Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team

[FlyingShark]

Didn't understand it as that much critics... and tried to be humorous myself. :)
Fine:), good luck with patch we'll get it and enjoy it when it's ready and have nice Christmass hollydays.

~S~

[MD_Titus]

I appreciate how much work has gone into it by so many people. Trying to weave it all together must be a nightmare. I wish you all luck. Perhaps more frequent, smaller additions would be better than one big one in future.
i think i recall a post from a TD member stating as much tbh, one of the lessons learnt from 4.10 - don't bite off so much. i wonder if, for all the features it is due to include, if there wouldn't be a similar dev time over several patch releases for the same content.
i personally dont expect the release before end january 2011.
I guess the TD members have more important things to do the last two weeks before Christmas and than in the holidays................at least i hope they have ;)

but a release of the RedMe PDF, as suggested in the past (and partly done already with the Hs129 stuff :) ) would be a nice move. I guess there is lot of reading needed, something for cold,dark winter nights :D

i'd take a hefty update and read me for christmas, rather than a hurried/harried patch release.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Hey TD IL2 Developers,

this would be an awesome mod or can I say development to have in 4.10m:

Please , click the YouTube link to directly watch this video in bigger screen and HD
in order to see all details :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsAXDB-sV8w

[76.IAP-Blackbird]

That`s a realy nice and very welcomed effect, is there a chance to have this officialy in the 4.10 created by Diadalos?!

What do you guys think about such a nice effect?! we know you have a lot of stuff to fix and check?!

Just asking, nothing more ;)

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

I can only speak for myself. Indeed it looks very nice and compared to the real one, quite impressive. But I have no idea, how its done, so I cannot judge the amount of work, needed to have it this way or any problems it might bring with it. In the end its just eyecandy, usefull only in movie productions (although the flames in darkness would match the nightfighting scenario and gain quite more importance there). Since we are a small team, I'd say, such is rather on the lower priority side.

[Letum]

In the end its just eyecandy, usefull only in movie productions

I don't think any eye candy is only useful for movie production.
Anything that makes the simulation look more real adds to the simulations over all fidelity and feel.

[Furio]

In any case, I would like the effect as an option only. We already have an excessive (in my opinion) propeller effect in front of our eyes, and developers should be prudent with anything further affecting our field of view.

[II/JG54_Emil]

In any case, I would like the effect as an option only. We already have an excessive (in my opinion) propeller effect in front of our eyes, and developers should be prudent with anything further affecting our field of view.

And what if it was like that in reality?
I think in a simulation we should stick to what it really looked like.
Apart from that it doesn´t affect your FoV.

[Letum]

I suspect that the problem the TD Devs would have to solve is how to make sure the flames are not visible in the wonder woman view (ctr+f1).

[FlyingShark]

I can only speak for myself. Indeed it looks very nice and compared to the real one, quite impressive. But I have no idea, how its done, so I cannot judge the amount of work, needed to have it this way or any problems it might bring with it. In the end its just eyecandy, usefull only in movie productions (although the flames in darkness would match the nightfighting scenario and gain quite more importance there). Since we are a small team, I'd say, such is rather on the lower priority side.
Why not try it out? You can still decide to delete and leave it if you don't like it.

~S~

[TheGrunch]

I think that DT probably have enough on their plate for the moment. I don't think DT would be likely to include something in the sim that only affects a few aircraft and would have to be tailored individually for each one. It does look really awesome, though. :) Although, I fully admit that I'm not sure whether the mod already does this for all aircraft.

[76.IAP-Blackbird]

@ Caspar, thanks for the reply, you are right, I will take all patches and features you and your team include into the new patch and maybe other further patches! Thank you for your time and the amount of work you all put into the new patch!!!

patiently waiting

Martin

[ImpalerNL]

A working fuel pressure gauge for the bf109 would be nice.
The fuel pressure should be atleast 1.5 / 1.8 kg/cm2 in flight.

Also it would be nice to have a hestitating engine on start up, for the most common used aircraft. Especially in cold climates.

(This document is part of a original bf109G2 checklist.)

[Furio]

And what if it was like that in reality?
I think in a simulation we should stick to what it really looked like.
Apart from that it doesn´t affect your FoV.

What is “like that in reality” is often a matter of debate. An example? In my opinion, the propeller effect we have in game is not realistic, and is needlessly hampering vision. Having flown hundreds of hours in single engine planes, I should even avoid saying “in my opinion”. In real world, propellers are not visible from the cockpit, period.
However, I understand that different opinions exist. Therefore, my proposal is simple: if some new visual effect must be added (for “realism”) it should be an option. I would like the possibility to turn off the propeller effect we have today and, if implemented someday, the flames from exhaust stacks.

[II/JG54_Emil]

That´s what I´m talking about.

If you can see the exhaust it should be in a sim, same goes for the exhaust flames, propeller look etc.

A sim should be as close as possible to the real look and feel.
Since we saw this is possible, I would love to see it in the stock sim.

[Furio]

I’m not sure to understand you well (I’m not English speaking).
What I’m trying to say is:
In my opinion, not all the visual effects today present in game are “realistic”. I cited the propeller case, which I find particularly unrealistic and annoying.
In adding new effects, the risk to obtain less realism instead of more is evident.
I’m not convinced about those blue flames. Are they always visible, or only under certain circumstances? If they’re visible under particular combination of atmospheric conditions, fuel mixture and engine temp, how should they be rendered in game?
As I believe a general consensus on this and other similar matters is hard to obtain, I’m simply asking to use prudence and options as much as possible. Unless clear evidence is obtained, nothing should be added to the “stock sim”. In conclusion, these are my preferences:
1) No flames effect by default. It should be an option.
2) If the flames effect is added, there should be the option to turn it off.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Looks like they are always there when the engine is runnign and most visible in the dark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs_qt4GCj4A&feature=player_embedded#!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhFAwSk9Vqg&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZzvKCQwWj0&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqrbtxcNqbM&feature=player_embedded#!
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=17629&page=7


and this is how it could look in game:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tzHTH2Jzhg&feature=player_embedded

None of this will affect you FoV.

[IceFire]

A working fuel pressure gauge for the bf109 would be nice.
The fuel pressure should be atleast 1.5 / 1.8 kg/cm2 in flight.

Also it would be nice to have a hestitating engine on start up, for the most common used aircraft. Especially in cold climates.

(This document is part of a original bf109G2 checklist.)

Hesitation was present in one of the 3.X patches... back in the day. I think that feature lasted one patch and was then taken out. I can't remember if there was some thoughts against it ... or what the situation was.

[Furio]

I never saw such flames with my eyes under normal daylight (and I saw a lot of “big iron” flying and big engines starting up from very close distance), exactly as I never saw turning propeller blades that look so evident in many videos.
It’s true that planes flying at night almost invariably had flame dampers, and planes without them usually were not flown in combat at night. Day fighters where flown at dawn or dusk, but at which light intensity should the flame effect disappear or appear?
Mi feeling remain that flames effect always on is not enhancing realism, even if it’s definitely a cool effect.
Anyway, this is my personal opinion. I stated it clearly enough, I think, and this is my last comment on this matter.

[ElAurens]

Hesitation was present in one of the 3.X patches... back in the day. I think that feature lasted one patch and was then taken out. I can't remember if there was some thoughts against it ... or what the situation was.


All the way back in V1.0 to V1.2 several aircraft would "foul" sparkplugs and run horribly if throttled up too quickly after initial start up. I don't know why this changed, but by the time of Forgotten Battles it was gone as I recall.

[robtek]

Well, if there was this feature i know very well why it changed!
The huge crowd of "ignition, throttle to the wall, start across the field regardless of traffic"-crowd wailed so loud that it was removed.
Also removed were the more realistic torque effects.
All so that the named above people could just so claim to fly full real and not arcade settings.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Its very much like TheGrunch said. Plus there are many many aspects in game, that can be more important than increasing quality of effects. Not every aspects must be considered equaly, onlybecause of 'it had been'.
i.e. it was also in reality, that pilots had to climb into their planes before they could get off, something that is not (or very hardly) possible with the game.

The game is about airwar and thats what is most important. I personally prefer gameplay improvements over atmosphere improvements. If we had a huge team with some bored members, we could adress such easily, but it isn't that case.

[Xallo]

What is needed to run the 4.10?
A plain vanilla IL2 1946 dvd install? (just found it in one of my moving boxes)

Will we still have to keep the dvd in for playing? My dvd is spinning insanely loud and I would like to keep it disconnected as much as possible.

Thanks for waking this old sim up again!

[IceFire]

What is needed to run the 4.10?
A plain vanilla IL2 1946 dvd install? (just found it in one of my moving boxes)

Will we still have to keep the dvd in for playing? My dvd is spinning insanely loud and I would like to keep it disconnected as much as possible.

Thanks for waking this old sim up again!

You'll want to have 4.08m and 4.09m patches first. Those and the IL-2 1946 original install.

[Xallo]

You'll want to have 4.08m and 4.09m patches first. Those and the IL-2 1946 original install.


Thanks a lot!

[TinyTim]

Well, if there was this feature i know very well why it changed!
The huge crowd of "ignition, throttle to the wall, start across the field regardless of traffic"-crowd wailed so loud that it was removed.
Also removed were the more realistic torque effects.
All so that the named above people could just so claim to fly full real and not arcade settings.

Interesting. It could be done as an option...

[ElAurens]

Oh, and to totally chnage the subject.

We could use a fixed gear version of the Curtiss Hawk 75 (75 H, M or N for Chinese Air Force and similar models for many other airforces).

I really need a fixed gear Hawk for my pre 1941 Sino-Japanese War scenarios. It was the fastest pursuit type flown by the Chinese until the formation of the AVG (Flying Tigers) that were equipped with their Hawk 81 models. (P-40).

Sorry to ask really, but this has been on my mind for some time.

[IceFire]

Oh, and to totally chnage the subject.

We could use a fixed gear version of the Curtiss Hawk 75 (75 H, M or N for Chinese Air Force and similar models for many other airforces).

I really need a fixed gear Hawk for my pre 1941 Sino-Japanese War scenarios. It was the fastest pursuit type flown by the Chinese until the formation of the AVG (Flying Tigers) that were equipped with their Hawk 81 models. (P-40).

Sorry to ask really, but this has been on my mind for some time.

I didn't know there was a fixed gear type... interesting!

I know what you mean about aircraft being stuck on your mind. I've just "discovered" the history about the Me210 and Me410 (I didn't know that the Ju88 was essentially replaced in many units by the Me410 light bomber version) and I'm realizing that it's an aircraft that saw a lot more use than I had thought and I'd love to be flying one around with a full cockpit and making use of some of the weapons and attachments.

[ElAurens]

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/1156/hawk753hd7.jpg

The "Chinese Hawk" 75-H demonstrator aircraft that was paid for personally by Madam Chaing Kai-shek and presented to Claire Chennault for use as his personal aircraft. In service in China it was painted dark green.

[Fafnir_6]

I didn't know there was a fixed gear type... interesting!

I know what you mean about aircraft being stuck on your mind. I've just "discovered" the history about the Me210 and Me410 (I didn't know that the Ju88 was essentially replaced in many units by the Me410 light bomber version) and I'm realizing that it's an aircraft that saw a lot more use than I had thought and I'd love to be flying one around with a full cockpit and making use of some of the weapons and attachments.

Oh man, I know EXACTLY what you are talking about. The Me210/410 was heavily engaged on many fronts and yet it is largely unheard of in flight sims (I think stock EAW may have had an Me410). I'd love to fly the Hornisse with a full 'pit in stock IL-2 :).

+1 for the fixed-gear Hawk as well.

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

[bf-110]

What is needed to run the 4.10?
A plain vanilla IL2 1946 dvd install? (just found it in one of my moving boxes)

Will we still have to keep the dvd in for playing? My dvd is spinning insanely loud and I would like to keep it disconnected as much as possible.

Thanks for waking this old sim up again!

The Hawk is a plane I´d love to fly.It´s bare metal painting makes it really gorgeous,like it was covered in silver.Would say it was a plane that got shadowed by the P-40.
Another planes used in China were the P-35 and P-43.But I guess most people would rather use Re.2000 with USAAF paint.

Me-210,it was said this plane was a real headache to Luftwaffe.Had several problems.

[KWM_Schnaps]

Bf110, you're right about the Me210.
Unstable, bad flyer,...
Problems were solved w/ Me410.
Me410 was used during "Little Blitz" beginning of 1944.
Great plane, but as usual, too few too late.
And "obsolete" as a fighter in 1944, when pitched against P51 and P47.

[Fafnir_6]

Bf110, you're right about the Me210.
Unstable, bad flyer,...
Problems were solved w/ Me410.
Me410 was used during "Little Blitz" beginning of 1944.
Great plane, but as usual, too few too late.
And "obsolete" as a fighter in 1944, when pitched against P51 and P47.

The bad reputation of the Me210 is only true for the initial production run machines. Later Me210s had (among other things) a fuselage plug installed that lengthened the fuselage and mitigated much of the instability. The greater power and different wing of the Me410 further improved upon this. Late-model Me210s were deployed by the Luftwaffe in large numbers in the med and on the Ostfront (also see the Hungarian Me210Ca-1 s we have in game already).

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

[bf-110]

There was a similar aircaft,the Ar-240.

[IceFire]

Cool! Didn't know about the Ar240. Although I suspect I've seen it before...somewhere.

Having the Me210/410 would definitely be an interesting addition to the game. Like many of the types being added recently they are interesting or important types that just don't get the same sort of recognition. I had assumed for a long while that they just didn't do anything with them and thus were not worthy of inclusion.

Turns out the Me410 was in production in early 1943 and that there were a number of A and B modifications that saw quite a bit of combat.

I can dream :)

[JG53Frankyboy]

the Me210 was in action with the III./ZG1 from November 1942 on, flying from Sicily :)
Its an MTO plane , actually :D

[IceFire]

the Me210 was in action with the III./ZG1 from November 1942 on, flying from Sicily :)
Its an MTO plane , actually :D

Yep and a East Front and a West Front aircraft. The thing was everywhere and aside from IL-2... I don't think it's been in a sim before!

[Wutz]

Yep and a East Front and a West Front aircraft. The thing was everywhere and aside from IL-2... I don't think it's been in a sim before!
The Me410 was also in use with the KG 51 Edelweiss

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Yep and a East Front and a West Front aircraft. The thing was everywhere and aside from IL-2... I don't think it's been in a sim before!


Its in Warbirds 2.77 on russian Free Host... at least the Me410.
I even made a cockpit for it. Thats where it all begun for me (and where I am now? Damn.) :grin:

http://www.stg2immelmann.de/galerien/1010/Warbirds/me410.jpg
http://home.arcor.de/caspar77/me410.jpg
http://home.arcor.de/caspar77/me410b.jpg

[Flanker35M]

S!

So make the cockpit for IL-2 to, please! ;) :D Gunner can be AI only if there are not enough references for modeling it ;) :D

[Sita]

S!

So make the cockpit for IL-2 to, please! ;) :D

+1 !!! please! please! please!

[Wutz]

Here a little addition that might not be generally known:
http://i107.photobucket.com/albums/m290/RSS-Martin/Flugzeuge/me210japanpicture1ww2sh.jpg
So you can add the "far-eastern" front too. :cool:

[d165w3ll]

Its in Warbirds 2.77 on russian Free Host... at least the Me410.
I even made a cockpit for it. Thats where it all begun for me (and where I am now? Damn.) :grin:


My favourite plane, and it is available :) (in three models :grin: (gunner AI)), as I recently stated but not (as a contributor corrected me), as part of the standard IL2 46 4.09. But I don't think I'm supposed to say that here. ;)

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

So make the cockpit for IL-2 to, please! ;)

I can't. We have to be red-biased now. :rolleyes:


Seriously, I really would like too - its one of my favorites, but there are already enough projects for me (in different levels of production).

;)

[Wutz]

I can't. We have to be red-biased now. :rolleyes:


Seriously, I really would like too - its one of my favorites, but there are already enough projects for me (in different levels of production).

;)
Oh oh those that mean .50cals that can sink a battleship of the Bismarck type in one pass? :lol:

[JG53Frankyboy]

a cockpit for the Me210C (only pilot, gunner as AI) would be realy fantastic :)
But i guess "der Zug ist abgefahren" ....

[FlyingShark]

I can't. We have to be red-biased now. :rolleyes:


Seriously, I really would like too - its one of my favorites, but there are already enough projects for me (in different levels of production).

;)
Maybe in a future update after 4.10?

~S~

[Fafnir_6]

I can't. We have to be red-biased now. :rolleyes:

;)

You're joking, right?

Fafnir_6

[IceFire]

I can't. We have to be red-biased now. :rolleyes:


Seriously, I really would like too - its one of my favorites, but there are already enough projects for me (in different levels of production).

;)

Surely we can clone you yesno? :D :cool:

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Maybe in a future update after 4.10?

~S~


Maybe. The world is full of wonders. :rolleyes:


You're joking, right?



YES! We stay blue-biased! :-D


Surely we can clone you yesno? :D :cool:

That would be cool! I take 5x then. :grin:

[FlyingShark]

Maybe. The world is full of wonders. :rolleyes:

True, Il2 and its updates are some of those wonders;).

~S~

[Zorin]

a cockpit for the Me210C (only pilot, gunner as AI) would be realy fantastic :)
But i guess "der Zug ist abgefahren" ....

Setup a donation site and gather cash to pay a freelance 3D artist and we have it in 6 month max. Rather straight forward affair.

[JG53Frankyboy]

well:

"SaQSoN
Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Nowhereland
Posts: 160
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xilon_x
i pay for this not problem DAIDALOS team i pay ok? i pay.
for a great work i pay

Standard minimal price is 1000 Euro per ship, plane, or one cockpit model. Now you only have to find a modeler. Good luck. "


the 1000€ would not be the main proplem, belive me !

[Zorin]

well:

"SaQSoN
Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Nowhereland
Posts: 160
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xilon_x
i pay for this not problem DAIDALOS team i pay ok? i pay.
for a great work i pay

Standard minimal price is 1000 Euro per ship, plane, or one cockpit model. Now you only have to find a modeler. Good luck. "


the 1000€ would not be the main proplem, belive me !

Exactly.

[IceFire]

That would be cool! I take 5x then. :grin:
I'll talk to the people at the cloning vats :)

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Thanks! Maybe I can send them my GF too?

[moilami]

Thanks! Maybe I can send them my GF too?

Lol you can always send her to me, if you don't need her :lol:

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Lol you can always send her to me, if you don't need her :lol:

You misunderstood... I need more of her. :grin:

[JG53Frankyboy]

now we know the real reason for the delay of 4.10 ;)

[Wutz]

now we know the real reason for the delay of 4.10 ;)
Yeah hard work on a certain "model" :lol:

[W32Blaster]

Thats why the release still is called 410 ?!

[ElAurens]

Can I have one of the improved "bis" versions please?

:-P

[Qpassa]

will be any news before christmas?

[flying]

THE development of 4.10 has taken almost as long as World war two itself,I'm losing all
patience.

[DD_crash]

THE development of 4.10 has taken almost as long as World war two itself,I'm losing all
patience.
Dont be silly.

[The Kraken]

THE development of 4.10 has taken almost as long as World war two itself,I'm losing all
patience.

Not much of a loss though.

[flying]

Dont be silly.

you too.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Just a little update on the bombs:

I found some historical data concerning the destruction radius for German SC bombs and FAB 5000.

Since some of TD said the shrapnel-radius needs to be taken into account for FABs blast-radius in game, I want to post a table for the shrapnel radius that I found in Wolfgang Thamms book Fliegerbomben:


Bomb__Shrapnel-Radius
SC50_______32,5m_______25m in game
SC250______65m_________77m in game
SC500______95m_________82m in game
SC1000____180m________168m in game
SC2000____350m________275,8m in game



Here is why the FABs destruction radius in game is very dubious:

The most common explosive in FAB bombs used was Amatol(exception FAB50 using pure TNT).
SC bombs contained a mix of 40% Amatol and 60% TNT.
The TNT equivalent for Amatol is given with 0,85. That means it´s less powerful.
Accordingly the TNT equivalent of SCs is 0,94 where the FABs TNT equivalent is 0,85, which results in 9% more explosive power for the SC bombs in comparison to FAB bombs.

Historically the SC bombs had a heavier filling than the FAB bombs.

I found a source in the internet giving away the blast radius of a FAB 5000 with 428m!!! in game we have 2500m!!!
one must think with horrific effect, as well-- the calculated zone of lethality for a non-armoured target in proximity to a 'normally fused' FAB 5000 blast was given as 428 meters!!

http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/Ordnance/fab5000/index.php

Another source states the radii to destroy concrete/wood in FAB bombs are:
FAB-50____12m/25m(stone/wood)____25m in game
FAB-100___18m/35m(stone/wood)____50m in game
FAB-250___28m/56m(stone/wood)____50m in game
FAB-500___40m/80m(stone/wood)___250m in game
FAB-1000_55m/112m(stone/wood)___500m in game


With this historical data in the background, I kindly ask TD to change the blast radius of FAB and SC bombs.

Another concern was that some of the German Cockpits weren´t historical correct.
Is TD interested in data on that to be able to do a change?

[daidalos.team]

@Emil: Please use the proper way of reporting errors or requests which is much more easier for us to follow than going through many pages of public forums: our email address. Thanks a lot.

Martin

[II/JG54_Emil]

Aha.

Where do I find the email?

[dFrog]

daidalos.team@gmail.com

[IceFire]

Just a little update on the bombs:

I found some historical data concerning the destruction radius for German SC bombs and FAB 5000.

Since some of TD said the shrapnel-radius needs to be taken into account for FABs blast-radius in game, I want to post a table for the shrapnel radius that I found in Wolfgang Thamms book Fliegerbomben:


Bomb__Shrapnel-Radius
SC50_______32,5m_______25m in game
SC250______65m_________77m in game
SC500______95m_________82m in game
SC1000____180m________168m in game
SC2000____350m________275,8m in game



Here is why the FABs destruction radius in game is very dubious:

The most common explosive in FAB bombs used was Amatol(exception FAB50 using pure TNT).
SC bombs contained a mix of 40% Amatol and 60% TNT.
The TNT equivalent for Amatol is given with 0,85. That means it´s less powerful.
Accordingly the TNT equivalent of SCs is 0,94 where the FABs TNT equivalent is 0,85, which results in 9% more explosive power for the SC bombs in comparison to FAB bombs.

Historically the SC bombs had a heavier filling than the FAB bombs.

I found a source in the internet giving away the blast radius of a FAB 5000 with 428m!!! in game we have 2500m!!!


Another source states the radii to destroy concrete/wood in FAB bombs are:
FAB-50____12m/25m(stone/wood)____25m in game
FAB-100___18m/35m(stone/wood)____50m in game
FAB-250___28m/56m(stone/wood)____50m in game
FAB-500___40m/80m(stone/wood)___250m in game
FAB-1000_55m/112m(stone/wood)___500m in game


With this historical data in the background, I kindly ask TD to change the blast radius of FAB and SC bombs.

Another concern was that some of the German Cockpits weren´t historical correct.
Is TD interested in data on that to be able to do a change?

Interesting research! I'm glad to see that someone has actually looked up some data on this rather than just saying something and running away :)

After hearing that the data was all out of whack... I had assumed that it was really badly screwed up. The data above suggests that although there are some glaring errors that it is very good in some areas.

[Hans Burger]

Is there a chance to see the 4.10 release as a Christmas gift or are you still debugging ?

[JG53Frankyboy]

MicroWave
Member Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 41



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bearcat
So whats the story here with this ........... How's it coming..? Enough with the humor and what not.. I mean... it's ha ha ha ... but... seriously... whats the story.. anything? Possibly before year end? 4.10 while on my vacation at the end of the month perhaps...?

I hope it might be released by the end of this year.
But then again, I was hoping for end of the summer release...
It will be released eventually, it's not abandoned or anything like that.

So, the short answer would be something like:
It's possible, but I wouldn't hold my breath.




<- i personally dont expect a release this year !

[Qpassa]

just take a seat and wait with popcorns.
I want 4.10 but, if they dont release, well, there isnt anything more to do than wait

[JtD]

<- i personally dont expect a release this year !

Have faith, there still are 10 days left. :)

[addman]

Have faith, there still are 10 days left. :)

10 days til new year yes, 10 days til patch...no. I hope it will be out before SoW is released because I'm "worried" that after playing SoW, IL-2 will no longer be as interesting anymore and that would render 4.10 superfluous. IMHO of course :)

[II/JG54_Emil]

Just a little update on the bombs:

I found some historical data concerning the destruction radius for German SC bombs and FAB 5000.

Since some of TD said the shrapnel-radius needs to be taken into account for FABs blast-radius in game, I want to post a table for the shrapnel radius that I found in Wolfgang Thamms book Fliegerbomben:


Bomb__Shrapnel-Radius
SC50_______32,5m_______25m in game
SC250______65m_________77m in game
SC500______95m_________82m in game
SC1000____180m________168m in game
SC2000____350m________275,8m in game



Here is why the FABs destruction radius in game is very dubious:

The most common explosive in FAB bombs used was Amatol(exception FAB50 using pure TNT).
SC bombs contained a mix of 40% Amatol and 60% TNT.
The TNT equivalent for Amatol is given with 0,85. That means it´s less powerful.
Accordingly the TNT equivalent of SCs is 0,94 where the FABs TNT equivalent is 0,85, which results in 9% more explosive power for the SC bombs in comparison to FAB bombs.

Historically the SC bombs had a heavier filling than the FAB bombs.

I found a source in the internet giving away the blast radius of a FAB 5000 with 428m!!! in game we have 2500m!!!
one must think with horrific effect, as well-- the calculated zone of lethality for a non-armoured target in proximity to a 'normally fused' FAB 5000 blast was given as 428 meters!!

http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/Ordnance/fab5000/index.php

Another source states the radii to destroy concrete/wood in FAB bombs are:
FAB-50____12m/25m(stone/wood)____25m in game
FAB-100___18m/35m(stone/wood)____50m in game
FAB-250___28m/56m(stone/wood)____50m in game
FAB-500___40m/80m(stone/wood)___250m in game
FAB-1000_55m/112m(stone/wood)___500m in game

FAB-5000_____428m(_____/wood)__2500m in game


With this historical data in the background, I kindly ask TD to change the blast radius of FAB and SC bombs.

Another concern was that some of the German cockpits are historical incorrect, along with temperature problems of Bf-110, underheat in I-185.
Is TD interested in data on that to be able to do a change?

Since I was asked not to post any such info as above here, but send them via email to TD, I did so three days ago, asking if they are interested in detailed info about several bugs and historical data on blast radii of bombs.

But since I don´t get any answer from TD, I begin to wonder if there is any serious interest in changing errors within the game.

I hope there is.

[csThor]

Ever considered that we have real lives, too? Ever considered that any investigation into that matter would take place only after the release of 4.10?

Jeez, Emil, don't you have any patience? ;)

[IceFire]

Since I was asked not to post any such info as above here, but send them via email to TD, I did so three days ago, asking if they are interested in detailed info about several bugs and historical data on blast radii of bombs.

But since I don´t get any answer from TD, I begin to wonder if there is any serious interest in changing errors within the game.

I hope there is.
Three days? Heck where I used to work it'd be great if my boss got back to me on critical items in under 2 weeks! That person gets a pay cheque... TD is volunteer based.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Enough time to post here on the the forum that there is real life out there.

A simple "yes, we are interested" as an answer would have been enough.

[rga]

Come on, don't be so mean. I guess TD has to read all the documents you sent them, try to find out who are the authors and if they can be trusted :D And if your documents are good (I'm sure they are), surely you'll get a big thank from TD. But now, as they have no time to read all of your stuffs, they can't be sure if what you sent them are good or bad. A short answer: yes, we are interested, for a fake document is quite silly, don't you think. And furthermore, as TD receive many documents from IL-2 fans everyday, they can't answer all of them. Most people are only interested in real answer, and such short answers as you suggest are normally considered just "superficial".
No offense or any intention to imply anything. I've just tried to think objectively.

[II/JG54_Emil]

I didn´t send any document, just asked if they were intersted in such info.

[W32Blaster]

you might send the documents per Email to them to find out how interesed they are ...

[Old_Canuck]

I didn´t send any document, just asked if they were intersted in such info.

It appears that Thor just posted his answer. When a gift is being offered the likes of which TD is giving it doesn't seem right to suggest how the gift can be improved unless the giver has specifically asked how it can be improved.

[II/JG54_Emil]

It appears that Thor just posted his answer. When a gift is being offered the likes of which TD is giving it doesn't seem right to suggest how the gift can be improved unless the giver has specifically asked how it can be improved.

Maybe you can open a TD-church. :rolleyes:

Or maybe I have I not realized that I am in a church already. :rolleyes:

[ElAurens]

Why so aggressive Emil?

All you have to do is send your info to the DT email address.

Such a simple thing to do.

I don't understand your attitude here at all.

[II/JG54_Emil]

you might send the documents per Email to them to find out how interesed they are ...

I´m not going to make a huge workload to scan documents, get them organized to just find out that there is no true interest.

A true interest can be indicated by simply answering my mail.


But as you read above it´s not going to be implemented in 4.10m.
And I doubt that we ever may see a 4.11m judging the delay we had this year.

[bf-110]

I guess it might be released on this week.It will be our xmas present.

[Azimech]

I have posted some ideas in the appropriate topic and haven't received a reply as well. Do I feel bad about it? Why should I. There are far more important things in life, even if this sim is the only game I'm playing after 27 years, it has no real meaning and no foundation for happiness.

The fact that bombs have an incorrect blast radius is less important than a whole bunch of other issues, and I don't recall a great fuss about these (maybe that's just me). So you could remember what mister Spock said: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one ;-)

The fact that you have correct data and took the time to look them up and compare them with the game is very nice indeed. But ... demanding an answer and then being irritated about the delay and the shape of the reply ... well, how would you feel? Don't bite the hand that feeds you, if you criticise TD, remember who gave them permission and backup in the first place and who controls the fate of the official product. Everything in the/a patch has to be approved with the same high standards that gave us the reason we're on this forum, so calling this team a "church" is an attack on the "god" ;-)

I think the majority would hate this product to be cut loose and end in "modding hell" for the obvious reasons, even if some mods are among the best I've seen in Gameland. The reason this topic on this forum exists is out of courtesy, I can't imagine anything else.

War should be inside the game, not outside ;-)

TD, keep up the good work in your own time and speed, we are thankful anyway. You guys wanna fly on servers the same as everyone else, feeling proud of your accomplishments. That's why we know it won't take forever.

[_RAAF_Smouch]

The fact that bombs have an incorrect blast radius is less important than a whole bunch of other issues, and I don't recall a great fuss about these (maybe that's just me). So you could remember what mister Spock said: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one ;-)

I think the majority would hate this product to be cut loose and end in "modding hell" for the obvious reasons, even if some mods are among the best I've seen in Gameland. The reason this topic on this forum exists is out of courtesy, I can't imagine anything else.

War should be inside the game, not outside ;-)

TD, keep up the good work in your own time and speed, we are thankful anyway. You guys wanna fly on servers the same as everyone else, feeling proud of your accomplishments. That's why we know it won't take forever.

+1

[zaelu]

Is there a chance to see the 4.10 release as a Christmas gift or are you still debugging ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9U_C_q6WcU

:grin:

[Qpassa]

check in betfair, release before christmas is 50:1 :D

[dFrog]

http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showpost.php?p=1517243&postcount=18

for those, who understand russian - Readme_410ru

[A.Fokker]

Brief description of add-on 4.10

IL-2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles - Aces - Pearl Harbor - Pe-2 - Stormtroopers over Manchuria - 1946

Version 4.10m


Warning

The current version 4.10m is not compatible with earlier versions of the game on the network. For compatibility with the game on the server and client must be the same version.

Attention: Version 4.10m is only for installation on top of the combined version (4.09m) Games IL-2 Sturmovik: Forgotten Battles "+" Aces "+" Pearl Harbor "+" History of the dive-bomber "+" Stormtroopers over Manchuria " + "46", or "IL-2. Platinum Collection. "


Additional information for installing add-on version 4.10m
(Please read)

Upgrading to version 4.10m for the game IL-2: Sturmovik "is only installed on top of upgrading 4.09m

To install the update, run the file 410m.exe and follow the instructions on the screen.

Please note that this update is not installed only on top of "Pearl Harbor".



Contents additions 4.10m.

New features:
MDS (multiplayer mode "duel" with moving objects under computer control).
Tensile strength of the airframe during overloads.
Updates Fast and full editor.
Updated all the missions in the Quick Editor and added the ability to create custom missions for quick editor.
Separate control thrust and propeller pitch several motors with separate joystick axes; control valves on the radiator axis joystick.
Advanced profile settings joystick.
New ways to navigate the game.
Added the option of "Reliability of Engines
Added the option of "Detailed model wounds Pilot
Updated signs state. membership lists and aviapodrazdeleny Finland, Italy, Romania, Germany, USSR and Great Britain (RAF and FAA).
Revised flight model for all aircraft Spitfire.

New maps:
Solomon Islands

Maps localized into Russian:
Murmansk - fully localized.
Bessarabia - fully localized.
Baltic States - completed yet localization.

New planes, controlled player:
Hs 129
I-15bis
CW-21
Re.2000
Ju 88 A-17
Ju 88 A-4/Torp
He 111 H-12

New variants of the aircraft Spitfire:
Spitfire Mk Vb 12lbs
Spitfire Mk Vb 16lbs
Spitfire Mk Vb M46 16lbs
Spitfire Mk Vc 16lbs
Spitfire Mk IXc M61
Spitfire Mk IXc M63
Spitfire Mk IXc HF
Spitfire Mk IX 25lbs CLP

New planes, controlled by computer:
P-5 (including a version of the ski chassis)
Fulmar
Swordfish
Re.2002
G.55 SS
Cant Z1007
Do 217 K-1
Do 217 K-2

New weapons:
Guided bombs Fritz-X
Guided bombs Hs-293
Guided bombs Razon
Guided bombs Bat
Circulatory torpedo Motobomba FFF (LT 350)
Torpedo 45-36AV-A (high-altitude aircraft torpedometaniya - Alferov)
Container bomblets AB23
Aerogun Mk-103 for Hs-129

Changes in weaponry:
New three-dimensional models of bombs SC50, SC70 and missiles Wfr.Gr. 21
New bomb racks ETC50 VIIId all series Bf-109
New three-dimensional model for the arms in the Hs-129
Change the choices of weapons for all the Bf-109, He-111 H-6 and Ju 88 A-4
Torpedo-Kommandogerät (Torpedo Automatic Shooting) for Ju-88 A-17, Ju-88 A-4/Torp and He-111 H-6.
Fuse bombs (bombs requires some time to cock).
Speed limits and high discharge torpedoes, close to real.
The possibility of accidental discharge of external suspensions (bombs and missiles and BK7.5 Wfr.Gr. 21)

Navigation equipment sea-and land-based:
Stationary object "non-directional beacon."
Stationary object "directional beacon YG land-based."
Directional beacon YE added to the carriers allies.
Stationary object "blind landing system Lorenz».
Stationary object Meacon (lzhemayak).
Stationary objects - the tower AM radio stations for different countries.
Added non-directional beacon (NDB) for all Japanese carriers.
Added non-directional beacon (NDB) at some destroyers and submarines of the axis.

Changes in the environment:
Dynamic changes in the intensity of muzzle fire: more of the scattered light -> less visible yellow flash on the surface of the model.
Objects "Light" can be used as switchable lights for the runway.
Added radio commands "Request for the inclusion of the runway lights"
Changed the color of the sky at high altitudes.
The intensity of illumination at night, depending on the specific date (month and day).
Phases of the moon is now calculated to match the date of the missions.
Smoke from vehicles is now visible from much larger distances.
Winter textures for railway trains.
Winter textures for bridges.
Wind parameters can be configured in the full editor.
Wind is now taking into account the trajectory of bullets, rockets and bombs.
Changed allowable minimum and maximum heights of the clouds.
Changed behavior of aircraft in the ski gear during taxiing on the snow.

Other improvements:
Modified damage model bridges and synchronization of the network of partial damage.
Hit near the bridge, no longer causes damage to it.
Improved external model Ju-88, as well as set up a model of damage.
Minor changes in the cabin Ju-88.
Improved external model P-11c.
Added a view through the binoculars at the Ju-88 A-4/Torp, Ju-88 A-17 and He-111 H-6 (with torpedo).
Added indicator finder (RDF) in the cab SM.79.
Changes in the model of damage SM.79.
Y Bf-110 C-4, C-4 / b and G-2 modified material on the damaged external model.
Changes in the external model of Bf-110 G-2.
Changes in the model car Bf 110 G-2 and the new job of radio operator.
Improvements in the visual model Gladiator/J8A.
The device is a blind landing, and the artificial horizon in the cockpit He-111 are replaced by the corresponding real prototypes.
Changed the handling on the ground He-111.
Changed the landing gear indicator in the cockpit of the MiG-3.
Changed the landing gear indicator in the cockpit MC.200 VII
Replaced the wrong night textures in the cockpit MC.202
Changes in the cockpit Mosquito FB Mk VI
Improved display of the compass in the cockpit Yak-15
The algorithm behavior is very light aircraft, computer-controlled, when attacking ground targets.
The algorithm of torpedo attack computer pilots. Now they stand historically correct height and rate of discharge torpedoes.
Tuned flight model P-51.
Changed speed indicator in the cockpit G4M-11 "Betty".
In the cabins Fw-190 and Ta-152 lower windshield frame is made smaller.
Solved the problem of clipping a graphic on a few planes.
Tuned flight model I-15 bis.
The Italian G.50 pointed spinner changed to rounded.
Changed the position of the compass in the cockpit Aichi D3A.
New color schemes by default for IAR-80 IAR-81.
Added alpha channel in color schemes by default for all models of IL-2.
Redone on the grid collimator sight in the cab I-153.
Configured overheating engine Fokker D. XXI.
Changed the appearance of a propeller at the sight through the telescopic sight on the Fokker D. XXI
Uniform grid of all the sights San Giorgio.
Algorithm flight systems changed for some aircraft.
Disabled control flaps with the axis joystick for those aircraft, which was possible only two provisions of the "release" and "clean."
Changed behavior of float carburetors.
Added a new carburetor with a hole Miss Shilling to the appropriate aircraft Spitfire.
Changed the amount of ammunition on aircraft F6F-3 and F6F-5 (400 rounds per barrel).
Change the distance switching lodov for Ju-87 and Seafire.
Configured pullout by Ju-87 and Ju-88.
Deleted the sound of brakes on aircraft with ski landing gear.
Set accuracy of computer shooters and their behavior at night.
Added intermediate between the rifle and caliber cannon caliber type of cartridge cases.
Adjusted weight of all the piers, according to their historical significance.
Adjusted rate of fire the coaxial machine gun MG-81Z.
Changed the position of the beginning of contrails, and now it is always located on the same level with the engine and closer to him.
Map of the pilot is no longer centered, if you disable "markers on the map in the settings of difficulty.
Unfrozen rivers on the map of Slovakia.
To the route point on the maps the pilot and the briefing added a signature to a course and distance.
Added new option of "no icon for the player on the map", independent of the option "No route on the map."
For winter maps Murmansk camouflage aircraft by default is switched to "winter".
Added random distribution for the missiles.
Added support for a complete date (day / month / year) in the missions.
The dialog "Load / Save" in the Advanced Editor can be configured.
Configured algorithm demonstration of three-dimensional images of game objects in a graphical user interface.
Adjust the value of the thickness of the armor of tanks.
Configured damage model railroad trains.
Modified model of collisions sunken submarine, and now she is more vulnerable to close hits.
Modified algorithm for calculating the penetration of armor by a projectile hit the top of the tanks and other armored vehicles.
Modified damage model bunkers, they are now much harder to destroy.
Moving tanks now do not hesitate to fire a large caliber gun in a fast-flying plane.
Italians have the color changed to red tracers.
On some bomb sights redesigned accounting demolition.
Maximum speed of the ships now reduced when they are damaged.
Added effect of Burun and synchronization across a network of partial damage to the ship for some older models of boats
Added a "cap" on the nose Mistel that the latter is guaranteed to explode on impact.
Reworked effect of feedback joystick for firing of guns.
Added filter the player's name and call sign for the server that allows only standard symbols of the Latin and Cyrillic.

Daidalos Team would like to thank the following people:

302_Corsair a Polish translation.
Zoltán Nagy of the Hungarian translation.
JP-Dore for the French translation.
Abraxa for color schemes for the G55.
Italo for color schemes for Cant Z.1007.
CanonUK for color schemes for Swordfish and Fulmar.
Mr. Moonlight over color schemes for the IAR.
Alessandro 'Sternjaeger' Taffetani and flygvapenmuseum.se for background information on Re.2000.
Antti-Pekka Tuovinen for testing and mission for the Fokker D. XXI.
Birdman for changing display lodov for Ju-87 and Seafire.
Bruno Dilecce for G.55 and background information on ToKG.
IceFire for the mission and testing.
JapanCat for help with three-dimensional models.
Loku for improving the model P-11c.
Martin Mednis for informatsiyupo Hs 129, and an excellent tour of this cabin Hs 129.
Maurizio Di Terlizzi for the original instructions on how to sight San Giorgio.
Dan Clewett (SC / JG_DC) and Mike Abbott (SC / JG_Oesau) for setting up and testing the limits of strength airframe.
Sean Trestrail for setting up the ultimate strength airframe design and testing almost everything else.
Team Pacific for the map of Solomon Islands.
Waldo Pepper for technical support and guidance relating to radar and radio navigation.
Zipo top modeling Fulmar and CantZ.1007.
Ivan [ZloyPetrushkO] Petrov for the programming of the wind.
Sergei "Moff" Pobezhimov for localization into Russian language map of Murmansk and the Baltic States, Bessarabia correction maps.
Andrew "MrN" Nagornov for localization into Russian Baltic maps.
Andrew "Andric" Sokolov for localization into Russian language map of Bessarabia.

[meplay]

in English read down:

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5121031528/p/17

[T}{OR]

...
Tuned flight model P-51
...
Added a new carburetor with a hole Miss Shilling to the appropriate aircraft Spitfire.
...

...very interesting, and so is everything else on the list!

[JG53Frankyboy]

............In the cabins Fw-190 and Ta-152 lower windshield frame is made smaller.............

after all these years :D

[AndyJWest]

It might have been better if A.Fokker had said where he got the readme from, rather than just copying it...

Note that it is a Google translation of a Russian original, and may be out-of-date. Don't take it as authoratitive.

[fruitbat]

It might have been better if A.Fokker had said where he got the readme from, rather than just copying it...

Note that it is a Google translation of a Russian original, and may be out-of-date. Don't take it as authoratitive.

he got it from the post above his......

[A.Fokker]

Yes, I did. Just got a bit carried away with excitement :)
It sure looks good

[AndyJWest]

It does indeed.

I'm still trying to figure out what the AI 'P-5' is referring to though. Any ideas, anyone? (or is it a typo?)

[JG53Frankyboy]

R-5 ,soviet biplane recon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_R-5

[JG53Frankyboy]

about Spit Vs, 12lb would be 1942 and 16lb 1943 ??

[fruitbat]

12lbs would be early '42, 16lbs late '42

[JG53Frankyboy]

so we have to wait till we can see how these new Spit Vs will compare with the already existend ones.

[Kwiatek]

16 lbs was cleared in Spit VB in late 1942. The question is about +12 lbs. I think actually there would be hard to find any evidence if +12 lbs was allowed from begining of service SPitfire Mark VB or it was allowed somewhere later? I suppose that +12 lbs was emergency boost in Merlin 45 from begining of service - so from 1941 year.

In previous Spitfire types - +12 lbs emergency was introduced with used 100 octan fuel in Merlins. So all Spits MK I which were allowed to used 100 octan fuel got new power settings - + 9lbs for nominal power and +12 lbs for emergency. The same Spitfire MK II which had +12 lbs emergency boost since begining. I think with Spitfire MK VB was the same - +12 lbs was emergency boost since begining, then incrased for +16 lbs in late 1942 ( and +18 lbs for LF Merlins).

[fruitbat]

I'm just really pleased Mrs Shilling's Orifice is in.

I asked, and i got!:grin:

[mazex]

"Stormtroopers over Manchuria"... Mmm is that a mod? ;)

[anikollag]

Thanks for the readme DT :)
Looking forward to enjoy your hard work!

[LukeFF]

............In the cabins Fw-190 and Ta-152 lower windshield frame is made smaller.............

after all these years :D

Will be very curious to see how much that has been modified.

[JtD]

With switched off cockpit the effect is barely noticeable.

[JG53Frankyboy]

:D

[Aviar]

Can anyone from DT shed a little light on these two additions:

-The possibility of accidental discharge of external suspensions (bombs and missiles and BK7.5 Wfr.Gr. 21)

-Added random distribution for the missiles.


Also, I hope the following does not mean we will again be subjected to being shot down by a tank's main gun. We already went through that hell about 9 years ago.


"Moving tanks now do not hesitate to fire a large caliber gun in a fast-flying plane."

Aviar

[kendo65]

...

Also, I hope the following does not mean we will again be subjected to being shot down by a tank's main gun. We already went through that hell about 9 years ago.


"Moving tanks now do not hesitate to fire a large caliber gun in a fast-flying plane."

Aviar

It's poorly translated - in fact it gives the opposite meaning to that intended!

Believe it makes sense if you replace 'hesitate' with 'stop':

"Moving tanks now do not stop to fire a large caliber gun in (at) a fast-flying plane."

:)

also should add that I have nothing to do with DT - just that I went through the same process as yourself in trying to decipher this

[FAE_Cazador]

What about the announced change in AI awareness? I can remember a video update from DT months ago showing some AI fighter under a cloud that didn't realize enemy fighters were over them. The "AI radar", I would call it. But I can not find a reference to that here.

On the other side, it is said Zuti's MDS has been incorporated. But recently a DT member said there were difficulties and some bugs when using it, so it probably would not be released with 4.10.

Is this really the definitive 4.10 Readme or is an out-of-date version?

Anyhow it will be a great step forward and I only can thank DT a lot for their work for the Community!

[swiss]

"Moving tanks now do not hesitate to fire a large caliber gun in a fast-flying plane."


"Moving" tanks didn't even fire at other tanks, never.
They only fired from a halt, always.

[FAE_Cazador]

By the way, once the official Readme has been released in English, I think it would deserve a new "Sticky Thread" on top for discussions, doubts, etc. so this post could be closed. The End of a Season.

[Avimimus]

Can anyone from DT shed a little light on these two additions:

-The possibility of accidental discharge of external suspensions (bombs and missiles and BK7.5 Wfr.Gr. 21)

-Added random distribution for the missiles.

[....]

Aviar

I'm fairly certain that the first entry refers to the ability to "dump" external stores (ie. release without arming the fuses)
- Although I'd love it if there was the possibility of weapons being "torn" from hardpoints during high-g's or malfunctioning and refusing to releaser or detonate (apparently up to 25% of RP-3's failed to detonate when fired at ground targets).

The second should refer to dispersion for unguided rockets (which has been a major omission in the series)!
- It would be lovely if gravity influenced trajectory drop (ie. the not just gravity drop, but gravity effect on the orientation of the projectile) was modeled (although this is unlikely due to the need to update AI).

It is nice to the new AI for biplane ground attacks. We could really do with AI capable of making shallow (25-45 degrees) dive-bombing attacks (sometimes referred to as "glide bombing"). Most high-speed aircraft used this type of attack.

[bf-110]

At whom the tank would fire if there was a plane passing by and tanks coming?

[Fafnir_6]

I'm fairly certain that the first entry refers to the ability to "dump" external stores (ie. release without arming the fuses)
- Although I'd love it if there was the possibility of weapons being "torn" from hardpoints during high-g's or malfunctioning and refusing to releaser or detonate (apparently up to 25% of RP-3's failed to detonate when fired at ground targets).


I believe jettsioning external stores was detailed in an older DT video. Anyhow, the patch looks to be an amazing addition to the sim. Thank you to everyone involved :).

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

[swiss]

At whom the tank would fire if there was a plane passing by and tanks coming?

Fire priority goes by level of threat.
In a modern tank that would be helicopter over battle tank, battle tank over APC and even RPG over APC if closer than 400yards.

If you have two tanks you'll have check their position, or more precisely, the position of the gun - if it points to you the decision is obvious.

However, WW2 main guns were not stabilized, therefore they were unable to fire while moving.
You could try to fire upon an incoming plane with the tower MG though.
I knew a German WW2 tank crew member, he never mentioned they gave it a try on airplane with the main gun - I mean hitting a moving target, in the air, in WW2? Thats not worth it.

[Tempest123]

Just read the readme, wow, thats way more features than I expected even if it is unofficial, thnkx to DT for taking the time to correct some of the longstanding issues in IL2. I'm interested to see the FM tweaks (esp. the p-51) and the engine reliability changes, gonna be spending a lot of time in front of the computer in the next 4 months I think.

[Erkki]

No mention of FM or loadout fixes for late 109s. :(


The G damage however, at least if done well, I think will change the nature of online flying. No more bombers doing +-5G maneuvers carrying tons of bombs.

[_RAAF_Smouch]

Thank You very much TD!!! :grin::grin:

Very much appreciated!!!

Gonna be a big d'load me thinks ;)

[zaelu]

"Moving" tanks didn't even fire at other tanks, never.
They only fired from a halt, always.

the readme talks about hesitation only... the tanks in IL2 fire at the planes since old times... now... they will only not hesitate :grin:

..hopefully they will miss more this way. :-P

[kendo65]

"Moving" tanks didn't even fire at other tanks, never.
They only fired from a halt, always.


...
However, WW2 main guns were not stabilized, therefore they were unable to fire while moving.
You could try to fire upon an incoming plane with the tower MG though.
I knew a German WW2 tank crew member, he never mentioned they gave it a try on airplane with the main gun - I mean hitting a moving target, in the air, in WW2? Thats not worth it.

It all makes sense if you read the quote as:

"Moving tanks now do not stop to fire a large caliber gun at a fast-flying plane."

Previously, the tank AI could make them stop to take a shot at planes with their main guns. Now they won't. :)

See my previous post - it's a translation thing

[swiss]

It all makes sense if you read the quote as:

"Moving tanks now do not stop to fire a large caliber gun at a fast-flying plane."

Previously, the tank AI could make them stop to take a shot at planes with their main guns. Now they won't. :)

But firing with MG would indeed be ok.


No mention of FM or loadout fixes for late 109s.

What needed a fix there?

[KWM_Schnaps]

What needed a fix there?

Loadouts.
Typically, allowing a Bf109G10 to be fitted with a co-axial MG151/20, the Mk108 being an Umbausatz...
As to the FM, I'm no specialist on the one side, and would not like to reopen Pandora's box on the other side.

[JG53Frankyboy]

No mention of .... or loadout fixes for late 109s. :(


.....................

????
-> "Change the choices of weapons for all the Bf-109, He-111 H-6 and Ju 88 A-4"

that will include as examples bombs for the F-4 , MG151/20 as default for G-14 & G-10.

[Daniël]

"Stormtroopers over Manchuria"... Mmm is that a mod? ;)

"Sturmoviks over Manchuria" :grin:

[TinyTim]

Besides the heap of lovely additions that we are getting, I'm most amazed at the fact, that TD brings us a major overhaul of existing code. Many corrections, bug fixes and tweakings of mostly small but numerous issues that got overlooked or maybe overshadowed by constant influx of new additions up to now.

[daidalos.team]

User guide PDF posted here: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=17730

It contains less obscure feature list. :-P

[Avimimus]

But firing with MG would indeed be ok.



What needed a fix there?

Most tanks of this era did not have roof machine guns - it was something of an innovation when they were installed. The Coaxial machinegun has the same limitations as the main gun (lack of automatic traverse & elevation, narrow sight) and is just as poor for shooting at aircraft (although with shorter range and higher rate of fire).

That said, tanks were indeed ordered to shoot at aircraft during the war and there are a indeed a couple of cases where they scored hits.

[SPITACE]

great news about the bf110 g radio pos/seat :cool:

[swiss]

That said, tanks were indeed ordered to shoot at aircraft during the war and there are a indeed a couple of cases where they scored hits.

With the main gun?
And they weren't moving(the tanks), were they?


Most tanks of this era did not have roof machine guns

Never noticed that fact. Thx.

[Avimimus]

Yes, with the main gun. The tank would stop to fire, of course. There is also one case reported of an artillery crew shooting down a fighter.

[LukeFF]

Yes, with the main gun. The tank would stop to fire, of course. There is also one case reported of an artillery crew shooting down a fighter.

...which just proves these instances were outlying cases and not the norm.

[bf-110]

This thread is obsolete.

When Patch 4.11 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team thread will be open?:grin:

WAIT WAIT!I´M JOKING!!!!

[Fafnir_6]

This thread is obsolete.

When Patch 4.11 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team thread will be open?:grin:

WAIT WAIT!I´M JOKING!!!!

Haha. I look forward to it too. Perhaps we should let DT rest over the holidays, though :).

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

[FlyingShark]

Haha. I look forward to it too. Perhaps we should let DT rest over the holidays, though :).

Cheers,

Fafnir_6
OK, from today untill the 1st of Januari 2011 then back to work:mad:.

Off course they should take a well deserved rest:grin:.

4.10 Rocks.


~S~