[DBS]TH0R Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 (edited) Another question -- on Silver Dragon's roadmap, he has a B-17F as a planned AI craft; if that rumour is true, why the "F" model is being made? It's strange that not the definitive "G" version is being considered, especially if one thinks about that the "G" was used from late 1943 and that almost all other DCS WW2 aircraft in comparison are the latest and greatest variant... Not to mention F model was almost completely phased out in the second half of '44. Edited October 1, 2015 by T}{OR P8Z68 | 2500k @ 4.5 | GTX 1080Ti | 2x8 GB @ 1600 | TM Hog (extended 7cm) & MFG Crosswind (S/N 007) | TIR v5 WWII bomber formations | DCS P-51D: [TEST] TO distance / gross weight / temperature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted October 1, 2015 ED Team Share Posted October 1, 2015 Its true there is a AI B-17 planned, I don't remember it being an F though, think that might be wrong? Its a G here: http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=363 Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quent Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 I've always had this desire somewhere in my head of having big, bulky aircrafts made into DCS modules. Would be amazing to have ten players in the same B-17 using the multicrew sharing technology. ;) Kind regards, Quentin. [sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic105862_2.gif[/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greco.bernardi Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 Can be the AI B17 include in DCSW this year? This will make more fun try to down something that return your fire like a porcupine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOnTheOP Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 (edited) I'm in total agreement we need some serious daylight bombers for the WW2 set to really "take off", but the more I think about it, the more I believe a B-24 would be a better choice than a B-17. The B-24 was produced in significantly higher numbers, saw extensive use in the Pacific (while, iirc the B-17 did not, outside the very early campaigns), the B-24 was much more heavily used in the maritime patrol role, and the B-24 had significantly better performance all around. It also would be nice from a historical perspective, because while everyone always thinks of the B-17, the B-24 was more significant to the war effort and more numerous, so having it be the lead-in heavy for DCS (even if only AI) would be a nice teaching point for people with only a casual understanding of WW2 history (in much the way having a Lancaster would be a nice teaching point for the US-centric folk who have never heard much about the British nightime heavy bomber campaign- though it wouldn't fit in the current plane set as nicely, as WW2 night ops are poorly covered in general right now) Edited October 18, 2015 by OutOnTheOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver_Dragon Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 Its true there is a AI B-17 planned, I don't remember it being an F though, think that might be wrong? Its a G here: http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=363 Fixed the Roadmap Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscar19681 Posted October 18, 2015 Share Posted October 18, 2015 I'm in total agreement we need some serious daylight bombers for the WW2 set to really "take off", but the more I think about it, the more I believe a B-24 would be a better choice than a B-17. The B-24 was produced in significantly higher numbers, saw extensive use in the Pacific (while, iirc the B-17 did not, outside the very early campaigns), the B-24 was much more heavily used in the maritime patrol role, and the B-24 had significantly better performance all around. It also would be nice from a historical perspective, because while everyone always thinks of the B-17, the B-24 was more significant to the war effort and more numerous, so having it be the lead-in heavy for DCS (even if only AI) would be a nice teaching point for people with only a casual understanding of WW2 history (in much the way having a Lancaster would be a nice teaching point for the US-centric folk who have never heard much about the British nightime heavy bomber campaign- though it wouldn't fit in the current plane set as nicely, as WW2 night ops are poorly covered in general right now) Maybe but The b-17 just looks so Much better then The b-24 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavagai Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 The B-24 was produced in significantly higher numbers, saw extensive use in the Pacific (while, iirc the B-17 did not, outside the very early campaigns), the B-24 was much more heavily used in the maritime patrol role, and the B-24 had significantly better performance all around. Reads like an argument for the B-17 in a game called "Europe 1944." P-51D | Fw 190D-9 | Bf 109K-4 | Spitfire Mk IX | P-47D | WW2 assets pack | F-86 | Mig-15 | Mig-21 | Mirage 2000C | A-10C II | F-5E | F-16 | F/A-18 | Ka-50 | Combined Arms | FC3 | Nevada | Normandy | Straight of Hormuz | Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[DBS]TH0R Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 I'm in total agreement we need some serious daylight bombers for the WW2 set to really "take off", but the more I think about it, the more I believe a B-24 would be a better choice than a B-17. The B-24 was produced in significantly higher numbers, saw extensive use in the Pacific (while, iirc the B-17 did not, outside the very early campaigns), the B-24 was much more heavily used in the maritime patrol role, and the B-24 had significantly better performance all around. It also would be nice from a historical perspective, because while everyone always thinks of the B-17, the B-24 was more significant to the war effort and more numerous, so having it be the lead-in heavy for DCS (even if only AI) would be a nice teaching point for people with only a casual understanding of WW2 history (in much the way having a Lancaster would be a nice teaching point for the US-centric folk who have never heard much about the British nightime heavy bomber campaign- though it wouldn't fit in the current plane set as nicely, as WW2 night ops are poorly covered in general right now) All true. OTOH B-17 was easier to fly formation in, and could fly higher IIRC. Back on the subject, since we're looking into ETO here (with the Normandy map), B-17 squadrons outnumbered those with B-24s by a large margin. Late B-17G with "Cheyenne" Tail Turret would fit like a glove considering the equipment and WWII planes we already have / are being built. P8Z68 | 2500k @ 4.5 | GTX 1080Ti | 2x8 GB @ 1600 | TM Hog (extended 7cm) & MFG Crosswind (S/N 007) | TIR v5 WWII bomber formations | DCS P-51D: [TEST] TO distance / gross weight / temperature Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 The 8th AF consisted of 3 Divisions. The 1st Division had 12 B-17 Groups. The 2cd Division had 15 Groups of B-24s. The 3rd Division had 14 groups of B-17s. So 26 BGs of B-17s and 15 BGs of B-24s. The medium bombers all started out as part of the 8th Bomber Command, then after reorganization in September/October 1943 all the mediums were transferred into the 9th. The 15th AF consisted of 5 Bomb Wings with 6 BG of B-17s and 15 BGs of B-24s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOnTheOP Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) The 8th AF consisted of 3 Divisions. The 1st Division had 12 B-17 Groups. The 2cd Division had 15 Groups of B-24s. The 3rd Division had 14 groups of B-17s. So 26 BGs of B-17s and 15 BGs of B-24s. The medium bombers all started out as part of the 8th Bomber Command, then after reorganization in September/October 1943 all the mediums were transferred into the 9th. The 15th AF consisted of 5 Bomb Wings with 6 BG of B-17s and 15 BGs of B-24s.. Exactly. You can't forget the 15th, operating out of the Mediterranean (later out of Italy itself), against targets in German-controlled territory, to include Germany itself. Not to mention key targets in the Balkans (Romanian petrochemical industry, for example). 30 groups of B-24, and 32 of B-17 in the west, after D-Day, all told. Prior to that, five of the groups operated B-24 instead of B-17. And in the Pacific, it was essentially *all* B-24, and no B-17 whatsoever. It still remains that the B-24 has been done great disservice in historical telling. 19,000 B-24 were built, vice only 12,700 B-17. Either way, the B-24 had higher top speed, larger bombload, and a better defensive layout (specifically, I'm talking about nose and tail positions on the -24 vice the -17). Edited October 19, 2015 by OutOnTheOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 By mid 1843 most B-17s had been withdrawn from the Pacific. They were needed as replacements in Europe. A/C on hand vs Germany Table 88 The highest number, 1st Line, March 1945, 2891 B-17s, 2181 B-24s In April 1945, there was 2355 P-47s, 2455 P-51s. A/C on hand, ETO Table 89 A/C on hand, MTO Table 90 http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a542518.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOnTheOP Posted October 19, 2015 Share Posted October 19, 2015 (edited) By mid 1843 most B-17s had been withdrawn from the Pacific. They were needed as replacements in Europe. A/C on hand vs Germany Table 88 The highest number, 1st Line, March 1945, 2891 B-17s, 2181 B-24s In April 1945, there was 2355 P-47s, 2455 P-51s. A/C on hand, ETO Table 89 A/C on hand, MTO Table 90 http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a542518.pdf Yes, and at more than a few points, that same table (88 ) tells a different story (note this is from an overleaf page, so you have to count down the rows based on the previous page's legend, which would have been on the opposite leaf): April 44, 2040 B-24, 1860 B-17 in theaters vs Germany. May 44, 2484 B-24, 1863 B-17 vs Germany. June 44, 2440 B-24, 1786 B-17 vs Germany. July 44, 2594 B-24, 2011 B-17 vs Germany. August 44, 2685 B-24, 2195 B-17 vs Germany. September 44, 2661 B-24, 2334 B-17 vs Germany In October, the B-17 finally overtakes the B-24. But when considering for what is, as was rather snidely pointed out to me earlier, supposed to be "Europe 1944", and the "Normandy" theater, it seems that the relative numbers during the period from the landings in early June, until the Operation Cobra breakout in early August, are the most pertinent to consider. Yes, B-24 was drawn down in Europe after Cobra; at that point, very-long-range aircraft were much more valuable in the Pacific, considering that continental bases were available in Europe after that (yes, I'm aware the 8th AF continued to operate from England, but the point is that the planners would have known that if they needed to strike targets further east, that they had airfields from which they could) Moreover, table 91 (aircraft in theaters against Japan) shows not a single, one, solitary B-17 after November 1943. Not one. Ultimately, it's worth considering that while ED may be advertising "Europe 1944" now, there are other developers with an eye on other theater (with LNS strongly hinting at a Zero); the B-24 fits in to Europe every bit as well as the B-17, and it also it fits in the Pacific infinitely better than late-model B-17s. Edited October 19, 2015 by OutOnTheOP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastfreddie Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 I'd be all for having both in the game but I think the B17 was promised in the WWII fund raiser so thats what we will get. My grandfather was a rear gunner on the B-24 in the Pacific and he has several interesting stories. He completed the entire tour (I believe 500 flight hours) and was shot down once my Jap AA. I doubt I'll get to see him before he dies or I'd video record his experiences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted October 20, 2015 ED Team Share Posted October 20, 2015 I'd be all for having both in the game but I think the B17 was promised in the WWII fund raiser so thats what we will get. My grandfather was a rear gunner on the B-24 in the Pacific and he has several interesting stories. He completed the entire tour (I believe 500 flight hours) and was shot down once my Jap AA. I doubt I'll get to see him before he dies or I'd video record his experiences. Yeah, the B-17 will come, but I think/hope we will see a well rounded list of units for both sides of the fight. Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOnTheOP Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 Yeah, the B-17 will come, but I think/hope we will see a well rounded list of units for both sides of the fight. I hope so. I'd really love to see some Mosquitos and Me410s and Yak9 and A-26s and P-61s and B-17s and C-47s and Pe2s and C.202s and Horsa and.... ...but of course, there are some that are needed before others. I think B-17 or B-24 is most desperately needed, followed by Ju88 or He111 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greco.bernardi Posted October 20, 2015 Share Posted October 20, 2015 I hope so. I'd really love to see some Mosquitos and Me410s and Yak9 and A-26s and P-61s and B-17s and C-47s and Pe2s and C.202s and Horsa and.... ...but of course, there are some that are needed before others. I think B-17 or B-24 is most desperately needed, followed by Ju88 or He111 I think that you will not see Yaks or Pe2s on Normandy Map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silky Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 If only for an AI right now would be outstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOnTheOP Posted November 1, 2015 Share Posted November 1, 2015 I think that you will not see Yaks or Pe2s on Normandy Map. Yes, of course, we should only expect, or desire, aircraft known to have historically engaged in combat in the limited theaters portrayed in DCS. So, please, give me a moment while I delete the P-51, Fw190D9, Bf109K4, F-86, A-10, and F-15 from my hard drive, because none of those ever performed a single combat mission over Georgia. I guess I can at least re-install the P-51, Focke-Wulf, and Messerschmidt when Normandy comes out, but I'll just have to go without for now. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warlord64 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 Hi Guys Here is B-17G skin I recently completed to be used with the WW2 Assets Set in DCS World 2 OpenAlpha. Regards Keith :thumbup: DOWNLOAD: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2829279/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warlord64 Posted January 16, 2018 Share Posted January 16, 2018 Hi Guys Here is another B-17G Skin for WW2 Assets Set in DCS World 2 OpenAlpha. 'Flak Eater' (WF-J) was assigned to 364th Bomb Squadron 305th Bomb Group Chelveston (England) on May 17, 1944 and later transferred to 351st Bomb Group at Polbrook on May 23,1945 then scrapped December 1945. I have included a 364thBS 305thBG 'No Codes' Skin so individual Aircraft Serial Numbers and Codes as well as any Nose Art can be added if required. Cheers Keith:salute: DOWNLOAD: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2875958/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vander Posted January 20, 2018 Share Posted January 20, 2018 :thumbup::thumbup: Looks fabulous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philstyle Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 :thumbup::thumbup: Looks fabulous! indeed... we need more skins in the default game. please ED.. tap the community . . . On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmy Posted January 21, 2018 Share Posted January 21, 2018 At least give us a traditional OD over Grey scheme. I'd rather have 24+ "generic" 17s in formation than the stock scheme which looks more like a Dumbo than a combat bird. Oh, and can we get a crew in the 17? Ghost Bombers kinda blow the immersion... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use. www.crosswindimages.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackLion213 Posted January 22, 2018 Share Posted January 22, 2018 At least give us a traditional OD over Grey scheme. I'd rather have 24+ "generic" 17s in formation than the stock scheme which looks more like a Dumbo than a combat bird. Well, the DCS B-17G is what the aircraft looked like the in the summer of 1944: Its a totally standard scheme for the 447th Bombardment group. :) The OD over grey scheme was pretty rare by the summer of 1944, especially in the newer B-17Gs with the Cheyenne tail as depicted in the current B-17G. OD over grey was 1942 to late 1943, after that the unpainted aluminum predominated. Also, by the summer of 1944, the 8th was launching big missions with around 1000 bombers. Nearly all these bombers were based in southeast England and the bases were just a few miles from each other. As such, it was easy for bombers to accidentally form up with the wrong group if they weren't careful (their fuel load was based on their target, so attempting to fly with the wrong group could end badly). To avoid this, Bomb groups were sporting ever more distinctive markings as time passed - hence all the yellow and big numerals. But it is a totally accurate scheme and not an outlier in terms of appearance. Here are some reference photos. :) http://www.8thafhs-pa.org/stories/bomb-group-gallery/447th-bomb-group/ -Nick 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts