DCS WWII: Pacific Marine Question

[greco.bernardi]

Its not our job to make aircraft to fight each other.

 

Its our aim to make aircraft simulations to the highest possible level.

 

We have some Axis aircraft planned but they are further down our roadmap.

 

Pman

 

If all 3rd Partnes don´t want to do airplanes that can engage a historic oponent at a correct theater of operation....Why I will buy a orphan aircraft?

Edited January 3, 2015 by greco.bernardi

[fastfreddie]

I don't think anyone should blame VEAO if they don't want to or can't make certain planes that they don't think is possible for them to complete. I just think that all the developers should look closely at what they plan to make and what purpose will the aircraft have in a combat simulator. If someone makes a early model Zero or whatever to pair with the P40 or Wildcat or something I'd buy both of them.

[Hiromachi]

 

For example, someone mentioned the Zero's in the states, although we have contacts over there and some good friends we live in the UK, over 3000 miles away. Where as Duxford or Northweald I can get to in an hours drive...

 

Pman

 

Hey, nobody is blaming you. You are doing a great job. And besides, I was in the Duxford this year for the air show. Pretty amazing stuff.

 

 

 

I don't think anyone should blame VEAO if they don't want to or can't make certain planes that they don't think is possible for them to complete. I just think that all the developers should look closely at what they plan to make and what purpose will the aircraft have in a combat simulator. If someone makes a early model Zero or whatever to pair with the P40 or Wildcat or something I'd buy both of them.

 

Its a role of community to show the developers what can be a potential money maker and what simply interests people.

 

If Pacific will gain enough support someone will pick it and work on it. Its partially a matter of showing any party that they can gain, not loose on the project :)

[Solty]

I am sorry you feel disappointed however this is just how it is.

 

Our aircraft will be combat capable but I have a very clear roadmap of what aircraft we have access to and an interest in bringing to DCS.

 

As DCS WW2 expands I am sure aircraft will come along that our aircraft can fight if that is what pilots want to do.

 

But in the same way that we do not balance our aircraft I can't start chasing aircraft to fill certain roles making the work of my teams harder when there are better aircraft more in line with what we want to develop that are easier to access

 

For example, someone mentioned the Zero's in the states, although we have contacts over there and some good friends we live in the UK, over 3000 miles away. Where as Duxford or Northweald I can get to in an hours drive...

 

Pman

Wait, if you have access to Duxford don't they have Bf109G2 Black 6? I know it still not a British plane and not on your list, neither a Pacific theatre though, and you have Fw190A8 planned for the future. ( I realy wait for this one)

 

Bf109G2 trop would be perfect to match the P-40F and simulating southern europe (italy). At least one of those older planes would have a "frenemy".

 

If at some point you want to make alterations in your roadmap you should definitly think over this one.

[Pman]

Wait, if you have access to Duxford don't they have Bf109G2 Black 6? I know it still not a British plane and not on your list, neither a Pacific theatre though, and you have Fw190A8 planned for the future. ( I realy wait for this one)

 

Bf109G2 trop would be perfect to match the P-40F and simulating southern europe (italy). At least one of those older planes would have a "frenemy".

 

If at some point you want to make alterations in your roadmap you should definitly think over this one.

Nope it's not at Duxford its in raf Hendon and although we have access to it we felt it was too close to the 109k to justify a separate project at the moment.

 

Pman

[Solty]

Sure, your choice. I wish I could buy the P-40, but without a proper enemy it is just going to be a nightmare to fight against anything that we have already in game.(109K4 and 190D9 will eat it allive.) It would be just waste of my money. I am sorry.

 

A shame because I realy love the P-40.:cry:

[Pman]

Sure, your choice. I wish I could buy the P-40, but without a proper enemy it is just going to be a nightmare to fight against anything that we have already in game.(109K4 and 190D9 will eat it allive.) It would be just waste of my money. I am sorry.

 

A shame because I realy love the P-40.:cry:

 

Well the problem is that it would take signifcant investment to build a G2-10 and to be quite honest I doubt there is enough people who wont buy the P-40 as it isnt there and/or enough people who would lay out $50 on a G2/10 when they have the K-4

 

It doesn't make commercial sense at this point in time.

 

I really dont want to take over this thread with VEAO matters, If you have any further questions about this or any of our lineup I suggest you post them here : http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=127100

 

Pman

[Merlin-27]

If all 3rd Partnes don´t want to do airplanes that can engage a historic oponent at a correct theater of operation....Why I will buy a orphan aircraft?

 

Because you love flying accurately simulated legendary historical aircraft that are offered at very reasonable prices?

 

That's my initial thought towards the P-40 until someone decides to produce a Zero or similar to battle MP...and then I will probably pay for that experience as well.

[Abburo]

If all 3rd Partnes don´t want to do airplanes that can engage a historic oponent at a correct theater of operation....Why I will buy a orphan aircraft?

 

Always should exist a "first" ... then is just a matter of time.

[Decibel dB]

I would give my left nut to be able to do a carrier landing with a hellcat. :D

[DB 605]

or enough people who would lay out $50 on a G2/10 when they have the K-4

 

It doesn't make commercial sense at this point in time.

 

Pman

 

 

Sorry to continue off-topic a bit, but i have to disagree here. I'm pretty sure every 109 fan out there (and there is lot of us!) would buy G2 in a heartbeat, plus those who like early-mid war fighters more.

Edited January 5, 2015 by DB 605

[nervousenergy]

Sorry to continue off-topic a bit, but i have to disagree here. I'm pretty sure every 109 fan out there (and there is lot of us!) would buy G2 in a heartbeat, plus those who like early-mid war fighters more.

G2 or F4 would be a pre-order purchase. Can't wait for the planned Emil.

[greco.bernardi]

Because you love flying accurately simulated legendary historical aircraft that are offered at very reasonable prices?

 

That's my initial thought towards the P-40 until someone decides to produce a Zero or similar to battle MP...and then I will probably pay for that experience as well.

 

I´m not Trying to force anyone to make a Zero or any other aircraft.... I didn´t make any call for it.

 

I understand that a development company can do what plane that they want to do. I don´t understand is a argument of make a fighter aircraft to fly like a FSX. I will love to buy a P-40 and Wildcat planes, but if I can´t combat with its beutifull aircrafts I will loose the interest to buy anothers orphan planes.....

 

I have the F86 and i can combat a AI Mig15...I´d like more to "kill" others human pilots, but its ok for me. and i will buy a Mig15 when it come as a module....

 

The P51 is a example of airplane that i didn´t fly too many times before a Dora comes. I don´t like to fly with a P51 vs a painted P51 as a luftwaffe plane.

 

Now I Fly all times with a 109....Its was made for me!:thumbup:

 

sorry by any confuse word...too many words for my poor english....

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

i agree that it was pretty boring to only have the p51 back then compared to what we have now....but boring is definitely the wrong word.i enjoyed many many hours with the p51 online back then.now as we get more and more WWII planes, i dont see any argument why the P40 would be an orphan plane.

 

also, some people make it out that the P40 will be useless against the other fighters...may i remind some guys here of il1946.some of the most popular servers had all aircraft in their selection.there we 109E1s fighting spitsMKXIVs.there were zeros fighting ME262s. :) and many people chose inferior planes and still were very very successfull.aircombat is not only about performance of planes.

the P40 will fit perfectly, and so would another 109, regardless whether be it a E or F or G version.it will just make our DCS WWII project more complete.

[greco.bernardi]

i agree that it was pretty boring to only have the p51 back then compared to what we have now....but boring is definitely the wrong word.i enjoyed many many hours with the p51 online back then.now as we get more and more WWII planes, i dont see any argument why the P40 would be an orphan plane.

 

also, some people make it out that the P40 will be useless against the other fighters...may i remind some guys here of il1946.some of the most popular servers had all aircraft in their selection.there we 109E1s fighting spitsMKXIVs.there were zeros fighting ME262s. :) and many people chose inferior planes and still were very very successfull.aircombat is not only about performance of planes.

the P40 will fit perfectly, and so would another 109, regardless whether be it a E or F or G version.it will just make our DCS WWII project more complete.

 

At my opnion.....

I´m a il2 veteran pilot and I like the servers that make a historical correct set of planes by the years and locations of combat fields.

I fly almost all times at warbirdsofprey.org....Its a il2 1946 server that make missions with a ground focus to win. Its make that fighters can cooperate with the bombers pilots for win the map.

I think that is a key of a complex combat enviroment...

fighters doing defence of your own "ground troops" by any enemy bomber that trying to destroy.

Fighters can try to escort your bombers or take air superiority over enemy.

Its do all diference for me!

[Solty]

i agree that it was pretty boring to only have the p51 back then compared to what we have now....but boring is definitely the wrong word.i enjoyed many many hours with the p51 online back then.now as we get more and more WWII planes, i dont see any argument why the P40 would be an orphan plane.

 

also, some people make it out that the P40 will be useless against the other fighters...may i remind some guys here of il1946.some of the most popular servers had all aircraft in their selection.there we 109E1s fighting spitsMKXIVs.there were zeros fighting ME262s. :) and many people chose inferior planes and still were very very successfull.aircombat is not only about performance of planes.

the P40 will fit perfectly, and so would another 109, regardless whether be it a E or F or G version.it will just make our DCS WWII project more complete.

I am an IL2 veteran too and must say that I disagree with that statement @David.

 

Just because somebody doesn't know how to fight doesn't make the other guy good at fighting. So with people that both are good at air combat (and I tend to think always that my enemy is going to be good) and one of them having a superior plane, well there is a high chance that a guy with Spit XIV will win against the Bf109E3. I am not saying it is good or bad, just that it doesn't have balance.

 

For that fight to be over with a dead SpitfireXIV, you need a very poor pilot of the Spitfire, not a very good one in the 109e3. The spit pilot has to make such a big mistake that it would be exploitable and just by staying in B&Z and extending he is safe. He can pull away at any given time. I agree that aircombat is not only about performance of 2 planes, but mostly about the positioning and tactics. But when both pilots see each other, the one with a superior plane will win if they are on the "same level" of experience. (knowing BFM)

 

I always want historical matchups that give both planes a chance to shine. They are not artificially balanced. Just using two (or more) planes from a similar period of time.

 

Right now we are at a position where both 109K4(with current FM) and 190D9 are superior to P-51D, which is far better than P-40F. Now imagine poor people that are average and get into a fight with a guy that is good and flies a superior plane.(K4) The outcome is easy to predict.

 

I still can't understand why the WW2 project went with Bf109K4 instead of G6 or even G14 which were far more common and would at least have a little bit more sens against P-40F... but I digress.

Edited January 7, 2015 by Solty

[Gooseneck]

Pacific.

 

Pacific, Pacific, Pacific. On and on and on and on and.....

 

Doesn't anyone remember Ilya's game, where we fly over a seemingly endless ocean, but with perfect navigational skill, manage to find the target, only to be shot down by AAA before bomb release??

 

Pacific is boring. Endless water. Ocean and then more Ocean, on and on and on. Then flak.

[javelina1]

i agree that it was pretty boring to only have the p51 back then compared to what we have now....but boring is definitely the wrong word.i enjoyed many many hours with the p51 online back then.now as we get more and more WWII planes, i dont see any argument why the P40 would be an orphan plane.

 

also, some people make it out that the P40 will be useless against the other fighters...may i remind some guys here of il1946.some of the most popular servers had all aircraft in their selection.there we 109E1s fighting spitsMKXIVs.there were zeros fighting ME262s. :) and many people chose inferior planes and still were very very successfull.aircombat is not only about performance of planes.

the P40 will fit perfectly, and so would another 109, regardless whether be it a E or F or G version.it will just make our DCS WWII project more complete.

 

Spot on buddy! Build 'em, and we'll fly those birds! Can't wait for the P-40, (and 262, and Spit, and... ) ;)

[Gooseneck]

Spot on buddy! Build 'em, and we'll fly those birds! Can't wait for the P-40, (and 262, and Spit, and... ) ;)

 

No-one seems to want to mention the P-38....... Oh. I aplogise. It's not a single engined fighter.

 

Silly me.

[Hiromachi]

Pacific.

 

Pacific, Pacific, Pacific. On and on and on and on and.....

 

Doesn't anyone remember Ilya's game, where we fly over a seemingly endless ocean, but with perfect navigational skill, manage to find the target, only to be shot down by AAA before bomb release??

 

Pacific is boring. Endless water. Ocean and then more Ocean, on and on and on. Then flak.

 

If I may answer, I remember that Ilya game and that a lot of things were simplified so you had ability to navigate perfectly. And guess what, I have been shot down quite a few times but cant complain, its a part of a risk of playing dive bomber or torpedo plane and not only fighter as most wants to.

 

But the moment that torpedo reaches the target and you see the splash of water mixed with fire and smoke ... thats why I love doing this.

 

Pacific is boring if someone imagines only water as he knows only Pearl Harbor, Midway, Truk, Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal.

 

But large part of campaigns was over a big lands or islands, just to bring mentioned a few times New Guinea or not mentioned Burma. There was also war over China at the same time. And Philippines saw a lot of action too.

 

For me Pacific is more like a golden beach with jungle behind it, sunny weather and Zeros fighting Warhawks over that.

 

No-one seems to want to mention the P-38....... Oh. I aplogise. It's not a single engined fighter.

 

Silly me.

 

P-38 has some legend. Certainly it was a great fighter but it might be exaggerated who flew this warbird and only this warbird. Others had mixed opinions.

If I may quote some source, the Report from Joint Fighter Conference in NAS Patuxent River which occurred between 16-23 October 1944.

The purpose was to gather about 400 Allied combat pilots and contractors, engineers and ground crew members. They had a "fly off" of every major US aircraft at the time. The British delegation brought a Seafire III and a Mosquito. The evaluators even had a Zeke 52 to use for comparison.

 

This will be a longer quote so I am going to put it into a spoiler, so not everyone will have to go through it, but only those who wish.

 

 

From the following machines : FM-2, F6F-5, F7F-1, F8F-1, F4U-1C and F4U-1D, XF4U-4, FG-1A, P-47D, P-47M, P-51D, P-61, P-63, Seafire, Mosquito, A6M5 model 52 and our P-38L which I picked to leave a details they commented.

 

To quote Lieutenant Colonel Toubman representing Army Air Force and discussing Lockheed fighter :

"They have a J and L-5 model P-38 airplane available for the conference. I just looked at it this morning and the J-25 has dive flaps and L-5 also has that. The Allison 1710 engine is in there and they are not fitted up with water injection as yet.

We have manifold pressure regulation on both the J-25 and L-5 and that is Minneapolis Honeywell control system. One point to notice on that boost aileron is that you will not turn your boost ailerons on or off in flight, we had a little trouble with P-38 hydraulic system so, if you contemplate using the boost ailerons, turn them on the ground and leave them on in flight.

The dive flaps control is right on the wheel and its quite a novel sensation which is like compressibility. You can overpower it very easily by pushing forward and you can practically come down in a saw tooth dive. I have not tried the 47 dive flaps, but the 38's are quite a novelty. On the turbo control you have Minneapolis Honeywell system. You can not overspeed the turbos and there will be no turbo indicator in the cockpit; I think it has worked out fairly nice in the P-38 and a note might be taken of this for turbo installation of some of the planes contemplated. "

 

Now to come to review section it is in a form of table so I have to rewrite some sections.

P-38L was reviewed by 1 Army pilot, 5 British, 9 Navy pilots and 13 Contractors. They had cards on which they left notes/remarks and marks about aircraft.

 

Cockpit layout:

Good - 2

Fair - 1

Poor - 11

Other -13

Blank -1

Total - 28

Remarks :

10 pilots - Yoke hides instruments. 3 pilots - Complicated. 1 pilot - Strong gasoline smell after rolls. 1 pilot - Control inaccessible. 1 pilot - Crowded. 1 pilot - Instrument panel and windshield too far away. 1 pilot - Many switches could not be reached with harness locked - including auto override switches. 1 pilot - Position of tabs poor. 1 pilot - No landing gear position indicator. 1 pilot - Comfortable and quite. 1 pilot - Visibility not too good.

 

Comfort :

Good - 9

Fair - 4

Poor - 5

Other - 7

Blank - 3

Total - 28

Remarks :

4 pilots - Cabin roof too low. 3 pilots - Too crowded. 1 pilot - Noise level good. 1 pilot - Fair except for visibility, all I could see were engines and boom. 1 pilot - Ok except have to duck to see up.

 

Ground handling:

Good - 21

Fair - 2

Poor - 0

Other - 4

Blank - 1

Total - 28

 

Power Plant Operation :

Good - 16

Fair - 0

Poor - 1

Other - 10

Blank - 1

Total - 28

 

Take-off :

Good - 10

Fair - 0

Poor - 0

Other - 14

Blank - 4

Total - 28

 

Approach and Landing :

Good - 8

Fair - 4

Poor - 0

Other - 9

Blank - 7

Total - 28

 

Wave-off :

Good - 6

Fair - 2

Poor - 0

Other - 3

Blank - 17

Total - 28

 

Bail-out :

Good - 2

Fair - 1

Poor - 12

Other - 3

Blank - 10

Total - 28

 

Combat Qualities :

Good - 3

Fair - 0

Poor - 1

Other - 15

Blank - 9

Total - 28

Remarks:

1 pilot - Bad visibility to sides and down. Would rather have F4U or F6F for Pacific. 1 pilot - I would not consider this a modern fighting aircraft. Poor coordination of control forces and effectiveness combined with very weak directional stability make it a poor gun platform and its maneuverability rating is so low as to preclude its use in modern combat. 1 pilot - As a fighter-bomber good, for fighter sweep - just fair, as escort - poor.

1 pilot - Good due to twin engine reliability, altitude performance, good accelerated stall, versatility, diver recovery flaps which make prolonged zero-lift dives possible.

1 pilot - Apart from very queer ailerons, the aircraft is quite pleasant to fly and would probably make a very good strike fighter. There is however objectionable wobble in bumpy air.

1 pilot - View is poor, too many struts in the way. rudder makes aircraft very hard to maneuver on first flight.

1 pilot - Too complicated and full of gadgets, would make unserviceability rate very high.

1 pilot - Query on maintenance and operational problems with liquid cooled engines in hot climates.

1 pilot - Too much mechanical equipment for one man to operate in combat.

 

Summary of questionnaires

Army - 9, Navy - 15, British - 7, Contractors - 20, Total - 51

 

Votes in percent

 

Best All Around Cockpit (Total votes - 91 %)

F8F - 36 %

F7F - 20 %

F6F - 16 %

F4U-4 - 12 %

P-51 - 7 %

F2G - 5 %

P-47 - 4 %

 

Worst Cockpit ( Total votes - 95% )

P-38 - 55 %

Mosquito - 11 %

P-61 - 10 %

F4U-4 - 9 %

P-63 - 4 %

P-47 - 3 %

F6F - 2 %

P-51 - 2 %

Seafire - 2 %

P-59 - 1 %

FM - 1 %

 

Nicest Arrangement of Engine Controls ( Total votes - 94% )

P-51 - 20 %

F7F - 17 %

P-47 - 13 %

P-63 - 12 %

F8F - 10 %

F4U-4 - 9 %

P-61 - 5 %

F6F - 3 %

Mosquito - 3 %

F4U-1 - 2 %

FM - 2 %

Mock-up - 2 %

P-38 - 1 %

F2G - 1 %

 

Most Convenient Gear and Flap Controls ( Total votes - 94% )

F8F - 19 %

F6F - 18 %

F7F - 14 %

P-51 - 11 %

F4U-1 - 8 %

F4U-4 - 7 %

P-63 - 5 %

Mosquito - 3 %

P-47 - 3 %

P-61 - 3 %

Mock up - 3 %

F2G - 2 %

FM - 2 %

P-38 - 2 %

 

Best Cockpit Canopy ( Total votes - 96% )

P-47 - 43 %

P-51 - 24 %

F8F - 16 %

F4U-4 - 5 %

F2G - 4 %

F6F - 3 %

F7F - 2 %

Any good bubble - 3 %

 

Most Comfortable Cockpit ( Total votes - 92 %)

P-47 - 24 %

F8F - 18 %

F6F - 15 %

F7F - 11 %

F4U-4 - 9 %

P-61 - 8 %

P-51 - 7 %

F4U-1 - 3 %

FM - 2 %

Seafire - 2 %

F2G - 1 %

 

In categories like :

- Best all-around visibility

- Best all-around armor

- Nicest harmonization of control forces

P-38 was not mentioned (which means nobody voted for it)

 

Best ailerons at 350 MPH (Total votes - 83 % )

P-51 - 33 %

F4U-1 - 20 %

P-38 - 19 %

F6F - 9 %

F8F - 6 %

P-47 - 4 %

P-61 - 3 %

F7F - 2 %

Seafire - 2%

Mosquito - 2%

 

Best ailerons at 100 MPH, landing condition. (Total votes - 88 %)

F6F - 36 %

F4U-1 - 18 %

Seafire - 12 %

P-47 - 6 %

FM-2 - 5 %

P-51 - 5 %

F8F - 5%

Zeke 52 - 4 %

P-38 - 3 %

F2G - 2 %

F7F - 2 %

P-61 - 2 %

 

Best elevator. (Total vote - 73 % )

F4U-1 - 20 %

F8F - 13 %

F7F - 13 %

F6F - 13 %

P-51 - 13 %

Seafire - 6 %

P-47 - 5 %

P-61 - 3 %

Zeke 52 - 3 %

FM-2 - 2 %

P-38 - 2 %

P-63 - 2 %

 

Best rudder. (Total votes - 76 %)

F7F - 20 %

F6F - 18%

F4U-1 - 14 %

Mosquito - 13 %

Seafire - 11 %

P-38 - 6 %

P-51 - 6 %

P-47 - 3 %

 

Fighter exhibiting nicest all-around stability. (Total vote - 76 %)

F6F - 33 %

F4U-1 - 23 %

P-61 - 14 %

P-47 - 11 %

F8F - 7 %

P-51 - 6 %

P-63 - 3 %

P-38 - 1 %

 

Fighter appearing to have the best stability and control in a dive. (Total vote - 75 %)

F4U-1 - 25 %

P-47 - 23 %

F6F - 13 %

F7F - 11 %

P-51 - 10 %

F8F - 4 %

P-63 - 4 %

P-61 - 3 %

FM-2 -2 %

P-38 - 2 %

 

Best characteristics at 5 MPH above stall. (Total votes - 87 %)

F6F - 47 %

P-61 - 17 %

P-38 - 7 %

Seafire - 7%

F7F - 4 %

FM-2 - 4 %

P-51 - 3 %

F8F - 3 %

F4U-1 - 3 %

 

Best All-Around Fighter Below 25,000ft (Total votes - 89%)

F8F - 30 %

P-51 - 29 %

F4U-1 - 27 %

F7F - 6 %

F6F - 2 %

Mosquito - 2 %

F4U-4 - 2 %

F2G - 2 %

 

Best All-Around Fighter Above 25,000ft ( Total votes - 82% )

P-47 - 45 %

P-51 - 39 %

F4U-1 - 7 %

F6F - 3 %

F4U-4 - 3 %

Seafire - 2 %

P-38 - 1 %

 

Best Fighter-Bomber ( Total votes - 72%)

F4U-1 - 32 %

P-47 - 19 %

Mosquito - 14 %

F6F - 12 %

F7F - 11 %

P-51 - 7 %

P-38 - 5 %

 

Best Strafer ( Total votes - 75% )

P-47 - 41 %

F4U-1 - 18 %

F7F - 17 %

P-51 - 9 %

F6F - 7 %

P-38 - 3 %

F8F - 2 %

P-63 - 2 %

F2G - 2 %

 

 

 

 

The other not always mentioned issue is sheer number of things you had to do if you got bounced by enemy fighters.

 

You had to come up on the rpm for both engines, go to auto rich mixture for both engines, increase the throttle setting to combat, set the rpm and mixture for what you were doing, turn on the gunsight, drop tanks if you had them, and then fight. Many P-38's were shot down while the pilot was reconfiguring for combat and not reacting to being bounced.

 

P-38 was a nice plane to fly but seems to be over-complicated and had certain flaws. And was expensive.

 

But surely is one of the symbols of Pacific :)

[IonicRipper]

Pacific fighter was my favorite in IL-2 1946. I loved flying the F4F off a carrier and fight the Japanese over the ocean and the small islands. If it was recreated in DCS I would be in heaven :D

[Mango]

+1 WWII carrier ops were great!

[greco.bernardi]

+1 Takeoff and landing at carriers

[javelina1]

No-one seems to want to mention the P-38....... Oh. I aplogise. It's not a single engined fighter.

 

Silly me.

 

Forked Wing Devil, shame on me! You bet, bring her on too! :thumbup:

[Solty]

Forked Tailed Devil, shame on me! You bet, bring her on too! :thumbup:

 

Let me fix it for ya.:)