Jump to content

DCS: Me 262 Discussion (Development on hold currently)


NineLine

Recommended Posts

How do we have a Mosquito before the 262?  Some people pledged money for the 262 way back during the kickstarter.

  • Like 4

P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, gavagai said:

How do we have a Mosquito before the 262?  Some people pledged money for the 262 way back during the kickstarter.

 

Available documentation.

  • Like 2

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gavagai said:

How do we have a Mosquito before the 262?  Some people pledged money for the 262 way back during the kickstarter.

 

We paid Ilya Shevchenko money, wherever he is… Not ED.
 

If we had a contract it was with Luthier, not ED, as I understand it ED never saw any of our Kickstarter money. The way things went I’m just glad I received anything in return. Tbh I feel like I’ve got a bargain with the content I’ve already been supplied with.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Mogster said:

 

We paid Ilya Shevchenko money, wherever he is… Not ED.
 

If we had a contract it was with Luthier, not ED, as I understand it ED never saw any of our Kickstarter money. The way things went I’m just glad I received anything in return. Tbh I feel like I’ve got a bargain with the content I’ve already been supplied with.

Hmm... then what is this for you if not any kind of promise?

 

DCS - Me262.jpg


Edited by iFoxRomeo
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Spoiler

PC Specs: Ryzen 9 5900X, 3080ti, 64GB RAM, Oculus Quest 3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Hmm... then what is this for you if not any kind of promise?

 

DCS - Me262.jpg

 


ED haven’t said they’ll never do it, just not now. Given the nature of the aircraft it doesn’t surprise me that data and documents are difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Hmm... then what is this for you if not any kind of promise

Well, that's exactly Eagle Dynamics honouring a pledge by RRG/Luthier from whom apparently they never saw a penny, so they are honouring promises from others ditching their projects with their money and development effort. I don't know yours, but In my book that only speaks good about ED despite those others making promises they could never deliver.

 

S!

  • Like 3

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hummingbird said:

I think it's clear that the Me262 is the most wanted WW2 bird amongst most atm (it's certainly at the top of my WW2 wanted list), so the incentive for ED to make it as soon as possible has got to be there.

 

Hopefully it will be the next WW2 module they release.

Amen brother! My understanding after reading this thread is that ED had all the documents it needed to complete the research for the model. So lets hope that they haven't bumped into some unmanageable snag, and that we will get news soon.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if we only had modern maps, i would want it for flying experience alone. Plus as a backer it's promised to me (yes, by Ilya but anyway) so bring it on please, as soon as possible. 🙂 Of course would love the westfall map too, really hoping it will come one day.

  • Like 1

CPU: Intel Core i7-2600k @3.40GHz | Motherboard: Asus P8P67-M | Memory: Kingston 8GB DDR3 | OS W10 | GPU: Sapphire R9 290x 8GBDDR5 | Monitor: Samsung Syncmaster 24" | Devices: Oculus Rift, MS FFB 2 joystick, Saitek X 52 Pro throttle, Saitek Pro pedals, Gametrix Jetseat

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hear you DB, and when it lands I'll be buying it for the same reasons - a DCS level 262 will be fascinating.

 

However, as a proponent of an authentic and cohesive DCS WW2 environment for both single- & multi-player there are multiple aircraft that we'd be better served having ED prioritise their development efforts in.

 

That or a Siegfried line Map.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Give us a Westwall map and yeah, 262 is valid. 

 

As it stands, it's completely irrelevant to the theatres we have. The chronological ADHD is bad enough, let's not make it any worse.

 

 

It is not "completely irrelevant to the theatres we have". Me 262 aircraft flew over Normandy. They were operated by I.Gruppe /  Kampfgeschwader 51 from Châteaudun in July 1944 and then Étampes in August 1944. Ref: https://ww2.dk/air/kampf/kg51.htm . The Me 262 is more relevant to the Normandy campaign than, say, the Bf 109 K4.

 

While I agree with you that there are airframes that are more relevant than the Me 262 (such as the FW 190 F-8), it is disingenuous to claim it is "completely irrelevant".

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/16/2021 at 3:06 PM, Hummingbird said:

I think it's clear that the Me262 is the most wanted WW2 bird amongst most atm (it's certainly at the top of my WW2 wanted list), so the incentive for ED to make it as soon as possible has got to be there.

 

Hopefully it will be the next WW2 module they release.


??? 
no idea where you get that from.  For me it’s way down the hit list of “most appropriate” for warbirds.

More mid or early war aircraft interest me far more.

System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse.

Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say that I don't understand much of the discussion here.

 

DCS is a study simulator which tries to simulate an actual aircraft as closely as possible.

For this, the Me262 is nearly perfect: it was new technology, it needed careful engine management and flying, it has a lot of flaws that can be explored.

 

DCS is also a sandbox, which means you can pit whatever aircraft you like against each other in any theatre that you like.

 

The MiG-15 happens to be one of my personal favourites, despite lack of a Korea map (not that I miss it) and despite the lack of opponents beside the Sabre. It's irrelevant. You can fly the MiG against B-17 (which could have happened during the 6-Day War, we even have a more or less appropriate theater for that now!), or you can fly it against F-5 (don't know if that ever happened but it's also not unimaginable). Or, if you like less of a challenge, you can fight Mustangs (also could have happened in Korea).

 

It's the same for the Me262. Maybe we don't have a one-on-one opponent. I would definately support the Meteor as well though, but that's not the point. You can still just learn to fly the plane and have fun in other scenario's besides dogfighting against an "equal" opponent. You can at the moment fight B-17 with P-51 escorts, which is historical. You can also try to fight the MiG-15 or the Sabre if you want a challenge.

 

In real life, air combat is also not about fairness. On paper, Desert Storm (or Deny Flight) could have been a somewhat fair fight: huge numbers of 4-th gen fighters vs. smaller but still large numbers of mostly 3-rd gen and some 4-th gen fighters. In reality, the combat was rather one sided, and that's how it was intended!

 

Fair dogfights in multiplayer may be fun, but hardly what sets DCS apart from other sims. DCS should be about simulating combat, not about fair and even matches or (gasp) game balance!

 

As for the discussion Me262 vs. Pacific Theatre, I also don't see the point there. Surely it must be much easier to create one aircraft (even a difficult one) vs. a working carrier, several aircraft, new asset pack, new map etc. But if ED want to do WW2 Pacific first, that's fine, they can decide what they want to work on first. As long as they come back to the Me262 later...


Edited by Zius
  • Like 10

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, xvii-Dietrich said:

 

It is not "completely irrelevant to the theatres we have". Me 262 aircraft flew over Normandy. They were operated by I.Gruppe /  Kampfgeschwader 51 from Châteaudun in July 1944 and then Étampes in August 1944. Ref: https://ww2.dk/air/kampf/kg51.htm . The Me 262 is more relevant to the Normandy campaign than, say, the Bf 109 K4.

 

While I agree with you that there are airframes that are more relevant than the Me 262 (such as the FW 190 F-8), it is disingenuous to claim it is "completely irrelevant".


Can that KG51 source be verified? As far as I was aware Ekdo 262 were the first operators and there seem to be zero combat reports of encounters which seems odd considering USAAF aircraft were visiting and attacking known Luftwaffe bases well beyond the immediate battlefront in attempts to suppress their activities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DD_Fenrir said:


Can that KG51 source be verified? As far as I was aware Ekdo 262 were the first operators and there seem to be zero combat reports of encounters which seems odd considering USAAF aircraft were visiting and attacking known Luftwaffe bases well beyond the immediate battlefront in attempts to suppress their activities.

 

Deployment started in July. The earliest reference to a bombing mission I can find is for Einsatzkommando Schenk (I./KG 51) which flew its first Me 262s against Allied ground forces along the Seine River on 25 August 1944. There may be earlier ones, but I don't have references for those. Due to the collapse at Falais, Luftwaffe forces retreated soon after, but that applies to all aircraft, not just the jet bombers.

 

To be clear, I am not stating that this is overly significant, but I am challenging the assertion that it is "completely irrelevant to the theatres we have".

 

References:
http://www.ww2.dk/air/kampf/kg51.htm
http://www.ww2.dk/air/kampf/schenck.html
http://www.ghostbombers.com/kf4/KG%2051/schenck_02.html
http://www.ghostbombers.com/kf4/KG%2051/schenck_05.html
https://ww2.dk/Airfields%20-%20France.pdf

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, xvii-Dietrich said:

 

To be clear, I am not stating that this is overly significant, but I am challenging the assertion that it is "completely irrelevant to the theatres we have".

 

 

Well then, challenge upheld and I stand corrected, I had no idea there were any outside of Germany in the late summer of 1944. Thanks Dietrich.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Zius said:

I have to say that I don't understand much of the discussion here.

 

DCS is a study simulator which tries to simulate an actual aircraft as closely as possible.

For this, the Me262 is nearly perfect: it was new technology, it needed careful engine management and flying, it has a lot of flaws that can be explored.

 

DCS is also a sandbox, which means you can pit whatever aircraft you like against each other in any theatre that you like.

Lots of great comments here, but I thought this ^^^ was particularly well written. This is a thread about the Me 262, and regardless of whether there were sorties that used them outside of Germany or not, a good number of people here would really like to see this iconic WWII machine make it into the SIM. I don't have the Persian Gulf or Syria maps yet, so I improvise by using the Nevada map when I want to do a desert mission.

 

And I agree with having period correct planes/vehicles meant for specific geographic areas, but in this case, the WWII theme itself should be all that is needed to warrant the Me 262. If we get additional period correct maps like Germany for example, all the better.

 

But while we all wait, I couldn't agree with @Zius more...."As for the discussion Me262 vs. Pacific Theatre, I also don't see the point there. Surely it must be much easier to create one aircraft (even a difficult one) vs. a working carrier, several aircraft, new asset pack, new map etc. But if ED want to do WW2 Pacific first, that's fine, they can decide what they want to work on first. As long as they come back to the Me262 later..."

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 1:01 AM, DD_Fenrir said:

I had no idea there were any outside of Germany in the late summer of 1944.

Some 262's from EKSchenk were also spotted at Fliegerhorst Volkel in August 1944 - although I'm somewhat cautious to call that a real deployment. Perhaps more a familiarisation tour for other units. Showing the flag, so to speak. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2021 at 6:52 PM, Mr_sukebe said:


??? 
no idea where you get that from.  For me it’s way down the hit list of “most appropriate” for warbirds.

More mid or early war aircraft interest me far more.

 

From all the people screaming for it perhaps? 

 

I didn't say EVERYONE wants it, I mean there are people out there who don't want an AH-64 Apache or F-4 Phantom either, but does that mean the majority don't ? No ofcourse not.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/20/2021 at 3:03 PM, Callsign112 said:

Lots of great comments here, but I thought this ^^^ was particularly well written.

 

Thanks!

 

To drive home my point a bit more: we have loads of aircraft without their historical theatre and opponents. Think about it:

MiG-15 and Sabre miss Korea (and perhaps more importantly: B-29 Superfortress / Tu-4, as well as other Korea-era opponents)

UH-1 misses Vietnam

Mi-24 misses Afghanistan (as do all "modern" units)

JF-17 misses Pakistan / Punjab

I-16 misses WW2 Eastern Front map and ANY appropriate enemy

MiG-19 misses a lot of maps but especially Vietnam (although I think Vietnam didn't have MiG-19P) and Mirage III and Phantom as opponent

F-14 misses Libya

Viggen misses Baltic / Sweden

 

Etc. etc.

 

I hear few people complaining about it.

 

And quite rightly: the beauty of DCS is that you can fly aircraft in any kind of setting and with any kind of opponent you like and you can make it as historically accurate (or not) as you like as well, provided the assets are there.

 

I think any of the maps above would be more interesting than yet another Western Front WW2 map, even though as a Dutchman I'd love to see my country in DCS.

 

So please guys, stop complaining and finding excuses why ED should first develop XYZ before the Me-262.

 

Simply accept that Me-262 would be an extremely interesting aircraft in it's own right.

 

And it has much more of a place with the assets that are already in DCS compared to a lot of other modules which are also already in DCS.


Edited by Zius
  • Like 5

Modules: Bf 109, C-101, CE-II, F-5, Gazelle, Huey, Ka-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-19, MiG-21, Albatros, Viggen, Mirage 2000, Hornet, Yak-52, FC3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Zius said:

So please guys, stop complaining and finding excuses why ED should first develop XYZ before the Me-262.

 

Simply accept that Me-262 would be an extremely interesting aircraft in it's own right.

 

 

 

Er... No.

 

I want chronologically relevant and historically authentic opponents and maps for my DCS experience thanks.

 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...