when will we see the B-17?

[MF_pennsy]

Are there any plans for a B-17? If so, what time frame?

TIA

Pennsy

[BlitzPig_EL]

Not in Great Battles.  Won't happen.

[Trooper117]

You are never going to see it here in GB... end of!

[RedeyeStorm]

Search if you want to know more… It’s a popular subject.

[BaglanBoy]

Shame really, it played such a prominent part in the European theatre during WW2 , it would have been  fantastic in career mode, you would have had your work cut out as an air gunner !!

[MF_pennsy]

On 8/30/2025 at 12:12 PM, RedeyeStorm said:

Search if you want to know more… It’s a popular subject.

I tried and most of the threads went long and diverted from the point. I gave up looking for an answer after more than 20 pages of useless input.

thanks for the answer, sad to hear.

[creamersdream]

I'm suprised this thread isn't closed. Anyway they should have done the B-17 or B-24. AI would have been fine. Would have the proper bobmbers to escort for missions.  

[BlitzPig_EL]

In a way I'm glad it' isn't an AI.  Can you imagine attacking it with all those AI controlled .50 Brownings?  

It would be a Death Star level event.

 

[MDzmitry]

52 минуты назад, BlitzPig_EL сказал:

In a way I'm glad it' isn't an AI.  Can you imagine attacking it with all those AI controlled .50 Brownings?  

It would be a Death Star level event.

 

Dear God...

Скрытый текст

 

[czech693]

Okay, my rant.

 

This sim started focused on the eastern front with the emphasis on ground attack (hence the name of the sim).  No four engined strategic bombers on the eastern front.

 

Later the addition of the western front brought the 2nd TAF and 9th AF, both focused on ground attack.  No four engined bombers in those air forces.  But, they left out flyable medium bombers which were part of the tactical air forces.  Why?

 

Then someone decided to include the high altitude fighters, Bf-109G6AS, FW-190D9, Me-410, and Me-262, which were intended to tackle the strategic bomber streams (and in RL were used mainly for that function).  Then came the Ar-234B, which only made one bombing mission on the Remagen Bridge, and mostly flew high altitude recon missions over England. Then the worst poke in the eye for air to mud jocks, the Ta-152, only operational in the last couple of months of the war and flew only a few missions.  And it doesn't carry a bomb.

 

We're finally going to get an early war Ju-87.  The latest updates are planes specific to either early war or late war (the east front donesn't even have a late war map but is getting two late war aircraft).  But, no medium Russian bombers beyond the Pe-2.

 

And worst of all in my opinion, no Hs-123, which was in combat from the Spanish Civil War through to mid-1944, particularly on the east front.  It was in both early and late war combat but has been completely left out of the aircraft inventory.

 

So, forget about four engined strategic bombers.

[Skycat1969]

Something is being teased as news coming this fall, and I don't think the B-17 has been ruled out yet:

 

Quote

However, the Siege and Liberation module is not the only thing we are already doing and planning for Great Battles this year and next. This fall we'll have the news about new winged engines, and there will be more engines than usual. There will also be news for those who are especially interested in the Great War - unexpected and pleasant additions to the map and the aircraft, huge aircraft! Please follow our news and stay in touch!

Dev blog #371 / IL-2 Sturmovik: Great Battles

 

czech693 lays out some good reasons why a flyable B-17 really doesn't fit the sim's strengths but could be added anyhow. Personally, I think a box of AI bombers programmed to hold formation at high altitude and fly from one map boundary to the other would be the best solution. That would give Ta-152 and Me-262 pilots something to intercept. We'll see.

[Kubert]

1 hour ago, czech693 said:

Okay, my rant.

I completely agree with tactical warfare focus. I also agree about uselessness of BF-109G6/AS and Ta-152...but FW-109D9 fits in. It was used as standard late war frontline fighter, took part in Operation Bodenplatte, guarded ME-262 during take offs and landings and so on...ME-262 itself was used as fighter-bomber which fits tactical warfare as well. 

As for Stuka, we are not getting early war variant, but late war D5. Early B2 will be still missing. I think one day early Stuka comes.  When there can be ten versions of BF-109, with another on the way, it would be unlogical to not add such an important plane to the game. Especially when it has place on three maps and it is one engine two seater with one version already in the game...many parts could be copy-paste.

[BraveSirRobin]

6 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

In a way I'm glad it' isn't an AI.  Can you imagine attacking it with all those AI controlled .50 Brownings?  

It would be a Death Star level event.

 

Death Star event at 4fps.

[R33GZ]

4 hours ago, czech693 said:

But, they left out flyable medium bombers which were part of the tactical air forces.  Why?

Too hard, too time consuming, too expensive... too incapable of creating a credible reason why 🙄

[ST_Catchov]

3 hours ago, Skycat1969 said:

This fall we'll have the news about new winged engines, and there will be more engines than usual.

 

The B17 for sure. I've never seen a more obvious statement.

[LukeFF]

4 hours ago, czech693 said:

Then someone decided to include the high altitude fighters, Bf-109G6AS, FW-190D9, Me-410, and Me-262, which were intended to tackle the strategic bomber streams (and in RL were used mainly for that function).  Then came the Ar-234B, which only made one bombing mission on the Remagen Bridge, and mostly flew high altitude recon missions over England.

 

Cliff notes version:

 

- G-6/AS (and G-14/AS) were used both on the Normandy front and then in the Rhineland as tactical fighters like the other contemporary 109s of the time

 

- D-9 and Me 262, already covered. The former actually flew very few bomber intercept missions. The latter was employed primarily as a fighter-bomber in our section of the map. 

 

- Me 410s were highly active over the Normandy front as night bombers/ attack planes long before the invasion and long afterward 

 

- Ar 234: used heavily by KG 76 as bombers, in addition as recon planes

[Tonester]

Id like to have heavy bombers…but they would look a lil silly in streams of only 6 aircraft and the AI guns would be deadly.

Just happy with what we have and to be honest for what ive spent on the game modules etc over the years its been

fantastic value for money

[ITAF_Rani]

I know Devs always try to surprise us...we know Devs have to do an anouncement in the next future about IL2 GB plans for 2026....maybe new planes (Bombers??) , maybe a new module.....who know !!!🫡

 

Best

Edited October 10 by ITAF_Rani

[Trooper117]

How many more times... this is a ''dead parrot''...

[Kubert]

If we got a dollar every time when this topic appears, we could afford real B-17 by now. 

[kraut1]

14 hours ago, Tonester said:

Id like to have heavy bombers…but they would look a lil silly in streams of only 6 aircraft and the AI guns would be deadly.

Just happy with what we have and to be honest for what ive spent on the game modules etc over the years its been

fantastic value for money

ca.9 years ago I had fps issues with the IL2 1946 CUP mod and I had to reduce the B17 / B24 unit sizes of my il2dcg RV43/44 campaigns to 6 planes.

In return I reduced the size of my interceptor flight to 2 planes and 1 random ai interceptor flight with 2 planes too.

1944 allied escort flights 2 - 4 planes.

Of course in respect of the overall immersion a poor solution...

But in tactical respect it was very challenging to fly head-on / frontal attacks or to attack from the side.

In Great Battles it ist possible to adjust the AI gunner accuracy per ailevel and in case that "AI Sniper gunner" issues appear it is easy to adjust the weapon dispersion per gun type as required...

So from my point if view at least 1  "AI only 4 engine bomber" would be great.

Maybe better the B24 due to the slightly lower number of required gunner bots.

[[CPT]Crunch]

I'm OK with B-29's just around the corner, can't exactly say nothings being done about big formation heavy bombers.  It's just not the type and era some wishes and hopes for.

[MF_pennsy]

On 9/1/2025 at 2:41 PM, czech693 said:

Okay, my rant.

 

This sim started focused on the eastern front with the emphasis on ground attack (hence the name of the sim).  No four engined strategic bombers on the eastern front.

 

Later the addition of the western front brought the 2nd TAF and 9th AF, both focused on ground attack.  No four engined bombers in those air forces.  But, they left out flyable medium bombers which were part of the tactical air forces.  Why?

 

Then someone decided to include the high altitude fighters, Bf-109G6AS, FW-190D9, Me-410, and Me-262, which were intended to tackle the strategic bomber streams (and in RL were used mainly for that function).  Then came the Ar-234B, which only made one bombing mission on the Remagen Bridge, and mostly flew high altitude recon missions over England. Then the worst poke in the eye for air to mud jocks, the Ta-152, only operational in the last couple of months of the war and flew only a few missions.  And it doesn't carry a bomb.

 

We're finally going to get an early war Ju-87.  The latest updates are planes specific to either early war or late war (the east front donesn't even have a late war map but is getting two late war aircraft).  But, no medium Russian bombers beyond the Pe-2.

 

And worst of all in my opinion, no Hs-123, which was in combat from the Spanish Civil War through to mid-1944, particularly on the east front.  It was in both early and late war combat but has been completely left out of the aircraft inventory.

 

So, forget about four engined strategic bombers.

in all fairness, the 8th air landed B-17s in Russia during the war, granted not on the lend lease program. But aside from the eastern front, we have Normandy maps on the roster. 

[Avimimus]

On 9/2/2025 at 12:43 AM, LukeFF said:

 

Cliff notes version:

 

- G-6/AS (and G-14/AS) were used both on the Normandy front and then in the Rhineland as tactical fighters like the other contemporary 109s of the time

 

- D-9 and Me 262, already covered. The former actually flew very few bomber intercept missions. The latter was employed primarily as a fighter-bomber in our section of the map. 

 

- Me 410s were highly active over the Normandy front as night bombers/ attack planes long before the invasion and long afterward 

 

- Ar 234: used heavily by KG 76 as bombers, in addition as recon planes

 

This really brings home how much of our vision of history is dominated by the 8th Airforce!

[LF_Mark_Krieger]

I think every time this topic appears there's a tendency to forget the reasons why B-17 is discarded. And the developers have explained it a lot of times.
Great Battles game engine doesn't allow a simplified flight model and every gunner of a B-17 would count as an independent AI. This is a huge load for the CPU. In IL-2 Series this will be possible because the engine has been modified and there is a simplified flight model and a AI will be able to control all the gunners at once to save resources.
The core design of the game wouldn't allow decent formations of B-17s. 

[FeuerFliegen]

21 hours ago, LF_Mark_Krieger said:

I think every time this topic appears there's a tendency to forget the reasons why B-17 is discarded. And the developers have explained it a lot of times.
Great Battles game engine doesn't allow a simplified flight model and every gunner of a B-17 would count as an independent AI. This is a huge load for the CPU. In IL-2 Series this will be possible because the engine has been modified and there is a simplified flight model and a AI will be able to control all the gunners at once to save resources.
The core design of the game wouldn't allow decent formations of B-17s. 

 

 

Exactly.  If we had B-17s, you couldn't have more than 15 or so without lag and CPU/GPU  issues.  Great Battles, for all of it's positives, was not designed for a mass amount of units.  Cliffs of Dover is much better at handling a large group of AI units.

[IckyATLAS]

My understanding is that you can very well make such a B17 bomber in GB, the only thing is the cost and the amount of work needed to make such a complex plane to the quality level we are used to is fairly enormous. If someone is ready to pay for it and there is a team ready to build it it could be done. But the devs will never do it, the have Korea and B29 bombers to build.

[FliegerAD]

On 9/1/2025 at 8:41 PM, czech693 said:

Then someone decided to include the high altitude fighters, Bf-109G6AS, FW-190D9, Me-410, and Me-262, which were intended to tackle the strategic bomber streams (and in RL were used mainly for that function).  Then came the Ar-234B, which only made one bombing mission on the Remagen Bridge, and mostly flew high altitude recon missions over England. Then the worst poke in the eye for air to mud jocks, the Ta-152, only operational in the last couple of months of the war and flew only a few missions.  And it doesn't carry a bomb.

 

We're finally going to get an early war Ju-87.  The latest updates are planes specific to either early war or late war (the east front donesn't even have a late war map but is getting two late war aircraft).  But, no medium Russian bombers beyond the Pe-2.

 

And worst of all in my opinion, no Hs-123, which was in combat from the Spanish Civil War through to mid-1944, particularly on the east front.  It was in both early and late war combat but has been completely left out of the aircraft inventory.

 

You make some valid points, although I disagree on the "high altitude" stuff for reasons LukeFF elaborated.

 

Also, you have to consider they commercial viability of add-on planes. Sure, the Hs 123 deserves a spot in a sim like this, whereas the Ta 152 seems rather dubious. But then what will sell better, be worth the effort? 

 

I would love to get my hands on a Pe-3 or Tu-2, a Ju 88 R-2 (Zerstörer) or Ju 88 S.

The Beaufighter is sorely missing if you ask me. 

The MC.200 was far more important on the Eastern Front than the 202.

What about the P-36? My favourite US...

And so on. The list is endless.

 

Realistically though, they have little chance in the open market. People want their late war super fighters and the game can handle them. So here is your Ta 152... Wasn't the P-47M operational over Europe? If so, I would expect that one sooner than any of my choices. 

[vadupleix7]

Considering the scale of airwar in the GB series, I'd much rather see JU86 than 4 engine bombers for some high altitude actions

[MaxPower]

The Ta-152 H-1 is a fun plane to fly and it is unlike the two main Luftwaffe fighters of any time period.  It is my favourite collector's plane that I bought for either coalition, although I do get surprising mileage out of the mossie and p-38 as well (which I think we're also collector's planes ???).  I like flying it and I'm glad I bought it.