1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 09-14-2010, 02:02 PM
ATAG_Dutch ATAG_Dutch is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bf-110 View Post
Wasn´t shooting at downed pilots forbidden by all AFs during WWII?(Except for some japanese pilots that shot at US pilots in mid air)
Also shooting at medics and those stuff?
Maybe, but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. On both sides.
A pilot bailing out on home territory will be able to fight again.
Bailing out over enemy territory, he's a P.O.W.
Dowding believed the Germans would be justified in shooting at RAF pilots in their 'chutes over Britain, but disagreed with RAF pilots shooting at German pilots under their 'chutes over Britain.
The Czecs and Poles in the RAF made their own rules, allegedly.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-14-2010, 03:56 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,757
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterPanPan View Post
Hi Viking,

Sweden in the 70s sounded fun! Yes, I think the Germans were much better equipped in terms of SAR at the outset of the war. Interesting you mention the superior German life vests. Brian Kingcome (RAF Spitfire pilot, 92 Sqn) wrote about how he visited the crash site of a German bomber he downed and helped himself to one of the crew's life vests as he knew it was better than RAF issue. He wore the German vest on all subsequent sorties I believe.

PPanPan
Yep, I have pictures of him in said vest. Another pilot, Eric Lock, did the same thing.
But oh the greatness of hindsight! They were, in fact, slightly silly to swap. Despite the liftwaffe vest using newer technology (it was CO2 inflated) it had no head support, and so a lot of the time it would cause the pilots to tip onto their front head-first in the water (especially if they were unconscious). Despite this, the technology was much better than that used in the British 1932 pattern mae west, which relied on 3 sets of kapok pads (tied together) and a self-inflating 'stole' made from natural indian rubber.
Ironically, the british had used the CO2 technology in vests prior to the 1932 pattern (I think a type developed in WW1 used the technology) so I don't know what the decision was to drop it for oral-inflation.
Anyway, the British pilots only had flourescene dye marker in and around December 1940 as far as I have been aware. having said this, I have a picture of a pilot with such a dye marker on his 1932 pattern mae west, and he (sadly) died in September 1940 so in this sense it may have been trialled by a few pilots.
It's usually best to model straight out FACTS in a game/film etc so I'd say no dye marker for the British pilot as clearly only a few might have used it.
Again, though, the Luftwaffe was ahead in terms of technology, and they did use dye-markers. I have a picture of a luftwaffe-fighter-pilots schimwestte (or whatever it's called ) that has stains from such a marker.

I don't even think many RAF pilots had whistles. Most took the kapoks out of their vest, but after a few hours in the drink they soon decided this was bad (if indeed they survived).

Again, I don't think many RAF pilots had the function of mirrors either. I've read an heard that apparently there were trials for a mirror addition to the 1932 pattern vest, but I don't know if this is true.

I could ramble all day
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-15-2010, 12:27 AM
Skoshi Tiger Skoshi Tiger is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,196
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking View Post
What I really, really would appreciate for SOW is the possibility to plan and fly missions of rescue, photo reconnaissance, meteorological info etc. ...
Regards
Viking

Will you be doing these all at the same time, or performing each seperate mission in appropirately marked aircraft?

Cheers and have a good holiday!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-15-2010, 03:41 AM
Blackdog_kt Blackdog_kt is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 2,711
Default

I don't know if it would be worth the development time to have single player campaigns for auxiliary roles, as the appeal might not be too much for the combat oriented folks, but on the other hand i still support the inclusion of the ability to have such flights, even if only for single player missions and multiplayer scenarios.

For example, i doubt many people would want to fly a campaign in a coastal command Catalina. These things were used post war in Australia as airliners and they were flown in some of the longest duration scheduled airliner flights ever, with 20 hours of non-stop flying or more between airports. Imagine a single player campaign where you would take off from a coastal command base and fly 10 hour patrols over the western approaches in search of U-boats. To keep things realistic, you wouldn't even encounter them in every mission. A guy used to to boom and zooming in a P51 or 190 would be hard to convince to sign up for something like that, not to mention the virtual pilots who enjoy flying furballs on the deck.

However, if aircraft systems modelling interacted well with the dynamic weather engine to give you a whole new set of realistic problems to face, it would be another story. Battling poor visibility and weather along with the catalina's pitiful de-icing equipment, navigation difficulties and strict operating limits of an aircraft that does maybe a 120mph IAS cruise on a good day, it suddenly becomes quite the challenge managing to reach that convoy under attack 50 miles away which just radioed in for help.
Add to that meeting prowling luftwaffe long-range aircraft and a mid-flight save feature and it would have the potential to draw quite a bunch of the civilian crowd who are interested in WW2 and want a taste of combat simming, but at the same time prefer slightly more relaxed flying instead of frantic paced dogfights. Once again, more variety=more potential customers and the good thing is, it's still perfectly within the scope of a WW2 combat simulator instead of having to make an entire civilian flight sim of the 30s-40s on the new engine to draw these customers in.

As for the people with stronger nerves who do want the added danger, flying Lysanders at night and landing agents in occupied Europe, or unarmed recon flights in broad daylight would be a whole new type of challenge. I remember reading an account about PR Spitfire pilots years ago , saying that "when you were flying at 28000 feet over the Netherlands on a good day you could see half way into Germany, that is until the canopy started fogging up...then one would have the constant sinking feeling that the air around was filled with Messerschmits".

I don't know about you, but the prospect of relying on stealth, positioning, energy-conserving maneuvering and deep knowledge of the airframe in order to squeeze out every last bit of performance available at the right time without having a single gun on your airplane, to me it's very exciting.

So in summary, maybe it's early to have single player campaigns for such roles, but there should be the appropriate mission types or triggers to support them for custom single missions and online play. Especially if the 3rd type of online mode is a built-in dynamic campaign where resources matter, it would be all the more important for each team to rescue downed pilots, attack enemy supplies while protecting their own and having accurate recon data to make sure which target is sufficiently damaged to stop wasting bombs on and which one needs a follow-up raid to ensure it will stop supplying the other team with fuel.

The more roles that are added, the more "periphery" the multiplayer experience gains and this gives people both new areas to operate as well as a false sense of security to be exploited when these areas suddenly become unsafe.
If we sometime have a 41-43 channel front add-on, i'd love to be flying those coastal command patrols in a persistent server running a multiplayer dynamic campaign between flying fighters on normal combat sorties.
Ok, i wouldn't be doing that every single day and i certainly wouldn't fly for 10 hours (maybe 2-3 would be manageable), however if i wanted to join my favorite online campaign server and help out my team but wasn't in the mood for fast paced action-filled flying, i'd have the option to do something else. Sometimes you want to fire up your favorite game or simulator but you are tired due to real life and have second thoughts. Well, it would be perfect for such days to have something slow-paced to do that still has an impact on the way the campaign plays out.

I'd also love to load up a flight of 110s or Ju88Cs and go prowling against those same coastal command flying boats because the last thing these guys would be expecting to see is a flight of Ju88Cs daring enough to duck under the radar all the way to the straight between the UK and Ireland. Sure, it might be a mere 1-2 kills for a couple of hours of flying and maybe getting lucky and sinking some concoy ships, but just the fact that i managed to get an 88 all the way up there without getting detected and intercepted would be satisfaction enough.

Other scenarios for multiplayer? Plentiful if you ask me. While everyone is busy duking it out over the main targets, you form up a small group of long-ranged aircraft that can fly fast at a sufficiently wide band of altitudes, sneak around to a secondary objective at high speed on the deck, pop up some miles away to attack the target, climb to high altitude after attacking and make the return trip via the normal route.
You'd be undetected by radar on the way in and your smaller numbers flying at wide spacing would probably present a less enticing target for the opposing team than the flock of bombers and escorts attacking the main target at 20000 feet.
You'd also be untouchable on the return as most of the enemy interceptors encountered during your return would be flying lower, be low on ammo and far too low on fuel to climb and catch up to you, or even damaged. You would have reduced your fuel supply as well, but not to the point of being unable to RTB...just to the point of being able to fly faster.

Specifically speaking? When you see your team forming a big bomber raid at medium to high altitudes with accompanying escorts, use that raid as a diversion to draw the enemy away from you. Say you have 10 people in your group, get 5 fighter-bomber mosquitos and one with a glass nose to act as lead bomber, add 4 P51Bs to act as scouts and advise you on threats during the ingress and go blast another target to smithereens, then if you feel lucky on your return trip bounce the damaged/low on fuel and ammo enemy interceptors as they are circling their airfield to land

In short, more "commando" style missions with the potential for fluid pacing (it could turn from serene to hectic in seconds) would be awesome for multiplayer and provide for more "whoah, how did that happen?!" moments.

And here i go getting a perfectly good thread off its rails again...sorry to the original poster for the hijack, i'll shut up now
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:56 PM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.