are you talking about the BZA periscope?

@ That's the one! Thank you. 🙏 Interesting plane.

@@adeck79 look at the 2:00 on this video kzbin.info/www/bejne/nXOmhaCMl9Jjrc0&ab_channel=HvB

@@HamvonBoom Tank controls. That's why I couldn't find it. 👍

From Wikipedia RS-82 and RS-132 - earlier high-explosive warhead (HE-Frag) RBS-82 and RBS-132 - armor-piercing warhead (APHE) ROFS-82 and ROFS-132 - later high-explosive warhead (HE-Frag)

you'd have to pose that question to the devs.

thanks man - - -

If they can replicate a gunner system that gives the B-29 the historical 1.12 K/D against Mig 15s, then it's slightly more risky for the Mig, not the slaughter you're predicting. Would be a similar situation to the Pe-2 blister turret vs. Bf 109. I did Pe-2 bomb runs through a cloud of 109s in TAW back then and nobody even tried to follow me lol.

@@HamvonBoom diff in speed is probably double then pe2 v 109 when you have b29 v mig , and because of size mig can shoot from far and hit, but fragale egos of fighter players would probably still complain that its not fair how b29 gunners kill them in mig15 1 out of 20 times :) how playr base is so fighter player based i just do not see them making any bombers for long time.

your naive if you still belive they gona make single bomber airplane for GB, 2 new maps and 8 airplanes are all fighters or maybe 110 version, only twin engine. And then look at Korea airplanes all fighters or fighter bomber exept IL10

Almost everyone makes something for one or both sides of that conflict right now, proxy conflicts aren't clean. Biggest damage you can do to them is keep playing the 1C products you already aquired, it's gonna be a net loss for them for operating the meta server.

I hadn't touched them since the second invasion, I did not know they were involved in murder. Thank you, and thank you for MvB for letting me know about Combat Pilot. I will support elsewhere too.

They'll be going back to WW II right after Korea, by doing the Pacific.

I have thought about it a lot. The game came out in 2013; by the end of 2017 they announced Bodenplatte. I don't know if they had a long-term plan for the game engine - I'd be surprised if they didn't. Seems to me they either didn't think about heavy bombers in the planning stage, or they decided at the beginning that it wasn't feasible. In either case I think it set a precedent that may come back to haunt them when Combat Pilot and DCS thoroughly upstage them in the heavy bomber department.

@@HamvonBoom And don't forget the Dieppe DLC for IL2 CloD.

For BoB there is IL2 CloD already tho. Also they made statement that they want to move into Pacific after Korea. Which is stupid decision imho, but whatever.

@ Surely there's CloD, I've even bought Blitz and Tobruk during Christmas time but no one plays the game.

Yeah though CloD is pretty decent, I think they should have brought the CloD group fully into their company and focused on GB. BoB & Italy, Africa, Malta etc, and then there's the Pacific too with it's many many sub-theaters & battles, to list just a few there's the 1937-1941 scenarios, Ki-27 Nate's and the like vs anything the Chinese could cobble together. Or the Tainan Airgroup with a multitude of aircraft, incl a lot of A6M variants, fighting against most anything the USAAF & USN fielded in the same period. They could do Pacific quite easily (if you put it into context) without having to make a whole Aircraft Carrier subsystem at first, it's the carriers that make most any dev go "hmmmmmmmmmmmm".

Thanks brozinator - - - -

Yeah and the jets they flew in Korea are crazy hard to master, it was so difficult in MiG Alley I never got into it, and I've tried it in DCS, the window you have for getting an accurate burst off is so small, people are gonna be jinking the instant you let a burst off and then they're gonna pick up speed and be outta range in no time. It's so passive and boring.

I'm fucking 60 lol, just incredibly immature. Thanks for the kind words, man. Hit me up when you get all your shit set up.

(my prev comment was shadowb'ed) All fair points, but I wanna also point out that GB was founded on the profits and engine from Rise of Flight a.k.a Flying Circus, it's literally almost the exact same engine (with obvious improvements, but anyone who played both for a period of time can tell the obvious similarities). WW1 buffs, through years of support, actually made GB possible for WW2 buffs such as yourself. We gobbled every bit of content they released for Rise of Flight, and many of us did so twice over, buying it for friends. Also I wanna add a lot of us has the WW2 content and are every bit as WW2 buff as you, further supporting the vision and hopes of you WW2 mains, a lot of us do beta testing for WW2 content and are quite involved in it's development overall. So it's actually quite the opposite, they didn't put the resources into FC to make it as successful as it should have been, FC should have supported itself by its own profits. While most any WW1 buff could (and have, if you look at the WW1 forums) list the specs and handling qualities for any German WW1 aircraft, the books on handling qualities of German WW1 aircraft has been b-listed, this is the material 1C has been adamant about needing from the get-go, and despite an aeronautical engineer's best efforts (Holtzauge on the WW1 forum), 1C has been on the fence as far as Flight Model changes goes, for far too long. While you're right that it's of their own doing, not us customers, they still could have come out on top of it. It's felt within the WW1 community that WW2 has seen the bulk of resources & attention put into it around every turn, while in reality they just haven't done their research for either, at least not as well as they could have. I personally also have my reservations about their CM, he seemed like a top bloke at first but as of lately things have gone kind of sour. I don't think any of us are overly optimistic at this point.

Even more, once the fighters from both sides met each other (unexpected), without recognizing - end engage into dogfight mutually !!!

@@Gledamsve100 And after Romania switched side to the Allies in August 1944 and they used a lot of German planes, there were dogfights between Bf 109 fighters from different sides. That's why Hungarian an German planes used a distinctiove yellow V sign on the underside of the left wing in this period.

yep, night bombers and fighters was a whole separate dimension they could have covered and didn't.

that makes sense. test it out and see if it works.

I just tested 80% success with 10 sc 50s against tanks. Starting point 900 to 1000. First put the target at the top of circle then let the tank slip between first and second cross line below the center of the reticle then fire at speeds 457 to 480. Bullseye!!! The positive of this method is that you drop from high enough to avoid trees... 335th_GRAlbatros

@@wolfpackj ok man, you have found your technique - - - - -

400-450 kph

You press the trigger when target is at the base of the circle not lower right?

@@wolfpackj yes

@@HamvonBoom thank you

Just about every vid I've put out the last 12 months is geared toward discussion or display of teamwork in MP ground attack.

If the tank is moving you have to drop in front of it, distance based on your bomb delay.

You just need to have a consistent dive angle and speed range at bomb release regardless of flap position. You can alter flaps depending on outside air temp. See this video - kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y6HPdZWkhrN2aac

depends on the number of aa, the number of attackers, and the enemy situation.