Hurricane additions sound like a very good idea. Useful in North Africa scenarios, Western Europe scenarios (in the case of the Hurribomber) and Burma scenarios where the Mark IV with rockets and bombs were used.

Yep more Hurris/loadouts (assymetrics would be so cool - 40 mil Vickers and drop tank ahoy!) get my vote. Desert filters would be tasty as well.

Perhaps that I'm working on a Western Europe scenario already, I'm working it for Mission4Today community.

Old Requests by Tolwyn...
 

Here's a post on SimHQ that I wanted to share... Also follows an idea I had.

In conf.ini:

smoke_rtip_hexvalue "rrggbb" (FF0000 is red, 00FF00 is Green, etc.)
smoke_ltip_hexvalue "rrggbb" (same)
smoke_persistence "" (value is in seconds before dissipation)

what is the max number of airplane to carrier illustrious?
36 fulmar and swordfish in il-2 sturmovik 1946 not possible 36 airplane to carrier.
The carrier illustious not have the elevator in il-2 why?
carrier illustrious i start to plane 2 a not to plane 1.

External view problem
 

When I'm looking in an external view (next friendly, for example) to another plane, if this multi-engine plane (bomber, fighter) has one engine shut down (eventually, feathered), all its engines seem to be shut down, as if this plane is only gliding.
Can this be changed? Thank you for your work and dedication!

I would like to see blood on the cockpit windows (both external and cockpit view) of a plane for 4.12 patch of Il-2 Sturmovik 1946. It makes it easier to tell that a pilot is KIA and its realistic.

That would require changing the game rating, and that's impossible at this point.

But maybe there could be some small drops of blood, not so gory, but reallistic enough.

I rememeber there was a HighGore option in an earlier version of the game, that worked only with some planes, but I think it was removed in later versions.

If blood isn't possible because of age ratings, pilots and gunners should at least slump forward when hit. At the moment it is impossible to tell if a pilot or gunner is still alive, which is especially frustrating when attacking bombers.

As far as I recall, gore only worked on the Russian version of the game. The He-111 had pilots that slumped for a long time, but there was a bug associated with it in which bailed out crewmen would appear like dead ones, or something like that....

I agree that slumping could be a reasonable effect. I don't know how that factors into the rating though. Someone more knowledgeable could answer.

Slumped pilots/crews shouldn't be a problem for the rating. Rise of Flights has this feature too and it got an ESRB rating of 10+, as long as no blood is shown everything is OK.
Slumping crews would be a big improvement and I think DT should consider adding it. The game already supports this feature, therefore it wouldn't cause too much work.

mi piacerebbe una campagna corea no mods

assolutamente d'accordo molto bello missioni di rifornimento o paracadutisti!!!
idea per daidalos

Two requests that I have:

1. A flyable B-26B with the wing enhancements (extending of the wing by 3 feet so you wouldn't have to land extremely fast relative to other aircraft)

2. Workable catapults like the mod does (I don't know if the mod is good enough for it since I always run my IL-2 games clean) as well as improved ship functions such as below decks on carriers (that was initially planned to be part of pacific fighters but never came through)

3. More surface ships (If someone will teach me how, I'll possibly work on some so we don't just have 3 merchant ships and only a limited number of German and British warships but someone else will have to do the skinning)

4. Skins for ships rather than having several examples of the same kind of ship like the Japanese carriers.

The early B26s were the better aircraft in combat.

That's actually four.

Add it to the pile of requests for official aircraft. There's a modded B-26B frankenplane, though. It works reasonably well.

Catapults are available as a mod and would be sort of useful as an official add-on. I don't see much point to below decks hangars on aircraft carriers, since that's mostly the domain of the mechanics and other ground crew. IL2 is a flight simulator, not a ship and aircraft maintenance simulator. Working elevators which make aircraft on deck "vanish" or magically appear would be sort of cool, but it's a real low priority.

Again, available as a whole variety of mods. Also, according to rumors there will be more ships in official DT patches. While the list of U.S. ships is limited by the NG agreement, there are no restrictions on ships of other nationalities (i.e., British, Italian, Japanese, Soviet, German), and no restrictions on the sort of small craft which were the typical prey of strike fighters.

Ships fall between aircraft and land vehicles and ground objects in terms of modding difficulty. There are tutorials on how to get ships into the game on various modding websites, but nothing official.

I agree that the ability to skin ships would be convenient. Not only could you update camo patterns by year, and make hack skins so that ships of one country could stand in for those of another, but you could apply skins to differentiate ships of the same class (e.g., the various U.S. CVL).

Who knows what the coding would be like to get this feature into the game, though? Again, IL2 is a flight simulator, not a ship simulator. The only reason that ships exist is as landing places, mobile flak batteries and/or targets. Most players probably don't give a rat's hindquarters that the U.S. Mahan class destroyer isn't in the game or that the Fletcher class destroyers all have the same camo scheme and that it never varies from 1941 to 1945. So, potentially a lot of work for little practical improvement to the game.

Skinning ships would be a good thing.

The Russian Marat BB would make a good stand in for the Fuso or Ise.

WW2 whit need war ships i not call ww2 but i call stupid game.
yes il-2 is a air simulation but in the object list i loock russian american english and german list of navy where are the italian navy(ROMA)? where is FLOTTIGLIA X MASS?
this is not respect for ww2 naval story.
in il-2 exist air combat and aereonaval combat i agree if you adding a catapult sistem and elevator to carrier and ship.
MISSING the super important WAR SHIP BIG IN THE WORLD ----THE YAMATO--- this is not respect for naval history.

ALSO the TANKS WHERE IS THE ITALIAN AND FRANCE TANKS in the object list i noot see this.

Someone has to build them. It's not like there is a pool from where developers just pick stuff they like.
Fortunately for you, someone built something from your list.

guerra italo etiopica guerra di spagna, alcune idee non ho caapito la scaelta del IK3 nella patch 4.11 èstato poco usato quasi sconosciuto!!!!

It sounds to me as if you're complaining, so allow me to say something:

Adding a 3-D model is extremely tough work (believe me, I've tried and failed to build a MiG-15 once). In order to be successful, you need expertise, and strong interest in the project.

This time around, someone was more interested in modeling the Yugoslavian front and built the IK-3. Also, I wouldn't call it an unimportant plane: it represented a people's ingenuity and fight for freedom. It was even preferred by pilots over the Hurricane and Bf-109E. Only 6 aircraft were operational at the time of the German invasion, yet pilots managed to shoot down 15 German aircraft.

I think the idea of a Spanish Civil War map would be interesting, but that would require staggering amounts of new aircraft, tanks, vehicles, etc.

The Italo-Ethiopian war may have been important too, but it's not interesting to most people where the only aerial combatants would have been the Potez 25 and a mish-mash of other aircraft vs. the Ca.101, Ca.111, Ro.1, Ro.37, MF.4, CR.20, and CANT 25. Overall, it was fairly one-sided, and most of the fighting took place on the ground. If someone does decide to take on that project, you can expect it to take a few years to have everything ready.

I may have asked about this before... but I honestly can't remember. Has anyone who worked on the Me410 project for UP or HSFX or wherever it showed up ever thought about trying to submit that for official inclusion? I believe even a cockpit was underway at one point.

Not an absolutely critical aircraft but one with quite a bit of flexibility in roles and... interestingly enough the aircraft that replaced the Ju88 in the bomber role despite being somewhat unsuited to it.

This is a long standing issue, and if I recall correctly there will be several AI changes to 4.11.

Other long standing AI issues include the ability of AI to see through their own plane, clouds and the dark of night, making it impossible to "bounce" them, and making nightfighting missions somewhat unbalanced. Their evasion tactics consist of endless aileron and barrel rolls, and if your wingmen follow you in for landing they often crash into the ground, or yourself. Also their speed and manoeuvres are somewhat superhuman, given that no one could pull all the g's the AI pull and still be able to fight.

The G-limits where IMHO the best change to IL2 in a long time, and has made it much better, but AI programming is very difficult so I don't know what issues can be addressed or not.

There's also the problem that DT is prevented by their license with 1c from modeling the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, which seriously limits the Italian equipment available in the game. Likewise, DT is prevented from modeling the Battle of Britain era, which limits the French equipment available.

And, not to be disrespectful to either the French or the Italians, but France was pretty much out of the war by 1941 and Italy was pretty much out of the war by the end of 1942. Certainly, French and Italian units continued to fight on, but they mostly used machines made by other countries (e.g., Germany, U.S., U.K.) to do it.

That said, there are independent efforts afoot to create Italian and French ships, planes and armor. They're just proceeding relatively quietly.

As for the IJN Yamato, it was a colossal waste of money and resources. Sure it was the biggest battleship in the world, but by 1942 that just made it a great big target. It was obsolete the day it was launched. Still, it looks like the Yamato will be in some future patch, so IL2 players will get the thrill of reenacting operation Ten-Go from the point of view of the Americans, I just wish that we had a proper SB2C Helldiver to bomb it with.

ok ok.... There's also the problem that DT is prevented by their license with 1c from modeling the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, which seriously limits the Italian equipment available in the game. Likewise, DT is prevented from modeling the Battle of Britain era, which limits the French equipment available.

MEDITERRAIN no is proibited
BATTLE OF BRITTAIN no is proibited


remain the BALKANS war ITALY GREECE
or REMAIN the RUSSIAN mission over BATTLE STALINGRATO
or remain the FRANCE germany attak france and italy attak south france especiale wen FRANCE and ENGLAND attak the port of GENOVA.
remain spanisc civil war and
final remain the post ww2 era the corea or suez crisis.

Do you expect anyone to make planes overnight? It's not easy.

You keep complaining that the Italian forces are under-represented.

Just in case you haven't noticed, we've gotten an SM.79, Re.2000, Re.2002, CANT Z.1007, Fiat G.55s of many variations and the G.50 model was corrected. The new patch will feature new default skin variations that will permit the user to change the skin of the Ju-87, Ju-88 etc to a Mediterranean one simply by switching the nationality. A few other surprises may be in store as well.

Think about how many planes that is in just two patches. Still want to complain?

Xilon if you want all this stuff you keep asking for then feel free to make it yourself.

I thank all the teams Daidalos for SM.79, Re.2000, Re.2002, CANT Z.1007, Fiat G.55s of many variations and the G.50 model was corrected.
BUT the work not is copletely complete missing much much italian airplane and bombers IMAM ro 43/44 missing piaggio p108 and missing fiat br20 missing reggiane 2006 missing CANT 1018 missing S.M.81 and 82 missing the DORNIER 217 iTALIAN HAVE THIS FOR BOMBER missing cant 501 cant 506 ecc.

but war ship pola, trento bolzano class littorio giulio cesare, roma ,cavour,zara,fiume,ecc.ecc.

and italian tank and trqansport unit missing for colum.
the work for daidalos team is hard and longe but for me is sufficent add only 2 important bombers italian example and 1 italian seaplane. 1important war ship and 1 importat cruiser 1 important tank stop.

Ok, but think about how many planes are missing from all the other air forces too! In a world of finite resources, you can't have everything, unfortunately.

I'd love to have those planes too, but since neither of us can model, we have to take what we get, and be happy that we have anything at all!

This is a request thread. It's ok to make requests. But, remember not to turn your request for something into a complaint for lack of that something. Have patience, and maybe you'll be pleasantly surprised! ;)

There are many generic skins that change with the theater of war, which can't be selected manually.

It would be nice to have each generic skin as a bmp in your skin folder so you can choose for instance a western europe p47 generic skin in a pacific theater map. Or winter cammo in a summer map.

Each new plane is welcome.
But I think it would be possible to have more planes easily whitout heavy modifications, by using the existing in game aircrafts in order to dispose many of missing variants.

Some examples:

GE: Me109 E1 & E3, Me110 D, E & F, Fw190 A2,A3,F9
GB: Hurricane mk IIa & Sea Hurricanes, Spitfire/Seafire mk I & II, Blenheim's fighter variant & IV-V (with improved defensive armament), Beaufighter Mk I & VI.
US: P40's F-K-L-N, P38's E-F-G-H, F4U1 Birdcage & F4U4, SBD's 2-4-6, B-25 C (field mod) & J strafer variant, A20 strafer (field mod).
USSR: A20 (field mod with UB machine guns and UTK rear turret)

And the list is far from being closed.
Sorry for my bad English.

I have a small request. There are many times when I would like to fly as a pilot or bombardier, but not both, in single player. I find it tedious to have to fly the aircraft, aim the bombsight and worry about fighters at the same time.
I think it would be realistic to allow the aircraft to be flown by AI (autopilot), and still have manual control of the bombsight and bomb release. And on the flipside, it would be nice to have an AI fellow as your bombardier so I could concentrate on flying.
Any thoughts?

I'm part of the CVW-13, and we mostly fly VT-13, a torpedo squadron. We love flying formations and all that Zekes vs Wildcats, but on servers with more flak, the risk/reward of torpedo bombing is really off.

Apparently the problem is that the explosive charge is not enough. It is realistic, but since ships only have "above the waterline armour", then the effect of explosives on a less protected, below the waterline area is not modelled. Therefore, each torpedo does a minimal, irrealistic amount of damage.

I would suggest counter-balancing by either 1) having torpedos with more explosives, or 2) modelling underwater armour as well as above waterline armour. Either way, if ships entered evasive manoeuvres, it would be the best thing ever :)

Cheers!

I understand, what you are heading for, but wasn't the bombadier flying the plane during bomb run?

On some planes - yes, on some other - no. And on some even others, bombardier was controlling plane indirectly through bombsight, connected to an autopilot.

Actually, most of the bombsights in IL-2 game are very simplified operation-wise, or even worse - work completely different, then IRL.

On top of that, bombardier in the game is actually same, as the pilot. Bombardier and bombsight views in game are just another viewpoints for the pilot, from the game mechanics point of view. And that, I believe, is main and most difficult to overcome problem, which wouldn't allow making more realistic bombardier to pilot operation and cooperation in the game.

a) there is no difference between "underwater" and "above water" strength of the ship hulls in the game, in other words, there is no such thing as "above the waterline armour", or "below the waterline armour" in the game;
b) real life WWII war ships had more or less adequate underwater protection, especially designed to withstand underwater ordnance detonation;
c) and finally, just as my personal opinion: most torpedoes in the game are way too effective, comparing to the real life, actually. Even destroyers and transports, which didn't have the underwater protection could often survive single torpedo hit IRL. In the game - they don't.

Torpedo-bombing was certainly a thankless job. Single "kills" were rare, and it was really a group effort. (Another reason for dividing points online for a shared kill: everyone wants to be the last one to drop the torpedo)

On the other hand, even one torpedo hit would do damage - the ship might list, slow down, or sit dead in the water. Many ships in the game have an "all-or-nothing" DM: The ship is either healthy, or stopped and sinking... Even the big ships like BBs and carriers have their simplifications.

Unfortunately, Il-2 wasn't designed as a sim for torpedo bombers, so many concessions were made in ship modeling. In order to be up to par with folks' and my own desires, everything about the ships will have to be redone completely from scratch: ship AI, convoy behavior, subs that dive, and also more detailed DM so players can damage the engines, blow up magazines or fuel, knock out guns, or destroy the bridge, etc. That's a Herculean task.

Somewhat related: In Silent Hunter 3 (a sub game) one has to make sure his torpedoes are going to hit the hull of the ship perpendicularly. If the angle is too shallow between the path of the torpedo and the side of the hull, an impact-pistol torpedo can bounce off, doing no harm. Magnetic-pistol torpedoes explode under the hull, eliminating this restriction, but as far as I know, planes didn't carry those (you have to know the draught of the vessel you're going to hit).

Good idea. I've asked for it myself! :)

Adding new variants of new planes, and increasing the loadout options for existing planes would make a lot of mods redundant. It would also be relatively quick and easy to do, since little new 3d modeling, FM and DM work would be needed.

For planes equipped with the Norden bombsight, you can already do this. Training video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BY3i7BlCPo

Some late war RAF and Luftwaffe planes had similar sights, which allowed the bombardier to essentially fly the plane during the bomb run, but the British and German versions of the Norden sight aren't yet in the game.

What isn't in the game is an AI pilot who will respond to your commands as bombardier. This would be much the same thing as the Norden sight, but with slower feedback and more chance of error if the pilot overcorrects, undercorrects or doesn't react in time.

Thanks for the answers, SaQSoN and Romanator. Appreciated :)

I've noticed that whenever the torpedo doesn't hit near a 90 degree angle, sometimes it won't even take down a destroyer. I think it is related to angle but I'm not sure. can anyone clarify?

Another question is whether hitting the same area repeatedly does more damage than hitting separate areas. For vanilla and/or UP, this information would be nice to have :)

For instance the carrier damage models are great (I only fly UP, so I'm not sure if it's their modification) for carriers. They get craters making take-off hard/impossible, and they list, and all that.

And if anyone could point me to statistics about how many torpedoes it took to take out ships in general, I'd love to read about it. I'm trying to figure out the actual effectiveness of torpedo bombing!

Thanks again!

Thanks, I wasn't aware that you could use trim to steer on level stabilizer. I was thinking maybe an AI pilot who would take care of overflying the target himself, so that the bombardier didn't have to make so many corrections.

Hello, new to this forum and very late making this inquiry. I realize this will most likely not rank as a high priority item, but might you include a toggle option in the set up to have the option of close in 'twist and turn' combat, B&Z, or random (with 3-way toggle) while flying offline?

I've found that if I fight any AI aircraft whose performance is greater than the one I'm flying, it will not engage in classic dogfighting, but always climbs away to begin the B&Z. This prevents one from ever knowing how the planes compare in close while flying offline.

I hope you will consider including this option in the future at some point, as it would greatly increase the quality of the AI offline experience for those wishing to see how the aircraft compare in close in fighting while flying offline.

Thanks for all the great work, love Il-2 and would love to see this feature in the game.

Respectfully,

Pugo3

P-51A (as flown by the Air Commandos in Burma) and P-47N comes to my mind


By the way, am I the only one who thinks that the ground is way too rough? It's nearly impossible to taxi around outside runways without nosing over. It's unrealistic, since forward airfields were usually just open stretches of land and aircraft were able to operate from them.

suggerimenti
 

:)perche non campagne tipo guerra civile in Spagna o guerra Italo Etiopica, nel secondo caso sarebbero in particolare ground targets in quanto , per quel che so gli etiopi non avevano quasi aviazione

siluranti
 

NOn ho ancora capito il problema avengers perche no?
Perchè no i Kate o i Swordfifish?
Sarebbe ben averli a bordo delle portaerei americane britanniche o giapponesi

Ho visto poche missione con SM 79 come mai?c'è qualche problema tecnico o non piace aereo?

A squadra Daidalos è molto impegnativo trasformare aereo AI in Aereo Fliable?
Vedo nella lista AI molti aerei della WW II

@ aquila26:

modellare un cockpit in 3D Studio MAX è impagnitivo tanto quanto un modello esterno. Quindi ci vuole qualcuno che lo sappia fare bene, e ci vuole tempo. Il Team Daidalos non ha un numero sufficente di modellatori 3D per modellare i cockpit di tutti i velivoli AI presenti nel gioco.

Per quanto riguarda l'Avenger, il suo cockpit non può essere aggiunto al gioco per una questione legale tra 1C e Northrop-Grumman.

Im qualsiasi modo facciate e quualsiasi decisione prendiate ....
sempre e comunque un grande e sentito grazie

Any response? :)
I thought it was a great idea. ;)

Is it possible to tweak the damage model so that an a/c hit in the wing would drop wheel? Judging from debriefing reports, it was a common occurrence, esp. with Bf 109s and Fw 190s.

Requesting fixes for these official missions which have been broken since Forgotten Battles was released.

\Missions\Net\coop\1IBCo-op3-HungaryBridge.mis is missing [Target] which makes RED WON ! and BLUE WON ! impossible
\Missions\Net\coop\1IBCo-op6-SeelowHeights.mis is missing [Target] which makes RED WON ! and BLUE WON ! impossible
\Missions\Net\coop\1IBCo-op8-FirstDay.mis is missing [Target] which makes RED WON ! and BLUE WON ! impossible
\Missions\Net\coop\3IBCo-op1-Stalingrad.mis is misbalanced and BLUE WON ! is 99% impossible
\Missions\Net\coop\3IBCo-op3-MistelBerlin.mis is missing "army" and "[Target] time" which makes RED WON ! impossible
\Missions\Net\coop\3IBCo-op5-ConvoyChina.mis is using "Target Ground" for non-stationary units which makes RED WON ! and BLUE WON ! impossible

More details here.

Wheels dropping are an indicator of a hydraulic fluid leak and/or damage to the hydraulic system, which was sometimes used to control other systems, such as flaps.

It's possible to model this sort of damage in IL2; there are several mods which do so for certain planes. But, it would require a fair bit of time given the number of planes in the game. It would also require investigation into which planes had hydraulics, what parts of the plane they controlled and how quickly they would fail if the system sprung a leak. To complicate things further, some planes had multiple hydraulic systems which controlled different parts.

I have a request relating to runway lights. In the real world, many ARCAL and other light systems stay active for 15 minutes after being turned on.
In Il2 tried them out and had to request the lights to be turned on 3 times during approach in Bf110, once they went out right as I was over the threshold. I doubt in the real world, that the ground crews would have killed the lights while the aircraft was on approach.
Can we make the duration of runway lights at least 5-10 minutes so that a full approach from a beacon can be made?


Another request, the landing light is non functional as it doesn't light up the ground, can this be fixed, maybe in the same way that flares and explosions cast light?

i request exential object in the game actualy exist only 3 flags GERMANY, JAPAN,AMERICAN..... where are the all flags of the rest of nations?
in mission builder if i want constructed italian base after i put only GERMAN flags where are the all flags?

and wing meausure wind flag in the airport.

As someone here has already said, gear dropping is a result of landing gear leg upper lock damage (which was holding the leg in retracted position). It has nothing to do with hydraulic system damage (or damage to any other system, used to operate the gear).

Actually there are only two nation flags. There is a Japanese Flag, an alternate Japanese Flag and the American flag. No Germany or otherwise without mods. Having some additional flags would be nice although the German flag would have to be modified or obscured to meet with censorship laws in various countries including Germany.

Flags would be nice props to have.

axis powers raprestation of flags.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._june_1943.png

loock this flags
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_powers
and after loock allied flags
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allies_of_World_War_II

if you want to GERMANY flags eliminate or removed the swastika(if it is illegal), while the rest of the flag remains normal.

While looking at a possibility to enjoy a good "Flying Tigers" campaign, I realized that there are no Ki-30 "Ann" nor Ki-48 "Lily" Japanese light bombers. Just a hint for future patches :)
By the way, both types were extensively used in kamikaze attacks in 1945.

I wholeheartedly support anything to advance the representation of the air war over China.

From 1937 on it was an amazing theatre of operations.

During wartime, especially when there were enemy planes about, landing lights were only turned on when the plane was on final approach and were killed as soon as the plane touched down. So, technically the landing light behavior in IL2 is realistic, if irritating.


Landing lights were often hooded to the sides, so that they were only visible when the plane was on the correct approach. This was partially a navigation aide and partially another method of keeping the lights from being visible to every plane in the air. So, again, arguable realistic.

Damage to the gear lock could also explain a gear dropping, as could excessive G-loads or severed cables, but I still hold that the main reason that gears, flaps and other plane parts dropped when damaged was due to hydraulic failure. Obviously, though, it depends on the plane and in the heat of combat the exact cause was often impossible to figure out.

In some cases, however, damage to the hydraulic system is so obvious it has to be the cause for gear drop.

Example: Starting at 0:32 in this video, you can see a fire on the oleo struts of the Hurricane as the hydraulic fluid burns away. Fire is localized and burns out quickly once the fluid is gone. (Actual damage to the hydraulic lines/pump was probably earlier, since smoke from the area becomes visible at around 0:30.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aqJwHdMDK0

More examples of shot-up planes dropping landing gear in a fashion consistent with hydraulic failure (and video of the mod I mentioned):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvlG9fY9g2Q

thanks Gitano

This is true for reducing side visibility from enemy aircraft during wartime, however the main function of a landing light is to light up the surface of runway on the final stages of approach and touchdown for depth perception. Having just recently flown IRL at night I can attest to the importance of a properly functioning landing light :)

All planes with retractable gear had 2 gear locks (one for each gear position) for each gear leg. And ONLY this locks were holding the gear in terminal positions, not hydraulic, or air pressure, or mechanical force from gear actuator (depending on how the gear was operated). The pressure was sent in the system ONLY when the gear was either retracted, or extended.
So, I repeat again: gear drop can be caused ONLY by lock damage.
However, it is quite possible, that hydraulic, or pneumatic lines, or whatever lines were used to operate gear could be damaged as well at hte same instance, as the locks, since they were usually located near the locks. Yet again, their damage is not related to the effect of gear drop.

PS Hydraulic fluid doesn't burn. The fire was probably from small fuel tanks, located on the front edge of Hurri wing. There is nothing in the video, that may hint, what caused the gear to extend.

PPS And after reading Hurri operating manual, I tend to believe, that in this particular case the pilot under attack occasionally engaged emergency gear down pedal, which releases the upper gear lock and lets gear to drop down under their own weight.

+1 for this, and if a hydraulic line was hit, but the up-lock was not, the gear could often be extended to engage the down-lock position via the aforementioned emergency system, where the pilot could extend the gear by using gravity, a hand crank or other "blow down" system. Of course if the gear falls out but doesn't lock down, you'll have a bad situation. It would be neat to see some of this in Il2, but I think there would be many other systems that would need to be modeled.

Additionally a lucky hit could inflict the electric/hydraulic system in a way, that the gear lowers normally but unintended, just as if the pilot would have pushed the lever.

"So always do aim with your 20mm for that little switcher on the left panel!" ;-)

I always aim for the altimeter

Soo... did we inspire DT's interest in the issue? ;)

I'm very sorry but hydraulic fluid does burn, if sprayed under high pressure even very violently, both mineral and synthetic types. Sometimes I use old fluid in my garden torches.

I see your point about needing the lights to illuminate the runway. It is unrealistic that they don't.

My point was that wartime airfields were kept as dark as possible, not lit up like Christmas trees the way that modern civil airports are. You're absolutely right that the lack of landing lights is a safety issue, however. The need to keep airfields dark to prevent attacks probably contributed to the higher rate of landing accidents among nightfighters.

I think you're generally right, but I also think that there are causes other than damage which might make the lock fail, or fail to engage in the first place. A combination of wear, vibration and/or poor maintenance could set up a situation where lock barely holds the gear in place, so that it drops when the hydraulics are hit.

The paradox, though, is that there is gun camera footage which shows both landing gears dropping in a pattern consistent with loss of hydraulic fluid. Otherwise, it would have to be a very lucky hit indeed to take out all the locks on both gears at once!

Others have pointed out that cockpit or electrical system damage could cause gears to come down. Also, as you point out it's possible that pilot error (hitting the wrong button) could also cause the gears to deploy.

In the case of the Hurricane, I think that you might be right, assuming the Hurricane was relatively low on fuel so that the other fuel cells didn't catch fire.

But, hydraulic fluid can burn if you use the right liquid! For example, during the Cold War some Soviet planes used alcohol as hydraulic fluid (doesn't freeze as easily at high altitudes). As a result, they had a problem with readiness as ground crews were prone to siphon off hydraulic fluid for illicit, unintended, purposes.

Anyhow, I think we're both in agreement that, regardless of origins, it would be nice if landing gear drop and hydraulic/pneumatic system failures were modeled in the game.

Dropped undercarriage
 

Anyhow, I think we're both in agreement that, regardless of origins, it would be nice if landing gear drop and hydraulic/pneumatic system failures were modeled in the game.[/QUOTE]

I've enjoyed this discussion, although we all need a beer to arrive at the correct answer! As for droopy underage or flaps, I will be happy when patch 4.11 arrives. Now my request to DT: DON'T LISTEN TO THEM - LISTEN TO ME!:-P:-P

Were the MiG-3 and Yak-3 from Aviaskins submitted to DT for inclusion, where they acceptable? just wondering.

There's also a PZl.23, PZL.37, Ju-88 C-6, etc that seem nice. I wonder if they meet the standards as well.

The cockpits in the PZL.23 and PZL.37 look a little bit unfinished compared to the required standard, but the external models look decent.

That is, assuming that they're not Frankenplanes, which are inherently unacceptable. (This isn't snobbery, either. There are lots of good reasons why Frankenplanes aren't as good as a plane made from scratch, although the problems with them aren't immediately obvious.)

In any case, however, TD seems to have taken the position that it's up to the mod maker to contact TD about getting their creation into the game, and TD doesn't go out of its way to ask modders for content.

I don't think the models are franken-planes, but I haven't seen the cockpits. I do hope they decide to contact DT if that's the case!

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/4...2011112734.jpg

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6938/nf3c.jpg

http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/6605/los22l.jpg

Hi:
I made up a list of things i would like to see it improved. It's mainly about the ships but theres also a little bit about our heavies:
- About the AI ships:
· It seems to me that they turn around their center, when it would be better if they turn around their stern.
· For other ship to set target on an allied ship (meaning same color) so they keep in formation with the first one, so we can setup a formation really easy.
· Whenever they are under aerial attack beggins zig zag maneuvers.
· Enhace their damage models so the gun, the rudder are disable, the power keg or fuel tanks can be blow.

- About the heavies:
· To review the load options and FM from B17, i had found that it has many other options than the ones from il2 and also that with them change the ceiling service. This is the page from where i read the pilots notes and other staff.

He-219A-2: By Checkyersix and Ranwers. Originally a frankenplane, subsequently it got its own 3d model. Cockpit is original and looks very good, but no bordfunker/radar operator station.

Mosquito MkII Nightfighter: By SAS~GJE52. model is IL2 stock with slight 3d improvements to wheels and spinners, plus the obvious radar antennas and a new default skin. Cockpit is IL2 stock with no radar operator station.

PZL P.37B Los: By Ranwers. Original 3d model, cockpit and gunners stations. Interior looks very good, except for the top gunner position which has a few minor 3d issues when you look into the fuselage interior.

===

Other mods that look pretty good:

A-20 Boston MkIII Strafer: Unkown modder. Minor external reworking of stock IL2 model. Stock cockpit.

A-20G: Aviator Mod Team. Tweak of stock IL2 3d model, new engines and loadouts.

Ar-234B Nachtjaeger: Unkown modder. Minor external reworking of stock IL2 model. Stock cockpit.

Ar-234C-2: Unkown modder. Minor external reworking of stock IL2 model. Stock cockpit.

B-29 "Silverplate": Oceanic Wing. Reworking of stock IL2 3d model. Exterior model and atomic ordinance looks good. Cockpit is a bit crude, gunner stations are franken.

Beaufighter MkIC: Unkown modder. Rework of stock IL2 Beaufighter MkIB model. Gunners position interior is franken.

Beaufighter MkX: Unkown modder. Ditto.

Bell 47 Iroqouis Helicopter: SAS_Sani. New 3d model, interior and cockpit. Looks good, flies well. Might be off-limits as an official plane due to contract with 1C.

Bf109B-D series: Japancat, SAS_Cirx: Reworking of stock IL2 Bf-109E-4 3d model. Stock cockpit. External model looks good.

Blenhein MkIF & MkIVF: Unknown. Reworking of stock IL2 Blenheim 3d model. Cockpit and gunner stations look to be franken and are fairly crude.

D4Y3 JUDY: ten010. Beautiful 3d model.

Fi-156: Fully modeled cockpit and crew station. Crew station looks a bit primitive and has some 3d issues, but the instrument panel and pilot station looks good.

FW-189: Fully modeled interior. Instrument panel looks good, the rest of the cockpit and interior looks a bit amateurish, rear gunner station not modeled. Still, it might save some work to use the existing modded interior as a starting point.

Hurricane MkI Rotol prop: Rework of stock Hurricane MkI 3d model. Stock cockpit.

Hurricane MkIII & IV: Ditto. In SAS "Dark Blue World" mod pack, sand filters only appear on desert maps, saving plane slots.

J7W1: Kodama. Original 3d model and cockpit. Looks good inside and out.

Ju-87C: Aviator Mod Team. Tweaks to stock IL2 Ju-87 model. Stock cockpit and gunner station.

Ju-52: Unknown modder (Ranwers?). New cockpit. Instrument panel looks good, but interior has some minor texture problems.

Ki-44. Japancat &/or Tainan Kosho mod team. Original 3d model and cockpit. Very nice!

Ki-46-III-Kai: Unknown modder. Cockpit, looks good but might be franken.

Ki-98: Kodama. Good exterior model.

L-5 Sentinel: Unknown modder. Original 3d model and interior. Only pilot station modeled, but looks good.

Me-210 (including Zestorer): Original 3d model, cockpit and interior. Gunner station not modeled and not player-operable.

Me-262B-1a Nachtjaeger: Reworking of stock IL2 mesh. Stock cockpit and pilot station, fully-modeled bordfunker/radar operator station station, but radar screen doesn't work.

Me-410 series (including Nachtjaeger model): Original 3d model, cockpit and interior. Gunner station not modeled, player operable only in gunsight mode.

Miles Magister: Oceanic Wing Mod team. New 3d model and cockpit. Only front seat cockpit modeled.

Mosquito FB MkXXVIII Tse-Tse: Unknown modder. Reworking of stock IL2 3d mesh. Stock cockpit.

Mustang MkI: Aviator Mod Team. Rework of stock P-51B 3d model. Stock cockpit.

MXY-11 Ohka: Oceanic Wing Mod Team: Reworking of stock IL2 3d model.

P-26 Peashooter: Deutschmark. Original 3d model. Cockpit franken.

P-38E & F series: Gibbage. Reworking of stock IL2 3d model. Stock cockpit.

P-38H Droop Snoot: Unknown Modder. Reworking of stock IL2 3d model. Stock cockpit. Franken bombardier station.

P-47N: 101tfs. Reworking of stock IL2 3d model. Stock cockpit. External model looks good.

P-51A: Aviator Mod Team. Rework of stock P-51B 3d model. Stock cockpit. A-36 Apache was promised but hasn't seen the light of day yet.

PZL P.24B: Ranwers: Original 3d model, cockpit and interior. Interior might need a tiny bit of cosmetic work, otherwise excellent.

PZL P.42: Ranwers. Ditto.

Sikorsky UH-19D/HRS3 Helicopter: SAS_Sani. Original 3d model & cockpit. Looks good, flies well.

Spitfire Griffon Engine Series (e.g., MkXIV): Unknown modders. LOTS of variants of this one. Tweak of stock IL2 3d mesh. Stock cockpits.

Spitfire PR.XIX: Tweak of stock IL2 3d mesh. Stock cockpit.

Su-26: Aviaskins? Original 3d model and cockpit. Exterior looks good, cockpit is fairly crude.

R.XIIID: Ranwers. Original 3d model, cockpit and interior. Interior might need a tiny bit of cosmetic work, otherwise excellent.

RWD-8: Ranwers. Original 3d model and cockpit. Observer/student pilot/passenger station not modeled. Looks good otherwise.

RWD-10: Ranwers. Original 3d model and cockpit. Excellent.

U-2 variants (night bomber, trainer, ShVAK rear gun): Unknown modder. Reworking of stock IL2 3d model, changing or eliminating rear gun and altering position of rear cockpit figure. Fully modeled interior, both cockpits/gunner stations. Looks good.

UTI-4: Uknown modder (Aviaskins?). Reworking of stock IL2 I-16 mesh. Rear cockpit is just duplicated version of front cockpit.

Yak-7UTI: Reworking of stock IL2 Yak-7 model. Reworked cockpit. Rear cockpit is just duplicated version of the front cockpit.

==

This list ignores the ridiculous number of A6M, Bf-109, FW-190, I-53, I-16, Ki-61, Ki-84, Lagg-3, La-5, La-7, N1K, P-38, P-39, P-40, Spitfire, Hurricane and Yak series mods which are basically nothing more than loadout and FM tweaks.

It also ignores announced projects which haven't yet been made public, such as the B7A, J4M, Ki-83 (http://damawo.blog99.fc2.com/), the Whirlwind, Boomerang, Vampire, Fury/Nimrod (http://www.oceanicwing.com/il2_projects.html) and the Foche-Angelis FA-223 (another one of Sani's projects, but it appears that the Youtube video of its flight test has vanished),

And that's JUST aircraft.

Honestly, I wish that TD team members wouldn't be so coy about asking for content. If you're a TD member and you see a mod that looks like it's up to TD standards, why don't you ASK the creator if you can incorporate it into a future patch. Better yet, load up UP or DBW, choose the content you like and shamelessly steal it.

At this point, mod packs such as UP, HSFX5 and SAS UP/DBW just beat stock IL2 hollow in terms of content and creativity, if not overall overall quality. Yes, there are some really ugly "frankenplane" cockpits and interiors to make every plane in the game flyable, some not so great original models (He-51, He-45), and some "frankenplanes" which technically not up to scratch, even if they look good (Battle, Halifax, Tiger Moth, Typhoon), but the modded game allows you to fly just about every theater of war from 1936-1956, the AI is challenging and the effects look great.

This is exactly, what DT does. This also explains, why most of the mods do not draw DT's attention.

PS To my knowledge, PZL P.37B Los, R.XIIID, RWD-8, RWD-10 models were built by a guy with a nick name Loku, not Ranwers, who seem to be unfamiliar with 3D programs and does creepy frankenplanes only.

I'm glad to hear this. Pity that so many of the mods on my list don't measure up for whatever reason. I can see them not being ready to go into the game immediately, but it seems like it would be a huge time savings to work with what's already there.

My apologies, my list of authors wasn't complete. Mod packs don't always list all the authors unless you download the mod and read the readme file, which would have taken too much bandwidth and too much time.

Ranwers might not be a 3d guy, but it's obvious that he's a reasonably skilled java programmer with a lot of very clever ideas. I can understand why you don't like what he does, but you still have to grudgingly admire his dedication and creativity. If he could be "converted" and his talents directed in the right direction, it would be a huge benefit for everyone.

I also apologize for a bit of a rant in my previous post. I absolutely love what TD is going for the game. Your skill and attention to detail is second to none and I look forward to every new patch. The problem is that you guys are on the extreme side of the "fast vs. good" equation. In the time it takes TD to lovingly craft a new patch and polish it to perfection, dozens of modders have produced hundreds of new mods which are "good enough" for most people. And, to quote one of the dictator on the winning side of WW2, "Sometimes quantity has a quality all its own."

By the way, no one ever considered making Bf 109T, Hs 126 or Bristol Beaufort? They would fit in nicely with some offline campaigns (Beaufort was used extensively in the ETO, MTO and PTO as well).

F4F Propeller Pitch Control fix
 

One of my pet bugs is the propeller pitch control in the F4F (all models, lower left corner of the front cockpit). Note that at high speed (fine pitch), it's all the way back, while at low RPM (coarse pitch), it's further in. To have it all the way in is to effectively feather the prop.

This is backwards, as it should be all the way in for fine pitch (high speed), and all the way out for feathering.

Please note pitch control in the Pilots Operating Manual:

http://books.google.com/books?id=lMZ...page&q&f=false

I'll throw in one more gotcha about the F4F. Note the shape of the handle in the sim that controls prop pitch. What's the shape the handle in the handbook? And what control IS shaped like the one in the sim? Hmmmmm... Great sim, always will be. Could've been greater with a bit more attention to the nits to pick.

One more note. Why is this such a big deal for me? What caused me to notice it in the first place? Why the clock, of course. How the heck are you supposed to dead recon with your view of the silly clock blocked by a control that's doing what it's supposed to do, but isn't where it's supposed to be while doing it??? Grumble... (Yes, this was pre-track IR things, but it still makes a big difference to those of us who minimize up/down, front/back sim-head movement.)

Thanks for consideration of this matter. And, of course, it would be great to see it fixed in 4.11! :mrgreen:

DT are a group of volunteers but they have rules or guidelines set by Oleg and 1C.

I personally think that high quality trumps high quantity. Of course, everyone is different, but that's why mods are optional. If something is going to be stock, it has to reach the baseline level of quality. If DT took nearly every plane that other modders built, there would almost be no point to have them working at all - just get the mods instead of patches...

I'm not a mod guy myself, but I'm not against mods. I think I'll wait once DT releases their final patch (hopefully not anytime soon) to pile on the plethora of mod aircraft :) I'm having too much fun just learning the ins-and-outs of their latest creations such as the Fokker, SM.79, and HS-129.

Loku´s planes are realy good, and if have any oportunit, this deserve to include in game:


R-XIII

http://img202.imageshack.us/img202/743/rxiiipack.jpg

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/336/rxiiihistoskin.jpg

PZL23B&PZL42

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/7946/pzl23b42.jpg

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/2...asstukas39.jpg

P-11F I.A.R - Romanian IAR P-11f license build version powered by French license build Gnome-Rhome engine with skis for Winter conditions

http://www.whatwalrus.com/sas2/Loku/iarp11fskis.jpg

RWD-10

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/9...wudewlocie.jpg

http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/6148/rwdwojskowy.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfIFGGwAN6w

And others plane for Stoupa to:

Avia BK534:

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...34defaulty.jpg

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...k534Lyze-1.jpg

Avia B-135

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

http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...itAviaB135.jpg

And many others planes:

Ki-44
D4Y2
J7W1
Ki 98
J4M

aircraft production by Loku looks veeeeeery good !!!
but they are unlikely will be included into the patch
(((

How many of the planes listed/shown have complete LOD models and not just the first one? Which match the polycount and texture size limits as set by 1C? Which ones do not violate some copyright law? Which authors want to have their creation in an official patch in the first place? And what's not subject to the NG issue?

Maybe if you filtered your list a little after these criteria it would help TD to find the good and useful things. Pointing out 3 good ones is always better than listing 30 possible ones. :)

All Loku´s planes listed are complete, Avia BK534 by Stoupa (autor of B-534 model) are done and will be great in game, and B-135 is in work.
K-44 first model is done, the others versions in work by Tainan
D4Y2 in work by Kodama (nice model need the cockpit)
J7W1 done whit cockpit and it´s a realy nice model
Ki 98 need cockpit or maybe can be used whit AI
J4M need cockpit or maybe can be used whit AI

And are others models that will be good for the game.
Ju-88C variants
Fw190 D-11 & D-13 by old AAA
Fw190 D-14 & D-15 by Gerd
Spitfire Mk XII and XIV by AAA
SeaHurricanes by Muas
SeaGladiators
Seafires MkI/II/XV
HurricaneMkIIa/IId/IV ant trop models
Remodeled external model for BF-109´s
(and maybe can be added BF-109 G-4, G-5, G-5AS, G-6TAil, G-14AS, K-6 and K-14, including trop versions ;))
P-38E/F/G/H
P-47N-15
Remodeled MIG-3 for aviaskins (and maybe can be added MIG-1 ;))
Remodeled YAK´s for aviaskins
I-15 M22 & M25 by Aviaskins
I-16 type 27/29 by Aviaskins

Nightfighters:
Bf 110 G-4NJ (functional radar)

Cockpits:
Cockpit DO-217K
Remodeled cockpit for BF-109´s
Remodeled cockpit for P-47´s
Retextured Cockpit for La´s, Lagg´s, Yak´s, Mig´s and IL-2´s
Retextured Cockpit for P-11 (this terrible cockpit, when i fly it i´m feling in old days of CFS I)

DT are make a wonderfull work in IL-2, and the last updates are amazing, P-8 cockpit and others planes, but i think there are others nice works done for other people in out side, and maybe this work can be added in game.

Tank´s for your graet work.

Is Loku also the author of the R-XIII for MSFS?

http://www.simhangar.com/main1/index...lublin&lang=en

http://www.simhangar.com/main1/image...-12-41-927.jpg

Good questions. Assuming that you weren't asking them as rhetorical questions, here are my answers.

Proper modeling: I had assumed that full LoD, damage and shadow models were required for any plane to be imported into the game. Obviously I was wrong. Is there an easy way to figure this out without having to hack into the game?

Polygon and texture count: For fighters and other small single-engined aircraft, it's very hard to exceed the polygon count. Poly count could be a problem for the P.37 and P.23/P.42. Texture size might be a problem for any of them. Is there an easy way to figure this out without having to hack into the game?

Copyright: Again, good question, but AFAIK, the mods I mentioned are original models or are reworkings of models which have been released into the public domain. There might be a few planes on the list which have been adapted from other games, though, so that could be problematic.

Northrop-Grumman: None of the planes on my list are made by NG or any other company it's bought up over the years (Ryan). And, most of the U.S. planes I mentioned are just variants of planes that are already flyable in the game. Everything else was made by companies that went out of business, were nationalized, or which were on the losing side (so copyrights and whatnot were taken by the victors as "spoils of war").

Why haven't modders contacted TD?: Language barriers? Ignorance? Dislike of TD and its policies? (The last one is stupid in my opinion. There's too damned much politics in the IL2 modding world.)

I do know that modders have big active web sites, which have extensive resources to help people create content for the game. That means that talented newcomers tend to gravitate towards mod sites.

Meanwhile, TD barely makes its email address known and the closest thing there is to an "official" guide to making content for the game is the "IL2 Bible" which hasn't been updated in 8 years.

As for good mods which should be in the game, look at Checkyersix's command and control mod, Certificate's AI mod and Frog's formation mod.

DT are already working on the AI. Some members have mentioned it a few times although it's not in this update thread.

The modeler would fairly quickly be able to answer some of these questions.

I'm in total agreement with you... there are some great mod packages out there with some really well deserved updates to all sorts of aircraft. Some of it looks top quality to me... have they produced a finished product or made one that works just "good enough" I don't know. Two or three guys I even asked them if they intended to bring their aircraft to TD to see about implementation... total silence.

There are several guys who have worked with TD and received fantastic support in my mind. The fruits of that labour are already showing in some of the current patches with more to come.

There is. Since the kind of modding is, that you have everything in an open structure, you will just to download the mods, open the packages and see, how many mesh files there are or how big the texture are.

The "IL2 Bible" is indeed still actual, if it comes to modeling for 1CMaddox standard (which is also DTs standard). On base of it you can make all the nice things, that have been released during 1CMaddox development times (excluding maybe the very first models). There is no need to update it.
And as IceFire said... the newest 3rd party models, that will be soon available via 4.11 and ongoing patches, show very well, that the (all so blamed) old standards are way enough to produce wonderfull content.
Higher standards or technologies are just good to help poorly skilled modeling freshmen.

many ModMakers are asking, why DT keep working under that old 1C MG standarts?
they told that performance of current grafik cards, with 1 gigabyte and higher, will enough for work with models, which exceeded poly count of older standarts, or they can handle with texture bigger then 256 or 512... or complects textures which higher than 8 mb...

EJGr.Ost_Caspar, you know that we are working in rights direction... and trying to fit into the requirements
and we like, that our work looks not bad for today and In this case we fit into the limits


just curious...

(p.s. sorry for my bad english)

Certainly not rhetorical and thanks for your answers. But I can't answer your question, so best listen to Caspar. :)

I hate politics, too. I want one version of the game that has the very best of all worlds, a common effort by the community. I hate to see things wasted, one way or the other, by having folks go in different directions. And I'm afraid that much of it is down to ego, nothing else. Some folks just can't take a seat in the second row - idiotic but human.

I, for one, am grateful that the old limits are still enforced. I can't afford to buy a new computer every 3 years.

I've been playing IL-2 on AMD Sempron 1800, 1.5 GB RAM, ATI X550 with 128 MB, resolution 1280x1024. It fully satisfies all my needs except when there are many objects in IL-2, but I keep hearing that is a problem even on today's high end computers.

What's your frame rate if you have a mission with a couple of hundred planes and several hundred ground objects?

Bottleneck isn't necessarily the graphics card, but I still get noticeable frame rate losses when flying over an air field with a hundred static planes on it, or over a city, and most recently I noticed even a cloud related frame rate drop.

Now if all the objects have twice the poly count, I'd get the same drop with half the objects, and even now the object count is too low for my taste.

understand)

REQUEST
http://i1110.photobucket.com/albums/...oloco1/FMB.jpg