DCS: Me 262 Discussion (Development on hold currently)

[Mogster]

14 hours ago, Cunctator said:

WW2 Pacific will add a lot to DCS, mainly WW2 carrier ops and naval warfare, but it is also a theater that wasn't done properly or at all for a very long time. I would imagine that it is also more attractive for that emerging Asian markets. The Pacific certainly has the potential to attract many more people to DCS WW2 with no competition of any kind around. If M3L finishes the F4U this year with an Essex Class carrier and some Japanese assets, a good foundation will  already be there.

The problem with forum polls is that mostly the followers of the current set up will vote, which is not so optimal if you try top expand your customer base and attract new players. 

I think what’s made the Pacific less attractive as a sim location is the perception that most realistic missions will involve very long flights over water. Simple as that.
 

I agree about choosing aircraft by poll, all you’ll end up with are late war super props + the 262...

[NineLine]

4 hours ago, Mogster said:

I think what’s made the Pacific less attractive as a sim location is the perception that most realistic missions will involve very long flights over water. Simple as that.

I'm not sure I understand? Why would the distances be different than an ETO mission, especially if Carriers are considered?

[Katj]

WW2 Pacific will add a lot to DCS, mainly WW2 carrier ops and naval warfare, but it is also a theater that wasn't done properly or at all for a very long time. I would imagine that it is also more attractive for that emerging Asian markets. The Pacific certainly has the potential to attract many more people to DCS WW2 with no competition of any kind around. If M3L finishes the F4U this year with an Essex Class carrier and some Japanese assets, a good foundation will  already be there.
The problem with forum polls is that mostly the followers of the current set up will vote, which is not so optimal if you try top expand your customer base and attract new players. 

Unfortunately the F4U is pretty much in the late war superprop category. As I understand it there are too few documents preserved for aircraft such as the N1K2-J for us to ever see them in DCS. So what is the F4U going to fight? It'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.

What we need, given the constraints above, is a pearl harbor/midway/coral sea era matchup, with Wildcats and Zeros, along with a dive bomber for each side. That is 4 aircraft that will give us the best experience, I'm sure. The F4U, while cool, is a waste.

[Mogster]

4 hours ago, NineLine said:

I'm not sure I understand? Why would the distances be different than an ETO mission, especially if Carriers are considered?

 

it’s just geography and the relative intensity of the air war in the two theatres. Rabaul to Guadalcanal is 1000km for instance.

 

Surely realistic carrier ops mostly involved launching at the maximum range of your aircraft. Land ops in the Pacific tended to involve flying hundreds of miles from one tiny island to another as mostly you have one airfield per island. Maps would mostly be water, unless you produce some version with the islands pushed closer together, which I have seen suggested many times. I’ve seen suggestions of all water maps for carrier v carrier ops. I’d like to see a New Guinea/Solomons map but measuring the distances between the airfields used it’d cover an enormous area, lots of it would be water though.

In Northern Europe scenarios you had aircraft based in Southern England or Holland and France flying between the 2 locations. Hundreds of airfields. Flight times of less than an hour mostly over land, easy navigation and plenty to look at. We already have quite small Northern Europe maps and there’s no problem creating historical scenarios on them.

Edited March 20, 2021 by Mogster

[Cunctator]

19 minutes ago, Katj said:

Unfortunately the F4U is pretty much in the late war superprop category. As I understand it there are too few documents preserved for aircraft such as the N1K2-J for us to ever see them in DCS. So what is the F4U going to fight? It'll be like shooting fish in a barrel.

What we need, given the constraints above, is a pearl harbor/midway/coral sea era matchup, with Wildcats and Zeros, along with a dive bomber for each side. That is 4 aircraft that will give us the best experience, I'm sure. The F4U, while cool, is a waste.

 

No it's not. We are not getting the late war/Korea F4U-4, introduced in 1945 during the Okinawa campaign, but the F4U-1D workhorse. Extensively used by the US Marine Corps, Navy and Fleet Air Arm, in Norway, the Indian Ocean and Pacific, the F4U-1D was pretty much the same F4U-1/A that first saw combat in the Salomons in 1943 plus water injection and provisions for additional external stores (two additional pylons for bombs under the inner wings and 8 launchers for rockets under the outer wings). The -1D was introduced in early 1944 with some improvements during it's production run (main canopy without the horizontal frames, rocket launchers). The version M3L is doing has some late war radios and other equipment installed, but that does not make it a superprop. 

[Cunctator]

58 minutes ago, Mogster said:

 

it’s just geography and the relative intensity of the air war in the two theatres. Rabaul to Guadalcanal is 1000km for instance.

 

Surely realistic carrier ops mostly involved launching at the maximum range of your aircraft. Land ops in the Pacific tended to involve flying hundreds of miles from one tiny island to another as mostly you have one airfield per island. Maps would mostly be water, unless you produce some version with the islands pushed closer together, which I have seen suggested many times. I’ve seen suggestions of all water maps for carrier v carrier ops. I’d like to see a New Guinea/Solomons map but measuring the distances between the airfields used it’d cover an enormous area, lots of it would be water though.

In Northern Europe scenarios you had aircraft based in Southern England or Holland and France flying between the 2 locations. Hundreds of airfields. Flight times of less than an hour mostly over land, easy navigation and plenty to look at. We already have quite small Northern Europe maps and there’s no problem creating historical scenarios on them.

 

 

It should be no problem to built some realistic missions that don't require half a day for flying them, if you leave out the Yamamoto intercept or Japanese strikes against Guadalcanal from Rabaul. Almost any map will offer some opportunities.  The range of many WW2 carrier types wasn't great to begin with. The Devastator had a 434 mile range for example. At Midway they launched from 140 miles away. During operation Mascot against the Tirpitz in Norway the British carriers launched their strike from 127 miles away.

At the Salomons, Renard airfield on the Russels is 145 miles way from Munda point, half of it over beautiful New Georgia island. Later Corsairs and other allied planes operating out of Munda and Ondonga hat to fly just 50 miles to cover the US landings on Vella Lavella islands. 

For the Japanese side one could also built realistic short range missions, like defending the Marianas or Iwo Jima form US carrier strikes.  

 

And of the course there is always the option to place the carriers closer to each other or their target.

 

[Katj]

 
No it's not. We are not getting the late war/Korea F4U-4, introduced in 1945 during the Okinawa campaign, but the F4U-1D workhorse. Extensively used by the US Marine Corps, Navy and Fleet Air Arm, in Norway, the Indian Ocean and Pacific, the F4U-1D was pretty much the same F4U-1/A that first saw combat in the Salomons in 1943 plus water injection and provisions for additional external stores (two additional pylons for bombs under the inner wings and 8 launchers for rockets under the outer wings). The -1D was introduced in early 1944 with some improvements during it's production run (main canopy without the horizontal frames, rocket launchers). The version M3L is doing has some late war radios and other equipment installed, but that does not make it a superprop. 

I'm not going to argue about what's a superprop or not. You're missing the point.

What is the Corsair going to fight?

[Mogster]

This discussion could do with being moved to a new thread in the WW2 Pacific folder.

 

Not sure if the mods can move the posts?

[Cunctator]

3 hours ago, Katj said:

I'm not going to argue about what's a superprop or not. You're missing the point.

What is the Corsair going to fight?

 

 

M3L has an AI Zero in development. Not sure if it will be released together with the F4U but eventually it will be available. For European scenarios we have the Fw 190A8, that was operated by JG 5 in Norway, and is an appropriate opponent from the same timeframe. Most likely ED has also plans for some kind of Japanese aircraft. IO think this was already confirmed in some interview.  

[tapi]

On 3/19/2021 at 1:07 AM, NineLine said:

Maybe its time for another poll, and I can give a list of possible aircraft and see what people want the most, at least a sample of the people on the forums. 

Well, one poll is here already:

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/254103-most-wantedneeded-aircraft-for-dcs-wwii/

So far 83 people voted...

[MrExplosion]

7 minutes ago, tapi said:

Well, one poll is here already:

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/254103-most-wantedneeded-aircraft-for-dcs-wwii/

So far 83 people voted...

 

That poll is void, since the situation changed after the majority of votes had been cast. 

[tapi]

AFAIK only thing that has changed is postponed Me 262. Do I miss something?

[MrExplosion]

52 minutes ago, tapi said:

AFAIK only thing that has changed is postponed Me 262. Do I miss something?

 

... and this is the 262 thread and part of the reason a new poll was proposed by NineLine was to find out if enough people are interested in the 262 aaaand the 262 is not in your poll. Sooo.... ;)

[NineLine]

On 3/20/2021 at 2:20 PM, tapi said:

AFAIK only thing that has changed is postponed Me 262. Do I miss something?

No nothing has changed.

[iFoxRomeo]

@NineLineIs that correct, that ED has separate Teams for (modern) jets, helicopters, (vintage) prop aircraft?

If so, the Me262 could be developed by the jet team, and the prop Team could continue on the props...

Should be easy peazy for the team that made the Hornet and Viper. They need only to program the Jumo engine and the Schwalbe airframe. No complicated avionics, no propeller interaction...

 

Fox

Edited March 22, 2021 by iFoxRomeo

[Silver_Dragon]

3 hours ago, iFoxRomeo said:

@NineLineIs that correct, that ED has separate Teams for (modern) jets, helicopters, (vintage) prop aircraft?

If so, the Me262 could be developed by the jet team, and the prop Team could continue on the props...

Should be easy peazy for the team that made the Hornet and Viper. They need only to program the Jumo engine and the Schwalbe airframe. No complicated avionics, no propeller interaction...

 

Fox

 

 

Someone need remember:

- WW2 team has on the main moscow ED Studio, that make WW2 aircrafts and other team the WW2 assets pack, the main team build ED DCS core, Supercarrier and others.

- F/A-18C, F-16CM, Mi-24 has the same team with build the UH-1, Mi-8, the Old Belsimtek team, on a separate studio on moscow.

- Map team has on Minsk, Bielorusia, build TDK (Terrain develop kit) and maps (WW2 and modern).

[xvii-Dietrich]

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:

Quote

I would ask anyone that wanted the 262, would you trade the 262 for the Hellcat...

 

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.

[TotenDead]

2 часа назад, xvii-Dietrich сказал:

 

 

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

Agreed, 262 is a way more interesting aircraft compared to Heilcat

[MrExplosion]

3 hours ago, xvii-Dietrich said:

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.

 

100% agree.

 

It seems to me like the fish stinks from the head. Is there a list of Nick's favourite warbirds, so we can estimate what the future of DCS WW2 will hold?

[Rosebud47]

Well, the 262 might be regarded outstanding as the grandfather of jet engine planes, but me would absolutely prefer the Hellcat or any other WW2 fighter/bomber to be added to DCS.
PersonaIly I´m not so much interested in PVP balance or PVP Wunderwaffe like gameplay, but more in historical and simulationwise accuracy of experiences with the real thing.

 

Regarding DCS Multiplayer scenario, i would consider to have fairly enough single seated fighters of the Luftwaffe to reach kind of historical scenario imagination in the simulation. Beside of this, I would love to see a fully simulated and multi seated Heinkel HE 111 or a multi seated ´Flying Fortress´ to push DCS WW2 to the next level.

 

A F6F Hellcat  for sure is stratetically the right choice to develop next for establishing a Pacific WW2 scenario aside of Magnitude´s F4U Corsair and later on Zero-Fighter ( and hopefully a new map of this region someday ).

 

Reaching the quality of DCS modules takes a lot of time in development, so it would be more appreciable to invest time into modules with much more synergy effects for the whole WW2 simulation scenario than the ME262 might deliver.

 

By the way, the P-51 really needs a revision to be on par in quality with the P-47 and for sure the upcoming WW2 modules. The Mustang does deserve a littel push in quality to not fall apart and left behind of the newer modules.    

[iFoxRomeo]

I just want to emphasize why this case, not the aircraft, is somehow different to other cases.

I said enough why I think the 262 would be a good addition. I would always favour the 262 over the Hellcat. But that doesn't say I don't want a Hellcat in the long run with a nice map and proper assets.

I think it is childish behaviour that some users say that they want this or that module INSTEAD of the Me262.
"Please make <insert favourite module here> after you finished the previous one", that would be mature and not so egocentric.

 

I am sure the number of available DCS WWII modules would be far less if the Kickstarter campaign and the subsequent ED take-over wouldn't have happened.
ED did give Luthier this option, because they did not have the manpower for this and had they had other plans.

 

When ED took over the project it appeared that all the KS modules would be made by ED.

Separate topics -like this one- were opened for all modules of the KS-campaign and on the backers page all modules were presented to choose - in 2014/2015.

 

I chose the first modules that were released and it was clear to me that I would buy every other module of this project, because I wanted to support ED. Actually I bought other modules, which I don't really use, just to support ED. E.g. I have less than 10h in the Spitfire or L-39, perhaps 10 landings on the super carrier... since EA/release.

 

The 262 was on the list from the beginning. People are waiting for it.

 

Pic from here: "https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/128613-dcs-me-262-discussion/?do=findComment&comment=4377688"

 

And this 262 thing is a special case, if you look at the other "promises". The Phantom or Cobra for example. Both announced, but after some time put on hold.
But there is not a F4 or AH-1 to choose from a list, there is no sub-section for these as well. It's sad that they're on hold, but okay, as everyone knows, that they should not hold their breath for these modules and it will take many more years to see them in DCS if at all.

 

So don't dangle the carrot in front of our nose. Announce that the 262 won't see the light anytime soon(<2years). Move this sub section to the wish list. Remove it from the bakers page. That would be honest. There is no half-pregnancy. Either do it or do not.

 

You were searching for data for 7 years, and now it's on hold ufn? I believe you didn't even start to programm the module.

Let me put this straight. I can live without the 262. The world continues to rotate without a DCS: ME262 Module. I have fun with other stuff.
But I am truly disappointed by ED, not because its the 262, but how ED handles this situation.

Fox

[NineLine]

4 hours ago, MrExplosion said:

 

100% agree.

 

It seems to me like the fish stinks from the head. Is there a list of Nick's favourite warbirds, so we can estimate what the future of DCS WW2 will hold?

First of all, the 262 is not going anywhere, its still planned.

 

Second, the Hellcat will be an important part of starting to flesh out the Pacific theater, along with I am sure a Zero.

 

3rd, Nick Grey flies these aircraft as well, and if he hasn't flown them, he is friends with someone that has in many cases. I trust his opinion on what would make a good DCS Module.

[NineLine]

9 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

You were searching for data for 7 years, and now it's on hold ufn? I believe you didn't even start to programm the module.

Let me put this straight. I can live without the 262. The world continues to rotate without a DCS: ME262 Module. I have fun with other stuff.
But I am truly disappointed by ED, not because its the 262, but how ED handles this situation.

 

 

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.

[Mogster]

People seem to have forgotten what a complete banjax the original Kickstarter was.

 

As an original top level supporter I’m always aware that I could have easily ended up with nothing. Instead thanks to ED I’ve received a handful of excellent digital warbirds.

 

So thanks ED 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Mogster

[Fliegefisch]

I would definitely prefer the 262 over the Hellcat. But I am also a fan of the 262 somewhat.

 

If ED choses to develop other ww2 modules before the 262 because of popularity or more available data I understand it. But now it would be a suitable moment to introduce the 262 into the other 1944/45 module area we currently have. If the Hellcat is next , we have a new theatre and a Zero and maybe a Carrier will follow and the 262 wont be released the next 4 years...

 

The most important thing for me would be some clarification what is planned when the decision has fallen.