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

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #221  
Old 11-09-2018, 11:21 AM
ddr ddr is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 43
Default

Hello! I can wait for release of your work!!
maybe in a future patch we can see a flyable Hs-123?
Thanks for your effort, TD!
Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 11-11-2018, 04:03 PM
stugumby stugumby is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 275
Default HMM no missile/glide bomb or torpedoes for He-177.

Ok seems the load out wont include what was previously out there with fritz x and torpedoes etc. Still quite a load carrier for short range missions.
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 11-15-2018, 10:55 AM
Marabekm Marabekm is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 204
Default

Hmm. Christmas wishlist.

Cr.32
Ba. 65
Flyable TBD-1
Flyable Blenheim

Some Italian and British ships and ground objects, such as artillery and AA guns, trucks, etc.

New armament on SBDs ---- 1 x 500 and 2 x 100 bombs
B5N2 ----- 2 x 250 Kg bombs
1 x 800 Kg bomb

And for Daidalos team to get whatever they want/need to keep up the work.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 11-15-2018, 06:49 PM
Barti Barti is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 1
Default P.11c fix

Hi. You could fix P.11c. There are several things in the game that are incorrect:
- the date of construction 1939, it should be 1933
- the underside of the wings should be blue
- lower chessboards on patches should not have white fields, only red colors were painted
- the speedometer indicator disappears when the engine is turned off, after landing
- the gear should not fall off in a diving flight, history doesn't know such cases
- it was possible to refuse a fuel tank in a plane in the event of a fire
- a fuel gauge should be on the left side of the instrument panel
- add a mirror on the windshield
- some planes had an additional mirror on the right side of the cabin
- some of the aircrafts had an on-board radio station; add antenna links
- pilot could see the 2 mg on the hawks from the inside of the cabin
- on the left side of the cabin there was a rocket in the holder; on both sides of the control stick shaft of the cartridge box
- the emblem of the units appears in the wrong place, they should move a bit forward, so as not to cover the serial number of the aircraft.
- 303 Squadron (polish unit in UK) used the 111 emblem from Cracow
- radio signals are missing at the bottom of the panel
- in polish aviation, planes in the border protection corps had other designation like that https://www.thenostalgiashop.co.uk/P...R583)/3783.htm
- there was also another experimental camouflage in sharpheads https://modelwork.pl/topic/10717-pzl...ge-148/?page=4

Rifle weapons are 2 mg in the fuselage or 2 in the fuselage and additionally 2 on the hawks. Both variants carried the same designation P.11c. Airplanes with 4 mg were rising slowly and had less maneuverability.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 11-27-2018, 03:17 AM
dedogist dedogist is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3
Default Current AI

The Current AI in 1946 is the only thing i find (as someone who still plays a lot) that has a majorly negative impact on the game. At various difficulty levels the AI is always making ridiculous high deflection campaign-ending shots from 100s of meters away without hardly ever missing. These shots are often performed while they wouldn't even be able to see you over their nose. If they start missing, they'll correct instantly even if they couldn't realistically see you.

The second issue with the AI i have is that often the fighters can be somewhat predictable in both their defensive maneuvering as well as when entering a fight. When entering an air battle, the AI loves to do weird stuff that puts them (often) under their opponents with low energy states. It would be awesome if they would be more conservative in their maneuverings until they actually engaged.
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 12-09-2018, 01:18 PM
Marabekm Marabekm is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 204
Default

Hmm. How about adding bomb armaments to the P-400? At least a 500 pound bomb option.
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 12-10-2018, 05:18 AM
JacksonsGhost JacksonsGhost is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 47
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marabekm View Post
Hmm. How about adding bomb armaments to the P-400? At least a 500 pound bomb option.
+1 for that, if the P-400 did have bomb capability. Does your research indicate this? I know the P-39D introduced the bomb armament for the P-39, and they all had it thereafter. Now although the P-400 was produced generally in parallel with the P-39D it did have a different armament, so I'm not 100% sure it included the bomb carrying ability. Numerous pictures showing them with drop tanks would seem to suggest bomb carrying ability was there also, so you're probably quite right.

I would definitely like to see the US manufactured bombs available for the later P-39 load outs, which only have the FAB-250 for some reason. The later versions of the P-39 were definitely used with bombs by the USAAF as late as 1944 in Italy on P-39N and Q of the 350th Fighter Group in Italy. One of these attacks will feature in an upcoming Fw 190 historical mission which I'm currently working on and plan to upload on M4T, so it would be nice to be able to feature the correct US manufacture bombs. I doubt this would be too difficult since the earlier P-39 models already have the US 500 pound bombs available.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 12-10-2018, 10:27 PM
Marabekm Marabekm is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 204
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JacksonsGhost View Post
+1 for that, if the P-400 did have bomb capability. Does your research indicate this? I know the P-39D introduced the bomb armament for the P-39, and they all had it thereafter. Now although the P-400 was produced generally in parallel with the P-39D it did have a different armament, so I'm not 100% sure it included the bomb carrying ability. Numerous pictures showing them with drop tanks would seem to suggest bomb carrying ability was there also, so you're probably quite right.

I would definitely like to see the US manufactured bombs available for the later P-39 load outs, which only have the FAB-250 for some reason. The later versions of the P-39 were definitely used with bombs by the USAAF as late as 1944 in Italy on P-39N and Q of the 350th Fighter Group in Italy. One of these attacks will feature in an upcoming Fw 190 historical mission which I'm currently working on and plan to upload on M4T, so it would be nice to be able to feature the correct US manufacture bombs. I doubt this would be too difficult since the earlier P-39 models already have the US 500 pound bombs available.
Since you asked.
https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/da...tus-air-force/

What would really give us the answer, is if anyone could dig up a pilots handbook/manual for the P-400/P-39.

Notice where it says they used bombs for ground attack after failing to compete as fighters. For now, I can use the P-39 and P-400 interchangeably, but... Its a wishlist so I wished. lol
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 12-11-2018, 05:31 AM
JacksonsGhost JacksonsGhost is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 47
Default

[QUOTE=Marabekm;718330]Since you asked.
https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/da...tus-air-force/]

Good job! That's a detailed account of the P-400s using 500 pound bombs at Guadalcanal. In fact I've added it to my bookmarks!

However, the author's lack of source quotation is annoying.

I did some digging through my own research papers and found a chapter which was basically devoted to P-400 operations at Guadalcanal from "Pacific Sweep" by William N. Hess, published in 1974. It backs up your article in stating that the Airacobras at Guadalcanal were initially 14 P-400s, not P-39s, so I assume the two P-39Fs mentioned in your link were gone by then (or not sent to Guadalcanal). And in the context of September 1942 it speaks of P-400 bombing missions and says "When replacement aircraft came up they were still P-400s. There was nothing else to send". So that's pretty firm support for the P-400 using bombs. Hess refers to the P-400 using 500 pound and 100 pound bombs.


In summary I'm convinced that all of the current Airacobra types in the game should be capable of carrying a single bomb of any of the standard US sizes up to 500 pound (or even 600 pound according to some reputable sources). Same goes for the drop tank option instead of a bomb.

Just having the existing US 500 pound bomb and 75 gal drop tank options available across all the Airacobra types would be enough to satisfy most situations I think!

Last edited by JacksonsGhost; 12-11-2018 at 06:30 AM. Reason: clarification
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 05:22 AM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.