IIRC, there were 3-4 months of bug-stomping prior to the release of the 4.12 patch, with a similar flurry of "Are We There Yet?" posts after 2-3 months of no updates.

With TD, no news is good news.

I'm sure they'll give us an update when they are ready ;)

i messaged them them before for not updating and then they told me that it is a good sign.Which means that they are near to the release. (I hope)

They're working hard locked up in my basement. Leave em alone. The sooner they finish, the sooner they eat.

:mrgreen:

target labels/markers
 

Hi all i like to see target labels/markers for ground targets in the 4.13 update :grin:

Hi all, I think TD work hard and don't have any time to post something news.
Cheerz, drunking GROHOT!

May I ask for a bit more French squads? Would be a small step for TD, but a giant leap for me. :cool:

Did they fight in ww2 ???

Jk

B)

Sometimes even against the British... ;)

Indeed! It would be good to have a few of the active French Air Force squadrons that fought in France and later for the Allies and for the Axis as needed. I suspect actually that two air forces would be appreciated here. A French Air Force and a Vichy French Air Force so you could have fights in the desert.

Speaking of adding air forces... in the North Africa and Italy campaign having the SAAF would be good as well.

If any of you have a list of French and Vichy French squadron organizations lets put it together. I'll see if I have a good list of SAAF groups in one or two of my books.

Here you find all the French/Vichy OOBs:

http://france1940.free.fr/

With the Sochi Olympics, I could understand a little bit of delay. I'm wondering if TD are various talented and appreciated developers that are actually in different parts of Russia as well as local countries. That being said, I hope they have not been caught up in current events and that they are all doing well.

TD is volunteer team made up of members who are located globally although I would guess at least a fair number live in central or northerly climates and may have been busy watching the olympics. I know I was!

Canadian Hockey... woo! :D

And yes, given the events in several countries, I would hope that things are well with everyone.

Now its back to normal

Vive les canadiens de Mmmmontrrrrrééééééééééaaaaaaaaalllllllll lll !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

More seriously ... i use Windows 8.1 .... and i can t play anymore whit il2, any help or patch will be good :|

Tks

The Sochi olympics were great. They rather remind me of the 1936 olympics. History repeats itself, eh?

IL2 1946 works perfectly well in Win 8.1

Instal the game to eg:

C:\IL-2 Sturmovik 1946

and not into the

C:\Program Files\Ubisoft\IL-2 Sturmovik 1946
or
C:\Program Files (x86)\Ubisoft\IL-2 Sturmovik 1946

Also

In the Windows compatibility settings enable "Run this Program as an Administrator"

I was just unpleasantly reminded that the armor glass in the cockpit of the Hurricane MkIIb isn't modeled.

Either that, or the Luftwaffe is disguising its 30 mm cannons as Mg 15. :(

Yet another sniper-like headshot through the front cockpit by a "rookie" bomber gunner. This time from 150 meters by the top rear gunner of a Ju-88A-4, a plane noted for its heavy and highly effective defensive armament (not). Just another reminder why bomber intercept missions suck in IL2.

Was that armour glass new with that model of Hurricane, or did they have it in the BoB, and the Spitfires too, as I have always believed?

While the earliest production versions of the Spitfire and Hurricane were built without armor glass, and there were some troubles getting it retrofitted when the war started, by summer of 1940 all RAF fighters had armor glass windscreens.

I'm not sure of the exact thickness, but it was between 3-4" (75-100 mm) and mounted at an angle both to conform with the cockpit shape and to further improve bullet resistance.

While WW2-era armor glass wasn't nearly as effective as modern varieties, in sufficient thicknesses it could stop a rifle caliber bullet, as shown here:

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j...n/Scan0195.jpg

Against anything heavier, however, armor glass was pretty well useless even at extreme ranges.

FWIW, the Luftwaffe also had and used armor glass. This picture gives a sense of the thickness:

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...kmlqUnR_RNzchg

According to Capt. Eric Brown, late war German armor glass wasn't as well manufactured and had a slight tint to it.

Interesting.

Was it taken out of lend-lease aircraft, either on arrival or before, or is it just bogus that Forgotten Battles Hurricanes don't have it?

The Hurricanes Mk I supplied to Finland in 1939 might have been early production versions that weren't fitted with armor glass, but I'm not sure. The Finnish experts on this forum would probably know, however.

But, even if the armor glass was never fitted, or was stripped for export, it makes sense that the Finns would have retrofitted it - possibly using German stocks - after 1941.

Since the Hurricane MkII series planes were (mostly) Ex-RAF stocks it makes no sense that their armor should be stripped before they were exported. Certainly, the armor and guns would have been left in the Hurricanes flown by the RAF in the USSR and then left for the Soviets once the RAF pulled out. But, again, I don't know for certain.

But, in fairness to IL2, I might be bitching about a "problem" that's actually realistic. Armor glass of the WW2-era period wasn't nearly as strong as it is today, so perhaps it's realistic that a rifle-caliber ball (not Armor-Piercing) bullet could penetrate it 50-100 mm of glass at 100 meters or more. Certainly, a Armor-Piercing 0.30 caliber/7.62 mm MG bullet could easily penetrate that amount of glass about 200-300 m.

Add the 300-500 km/h of airspeed for a pursuing fighter to the basic bullet velocity of about 900 m/s, and penetration is improved even further.

Well, I'm not an expert but I have some photos I took a couple of years ago in Keski-Suomen Ilmailumuseo (The Aviation Museum of Central Finland). I had an opportunuty to have a look at a Hurricane Mk I which was under restoration. This fighter was delivered to Finland in 7th of March 1940 and it is the only one which is still remaining. You'll find two pictures from these links:

http://www.mediafire.com/view/qzljpkh66z7l0jc/HC452.jpg
http://www.mediafire.com/view/vu404m...e6/HC452_a.jpg

It seems to me that there is an armor glass fitted, but I'm not sure. It's a pity that I didn't take a closer look at the cockpit glasses when visiting there.

And here is a link to the museum's virtual pages:

http://www.airforcemuseum.fi/flash.asp?file=1

Jami, that aircraft most definitely has armor glass.

Great photos, thanks for posting them.

Most distinctly armor glass, same as was fitted on RAF fighters, maybe about 3" (~75 mm).

Thanks, Jami!

Since I'm hating on the Hurricane series (by misusing the poor things by doing really stupid things with them, like hanging out behind massed bombers at 50-100 m), I've discovered a few other bugs.

It appears that the armor that surrounded the reserve fuel tank (the one ahead of the cockpit, behind the engine) and the firewall isn't modeled, or else are modeled in a way such that the armor isn't flush with the fuselage.

The effect is that rifle caliber bullets penetrating from dead ahead, penetrating the fuselage just behind the engine, penetrate the engine firewall and the reserve fuel tank (probably empty since I was flying with 50% fuel) to seriously wound the pilot.

The problem is that there should be about 1/4" (6 mm) of armor plate over the top half of the firewall, plus at least four layers of aluminum (2 for the firewall, 2 for the tank) and possibly more layers of armor that surround the reserve fuel tank that should slow down or stop even an AP 7.62 mm bullet fired from 100+ meters.

Cutaway view that shows what I'm talking about here (assuming bullets penetrate about 25-50 cm ahead of the filler cap and penetrate through the instrument panel):

http://references.charlyecho.com/Avi...icanecut-1.jpg

This website gives really nice illustrations of what the armor and firewall look like and how they should be mounted:

http://www.jneaircraft.com/am274/2008-2/

As another minor issue, it appears that while hits to the leading edge of the inboard wing will puncture the oil tank mounted there, the black smoke "oil leak" effect only emerges from just behind the oil cooler on the plane's belly.

It also seems to be impossible to get a coolant leak effect (white "smoke"), despite the fact that the coolant radiator and oil radiator seem to have shared the same housing.

Looking into the whole Hurricane armor plate thing, it appears that at least one Hurricane MkX (Canadian built Mk IIb with U.S.-made Packard Merlin engine) with 12 guns, was supplied to the USSR with armor glass. The mounting is visible here, although the armor glass is missing:

http://www.jneaircraft.com/am274/artifacts/

This particular plane has a fascinating history and models several Hurricane variants not available in IL2.

First, it was a Hurricane MkIIa originally fitted with 12 0.303 caliber guns.

Second, once the Soviets got it, they removed the British guns and replaced them with 2 ShVAK-20 mm cannons and two-UBT-12.7 mm MG in the wings, with ejection ports for the 0.303 guns faired over and new ejection ports and chutes fitted for the new guns.

Further pictures show that it was fitted with Soviet wooden propellor blades.

http://www.jneaircraft.com/am274/history/

As you scroll through this web site, you'll notice several places where bullets punched through armor - one through the rear bulkhead to wound the pilot, another where a bullet missed the pilot and the reserve fuel tank bulkheads and then punched through the firewall (missing the armor plate) to hit the engine.

Since the plane that shot down AM274 was probably a Fw-190A armed with MG 17 (7.62 mm) and 20mm cannons, it's proof that rifle caliber bullets could sometimes punch through armor plate if fired at sufficiently close distance - and if they were AP rounds. So, the armor on the Hurricane series didn't make it invincible, but it helped. :)

FYI: Aside from maybe some details ... we have this variant of the Hurricane. It's the Mark II Field Mod. and it has the ShVAK and UBK machine guns in the wings. It's quite potent actually.

I thought that model also had a Soviet inline engine rather than the RR Merlin, but I could be confusing it with the P-40 field mod.

I was definitely wrong about the MkII with 12 guns not being modeled in the game. It is, although four of the guns are in the outboard wings (where I didn't notice them :( initially).

For the Hurricane series, the cockpit armor glass appears to be modeled in the cockpit, but not in the external view. I have no idea if it's actually modeled in the DM

I strongly suspect that the armored portions of the fuel tanks and firewall aren't modeled. Either that, or all 7.62 mm bullets fired by German and Japanese bombers are modeled as being AP rather than ball.

As simple error in calculating penetration values by 7.62 mm/0.30/0.303 ball bullets, or the assumption that all bullets of that caliber are AP might go a long way to explaining why bomber gunners are so effective.

That concerns all Russian bombers and U-2/R-5 as well.

Confused with the P-40 Field Mod which uses a Klimov VK-105 off of a Yak or LaGG series. The Hurricane II Field Mod. still features a Merlin engine but with the different armament.

Great stuff!

If possible in FMB, make Test Runway4 same length as Test Runway3/2 (under 'Stationary Ships) so that a base/airfield can be made with plates that AI will fly to and land on. Currently, Test Runway 3/2 (textured with Marston Matting) does not allow players to taxi off of them without damage. Aircraft 'bounce' and usually loose landing gear.

Most terrain, especially on Pacific Maps is overgrown and prohibitive to any long runways.

May be i am wrong, but can you just merge 2 runways to make a single larger one? I saw some videos of FMB in which people merged objects in order to make personalized things... Can that be applied to create the larger runways you need?

i'm sorry to be irrelevant with the previous posts but the "no updates is good news" is making me a little nervous.What is going on no updates for so long?

Boring behind the scenes work.

If you can find a flat spot then you can create your own runways and taxi ways with the airfield objects added to the very end of the objects list in the last patch. I've been having a blast creating custom airfields for use online.

I'm very much hoping for patch 4.13 to be a reality also.

Multiple engine heavy's have always been my personal favorites to fly. As such I have been looking forward to this patch even more so!!
The new bombsight functions, along with the new co-pilot positions are absolutely ground breaking (pun intended) for us heavy iron users.

And then there's the new B-24.

It would be really nice to see some of the proposed Luftwaffe heavy's which never made it into production, make it into the simulation someday,
such as the Me-264B, Ta400, He 274/277.

Since the 4.09 release it's always been the same story... TD posts a bunch of updates, then its quiet as things are prepared, and then the worries begin. I'm not sure why. The patch always comes along. Remember... it's a team of volunteers. They have day jobs and families.

Having some flyable heavy, four engined bombers is a blast. I agree completely! Having the Pe-8 has been so much fun. I've flown many a eastern front bombing mission in it with all of the stations modeled... its really quite a blast. The B-24 will also be, I suspect, similarly if not more of a great thing seeing as its so iconic in the west.

Our Dedicated Bomber Squad group will be enjoying this and all of the bomb option enhancements for sure.

Those are some pretty obscure choices. I had to look them up. While they weren't entirely unknown to me... still very obscure. Fascinating from a aviation history perspective. I don't know if we'll ever see them... I am excited by the prospects of the He177 project. It's a AI type for now... but I believe its intended to be made flyable if time and resources are available. As far as optional Luftwaffe "heavy" bombers go... this is the one with a range of use including at Stalingrad. Technically it is four engines although only two propellers.

Oh yes, easy to merge two runways. I've even seen someone do two carriers joined at the deck! :)

I actually meant making *shorter* runways as runway 3/2 are shorter than runway 4. And most open flat areas in the Solomons Map are short.

Thanks Icefire! I've been doing the same! :)

But the issue is that the transparent (red) runways that you can build a strip(s) on are a bit too long and it's very difficult to find an ideal flat and clear spot in the Solomons map in the historical battle spots.

What I'm trying to do is create airfields a little closer instead of having to fly from the historical airstrips for playability. Much easier to make testrunway 3/4 shorter than to defoliate the Solomons. (Agent Orange is nasty stuff)

So yes, I too have been creating some really nice main and secondary customized airstrips!

It would almost be more convenient for mission and map designers if runways could be created "by the yard/meter". You just designate the portions of the map where you want runway, choose your type (concrete, crushed coral, dirt, grass, PSP, sand or snow), choose the direction, and then enter dimensions for length and width. Overlapping runway textures, as well as textures for taxiways and revetments, could be merged to create one object.

That way, rather than having to create custom airfield templates map builders could lay out historically accurate runways and taxiways "on the fly."

He-111 and Ju-88 is painfully weak and useless from 1942-1943, so in my opinion, there is no place for those prototypes in this game until we get an useful LW bomber that was produced in series, like the Do-217 or He-177 first.

I agree, there are so many types of aircraft that were used in numbers, that would be more beneficial to the sim overall, than these "paper napkin" proposed aircraft that did exactly nothing.

Notably, Japanese Army bombers and attack two seater types.

Kawanishi H6K "Mavis".

Lockheed Hudson and Ventura.

D 520

Hell, even the CAC Boomerang can be called far more important than the German never built aircraft.

Not to mention the ship models we desperately need.

Yes, the H6K! An extremely important plane.

And in my opinion, cockpits for the existing B-25 variants are also missing. I dont know how different are their cockpits, but in the case of the "C/D" the top turret, and forward cockpit may be the same as in the "J". The ventral position should be simulated like in the Pe-2. In the case of the "H", the gunner positions are definitely the same. So I think the B-25 series only needs pilot cockpits.

Yes, I've always wanted to fly one of the up-gunned B-25s, be it with 1X .50cals or the 75mm version, bet you could create even more havoc than you currently can with the already very nice B-25 - those things are nice attack planes, and if the need arises also decent level bombers.

Yes, there are quite a few Japanese planes that could be very useful.

Agree! the Do-217 and He-177 would make very appropriate and useful addition also, which I'd very much like to see.
As the simulation is IL-2-1946, hence the Me-264B, Ta400, and He 274/277.
Other 1946 heavy bombers, the Ju-390, 6 engines (2 prototypes built) and a FocKe-Wulf "1000x1000x1000" proposal, would make great additions.
If I had the skills, software, technical data, and time, (actually I do have the time) I'd have a go at them myself. I'd likely start with the Do-217.

someone to make the h6k ?? the g3m , the ginga and other seaplanes missing in the games that have yet heavily used during the war ....

Definitely the Do217 or He177 would be great. Also it would be nice to have the Me410 as the A-1 and B-1 variants were used heavily by bomber regiments as they "upgraded" from the Ju88 and He111. Useful in a variety of other roles as well.

Several Do-217K variants already exist in the game and the He-177 will be forthcoming in the 4.13 patch. Or, were you specifically requesting flyable versions of these planes?

For "missing planes" almost nobody's mentioned the lack of French and Polish types.

Currently, although there are some frustrating gaps, you can put together early, mid, or late war fighter, attack or bomber campaigns for Germany, Japan (at least the IJN, not the IJAAF), Finland, UK/Commonwealth, USAAF, USN/USMC and the Soviet Union. You can also put together an early to mid war fighter, attack or bomber campaign for Italy.

But, you can only do very limited early war fighter campaigns for campaign for Poland, and technically you can't even do that for France (The Hawk 75 and Ms406 variants in the game are Finnish).

It's easy to forget that both Poland and France had relatively large airforces and were desperately attempting to expand and modernize in the face of the Nazi threat when they were invaded. In both 1939 in Poland and in 1940 in France, had their armies been able to hold against the German Blitzkrieg, the French or Polish Air Forces might have been able to put up a credible defense of their countries.

While there's a natural tendency to want late war planes, there are many fascinating early-war types that nobody seems to know or care about.

Ju-188

But for most of these planes there is limited use, both regarding scenario(s) and time frame. And IIRC the maps needed would have to be made, too. IJA/German planes wouldn't need the maps, and could be used for almost the entire war after their introduction.

Maybe it would be a good idea to have a few bombers that are currently AI only made flyable with a working cockpit for pilot/copilot and bombardier without the other crew stations?

Yes, flyable. As I said earlier, it is absolutely no fun flying Ju-88 and He-111 starting from 1942, unless there arent any enemy planes around. (in fact, they are already little more than sitting ducks even in 1941), They are completely unable to defend themselves, with their low speed and useless guns.
What makes me really sad, there are more than enough cockpit references for the most important Do-217 variants (E2/E4, K1, M1), but no attempt was made to model them properly (OK, except one mod). We are slowly getting more and more multi engined flyable bombers which is really good, (cant wait for the B-24) but unfortunately none of them are german or japanese. Yes, I know its incredibly hard to model a cockpit, but at least adding a later He-111, (H11 or H16) with better armament would be more or less easier, so we would get a LW bomber that is more useful than what we currently have. One more point: By 1942, LW barely had any H-2 and H-6 variants, they were all converted to H-11/16.
The only is hope that the He-177 cockpit project will start someday. I'd gladly donate money to them, (even though I still think the price is too much) but here in India people arent rich at all, including myself.

For an enemy that knows where you are and can predict where you will likley be, you are right.
But the reasonable speed of the Ju-88 can make it a formidable weapon against an unknowing enemy, in with lots of alt, out in a shallow dive - any early war fighte will have trouble intercepting you.
And the He-111 can be used, too, as long as the enemy does not have cannon armed fighters it is flying tank -only head on passes bring them down without using lots of ammo per plane - and against an unprepared enemy a massed formation of He-111 can get results.

That said -both of them are pretty useless later in the war where fighters are fast and well armed enough to successfully catch, overtake and head-on them or even shoot them down from 6'o clock.

I fly the Ju-88 a lot and the main problem I find is the MG-81 range is too small compared to the turret MGs on allied planes.
The MG-81 bullets only exists for about 650/700m, while on allied bombers the bullets can go as far as 1500m or more. This allows fighters to get too close before the gunners have a chance to damage them. (But AI gunners still open fire when the enemy is at 1500m like in other bombers)

But you forget that after the fall of Poland and France, Germany stole all the French and Polish airplanes for their own use, or to sell off to their allies. Also, some Polish and French types were flown to Allied or neutral countries just before the German occupation and were interned when they landed. Also, prior to WW2, both Poland and France exported some of their planes to other countries.

That means the better French and Polish types flew for the Germans, German Allies AND the Western Allies in limited capacity until lack of spare parts finally grounded them. So, for 1941-43 scenarios, a few Polish and French types would vastly expand the number of campaign possibilities.

In particular, the Dewoitine D.520, Potez 630, PZL P.37, and some variant of the PZL P.24 would be welcome additions to the game. Not just because they'd give both France and Poland viable fighter and bomber types, but also because they'd round out the Romanian, Italian and German orders of battle!

But, it's all wishful thinking. What new features we get in the game all depends on what the people with the proper skills are willing to make.

That's the difference between 12.7/.50 caliber and 7.62 mm/.30 caliber guns.

I haven't encountered this, not even for rookie gunners. Typically, rookie gunners will make a short burst at about 500 m, then stop until you get to about 300 m.

Given the huge number of Ju-88 variants, a "fix" that would both make the Ju-88A more effective and which would work around the problem that the rear gunner can't man both guns would be to introduce a version that has a single window with a twin MG 81 mounted in it.

Agree, it would be great if both guns could fire. As far as I know, in reality, the bombardier/front gunner often left his position and manned the second gun.
Another "fix" would be adding the Ju-88A14, which was more survivable. It was primarily an anti shipping dive bomber variant (but widely used against ground targets on eastern front too), so it had a little more armor to withstand the AAA fire from ships. And it would be really easy to make, both the external model (just add MGFF in place of bombsight window, like the torp bomber A4), and cockpit (A4 torp cockpit, with dive bombsight from ordinary A4)

Yeah, I agree a bullet with a relative higher gunpowder load will travel farther, but what I mean is that in game, bullets _dissappear_ after 600m (Just made a test in the QMB and you can fly at 590m from the bomber, directly into the bullet stream of the bottom MG-81z and all the tracers will dissappear right in front of your propeller and you'll not receive a single hit)

Looking at the gun parameters of the game, MG-81 bullets exist (if Im reading it right) for 1.1seconds after leaving the gun.
Russian ShKAS, another 7.62mm gun with higher muzzle velocity but slighty smaller cartridge, the bullets weight is almost the same that the MG-81s, yet it exists for 2.2seconds after leaving the gun.
For the Browning .50 bullet life varies with round type, but is 6.4 secs on average
For the MG-FF, heavier round and slower muzzle velocity, average bullet life is 2.8secs
For the Breda SAFAT 12.7mm, which is a Browning .50 with a smaller cartridge and thus slower muzzle velocity (only 30m/sec faster than the MG-81) the bullet life time is the same as the .50: 6.4 secs on average.


It sure seems something is off with the MG-81, seeing as bullet life time is not exactly directly related with the ballistic properties of the gun.

Daidalos Team, it has been two months since any type of official, or semi-official update. Could we get a little something, at least a grunt, be patient, go away, or something please.
Just being a little sarcastic. :rolleyes: :cool:

The bomber functions in this patch are very greatly anticipated, myself anyway.
Thank you for the awesome work this team has done!!
It is greatly appreciated!!

What the man above said ;)

They are working hard (or not)...

Can't wait to see what you are doing!

All is quiet on the western front.

maybe a good sign :grin:

Another idea, which might be within the limits of the IL2 game engine:

Could oil splashes and bullet holes seen in the cockpit view be modeled in the external view?

Could there be damage textures to specifically indicate things like oil leaks from the engine? Maybe not as extreme as this picture, but you get the idea:

http://i412.photobucket.com/albums/p...psea4a5307.jpg

bad luck for the guy in the picture :eek:

No, he walked away from the landing, it was a good one. :grin:

I don't know what they are doing (if they do something) no matter how boring they call it, i would like to know what it is.
If it is the good sign (that they are about to finish) i didn't see the updtate for longer than a month.
Ok they may have a difyculty but i would like to know.
i'm sorry if i sound a bit mean i just want to know their progress.

Maybe it's because of what's happening in Ukraine and Crimea? Daidalos Team are Russians no?

Saxon is russian, but the other guys are form all over the world. This silence maybe its a sign the´re ironing the last bugs. I think 4.13 it s around the corner.

TD is a worldwide team of volunteers. So... probably has nothing to do with that.

ok didn't know. Thx :)

And to ECV56_Guevara too.

It's because all devs for Il2 Cliffs of Dover and BOS are russians.

++
 

Hello,

I am a crazy about of aviation and IL*2 in particular. Later 10year of no gaming, I resumed in hands my control stick on it fantastic game and I was surprised finding a big community. For me IL*2 1946 remains better than his(her) small brother CliffofDover.

Thanks you for your work.


Juss ( Fr)
My Planes: FW190 Aseries / Yak3 of " NormandieNiemen "

While waiting for the 4.13 release dare I ask whether DT don't forget to fix AI torpedo attack mode of Kate B5N, which use shallow dive instead of torpedo run?
Also the bug of autopilot still attached to taxi waypoints after manual take off? I reported these bugs before, now just wondering whether they are going to be fixed, could any of DT tell me. Thanks!

Is no news good news?

They are communication experts.

Team Daidalos could learn from Team Fusion in this regard...

Off playing BoS I reckon :rolleyes:

Remember that these guys are volunteers. But even if they did cease work, I wouldn't blame them. :lol:

As one who chooses to still only to fly the official patched version of the sim', and in no way wanting be one who bothers the TD members with those are we there yet type questions, I do however find myself becoming far more eager than usual for any sort of news from the TD front.

I'm sure that there very good reasons that the team have gone dark with updates announcements, not to mention comments in general, and although the comprehensive updates are greatly appreciated, a simple hello we are still here now and then would help to keep the morale here upbeat and positive.

As always greatly looking forward to what's to come.

Hello everyone,

just to let you know that 4.13 is still in the pipeline. Most of the content is ready but some things need to be integrated and polished. Our wish is to go on with a beta soon. We all hope you will like the patch once it is released. About lack of communications, we are sorry about that but real life can be quite demanding, and IL-2 may fall well below in the priority list for undetermined periods of time.

Cheers

Thank you, its great to here from you, and all the above is well understood, as life does tend to get in the way, and many of these life things are far more important.

Any news are MUCH better than NO news ;)
Looking forward to the patch.

Thank you!

http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthrea...=1#post2061912
...

Very interesting ordnance there Sita.

Spasibo.

Thanks for the update. I figured it was mostly bug-stomping.

Are the new modelled P-40s available for 4.13?

And BOY would it be nice (hint, hint) if you could:

1) Have a current waypoint indicator in the wingman command menu, like the torpedo/bomb info (which is GREAT, BTW)

2) Have a way of selecting waypoints when you're the only airplane in your flight.

3) Have a way of selecting waypoints at all, other than being able to command your wingman to fly to next or back to base, especially since he's going to ignore you anyway.

Regardless, as ever Team Daidalos is the beating heart of Il2, keeping it alive, and no words are sufficient to express our thanks.

For future reference, an addition to the perennial wishlist:

Sometime within the next few days I'll be uploading a new single-mission set to M4T. The base mission is the 9 February 1945 RAF attack on the German Narvik-class destroyer Z33. The stock Norway map includes an area which very closely resembles the target area, deep in Forde Fjord, where the real raid took place. A lot of new skins were made by Hayate for this mission; between those and equally accurate RaFiGer skins for the blue flights, the mission looks very good. However, there is one somewhat jarring visual anomaly: I had to use a Russian single-stack destroyer to stand in for Z33.

The overall outlines of one of the later-model Japanese destroyers - Yukikaze, for instance - would have been much better, but the Japanese DDs all have the name painted on the side of the hull, right in the middle, in huge, white characters.

It is my hope, then, that TD may be able to include a German destroyer, at least something resembling a Narvik-class DD, in a future patch.

Meanwhile, I would like once again to express my gratitude to Team Daidalos. As always, I'm looking forward very much to the next patch...and the next...and the next...knock wood.

I think it could be a great idea one time to create new textures for the whole game. What I mean is that the game is currently with 2006 graphics and I think it should be possible to make a game with new graphic just by making new texture for everything, create new "forest" and include self-shadowing. (OpenGL and DirectX?)

2048 pixel skins and ground textures are already available as mods. They really improve the game's look.

Not a big job then ;)

How many hoops are jumped through to get there though.

IIRC not compatible with anything normally flown online either.

If it was to go that way the old system specs would have to be disregarded,
a new game made with completely new specs under 1C's supervision for possible legal matters.
However.......if HSFX were to include it as a switchable option in the JSGME I see a more easily
approachable solution.

:)











.

You can forget me with my poor Intel HD Graphic 1st gen lol. I think everyone in 2014 have a correct specs to upgrade a little bit Il2 1946.

I though about map design that need to be re-done with accurate custom cities everywhere with realistic roads locations.

Thanks for update, I was worried TD had drifted off into oblivion. Now back to IL2

i hope to see more german planes someday

I'd like to see more flyable German and Japanese multiple engine heavy's, bombers and transports. The more engines, the more weight, the better!!
If I had the skill's I'd put the effort into making it happen, as I do have some amount of free time.

They'd be interesting to have, but neither the Germans or the Japanese had that many heavy bombers or transport types.

The main German heavy bomber, the He-177 Grief, will be available as a non-flyable plane in the 4.13 patch.

For the Germans, I'd be more interested in seeing more of the vast number of Ju-88 and He-111 medium bomber variants, since they were most important in terms of numbers and tactical usefulness.

For the Japanese, the G3M Nell would be a useful early WW II/Sino-Japanese war IJN type, while the Yokosuka P1Y Ginga/Frances would be a nice late war IJN type. The Ki-49 Donru/Helen would be a good choice for a IJA mid- to late-WW2 type. Having any flyable IJA bomber type would also be welcome.

As for transports, a flyable Ju-52 would be welcome choice for the Axis, since they were used in a variety of combat roles throughout WW2 and were used in limited numbers by Germany's allies, as well as the Luftwaffe. For the Japanese and the Allies, a flyable DC-3/C-47 would be the best choice.

The Japanese never had a really successful Japanese-designed purpose-built transport. Instead, they used bombers or converted bombers (like the G3M, G4M or Ki-21). But, in terms of numbers, the most successful Japanese transport was the Showa/Nakajima L2D "Tabby" which was just a license-built DC-3.

There's one weather effect that I'd like to see: a rainbow, with colours such as orange, indigo and violet

Could also be used to calibrate the colours of the display... ;)

That would be very nice bit of eye candy, but getting the physics right would be a bit tricky.

The weather effect I'd like to see is more cloud options.

1) Ability for mission builders to set percentage of cloud cover (e.g., 1 to 10 10ths).

2) Ability for mission builders to set multiple layers of clouds.

3) Ability for mission builders to place clouds in a particular sector of the map and/or in a particular location.

4) Dynamic clouds - which move, appear or disappear as set by the mission builder.

5) Different colors of clouds to represent layers of smog/coal smoke (a yellowish brown haze), fire (black or grayish smoke) and thunderheads (grayish).

6) Ability for mission builders to set transparency of clouds to represent mist or fog and control exact visibility range (in visibility out to X km/miles).

7) Larger and smaller clouds.

8) Different shapes of clouds to represent different cloud types.

9) Ability to set altitude at which contrails form.

10) Option to have contrails persist for shorter or longer amount of time.


Comparatively, a rainbow effect would be easy!