If we model every single type of war time service Spitfire it'd probably be pretty close in number to the Bf109 variations that saw service from the Spanish Civil War and up. Two very prolifically upgraded fighters for sure!

US P40s operating in China used the "bazooka" type rocket launcher tubes. This was well after the AVG was merged into the regular Air Corps of course.

Also, the Hawk 75s as used by the Dutch in the Netherlands East Indies should be able to carry a bomb under each wing. KNIL Hawk 75s in the ground attack role successfully bombed a bridge to slow, at least for a short while, the advance of the Japanese in Java.

if possible, check the variometer indication speed...

i think that are too slow...

after diving, i saw the altitude increasing, but he are still indicating altutide loosing...

Please is possible include the Avia B-135, i hear about this model for IL-2.
Model made by Stoupa, and i don´t know so this is finish or not...


http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af2/Stoupa/camo.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...Konstrukce.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...iaB135_BG5.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...ia135Bomby.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...5Bomby6x10.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/af2/Stoupa/tucet.jpg

Tank´s

Tail looks like a Hurricane, other parts like a Spitfire! :o

i think this is good reference for P51 B&C cockpit...

http://www.stclairphoto-imaging.com/...g/P51_swf.html

Nice plane
 

Very nice plane, I hope TD would add that in the next patch or this patch.

I disagree with that, Yes the tail might look like a Hawker Hurricane. The engine and the propellars doesn't look like a Spitfire.Also the front of the Avia B-145 model looks more like a Typhoon. But skins doesn't make it look like a Spitfire or a Hurricane.

If you imagine a bit;) Those wings and canopy...

Hi, TD.

First, I would like to thank you for your continuous hard work on the development of IL2. As follows is my request for the incoming patches.

Would you please fix the high altitude performance of late-war 109s in the incoming patch? Both historically and according to IL2 Compare, late-war 109s should outrun and outclimb P-51 and P-47 at high altitude. But in the game, what 109 pilots can do is merely struggling for a level flight above 8000m. Let alone maneuvering and climbing.

This problem has been existing ever since the birth of IL2. Oleg once mentioned that the inaccurate high altitude performance was due to the limitation of IL2 engine, which was originally designed for low altitude air combat scenario. But while P-51 and P-47 can perform normally high up. I believe there should be a way to fix this problem.

Also, is it possible to modify the cockpit of late-war 109 variants? The cockpit struts are just too big compared with real 109s, which make 109 pilots suffer from a great SA disadvantage in combat.

Thank you!

Jermin, I think it mite go to the 4.12, because that 4.11 patch is almost done from my view. But Very good request.

Well yes, but it looks like a mix of parts from the Hurricane,Spitfire, and Typhoon. Well yes the wings and canopy may look like a spitfire but the front of the aircraft looks more like a Typhoon.

German Sqadron markings and color coding
 

Hi Team Daidalos,

first I want to thank you for your dedication to make IL-2 better and listen to the community. Excellent job.

Now coming to my main point. It seems that most of the German Squadron markings and color codings are incorrect somehow. As an example sqadron 4 is green and have the character of a Gruppenstab, but it should be blue and have the letter of a Staffel (squadron). As a reference please look at http://www.luftarchiv.de/index.htm?/.../kenungen2.htm. I cross checked this source with other I have like Flugzeug Classic Special 7 or Ju 87 from Planes and Pilots. Also the Geschwaderstab is always mapped to I. Gruppe when set to 4. Staffel. So instead of showing XX + A(in green)A it shows XX + A (in green)B. My recommendation to fix this would be a 0 for Geschwader or Gruppenstab in the squadron selection, than 1 -4 for the Staffel of each Gruppe.

Regarding the markings it seems to be wrong as well. As an example take IV. Gruppe/KG 27. The IV. Gruppes Shield is blue regarding the link to http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/...wader/KG27.htm. I have seen similar issues for other Geschwaders as well e.g. Lehrgeschwader 1 or KG 26.
I would appreciate if you can fix this, because I fly missions that are based on historical data. And I want to use the proper Squadron for this, which is not possible at all. I know, this might seem to be a little bit picky, but there are a lot of Geschwader, Gruppe and Staffeln out there in the community that want to have right markings for there online squadrons as well.

Thanks!

Zorro

Quite frankly the marking system is inflexible and often downright wrong. I have tried to correct it as much as I could but my influence was limited. As for the unit emblem found on the internet - I have learned not to trust any of them without checking myself. There is a lot of conflicting information around.

Bottom line: Il-2 would need a completely new marking system to fix all the issues and that isn't going to happen.

This comes dangerously close to the typical "chart war" complaint, which is extremely difficult to prove and lends itself to endless online arguments. By 1944, there were so many factors which muddied pure plane vs. plane performance of German vs. Allied fighters - fuel quality, pilot skill, operational factors, manufacturing quality - that it's very hard to tell which was the better plane - Bf-109G, P-47D, P-51D, Yak-9 or La-7.

A better strategy would be to fix IL2's high altitude performance. Personally, I don't understand why modeling high altitude performance should be a problem, since atmospheric pressure, oxygen content, temperature and similar factors all vary as a constant with altitude, which in turn affect engine and aeronautical performance in a predictable fashion.

Is this due to limitations of the game engine, restrictions on DT's license with 1C, or lack of time/interest on the part of DT?

Personally, I don't think it's that big a deal, since the marking system can easily be altered by add-ons or custom skins.

If it can "easily" fixed by mods, then why don't you talk to the author(s) of said mods and ask them to contact TD with the solution ?

or perhaps, the decal-markings system, may indeed have limitations you are not aware of (proper positioning for different dates comes to mind, as well as some skins having slightly 'off' positions that the decal-markings overlay incorrectly)

Well, we'd have to rewrite pretty much all the units in the game and the way markings are applied. We'd need to go over all the models and create new overlays and and and ... Quite frankly this is simply far too much work at this stage quite honestly 99% of the players would not even notice it.

guys, not sure this has come to your attention, and whether there is any easy way to fix this. this is from online play in stock IL-2, i.e. 4.10.1, on spits v 109s.

often, when ONE of your engine dies, the other player sees that BOTH of your engines have died. is there any way to fix this? so you have an example, please see the link to this youtube video (sorry for the stuttering, but, hopefully you can see that BOTH engines are not moving):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vdZtnYi-MUY

BUT, in reality, it was only the left engine that wasn't working - here is the proof, the record from the mission (the right engine was working all the time):

http://redo.net/temp/public/quick0013.ntrk

are you able to fix this? would be great for immersion...

hi can we see more british bombers in the sim for some night" rear gunner "missions we have got the me 110 allready in the sim to do it.

That's what I thought. There are add-ons like Mat-Manager and the "Forgotten Countries" mod which sort of rework units and markings, but they're of indifferent quality. They add a lot of stuff, but some of it isn't well done. That said, I'd love to see national and unit markings of equivalent quality to those in Mat-Manager in the stock game.

That's not to say that DT has done nothing to improve the default national and unit markings. While it's never been an advertised feature in any of the patches, the new national markings for the U.S. and Japan look a lot better than used to.

More flyable British bombers would be welcome. There's a mod effort afoot to get the Lancaster into the game, but I don't know its current status.

As for night gunner missions, the grim reality is that most British bomber crewmen never saw the nightfighter than killed them. The top scoring German nightfighter ace scored 121 victories; the top British tailgunner ace had 8. And, there were a lot more Luftwaffe nightfighter aces than there were RAF gunner aces.

Realistically, an RAF tailgunner mission would consist of 8-12 hours of constant vigilance, where your main tactic would be to scream at the pilot to "corkscrew" (i.e., go into a deep curving dive) to avoid being shot down. If you failed to see your enemy against the virtually black ground of blacked-out occupied Europe, suddenly, without warning, you'd find your plane engulfed in flames before you can fire a shot.

Hi guys!

I'd like to ask you to remove the limitations on the DeviceLink so we can export information to our X52pro MFD or other displays :grin:

And, if you at it :grin::

Would you please, please make set()-keys available for the new "Multi-throttle/prop support and radiator axis" in DeviceLink?

Artist

Is the end of the month will be made ​​patch 4.11?

We need more Japanese Bombers such as Ki-21 sallys and so on so we could make a campaign about the war in China.

Nice request Ki-21 flyable + 1 for this...

I wouldn't mind being able to put AAA on the roofs of buildings or on bunkers.
Could this be done?

Also, catapult-launch option from battleships to simulate North Sea convoys or ship-launched recon planes.

Well yes the Ki-21 is a very good request but I didn't care if it was Flyable or not, it would be perfect for flying against the flying tigers or shooting it down as a flying Tiger, But mcmmilli, I still agree with you still that it should be flyable because it makes bomber pilots happy.

I like your request, but I'm not sure if its possible, but this request should be +1

Trouble is we have no Allied warship launched recon planes.

The Curtiss SOC Seagull would be a good one to have for the Allies, and the Misubishi F1M "Pete" for the IJN.

I could be wrong here but it sounds a bit like you aren't aware that the Ki-21 is in the game already...

Ki-21-I and Ki-21-II have been available in the game for a few years now :)

The request is mostly around making it flyable. Having it or a Ki-48 or some sort of Japanese Army bomber would be really great.

ajustable time for runway lights...
i don't know if that speed of variometers are historical, but that are too slow...

fix that if possible..

sry for my bad english

I think catapult-launched Hurricanes were common for the North Sea convoys (although it was a one-way trip for them!). But you're right about the battleship launched planes, not too sure about US ships, but King George V battleships carried the as yet un-modeled Supermarine Walrus.

Well, we won't get the Walrus, as that is a Cliffs of Dover model and TD cannot use it, sadly.

THe Curtiss SOC served the USN throughout the war, even as it's replacement, the Kingfisher monoplane came on the scene.

The Curtiss will have to do then, I guess...

Thinking about the idea as a whole though, I've started thinking that it's a bit gimmicky. As much as I'd like the feature, the missions it'd be used for would be a bit repetative...

It would be nice to see another flyable seaplane, particularly if it could be catapult launched.

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/f.../image13-4.jpg

If we do go down the road of catapult-launched aircraft, maybe a new ship?

http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/5...1n3cb3d682.png
Japanese I-400 class submarine


Would involve modelling of the Aichi M6A Seiran to go with it, but could make for some interesting alternate history missions in Pacific theatre...

The I 400s were not the only IJN submarines that deployed seaplanes.

The Kugisho E14Y Glen was carried on the smaller seaplane launching subs and was the only Axis aircraft to bomb the continental United States, though the attack was ineffective.

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/att...y-glen-001.jpg

True, but the I-400 would be the one I'd like to see in the sim.

oops, forgot about that, but the French potez 540 would be nice

Also a new request :

Nakajima B3N Torpedo Bomber, I know its prototype, but what if its in WWII.

Here what it looks like :

http://http://archives.starbulletin..../news/artb.jpg

The I 400 never sailed with it's intended aircraft, or on it's intended mission (attack of Panama Canal).

The other classes of IJN subs would be more useful.

But I't take anything I can get.

I think with some of the '46 aircraft in the sim, we can allow a bit of artistic license on the Pacific front too....

Oh I agree with that.

But then we would need a Rita, Kikka and Shinden.

;)

and why not? :grin:

I'm in no position to make demands, but I feel the experimental weapons on the Pacific front have been rather neglected.



Had another thought too, maybe a USN variant of the P-80, with arrestor hook etc?

Please, please, please do something about the ability of gunners, both human and AI, to fire accurately (or at all) while the airplane is maneuvering violently.

I'm so sick of taking hits from inverted bombers pulling 5 "G's".

Does anybody really think this kind of thing as at all reasonable? And it's been like this for how long?

It's long past time for this incredible oversight to be addressed.


I.D.

This is one of the best things about Cliffs of Dover.

The AI gunners behave like humans under stress and not robots from the planet Argus 9.

You can attack BF 109s and actually have a chance in a stern attack, unlike in IL2 where they snipe you from great distance. In fact all encounters with aircraft that have flexible gunners stations are far more realistic in Cliffs than IL2, and result in far more historical outcomes. (110s get slaughtered, as in real life).

If some plane designer were to get the urge to model catapult-launched float planes, these would be my choices:

USN: Vought OS2U Kingfisher (most important operationally and numerically). Free of copyright, but not as good: Curtiss SOC Seagull, SOC3 Seamew or SC Seahawk.

RN: Swordfish Mk I (with floats) or Fairey Seafox, Supermarine Walrus (off-limits due to CloD) or Supermarine Sea Otter. Also, US lend-lease designs could substitute; the RN used the SO3C Seamew.

IJN: Mitsubishi F1M Pete, Aichi E13A Jake.

VVS: Beriev Be-4/KOR-2.

Regia Marina: IMAM Ro-43

France: Liore 130

The problem is that the sort of work that patrol/recce floatplanes did doesn't lend itself to in-game action. In the game, they're just targets and there are already plenty of planes which serve that role.

Or, just being able to place objects on top of other objects, so that you could, for example, put trucks or cargo on piers.

Sorry but you make it sound like it's this really easy thing to fix and that by throwing a switch it'll be done. How dare people not throw the switch. That isn't how it is.

AI programming is not the easiest thing... Cliffs of Dover had a totally different AI implementation from the ground up and that's why that system is so much better than the way the AI gunners in IL-2 behave. I know stuff has been worked on in the past and probably will be worked on in the future... but it isn't an easy thing.

Would it be that hard to just temporarily disable the gun for a human or switch off the AI gunner while the plane is pulling a certain "G" load?

When I say it's long past time this were fixed, what I mean is the game should never have been released this way. I know you Daidalos Team guys haven't been tinkering with the sim that long, relatively speaking. I don't blame you for the fact that Oleg never did anything about it, but I do think something like this, that would benefit everyone and greatly improve the realism of the sim, is very much worth the time it would take to do it, no matter what needed to be pushed to the back burner.


I.D.

When I first had the idea I was actually thinking of SeaHurricanes used on the Arctic convoys.

And I don't think the game is past a bit of patrol/recce work, I've had to fly SAR missions in the past which just involved me flying over the pacific ocean looking for a pilot in a raft....

Could use the floatplanes for ASW mission for a larger carrier group maybe?
Put some depth charges in game and take on those submerged subs!

I agree. ASW would be an interesting area which hasn't been covered (at least from the aerial sub-hunter's point of view) and would fit in nicely with some of the strike-fighter, navigation and electronic warfare mods which have been developed.

SAR operations would take more more work, such as animated swimming figures or figures in lifeboats or life rafts.

The USN Bomber campaign has one or two of these. Very long distance flying though, and all to try and spot the pilot in a life raft object from height!

Not to seem demanding or anything, but maybe this one day?
EDIT: I can't see the picture just at the moment (may be my version of Flash playing up) but the pic is a He-343 Strahlbomber.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/image...3 Strahlbomber

This website (http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircr...ircraft_id=859) has all the relevant speculation needed (I think).

At the moment during an offline mission you can escape to Controls then rejoin the Mission. When you rejoin would it be possible to select a different aircraft, switch planes mid-mission in other words.

I can remember having a facility like this in "1942 Pacific Air War".
You could start a Midway mission in a torpedo bomber, and when inevitably you were shot down or successfully attacked and evaded, you could then switch to another flight and do the attack run all again. No need to start the mission at the beginning again.

Could this finally be implemented in IL-2 series as well - dot is a dot regardless of the side or camouflage??

We REALLY NEED the D-520. It would fill a hole in the early French Aircraft.

dear developers! how about controlable Douglas DC-3, li-2, ju-52 and other cargo crafts? and it would be great to have cargo boxes, paratroopers and agents as loadouts on some planes. Many thnx!

And then we can have our Bf-109s fill the D-250 with holes! :D
Champion.

Add proper friction to runway and field surfaces so that a static aircraft will not weathercock into the wind.

and it would be great if some new map will appear. especially something from western and central europe. france, britain, greece, poland, belorussia , etc. there are lots of maps in Ultrapack. there are new and old in autumn and spring variants. and there are really good mods providing new textures to maps. (i think everyone agrees that the difference between slovakian and old prohorovka's textures are great) our squad hopes that something new will happen with maps in 4.11. thxs! (sorry if a similar request was mentioned above in this topik by someone else)

I think we're out of luck as far as maps of Britain are concerned, CoD has seen to that!
But some new maps would be nice, South of France maybe, definitely Greek maps!

Unlimited Ammo with Limited Ordinance
 

This would be a welcome mod for folks who like their unlimited ammo, but still want to be able to dogfight or crash land safely when needed.

For off-liners, this change to the game has been right up there on the request list for years, but it's been ignored like a short kid when it's time to pick basketball teams.

Now, there's a mod (a really small, relatively simple mod) which fixes this problem. Perhaps it will inspire DT to produce an official, better, version.

Mod here:

http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.ph...html#msg188117

I think "jettison stores" will do the trick.

I might be replying to the wrong person, but, to Team Daidalos, thanks for keeping the game alive.
Like many others,I would like to see an allied 4-engine bomber but realise that it must be a huge undertaking to do properly, so enough of that. I would like to see more ships for the FMB. A wider variety of merchants, the German cruisers and battlecruisers , 8-inch gunned county class british, or the special anti-aircraft cruisers that the Americans developed during the period. Not all at once, of course , but perhaps some of the could be added over time. Also, I would like to be able to place objects such as stores or AA on docks/piers and on the concrete gun placements which are already included in the "objects" file in FMB. At the moment everything sits on the ground level or water surface. One last thing, can someone explain to me how to use the Test Runways in FMB? When I build an airfield, there only seems to be one that works for take-off.

Bombers pulling high "G" loads
 

I am 57 years old and my father and uncles were soldiers. I was fortunate to be acquainted with so many of that generation, most of whom are now dead, and I miss them. Your post reminded me of a short conversation I had with one such, an ex RAF navigator who flew in Handley Page Halifaxes. He new I was interested in aircraft because I have a private pilot licence, fly microlights and used to be a jumper (parachutist). He mentioned that the early model Halifaxes often did not recover from a 90 degree bank. Incredulous, I said: "Surely they did'nt put a 4 -engined aircraft into a 90 Degree bank!!." (I thought he was joking.) He simply said:"They did with a fighter on their tail!" Your post made me laugh, that's all. Suggestion; Get high on their flank, dive and make high-speed firing passes. If it were too easy it would become boring.

New vehicles
 

Hi people.

I would like to know how difficult is to develop and add new vehicles to the game. I ask this because I feel the sim is missing important vehicles, and it would be good if Team Daidalos (or a specific developer, I don't know how they work) could add some of these in the next patches.

I miss vehicles mainly of three nations:

France - There aren't any kind of vehicle or tanks, but considering the lack of French stuff, even aircraft, those aren't a priority at all.

England - We could have early vehicles, like the Austin truck series, and some tanks, like Crusader, Churchill, etc., that were used in the North Africa, for example, before the British start receiving great amounts of American stuff through Lend-Lease.

Italy - It's a shame we don't have a single Italian vehicle, or even a tank, in the sim :mad:. They were used in some numbers at the USSR with the ARMIR, by the Whermacht in Italy after the armistice, but mainly in the Balkans and North Africa. CV-33, M13/40, the Semoventes, and the Fiat trucks would be my bet.

I think adding these vehicles would increse realism level, and make some strafings much funnier :rolleyes:. If someone is interested, I can add some links to these vehicles data and profiles. But, anyway, it's just a secondary request. If this process request too much resources and abusive hours of work, it's better just leave it aside and keep doing the most important work. That's why my first question.

I would like to thanks Team Daidalos for their good work, and for the promising 4.11 patch. Thanks in advance guys.

batistadk

Nope. I tried this, and unless I'm doing something wrong, it only works to jettison the cannon of the Hs-129Wa.

For other planes, if you select unlimited ammo from the options menu and choose any loadout option that includes rockets, bombs or gunpods, you're stuck with them for the entire mission.

You're right. from my experience "Jettison Stores" doesn't work with infinite ammo.
Also, I didn't know you could drop that cannon on the Hs-129! I'm now contemplating how this could be used in a hilarious/practical manner!

Any chance of the higher rated +10.5lbTempest please?

That'd be a dream :)

On the outside... a +13lbs with Rotol propeller would be a blast.

:-D

would be - we have all these obscure variants of the Bf-109 and FW-190 but not more widespread British fighters like the 13lb Tempest or dare I even say the Spitfire Mk XIV. Shame really.

Maybe they'd be just a bit too awesome.

+1 for the 13lb Tempest.

Go on TD, you love it!

To be fair the Bf109 spans the entire war and several theaters while the Tempest arrived on the scene in 1944 and received very few modifications through it's wartime career (not counting the design lineage and history with the Typhoon). Nonetheless we're missing some key British types that I'd really love to see implemented. I'm not talking about bombers either (which is a default position people seem to take when I say that).

Going back to the Tempest itself. The biggest impediment a few years ago was utter lack of detailed documentation on the +11lbs. Oleg was more than willing to entertain the notion of a +11lb Tempest but we couldn't find enough information. It's like the Air Ministry waved its hand and proclaimed that 11lbs was just fine without worrying too much about it... sounds rather un-British like to me. There are a couple of charts but they were lacking detail and had no climb information. Surely performance information exists somewhere.

Perhaps more has been dug up since the last time I looked?

EDIT: I forgot to mention... the Spitfire XIV only problem has been a lack of 3d modeling. Back in the early days of IL-2 there were several attempts at Spitfires and the two successful ones gave us the Mark V, IX and Vc/VIII and Seafire III. There were a couple of later model Spitfires that were never finished. I know there is one that was made by one third party somewhere... not sure how fully complete it is and to what specifications it was done to. There may be others floating around somewhere! I still have some pieces of information about the XIV gunsight.

I hear what you say about the Tempest - the lack of performance data is odd. Closterman's account of the 13lb makes it sound like a beast - a pity.

There is a good 3D model of the Spit XIV in UP3. They've done the XVI too.

All the new aircraft from 4.09 and 4.10 should be integrated into the DGen sometimes.(AI and flyable)
The Fokkers DXXI for example is a must be for the FAF campaign. :)

Do you know if:

A) It's actually finished (meaning all LODs, etc.)?
B) Done to specifications in terms of solidity of the mesh and poly count?
C) Contacted Team Daidalos?

If so that'd be fantastic. It does seem that sometimes some great MODs are out there but only partly finished (the bits important enough to get into the game) and not quite ready for an official release. I'd love for the extra mile to be covered... there are some truly great works out there.

Sadly, I don't know the answers to your questions. I just play the game from time to time. All I can say is that the XIV and XVI models look good enough on screen.

Not to look down on the mod makers because they do fantastic stuff but often enough things are done just to get it in (which is fine) but not truly finished which is sometimes problematic over the long haul. Especially on lower end systems. This is often a problem with mods for other games too. Still I'd love to see some great content migrate over to the official patches... the mod world is a great place to iron out the kinks and get things right.

Hello there team Daidalos !

First, i'd like to introduce why i'm going to ask you, what i'm going to do. I've been an spanish IL2 user for 6 years (i've started when i was 15 years old only :grin: ) and i've been all this time a member of an spanish squad called Escuadron 69 all this time. Nowadays, we mostly fly serious missions with or/and against other squads, so we mostly use SEOW mission generator and another one called Danger Zone that is under constant update.

For this both kind of mission generators, there is one kind of mission type for supply airfields and cities. To do that, we have to turn on smoke so eventlog register the point of supply, what is really innacuratte.

I'd like to ask you to add the option to register in eventlog the drop of supply cargo from planes, and the drop of paratroopers. If these both actions are registered in eventlog, it does open a new world of gameplay adding realistic supplies and paratroopers launching to take enemy airfields and cities. More than interesting, don't you think? ;).

Thanks for your hard working in IL2 series Daidalos !

supply and repair the airport. launch of paratroopers on the city to win them.MMMMMMM good idea!!!
are years that ask for refueling at the airport and a very important thing.

i ask also optional comand for NAVY and ARTIGLIERY.

I don't know whether there's any lines open between TD and the mod makers, but it strikes me that some kind of communication might be constructive for both sides.

Perhaps someone from TD could assess the Spitfire XIV models present in UP3 to see whether they're good enough - at the very least they should provide a base from which to work.

There were as many XIVs produced as there were FW190 Doras so the XIV deserves to be in the sim, in my opinion at least.

I do not know if was proposed, groups of naval force, ewxample: 1DD + 6Cargo Ships; 1CV + 1BB + 3DD; this moves at same form to vehicles columns.
Set the waipoints and the naval force move in the map as yuo want.

Some people work in both areas... which is great because some cool stuff gets implemented in the official releases later. I'd love to see more of that.

I would also like this. Very frustrating trying to get ships to hold formation in anything other than a straight line.

Would it be possible to incorporate the mod B 26 into 4.11 since some of us (like me) do not wish to run mods. Also, since there is so many requests for repaints of the cockpits, is it even a possibility to add the mod repaints of the cockpits. Also, I don't know if this has been mentioned but is it possible to use the ground AA 50 cal tracer in the aircraft tracer rather than the current red or is the red historically more correct than the white since I remember seeing gun camera footage of white 50 cals over Europe but red in the pacific.

Thanks for your dedication and time.

I think the mod cockpit repaints are way out of spec in regards to poly counts. This is why they do not get included in official TD patches.

.50 cal tracer is red/red-orange depending on the person looking at it.
This is true of ball, API, SLAP and I believe SLAP-T ammo.

I would like to see a Netherlands Fokker G.I in the 4.12 patch as flyable or unflyable because it would be a great for my new Empires and Allies camapign. Which this might be included in the 2nd version of my campaign.

I have this question as well since you have said that: the AAA 50 Cal fires white rounds not the red rounds so why the difference?

"Control surface & pilot's head positions" in track files?
 

"Control surface & pilot's head positions transferred over network"

This is really a good feature and thanks very much Team Daidalos.

are these information stored in the track files? i.e. when I play the track files, I can still see the control surface and pilot head moving for all aircrafts?

Currently I can see the control surface moving of my own plane, and that's all.

Besides it would be even better if we could see the speed, altitude, even whole instruments of every aircraft in the track. But I seriously doubt about this. :-P

Triggers
 

Are (AI) triggers planned for 4.11 release?

A small mission clock in the corner of the full mission builder for testing missions as they are built would be very welcome.
cheers,
Ibis.

dear Daidalos Team my request is:
a STANDARD FICTIONAL COCKPIT(simple interface) for AIRPLANE NOT FLYIABLE.
Actualy when you play online whit not flyable airplane the problem is fly whit only esternal view.

Historically, the incendiary material used for tracers could vary, giving them different colors - white, red/reddish-orange or green. Details here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tracer_ammunition

Ideas for QMB and FMB
 

Some ideas for the QMB and FMB:

1) Make it possible to give all planes in a flight the same skin without having to select each plane individually. That is, in addition to plane 1-4, have an "All planes in this flight" option.

2) Make it possible to "clone" flights in the QMB, without having to select the same aircraft, nationality, loadout, etc.

Dear Santa
 

We all have our favourites I guess. Since there are so many Spitfire and Bf109 variants I hope Team Daidalos will revisit the Hawker Hurricane. It carried yes, 500 lb bombs, rocket projectiles, external fuel and don't forget the 40mm Vickers guns. These were belt fed with 15 rounds. The Stuka and Sturmovik are modelled with similar weapons, so why not the good old RAF workhorse, the Hurricane. The addiition of the correctly shaped arrestor hook would also produce the Sea Hurricane which operated from HMS Argus and also I think ARK ROYAL in the Med. This coding is already in the game, and would only have to be 'linked' to the hurricane. Oh, and the Hurricane also carried assymetric stores, although not popular with pilots doing this. I have a photo in a book showing one in North Africa with a 40mm gun under the starboard wing and an external fuel tank under the port wing. Considering that it was also used in the Far East, I think this aircraft has been overlooked a bit in the game.:rolleyes:

Oi! Oi! Oi! Sea Hurricane!
 

This is Jumpy again still raving about the Hurricane. I Have just performed a successful circuit (take off and landing) from an aircraft carrier with the Hawker Hurricane in Il-2. How do I record this and put it on You-tube?
Maybe it was a fluke, but I would like to do it again and post it. I had about one fuselage length between me and the bow when the plane stopped.
And this time I did'nt bend the propeller. Please Daidalos Team, give me an arrestor hook before I kill myself, ha-ha! :-D:-D

You need to record the track in game then capture the playback using FRAPS. Check out the movie forum at Ubi.