Jump to content

Cliffhanger31

Members
  • Posts

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Cliffhanger31

  1. Hey all

    Sorry for the lack of updates, it’s been a crazy summer so far and I haven’t been able to work on the Cub as much as I wanted to. I’m currently working on an intro/tutorial video that I will release soon so you all can see it in action. The FM refactor is coming along nicely and should be done soon. After that I just need to fix a few minor bugs and wrap up some textures and she’ll be ready to go!

    On 5/31/2025 at 5:33 AM, Petard said:

    Awesome work! Will there be a pilot and damage model included?

    Damage model is simple but it’s there. I made it pretty fragile so if you take a hit from any of the AA in the game you are likely cooked. Pilot model might be an EA item because I haven’t started it yet and I don’t really want to delay the release while I work on it. 

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 2
  2. 3 hours ago, evanf117 said:

    i may be wrong but i believe the rockets could be fired individually from one another, also smoke rockets would be great for marking targets

    this is brilliant, ive been wanting more FAC aircraft in DCS for some time

    You are correct. There’s a switch panel in the cockpit for for arming each tube, which is fully implemented. I just fired all 6 at once in the video so I would actually hit something 😂

    • Like 2
  3. 1 hour ago, Slippa said:

    How far along is the project?

    I see one of these quite regularly during the summer, be a laugh trying one out. Keep up the good work 🙂.

    It's functionally complete. I'm pretty much just finishing some textures, playing with the sounds, and fixing bugs that have cropped up over time. Right now, the biggest barrier to release is that I decided to re-architect my flight model codebase for the third time. It won't have any effect on the aircraft itself other than hopefully making the code run a little faster, but it should make it much easier to create other aircraft in the future. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  4. Great work @DD_Fenrir! I agree that all 75 is likely not possible for several reasons. However in my opinion adding the airfields of the 2nd TAF, 9th USAAF, and a few of the ADGB airfields to the map would allow for endless mission/campaign creation for a variety of different aircraft. These organizations account for the majority of air power that operated over the Normandy area in the summer of 1944. Thus, I believe they offer the best gameplay possibilities compared to airfields that would only offer novelty missions such as Airborne, Photo Recon, or transport. 

    • Like 1
  5. I’m actually very impressed with Normandy 2.0, it is by far the best WWII map ever created for a flight sim. There are a few issues that need addressing, including Creil, Odiham, Poix, Amiens, and Conches, but I think these are just early access problems. The devs have shown they are willing to tweak airfields to make them correct, for example Villacoublay, Orly, and Cormellies are spectacular. 

    • Like 2
  6. Yes I’ve noticed that many of the airfields are “copy-pasted”. For example Beauvais-Tille and Amiens-Glisy are the exact same airfield. Similarly, Odiham is just Conches copied and pasted into England which is really disappointing because it looks nothing like a wartime RAF base and they don’t even have the same number of runways! Poix is also exactly the same as Evreux. I hope they can bring all of these airfields up to the same standards as Villacoublay and Cormellies which are both excellent representations of the real airfields during the war. 

  7. 3 hours ago, Mogster said:

    I agree completely.

    However, if ED make the -3 then we’ll have to suffer endless “was the Hellcat really this bad…”  “dude… where’s my water injection…” Threads 🙄

     

    Maybe, but given that the most likely opponent for the Hellcat and Corsair in the near future will be the A6M5, I think it would be a very balanced scenario similar to the P-51 vs 109-K4 or D9. The -5 Hellcat will have all of the cards over any variant of the Zero so it would be less compelling from a 1v1 perspective.

    1 hour ago, grafspee said:

    It all depends what kind of planes hellcat would face, if only A-8 then no one will complain but when it would be K-4 or D-9 that change things.

    In multi session you can mitigate this by flying with fiends but in single session flying with stupid AI can be enjoying when your foe out run you in every aspect.

     

    I definitely don’t think we should take the German aircraft into account when considering the best variant of the Hellcat. 

  8. Just to clear things up, the only difference in “ground pounding capability” between the -3 and -5 is the introduction of HVAR on the -5. Apart from that they could both carry the exact same bomb load. Furthermore F6F-5s only carried rockets occasionally, as by that time the F4U-1D was operating off of fleet carriers as the primary fighter-bomber (VBF) type, leaving the A2A role largely to the F6F. If we are only going to get one variant I’d much prefer the -3 as it would be an excellent match for the WWII Marianas map and the lack of water injection would make it a really balanced match for the A6M5 Zeke. The ideal scenario would, however, be the development of both types as the differences are relatively minimal. 

    • Like 6
  9. 4 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

    You can load up the Spitfire with 1000lb of bomb.

    And the drop mechanism is literally 1 button. Not even an arming ability.

    But I assume those times they were loaded with 3 bombs they were doing very short range missions. 

    At Goodwood I think some spitfires had like a 5 minute flight to targets.

    How often is a Hellcat gonna be 5 or 10 minutes from their target? 

    So even if possible,  I would assume 2 bombs were max in reality. 

    Quite often. For example in the Marianas, many of the CVEs and CVLs were apart of the amphibious fleet operating right off shore to provide direct support to the landings. 

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...