They still can't get the "in cockpit" sounds right. The game now sounds like I am playing it on a Portable Playstation or listening to an AM radio, just horrible. Externally, the sounds are great, but what freakin good does that do me? I fly the game 99.99% of the time, not watch it!

I like the cockpit repaints. And I don't understand the constant frenzy for new planes - it's just more machines that you'll frig around with for 5 minutes without getting a deep understanding of.

I think the constant demand for new aircraft has held back the development of the original game so that we still have poor map textures, pop-up visibility, commodore-64 standard in-game markings, cardboard vehicles, hexagonal cockpit handles etc. etc.

I'm glad AAA are fixing the basic stuff - I just wish the official people would.

I like the 1.2 U.I alot.........except for one thing, listen to a plane with multiple .30 cals (Hurri MK1 for example) pull the trigger, and it sounds like someone being electrocuted.

I can only fly 3 or 4 nights a week AT BEST. I'm sick of spending days and hours I don't have to spare, trying to get the latest mod to work or wait to be walked through it by someone else. As far as I'm concerned we've now 2 communities here, patched vs. modded and at the current time you can't be both without jumping through more hoops than I care to do.

Judging by the amount of problems folks are having with U.I. 1.2 I'm going to give it a pass until they get it compatible with 4.09 and maybe not even then.

Da Worfster

I have one question.

Can I fly new P-38's without need to install the mammoth package?
Truth to be told I don't have enough space on my hard disk to do it. And frankly, I'm only interested in P-38's.

Thanks.

quote:

Originally posted by DKoor:
I have one question.

Can I fly new P-38's without need to install the mammoth package?
Truth to be told I don't have enough space on my hard disk to do it. And frankly, I'm only interested in P-38's.

Thanks.

theoretically yes, in practice, probally not...

quote:

Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
Salute

Great work by a lot of dedicated people, however...

Lots of German planes which either never flew or of which only one or two flew included.

Don't fly them

quote:

And the turnrate of the Spit XIVc seems quite off, its low speed turnrate is not accurate. The AAA mod has it handily being outturned by the 109G2.

What did real tests show?

From the AFDU trials against G2:

Turning Circle
47. The Spitfire XIV easily out-turns the Me.109G in either direction.

So where exactly does the test state the XIV outturns the Gustav at "LOW SPEEDS"?

Better take your pills tomorrow

quote:

Originally posted by mortoma:
I just notice that when I try to start a Dgen career a lot of the words for the choices are in Russian!! This may be a problem.

Это не проблема для меня.

quote:

Originally posted by Gibbage1:

quote:

Originally posted by mortoma:
I gave my rating one extra star just due to the new P-38's added.

Your welcome. BTW, IBTL.

Good form, Gibbage, coming through for all the folks who stood behind your P-38 project years ago.

Last IBTL

Overall I think it's a good package. It's a shame the links to the downloads were/are screwed up. It sounds like that's on the server side, not the mod package. Once they got the torrent DL going it was a piece of cake. Installation really couldn't be simpler. Not all of it is perfect but neither have been the official patches always been perfect on release. The load times could be quicker I suppose but it isn't that long. Certainly not so long I've fallen asleep waiting for the game to load.

My only real complaint is the new gunsight in the P-51s. I really don't like it but I don't know if that is supposed to be realistic and I don't seem to be able to replace it with the old version yet. I don't have access to most of my books right now to check. Does anyone know if that is what late model Mustangs had?

quote:

Originally posted by PF_Coastie:
They still can't get the "in cockpit" sounds right. The game now sounds like I am playing it on a Portable Playstation or listening to an AM radio, just horrible. Externally, the sounds are great, but what freakin good does that do me? I fly the game 99.99% of the time, not watch it!

I personally think the sounds from the pit are still way more realistic than the original Oleg sounds, which made you think your plane had vacuum cleaner engines on it.

I have to say, this is the first time i've actually been excited by the sounds. While i always thought that the new sounds on other mod versions were an improvement on the stock sounds, i felt that they were a sign of things to come. This feels like a massive improvement across the board, and while not perfect by any means, sounds quite simply brillient from outside. I spent some of the afternoon watching the tracks that shipped with il2, and its like a different game

why they don't have qmb+ in, i'll never know, but its easy to add. i've added holygrails and potenz ultimate 3d smoke and fire mod as well, a must have imo, and i am V happy

fruitbat

quote:

Originally posted by Old_Canuck:

quote:

Originally posted by mortoma:
I just notice that when I try to start a Dgen career a lot of the words for the choices are in Russian!! This may be a problem.

Это не проблема для меня.

Check your PM's Old_Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by mortoma:
I just notice that when I try to start a Dgen career a lot of the words for the choices are in Russian!! This may be a problem.

just noticed this, this is a long time problem, there is a fix of sorts, but from experience, what i have done, is with my clean install of 4.08, add all the extra dgen campaigns with enjoyrs latest patch, and then when your happy with your dgen folder, make a copy of it.

then mod your game, and when thats all done, just replace your dgen folder in the mod version with the one you copied, saves a lot of effort.

fruitbat

quote:

Originally posted by na85:
Looks like buzzsaw is quoting this test:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html

I've read through it and the 109 is only referred to as an "Me.109G" and the specific model is never mentioned. Moreover it doesn't mention at what altitude(s) the turn tests were conducted.

Obviously you haven't read the book "The Captured Luftwaffe", which details all the aircraft captured by the British and Americans, and exactly which tests they were used in.

If you had, you'd note that the 109G2 was used in this test.

quote:

Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:

quote:

Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
And the FM's of some of these new 109's are wildly speculative.

Compare the turnrate of the Oleg approved 109G6AS with the new G6ASN for example.

I've made all the flight models for these new Bf109s and the above just shows how little you know about them. You are comparing apples and oranges.

The Oleg "approved" version is a fantasy aircraft, not matching performance of any Bf109 variant I can think of. It is NOT a G-6/AS (DB605AS) and NOT a G-14/AS (DB605ASM)

The Bf109G-6/ASN on the other hand now is a TRUE G-6/AS meaning that it is simply a G-6 airframe mated with a DB605AS engine of 1435PS featuring the larger DB603 supercharger. Because of a slightly higher takeoff weight and slightly less engine power at takeoff (due to the bigger SC) its performance is inferior to the one of the ordinary G-6 at low and medium altitudes but greatly superior at high altitudes (>7000m).

Of course the G-6/ASN turns better than your "approved" G-6/AS, it doesnt have MW-50 and is over 150kg lighter!

Topspeed both on the deck and at altitude is spot on (510km/h at 0m and 665km/h at 8800m) so I dont know where you are coming from with your wild exagerations.

Please post the original test documents.

quote:

Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:

Honestly I dont trust these British reports one bit as far as maneuverability is concerned

Perhaps you'd like to explain what empirical reason you'd have for distrusting these tests?

They were not propaganda tests, they were labelled top secret, not for public distribution, they were only for the use of British fighter pilots, to give them an exact idea of how these aircraft compared.

The AFDU was a highly funded and dedicated body, which used the resources of many very experienced aeronautical engineers, and a set of test pilots who flew nothing but captured German aircraft.

But of course, you, with your extensive experience in flying 109s, know better...

Easy on the troubleshooting stuff guys, I know it's hard to resist just posting the helpful advise but it is against the rules.

Oh, and please don't post test chart data in this thread, start another thread to debate aircraft performance, it's off-topic to this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:

quote:

Originally posted by na85:
Looks like buzzsaw is quoting this test:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html

I've read through it and the 109 is only referred to as an "Me.109G" and the specific model is never mentioned. Moreover it doesn't mention at what altitude(s) the turn tests were conducted.

Obviously you haven't read the book "The Captured Luftwaffe", which details all the aircraft captured by the British and Americans, and exactly which tests they were used in.

If you had, you'd note that the 109G2 was used in this test.

Does your source also list what speeds the turn tests were conducted at? Issuing a blank statement of "spit out turns 109" is not really useful in evaluating performance. How can you extend that to say "spit has better LOW SPEED turn than 109"?

quote:

Originally posted by Old_Canuck:

quote:

Originally posted by mortoma:
I just notice that when I try to start a Dgen career a lot of the words for the choices are in Russian!! This may be a problem.

Это не проблема для меня.

Я согласен!

I'm having a ball with the AAA UI 1.2, especially with the MiG-15 and Sabre installed. I won't be installing 4.09 until the AAA mods work with it. Although I'm missing the B.534, which is probably my favorite biplane, I can wait for now.

quote:

Originally posted by na85:

quote:

Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:

quote:

Originally posted by na85:
Looks like buzzsaw is quoting this test:

http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14afdu.html

I've read through it and the 109 is only referred to as an "Me.109G" and the specific model is never mentioned. Moreover it doesn't mention at what altitude(s) the turn tests were conducted.

Obviously you haven't read the book "The Captured Luftwaffe", which details all the aircraft captured by the British and Americans, and exactly which tests they were used in.

If you had, you'd note that the 109G2 was used in this test.

Does your source also list what speeds the turn tests were conducted at? Issuing a blank statement of "spit out turns 109" is not really useful in evaluating performance. How can you extend that to say "spit has better LOW SPEED turn than 109"?

Salute

I didn't 'issue a blanket statement', I quoted from a test.

Look at the quote again. What is the header? TURN CIRCLE. Not turn time. Ie. the Spitfire can turn inside the 109. EASILY.

For other reference here is a list of German aircraft flown regularly and tested extensively by No. 1426 ENEMY AIRCRAFT FLIGHT, the ROYAL AIRCRAFT ESTABLISHMENT, and the AIR FIGHTING DEVELOPMENT UNIT:

RAE

* AE479 - Messerschmitt Bf109E-3 - W.Nr.1304 - "White 1" of JG76 - damaged during forced landing in the US
* AW177 - Heinkel He111H-1 - W.Nr.6853 - 1H+EN of II./KG26 - crashed November 1943
* AX772 - Messerschmitt Bf110C-5 - W.Nr.2177 - 5F+CM of 4.(F)14 - scrapped November 1947
* AX774 - possible Bf110C-5, coded 2N+EP?
* AX919 - Junkers Ju88A-1 - W.Nr.7036 - 9K+HL of I./KG51 - used for spares
* BV207 - Gotha Go145B - W.Nr.1115 - SM+NQ of Stab/JG27 - SoC April 1942
* EE205 - Junkers Ju88A-5 - W.Nr.3457 - 4D+DL of I./KG30 - scrapped early 1948
* ES906 - Messerschmitt Bf109F-2 - W.Nr.12764 - ? of 2./JG26 - SoC October 1941
* MP499 - Focke-Wulf Fw190A-3 - W.Nr.313 - single chevron of III./JG2 - SoC September 1943
* PE822 - Focke-Wulf Fw190A-4/U8 - W.Nr.7155 - H+ of II./SKG10 - crashed October 1944
* PJ876 - Junkers Ju88R-1 - W.Nr.360043 - D5+EV of IV./NJG3 - static display RAF Museum @ Hendon
* PM679 - Focke-Wulf Fw190A-4/U8 - W.Nr.5843 - "Red 9" of I./SKG10 - used for spares July 1944
* PN999 - Focke-Wulf Fw190A-5/U8 - W.Nr.2596 - "White 6" of I./SKG10 - despatched to unknown destination July 1946
* TF209 - Messerschmitt Me410A-3 - W.Nr.10259 - F6+OK of 2(F)/122
* TP190 - Junkers Ju88G-1 - W.Nr.712273 - 4R+UR of III./NJG2 - scapped at Farnborough after October 1945
* TP814 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-6/U2 - W.Nr.412951 - "White 16" of I./JG301 - crashed November 1944
* TS439 - Heinkel He177A-5/R6 - W.Nr.550062 - F8+AP of II./KG40 - shipped to US to become FE-2100, fate unknown
* unknown - Arado Ar234B - W.Nr.140173 - F1+MT of III./KG76 - fate unknown
* SL538 - Gotha Go242 - W.Nr.unknown - unknown - unknown
* unknown - Junkers Ju87B-1 - W.Nr.087/5600 - S2+LM of II./St G77 - noted on Farnborough scrap area December 1946

No. 1426

* DG200 - Messerschmitt Bf109E-3 - W.Nr.4101 - "Black 12" of I./JG51 - on static display at RAF Museum, Hendon
* HM509 - Junkers Ju88A-6 - W.Nr.6073 - M2+MK of KuFlGr.106 - damaged in landing accident May 1944
* HX360 - Junkers Ju88A-5 - W.Nr.6214 - V4+GS of III./KG1 - used for spares
* NF754 - Focke-Wulf Fw190A - W.Nr.unknown - unknown unit - fate unknown
* NF755 - Focke-Wulf Fw190A - W.Nr.unknown - unknown unit - fate unknown
* NF756 - Henschel Hs129B-1 - W.Nr.0297 - unknown code of I./SG2 - struck of charge August 1947
* NN644 - Messerschmitt Bf109F-4 - W.Nr.7232 - "White 11" of IV./JG26 - fate unknown
* RN228 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-2/trop - W.Nr.10639 - "Black 6" of III./JG77 - restored to flying condition, but now on static display at RAF Museum, Hendon
* RN231 - Messerschmitt Me210 - W.Nr.unknown - unknown unit - possible not shipped to UK
* TS472 - Junkers Ju88S-1 - W.Nr.140604 - radio code RF+MT of unknown unit - scrapped post-war
* VD364 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-14/U4 - W.Nr.3114 or 2484? - unknown unit - struck of charge after landing accident May 1945
* VX101 - Messerschmitt Bf109G-6/trop - W.Nr.unknown - unknown unit - used for spares after landing accident in May 1944

<<<

There were far more than these aircraft captured by the RAF, another 200 functional aircraft at least, but most were not shipped back to the UK, they were not needed.

For example, this 109F4 captured by No. 250 Squadron in the desert, and used by its pilots to compare with their aircraft.