Hi Oleg,

You didnt see my question i guess.

Thanks.

@proton

you realize that the explosions in your pictures are pure hollywood and have only a very distant relation to reality??

Hi Oleg, I would like to ask if you might release a small sound example in one of your up-coming game updates...109E at idle speed inside the pit would be :cool:

So...it doesn't change the idea. I just used the "gas" explosions as an eye catcher...

p.s. we could see gas explode in the context of the game...aviation fuel in barrels ect.

Oleg, with all due respect. If a "more complex" cockpit control or engine start is such a watse of time, why did you include take offs and landings or even an eject sequence for Il2 if its unnecesary. When you get shot down, it doesn´t matter if you eject or not, or whay take off at all, why did you give us the choice of taking off, (to make the feeling more inmersive) and yet you don´t want to give us the choice of transfering fuel from tank to tank, or select magnetos or turning on the bateries... we don´t need much, just a little more than in Il-2. Ususally setting the cockpit and doing stuff befor taking off sets the mood, the amience, to get in the role of a fighterpilot, not just a kid palying a "planes game".... Every new sim has more and more interactivity than previosu ones.. It feels that leaving the SOW series out of that trend like if you would still continue to do movies in Mono sound and not use stereo...and Sounf FX and that kind of thing...

Why not enchance the experience of being there for those who ant it?

Agree with Baco

I don't want a totally realistic start procedure, but mapping a couple of switches, fuel pump, and start button to a hotas or keyboard that must be set right for the engine to start creates a hightened immersion. Hearing the engine cranking over, and not being totally sure it will fire is an immersion factor that shouldn't be left out of SOW, especially in scramble situations.

Yes I agree...also, I would love to have the engine a bit tempermental on the winter map's. I wonder if Oleg will have temperature affecting fluids :-P

Yeah... I think that all here agree with a simple engine start sequence, but a little more complex than in IL-2 with battery, fuel tank selector, maybe a primer, two or three more commands, and ready to go. PLEASE!! :-P

Obviously people have not read what Qleg has said on the matter.
Basically it is a compromise for the online community who would not enjoy spending ten to twenty minutes going through realistic starts up procedures.
Lock-on has all the bells and whistles, look what a great commercial hit that was.

He has already indicated it will be a bit more realistic.
But imagine flying in an HIII in WW2, you would spend 20 minutes on the ground as your squad slowly circles above until it is your turn to take-off.
You might enjoy it the first time you do it in single player but after a few months????

I am more interested in damage model and FM than bells and whistles.
"Wow look I spent ten minutes inflight transfering fuel from my damaged right wing tank to my central one..."

Things I would like to see is a gunner kill does not shut-down your rear guns for long in a large bomber in real life someone else would take over over time.
but an entire mission flown without a rear gunner because of one lucky burst is unrealistic.
Pilots should have the option of reassigning crew positions.
When all is said and done IL2 was a survey sim and so will SOW be. That requires some compromise.