PDA

View Full Version : SB2C Helldiver?



faelas
04-09-2006, 06:52 PM
Since it was made by Curtiss it could be in game if anyone wanted to model it, right? Anyone want to? heh!

Also, would be neat if the allies had a seaplane... like maybe the Kingfisher.

faelas
04-09-2006, 06:52 PM
Since it was made by Curtiss it could be in game if anyone wanted to model it, right? Anyone want to? heh!

Also, would be neat if the allies had a seaplane... like maybe the Kingfisher.

Nimits
04-09-2006, 08:58 PM
As I understand it, NTG is not the issue with the SB2C, TBD, OS2U, etc. They ran out of time and money, but particularly time (the deadline for new aircraft has passed). They did have a model of the OS2U in the works at one point, I do believe. I also understand that an SB2C model as also built, but it was rejected as too poor of a quality to use in the sim, and they never had a chance to go back and do a new one.

Anyways, unlike IJN floatplanes, USN floatplanes did not do much long range fleet recon work, but were instead used mostly for gunnery spotting, air-sea rescue, and ASW Inner Air Patrols. So the whole left by the OS2U is not as big as that left by the lack of an F1M or E13A.

VW-IceFire
04-09-2006, 09:01 PM
Yeah there was a SB2C Helldiver done but it was poorly modeled so it was not accepted from what we've been told. Its a black hole of missing naval aircraft just like the Devastator and the B6N, D3Y and others.

Its not coming...we have to accept that and use what we have. It limits us in some ways but we have alot to work with and nobody has exhausted the possibilities for detailed single player campaigns even without these aircraft.

AKA_TAGERT
04-09-2006, 09:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nimits:
As I understand it, NTG is not the issue with the SB2C, TBD, OS2U, etc. They ran out of time and money, but particularly time (the deadline for new aircraft has passed). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I dont buy that excuse anymore.. In light of the fact that the 3D art for the Do335 was totally redone just prior to release.. Granted, the cockpit is the deciding factor.. But if they can S can Gibbages 3D exterior art between the last beta before release and generte a whole new 3D exterior.. Well, I just dont buy the time excuse anymore in light of that. Long story short.. A PACIFIC sim without a NAVY torp plane is like a boxing match with one boxer.

faelas
04-10-2006, 10:29 AM
Well, I think the "out of time" explanation is probly a polite way of saying "nobody wanted to do it" which is acceptable to me, not that I especially deserve any explanation http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I agree 100% about the lack of flyable torpedo bombers, but this thread was really about dive bombers and seaplanes. From what I've read the SB2C actually sank more ships than the SBD, and it's always nice to have a floatplane for both sides. I do see the point about a lack of floatplanes for the Japs being a bigger loss than for the Americans though, and the choice makes sense to me.

People keep saying "it will never happen" when referring to new planes in IL2. But, new planes keep coming out. for years now, people have been saying we will never see another new plane in IL2 yet new ones have come out every couple months for those same years. Some day the trickle of new planes may stop, but I think people are too quick to say "never" in this community. "Probably never" would be more accurate. Two years ago who would have thought a flyable Do-335 would make it into the sim? So never say never!

Bluebeard2006
04-10-2006, 03:56 PM
You make a point!

stansdds
04-10-2006, 05:32 PM
One thing is pretty certain, there will be nothing added that is linked to Northrop-Grumman. That was stated in another thread.

Nimits
04-10-2006, 06:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">just like the Devastator and the B6N, D3Y and others </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was under the impression that an AI B6N was still coming, either in the Manchuria add-on or in last patch or two. Do you have information that is has definately been cancelled?

goshikisen
04-10-2006, 07:05 PM
Naval Torpedo planes would need something to torpedo... and we're decidely light in the ship department as well. PF = anorexic IJN

VW-IceFire
04-10-2006, 09:21 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nimits:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">just like the Devastator and the B6N, D3Y and others </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was under the impression that an AI B6N was still coming, either in the Manchuria add-on or in last patch or two. Do you have information that is has definately been cancelled? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Nope...still expecting the B6N. Not what I had intended to mean in that specific instance.

faelas
04-11-2006, 02:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by goshikisen:
Naval Torpedo planes would need something to torpedo... and we're decidely light in the ship department as well. PF = anorexic IJN </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As a guy who has made 20+ online dogfight maps for PF in just the last two weeks, I can say I know where you're coming from with this. The way I get around it is using ships from other navies, like the Russians and Germans. Since they are never part of a Pacific only server, they seem "different" enough to fit the bill. Besides, most of the time you're too far away from them to be able to tell the difference anyway.

I'm pretty sure the B6N will be in one of the add ons. I've even heard rumor that there may be other planes that seep into them that we arent aware of yet. I even got a shot in the arm last week by the thought being tossed around that if a viable cockpit existed in real life for the B6N that they might even make it flyable. It's a long shot, and to the collective knowledge there isn't any in existance, but just the thought that they would do it, even if it's technically impossible, makes me happy.

VW-IceFire
04-11-2006, 03:51 PM
There is a B6N or two that survive...but I don't think they are in good shape. This is the trouble with Japanese aircraft is that both documents (burned during the surrender usually) and surviving examples are difficult to find.

This is in stark contrast to the Europeans and the Americans which have most of the wartime documentation preserved in archives and with many examples of the types available throughout the war.

darkhorizon11
04-12-2006, 03:55 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Nimits:
As I understand it, NTG is not the issue with the SB2C, TBD, OS2U, etc. They ran out of time and money, but particularly time (the deadline for new aircraft has passed). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>I dont buy that excuse anymore.. In light of the fact that the 3D art for the Do335 was totally redone just prior to release.. Granted, the cockpit is the deciding factor.. But if they can S can Gibbages 3D exterior art between the last beta before release and generte a whole new 3D exterior.. Well, I just dont buy the time excuse anymore in light of that. Long story short.. A PACIFIC sim without a NAVY torp plane is like a boxing match with one boxer. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I half agree with that. Remember the Pacific theater is/was the biggest theater of the war. Both physical ocean, landmass and the amount of aircraft, equipment and ships used. The world, including the United States was geared up for the war in Europe when PH happened. Therefore the Pacific was neglected, a myriad of old equipment dating back to WWI that was basically forced into commission until new equipment could be produced. This is apparent when you consider that the battleships sunk at Pearl were mostly late WWI era dreadnoughts retrofitted with new better guns. Or that the best Japanese carrier borne fighters (which held tight constraints for weight and size) could manhandle most of the land-based American fighters stationed in the Pacific at the time.

Anyways because of there is a much wider range of aircraft and ships that need to be modeled for realism. And this is just in the pacific itself, not including SE Asia and Manchuria which are two more massive front in themselves. FB and all its add-ons has what? 250 flyable aircraft total if you include the different variants and subvariants? Well to thoroughly cover the Pacific, China, and Manchuria we'd probably need 175 total for all sides. Nevermind all the ships...

Don't get me wrong I'm dissappointed to but the task of PF was so big to begin with... if SOW:BOB was never started we'd still be another two years or more of updates before most of us felt satisfied.

NS38th_Aristaus
04-12-2006, 06:07 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
There is a B6N or two that survive...but I don't think they are in good shape. This is the trouble with Japanese aircraft is that both documents (burned during the surrender usually) and surviving examples are difficult to find.

This is in stark contrast to the Europeans and the Americans which have most of the wartime documentation preserved in archives and with many examples of the types available throughout the war. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A nice Pic.
http://www.j-aircraft.com/walk/john_ferguson/jill1stbrd.jpg

link taken fm this site.

http://www.j-aircraft.com/walk/walkarou.htm

faelas
04-13-2006, 07:23 PM
As I'm sure you realize, it's the inside of the Tenzan that's the real problem. The two that are still around apparently don't have any cockpit left, just a gutted fuselage.

shinden1974
04-13-2006, 08:41 PM
I've pinned my hopes on BOB...the add-ons/expansions for it anyway...with increased third party support I'm sure we'll see many more pacific planes, and I'm very confident the US planes issues will be dealt with by then.

The problem of cockpits for japanese torpedo bombers remains...all data for all japanese planes is scarce.

I've found pictures of the panels for the B6N and B5N, though I'm sure modellers have seen the panels for these planes many times, and the problem lies with the rest of the cockpit:

B5N:
http://gunsight.jp/a/english/n-kisyu15e.htm

B6N:
http://gunsight.jp/a/english/n-kisyu17e.htm

what will probably have to happen is someome will have to create a semi-historical cockpit using any information still available, I'm sure it's possible but very difficult.

goshikisen
04-14-2006, 06:27 AM
The Smithsonian's Tenzan is reasonably intact cockpit wise. If it's general structure of the cockpit interior that is required you'd think this example would fit the bill... the information about specific instruments could be gathered from elsewhere.

http://www.j-aircraft.com/walk/tim_hortman/b6n2-4.jpg

NS38th_Aristaus
04-14-2006, 06:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by faelas:
As I'm sure you realize, it's the inside of the Tenzan that's the real problem. The two that are still around apparently don't have any cockpit left, just a gutted fuselage. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol ok another site.

http://www.nasm.si.edu/research/aero/aircraft/nakajima_b6n2.htm

quote fm this site.". The U. S. Navy recovered the B6N2 to the United States after the war along with about 145 Japanese aircraft shipped aboard three U. S. aircraft carriers. American technical experts tested evaluated these airplanes for a few years and eventually the airplane ended up at Naval Air Station Willow Grove, Pennsylvania, where it remained displayed outside until the NASM acquired it in 1981. End of quote.
My point in the first post is that the U.S. along with the U.K. brought examples of almost if not all of the Axis planes home and evaluated them. they also took detailed pics of the cockpits along with the A/C. If you would like to know about these planes then the WarBird Community would be a good place to start. They have used Willow Grove exampels to restore A/C in the past.