When will the B25 become flyable?

[Hartsblade]

1 hour ago, VBF-12_Stick-95 said:

I understand that you would like the gunner positions available.  I wouldn't miss them if eliminated however it wouldn't bother me having them either.  Having them would always  be the best option.  The issue however is the Devs have said that making the gunner positions available in the B-25 or B-26 is a no go, period.

So, if leaving out the gunner positions means the community could potentially have flyable B-25s/B-26s, wouldn't that be better than our current situation?  Flying in a squad with several B-25s/B-26s flying in formation on a bomb run would be awesome.
 

For me flying with a formation of B-25's without the multi-crew option would be pretty much the same as flying in formation with the Mosquito, the A-20, or any of the German Bombers, which I enjoy.  However, it's the same relative experience just different window dressing via cockpit graphics.

 

I know that is over simplifying it a bit as all of those aircraft have different characteristics and quirks, but I guess I want more than just another "single seater" experience in an aircraft that relied on the coordination of it's crew to have the best chance of success and survival.

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, VBF-12_Stick-95 said:

I understand that you would like the gunner positions available.  I wouldn't miss them if eliminated however it wouldn't bother me having them either.  Having them would always  be the best option.  The issue however is the Devs have said that making the gunner positions available in the B-25 or B-26 is a no go, period.

 

They have not said that making the gunner positions is a no-go. It's just (again) finding the right resources that show how these things worked. I will concede that the belly gunner position on the B-25 C/D was an odd affair that wasn't carried forward on later models. Combine that with the lack of documentation about how it worked and that most surviving B-25s today are late-production models and yeah, that one position is one that might have to be omitted should a flyable C or D ever be built.

[Enceladus828]

4 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Combine that with the lack of documentation about how it worked and that most surviving B-25s today are late-production models and yeah, that one position is one that might have to be omitted should a flyable C or D ever be built.

The playable positions on the B-25 should just be the pilot including co-pilot position and the top gunner. The nose gunner position can be added later.

 

Given that it would take a shorter amount of time to make the B-25 flyable than the B-26 as most would want the Top and Rear gunner positions also modelled. Or given the demand for either of these 2 planes to become flyable another option could be that only the pilot position gets modelled with the gunner positions modelled later. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

I think a lot of you are grasping at straws.  IMHO there is exactly ZERO chance of any new medium or heavy bomber appearing for the current Great Battles series. I don't like that, but that's how I see it.  Once the aircraft that we know about already for the current series are released, that will be it.  Finito, done, no more.  The team will move on to the new game engine, and Great Battles will be a pleasant memory, just like the original IL2 series is today.

[Lusekofte]

2 hours ago, Enceladus828 said:

The playable positions on the B-25 should just be the pilot including co-pilot position and the top gunner

There should rather be a bombardier pit. Than a gunner pit. 
But I think if not a miracle strikes we will not see such a complex plane in this game

[sevenless]

1 hour ago, Lusekofte said:

But I think if not a miracle strikes we will not see such a complex plane in this game

 

Nope. Else they would have adapted the A20 for RAF and USAAF usage long ago. Except some high selling collector planes in 2024/25 for the Karelia and/or Odessa map I would not expect any larger efforts going into GB anymore.

[Gambit21]

2 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

I think a lot of you are grasping at straws.  IMHO there is exactly ZERO chance of any new medium or heavy bomber appearing for the current Great Battles series. I don't like that, but that's how I see it.  Once the aircraft that we know about already for the current series are released, that will be it.  Finito, done, no more.  The team will move on to the new game engine, and Great Battles will be a pleasant memory, just like the original IL2 series is today.

 

Yep.

The only one actually worth all of the effort IMO anyway is the J, and that would come later in new engine (if it came at all)

 

 

Nothing against the other variants (well a little bit against them) because you can't argue with all of those .50 cals!

[Guest deleted@83466]

But you promised they were going to the Pacific!  You can’t have Pacific without 5th AF B-25s skip bombing Japanese barges off New Guinea, so of course they will make it flyable someday.

[Avimimus]

On 1/5/2024 at 12:47 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

I think a lot of you are grasping at straws.  IMHO there is exactly ZERO chance of any new medium or heavy bomber appearing for the current Great Battles series. I don't like that, but that's how I see it.  Once the aircraft that we know about already for the current series are released, that will be it.  Finito, done, no more.  The team will move on to the new game engine, and Great Battles will be a pleasant memory, just like the original IL2 series is today.

 

Do you have a source for that?

Do you know something about the developer's plans that we don't have?

 

Please see rule 20:

 

I think it is good for us to keep our expectations reasonable until we know more... it is better to be pleasantly surprised than it is to be disappointed. I wouldn't entirely rule out a third party creating such an aircraft, even if the main team is focussed on the new project - but I agree it is less likely than getting a new fighter (for instance).

 

However, I present what I'm saying as speculations about what I feel it would be reasonable for me to hope for - not definitive statements about the developers' actual plans (hence, I'm able to avoid giving myself a seven day ban on entry). I would do that by the way - it would be unfair to give myself preferential treatment. Besides, it'd be a nice break from moderating. That said, I'm willing to treat this as a warning this time - even if you can't back your claims with a statement from the developers.

 

If anyone takes issue with any of this, please communicate with me (or another moderator) through direct messages (see rule 6) rather than starting a debate in the pubic forum. I also hope everyone can see why it is important that the official forums not have possibly inaccurate information or rumours about the developer's plans (and why it is best to keep discussions about moderation off the public forum) and why these rules haven't changed in the last fourteen years.

 

  

On 1/5/2024 at 3:50 AM, SeaSerpent said:

But you promised they were going to the Pacific!  You can’t have Pacific without 5th AF B-25s skip bombing Japanese barges off New Guinea, so of course they will make it flyable someday.

 

This actually gets me interested. ? I'm not that into level bombing in a B-25D - but if you strap a bunch of guns around the nose, maybe give me a 75mm cannon or some rockets, and tell me that I'm an unarmoured 15 ton Sturmovik which is supposed to be dropping bombs wayyy to close to the water surface - I'm all in. I still want my Ju-188 for sightseeing, but I won't be hugely unhappy to see a B-25G/H/J, not by any means.

[Trooper117]

10 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

Do you have a source for that?

Do you know something about the developer's plans that we don't have?

 

 

In his post he did also say this...

On 1/5/2024 at 12:47 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

I don't like that, but that's how I see it.

 

He also stated...

On 1/5/2024 at 12:47 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

IMHO

 

It was his opinion mate, that's all.

[Avimimus]

3 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

In his post he did also say this...

 

He also stated...

 

It was his opinion mate, that's all.

 

It seems I missed the 'IMHO'. Well, good thing I behaved reasonably, eh? But also, this really should have been sent via a private message... I do appreciate the feedback though.

[Bajzon20]

Microprose will release their heavy bomber games faster than 1C will make the B-25/26 flying. It's just that issues like... the limits of the game engine, the difficulties in obtaining information about what and how it worked in a plane do not appeal to me.
I don't understand why they are able to release a little-known plane for the German side rather than add something for the Allies. Apart from the B-25/26 issue, our developers could at least add another version of the A20.
I don't believe there are no any B-25/26 or A20G in museums anywhere, for example.
The biggest issue in this whole problem is not what I mentioned above. But it takes work, more work than making a glider. That's why I think that the IL-2 BoX will not see new large aircraft for the Allied side, it will be better for developers to take care of the German side in terms of planes for ground targets, or making another glider.
BoX is focusing about germans and allied fighter planes ONLY.

Again.

Microprose will release their bomber focused games than 1C will give for players flyable B-25/26/Variants of Havoc.

Edited March 19, 2024 by Bajzon20

[MAJ_stug41]

4 minutes ago, Bajzon20 said:

I don't believe there are any B-25/26 or A20G in museums anywhere, for example

?

There are plenty of flying b25s, and even russia has an a20 in their air museum.

[Bajzon20]

4 minutes ago, MAJ_stug41 said:

?

There are plenty of flying b25s, and even russia has an a20 in their air museum.

I forgot to add "no", my fault. That's what I mean, there are some of these planes left, along with the documentation, if they could make an Arado that wasn't produced in large numbers, so they can make a 25/26 flyeable.



 

Spoiler

If only they wanted to.

 

[Enceladus828]

At this point just put in the effort to make it flyable. Even if it's just the cockpit I'd still pre-order it. 

[BMA_FlyingShark]

If the other stations are too hard to model, maybe they could make generic versions of 'em.

Just an idea.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Lusekofte]

17 hours ago, Enceladus828 said:

At this point just put in the effort to make it flyable. Even if it's just the cockpit I'd still pre-order it. 

I would like the bombardier position in both A 20 and B 25. And rather skip the gunner stations. You fly pretty blind against targets without them. For the B 25 I would like the possibility to hand over controls to ai co pilot also

If current game engine has been further developed. I think a B 25 would have been flyable 

with the new. I sense there will be a lot of simplified ai bombers for fighters to shoot down. I will look at that closely before I endeavour into that new game engine. I fly DCS with no bombers, a Lancaster will eventually come. But this game got bombers in my eyes that is gold

[Robli]

I don't think that the current game engine has anything to do about whether B25 is flyable or not. We have flyable He-111's, so if the game engine could handle that, why wouldn't it handle B25.

[kestrel79]

My guess is we probably won't see it in the current gen IL2 sim. It would be a waste of resources to spend all that time and money on a bomber for a sim that's getting replaced by what they are working on now.

 

So maybe we'll get a B-25 eventually in the NEXT IL-2 they are working on? 

[Blitzen]

Probably posted already, but you wouldn’t need to worry about gunner positions if an earlier B-25 model is used.

( BTW: Developers do a great job with gunner positions on the He-111 ,sans upper turret, but with a dorsal gunner and theLate model Pe-2 has a turret,so…..why not the B-25 B ( forget about the remote controlled belly turret, and you could always use broomsticks for the tail gun effect ?,)for which there is plenty of reference ?)

 

 

Edited March 20, 2024 by Blitzen
Text

[LukeFF]

3 hours ago, Robli said:

I don't think that the current game engine has anything to do about whether B25 is flyable or not. We have flyable He-111's, so if the game engine could handle that, why wouldn't it handle B25.

 

Correct, the engine has nothing to do with the current status of the B-25. Jason himself explained this long, long ago. ?

[Blitzen]

BTW: just a quick Google

 

 

[Lusekofte]

I never meant to say this game engine could not handle the  B 25

I ment to say that this game engine will not be developed any more. At best only maintained. It is the new thing 

And as they implied fighters was the future. 
What make me believe all levelbombers will have a simplified ai configuration and target drones. And we might , just might get some two engine low altitude ground pounders. 
To me this will be a sad thing

[KodiakJac]

I flew an escort mission for a B-25 flight last night, and after I landed, I did a SHIFT-F2 view of one of the B-25s I had escorted and watched it in the circuit and while it landed.  The B-25 with its gull wings is one of the most beautiful medium bombers of WWII.  We can fly German and Russian medium bombers on the Moscow, Stalingrad, and Kuban maps, but we have no medium bomber to fly on the Normandy and Bodenplatte maps.  The B-25 would give us that bomber to fly.  The B-25 would fill a sorely missing hole in IL-2 Great Battles.

 

I wish 1C would do a Presale on the B-25 to see if they can generate enough revenue to justify a project to add it to IL-2 Great Battles with a "No Promises" stipulation that if the presale doesn't generate enough income to justify the project, they would refund the money to the customers who bought it with no harm done.  I think 1C would be surprised at how much interest there would be in the B-25 as a Collector Aircraft.

 

1C is still using 3rd party developers for aircraft projects for IL-2 Great Battles.  And even if it took as long as the I.A.R. 80 took, I think customers would be satisfied with a long-term timeline.  American players would love the B-25, and probably many British players as well as other players from around the world.  It is a beautiful aircraft.

 

Come on 1C, give us a medium bomber for the Normandy and Bodenplatte maps!  Please! ?

 

Edited March 25, 2024 by KodiakJac

[MajorMagee]

The more appropriate Medium Bomber for the Normandy and Bodenplatte maps is the B-26.

[KodiakJac]

31 minutes ago, MajorMagee said:

The more appropriate Medium Bomber for the Normandy and Bodenplatte maps is the B-26.

 

But, whereas the B-25 is the most beautiful, iconic medium bomber of WWII, the B-26 is the ugliest ? 

[jeanba]

I would like to hae the B26 flyable, because it was not in Il2:1946 so it generated from frustration

[Oboe]

I was very hopeful IL-2's big announcement would involve the development and addition of two- and four-engined Allied bombers for the Normandy campaign, as collector aircraft.   

 

I would definitely contribute to a pre-sale program toward bombers as described by KodiakJac.   Korean War only does a little for me, especially if it includes an aircraft carrier and the F9F Panther and F4U Corsair.   But I would've much preferred continued development of air combat in NW Europe.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, MajorMagee said:

The more appropriate Medium Bomber for the Normandy and Bodenplatte maps is the B-26.

 

Both are actually fully appropriate. It was just that the B-25 was used only by the RAF in northwest Europe.

[Lusekofte]

4 hours ago, Oboe said:

was very hopeful IL-2's big announcement would involve the development and addition of two- and four-engined Allied bombers for the Normandy campaign, as collector aircraft

You like me hope too much. Basicly moving over to another platform. I fear the train has left the station with bombers in general for current game engine. 
four engined heavies will not happen. Ever in this platform. We will get them as ai in next. 

Edited March 25, 2024 by Lusekofte

[Oboe]

Can't help but see this as a loss for the present and future IL-2 community.  Seems like the developers have abandoned a still-viable game engine to start over with a new one, in a less attractive theater of war.   

 

Combat Box in VR with SRS radio is as great a multiplayer WWII air combat as I've had. 

 

If the new game incorporates (integrates) such great addons as XRNeckSafer, SRS Radio, and OpenKneeboard that would definitely be a plus.

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Oboe said:

Seems like the developers have abandoned a still-viable game engine to start over with a new one, in a less attractive theater of war.   

 

I suggest you have a look again at the dev blog entry from last week, if you've not done so already. ? At some point you have to let go of old technology if you want the game to progress. 

[Irishratticus72]

47 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

 

I suggest you have a look again at the dev blog entry from last week, if you've not done so already. ? At some point you have to let go of old technology if you want the game to progress. 

I still fire up my A500.

[KodiakJac]

On 3/25/2024 at 8:47 AM, LukeFF said:

It was just that the B-25 was used only by the RAF in northwest Europe.

 

"Only flown by one country" could be said about most of the aircraft in IL-2 Great Battles.  The B-25 was used in the Doolittle raid on Tokyo in 1942!  Only the B-17 would rival the B-25 in notoriety among American players.  In the latest Dev Blog, Daniel and Albert talk about their passion for flight sims, which is wonderful.  But I think they may have underestimated the passion that American players and players from around the world have for the B-25.

 

As an American, I for one, can say that I would be quite happy flying the B-25 for the RAF! 

 

The B-25 would be one of the most successful Collector Aircraft ever produced for IL-2 Great Battles.  I know I'm preaching to the choir in answering your post, Luke.  I know you get it! ?

[Blitzen]

2 minutes ago, KodiakJac said:

 

"Only flown by one country" could be said about most of the aircraft in IL-2 Great Battles.  The B-25 was used in the Doolittle raid on Tokyo in 1942!  Only the B-17 would rival the B-25 in notoriety among American players.  In the latest Dev Blog, Daniel and Albert talk about their passion for flight sims, which is wonderful.  But I think they may have underestimated the passion that American players and players from around the world have for the B-25.

 

As an American, I for one, can say that I would be quite happy flying the B-25 for the RAF! 

 

The B-25 would be one of the most successful Collector Aircraft ever produced for IL-2 Great Battles.  I know I'm preaching to the choir in answering your post, Luke.  I know you get it! ?

Totally agree!

[MajorMagee]

I am a Raider. 

 

[Lusekofte]

21 hours ago, KodiakJac said:

 

But, whereas the B-25 is the most beautiful, iconic medium bomber of WWII, the B-26 is the ugliest ? 

W H A T ????

 

heresy!

 

I know B 25 hard extremely armed nose is popular here But you cannot deny J model got its uses

Edited March 26, 2024 by Lusekofte

[MajorMagee]

[MajorMagee]

Still keeping them flying. (17 at our 2010 Doolittle Reunion Fly-In)

 

 

 

[R7-S276]

Don’t forget the french players. The bombardement group “Lorraine” (Squadron 342) was equipped with B-25 in march 1945 and operate from Netherlands, that would be perfect with the Bodenplatte map…. and would like a B-25 with all the positions fully available for player (pilot, co-pilot, bombardier/navigator, radio/gunners)