie said:

Yeah this is the thing isn’t it, we have no idea how much it would cost to make a heavy. I agree, AI would be a great start and would make a lot of people happy, and give the sim as well another string to its bow.

And AI version can only be build as part of DLC.

[Cybermat47]

I'd sell my soul for a Lancaster Mk III.

[SYN_Vander]

22 minutes ago, Cybermat47 said:

I'd sell my soul for a Lancaster Mk III.

 

This is your only hope I think: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/288121-project-lancaster/

 

Of course, there is no fitting map, but that's DCS in a nutshell

Edited May 18, 2022 by SYN_Vander

[Eisenfaustus]

I think @CountZero‘s AI only approach makes the most sense. We won‘t get a map that features both: The correct airbases and target area’s. 
 

And to make the strategic bomber experience work in a game for more then 3 people you‘d need a good system to skip long uneventful cruises. 
 

Unfortunatly the way AI works in GB even a very small combat box of 12 bombers (with 10ish gunners per plane each tracking targets individually) and an ultra small escort of 8 fighters and 8 interceptors would grind current cpus to a halt. A larger 100+ planes fight is unthinkable. 
 

So I think the devs made the right choice to focus on smaller tactical engagements. 

[EAF19_Marsh]

1 hour ago, Eisenfaustus said:

I think @CountZero‘s AI only approach makes the most sense. We won‘t get a map that features both: The correct airbases and target area’s.

Yep, totally agree.

 

Also, not spending any £ until Jason reveals the 'mystery aircraft' or the new bi-planes are up for PP.

[354thFG_Leifr]

At this point in time, I would pay just for the AI versions to be added and focus put towards the smaller medium bombers for players to use. I'm desperate to be able to hand off controls on the bomb run to my bombardier/navigator friend, to have map tools in-game for calculating positions, for bomb sights to be something a little better than the old RoF set and forget, etc etc.

[Soilworker]

@IckyATLAS I think to be fair you need to have a "Less than 30 US$" option. Probably an "I wouldn't buy it" option too. 

 

I'm not prepared to pay a lot of money for a plane I'm only going to take out for a few spins out of interest.

 

BUT

I do really want B-17s or B-24s to shoot down and I'm more than happy with AI only and even some form of performance friendly, dumbed down version because I think it would be a vast improvement over what we currently have. 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

27 minutes ago, Soilworker said:

@IckyATLAS I think to be fair you need to have a "Less than 30 US$" option. Probably an "I wouldn't buy it" option too. 

 

I'm not prepared to pay a lot of money for a plane I'm only going to take out for a few spins out of interest.

Well, to be frank even with those options, the usefulness is rather limited. With polls such as these, there's always a huge amount of bias. The people who are often on this forum are more likely to read and vote on this topic (the median amount of posts of everyone who has posted in this thread thus far is 1200!). That's probably the same group of people who are enthusiastic enough about WW2 aviation to buy pretty much any plane. The median amount of forum posts of the average buyer of a collector aircraft is probably something like 1, on the other hand.

 

Similarly, people who are interested in four-engine bombers are more likely to read this thread than those who aren't, which will severely skew the results as well.

 

In short, a poll such as this doesn't really give any useful information about the market and about what price any such module should have, at all.

Edited May 18, 2022 by AEthelraedUnraed

[Soilworker]

34 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Well, to be frank even with those options, the usefulness is rather limited. With polls such as these, there's always a huge amount of bias. The people who are often on this forum are more likely to read and vote on this topic (the median amount of posts of everyone who has posted in this thread thus far is 1200!). That's probably the same group of people who are enthusiastic enough about WW2 aviation to buy pretty much any plane. The median amount of forum posts of the average buyer of a collector aircraft is probably something like 1, on the other hand.

 

Similarly, people who are interested in four-engine bombers are more likely to read this thread than those who aren't, which will severely skew the results as well.

 

In short, a poll such as this doesn't really give any useful information about the market and about what price any such module should have, at all.

 

That is a very good point ☝️

[BlitzPig_EL]

Flyable mediums are the best solution for the maps and game play in this sim.  As much as I love the real B17, it really has no place, or even usefulness, in this title as it stands today.  What we really need, and can actually properly use, are flyable B25, B26, A20G, and IL-4.  The He-111 and Ju 88 already exist, and one can only hope for G3M Nell and G4M Betty.

 

Are any of the maps in the sim even large enough, with proper sized airfields, to get an Allied heavy up to altitude before getting to the IP?

[BMA_FlyingShark]

For me, more than 50$ for either one of them.

But if I've got to choose, a Lancaster would be it.

To be more realistic though, I would already be glad if we get flyable a 2-engined bomber within a year or 3.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Robli]

22 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

one can only hope for G3M Nell and G4M Betty

 

Speaking of which, if this game ever goes to Pacific, maybe that's where B-17 could make an entrance. They were present at Midway, Coral Sea, Bismarck Sea and elsewhere and could be used there in a more realistic way in smaller quantities, compared to the massive formations that were used over Europe that the game probably could not handle.

[Rjel]

I think the new B-26 will make an excellent substitute for the American heavies. The visual of flying escort over that formation in a Mustang will be appealing to me. I too want to see 4 engine bombers in the sim someday. However my somedays are getting shorter with each passing year so I’d pony up $50-100 as a pre-sell if it would hasten their arrival. 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Flyable mediums are the best solution for the maps and game play in this sim.  As much as I love the real B17, it really has no place, or even usefulness, in this title as it stands today.  What we really need, and can actually properly use, are flyable B25, B26, A20G, and IL-4.  The He-111 and Ju 88 already exist, and one can only hope for G3M Nell and G4M Betty.

 

Are any of the maps in the sim even large enough, with proper sized airfields, to get an Allied heavy up to altitude before getting to the IP?

I agree with your assessment that a *flyable* 4-engine bomber has no real place in the game currently. However, I think an AI bomber would have a place. We have several fighter types historically used to intercept or protect heavy bombers, including specific modifications and armament options (e.g. Wfr.Gr.21, Fw-190 "Sturmbock", 150 octane fuel), as well as a relevant map. If there is a way to finance a four-engine bomber, as well as make it possible to have a medium-sized formation without ending up with a slideshow, I think a heavy bomber could be a real asset.

[Feldgrun]

30 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I agree with your assessment that a *flyable* 4-engine bomber has no real place in the game currently. However, I think an AI bomber would have a place. We have several fighter types historically used to intercept or protect heavy bombers, including specific modifications and armament options (e.g. Wfr.Gr.21, Fw-190 "Sturmbock", 150 octane fuel), as well as a relevant map. If there is a way to finance a four-engine bomber, as well as make it possible to have a medium-sized formation without ending up with a slideshow, I think a heavy bomber could be a real asset.

I would love to see heavy bombers, but not because I'm interested in flyable four engine bombers. Formations of AI B-17s, B-24s, Lancasters, etc. would give opportunities for high altitude fighter engagements between escorts and attackers. I agree that many of the late war German aircraft and weapons were designed to intercept bomber formations (20-50mm HE cannons, rockets, etc), and many US fighters were designed for performance at high altitude. I would like an opportunity to simulate high altitude engagements. I can do this all day in IL-2 1946, but I'd pay for the GB experience. I realize this is a fighter based sim, but we need something to fight over.

[Avimimus]

There is no 'I'm not interested' option in your poll! ? We can only vote yes.

 

That said, a Lancaster would be pretty cool (as per my previous Poll on the topic)... and the FW-190A8 did make me want a formation of AI B-17s as a target.

[IckyATLAS]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

There is no 'I'm not interested' option in your poll! ? We can only vote yes.

Good point, I have added two additional possibilities in the poll. Now it is complete. ? 

[Gambit21]

Votes “who cares” - not interested 

I’m so sick of this topic.

The whole notion is untenable for this product. I can see the whining now…”what about this or that station?” Or  “Why isn’t this station, or that station modeled accurately?” …and on, and on. 

Edited May 18, 2022 by Gambit21

[DBFlyguy]

Nope, not gonna happen. Let's be happy with a flyable allied medium bomber if we ever get that.

Edited May 18, 2022 by DBFlyguy

[Gambit21]

5 hours ago, DBFlyguy said:

Nope, not gonna happen. Let's be happy with a flyable allied medium bomber if we ever get that.

 

It confuses some people apparently.

[BraveSirRobin]

6 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Votes “who cares” - not interested 

I’m so sick of this topic.

The whole notion is untenable for this product. I can see the whining now…”what about this or that station?” Or  “Why isn’t this station, or that station modeled accurately?” …and on, and on. 

‘If you think that whining is bad, just wait until someone tries a mission/slide show with more than 8 (or possibly only 4+) heavy bombers.

[[CPT]milopugdog]

About a year ago, I made a simple mission with the idea of Luftwaffe fighters intercepting B-25s on their way to a target. No ground objectives, no complex triggers, just a bunch of bombers following way points in formation. Ran it on a D-server with one PC, flew on another. Thought it would be a fun co-op mission.

 

Flew around in the P-38, looked good until you started flying with the bombers, then they started jittering around. Wanted to see what would happen with an Axis fighter, so I came in with a 262. As soon as those gunner brains and damage calculations got going; oh my. (Don't mind my horrid flying if you watch the video.)

 

It was a decently sized formation, but there's no way the game could take a similar scaled of of heavies as it is. Is what it is.

 

Want flyable heavies? Yes.

Do I think they could happen right now? Very unlikely.

 

Spoiler

 

 

Edited May 19, 2022 by [CPT]milopugdog

[Feldgrun]

On 5/18/2022 at 7:16 PM, [CPT]milopugdog said:

Want flyable heavies? Yes.

Do I think they could happen right now? Very unlikely.

 

I'd like to think that Jason's poll regarding video cards may signal a coming upgrade to IL-2 GB's performance capabilities in the future. Maybe that could include... AI heavies.

[Eisenfaustus]

1 hour ago, Feldgrun said:

 

I'd like to think that Jason's poll regarding video cards may signal a coming upgrade to IL-2 GB's performance capabilities in the future. Maybe that could include... AI heavies.

Unlikely. 
Firstly he told us what that poll was about. 
Secondly the AI computing bottleneck has nothing to do with gpu but rather cpu. 

[CountZero]

On 5/19/2022 at 4:16 AM, [CPT]milopugdog said:

About a year ago, I made a simple mission with the idea of Luftwaffe fighters intercepting B-25s on their way to a target. No ground objectives, no complex triggers, just a bunch of bombers following way points in formation. Ran it on a D-server with one PC, flew on another. Thought it would be a fun co-op mission.

 

Flew around in the P-38, looked good until you started flying with the bombers, then they started jittering around. Wanted to see what would happen with an Axis fighter, so I came in with a 262. As soon as those gunner brains and damage calculations got going; oh my. (Don't mind my horrid flying if you watch the video.)

 

It was a decently sized formation, but there's no way the game could take a similar scaled of of heavies as it is. Is what it is.

 

Want flyable heavies? Yes.

Do I think they could happen right now? Very unlikely.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

Now imagine normandy invasion fleet with ~20 small /medium landing boats... or god forbid one battleship opening fire with its AA guns...

[Feldgrun]

14 minutes ago, Eisenfaustus said:

Unlikely. 
Firstly he told us what that poll was about. 
Secondly the AI computing bottleneck has nothing to do with gpu but rather cpu. 

 

It looks like the survey was primarily about GPUs:

 

On 1/27/2022 at 5:59 PM, Jason_Williams said:

As posted in DD #305, we are working on some changes to the engine and it might require an increase in certain minimum system requirements. Especially in the video card category.

 

An increase in system requirements (to include GPU & CPU/RAM) could help support more & more complex aircraft, including 4 engine bombers.

[[CPT]milopugdog]

1 hour ago, CountZero said:

Now imagine normandy invasion fleet with ~20 small /medium landing boats... or god forbid one battleship opening fire with its AA guns...

I can't really speak towards how that might perform, but a large fleet with today's engine could be a fun stress test.

 

I did make a short mission with 6 ships when testing the German Torpedo mod, only stutters I got were from my desktop's old (now upgraded) CPU. I've kept playing with it, mainly adjusting time and what not; and the only issue I've ran into is that the German bombers fall to that much flak pretty easily.

 

Spoiler

 

 

1 hour ago, Feldgrun said:

 

It looks like the survey was primarily about GPUs:

 

 

An increase in system requirements (to include GPU & CPU/RAM) could help support more & more complex aircraft, including 4 engine bombers.

That would be cool! I completely forgot that was a thing, and was mainly focused on how the game is now. iirc, there needs to be some serious optimizing for the D-Server tool when it comes to multi-threading; so idk how much changing the system requirements would help things on that end tbh.

[SkychaserGT]

On 5/18/2022 at 12:31 PM, IckyATLAS said:

Besides all the negativity, I would gladly contribute financially to get some quad engines in this sim. We have a few bombers' and they do pretty well. Maybe it will be an incentive to fly together versus lone wolf style on just in pairs. There will always be a certain amount of whining no matter how good a product is. And the whining mostly come from those who have actually zlurch to do with the project anyway. We should all be glad that there is something like IL2 and not be reluctant to support the effort, even if we mostly have to wait many moons to see something or not... I think the Arado is pretty sweet and a great undertaking ! But then again now allied players are moaning they can't catch them ...So we do not see much in maps for the time being..They are vulnerable on TO , Landing and if they maneuver. The ycannot accelerate the way a P51 can ! The Mosquito is a great addition as well. So why not B17's!  Just spend less on beers :)). Hopefully there will be a Pacific theater! Zekes, Fu4 Vought, B29's and some serious payloads to go along with them. When I am still young that is 

 

[FTC_Snowy]

We are gettimg a free community built Lancaster in DCS that looks very promising in the not too distant future. I’d pay for a Lancaster in IL-2.

[THERION]

On 5/18/2022 at 9:43 AM, SYN_Vander said:

 

This is your only hope I think: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/288121-project-lancaster/

 

Of course, there is no fitting map, but that's DCS in a nutshell

 

Oh please mate, don't mention DCS in this matter, because as you already said - you might get a very expensive module, but that's it.
No other content, no suitable map, no historical complete plane set and if lucky, you will get some basic training missions.

I bought too many modules in DCS because of the unique jet planes I'm interested in, but once I setup my HOTAS and "master"
those planes more or less, there is no motivation to get involved with them any longer - well, in my case that's all about it.

If it is technically possible (performance wise, game engine etc.), I'd rather toss some 50ish bucks to have an Avro Lancaster in GB
because I know I would definitely not be the only weirdo eager to fly long ("boring") bombing raids in MP - even if I will probably
fail gorgeously trying it. 

Edited July 1, 2022 by THERION

[IckyATLAS]

4 hours ago, SkychaserGT said:

On 5/18/2022 at 7:31 AM, IckyATLAS said:

Besides all the negativity, I would gladly contribute financially to get some quad engines in this sim. We have a few bombers' and they do pretty well. Maybe it will be an incentive to fly together versus lone wolf style on just in pairs. There will always be a certain amount of whining no matter how good a product is. And the whining mostly come from those who have actually zlurch to do with the project anyway. We should all be glad that there is something like IL2 and not be reluctant to support the effort, even if we mostly have to wait many moons to see something or not... I think the Arado is pretty sweet and a great undertaking ! But then again now allied players are moaning they can't catch them ...So we do not see much in maps for the time being..They are vulnerable on TO , Landing and if they maneuver. The ycannot accelerate the way a P51 can ! The Mosquito is a great addition as well. So why not B17's!  Just spend less on beers :)). Hopefully there will be a Pacific theater! Zekes, Fu4 Vought, B29's and some serious payloads to go along with them. When I am still young that is 

 

SkychaserGT you quote me here in your post, but this text is not from me. Did you  mix your text here. Otherwise please point out my original post. Thanks.

[Mtnbiker1998]

Frankly, I have no interest in flying heavies in this sim. An AI on the other hand is sorely needed. 

 

That being said, if they did pop up I'd hope they wouldn't be such a giant leap from the $20 collector planes we've come to expect, especially if they don't hugely expand on the current bomber formula. Over $50 for a plane that doesn't even have a clickable cockpit, and with no multi-crew capabilities beyond gunners? Come on now. 

[Feldgrun]

On 7/4/2022 at 8:11 PM, Mtnbiker1998 said:

An AI on the other hand is sorely needed. 

 

Mid-late war Allied fighters were built to intercept Luftwaffe attackers at high altitude while escorting Allied heavy bombers. Late war Luftwaffe was built to intercept heavy bombers using weapons such as the Werfer-Granate 21, R4M, and Mk 108 30mm. We need something in this simulation to allow these scenarios. Otherwise, their targets will be Yaks circling at 800 meters.

[sevenless]

I don´t care to have them flyable, but they should be there as AI planes to have fun attacking them.

 

Until that happens, this one is the best you can get...