Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[Billfish]

For some time I made the request (in Oleg's Ready Room) that the windscreen oiling of the Ki-61 be relooked at in that on many levels it is not an upright V like the allies used, yet more so in the regard that how the oiling system is laid out it is also very different then the BF-109.

In a nutshell, it would be very difficult to impossible to oil the windscreen in a Ki-61, all other aircraft except twin engine aircraft would be worse.......

I'd like to see if DT would be willing to look at the data and documentation.....If so, I'd be glad to post it again.........This should be a rather simple fix to a glaring error with the Ki-61 that would help make it more realistic........In kind removal of the venturi above the air intake would be appreciated (only 3-5 Ki-61 EVER had them).

Please let me know if DT would be willing to look at this information.....Thanks for the work.

K2

[zaelu]

A scoring system like BF2's Reality Mod would be more than OK.

Team mates nearby get points for support. Suppressing an enemy gets you points. Downing an enemy does not give you best points. Etc. A lot of good ideas there but, I don't know if IL-2 can do it.

[IvanK]

My only comment on the 50Call debate.

In static tests just done using P51 against target 1000feet away directly along the Mean Fixed Boreline with convergence set to 305metres. 100% of impacts fell in 6mill group.

USAF Harmonisation requirements as laid out in USAF Air Force Manual 335-25 Fighter Gunnery Section 3-4 Paragraph requires 100% CEP at 8Mills with 75%CEP at 4mills for 50Cal.

So dispersion is within USAF spec.

Fini

[cmirko]

Originally Posted by Billfish

Please let me know if DT would be willing to look at this information.....Thanks for the work.

K2

sure, every piece of info, backed up by tests and/or hard data will be looked at , if you are more comfortable use the DT email...

cheers

[=FPS=Salsero]

Next 3 questions:

1. There is some mod which allows moving trains/ships etc in dogfight mode, are there any plans for the the official implementation of it?
2. Very popular request is to limit the information given on the plane types that are flown by the adversaries in dogfight, any plans to implement it?
3. Are there any plans for tight integration with a free server commander (FBD)?

Previous batch of questions:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=266

[csThor]

@ Salsero

I hope you don't mind when I give my personal opinion. At least on some of the questions, that is.

1.) Bf 109 G-4 - IMO not worth the workload since it is essentially the same as a G-2, just with FuG 16, larger wheels and a stronger main landing gear.
2.) Fw 190 D-11 - extremely rare late-war type, ATM there is more important work on existing types and historically relevant types to be done.
3.) Yak-1 Model 1942 - I agree. Should close a gap in the planeset.
4.) I have no idea if the engine can even handle such "Lego airfields", but I doubt it. My guess: don't hope for it.
5.) Regarding deactivated 3D features: No idea. This is one for the coders.
6.) Murmansk map - no idea. Don't think so, though.

[II/JG54_Emil]

As I posted in a thread here that the guns are not historically correct.

If I name true numbers from different reliably sources, will you consider correcting them?

[csThor]

We'll need a little more specific info on what you consider not correct.

[Red Dragon-DK]

I been asking if DT would do anything about the sound in the Sim?

Regarding the 109 G4. I deffently disargee. We need it more, than we need biplane. Why do DT think we need more biplane?

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...t=8815&page=32

[II/JG54_Emil]

Originally Posted by csThor

We'll need a little more specific info on what you consider not correct.

Weapon correction concerning muzzle velocity, frequency, belting sequence.

The changes are in most cases minimal but should done.

Also concerning some load-outs.