DCS: Me 262 Discussion (Development on hold currently)

M3L is already building an Essex class carrier for the F4U-1D. The Hellcat as ED next WW2 module seems to be a safe bet now. Who does and when will com the inevitable Japanese plane is the open question. 

16 hours ago, NineLine said:

 

No one ever said it was being researched for 7 years, because that was the phase it was in during that time doesn't mean it was being actively researched, but also note that if you have never ordered stuff from a Museum or other like place, it can take a LONG time.

 

SO far ED has chosen 3 aircraft for WWII to do, the P-51D, the Fw 190A-8 and the Mosquito. Everything else has been thrust upon us. So while you can be disappointed by how we have handled this, understand that we could have not picked up the Kickstarter at all, and went on with our own plans. The Kickstarted money ran out part way through the 109K, its not like we were rolling in funds because of it, I am not asking you to feel sorry for us, but understand we have to do what will push us further ahead, if that means cracking the window on the Pacific first before the 262, then so be it.

 

Our aircraft are not made by cookie cutters, so development time is held at a premium, we cant make a lot of mistakes or miss steps in what we choose to do.

 

Thanks.

Norm, sorry, but you misunderstood me. Do you think I'm a ED/DCS fan or hater?

I'm not an native english speaker, so it's possible I didn't make myself clear.

To be clear: I want ED to prosper! For that I buy modules I don't even use.
I have these modules, but 2/3 of the time I spend in DCS I'm either flying the F-86F or Bf-109K4. Both released to beta in 2014. And I still continue to support ED.

So is it now clear how I stand to ED?

Please, If you read what I write or wrote, imagine it with a calm voice and no shouting.
Discussion helps making better decisions for everyone. Assumptions not. Do you know the saying: If you assume...?

But I'm not a blind disciple.

I'm criticising ED for them to get a better product - from my pov as a DCS user. I don't want them to feel bad about their product. If you think that I did that, then I'm sorry. That wasn't my intention.

I'm long enough here to remember how the KS went and the financial stuff about it. I took part in it and my name is in the manuals of those aircraft.

ED has to produce modules that create income. No question about that, absolutely not. We currently have 6(+1 soon) ED DCS WWII aircraft, 3 of those and all the assets and the normandy map are from the KS-Campaign. If these modules wouldn't sell good enough, why would ED make them and make more? And the last one of this list, the Me262 is the one that wouldn't sell well?? I think it would sell -at least- acceptable, but that's just my opinion.

I think that there are more books about the Me 262 than about e.g. the Mosquito. But that is also a subjective impression, I didn't make a thorough study about that.

Just a quick google search:
"Me 262 books" presents you 49 books.
"dh mosquito books" leads to 2 books about the aircraft, and some more about the insect.
"de havilland mosquito books" presents you 25 books about the mossie.

49 to 25...

Does it tell the whole story? No of course not. But I think it gives at least a indication of a general interest in this aircraft.

If there wasn't interest about 'stuff' there wouldn't be books about 'stuff' because no publisher would sell it.

ED and you gave the impression that ED is working on the 262. One example:

November 20:

source: "https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/128613-dcs-me-262-discussion/?do=findComment&comment=4485013"

But Kate said that ED is not working on it. I'm sure I'm not the only person who was stunned by this.

We have this back and forth with the 262 and that is fuelling this discussion. There wouldn't be any discussion about that if ED made it clear what is happening next or in particular with the 262. "Me262, yeah but Hellcat..." comments don't help. Or do you see these type of discussions about the F4 or AH-1? Or anytime before for another modules?

So my point is that I ask ED to stop giving the impression that a 262 will see the light anytime soon* by moving this thread to the wishlist and remove the option on the ED-Shop bakers page and adjust the Backers FAQ.

* "planned" doesn't tell anything, it's a hollow word that doesn't tell anything because every aircraft as an upcoming module is planned eventually in the future.

I do agree that ED should take care of the PTO. But I disagree on the timeline. ETO '44-'45 isn't finished imho and ED is now opening a new construction site in parallel with an already small WWII-Team. I fail to see how that makes things better. Split the team and the progress slows down significantly for both areas. Shift the focus and the other xTO comes to a stop.

I hope I was better understandable now.

Fox

Unfortunately, I have more and more an increased feeling that ED plans are base mainly on presenting single aircrafts without many thoughts about gameplay. Despite recently released new DM it seems that ED is building only gallery of warbirds (though marvelous ones) that are usable for gameplay combat only with great discrepancies to each others or to the theatre of operations. But from the commercial point of view I understand that (but that does not mean that I agree with that) - if we as customers buy everything regardless of coherency with the other modules then why they should care...

22 minutes ago, NineLine said:

I'm sorry but I have been saying in here that we have been locked into someone elses vision of WWII, and the idea of some top Pacific Fighters or a BoB plane set is the exact opposite of what you are describing.

OK, we will see how the two planned new theatres of operation are done in the terms of historically comparable performance and the gameplay. Personally I have no problem with PTO or BOB (though I would like the ETO is more complete before leaving it or postpone it). That is why, honestly, I will be very pleased if my above statement prove to be the false one. PLS, do not get me wrong NineLine, I am a great fan of ED and DCS is the best sim I am playing so my critique is intended as the constructive one with the intention to help you (i.e. ED) to understand the view of us ( i.e. your loyal customers). 

13 hours ago, tapi said:

OK, we will see how the two planned new theatres of operation are done in the terms of historically comparable performance and the gameplay. Personally I have no problem with PTO or BOB (though I would like the ETO is more complete before leaving it or postpone it). That is why, honestly, I will be very pleased if my above statement prove to be the false one. PLS, do not get me wrong NineLine, I am a great fan of ED and DCS is the best sim I am playing so my critique is intended as the constructive one with the intention to help you (i.e. ED) to understand the view of us ( i.e. your loyal customers). 

Form last Wags interview. Free Marianas map (modern) coming that year, WW2 map coming after. ED has planned to build propper Us Army, Marines and Imperial Japan Air, land and naval Assets. Meanwhile, ETO assets continue building.

11 hours ago, NineLine said:

I know you are a fan, never questioned that. 

Yes I did, at the time that was the info I had, but things can change. 

 

I don't have an official statement concerning the next WWII module, but the impression I am getting is it will be something to support the new WWII version of Marianas. 

Also understand that when I say the 262 is being researched or when it was that is, 10 other aircraft could be getting research as well. There is research, there is turning that research into useable data, there is actually building the FM, etc etc. We could also say the next aircraft is X and be working on Y and Z quietly. 

I have been doing research and searching for a couple of aircraft for a couple years now on and off. Nothing that has been announced or shared, so don't think we are in capable of multitasking. Many factors will determine the next aircraft or when the 262 will be done.

Thanks Norm

Fox

On 4/2/2021 at 8:46 PM, NineLine said:

 

I don't have an official statement concerning the next WWII module, but the impression I am getting is it will be something to support the new WWII version of Marianas. 

And as we know, Nick loves the Hellcat Awesome! Would be great to also get the -5 to go along with the Corsair for later scenarios. Hoping it comes soon.

But yes, I would love to get the Me-262 at some point. One of my favorite planes. And the last one from my rewards list from the KS (top tier backer).

On another note, are the 3d models for the Me 262 presented years ago still usable?
Thinking about the possibility of shortening its development time by picking it up from where it stopped once work on resumes.

But also considering what happened to the Mossie just last week, I assume you would be starting from scratch once development focus shifts to it?

Update #34 external models 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/508681281/dcs-wwii-europe-1944/posts/808060

Update #23 cockpit

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/508681281/dcs-wwii-europe-1944/posts/694456

JHAT, here are also some nice ones

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/508681281/dcs-wwii-europe-1944/posts/723040

Fox

Bear in mind that even some of the early modules have been updated with new 3D and textures recently. I find it very hard to believe people would be satisfied with art from 6 years ago. At a glance they don’t look anywhere near the quality of the recently released stuff.

At least the UH-1H, Mi8, F-86F, MiG-15, Fw190D9, Bf109K4 are similarily "old"...

The lighting got updated, 3D not.

21 hours ago, iFoxRomeo said:

 

 

Has plans to update yet, but no timeline.

On 3/31/2021 at 10:41 AM, xvii-Dietrich said:

In Episode 18 of the Air Combat Simulator podcast published yesterday, there was the second part of an interview with Nineline.

Ref: https://redcircle.com/shows/air-combat-sim/episodes/c2bd0746-9a19-428e-b8f9-e00d9702d99c

 

At 10m42s in the interview, @NineLine said, and I quote exactly:

 

So, let me answer that categorically:     YES.   I would trade the 262 for the Hellcat.

 

Nineline went on to say that the 262 would not be a good as people think it would be. Well, if it would be a challenge, great! Bring it on!! In fact the more temperamental and finicky the engines, the better. Its introduction has shaped the course of aviation in the 80 years since. Even if it was completely unarmed, I would still prefer it to the Hellcat (or any other aircraft currently in DCS). It has a context already in the simulator: a relevant map (Normandy), WW2 (European) Assets, and aircraft both to fly with (FW190D9) and against (P47D, B17G). And it would be a valuable and useful addition to our multiplayer server (Storm of War).

 

Nineline went on to say about the Hellcat that it had "... one of the highest kill ratio aircraft in World War 2". That does not make for compelling game play. And I would ask: against what (air/sea/land) does the Hellcat fly?  And I also understand that Nick Grey is partial to the Hellcat. Sure, it's his company, and no doubt we'll get that aircraft. But I do not not want to let the 262 be dismissed without adding at least one voice, no matter how small, for its inclusion in DCS World.

Lets look at the big picture. I suppose you like multiplayer yes? If you do, how is it going to fit in with the rest of the planeset?  I think we all agree, that what dcs needs more of is a planeset that matches historical accuracy, AND is congruent with the other planes that are available. Besides that it wasn´t flown in normandy(neither were most of the planes in dcs ww2), it was extremely rare to see one.

THe 262 is just going to be a plane you zip around 100 Mph faster than anyone else, getting cheap kills on an aircraft in one pass who doesnt see you. If you fly it very well, you will get 5-10 kills per sortie. Compelling gameplay... This will ultimately lead to multiplayer servers and mission designers to severly limit its use. You´ve played il -2 bodenplatte, yes? I don´t need to explain any further.

So other than a museum showcase, in which you can fly a lot offline, I´m pretty sure there are PLENTY of aircraft, even in ETO that would be mmuch more interesting to introduce into the DCS ww2 multiplayer world before a 262. 

And here I have to agree with the devs to leave it low priority.

Let's forget the other sim, the engine management will be a lot harder in DCS, and people fly higher in DCS, in the other sim if you climb at 7km you will see nobody and in 2 mins you're in the combat zone. I don't think it will be op, it's a good aircraft but if your enemy see you will hardly shoot them down, at 700-800 km/h the manoeuvrability is poor(+mk108 bad balistic) and if you slow down you will get shot down.

I don't understand why in the pacific it's not problem to have a6m wich are 100km/h slower than hellcat and here yes with the 262 and other planes, and I don't think we will get a ki-84 or N1k1 for the pacific 

22 minutes ago, Blackbird12 said:

Let's forget the other sim, the engine management will be a lot harder in DCS, and people fly higher in DCS, in the other sim if you climb at 7km you will see nobody and in 2 mins you're in the combat zone. I don't think it will be op, it's a good aircraft but if your enemy see you will hardly shoot them down, at 700-800 km/h the manoeuvrability is poor(+mk108 bad balistic) and if you slow down you will get shot down.

 

I don't understand why in the pacific it's not problem to have a6m wich are 100km/h slower than hellcat and here yes with the 262 and other planes, and I don't think we will get a ki-84 or N1k1 for the pacific 

 

 

Thanks for pointing into this direction. I was completely unaware of this.

Fox

19 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Thanks for pointing into this direction. I was completely unaware of this.

 

 

 

Fox

I never said the Pacific was great theatre. IMO, they should have gone for a Midway-New guinea theatre instead of the late one. But you don´t have 4 *30mm on each Hellcat that will utterly devastate any aircraft in one pass.

Though admit the Zeke armour wasn´t the best even for .50 cals. 

DCS going for pacific or Eto is besides what i´m talking about. I´m talking about specifically the ETO, there are better aircraft to introduce before the 262. The me 410, the 109 G6 late/G-14.. 109 g-10, P-38 Lightning, Hawker Tempest (if its possible)... the list goes on.

40 minutes ago, Blackbird12 said:

I don't understand why in the pacific it's not problem to have a6m wich are 100km/h slower than hellcat and here yes with the 262 and other planes, and I don't think we will get a ki-84 or N1k1 for the pacific 

I dont mean to hijack thread, hope Nineline wont be mad (apologies in advance!) but the report you are (and following poster) referring too is based on evaluation of captured airframe. It was captured on Saipan, shipped to San Diego and went through overhaul (to the best of U.S. Navy abilities). Afterwards it was flown to Patuxent River Naval Air Station where comparative performance trials were conducted vs FM-2, F6F-5, F4U-1D, P-38J-25, P-47D-30 and P-51D. 

Not going into full detail (actual values can be found in TAIC 38), the airplane performed below specs. It attained at full power 291 MPH on deck and 326 MPH at critical altitude (about 19.000+ ft). Japanese specifications for A6M5 model 52 indicate maximum speed of 302 knots (348 MPH) at 6.000 m but at rated power (so not full power, which would push it a bit more). Airplane in that test was thus at least (accounting for full power) 25 MPH slower than it should be at given altitude. What could be the cause of that remains unknown, likely captured on Saipan unit had damaged or tuned incorrectly supercharger. Climb performance was also below the specifications (it took nearly 9 minutes for it to reach 20.000 ft, whereas I.J.N. specifications indicate that it should reach that altitude in 7 min and 17 sec.), which also points at the supercharger malfunction.

Additionally, this comparison was conducted in November 1944 vs newest types of Allied airframes (so even after Leyte and Philippines). I don't know what is EDs idea for the PTO and I sincerely hope that they wish to make a coherent and historical plane choices, so there would be no F6F-5s over Marianas. In fact F6F-3s with water injection only started leaving factories around that time. The actual F6F-3 attained 376 - 379 MPH at critical altitude (based on all tests I've seen from 1943 and up to May 1944 period) which is still around 30 MPH faster than a Zero, but not nearly as fast as in those tests quoted. 

I've given some effort in another thread to provide better picture of the two in Marianas struggles, based on actual reports from U.S. Navy pilots:

As for personal preferences, I leave that to you. Everyone has his favorite birds. As for me, I've waited 17 years for a new Pacific Sim while flying all kinds of 109s, Spitfires, 190s and others in various sims. Guess its as good argument as any other to have it. But I wouldn't mind 262 as a study plane, in DCS it would fit perfectly as you could truly embrace it and see for what it was  

I refered to the TAIC report No.17. The test states, that another Zeke52 would be used for Army trials.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/ptr-1111.pdf

The Zeke 52 in the Army test TAIC 38 didn't have full power during 3/4 of the test

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/zeke52-taic38.pdf

41 minutes ago, Hiromachi said:

Japanese specifications for A6M5 model 52 indicate maximum speed of 302 knots (348 MPH) at 6.000 m but at rated power (so not full power, which would push it a bit more)

Where can we see these documents?

Here is another report: Zeke 52 @ 6000m 350mph but at WEP.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/japan/Zeke-52-TAIC-102D.pdf

A Mustang would snuff this Zero for lunch at 6.000m with 420mph@67''HG.

And that's Blackbird's point. There are people claiming that it is "uncool" that the axis Me262 is so much faster than allied aircraft... but when it is the other way around, it is okay.

1 hour ago, Hiromachi said:

As for me, I've waited 17 years for a new Pacific Sim while flying all kinds of 109s, Spitfires, 190s and others in various sims.

I'm with you on this. PTO will be interesting. But the PTO wasn't part of the Kickstarter. ED didn't exclude the Me262 when they took over. I see a difference here... But I sound like a broken record on this... reminder to myself ***stop it Fox, stop it***

Fox

i think 30mph faster is a pretty big deal when you get passed on the highway by a guy doing 30mph faster he is out of sight real soon

4 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

I refered to the TAIC report No.17. The test states, that another Zeke52 would be used for Army trials.

That might be so. There were 12 Zeros captured on Saipan. But it does not change the fact that numbers in there are not representative for comparison. For both reasons mentioned above.

11 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

The Zeke 52 in the Army test TAIC 38 didn't have full power during 3/4 of the test

Following sentence indicates that this was sorted after rewiring. They were running it at 2750 RPM, so it was full power since thats take-off / full power RPM for Sakae 21.

13 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Where can we see these documents?

This is a single data card from IJN, I got it from National Air and Space Museum. Not sure if I am allowed to post it (copyright and that kind of stuff, Smithsonians are very touchy about that). Other documents can be found in various US and Japanese museums and archives.

15 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Here is another report: Zeke 52 @ 6000m 350mph but at WEP.

It's not a report. It's one of the cards of TAIC No. 1 Performance & Characteristics which was meant to provide for pilots predictable and easy to use data of enemy aircraft based on Intelligence and Engineering data. To put it in other words, or as TAIC says itself, "Except where otherwise stated, performance figures represent estimates of Technical Air Intelligence Center and have been calculated after careful analysis derived from intelligence, captured equipment, drawings and photographs, using power ratings derived from the same sources. (...) Vmax is estimated using Military Power, and when available, War Emergency Power for representative calculations."

I will look later if this specific card was calculation or was based on one of those 12 Zeros tests. Its certainly closer to original Mitsubishi specification, so Intelligence guys did a good job  

23 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

A Mustang would snuff this Zero for lunch at 6.000m with 420mph@67''HG.

And where would that Mustang fly from ? Or land ? Certainly not on Marianas, which were occupied by Japanese

23 minutes ago, probad said:

i think 30mph faster is a pretty big deal when you get passed on the highway by a guy doing 30mph faster he is out of sight real soon

It is. But Spitfire is slower than 109. FW-190 A-8 is slower than P-51D. Yet we fly them. 30 MPH speed advantage is certainly not easy but for as long as Zero will stay above Hellcat (and Zero climbs faster) you can benefit from height advantage to catch up. 

But anyway, its all theory until ED decides to make it reality

12 minutes ago, Hiromachi said:

There were 12 Zeros captured on Saipan. But it does not change the fact that numbers in there are not representative for comparison. For both reasons mentioned above.

12 captured Zeros and none representative? I would think they had managed to re-build one or two Zeros in good condition out of the parts that 12 aircraft provide.

But I have no thorough knowledge about the PTO. Just what I found on wwiiacperf.

15 minutes ago, Hiromachi said:

This is a single data card from IJN, I got it from National Air and Space Museum. Not sure if I am allowed to post it (copyright and that kind of stuff, Smithsonians are very touchy about that). Other documents can be found in various US and Japanese museums and archives.

Thanks nonetheless.

24 minutes ago, Hiromachi said:

It's not a report. It's one of the cards of TAIC No. 1 Performance & Characteristics

Page 2 General Data: "A maximum speed of only 340mph has been obtained in flight tests"

So it's a bit more than just a data card. As you said collection of all available data, including testflights.

17 minutes ago, Hiromachi said:

And where would that Mustang fly from ? Or land ? Certainly not on Marianas, which were occupied by Japanese

I'm sure you understood the criticism.

Fox

4 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

I'm sure you understood the criticism.

And Im sure you understood sarcasm  

5 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

12 captured Zeros and none representative? I would think they had managed to re-build one or two Zeros in good condition out of the parts that 12 aircraft provide.

But I have no thorough knowledge about the PTO. Just what I found on wwiiacperf.

I dont know if all 12 were rebuilt. At least 4 were. But work on foreign technology is not easy when you have to supplement parts and don't have access to technical documentation. All engines are the same. But they are also different. First captured Zero, the Akutan Zero, was rebuilt to a flying condition with carburetor mismanaged in such way that it exhibited power and pressure loss in negative G maneuvers (akin to early Spitfires). Something that led U.S. Navy falsely to believe that pushovers can be a good idea to get away from Zeros. And which was terribly wrong since Zero could follow that trick.