Planned Aircraft - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-05-2016, 01:57 PM   #21
OutOnTheOP
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Solty View Post
I always think.that we should have the current time line fleshed out. So to me, they should make prioeites for following aircraft: P38L, Fw190A8, Typhoon or Tempest, Mosquito, B25, B24, Hs129, Ju87D, He111, Ju88, Me410, Me109G14.
I agree they should first focus on rounding out the current stable, but I would personally think the A-20, A-26 and B-26 would be more appropriate for late '44 than the B-25 (A-20 having the broadest roles and proliferation in 1944, but A-26 being usable for Korea and Vietnam).

Me410 would probably be the best choice for the German light bomber/ attack role, as the He111 were very low numbers and practically out of service by late 1944. ...I guess Ju88 would give a good variety of roles beyond just bomber, though, and would make a good match to the A-20 as they both had variants in the night fighter, torpedo bomber, and ground attack/ heavy strafing role

And on a side note: for everyone that like to thumb their nose and act superior about how "balance isn't important, everything should be simulated to reality, and anyone who wants balance is a HAWX noob!", THIS is how you balance the game while staying a pure simulation: by selecting to develop aircraft that are well-balanced in capabilities against each other, while still historically compatible. You *could* pit a P-51D-25 against an A6M2 (Japan, 1944) or an F-15C versus a MiG-21 (Iraq, 1991) or an F-22 against a MiG-17 (DPRK, current day), and it would be totally historically valid. It would *also* be a wildly unfair matchup. Instead, choose good analogs: P-51B versus FW190A8; P-51D (75"MP) or Spitfire XIV versus Bf109K4; Spitfire IX versus Bf109G6; F-5E versus MiG-21bis; MiG-15 versus F-86. Don't throw a Brewster Buffalo up against a Bf109K4 and call it fair just because they were technically in service at the same time, then act like you're intellectually superior just because you value "accuracy".

Last edited by OutOnTheOP; 11-05-2016 at 02:31 PM.
OutOnTheOP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2016, 03:27 PM   #22
56RAF_Talisman
Member
 
56RAF_Talisman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OutOnTheOP View Post
I agree they should first focus on rounding out the current stable, but I would personally think the A-20, A-26 and B-26 would be more appropriate for late '44 than the B-25 (A-20 having the broadest roles and proliferation in 1944, but A-26 being usable for Korea and Vietnam).

Me410 would probably be the best choice for the German light bomber/ attack role, as the He111 were very low numbers and practically out of service by late 1944. ...I guess Ju88 would give a good variety of roles beyond just bomber, though, and would make a good match to the A-20 as they both had variants in the night fighter, torpedo bomber, and ground attack/ heavy strafing role

And on a side note: for everyone that like to thumb their nose and act superior about how "balance isn't important, everything should be simulated to reality, and anyone who wants balance is a HAWX noob!", THIS is how you balance the game while staying a pure simulation: by selecting to develop aircraft that are well-balanced in capabilities against each other, while still historically compatible. You *could* pit a P-51D-25 against an A6M2 (Japan, 1944) or an F-15C versus a MiG-21 (Iraq, 1991) or an F-22 against a MiG-17 (DPRK, current day), and it would be totally historically valid. It would *also* be a wildly unfair matchup. Instead, choose good analogs: P-51B versus FW190A8; P-51D (75"MP) or Spitfire XIV versus Bf109K4; Spitfire IX versus Bf109G6; F-5E versus MiG-21bis; MiG-15 versus F-86. Don't throw a Brewster Buffalo up against a Bf109K4 and call it fair just because they were technically in service at the same time, then act like you're intellectually superior just because you value "accuracy".
Well said

Happy landings,

Talisman
56RAF_Talisman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2016, 11:23 PM   #23
MiloMorai+
Posting Rights Revoked
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 666
Default

The B-25 would not be that out of place as it flew with the RAF 2 TAF.




Last edited by MiloMorai; 11-05-2016 at 11:26 PM.
MiloMorai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2016, 10:05 AM   #24
Buzzles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Europe
Posts: 2,440
Default

And again, another thread simply asking what's currently in development turns into a wishlist...
Buzzles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2016, 10:25 AM   #25
gavagai
Senior Member
 
gavagai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 2,070
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzles View Post
And again, another thread simply asking what's currently in development turns into a wishlist...
Yup.

Silver Dragon's list is cool, but most of that stuff I won't see in DCS for decades based on the current rate of development.

Here is what I might expect in the next 4 years. I won't go into the debates about whether to count three of them as WW2, so they are in italics.

ED:
Spitfire Mk IX
Me-262
P-47D
B-17 (AI only or flyable? We don't know yet)

VEAO:
P-40F (for how long has this thing been in preorder status???)
Spitfire Mk XIV
Glostor Meteor
Dehaviland Vampire
F-8F Bearcat


And I've read that Leatherneck has planned the F-4U and Okinawa map, but I haven't seen official confirmation for it. There could be more I haven't thought of...
__________________
Ryzen 2700x - AsRock x470 Master SLI/ac - 8gb EVGA 1070 - 32gb Corsair Vengeance LPX ddr4 @3.2ghz - Win 10 - MSFFB2 - CH Pro pedals - TWCS throttle - Trackir 5

Last edited by gavagai; 11-06-2016 at 10:30 AM.
gavagai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2016, 10:47 AM   #26
Silver_Dragon
ED Translator
 
Silver_Dragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Arafo, Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain
Posts: 5,507
Send a message via MSN to Silver_Dragon
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gavagai View Post
Yup.

Silver Dragon's list is cool, but most of that stuff I won't see in DCS for decades based on the current rate of development.

Here is what I might expect in the next 4 years. I won't go into the debates about whether to count three of them as WW2, so they are in italics.

ED:
Spitfire Mk IX
Me-262
P-47D
B-17 (AI only or flyable? We don't know yet)
Only AI.
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...&postcount=676


Quote:
Originally Posted by gavagai View Post
And I've read that Leatherneck has planned the F-4U and Okinawa map, but I haven't seen official confirmation for it. There could be more I haven't thought of...
First appears a year ago on SteamDB
https://steamdb.info/app/223750/dlc/

and after confirmed by Leatherneck
https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157420
https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=166168
__________________
More news to the front
Wishlist: ED / 3rd Party Campaings
My Rig: Intel I-5 750 2.67Ghz / Packard Bell FMP55 / 16 GB DDR3 RAM / GTX-1080 8 GB RAM / HD 1Tb/2Tb / Warthog / 2 MDF / TFPR

DCS: Roadmap (unofficial):https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893
DCS: List of Vacant models: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=104115
21Squad DCS: World News: https://www.facebook.com/21Squad-219508958071000/
Silver_Dragon Youtube
Spanish 4Th Perrus Squadon Member: http://www.4thperrus.com
Silver_Dragon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2016, 02:18 PM   #27
OutOnTheOP
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MiloMorai View Post
The B-25 would not be that out of place as it flew with the RAF 2 TAF.
You're correct, it would not be inappropriate. I just think the A-20, A-26, or B-26 would be *more* appropriate, both in the numbers used by then, and their superior performance giving them better chances in online play.

I will admit that the 75mm-armed B-25s would be great for anti-shipping when Pacific theater eventually comes along, but I think the broader roles and proliferation of the A-20, or the vastly superior aerodynamic performance and long service life of the A-26 would make them (in my opinion) better selections for development.

The A-20 and A-26 are reputed as handling "like fighters", making them a bit more survivable. They are 25% and 30% faster than a B-25, respectively. A-26, despite being rather smaller, carried twice the bomb load of the B-25. Also keep in mind that the B-25 is a 6-man crew, while A-20 and A-26 are 3 man crews: this means the A-20 or -26 can be operated by a single player with less "cheats" / workarounds, automation, or seat-jumping.
OutOnTheOP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2016, 02:20 PM   #28
OutOnTheOP
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gavagai View Post
Yup.
P-40F (for how long has this thing been in preorder status???)

Yep. That and a few other disappointments (Hawk, anyone?) are why I will no longer pre-order anything. I have grown very jaded about DCS releases. I will wait until it's out, there are reviews up on youtube, and the bugs are mostly worked out.

So, like... three years after release, at the average rate of debugging.
OutOnTheOP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2016, 07:56 PM   #29
firmek
Senior Member
 
firmek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 1,242
Default

Overall, The WWII period in DCS is:
1. Normandy Map
Not only the map itself but also ground, land and probably naval units.
2. Modules:
Already available:
- Fw 190 D-9
- Bf 109 K-4
- P-51D
Released in 2016
- Spitfire LF Mk. IX
- P-40F Kitty hawk
Probably released relatively soon:
- Spitfire Mk XIV
- F-4U Corsair

And more planned in the future. Just roughly with new Normandy map there are going to be 5 airplanes at the start and possibly 7 soon afterwards.
Considering full fidelity modules (not counting FC3) and excluding trainers, from other periods there are 6 planes and 4 helicopters. Those in total are from 1'st, 2'nd, 3'd and 4'th gen while the Caucasus and current availability of AI units is mostly tailored towards 1980+ scenarios.

The overall package of modules, map, AI units from the same era has much bigger value than each of the components separately. Thinking about it is quite interesting as comparing to the other periods, the WWII in DCS will be the most complete one and will provide the most consistent experience.
__________________
F/A-18, M-2000C, A-10C, AV-8B, AJS-37 Viggen, F-5E-3, F-86F, MiG-21bis, MiG-15bis, L-39 Albatros, C-101 Aviojet, P-51D, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Bf 109 4-K, UH-1H, Mi-8, Ka-50, NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf... and not enough time to fully enjoy it all
firmek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2017, 07:56 PM   #30
Jaktaz
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: California
Posts: 159
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ala13_ManOWar View Post
It's not like I'm interested in a rare Emil version instead of a proper 109E, but T model was built indeed. When it was obvious Graf Zepellin carrier wouldn't ever be in service naval features were disassembled and 109T operated as regular long range fighters in Norway. It wasn't the only example, Ju-87R, a B model with drop tanks capacity for long range, was used in North Africa. Without carrier equipment it looked like a regular B model though, but Afrika Korps' Stukas pics showing drop tanks reveal the model.


S!
That's very interesting, where can I read about the T's operating in Norway?
Jaktaz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:18 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.