no news on other WW2 addons?

[leafer]

Well, in the flight sim-games I more or less mastered (IL-2: Forgotten Battles, Aces High), the pilot skill did indeed make a huge difference, of course, but if the pilots were roughly equal, the Spitfire would always win any otherwise-even dogfight against the P-51. Granted, those two sim-games weren't very realistic in their general modelling of things, but I feel that the people who say "it's the pilot not the plane" don't really have a good understanding of how the two relate. It takes two to tango; the aircraft matters as much as the pilot. A good airplane won't do much with a bad pilot, but a good pilot won't do much with a bad airplane. At least, not when he's flying against a good pilot with a good airplane. Of course, I'm not calling the P-51 a bad airplane. It was, however, in those sim-games (especially IL-2). Energy fighting wouldn't allow a good P-51 pilot to knock down a decent Spitifre pilot in a duel. Yank-and-bank would always win the day for the latter, which was disappointing.

 

May I suggest...

 

Skip the bs and go straight to chapter 1...

 

http://www.amazon.com/Scream-Eagles-Dramatic-Account-Fighter/dp/0743497244

[Echo38]

Leafer, how many kills do you think the best fighter pilot in the world would get if he's flying a Fokker E.III and the enemy has F-22s? : /

Extreme example, but it shows that the adage isn't accurate, even if there's some truth in it. "It's the pilot, not the airplane" is only true until the differences between the aircraft are great enough, and/or the differences between the pilots are small enough. In the flight-sim world, the phrase tends to be used by those who favor flying the superior fighting aircraft ...

Edited October 31, 2012 by Echo38

[EtherealN]

In the flight-sim world, the phrase tends to be used by those who favor flying the superior fighting aircraft ...

 

I smell invented statistics right here. ;)

 

Though it is true, in general, in the flight sim world: for example, someone that has done his homework and currency with the Flanker in FC2 will do very very well against the nominally superior F-15C. Simply because most people who fly any simulator hasn't done their homework. :P

 

(Doing said homework takes a LOT of time and dedication, so for most people it's just not possible between work, spouse, children, house etcetera etcetera.)

[mmaruda]

All that I have learned while flying WWI and WWII sims is this - you pick your fights. Only attack when you have the upper hand and when you get bounced use all your aircraft's perks to get out of there ASAP.

 

In this case - the Mustang is superior due to being faster. The Spit can try going for a turn fight, but assuming the P-51 has the energy advantage, the pilot would have to be really stupid to fall for that.

 

IL-2 is generally a bad example of comparing aircraft as it has this propaganda feel about it. The Spit and Mustang fly as they should in theory, but they cannot compare to Russian Lavochkins for example, which were a lot harder to fly in RL (too many levers to operate, sometimes bad production quality resulting in failures, no radio or problematic radio etc.). IL-2 is a great sim, but anyone who thinks it represents proper balance of WWII should get their head examined. It's a good skeleton basis, where planes feel generally as they should, but in an offline scenario it's ridiculous even with the latest AI updates.

 

All in all, a head to head duel scenario is not realistic. Engagements were far from gentlemen's rules. During WWII the Mustangs had better trained pilots, teamwork and superior aircraft maintenance most of the time (we're talking 1944 here), not to mention the advantage in numbers. As for the pilot vs. the machine - even the best fighters are crap when they are flown by crappy pilots. A good pilot has a good understanding of the general situation, thinks 3d and knows how to best use the advantages of their plane to win or escape a tricky situation.

 

Anyway, if you look the top scoring aces of WWI and WWI like Hartmann and Richthofen, they got their kills by surprise attacks with significant advantage, they did not get into fair fights and they knew how to use their plane's advantages to win.

[VH-Rock]

Is there not an old story about Eric Hartman and Hans Joachim Marseille? Hartman was asked what it was like to be the greatest fighter pilot in the world with the most kills, he replied that he wasn't. "Hans Joachim Marseille was because he got his kills against the british" - who's pilots he considered superior.

 

Ehco, Obviously an F-22 against a Fokker E.III is far to extreme. During the war, the Fw-190, Bf-109, Spitfire and Mustang were all relatively close - sure they all had their own advantages and disadvantages. But, the fact is that the performance of the aircraft was sufficiently close for the pilot to make the difference. He knows how to exploit his aircraft the most, surely has the advantage.

 

We could debate this all day and sure, in some cases, it's the aircraft that makes the difference. A spitfire against an old bi-plane for example. But, in close combat in WWII between the most common fighters from the U.K, Germany and the U.S.A, it has to be the pilot who is the deciding factor. The aircraft were developed in competition with each other, always fighting for that advantage over the enemy. Sure, one would have a slight advantage, but that small advantage is in no way great enough to offset the skill of a fantastic pilot who understands his aircraft.

[EtherealN]

I also remember an interview with a German ace that had something like 100+ victories where he got the question if the germans counted victories differently (given the large difference in the top scoring aces on the two sides). He responded (from memory): "I don't think so, but in the last few years we only had to take off to find someone to fight, I think the allies could fly for weeks and never even see us."

[NineLine]

I also remember an interview with a German ace that had something like 100+ victories where he got the question if the germans counted victories differently (given the large difference in the top scoring aces on the two sides). He responded (from memory): "I don't think so, but in the last few years we only had to take off to find someone to fight, I think the allies could fly for weeks and never even see us."

 

That's a good point too, there are a lot of factors to consider when trying to determine all this... really not a cut and dry x is better than Y type of argument... now sexy factor? The Spitfire wins hands down :P

[leafer]

Leafer, how many kills do you think the best fighter pilot in the world would get if he's flying a Fokker E.III and the enemy has F-22s? : /

Extreme example, but it shows that the adage isn't accurate, even if there's some truth in it. "It's the pilot, not the airplane" is only true until the differences between the aircraft are great enough, and/or the differences between the pilots are small enough. In the flight-sim world, the phrase tends to be used by those who favor flying the superior fighting aircraft ...

 

The adage is accurate if the F22 is flown by you or me and we're back to it's the pilot and not the plane.

[Yo-Yo]

Zero was uncomparable to F-4F but American pilots could win using F-4F advantages and Zero disadvantages.

[NineLine]

Zero was uncomparable to F-4F but American pilots could win using F-4F advantages and Zero disadvantages.

 

Too many variables the Fokker E.III wins if the F22 is on the tarmac :)

[Isegrim]

Starting a Poll ?????

 

Named :What should the new WWII DCS Plane be from ?

 

"AXIS Powers" or "Allies of World War II"

[EtherealN]

Named :What should the new WWII DCS Plane be from ?

 

Answer is easy:

 

 

Yes, the PZL P.11 is now officially the AT-802U of WW2. You all asked for it! :D

 

Could go for one of these as well:

 

[NineLine]

Answer is easy:

 

 

 

Yes, the PZL P.11 is now officially the AT-802U of WW2. You all asked for it! :D

 

Could go for one of these as well:

 

 

Ah, for those I would need to lengthen my flight stick and get a high powered fan to blow in my face lol....

[Isegrim]

Answer is easy:

 

 

Yes, the PZL P.11 is now officially the AT-802U of WW2. You all asked for it! :D

 

Could go for one of these as well:

 

 

 

No Joke! I liked that one in IL2:smilewink::thumbup:

[Blaze]

Aye, good ol' Fairey Swordfish. Love that plane. :)

[nick10]

Check this out. For fsx but would be amazing in dcs:

 

http://www.classics-hangar.de/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=670&start=40

[SNAFU]

Aye, good ol' Fairey Swordfish. Love that plane. :)

If you haven´t already read it, then it is a must:

 

"To War in a Stringbag" Ch. Lamb

 

I have got meters of WWII aviation books in my bookshelf, but this one is definitely the most astonishing WWII book I came across.

[stiffstarch]

Christmas is coming...maybe ED will grant all our wishes for WW2 opponents !!!..lol

[PE_Tigar]

Let's put it this way - DCS: P-51 D is awesome, love it. But I don't fly it too much because it lacks:

 

- a map where it truly flew in WWII (my favorite would be something like Benelux+surrounding areas).

- ground objects from WWII

- adversaries and aerial targets - all these could be AI, don't care, having a choice of a Mustang vs. anything German I'd probably fly a Mustang 90% of times.

 

I know there are many people who are happy just to fly it, but I also like to shoot/blow things up, and generally pretend to be a combat pilot, not just a vintage airshow one :).

[PFunk1606688187]

That's a good point too, there are a lot of factors to consider when trying to determine all this... really not a cut and dry x is better than Y type of argument... now sexy factor? The Spitfire wins hands down :P

 

Thats really true. Its so much simpler in more modern conflicts where you can probably list the air to air encounters on two hands and the kills on one in many cases.

 

The sheer sample size of the head to head figures in WW2 is astounding. Tens of thousands of combat aircraft all trying to kill each other. Today? Over 4000 F-16s built and really how many of them have ever had to even consider holding the weapons release in A-A?

 

Its obviously a good thing that modern war is somewhat rarer in its scope and breadth compared to the early lunatic years of industrial warfare, but it does starve and tease the arm chair enthusiasts worse.

[Kwiatek]

The only choice is 109 or 190 or better both of them.

[ami7b5]

The only choice is 109 or 190 or better both of them.

 

Exactly!

[msalama]

Let's see. We've got the Pony, so we'd need a Langnase Dora and a K-series Biffer for fighter opposition. What else? An AI B-17 so we've got something to defend from the buggers. And a subset of contemporary German iron (a Tiger, some SdKfz halftracks, an assault gun or two, some utility vehicles) for those strafing missions, and a map of Europe and we're set. Can't be too much to ask, now can it ;)

[PFunk1606688187]

Well most of that is just a few models and a silly AI background to run it, but the Focke Wulf or Messerschmidt would take a lot of work.

 

My question is, why oh why are there so many 3rd parties trying desperately to lay claim to every jet fighter that ever flew for a NATO country, but there is NOBODY touching WW2?

 

We've got a vietnam era transport helicopter for god's sake coming, but nothing in WW2?

 

Methinks there isn't much optimism for the market's appetite for vintage prop planes.

[mmaruda]

It would be nice if ED could get a Third Party to WWII content elusively (A2A maybe?). A fully study sim of 1940 conflict would be the best thing ever.

 

Still, I think we will wait a looooong time for that to happen. What would satisfy me for now, is a combat campaign for the P-51 in Caucasus. A far fetched concept, but with the some creative writing it could be made plausible (mercenary counter insurgency recon Mustang?). This is supposed to work somehow:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embraer_EMB-314_Super_Tucano