View Full Version : How much did you know about Russian WW2 aircraft before IL2?

10-27-2005, 08:27 PM

10-27-2005, 08:42 PM
I knew very little about russian planes. Bought IL2 when it came out and I did learn. I remember the first time I flew, I was blown away by the graphics.

Bias I hope not. Some things about the flight models could be what the programmer feels is right. Like how much torque, And when a plane will stall or depart from flight in a turn. Are things like this more subjective? So if in WW2 certain planes were not suitable for them but worked well in another allied country. Could that thinking spill over in the subjective part of the flight models, and not the hard data.

I do not know for sure if all of the FM comes from Real data or does some come from feelings.

10-27-2005, 08:48 PM
Seriously, I thought the USSR had no planes at all. When I first heard about IL2 WW2 sim, I thought "Hmm Il2? Must be a Brit bomber of some sorts" Then, when I tried the game for the first time I'm like "WTF! Where did all those plane come from!? Did they build them from melted hammers?"

I had noooooooooo idea Russia had such a significant airforce during WW2.

10-27-2005, 08:50 PM
Hey Stanger.... How are ya?!
Yeah but I mean even on paper.. some of those Russian birds were no slouches... certainly contenders. Yet as I said... I never even knew about them. They just didnt have the up high thing going on... and I guess that would factor in to an overall rating of how good a plane was... but still.. any way.. keep em coming.... I am curious. I am not trying to start a pi$$ing contest at all so please.. if you want to start one don't do it here... if you cant keep it civil (not you Stanger or Esto.... but in general.. to whomever comes in this thread) then just don't post here please.

10-27-2005, 08:55 PM
I was always interested in mechanical stuff and airplanes was one of them. In the sixties my dad used to take me to airshows and that is were I first saw WWII fighters do aerobatic routines. Back then they were not that old, and not worth jack, and the pilots were not afraid to really horse around in them.

My dad also got me a book for christmas one year in the mid-seventies called The Encyclopedia of the world's Combat Aircraft. It was out of England, and it had every WWII bird in it, even the IL2, IL10 and the Ki-61. So I read about all the planes history. I remember me and my little brother laughing at the appearance of the I-16, and thinking how we would like to be stuck in one of those against all the more modern planes. I thought the Mig3 was really sleek looking. I was a bookworm, and when I read something with interest I never forget it.

A nieghbor a few doors down from my parents was a WWII pilot, and his daughter used to babysit us kids. Whenever we wanted to he would tell stories non-stop about flying then.
Also of course I built tons of aircraft models, static and flying. A small airport by my parents house had a hobby shop that sold only flying airplane supplies. I wonder if it is still there.
That is what kids did in the sixties and seventies, before digital electronics. Now if a kid knew how to do anything with his hands when a keyboard or game controller were not in them, the Department of Homeland Security would probably put him on a list.

So I was much more familiar with Russian craft, and a lot of other things long before there was any flight sims, and before most anyone had a reason to, except if they were there, or had a love of all things mechanical, including aircraft.


10-27-2005, 08:58 PM
Not only did I not know much about the Soviet airforce, but not much about the Eastern Front. I am enjoying getting into all the famous battles, especially the obscure "forgotten battles" like the Finnish/Leningrad campaign.
Moving to Australia has opened me up to New Guinea as well, one of the reasons I bought PF after owning the orig IL2. I then antied up for FB and AEP and now have enough planes and maps to see me through to my rest home days...........

10-27-2005, 08:59 PM
I knew about MiGs and Yaks and the P39 and that's about it really. Being an Aussie I wasn't really exposed to the kind of bias towards the 'our planes are the best!' mentality as we used a mix of aircraft.

10-27-2005, 08:59 PM
I had no knowledge of Soviet birds before starting on line gaming.

Airwarrior introduced me to the LA5; which was a resonably potent airframe in the Airwarrior context; and the Yak 9 (I don't remember which sub model) which was a dog.

Aces high clarified the differences between the Yak 9-T and the 9-U; both of which are potent in that context, and introduced the IL-2; although Madox games IL-2 had already been released onto the market and was an (unknown) force to be reckoned with; but in Aces High; the true uber plane of the whole Aces high plane set is the 3 cannon LA-7 under 20K.

In the Aces high community many people claimed, for the longest time, that Soviet planes couldn't have been that good as otherwise they'd have been famous and they'd have known about them already.

A curious logic.

All the migs, Ratas and other "esoteric stuff" was unknown to me until I started playing IL-2.

(Edit: I seem to remember Airwarrior had an IL-2; but it was rarely used)

(edit #2; common to all these games is that they attempt to model; to the best of thier ability; the sirframes performance and that only. No one has really attempted (thank god; think of the whining!) to model manufactering quality and consistancy. If they did; every second Dora would blow it's engine; every other LA-7 would lose it's wings, most P-51-B's would blow their plugs; Lightning cockpits would ice over and Spit aerlirons would balloon at high speed.....)

10-27-2005, 09:09 PM
I knew vaguely, but not as much as I do now. It's my favorite front now, actually. There's still so much more to discover.

10-27-2005, 09:11 PM
Prior to Il-2 most of my knowledge was in ETO and PTO aircraft. I had only a limited knowledge of Russian aircraft, and a limited knowledge of the Eastern front in general. IL-2 has definately help to open my eyes to another part of history.

10-27-2005, 09:12 PM
next to nothing

been an avid reader about WW2 since 2001 because of Sturmovik

10-27-2005, 09:12 PM
Originally posted by Bearcat99:
Hey Stanger.... How are ya?!
Yeah but I mean even on paper.. some of those Russian birds were no slouches... certainly contenders. Yet as I said... I never even knew about them. They just didnt have the up high thing going on... and I guess that would factor in to an overall rating of how good a plane was... but still.. any way.. keep em coming.... I am curious. I am not trying to start a pi$$ing contest at all so please.. if you want to start one don't do it here... if you cant keep it civil (not you Stanger or Esto.... but in general.. to whomever comes in this thread) then just don't post here please.

Hi Berry doing fine. Just working about 76 hours this week.
Yea At first you had to fly russian planes because I wanted to shoot the HUNs down. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif
Learned alot about Russians planes. Coming over from EAW to this Sim, I was amazed at the detail in IL2. My first campaign was the Stormie.
Love the ground pounding.

10-27-2005, 09:40 PM
Voted for the first option; I bought IL2 on the basis of what I read over at combatsimhq, the thought that a developer was taking such a role with a player community was unheard of to me and pretty much in opposition to previous experiance. What I find funny now is that playing it in the beginning was just the purest form of frustration. It look wonderful but I couldn't do jack with it (and I've been playing with various 'flight sims' since Microprose F-15 and F-19, can't even remember which I played first now). I left it alone until I read some reviews and thought I must have had some corruption/ bad data or something with the copy I got. A couple of days of swearing at the game, my rig, my stick and anything else that came to mind and I could just about do some basic circuits, as for the AI, well I had only one word for them >Evil<. Course after the first sweaty, hard earned kill I was utterly exhausted, thought playing a game shouldn't be as hard as I found it; yet I couldn't leave it alone and have never looked back.

Back to the poll question: I didn't really know much, though enough to know they had to have an airforce. But TBH I held strong cold war propagandic views regarding the quality of both men and equipment, this changed somewhat when I joined the service; then the prospect of defending UK airfields against swarming hordes of spetnatz (as was drummed into us) literally scared the cr@p out of me and I did develop (rapidly) a new found respect and kept plenty of spare underwear just in case. But seriously I had no idea of the extent of suffering and loss carried by the russian people until I started reading better material, I did know it was a brutal theatre of war but really had no idea of the scale of hardship and loss, simply huge and it was quite a shock. Previously I held a very naive view that the russian solution to conflict was numbers, shame on me. The big turn around for me was seeing quality footage of the Mig-29 AWESOME, all I had seen previosly were pictures/ film of bears escorted out of UK airspace by lightenings or grainy/ blurry black and white images of jets with Nato codes. A week or so of flying IL2 and wham, RESPECT. Never has a program or other single thing generated such an interest in a specific area before or since, which to this day is simply impressive and powerful. Just as impressive back in those days was the fact after having a long stint (bout a month) of regular play in the TX server (stalingrad map) on ubi, I lost a significant amount of weight I sweated so much - talk about immersion, just WOW. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



10-27-2005, 10:04 PM
I knew a little about Russian aircraft prior to playing the game.

I knew quite a bit about the IL-2 (and a bit about the IL-10). One of my books I had covered it in detail.

I knew a small amount about the Yak-9 and Mig-3 and thats about where it ended. I knew most about the Mig-3 because I was interested in the history of Mig's upto the Mig-29. I just assumed the Mig-3 was the Russians first line fighter...how was I wrong http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

10-27-2005, 10:30 PM
i knew abit, but not much...

think i knew vagualy about i16 and yaks

and bearcat, "even the italians" pre ww2 the italians really where one of the leaders in aircraft http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

10-27-2005, 11:22 PM
I grew surrounded by story telling, I have family that came from Poland and Germany before ww2, and the other part of the family stayed in Europe during the war...one of my uncles was killed in a German tank in Berlin 4 days before wars end..he was 19...another I heard was a gunner in a stuka and disapeared somewhere in russia during the war, My father was a Pilot in the 50's ( he was 6 at war start..so no making stuff up here) and some of the people he flew with were pilots in WW2, so there was always the long stories of planes and stuff ( hangar talk) during parties at home, later I became quite interested in ww2 planes and read anything that fell in my hands about planes and war stories, so by the time a friend of mine recommended me to buy IL ( original) I knew most of the names and shapes of those planes but in the great majority I had no idea of what they were capable of doing..this sim is a great teacher on what did those planes fit in the historical context, and mind boggling to see how small were the odds of surviving the war flying in one of them.

10-27-2005, 11:47 PM
I grew up reading about all the "unkown" Soviet planes including Russian designed planes before WW1. The only reason I got FB as my first computer game since 1996 Su-27 Flanker 1.0 was because it was Eastern Front.

My Deviant social nature began when I was a little squish about 10 years old, when Pop brought home for me a special (USA) magazine issue detailing the following WW2 planes...

Fairey Battle
Westland Lysander
Vought Kingfisher(tm)

...possibly others

I remember being weirded out by the slender fuselage of Ki-43 when viewed from above (nice pic from above).

I remember freaking over the grotesque Fairey Battle losses in France summer 1940. The Battle and Kingfisher began my life-long infatuation with long greenhouse canopies which years later I finally got to sim with Bf-110 over the AEP.

The famous Yak pic with the sexy white "22" stayed with me until I downloaded FB skins for it years later (skin by SaVaGe).

The Tubbie nature of I-16 captivated me at a tender age, but my passion for Soviet planes only got started a year or two later, when I was forced to hide in the closet reading about MiGs when society expected me to be liking P-51s (wretchfest maximus). Thus it began...

10-27-2005, 11:55 PM
It's funny when I realise it, but I know far(and knew) more about VVS, German, and British aircraft than US. Other than the Cobras (again, mainly from my knowledge of the Eastern Front and Soviet weapons) and the P-40's (mainly because ever since I was little I thought they were the coolest planes around) I never really was interested in US planes. They always struck me as kinda boring, don't ask why cuz I don't know.

The East Front was always where it was at in my book. it's where the European war was really decided and it's an endless source of fascination for me.

I had a lot/some/a little knowledge of all these Soviet aircraft a long time before I bought this sim ---which is why I couldn't wait for it come out in the first place. I was eagerly following it's development for a long time and couldn't wait to get my hands "on" a shturmovik or real Soviet Cobra. I still can't play with the other planes I wanted badly - the Pe-2/3 series, but the I-16 has been a very nice consolation prize.

Coming from a background of serious wargaming I have done (and still do) a lot of research on the Great Patriotic War and because the Soviets considered their Air Force to be a tactical asset for the support of ground troops (the shturmoviks really were just considered to be "flying tanks" for more than just their heavy armor), as opposed to a strategic asset, knowledge of the various planes was essential. Especially with the shturmoviks: the Soviets pioneered the concept of tankbusting ground attack craft that were purpose-built for the task. It continued right up to the development of the SU-25.

I also build a lot of models and Russian planes are among my favorites and hardest to build. Reliable information used to be hard to come by, the Soviets did a lot of field mods to them (individual pilots often "customized" their plane to their liking - or out of need due to limited supplies), and even the manufacturer's info is hard to get. So, again...lots of research goes into my VVS kits and that leads to more lines of investigation.....

And Russian planes seemed to be more of a flyer's plane than the German and American craft. They still are that way. Less technology, more of what I call real flying required. The stories about the Russian and German pilots on the East Front far surpass anything out west (with the huge exception of the Battle of Britain!) and it's really a shame that more people don't realise how much went on on that front. Flying wooden Yaks with a pocketful of ammo against the experienced aces of the Luftwaffe in planes like the Focke-Wulf? Shturmoviks at 15-20 feet off the grass in line abreast close formations so they could hit tanks at Kursk in the side and rear armor without giving the crews time to react? It makes my hair stand on end to think about doing that sort of thing for real.

And all the great things from the "Home Front" like, the presentation of the T-34's to their crews at Leningrad while under siege: the workers writing their names on the unpainted tanks and personally handing them over to the crews to driven straight out to the battle a few blocks away. The planes paid for and donated to particular aircrews and pilots with presentation markings dedicating it to them. The common dedications to fallen family members and comrades painted on the sides of tanks and planes. All most people ever get to know about what happened in the East is from that Godawful movie "Enemy at the Gates." It's a shame, but that's what putting up and Iron Curtain for 60 years will do for educating others in your history.

Yeah, I knew all about these planes and what, in theory and practice, they could do prior to buying this game. I suppose that that is why no matter how screwed up it may get, as long as it's the only shturmovik in town I'll still fly it.

10-28-2005, 12:14 AM
I hear you CivilDog. For us, Eastern Front was a step into a distant alien world, one could almost say...tales from a parallel universe.

10-28-2005, 01:07 AM
I knew very little. Most of my knowledge on Soviet aircraft was limited to post war jets, and even then, my knowledge was sparse!

I had always considered the eastern front to be primarily a ground war centric conflict. Although, I feel that this is still the case, I am far far more aware of the aerial contribution on both sides of the eastern conflict.

10-28-2005, 01:16 AM
I am with Badsight. Started off knowing diddle
and squad. Learnt lots since playing IL2 demo.

10-28-2005, 01:28 AM
I knew nothing. The wests view of the USSR in the 80's when I was at school was that they didn't do much in WW2 other than look menacing so I never really learnt about the USSR's contribution in the war let alone planes. So despite having an interest in planes I never once had interest in VVS planes.

IL2 changed that.

10-28-2005, 01:42 AM
Being from Norway, I mostly knew the Battle of Britain and what the Norwegian pilots had been doing during WWII (they flew Gladiators in Norway and Spitfires for the RAF after Norway fell in 1940). Where I€m from, the Spitfire was the best fighter plane of WWII, the €˜109 comes second, Hurricane third. Mustangs are in the €œadequate€ category, I think more of the guys I grew up with knew the €œZero€ than the Mustang. It only goes to show what a national perception will do to you.

The only Russian WWII planes I knew about was the P-3 "Petlacov", that a friend of mine came across as a 1:72 set, and the little I-16 off course. The little Polycarpov is so characteristic, it€s hard to miss. In 1989 (I think) I saw a Yak at an air-show. It was an instant show star.

I knew a lot about the war in the East, but almost nothing about the aircrafts. When reading some of the The World at War (three books, about a foot thick combined) back when I was a lad at 14, I got the impression that the war in Russia was fought mainly by infantry and tanks. This sim/game has taught me a lot, first of all the wonderful diversity of aircrafts that flew. I realise I have no basis for judging what aircrafts are modelled well and what are modelled not so well. Actually, I think this game is about as comprehensive a source as any, especially considered the number of flyable planes we have.

10-28-2005, 02:02 AM
Hi, Bearcat

I consider that I was lucky as a boy and a young man, because I was fired up with a passion for this and related subjects early in my life.

First, at the tender age of 8 years, I began building model kits of WW2 armoured vehicles and combat aircraft. I became so fascinated by them, that when I reached high school age I was already starting to study them seriously. This began to combine with a love of history, which I also keenly studied.

By the time I was a young man, I had developed specialized areas of interest within WW2 and one of these was the Eastern Front. The sheer scale, ferocity and intensity of the conflict had me hooked and I just couldn't get enough.
I looked up everything I could find. This was still pretty much part of the 'cold war' period but quite a lot of info was available, if you were prepared to dig to find it.

I have remained a keen model builder throughout my life and over the decades have collected quite a sizeable personal library. Included in this, from about the mid 1980's onwards, were books from two American publishers that cover warbirds in the sort of detail that modellers love. A number of these titles cover a good variety of the Soviet types.

Then in 1999, I saw a friend playing combat flight sims and that was it. I just HAD to get a computer!

My first 'love affair' was with EAW and I tried a number of others but was wishing that somebody, somewhere, would release an Eastern Front sim. When IL-2 appeared it was like an answer to a prayer for me - it just blew me away!

IL-2/FB have intensified the experience still further for me, bringing it to new heights. They have stimulated me to learn even more and this has been contagious, because friends and family - who might otherwise have been completely unaware - have also had their brain cells tickled by the Eastern Front and the warbirds that flew there.

I guess we've all got quite a lot more than just a 'game' to be thankful for!

Best regards,

10-28-2005, 02:06 AM
I knew nothing about Russian planes - didn't know much about the Eastern Front. I had read about the battle of Stalingrad & seen the German movie & I knew it was the Russian army that entered Berlin first. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

10-28-2005, 02:08 AM
This is one of the incredible things about IL2 -it`s how much it taught me.

Like many others I knew absolutely nothing about Russian aircraft. I thought all they had were a few useless biplanes and won the won by simply overwhelming the Gerams in cannon-fodder soldiers.

I am so familiar with Russian WWII aircraft that I can now tell a sturmovik from a Yak in less than 1 second of black and white footage. I`ve seen numerous mistakes made with Russian planes being called something else in footage (same with German 109s and 190s or spits and Hurris). For teaching me this alone, Oleg deserves much praise, considering you`d never force me to a course on WWII aircraft recognition. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

It`s amazing how the cold war polarised our knowledge of Russian capabilities in WWII. Shocking really.

10-28-2005, 02:18 AM
Before Il-2, the only plane I knew the Russians had WAS-the Il2!!!

Thanks to FB/PF, my knowledge has increased hundredfold. I love to yarn about the differences between planes to my mates; pisses them off and impresses the ladies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And it also helps, because I am in a Aircraft Recognition Team for cadets, and we've won 4 years in a row, to which I thank Il2 in part http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

10-28-2005, 02:20 AM
I agree guys, I voted the 2nd option.. I was aware Russia HAD an airforce but new very little about it.

I am very interested in WW2 and know a lot about the Western Front, but for some reason we hear very little about the Eastern front in the UK.

Its only since we got sky TV that I have learnt about the Russian ground battles in detail, and there is still hardly anything on about the Red Airforce.

This game has taught me most of what I know about the VVS. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

10-28-2005, 02:24 AM
From my memories as a kid interested in ww2 aircraft and a keen modeller i knew the il2 existed because i had an airfix model of it, i also knew the rata, but thats about it. When i saw the original il2 on the shelf i thought it was an add-on for msfs and did.nt even pick it up, when i read a review on it in a pc mag i rushed out and bought it. Ended up building a new pc to play it on (i was trying to play it on a p3 450mhz with a 16mb riva tnt2 card)A month later FB came out, I've pretty well got the lot, the only add-on i havent got is TLD and no pacific ones as i am not particularly interested in that theatre(obviously i have PF) Il2 really rekindled my interest especially in the vvs side of things, i've now got a hard drive stuffed with pictures and information, i even bought an 'accurate miniatures' il2 1/48 kit! I am eagerly awaitng for Ian Boys 'Ostfront' add-on to become available in the UK.

10-28-2005, 03:20 AM
I know that the Soviets have always had scientists and engineers that are exceptional, when dealing with fluid dynamics, albeit their historical familiarity with thermal dynamics has been a tad sketchy.
My only beef is that: I figure the flight models are based on engineering concepts, blueprints and overblown heresay.
The fact is, back in the olden days, it was practically impossible to mass manufacture most fluid dynamics concepts with any modicum of reliability.
For instance, the North American P-51 Mustang was the first fighter aeroplane, ever, to have a wing designed for laminar flow. However, no P51 fighter plane was ever produced with a wing skin smooth enough to actually promote the laminar flow, for which the plane was designed to fly.
Since the Soviets had to move many of their factories East of the Urals (due to the invasion of the Nazis), the quality of some production must have dropped below normal standards. Personally, I would expect the standards to drop below that of uninvaded Allied countries, such as the United States of America, but you can decide on that concept amongst yourselves.
Hence, my answer is that the Soviets did design aircraft that did outperform many German designs. In fact, the IL2 design was decades ahead of the Stuka (barring future technologies). However, due to the quality of production available at the time and place, the final products must have fallen short of their final engineering specifications.
For instance, the Pe8 bombing raid of Berlin, where no bombs were ever dropped on Berlin and the force suffered a 78% mechanical failure rate and exactly 0% of the bomber force returned to base could be some indication of the manufacturing infrastucture, as well as the reason why the Soviet Bombing Command was sent to the infantry.
The Soviet rocket bomb... err launching pad explosive device... err rocket plane, was less than succesfull.
As for game play, our squad adapts and kills, without resortin to the n00b models.
It's a game and we all pretend.
I like to pretend to be Paul Henderson: the Soviets have stolen all of my beer and the only way I can have revenge is to score a goal!

Good Hunting,

10-28-2005, 03:33 AM
i no mig-15 onward aboutrussian fighter but no no much about ww2 did have airforce just no no anything real other than i-16 and ki-27 play each other start war.

problem most people forget all plane il-2/aep/pf are model with no problem such reliability, manufacture problem. result any plane seem unreilable during war soon become uber in people mind becuase preform well in game. game = perfect world no matinece/manufacture/reliability problem

10-28-2005, 06:53 AM
never knew that much about VVS, but was fascinated by the whole conflict as a nipper and indeed as an adult (Purnell's History of WW2 and the World at War on TV).

Have learned a lot from Il2 (including quite a bit about PCs) and probably to the extent where I can seem a bit of a bore at dinner parties, not that I get invited to that many any more. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

10-28-2005, 07:07 AM
was fairly familiar wiht the planes, but not in detail. I still have mostof my 30 yr old model collection, and there is only one soviet plane in it (yak 9). but i was fascinated wiht their planes, but the info was limited. Much of the info was from Korea, which was no real indicator of performance in the case of prop planes.

this sim really has fleshed it out alot, and has made the unknown war an open secret now.

-HH- Beebop
10-28-2005, 07:33 AM
I knew about the Yak and Mig prop fighters but not the rest.
I "knew" that Russian fighters and bombers were "inferior" to other Allied planes. That's why they "needed" US Lend-Lease aircraft.
I had never heard of the Il-2 Sturmovik. The odd, ungainly looking aircraft intrigued me.
I "knew" that Hitler foolishly opened a second front in Russia and was defeated by "the weather".

I KNEW after flying the first IL-2 Sturmovik demo for one minute that I had to have it.

I've learned SO MUCH more since.

Thanks Oleg! A million times over.

han freak solo
10-28-2005, 07:39 AM
Imagine how little we would know if the Soviet Union was still intact.

Probably no IL-2FB/AEP/PF for the rest of the world either. That's if it would have been developed at all.

10-28-2005, 07:47 AM
Sad to say i am in the 18% who voted number 1. Luckily though since i bought il2 in 2001 that changed alot. Before this game, i wasnt even interested in the pacific theatre and didnt know anything about it, if you said to me what was an F4U i would of looked at you quite confused, in fact i only bought PF because i wanted to play online. But im glad i did. Opened a whole world to me. Even though i been making plastic kits up since i was what, 5 or 6, i was only interested in making spitfires or 109's. I didnt know what a 190 was until i was around 12 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif I had always heard of Yaks but didnt think they were a WW2 era plane, i thought they were Korean war. lol. Of course i have learned so much because of this game. Sure it didnt push me outside and tell me to buy books and magazines to learn, but it made me want to. That's special. Now some of my favourite missions are based in the Pacific Theatre. In fact, id rather fly Eastern or Pacific than Western Front these days. Spitfires VS 109s gets boring http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

10-28-2005, 07:49 AM
Originally posted by nakamura_kenji:
problem most people forget all plane il-2/aep/pf are model with no problem such reliability, manufacture problem. result any plane seem unreilable during war soon become uber in people mind becuase preform well in game. game = perfect world no matinece/manufacture/reliability problem
A good idea there. We could have an additional difficulty switch for realistic probability of breakdown during flight due to historical maintenance issues. I'd love that. Too much for a game, I agree, but many after a while want to play at the computationally maximum possible realism, and that would be very very good for immersion.

10-28-2005, 10:13 AM
Originally posted by han freak solo:
Imagine how little we would know if the Soviet Union was still intact.

Probably no IL-2FB/AEP/PF for the rest of the world either. That's if it would have been developed at all.

Yeah then we would all be flying in http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif CFS3 no doubt.... or by now BoB II. Either that or we would all be doing other things....

10-28-2005, 11:08 AM
I'm 43 now, but have been an avid reader about WW2 history and aviation since I was about 10, so I knew of most Russian A/C, and a decent idea of the eastern front war on the ground; But it would be a gross understatement to say that IL-2 "filled in the blanks".

Between this sim, and all the other neat snippets of info available, especially after the breakup of the USSR, there has been just so much tertiary and tangiental info for enthusiasts like me to greedily lap up. Synergies, if you will.

Learning has caused one thing though: I get ticked off everytime I hear the "P-51 Mustang was the best..." and "The P-39 was junk but the Russians used it well in the ground attack role..." cliche's lipped by peripherally informed ( at best ) History Channel/Wings Discovery watching parrots. When trying to correct them ( tactfully ) my ( relative ) knowledge comes accross to them as obsessive, though I'm no geek. I love this sim.

10-28-2005, 12:27 PM
I knew about the Mig 3 and Yak, but I've learned alot about other stuff from playing IL2. I knew quite abit about the land war being a history major in college, and I knew lend lease brought them a bunch of stuff. But as far as the other types of planes, I don't know if I had ever heard of the LA-5 and 7, or the IL2 or Laggs at all until I started playing this sim. It has also led me to reading more about the Russian land & air war against the Germans.

I also think the cold war did a lot of damage, and we are finally putting that behind us. Hopefully it will stay behind us.


10-28-2005, 01:13 PM
I'd class myself as one knowledgeable of the Soviet Air Force in the context of the whole war.

I started making model aircraft at the age of seven. As an Air Force brat until the age of 18, I've literally spent more time in line at the commissary than most one or two enlistment NCOs have on duty. Add in my six years in the Navy and twenty plus years as a field engineer for a major defense contractor, and well, I've been around the subject for a long time.

I've seen Bob Hoover honking that yellow Mustang around as hard as it could be pushed in the late sixties airshows at Davis-Monthan, and ridden in the back seat of a modified P-51 owned by the company my Dad took his flying lessons from (a junior NCO in his air traffic control squadron was an instructor pilot who got his buddies military discounts for flying lessons from his 'night job'-back in the day, every enlisted man with a family had at least one part time job-and so did his wife & their older kids), where I noticed no 'bumpiness', even while scraping barely above the saguaro cactus at 300 mph.

To be honest, there was zip, zero, nada about the Soviet air war beyond the German accounts until the mid-late seventies (I even choked my way through Horrido!, Toliver and Constable's shameless arsekissing exercise).

As Civildog pointed out, the models available of Soviet wartime aircraft were a bit on the crude side for an awful long time. As I recall, the best kits of Great Patriotic War aircraft were from the French company Heller, including the only decent 1/72nd scale P-39, although Italieri made a very nice La-5FN (and a lovely Dora-9).

I still have a few Heller I-153 kits still unbuilt in my garage somewhere, and my first YaK-1 kit was snatched from a store I found in Garden Grove (Brookhurst Hobby) that had some contacts in the Warsaw Pact countries (one of the early Czech efforts, I think). I got Green & Swanborough's Soviet Air Force Fighters of WW2 as soon as I became aware of it (same store) in the early eighties, along with the more general regurgitations of WWII fighter lore (and much of it was the same stuff, over and over again).

What I gathered from my reading and modelling research was that the performance and quality of Soviet fighters and the training and skills of their pilots was made largely irrelevant by the blind obedience required to commands from ground commanders/controllers whose priorities were direct support of ground objectives (and just coincidentally, keeping their commissars happy). Only a few lucky and extremely skilled pilots managed to survive and by dint of their reputations, bring about some sanity to Soviet air tactics by war's end, at least within the 'Guards' units.

The Soviets' swarming to ground targets undoubtedly catered to the German fighters' 'hunting' philosophy and ambush tactics, and contributed to most of the high scoring that continued on that front right up to the end. In a very real sense, the Soviets fought in the air the way the Germans wanted them to, and paid the butcher's bill.

It could be argued that the Soviet military in general fought the way the Germans wanted them to (tactically), and suffered many more casualties than necessary as a result. In some people's eyes, this lessens the 'credit' given for Soviet sacrifices in the war. Western leaders are judged harshly for unnecessary casualties; Stalin and the boys in the Kremlin share the blame for a large portion of the casualties in their theater of the war.

By all accounts, early-war Soviet fighters were poorly built, and from examples obtained of mid-to late war aircraft, the quality was vastly improved, but still thought to be below Western standards on many points, although I would point out that the basic designs were very good in the context of Soviet air combat philosophy (every design is built to a customer's requirements: American, British, and German designs varied as much from each other as from the Soviets', IMHO), and the aircraft met the customer's requirements.

To this day, though, a great deal of the data we have been getting is still colored by wartime and Soviet era propaganda. I find a lot of it to contain the same anecdotal qualities of Japanese wartime memoirs (and immediate post-war Western memoirs & accounts), and see little of the critical thinking we have seen in research of the West's military campaigns over the last thirty years.

Part of this is due to the need to get something published, part may be attributed to the desire not to be thought rude or ungrateful by one's hosts, and thereby lose access to what are still closely kept records. It will be years before a balanced picture will emerge, if it can.

Both Soviet and German records are sparse, obscure, and affected by a need to please their respective political masters. It will take a lot of burrowing and putting disparate pieces of data from both sides together to arrive at something like the truth.



10-28-2005, 01:25 PM
I've learnt a lot about a whole load of aircraft since playing this game. I always remember having an Airfix 190 and thinking that it couldn't possible be as good as the Spitfire model I had.

How knowledge changes things http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

With respect to VVS aircraft, I didn't know a whole lot about them and, to be truthful, this game has probably turned me off from wanting to know much about them when it's obvious that they are portrayed/modelled better than, perhaps, they should be. And yes, that's being small minded but that's just the way I feel about it.


10-28-2005, 01:54 PM
How much I did know? Well I was even teached in elementary school that La7 was the best fighter of WWII. I asked my dad and he said to me: "Son, look actually the best was Spitfire but there no need to talk about that in school" That experience sparks my interest about WWII aviation...

10-28-2005, 04:31 PM
My dad was a merchant seaman Officer in WWII and I knew through his experiance that they used the P-39/63. He made a trip to the Soviet Union, Cherbourgh, Fr but mostly Manila Bay.

10-28-2005, 05:38 PM
I had no idea that the Soviet Union built aircraft. My high school 'education' left me with the impression that the war in the east was fought by farmers with pitchforks, hunting rifles and tanks based on tractor technology and led by a psychopath with big hair.

10-28-2005, 10:00 PM
hm, id never heard of la7 or any of the la series i think. when i first started to play against friends i was afraid to pick la7 in case it was **** http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

models of russians planes are rare, if u want english,american,german fighters then its easy for bombers its harder..
i have a mig3 model i got from duxford, was they only one they had http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif
looks sexy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

10-29-2005, 12:41 AM
I have a (though quite dated now) WW2 Aircraft Encyclopedia so I knew a few little details about one or two of them - the I-16 was the major one.

I will admit though I knew practically nothing about the Sturmovik, the Mig, Lagg and especially the La-7s. For some odd reason though, before IL-2 I had this crazy notion a YAK was a Japanese aircraft. Mis-informed by stupidity maybe, or not just paying attention.

I regard IL-2 as a successful medium of informative history. Without it I can not dare imagine how ignorant I would still be right now.

I might even still think a Yak is Japanese. What a sorry slab of lifeform I would be.

10-29-2005, 12:51 AM
Hi there, p1ngu666

Yes, model kits of WW2 Soviet types are noticeably less common but I guess this had to be expected in a 'Western' marketplace.

Nevertheless, the position is not as bad as some here might think. As long ago as the 60's and 70's, kits of some soviet types had been available. You had to 'scratch around' among the different brands to find them. Some were very crude by today's standards but that was just how injection moulded kits were in those days.

During this period, my aircraft were mostly 1/72 scale. I recall having built a Yak 9, Pe-2 and Il-2 (at least). The Yak 9 was an Airfix kit but I can't remember what brands the others were.

[Among the better known brands I remember from my earlier days of modelling were Airfix, Frog, Heller, Monogram and Revell but there were numerous other Western companies. In addition to this, from the late 70's onwards at least, some stuff produced by manufacturers in Central and Eastern Europe started to appear in our local shops.]

In recent times, the situation has improved a lot and you can get a good variety of Eastern Bloc/Soviet models. Admittedly, these do not sell as well as their Western counterparts so dealers tend to carry less of them, but they are still out there to be found. These days my aircraft are almost entirely 1/48 scale, which is less well covered than 1/72 when it comes to bombers. Nevertheless, sitting on my shelves at my left elbow right now, are the following 1/48 kits that I purchased over the last decade or so:

Accurate Miniatures - Yak-1 (Lilya Litvyak)
Accurate Miniatures - Yak-1b
Eduard - Yak-3 (Normandie-Niemen)
Eduard 'Profipack' - Yak-3
Hobby Craft - La-5
Hobby Craft - La-7
Classic Airframes - I-153
Hobby Craft - I-16
Accurate Miniatures - Il-2 (single seat)
Accurate Miniatures - Il-2M3 (two seat)
Historic Plastic Models - Pe-2 (series 1-105)

The quality and accuracy of these kits is varied (all the Accurate Miniatures ones are very good) and some require a bit of extra work but the Historic Models Pe-2, for example, was a pleasant surprise - not nearly as 'clunky' and crude as I had expected, having good fine recessed panel lines, a great set of photo-etch detail parts, beautiful instrument film and nice clear instructions. The decals are not too bad either, with markings for two different Soviet versions and one captured Finnish example! I'll find out about fit when I build it.

(Also in this scale, a friend recently purcheased a MiG-3 at my local store. I haven't found an LaGG-3 there yet. Still looking!)

As you would probably be aware, the advent of online purchasing has considerably expanded consumers' options and there are now a lot of 'boutique' manufacturers offering their wares. I think it should be possible to get a lot of different types now, if you include 1/72 scale.

Best regards,

10-29-2005, 03:32 AM
^ I built a (IIRC 1/72) Pe-2 also; I seem to remember that the base plastic was light blue and it had a glass floor in the nose.

I think it was Airfix.


10-29-2005, 05:01 AM
i had no clue.

if i did..i forgot it in some history lesson barely touched, back in middle or high school in the 80s.

im sure they HAD an airforce. i just thought they were outdated or not interesting. (watching films of russia during WWI made me believe they lived in the stone age)

for aviation purposes, OLEG AND CREW.. have been my best history teachers .thanx big "O"!

i love my yak 9K http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

10-29-2005, 06:18 AM
Hi, Bearcat! Good topic. As a finn I did know about most of the Russian aeroplanes showed in the game. Finns have known quite a bit about Russian planes because we fought them and we also flew them. We captured some of them and partly bought them from the german storages.

The quality of the Russian aeroplanes may surprise most of us indeed! But the common (finnish) conseption goes that their aeroplanes actually were quite good. What was, then, the reason for their lack of success? They were missing skill, not ability but skill. One more thing about the quality of the planes is, that the series-produced units may not have been always adequately finished which means, that there have been better and worse units of each type, but in general they were good aeroplanes. (The same was of course with Germans.)

But do we know and more, do we understand the Russian lack of skill? That is a topic that have been discussed largely in litterature and I try to put it shortly what I have understood it about:

1) Stalin purged the high officer staff in late 1930:ies.
2) Because of fear every officer lacked initiative - enterprise.
3) Because of low standard of public education an average russian worker or soldier lacked the skill of reading and writing.
4) In general the Russians were afraid of Germans. Expecially pilots were afraid of Luftwaffe.

It has took me years to understand even a bit, that the basic mentality in Russian (1920-1950) may have been quite depressive and sceary. I wonder how many of us can really understand such conditions and how does it can effect on - for example - the mentality of the Russian pilots, officers and tactics!

So, as far as I have understood the Russian aeroplanes were good in general. They were used in bad way due to the lack of good training (of the leadership) and -mentality. Those things did ghance as the war went on, but many Luftwaffe sources tell, that the Russians never could truly master the tactics. That´s how German fighters often got the Russian unescorted bombers and shot them down before the LaGG:s, La's, Yaks etc. got there in the battle.

Have a nice day,

10-29-2005, 06:44 AM
At the moment of my voting its 85% for lack or miniumum of of knowledge.

Most of you guys started interest with WW2 aviation, especially VVS after buying Il2. My story is different: I started my interest being a kid in mid-1980s, so Il2 was a bliss for me! I could actually "do" what I read about for years, ever since I was 10 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif!

Most voters are from the west, so you either had no knowledge on VVS aviation or what you knew was one of extremes: "soviets didnt have aviation at all, well some land-lease planes only" OR "Yaks, Las and Il2 were perfect and dominated the skys over east front at least from 1943 on".

And I come from darker side of former iron courtain. There was something like balance in amount of literature in Poland in 1980s on eastern and western WW2 aviation, but with accent put on western planes Poles flew then. As much as you could read about problems with German or western Allies planes THERE WERE NO PROBLEMS with soviet planes in pre-1989 literature! Yaks were all perfectly agile, Pes always escaped LW fighters, Il2 were indestructible flying tanks and Las were just perfect, i.e. entire knowledge I or we all could have learned from pre-1990s books were full of soviet propaganda myths on soviet technology superiority. So I can honestly say I had knowledge on VVS planes but that was "pros-only" propaganda BS.

And then there were 1990s: the wall fell and so did SU and Russian authors could finally write all truth, i.e. on cons too and it appeared that I16 was agile but very difficult to fly, that Yaks kept breaking apart in air even with no enemy intervention, that Il2s were SLOUGHTERED through most of war, that Las were seriously troubled with quality problems (like all soviet planes actually), that soviet engines technology was behind other nations by years, that VVS overclaimed their victories by like 8-11 times and so on and on.

I dont really think you guys there in the west had much contact with that 1990s wave of information on WW2 VVS. Being Polish I had such contact, beause we were fed with propaganda long enough to be very hungry for the truth, so publishers rushed for it...So I learned Yaks lost their wings at 700kmh in dive, that Il-2s were lost averagely at 1 per 18,5 sorties, that La-7 was dismissed by Pokryshkin after one the first examples delivered lost wing in familiarization flight, and so on.

Problem is it "looks" like Oleg had no contact with post-soviet sources on VVS planes either, sadly...
Il-2 series might be called a sim as far as western planes are concerned, but for VVS its a "simulation of simulation". Soviet planes act here like they WERE SUPPOSED to, but DID NOT IRL actually. Declaration of non-modeling quality issues is very convenient: in the west differencies in performance between serial planes were 1-5% the most, but soviet planes were "capable" of having 100kmh gap of top speed between planes of the same batch and their engines rated alts could be different by hundrets of meters. As late as winter 1944/45 there were hundrets of newest VVS fighters (Yak-3s, La-7s) grounded because it was discovered, that entire batches were dangerous to fly not to mention fighting. Even in the end of WW2, in apil 1945 over 17% of VVS planes had quality below minimal standards! But all that is conveniently passed by, and we have in game VVS planes modeled not according to average standard but to state of those few top quality examples or prototypes - not even according to average quality of top quality batches.

Not any other AF has that many rare birds like I185, minimal-quantity MiG variations or MiG-3U, the latter is even put in 1942 even though was built in 1943! One should ask why? The answer I see is: even top quality VVS serial planes of 1941/42 were so much worse than their opponnets, that Oleg decided to simulate in the game simulated-reality - in which there were more than 5 I-185s (I-185 M-71 was dismissed IRL BECAUSE M-71 engine was TOTALLY UNRELIABLE!) and more than 6 MiG-3Us. The MiG-3U is important here: the plane did not exist in 1942, as it is labelled in the game, but since Oleg's VVS of 1942 needs it, it was put there, even though it was built in 1943. 85% of you, western buyers dont know what was reality, because you were not interested or had no sources, so all your knowledge comes from Oleg. Problem is Oleg has shown he can not be trusted as far as VVS is concerned, to say it gently.

Can really "engine limitations" or necessity of making "best guesses" validate some of strange behaviours of some planes?
Oleg modeled breaking P-51D wings, even though reasons for that were quickly deleted IRL and even earliest examples were modified, he modeles Fw190 losing great deal of lift after few mg hits, and so on, but somehow none of that happenes to soviet planes. In fact Yaks handling remaines unchanged no matter how many 20mm HE hits received. Why?
Oleg modeled P-47 all-metal fuselage being cut in half behind cocpit by certain amount of hits, but wooden Las fuselage of much smaller diameter takes far more hits. Why?
He modeled all-metal A6M5c of empty weight 2155kg as a delicate bird but he modeled mix metal/wood construction Yak-3 of empty weight of 2123kg to have DM among toughest! Why?
I could dig up from popular Russian aviation site and read La-5 pilots manual forbidding to ecxeed 625kmhIAS in dive and Yak-3 pilots maual forbidding to exceed 650kmhIAS but Oleg could not? Or he chosed to ignore or dismiss that information and let those planes dive safely at 100kmh+ in the game. Why?
Oleg was provided by members of Polish community with P.11c pilots manual stating dive speed of 696kmhIAS but he chosed to ignore it and model the plane with Vne lower by at least 200kmh. Why?
"Probability of Fw190 catching fire" was "corrected" in 4.02 but Yaks remained inflammable. Why?
Russian book "˜ÑÑ"Ñ€µб¸Ñ"µл¸ ¯К ¿µÑ€¸о´? 'µл¸ºо' žÑ"µÑ"µÑÑ"²µнно' ²о'нÑ"" by .Т.СÑ"µ¿?нµÑ"* published in 1992 and based on NII VVS test data says Yak-3 turn time was 21s, but Oleg models the plane to do the same in like 16s. Why? To make it even "funnier" Oleg once recommended that book as the most complete source for Yaks! So he knew what was reality, kept in closet for decades until SU fell, but choosed to model Yak-3 according to soviet propaganda myths on that plane. And I read he sometimes dismissed data on planes provided by community, calling it "propaganda". Funny, isnt it.

Not that I think anything will be changed in the game just bacause I wrote what know and what majority of buyers dont. Simply be aware you need to be careful with Il-2 series as credible source of knowledge. It isnt.

10-29-2005, 07:22 AM
I didnt read this thread.

It seems to me that history is bunk. You can't really believe a word of it. Especially the histories that come from governments with experience in book burning and press manipulation.

No matter where you go, there is "the best". Just ask the locals.

10-29-2005, 07:35 AM
Ah, that would explain why the performance data for Russian a/c used for modelling VVS a/c by 1C/Maddox Games is not released to the 'public'.

Would really like this data to update/correct the info I have on Soviet a/c gathered over many many years, here in the West.

And I read he sometimes dismissed data on planes provided by community, calling it "propaganda".
Yes, I remember American a/c data being called American manufacturer's propaganda.

10-29-2005, 08:09 AM
So, it really is the Bias week this one http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif.
Only subject of discussion.

I'd put the "all your bias are belong to us" picture if it weren't also overplayed this week http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

10-29-2005, 08:22 AM
yak9 handles very badly when hit by 20mm, happened to me last night http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

i think the quality issues where often the fault of stalin placing so much pressure on the factories http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

the russians up in murmansk had absolute contempt for the germans, and where very brave according to RAF pilots who went there. (not just fighting the germans, flying in awful weather etc) RAF pilots also used to shout "only the best can fly i16!" when one of the russian pilots made a mistake in a "easy" hurricane http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

the japanease also blamed their generals, which i think is pretty fair

10-29-2005, 08:50 AM
There was no literature to be found on Soviet WWII Soviet aircraft in the area where I grew up during the sixties. I built plastic models of anything I could get my hands on, and hung them from the ceiling with tacks, so by the time I was 15, I had several dozen models of all nationalities, but no Soviet aircraft at all.

It was when I got Kenneth Munson's little pocket book on WWII aircraft in the late sixties that I saw my first soviet aircraft. They struck me as either non-descript or awkward-looking (the Lagg-5 looked like something I could have made from parts from different plastic model kits). Not so cool as the American or British planes.

About the only thing I knew about the Eastern Front was that Colonel Klink was often threatened by that General (what was his name?) to be sent there as punishment in 'Hogan's Heroes'. I bought IL-2 3 years ago because it was in the cheap bin, I was an airplane-sim nerd, and had not played with a sim since Red BAron II. Wow, did I hit the jack-pot !!

I already knew alot about WWI and WWII aircraft (but not Soviet aircraft) before I bought IL-2. I knew very little about jet aircraft (I find missile-era combat boring). I see there are many here on this forum who know a heck of alot more about WWII aircraft than I do, though.

I do think the Soviet aircraft of IL-2 are over-modelled compared to the US aircraft, however. But this is not a big issue with me; I can live with the the fact that a Russion software product exaggerates modelling of Russian aircraft, as I suspect that the Americans and British do the same thing when they develop a flight sim. I currently like to fly the Bf109 and FW190, so it's OK. I do think the FW190 was better in reality than in IL-2, though.

10-29-2005, 09:20 AM
I had heard that the Sturmovik had the biggest production run of any aircraft ever, I found this fact out about the time I first heard of IL2 (the original).

I had heard of the Yak and LaGGs but just those names, and knew no details.

The bombers were the big suprise...and a great discovery...this really helped to rekindle my childhood interest in aircraft...so much NEW to discover!!

I may have suffered from the 'if I havn't heard of it, it can't be any good!' attitude, this is probably how people thought where I grew up.

Also we're all brought up (I suppose ) to believe that our own countries aircraft are the greatest. This goes for all countries except Britain... we had the Spitfire...which, as every Brit will tell you, was the best fighter in the war ! ! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

10-29-2005, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by scottmal1:
... Ended up building a new pc to play it on ...

...same here. I had to wait a year after buying IL2 (the original) before I could get a computer that would get past the introduction video! (I played CFS2 until that point...an online nightmare...unfortunately it put me off online gaming)!

10-29-2005, 09:37 AM
I'm looking for diecast Russian models in London lately and I can't find any. Have you ever come across a Lavochkin or a Sturmovik in any UK model shop?

10-29-2005, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by neural_dream:
I'm looking for diecast Russian models in London lately and I can't find any. Have you ever come across a Lavochkin or a Sturmovik in any UK model shop?

Very rare picture of a very rare die cast model?

http://www.planecrazy.biz/phpcode/resize_image.php?imag...h=500&max_height=500 (http://www.planecrazy.biz/phpcode/resize_image.php?image=../upfiles/477.jpg&max_width=500&max_height=500)



10-29-2005, 10:18 AM
Too bad it's not available anymore.

They are so rare that Oleg would become rich if he included a sturmovik 1:72 diecast in the Platinum Edition and added 10-20 pounds in the price. I bet they aren't that rare in Russia.

10-29-2005, 11:08 AM
well my mig3, and a few models my dad has are made by the "easy model" sub devision of these people http://www.trumpeter-china.com/

sounds like some awful cheap product, but there actully pretty good. prebulit plastic kits kinda, but there really well done, better by far than 90% of die cast models

cant really find any info on there website or google tho http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

10-29-2005, 11:12 AM
well, a quick stab on ebay turns up german easy models

http://toys.search.ebay.co.uk/easy-model_Diecast-Vehicl...1QQfsopZ1QQsacatZ222 (http://toys.search.ebay.co.uk/easy-model_Diecast-Vehicles_W0QQcatrefZC12QQfromZR8QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQ sacatZ222)

one for teh italians http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

10-29-2005, 12:33 PM
I forgot ebay http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

10-29-2005, 09:32 PM
in reply to the original question - I feel as though I missed out on over half of all the material that was available had I but known.

...missed out until recently, that is.

Thanks to 1c for making the Eastern Front come alive, and inspiring an urge to learn more.

10-31-2005, 09:28 AM
In response to the original question, I've just stepped up to the IL2 series after years of Air Warrior III. As was mentioned earlier AW has Yak-9D and La-5, the Yak in AW was quite weak and easy prey whereas the La-5 had pretty good legs.

In books and models, I was always in a hurry to get to the P-51D so I overlooked quite a few planes.

11-20-2005, 11:04 AM
Hey I found it! Hoohoo! It's better than I remembered! For your entertainment:
The menu page is here:

This description is accurate of the FM in the game, and it's funny that it's so different to what we have now in the IL2/FB/Pf series. (FWIW, the Yak is now one of my favorites).

Enjoy. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

11-20-2005, 02:20 PM
To be honest, I always considered myself a huge WW2 aviation buff - from the time I was born until I was about 14 (I'm 16 now) I studied WW2 and aviation.
That being said, I knew almost nothing about Russia's WW2 aircraft. I knew some minute details that I had gleaned from other books that had mentioned Russian aircraft during major operations, but then after IL-2 I really studied up. I'm glad these sims came out http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif (and honestly, I really think that the MiG-3 is my favorite WW2 aircraft now).

11-20-2005, 06:14 PM
Originally posted by LameDuck.:
In response to the original question, I've just stepped up to the IL2 series after years of Air Warrior III. As was mentioned earlier AW has Yak-9D and La-5, the Yak in AW was quite weak and easy prey whereas the La-5 had pretty good legs.

In books and models, I was always in a hurry to get to the P-51D so I overlooked quite a few planes.

What was your CPID in AW??

11-20-2005, 09:45 PM
off-line only. Singin' the hardware blues.


11-20-2005, 10:21 PM

I knew another Duck in AW; he was dead though http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

11-20-2005, 10:44 PM
I really think that the MiG-3 is my favorite WW2 aircraft now.
It's always been my Fave WW2 plane, with F~106 my Fave jet. Both are made purely for high speed high altitude interception. For the same reason, Ki-44 is my Fave Japanese plane. That Siemens Shuckart you mention in the Kill IL2 thread I think also made as a fast climbing interceptor, and its cool they were thinking of that back in WW1. That SS looks sharp too, like the -3, -44, and -106.

11-20-2005, 10:53 PM
Before IL-2, I thought they flew I16 and TB-3 for the whole war.