Leaderboard

Good Afternoon Everyone. I have released HMS Albion L14 along with Support Craft. There's also a livery of HMS Bulwark L15 included with the download. Please PM me if you experience any major technical issues. Thank you all for your interest in the AI Ship Mods I create. Enjoy. HMS Albion is an amphibious transport dock of the Royal Navy, the first of the two-ship Albion class. Built by BAE Systems Marine in Barrow-in-Furness, Albion was launched in March 2001 by the Princess Royal. Her sister ship, Bulwark, was launched in November 2001, also from Barrow. Affiliated to the city of Chester and based in Plymouth, she is the ninth ship to carry the name Albion (after Albion, an ancient name of Great Britain), stretching back to the 74-gun 1763 warship, and last carried by an aircraft carrier decommissioned in 1973 after 19 years service. Designed as an amphibious warfare ship, Albion carries troops, normally Royal Marines, and vehicles up to the size of the Challenger 2 main battle tank. She can deploy these forces using four Landing Craft Utility (LCUs) and four Landing Craft Vehicle and Personnel (LCVPs). A flight deck supports helicopter operations.

I have massive amounts of respect for the development team, but just like with the night equipment - get the basics first, and then take care of the extras. A specific WP command that allows the carrier to turn into the wind should have been there as a day-one feature. I am sure you agree with that. Most of us would appreciate those additions more than the elevators or ready room. Additionally, what's the purpose of developing this complex deck crew routine if you don't allow us to select custom spawn locations for aircraft, disable cats or support more than 12 jets on deck? I mean, it is really pointless. The ATC doesn't even want to cooperate with me and my friends flying in MP. If we can't get it to get us back to the ship, why should we care about a system that helps us park or taxi?

Да, хочу выразить благодарность всем, кто долго пинал эту тему - благодаря их настойчивости нашелся хоть и минорный , но баг, который влиял на все самолеты. Хотя и заметить его почти невозможно... :).

The texture colors were sampled from the original support craft as shown below.

Now we're going to need Russian "trawlers" Sailing on their "fishing" missions.

This is a submission for the B-17G Livery Competition. It includes two skins, one a detailed 'Louie the Creep' and one plain and without the distinguishing markings of 'Louie the Creep" as specified in the competition. Speculars are used but I will change to roughmets if the developers decide to upgrade the B-17 to PBR. The detailed skin depicts Serial number 42-97976, a B-17G-40-VE, code letter D, nicknamed "Louie the Creep". The plane completed 27 combat missions with the 709th Bombardment Squadron of the 447th Bombardment Group at this point and would be renamed "Bit O' Lace" for the remainder of it's combat missions which totaled 83 by the end of the war in Europe. Please Note: This skin will work with the default JSON file included in the game but to see the skin at it's best, use the improved Metallic look MOD by Warlord64 available here :https://forum.dcs.world/topic/319116-specular-reflectivity-from-brushed-to-mirror-effect/#comment-5 DCS: World War II Assets Pack is required. Look for "Bit O' Lace" skinned by Helles Belle. Many thanks to Warlord64 for his JSON Mod and for assistance on the spinning props. I also borrowed his colors for the speculars. The only photos I could find for "Louie the Creep" are nose shots as per the attached photo. I used other, all aircraft, photos of "Bit O' Lace" with the assumption that they would be relevant. Download here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3332565/

У меня для некоторых граждан несколько новостей, хороших и плохих: 1. Плохая. Прирост Су у земли таки есть. 2. Хорошая. Прирост Cy у земли хоть и есть (проверялось в отладчике даже, а не в тестах), но меньше той, что на рисунке раза в два). Причина банальная - в общую модель эффекта приходили не те геометрические данные самолета. Т.к. модель использует фундаментальные соотношения с углами скоса и прочими радостями, она не настраиваемая, но, естественно, требует правильных исходных данных. 3. Хорошая: общая модель экранного эффекта с правильными входными данными дает в точности то, что на графике, и касание передвинулось с 265 на 260 км/ч. 4. Очень плохая: если кто-то ожидал, что теперь самолет будет садиться сам, то нет - посадка остается с выбором ручки на себя, и тот, кто садился хорошо, так и будет садиться хорошо, а кто плюхался - так и будет плюхаться.

Hi all, appreciate you all want to hear news, we totally understand it is a long time between new features for the Supercarrier, but as mentioned in other posts a lot of what we are doing with the supercarrier is completely new for DCS so it will take time and can not be rushed. We are currently testing deck crew directors who will direct you to launch and to parking. This is very complex as I am sure you can imagine. Without early access and long development times modules like this would not be possible, so for those of you who do support us during early access we thank you.

Как многие знают, в ВВС (и не только) активно используется навигационная программа ProNebo. Так как я ни разу не компьютерный гуру, то я долго, медленно и печально пытался подружить её с DCS и это получилось! 1) Вам нужна программа GpsGate. Гайд по настройке тут https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcF1SgJUivA&t=1s 2) Скачиваете и устанавливаете DCS-to-GPS https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3303310/ В файле DCS_NMEA.lua прописываете NMEA_Serial = 1 и ваш виртуальный порт sPort_Nr = { } выбранный в п.1 3) Если в компе нет встроенного, то покупаете USB блютуз адаптер. 4) В ProNebo, во вкладке Настройки - Настройки ГлоНаСС/GPS - Внешний GPS и бародатчик выбираете Блютуз GPS. В общем это всё. Запускаете и летаете с навигационным инструментом использующимся прямо сейчас в реале. С поправкой на плоский мир всё работает. P.S. без GpsGate тоже работает, но игра будет "спотыкаться" каждые несколько секунд.

We know because you just posted about it yesterday, three times and I think you got the explanation why that’s not feasible. And again, this just makes no sense. I see an Su-27 but surprise! It’s actually an amateur-made cartoonish mod Su-57! And it thrust vector turns on me I’m sure that’s what everyone wants to see in DCS. Surprise encounters with inauthentic mod planes

Very unlikely Sad MiG-23, MiG-17 and Su-22 noise that are currently all in development

this thread is for CJS Super Bug mod, which covers F/A-18E/F/G......

Hi! Will take a look at it, yes.

@dggoofy Just finished Ad Pacem 1985 Campaign! Thank you for this marvelous journey that your FREE campaign gave us (also tried and finished Mirage F1 Equilibrium 1975 Campaign) Hat's off to you sir! I hope you will not give up and provide us with more similar campaigns in the future!

Give this a shot. /Mods/terrains/Syria/vfsTextures/ All credit to Barthek, I just added a few textures from the update that weren't in the zip of the mod. There may be more errors, don't have the time for a complete test/check. HardSplatColor.zip

My new wallpaper. This is the ramp at Seymour Johnson although the aircraft are not parked in rows like when I was there. However, I worked on Phantoms from the 337th (red tail stripe) and 335th (green tail stripe) squadrons. I loaded weapons on all of the aircraft in this photo. Iirc, the white building that says Munitions Handling on it is where our stocks of impulse cartridges were stored for easy access to all the AMU's weapons flights.

I have been flying this campaign an it was great. It has been created as a story driven tour of duty of a Huey pilot in Vietnam... just it is not Vietnam. Very immersive and the missions are challenging at times, such as making you land in spots where you know that the helicopter just does not fit... yet somehow it does (sometimes you need to do a leap of faith!) or the cool developments in most of the missions: wait, was that an emergency beacon? Why did it stop? Is that a bug? From which radio did it come? Navigation is not specially hard, but you will need to work on it a bit. We are flying around a small island and there are large landmarks as reference (coastlines, airports, golf courses, lakes) and sometimes you can even use direction finding to locate places or they are marked with smoke. Note that your icon and the enemies are hidden in the F10 map, which is something that I usually dislike in case there are problems with the missions or if I did not understand something. This is because at some stages it is required to look in this F10 map, which will be your reference map. Note that you will be required to do some multitasking: looking at that F10 map or tune radios while in flight. It is good to learn how to correctly trim the aircraft for that (and for taking external view screenshots) or use the "autopilot". In general, I preferred flying the slicks over the gunships (personal preference). I am not such a good Huey pilot, but always enjoy the challenges of landing in a difficult place, in a hot LZ or sling carrying some cargo. If this is not enough, in some missions you will be flying from the left seat (not a difficult feat in itself, but harder when you are not used to the new visual references). With the gunships at times you need to shoot targets that you can't see, because they are hidden in the jungle. Is is very realistic and always fun spraying 7.62mm and rockets, but somewhat disconcerning not really knowing whether you are hitting the bad guys or not. Is is really well done. As for the targets, mainly they are foot soldiers an trucks, easily neutralized with your weapons. The part I mostly struggled with is the takeoff in the fully loaded gunships. The overweight is insane, and despite watching Reflected videos where he explains the why and how of this (I also read Mark Garrison's book :P), I never was able to do a rolling takeoff without blowing the EGT above the red line. Just a little bit and for a few seconds, but I always had to do it. BTW, I flew the campaign with the previous engine model, as I guess that it was created with that one in mind. In any case, it is a very enjoyable campaign and very recommended for intermediate and advanced Huey virtual pilots. I really hope Reflected creates more content for the Huey at some point.

Has anyone ever tried to make a mod of the TV show Air Wolf Helicopter, if so, is there any link to it. also if not, it would be awesome to have that bird in DCS. Just wishful thinking.

The AI literally flies into itself while waiting for other groups to join the formation. It's really astonishing how busted the AI in DCS can act. In this example, there are 3 Groups with 4 aircraft each. The lead group takes off first and is set to go to Waypoint 1, which is far away. Group 2 and 3 have a waypoint much closer with the task to join a big WWII formation with the lead group. In the mission, it starts well. Group 1 takes off first, then group 2 and lastly group 3. At this point you will slowly observe things going out of control. Lead group goes full power until the last group has taken off. Only then does the lead reduce power to slow down only to maintain a speed slightly above stall speed. And this is the point where things will go really awkward. - The lead aircraft, and maybe one or two other of his flight, will now continuously pitch up and down in a rythmic fasion. - Once in a while you will see some aircraft, including lead for some reason, rubberband up and down, occasionally also back and forth. Why do they do that? They were told to maintain altitude, not rubberband around. https://imgur.com/47U7PP8 - Occasionally, because of the rubberbanding, some aircraft will collide into each other https://imgur.com/k0aRa7u And this absolute mess will continue until every group has joined the formation. Only then will they accelerate and fly in a normal way. AI....trk As a sidenote: This was all done in SP.

Presents, A Add on by the Admiral, and myself. Using code originally created by SuntSag, slightly modified. The Proximity Mines and IEd"s Add On for DCS world https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/t13etwgrotmcqgu4o6prg/Proximity-Mines-and-IED-s-V2.8.4.zip?rlkey=7x9rach4o49fbo62fmmgukrcm&dl=0 Give no way points You may need to place a few. The ai tend to avoid them! Saved Games install location OvGME ready From models found at sketch fab.. Took out the entire block! Tank did not stand a chance! Leaves craters? Have fun!

0:58 Outboard wing panel is not impressed by that non-flared landing

Just saw on photos from military exhibition “official” leaflet with Shaheed techical specification. Both 1500 and 2000 ranges are declared

that exception has already been fixed internally.

I also am eager for this feature. Seems to me that ED should just work it into the rearming menu. The kneeboard approach seems weird to me, but I appreciate the module makers for giving us a way.

If you are not restricted by your loadout anymore, you can switch to CAT I anytime.

Ich finde VR einfach 1000 Mal besser als am Monitor, aber ich sehe das nicht mal im Ansatz so wie du und ich werde das auch begründen. Es ist einfach nicht möglich DCS in VR mit halbwegs guten Settings in irgendeiner Form auch nur annähernd mit guter Performance !!und!! bester Grafikqualität so wie in 2D (Monitor) spielen zu können. Spielt man ohne MR muss, man das Spiel so einrichten, dass man !!min. (in allen Situationen)!! 90 FPS erreicht, ansonsten kommt es bei FPS (Frame Time) Drops zum "Stottern" des Bildaufbaus, was wiederum zum Ghosting (Nachziehen/Mehrfachdarstellung) eines Objekts führt. Dazu muss man die Bildqualität aber schon weit weg vom maximal möglichen einstellen. Nimmt man MR, ist das Ghosting als ein übler Standard gerade in DCS enthalten. Es tritt aber dann meist nur bei sich selbst schnell bewegenden Objekten auf. MR führt auch dazu, dass die Bildschärfe ein wenig abnimmt. Am stärksten ist das zu sehen, wenn man MR in SteamVR einsetzt. Open XR ist nicht so stark betroffen, was allerdings auch an der Möglichkeit des Nachschärfens durch diverse Tools erreicht wird. Das Nachschärfen führt aber dazu, dass man noch mehr Flimmern als ohnehin schon bekommt. VR, besonders in DCS, ist ein einziger Kompromiss (das liegt aber hauptsächlich an der total veralteten Spiele-Engine, welche ED benutzt). Das sorgt dafür, dass VR, in puncto Darstellung, selbst mit der aktuell besten VR- und Rechner-Hardware, nicht mit der Bildqualität in 2D mithalten kann. Nicht mal im Ansatz. In 2D mit 4x MAA ist fast gar kein Flimmern mehr zu sehen und ich spiele mit einer Frame Time von unter 15 ms (alles maxed out). Kein Stottern, kein Ghosting, alles sieht gut aus (bis auf ein paar seltsame Engine-Probleme, aber das ist ein anderes Thema ;)). Um eine ähnlich gute Umgebungsdarstellung in VR zu erhalten, müsste ich die Leistung meiner GPU mehr als vervierfachen. Selbst mit 4 x MAA habe ich in VR immer noch ein Flimmern, allerdings erst sehr viel weiter in der Ferne. Dann gehen die Frame Times aber hoch auf mehr als 30 ms, wenn mal viel auf der Karte los ist. Das ist unspielbar (sieht aber schon richtig gut aus ;)). VR verstärkt alle negativen Effekte, da die dargestellten Pixel, aufgrund der Nähe zum Auge, wie durch ein Vergrößerungsglas dargestellt werden. Die dargestellten Pixel müssten min. um den Faktor 4 verkleinert werden, um in VR genauso klein zu sein, wie derzeit am Monitor, um damit eine in allen Bereichen genauso gute Bildqualität abliefern zu können. Das Hauptproblem, weshalb VR in DCS derzeit nicht so gut in VR aussehen wird, sind die Shader, die zur Darstellung der Reflexionen oder Transparenz genutzt werden. Denn diese können nicht einfach so mit AA geglättet werden. Es gibt Verfahren, um das zu ändern, ich bezweifle aber stark, dass die von ED eingesetzte Engine dazu in der Lage ist. Der Aufwand das anzupassen, wenn man es nicht sofort macht, ist vermutlich fast genauso hoch, wie eine Engine komplett neu zu schreiben. Also keine Option. VR macht mir trotzdem immer noch 1000 Mal mehr Spaß als am Monitor zu spielen (mitten drin, statt nur dabei ;)), aber es wird sehr wahrscheinlich noch min. 6 Jahre dauern, bis wir in VR eine Darstellungsqualität bekommen, die der eines guten Monitors entspricht, ohne all die derzeitigen Nachteile (Bildunschärfe, Ghosting, etc.) ertragen zu müssen.

@Art-J and @motoadve I think that we cleared what was the true stabilizer trim configuration of the Bf-109G in cruise flight, in our interview to Flugmuseum Messerschmitt test pilot Volker Bau in 2016. The neutral trim modeling of the K4 in game is completely broken compared what Volker Bau said. ..and yes it is awesome, but it still broken from 2015.

Не так. Продажи в РФ не то что бы сильно упали, но просто продажи в мире выросли с нулевых очень сильно. Мы по прежнему переводим свой проект на русский, как вы наверно это можете заметить. Но за внешников мы не отвечаем. Они сами себе режиссеры. Что касается русских ЛА, то при прочих равных они продаются заметно хуже западных образцов. Это факт. Поэтому такой приоритет. Уже говорили. Локализация это тяжелая и затратная задача для людей, которые не знают эти языки.

"If you fly directly over that core I promise you by tomorrow morning you'll be begging for that bullet!"

Так может потому это и единицы процентов что вы русскоговорящих игроков кхм, как бы это по мягче выразиться... В расчет не берёте. И вся DCS ориентирована на запад уже много-много лет. Откуда взяться новому поколению русскоговорящих если условно 90% кампаний на английском а процент авиации красной коалиции и того меньше. Если не брать в расчет не кликабельные самолёты из ГС3 в сухом остатке остались только пара старых МиГов, Акула и Ми-8 (хвала их создателям). Если политика компании направлена на постепенный уход с российского рынка, то в принципе всё пока делаете верно. P.S. Эммм... А давно у нас только (!) в России говорят на русском? Я сходу ещё с десяток стран могу назвать где им активно пользуются до сих пор. Он в первой десятке по распространенности в мире. И ладно бог с ним с русским. Меня правильно поправили выше - немецкий, французский, испанский ничем не хуже и не лучше. Создайте в профильных сообществах опрос по данной теме. Попробуйте поговорить с разработчиками какой-нибудь самой популярной кампании из тех что у вас продаётся, по поводу перевода на несколько других языков. И на примере одной кампании посмотрите как будут вести себя её продажи. Риски минимальны. Я думаю если вы заинтересованы чтобы сообщество в вашей игре росло, вы хотя бы попробуете. А там как пойдет.

You could paint the outer side and the back black, leave the seat side grey? Or argue the case that the colour grey is in fact a lightened shade of black, when you mixed the black with a bit too much white they lightened etc. etc. (this may require copious amounts of the finest wines known to man and possibly a meal out). I’m not gonna even mention this to my missus. On past experience she’ll mess your head up and confuse and complicate matters. You’ll spend fortunes, won’t be happy with the result and won’t have any money left to put it right. Then she’ll have you hoovering the place, doing the laundry, the garden, putting shelves up etc. All the while trying to tell you it’s what you wanted all along. in fact, does anyone know of a cheap solicitor? E.T.A: Leave it grey for now, go to the pub and have a think about it. This may take quite some time but it’s only for the best.

I'll have to check on that. But according to EDs OptionsDB File, Both Forrest and Scenery Details Options have a Slider w/ Range of 0.1 to 1.0 w/ increments of .1. and 0.1 = 10% and 1.0 = 100%. The Parser Takes the Value and Applies it to the Slider Control Value, so You are likely not using the proper format for those values. The only way I can re-produce the issue is the edit the options.lua to read: ["sceneryDetailsFactor"] = 59, instead of: ["sceneryDetailsFactor"] = 0.59, in which it rounds up to .60 value on the slider. Please attach the options.lua file. I'd like to check and make sure DCS doesnt use different symbols in different region settings. The next version will list what's changed. 99% of the time it's the aspect ratio, as the app calculates to a set decimal number, where as DCS doesn't. ie: Aspect Ratio for 16:9 is: "1.7777777777778" for the APP, "1.777777777777778" for DCS. Once saved, DCS doesn't change it back, so the prompt wont occur after, I also have an internal debug function that I may unhide in the next public release, that will output a compare.lua file., that a user can open in notepad++ and use the compare plugin to do a line by line compare and notepad++ will show/highlight any changes. And for further demonstration, I'll change a whole panel's worth of settings, though I do believe I set the prompt max at 20 lines for the changed values list, after which it will simply state that there's more than 20 changes, I may increase the limit, as it was a limit placed just to test.

The Parser is being re-written to resolve some issues (There is a few mis-linked items, and I have found some values are being mis-read randomly for an unknown reason)., The next version if no issues will arise will complete all the planned sections and use the new parser. Mis-read values may cause the splat/radar graph to not update correctly as well.

From the horse's mouth (McDonnell) circa 1973: "The aft fuselage is constructed of aluminum with the exception of the area subjected to the engine exhaust which is fabricated of stainless steel, Hastelloy X and titanium. Ventilation air and insulation are used where needed to control the temperature of the primary structure"

As I did not have much first hand IAM experience, I am certainly aware of how to target at night. As stated in a few posts, NVG with InfaRed pointer works wonders for illuminating a target. The real answer unfortunately is simple. "Check and verify." In real world scenarios you would be doing pilot related drills to check and verify on certain type of control targets and some of those are sight unseen and mostly consist of verifying your INS drift, read-back information, or painted target. Or a combination of all of them. Even verifying everything in your control you can still miss your target. There are checklists to make sure you verify all of your information is correct and accurate and you rely on them and your training. Ultimately lack of attention can needlessly cost someone their life and it may be same team. If flying with other people, or JTAC, a talk on may be warranted by someone who has more SA than you. Practice at it..

Nah, it's ok. I mean, it can be real pain in the sitting apparatus to hit an AI in jink mode, but it's also one hell of a good gunnery practice and i learned to love it!

That's kind of a broad statement. I have of course done testing before release, I just ran a mission with the Type 055 without issues. I guess what you mean is that the Type 055 Destroyer 1.5.0 will crash your game. Are you running the latest open beta?

Me too, but things have changed. Good to hear from you, mate. Stay well. I play singleplayer missions when time permits it. Very relaxing

In your track you did not wait for alignment to complete (it needs to get to 8.0 and RDY has to be flashing, ALIGN on the HUD has to be flashing) you turned the INS knob to NAV too soon. I took control of your track and aligned just fine, TGP works as it should.

I was just amazed by the weather patterns flying at 10000 feet and decided to take a few pics.

Hi, I'm glad you joined the discussion. As I have already written, I understand the technical difficulties, but not the long times to still have something more concrete. As the friend wrote above, just having a decent ATC and the ability to point Carrier in the right direction would be a big step forward. I hope I have been clear enough. Inviato dal mio SM-G998B utilizzando Tapatalk

You are correct. One can be grateful for a product and also voice concerns (which is what people around here seem to forget). The fact that the carrier can not even turn into the wind without a script at this point is embracing, and I didn't even mention the fact that the ATC doesn't work well at all in MP, and nothing will change that. As a paying costumer, you are allowed to seek answers.

I have no active filter you can rest assured. With this post I am unfortunately attracting unusual lawyers of lost causes, when I have already made it clear that I am grateful for the work done by the development team. I would just like more concrete answers from them, I don't think I'm nagging or rude towards them. In your answers, however, we read the clear intention of creating a storm of *** , a sterile controversy, playing the part of the do-gooder who defends the cause. I repeat, perhaps my post can also be provocative, but I simply ask for some more information from insiders. Inviato dal mio SM-G998B utilizzando Tapatalk

Nice!

When using the TWS option on PB10 on the ATTK format with a trackfile in STT, the TWS AUTO scan volume is using the antenna elevation value from the position prior to STT instead of centering elevation on the L&S. TWS_AUTO_elevation.trk

Hi, as far as I know, 140 mph is absolutely out of reality. Real max speed is somewhere about 110 but common speed is about 90, sometimes 100.

I don't disagree with the general sentiment; pushing the chronological purview of the Asset Pack both forward and back has some merit, but only if it supports aircraft types and maps we have in game. The key is this: If you are prepared to fight recreations of historical battles (1) on maps that do not represent the historical area and (2) with aircraft that aren't historically relevant then why do you care about (3) units that aren't historically accurate? Why is using a panzer IV instead of a III against a 75mm Sherman in lieu of an M3 Lee to recreate an El Alamein scenario using the Persian Gulf map such a problem? The arguments are inconsistent. Half the time from the cockpit of a fighter-bomber you won't tell the difference of armour types (and don't really care anyway) and given the challenge of hitting such small targets, it doesn't really matter. What you are after are troops, trucks, trains, artillery - all of which we have now - ships (a little sparse on the Axis side, but both need fleshing out) and radars (Allies suffer in the latter example). My key point is that by fleshing out the Normandy/Channel with chronologically relevant units we often bring that desired usefulness for wider scope anyway; for example a USN Destroyer could be useful for both Normandy and the WW2 Marianas. An Austin K2 ambulance would benefit the Normandy scenarios and a future foray to the Western Desert, should that ever happen. Should DCS make a move later or earlier in the war then yes, 100%, let's have AI Ju-87Bs and He-111s to fight in our Spitfire Mk I over a modified Channel map when DCS: Battle of Britain appears; let's have the Yaks, Laggs T-34s and Panzer IIIs when DCS: Kursk is announced. Until then let's ensure that the Asset Pack remains relevant to providing depth to what we have.

All largely irrelevant to the WW2 maps we have. The following would be far more useful. Ships: Axis Destroyer Axis Minesweeper Axis Tanker Axis Cargo Vessel Allied Destroyer Allied Minesweeper Allied Liberty Ship Allied T2 Tanker Ship Allied Fighter Direction Tender Ground units: Nebelwerfer Luftwaffe Unarmed Ground Crew Axis Fuel Bowser Axis Airfield Fire Fighting Truck USAAF Unarmed Ground Crew RAF Unarmed Ground Crew Allied Ambulance Allied Radar array AMES 25 Allied Fuel Bowser Allied Airfield Fire Fighting Truck Allied Ambulance Air Units Hawker Typhoon Mk.Ib Bf 109G-6/14 B-26C Marauder B-25C Mitchell P-38J Lightning P-51B Mustang P-47D-22 Thunderbolt (Razorback) Ju 52 Do 217 If you had to include Eastern Front (not a bad idea, incidentally - the poor old Ishzak does seem a little lonely) then the following would be a good idea: T-34 Model 1943 Bf 109E-7 Panzer III Ausf. J GAZ-MM 25 mm automatic air defence gun M1940 (72-K)