Discussion in 'Simulation' started by D3lthar, Feb 1, 2013.
Now give me the B-25G/H or solid nose J (12 or 14 forward firing .50's!) and skip-bombing.
Flying Beavers ..... the mind boggles
next we'll have flying Brazillians......or flying al-la-natural
Just give me a Me-410 whose bloomin wings just don't fall off due to the power of a 7.62mm MG round fired by some OP Russian bi-plane!!!
Simon Cowell will be flying with the Beavers, he is the king of the beavers!
I just want 20mm cannon that are as accurate and powerful as the LMG rounds that tail gunners fire.
One of the War Thunder Comps .... some winners here
"Fly, Catalina, fly!" winners - News (discussion) - War Thunder - Official Forum
i studied the arts at university (not math), but as we seem to be running 188.8.131.52 presently, i don't see 1.29 unless we see all variations of 1.28 come and go rapidly. looking forward to more iconic aircraft, though (Flying Pencil).
the patch note:
* Changed FM La-5, La-7, Wirraway, Tempest, TBF-1c, SM.79, Me.410, Ki-49, Ju-87B, Ju-87D, Ju-87G, F1M2, D3A1, Boomerang, Beufighter , Me.262, Me.163
looks to be ambiguous, but any changes to the Beaufighter almost certainly can't be a good sign for pilots who favour it.
would rather see some logs on FM improvements (or at least accurate representations) for some of the rumoured place-holders (e.g. the Lightning)...
My take on the whole thing...
The game's Beta so we all accept not everything is good/right/in that happy space.
If I can get kills in a fighter that is using a bomber FM well I'm going to go off when it gets it's proper fighter FM (I have 2 P-38's).
As long as all the aircraft get a FM based 'gaming accuracy wise' on it's historical performance (and doesn't go down the path of WoT/WoWpl and make the models look different but become 'grey' (as they all perform somewhat similarly)) then I'll be happy.
It feels that Russian developers are trying to make up for the fact that historically their planes have been 'mostly' inferior with a few notible execptions....
In the summer of 1943, a brand-new La-5 made a forced landing on a German airfield providing the Luftwaffe with an opportunity to test-fly the newest Soviet fighter. Test pilot Hans-Werner Lerche wrote a detailed report of his experience. He particularly noted that the La-5FN excelled at altitudes below 3,000 m (9,843 ft) but suffered from short range and flight time of only 40 minutes at cruise engine power. All of the engine controls (throttle, mixture, propeller pitch, radiator and cowl flaps, and supercharger gearbox) had separate levers which served to distract the pilot during combat to make constant adjustments or risk suboptimal performance. For example, rapid acceleration required moving no less than six levers. In contrast, contemporary German aircraft, especially the BMW 801 radial-engined variants of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190 front line fighter, had largely automatic engine controls with the pilot operating a single lever and electromechanical devices, like the Kommandogerät pioneering engine computer on the radial-engined Fw 190s, making the appropriate adjustments. Due to airflow limitations, the engine boost system (Forsazh) could not be used above 2,000 m (6,562 ft). Stability in all axes was generally good. The authority of the ailerons was deemed exceptional but the rudder was insufficiently powerful at lower speeds. At speeds in excess of 600 km/h (370 mph), the forces on control surfaces became excessive. Horizontal turn time at 1,000 m (3,281 ft) and maximum engine power was 25 seconds.
In comparison with Luftwaffe fighters, the La-5FN was found to have a comparable top speed and acceleration at low altitude. It possessed a higher roll rate and a smaller turn radius than the Bf 109 and a better climb rate than the Fw 190A-8. The Bf 109 utilizing MW 50 had superior performance at all altitudes, and the Fw 190A-8 had better dive performance. Lerche's recommendations were to attempt to draw the La-5FN to higher altitudes, to escape attacks in a dive followed by a high-speed shallow climb, and to avoid prolonged turning engagements.
The Yak-3 was a forgiving, easy-to-handle aircraft loved by both rookie and veteran pilots and ground crew as well. It was robust, easy to maintain, and a highly successful dog-fighter, the Luftwaffe issued an order to "avoid combat with Yak fighters without an oil cooler under the nose and with an inclined aerial mast below 5000 m
However, the Lagg3 not so good...The LaGG-3 rapidly replaced the LaGG-1 although the new fighter was too heavy for its engine. In fact, Lavochkin, Gorbunov and Gudkov had originally designed their prototype for the powerful Klimov M-106 engine. But it proved to be unreliable. So they were obliged to install the relatively weak Klimov M-105P. As a result, the LaGG was slow; its top speed was just 474 km/h, while its rate of climb at ground level was as slow as 8.5 meters/second. The LaGG-3 proved to be somewhat hard to control as it reacted sluggishly to stick forces. In particular, it was difficult to pull out of a dive, and if the stick was pulled too hard, it tended to fall into a spin. As a consequence, sharp turns were difficult to perform. A more powerful engine was installed, but the improvement was little so, the only solution was to lighten the airframe. The LaGG team re-examined the design and pared down the structure as much as possible. Fixed slats were added to the wings to improve climb and manoeuvrability and further weight was saved by installing lighter armament. But the improvement was slight and without an alternative powerplant thus, when the LaGG-3 was first committed to combat in July 1941, it was completely outclassed by the Messerschmitt Bf 109
There is a zillion other sites with the same analysis ... it shouldn't be that hard to get appropriate FMs (over time) and as such I'll look forward to all future patches with interest.
The dev versions are as you described, thankfully we don't have to have every single update separately, can you imagine the QQ on the forums from it being more buggy even though it's in Beta.
That ... and they're Russian ..... meh we don't need to make sence tovarich!
whats the news on our own forum , this game is getting good ......
This game is awesome. Let's get a TOG presence rolling!
so there at least three War Thunder threads (and i'm likely missing a couple) of more than one page. whilst this one seems the most organised, i can't help but think we might be better served by consolidating into a dedicated space. this game is in "Open Beta", but is taking money for premium accounts/upgrades etc and it is very unlikely any wipes are coming. more than 30k players in peak hours daily, and i've noticed the TS3 channel with players in it quite often. if this matter is still under consideration, i apologise most sincerely.
There are no planned roll backs from what i've read.
Don't quote me, but one of the regulars has put forward to the higher echelons a request for our own sub section which would be great.
any idea when 1.29 is being released?
certainly no end to the speculation! if you have a look at the updates thread, it appears it stopped on 184.108.40.206 ~two weeks ago, which is far longer than all the previous versions had been in service.
...is a fun and interesting read at almost 100 pages of posts. most speculation over the last couple of days looks at mid/late week, but it doesn't appear anyone really has any proof at all. my guess is "soon". :w
what is almost certain is that there are significant changes, especially in the economy.
**any other Ubisoft IL-2 forum vets around?
Here is the video i mentioned last night. Of particular note is the part around the 4min mark showing the match making grid.