4-12 wish list (Merged)

[Pfeil]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Tanks full of Avgas sort of act as flotation devices since oil is less dense than water.

Even so, oil/avgas are not lighter than air.
As such, draining both tanks(which would simultaneously fill them with air) would make for more effective floatation and less weight(thus higher on the water) than leaving them full.
Reducing overall mass would also reduce the damage caused by the initial impact into the water.

Originally Posted by Viking

I'd like to see longer wakes after the ships. More realistic.

I remember seeing something about a carrier pilot who had a lightning strike take out most of his instruments.
He actually found the carrier at night because he followed the algae churned up in the wake of the ship. So presumably large ships would leave behind quite a trail(even if not exactly a wake).

[shelby]

Morane ms 406 cockpit
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aerofos...12/3686786710/
http://www.airventure.de/hilzingen02...-Cockpit-R.jpg
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b3...406cockpit.jpg

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by RegRag1977

When two aircraft collide, the more robust in construction suffers less damage. Or at least both suffer fatal damages.

Anything than instant explosion would be an improvement.

Originally Posted by Bearcat

A possible workaround to that could be to try to time a mission so that when the strike group arrives the AI ships will begin a zig zag course.. I have seen this in coops before..

Having built one such mission, yeah, it indeed it a tedious task. Non the less, if we could have at least proper banking and turning simulated followed by proper curved wake texture it would add so much to those who build such missions.


Here is one idea for bomber pilots, especially since B-24 is being built now: ability to control or give some kind of input to our gunners (e.g. range at which they start firing, hold fire, scan the horizon / return to cruise mode* etc.), perhaps even have AI gunners calling out spotted bandits.

* This alone would add so much immersion to those flying bombers in formation.

[1984]

for 4.1x...

Originally Posted by 1984

1. yak-9m with vk-105pf2 engine...

about m-105 engines and these, i think, important yaks...


at first, what i found about engines (few of various pics attached)...

m-105p/pa – 1020-1050 hp at sl (nominal power, + 5 min. forzash with 1100 hp only before 200? m)...

m-105pf - 1210 hp at sl (nominal)...

m-105pf2 (vk-105pf2) - 1290 hp at sl (nominal)...

next, we know what in 44 yak-9 (m,d,t) in good condition had 525-545 kph at sl and >537-540, maybe, because new prop (like vish-105v4 for la-5fn/7)... well, anyway, 110 hp gives for yak-1,7,9 in 42-43 - only my opinion - around 15 kph (in total, confirmed in one document, later about this and yak-7b/lagg-3 in 42)... so, if pf2 really had 1290 hp, this engine can give for yak-9 with middle speed 537 around 10 kph, ie, 537+10=547 for normal yak-9m with pf-2 in autumn-winter'44 and later, or 550-555 kph for best yaks...

maybe, this simple calculation sometimes little wrong, but, anyway pf2 really gives for serial yaks better performance - well, i think, it's important like f-4 1.42? ata in early 42 - and it's reason why we need this yak in game, especially, because need do only other performance...

other reason, yak-3, la-7 and especially yak-9u were new types with some defects sometimes, and, if i'm not mistaken, not most mass fighters even in 45, so, better versions of really mass planes it's not whims or something like this (this i can say and about la-5f with metal spars)...

well, maybe, it's why even bf 109 with mw-50 and fw 190a 1.58/1.65 ata especially as F/G, besides poorer quality of german planes in 44-45, were not so dangerous for these yaks... but it's only my simple theory...


in ideal, if i'm not mistaken, need other number of shells/rounds for weapon (like 120/220 or 140/220 or 135/240 etc), some types of bombs and more correctly performances in total (for example, now wrong weight 3029 kg instead around 3050-3090 kg)...


and... just, remind and for start...

here most correctly drawings - how said at scalemodels.ru - for some series of yak-9t/m/dd (initials of the author, with same forum, in drawings)...

i hope, it's helps if DT wants change 3d model (or someone like JapanCat), especially, because we can see what front bulletproof for many yaks in game wrongly...

prototype of not serial yak-9p...

hmm, maybe, all the same, these yak-9p m-105pf, yak-7p m-105pf and yak-9s and other similar, mainly, experimental yaks must wait... better do something like yak-7b or ki-44 or a-36 etc etc etc... maybe, chance have only yak-7p with 3 shvaks - together with new yak-7b - because (it's only from one source) he "returned in 1 AR (air army) and could be used in combats after elimination of defects" (for prototype, how with yak-9k, was used repaired yak-7)...

[Bionde]

Wreckage of other airplanes can hit other airplanes, example, one airplane explodes and its wreckage could hit other airplanes.

sry for my bad translate english

[SPAD-1949]

Originally Posted by Bionde

Wreckage of other airplanes can hit other airplanes, example, one airplane explodes and its wreckage could hit other airplanes.

All of the above is allready implemented.
You can collide and just loose surfaces, you can cut your enemy in halft or rip of wings under the danger of exploding.
Pieces of ac will inflict damage or down other ac.

[Bionde]

Originally Posted by SPAD-1949

All of the above is allready implemented.
You can collide and just loose surfaces, you can cut your enemy in halft or rip of wings under the danger of exploding.
Pieces of ac will inflict damage or down other ac.

I know it but if a wing of B24 ripped in fall hits you, nothing happens, by I saw...

Another wish is the external ordnance can be hit, yesterday flying in La7 vs Ar-234 with 3xAB500 and I didn't know what happened with AI's, they just flew leveled, like drones and I can pratice shoot, and I tried to hit a bomb and nothing happens, as if the bomb was not it there. I know if a bomb was hit, probably wouldn't explode but at least would come off from the wing.

sry for my bad english.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Pfeil

Even so, oil/avgas are not lighter than air.
As such, draining both tanks(which would simultaneously fill them with air) would make for more effective floatation and less weight(thus higher on the water) than leaving them full.
Reducing overall mass would also reduce the damage caused by the initial impact into the water.

True. Some fuel systems actually route exhaust gasses into the fuel tanks as a fire protection (the layer of CO2 and other gasses prevents a spark in the tank from igniting the fuel). In a few cases, there are fuel bladders which collapse as the fuel empties, so they wouldn't provide flotation.

Originally Posted by Pfeil

I remember seeing something about a carrier pilot who had a lightning strike take out most of his instruments.
He actually found the carrier at night because he followed the algae churned up in the wake of the ship. So presumably large ships would leave behind quite a trail(even if not exactly a wake).

This is a bit of an unusual situation, since bioluminescent plankton don't appear in all waters, and they continue to glow for a while after they are agitated; possibly even after the ship's wake has subsided. (And damned lucky for the pilot!)

Even so, big ships traveling at speed leave long wakes. It would be wonderful if ships in IL2 looked like this:

http://bellsouthpwp2.net/e/a/ea_herr/Friday13th.jpg

http://bellsouthpwp2.net/e/a/ea_herr/NightFight2.gif

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/i...01/f003725.jpg

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/i...01/f004845.jpg

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/i...01/f057576.jpg

Note long wakes at high speeds and evasive action to avoid bombs and torpedoes.