OK, How About Your Top Five Planes That Are Not In The Sim (yet)?

[danielprates]

4 hours ago, RNAS10_Oliver said:

What’s the reason that trying to keep things real means you’ve had to exclude the flying boats? They were able to exist in Rise of Flight.

 

This being a fantasy thread, whats the difference what my reasoning is? In any case I just dont think we'll be have flying boats, doesnt matter if the game supports them or not.

[RNAS10_Oliver]

16 minutes ago, danielprates said:

 

This being a fantasy thread, whats the difference what my reasoning is? In any case I just dont think we'll be have flying boats, doesnt matter if the game supports them or not.

Just a matter of curiosity.

 

I mean you’ve said that you tried to keep yours real. So was just curious to know why the flying boats (and seaplanes) are fantasy as I would also like to see some and they have been in the engine before. Like maybe there had been some dev communication (as with the pacific, naval aviation and four engined bombers) ruling them out that I was unaware of etc.

[PatrickAWlson]

Spitfire MK.I

Hurricane Mk.I

Ju 87B

Do 17

Bristol Blenheim

 

See where I'm going with this?  

[danielprates]

3 hours ago, RNAS10_Oliver said:

Just a matter of curiosity.

 

I mean you’ve said that you tried to keep yours real. So was just curious to know why the flying boats (and seaplanes) are fantasy as I would also like to see some and they have been in the engine before. Like maybe there had been some dev communication (as with the pacific, naval aviation and four engined bombers) ruling them out that I was unaware of etc.

 

Oh in that sense. No, see, after some 5 years I've been here, I guess I have an intuition of what they won't do, steming from a variety of reasons. To be fair I guess one could have some hopes of seeing a flying boat eventually - that I can remember it hasnt been ruled out (unlike, say, north africa because of the CloD redundancy or the PTO for, well, reasons). But then again, being here long enough, you catch a glimpse of the developers' line of thinking. I think the following guidelines are basic assumptions:

 

1.  We wont see a plane that hasn't enough available  technical data, covering almost everything from how it looked like to how it performed to how the cockpit layout was etc. 

 

2. They wont drasticly change the game on a mere bet of what may sell or not, what people may like or not, what will detract from performance etc.

 

3. They wont go over no-go zones which have been explicitly stated as no-go zones, much as we beg them (which doesnt prevent a weekly new thread asking for them to go for what has already been discarded 100s of times)

 

4.  They wont go for planes which may be of only a few people's liking. They go for variety but at the same time all planes must appeal at least for a decent number of people.

 

All of which are very sound arguments if you ask me.

 

So.... put planes through this filter. You will see some desires of ours are just that: fantasy.

Edited October 20, 2022 by danielprates

[CSW_311_Mart]

Okay, filters ON...

1) A-20C/G with bombardier position for C variant (and for B of course, we are waiting way too long ?)

2) Mosquito B IV, IX or XVI with cookies 

3) IL-4

4) B-26

5) Ju-188

 

This looks like a first bomber pack DLC ?

 

Filters OFF, proper number of engines ON...

1) B-17

2) Lancaster

3) B-24

4) He-177

5) Pe-8

 

You cannot stop me dreaming ?

[Legioneod]

1) P-47M (or just a look at the current P-47 FM)

2) B-26

3) BF109 E3

4) B-25

5) F4F Wildcat