leitmotiv Posted January 2, 2023 Posted January 2, 2023 Quick query: is it true the Great Battles Ju 88A-4 does not have a Stuvi dive bombing apparatus on the cockpit roof?
leitmotiv Posted January 2, 2023 Author Posted January 2, 2023 I understand the Me 410 has it. Any chance the Ju 88A-4 might get one? I used the Ju 88A-4 Stuvi quite a bit in the original IL-2 days. 2
ShamrockOneFive Posted January 2, 2023 Posted January 2, 2023 It'd be a really nice option to have. 1
LLv44_Oke Posted January 2, 2023 Posted January 2, 2023 Hope we get that...but we have use to manage without it? I will also like to get front 20mm ....and remove that useless mg blocking pilots wiev when things get nasty.... 1 2
leitmotiv Posted January 2, 2023 Author Posted January 2, 2023 The Me 410 Stuvi is the goods. Really wonderful job on the part of the designers! I had no idea the 410 had one.I also forgot the 410 had dive brakes. Please stick it on the 88A-4! 3 1 2
RossMarBow Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 It would be nice to get it on the stuka and 88s. Not sure if it was a 111 upgrade. Would happily pay for a stuuvi sight upgrade pack for existing bombers.
leitmotiv Posted January 20, 2023 Author Posted January 20, 2023 It was a dive bombing sight. The Heinkel never carried it. I wonder how realistically it was modeled on the Me 410 in BON? I enjoyed using it on the IL-2 1946 Ju 88A-4.
1CGS LukeFF Posted January 20, 2023 1CGS Posted January 20, 2023 11 hours ago, leitmotiv said: I wonder how realistically it was modeled on the Me 410 in BON? It's modeled according to the real-world specs. Is there something you think that's wrong with it?
LLv44_Oke Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 The real stuvi had to set up before taking of ...so it was as accurate as the weather forecast on target was . In IL-2 it is accurate... Atmospheric pressure and wind direction and speed. Lw had always weather recon flight on possible target areas before offensive...it was very accurate if parameters were correct.
LLv44_Oke Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 The ju-88 dive brake system was the same as in ju-87 ...and because the 88 was bigger (heavier) the braking in dive was not so accurate, the brake system was usually removed ( FAF removed dive brakes out all of its ju-88) cause of structural damage in wings and fuselage...the weight reduction was almost 400 kg...they still used stuvi sight and dive bombing...dive angle was not so deep... Practically divebrake system was not used in ju-88 at all during war.
leitmotiv Posted January 20, 2023 Author Posted January 20, 2023 Thanks for the information, LukeFF and LLv44_Oke. I asked about the realism of the BON Stuvi because a poster seemed to find my being impressed by its realism to be amusing. I am in the process of setting up my flight sim gear after seven years exile, and am not up to speed. I had no idea the Stuvi had to be calibrated for weather before takeoff! As usual, the IL-2 forums are repositories of information.
Jaws2002 Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 35 minutes ago, leitmotiv said: Thanks for the information, LukeFF and LLv44_Oke. I asked about the realism of the BON Stuvi because a poster seemed to find my being impressed by its realism to be amusing. I am in the process of setting up my flight sim gear after seven years exile, and am not up to speed. I had no idea the Stuvi had to be calibrated for weather before takeoff! As usual, the IL-2 forums are repositories of information. Hey there leitmotiv. It's been a long time since I've seen you on the forum. Good to see you come back to the game. You are a bit late, they are already talking about making a new game, but you are just in time for the release of the IAR-80/81.
leitmotiv Posted January 20, 2023 Author Posted January 20, 2023 Good to see you, Jaws. Was Jaws your moniker on the Ubi forum? P.S. Is it still impossible to change one's image? I was mainly interested in tanks when I made mine some time ago.
Jaws2002 Posted January 20, 2023 Posted January 20, 2023 3 hours ago, leitmotiv said: Good to see you, Jaws. Was Jaws your moniker on the Ubi forum? P.S. Is it still impossible to change one's image? I was mainly interested in tanks when I made mine some time ago. Yep. I miss the good old days of UbiZoo and Hyperlobby. And yes. It's stil impossible to change avatars. People used them to support the latest political trends, so sigs disappeared and avatars were frozen to whatever we had. You at least have one, New players get the blank one.
leitmotiv Posted January 21, 2023 Author Posted January 21, 2023 Arrrgggghhhhh. Stuck with a tank avatar---oh well! Hope to have my flight sim gear operational soon for BOS, BON, Blitz, and Tobruk. I have really missed flight sims.
[CPT]milopugdog Posted January 21, 2023 Posted January 21, 2023 20 hours ago, Jaws2002 said: Yep. I miss the good old days of UbiZoo and Hyperlobby. And yes. It's stil impossible to change avatars. People used them to support the latest political trends, so sigs disappeared and avatars were frozen to whatever we had. You at least have one, New players get the blank one. 1 1
Avimimus Posted January 21, 2023 Posted January 21, 2023 On 1/19/2023 at 11:54 PM, leitmotiv said: I wonder how realistically it was modeled on the Me 410 in BON? I'm not sure but there might be some limitations (similar to the modelling of the BZA). I wouldn't be surprised if these sights were quite a bit less reliable and couldn't be handled as roughly as I handle them.
leitmotiv Posted January 23, 2023 Author Posted January 23, 2023 As the little girl said in the film "Days of Heaven": "Nobody's perfect!"
1CGS LukeFF Posted January 23, 2023 1CGS Posted January 23, 2023 On 1/21/2023 at 11:56 AM, Avimimus said: I'm not sure but there might be some limitations (similar to the modelling of the BZA). I wouldn't be surprised if these sights were quite a bit less reliable and couldn't be handled as roughly as I handle them. What limitations? ? As I wrote above, it's modeled according to the real-world specs, which mainly require a proper altitude and barometric setting to be set by the pilot. Airspeed is handled by the sight's internal components. If all those things are set correctly, then the bomb is going to hit what it's aimed at. The only thing I've seen that's not modeled with the sight is excessive vibrations at high speed, but if I recall correctly that was eventually fixed.
leitmotiv Posted January 23, 2023 Author Posted January 23, 2023 I watched a detailed video on how to use the 410 and its Stuvi. VERY IMPRESSIVE. Apparently you only have big trouble if you attack with a crosswind hitting you. The Stuvi only compensates for attacking into the wind and with the wind. You can try to deal with a crosswind by intuition---or, if you have a large bomb, a direct hit is not necessary (I am a big fan of a Ju 88A with a PC1000 bomb) . . .
Avimimus Posted January 23, 2023 Posted January 23, 2023 51 minutes ago, LukeFF said: What limitations? ? As I wrote above, it's modeled according to the real-world specs, which mainly require a proper altitude and barometric setting to be set by the pilot. Airspeed is handled by the sight's internal components. If all those things are set correctly, then the bomb is going to hit what it's aimed at. The only thing I've seen that's not modeled with the sight is excessive vibrations at high speed, but if I recall correctly that was eventually fixed. I'm assuming that the way I'd fly would probably shake a few screws loose! ? ? That is it!
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now