Stuka D-5 needs more love!!

[Nickkyboy99]

I was really excited about the Ju 87 D-5, especially since we were finally getting an updated Stuka with an improved interior model, given that the D-3 was made over a decade ago. However, I was pretty disappointed. While a few gauges were moved or changed, the overall texturing and quality are essentially the same as the D-3.

Here's a side-by-side comparison (D-3 v D-5):

 

Same thing for the rear gunner (D-3 v D-5):

The frame is still the same old low-res as the D-3. 🙁

 

These are just two examples, of course, but look around, and it literally looks the same (the same applies to the Bf 109 E-4). Compared to the Me 410's gunner position, and looking at the framing, you can see a massive quality difference.

 

I understand that the devs are focused on Korea and can’t put as much time and effort into Odessa as they did with previous modules. But the Yak-1 ser. 23 has still been visually improved over the older Yak-1s. I could instantly tell the difference in quality (at least for me) the first time I spawned into it.

 

So my question is, why did the Yak-1 and LaGG-3 receive cockpit improvements (quality-wise), while the Stuka D-5 and 109 E-4 did not?

Edited October 4 by Nickkyboy99

[Avimimus]

My understanding is that it is simple: The Yak-1 has a completely different canopy. The LaGG-3 also has a lot of differences. In contrast, the D-5 cockpit is almost identical to the D-3, so existing art could be re-used.

 

The real mystery is why the E-4 is so improved compared to the E-7?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

6 hours ago, Avimimus said:

The real mystery is why the E-4 is so improved compared to the E-7?

Does it? I didn't noticed.

[jollyjack]

we'll see what the templates offer, BTW how many Bf109 we have now? Cannot complain really, In DCS there's only one and NO Stuka ...

[Kubert]

2 hours ago, jollyjack said:

BTW how many Bf109 we have now?

 

You probably don't expect answer, but this question made me interested as well. 

 

E4, E7, F2, F4, G2, G4, G6, G6 Late, G6/AS, G14, K4 = 11 BF-109s

 

G10 when? 

[ST_Catchov]

5 hours ago, Kubert said:

11 BF-109s

 

It's still not enough. 1C need to lift their game.

[Avimimus]

 

On 10/6/2025 at 4:30 PM, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Does it? I didn't noticed.

 

I'll give it a check. I haven't been flying the E-7 much recently - and it might be that I just like Emils so much that the E-4 looks really good to me.

13 hours ago, Kubert said:

 

You probably don't expect answer, but this question made me interested as well. 

 

E4, E7, F2, F4, G2, G4, G6, G6 Late, G6/AS, G14, K4 = 11 BF-109s

 

G10 when? 

 

To be honest, before planes were announced for Odessa and Leningrad, I recall thinking "If we have to have another Bf-109 - let it be the G-8". It'd be interesting as a counterpart to the recon Spitfire, the Pe-3 (or Pe-2 if we didn't get the Pe-3), and it'd be cool to have the lightened/reduced armament options. Of course, the composition of the module turned out to be different.

 

In any case, an AI Ju-87B/R would seem to be more valuable than another Bf-109 - although I could see it being difficult to add from a business case perspective (especially without another early war module or two)... anyway, supposed to be a Ju-87 thread... but if one had to go for a Bf-109... better the 8 than the 10 in my opinion.

[TempestV]

When does the Me-109 Kalifornia get modeled?

[Ghost666]

Watched that movie just last week!