PDA

View Full Version : IL10



LuftKuhMist
02-18-2004, 11:46 AM
What about the IL10 one day? Great plane, mucho loadouts, mucho armor, mucho guns and mucho manoeuvrability.

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif

LuftKuhMist
02-18-2004, 11:46 AM
What about the IL10 one day? Great plane, mucho loadouts, mucho armor, mucho guns and mucho manoeuvrability.

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif

Luftcaca
02-18-2004, 12:13 PM
agreed
I struggle to understand why the Go-229, the P-80 and NOT the Il10

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

StG77_Stuka
02-18-2004, 12:14 PM
Yes! 2000hp of pure Terror.
http://www.aeronautics.ru/il10.jpg

clint-ruin
02-18-2004, 12:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LuftKuhMist:
What about the IL10 one day? Great plane, mucho loadouts, mucho armor, mucho guns and mucho manoeuvrability.

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This has been requested quite a lot - its addition could make for some entertaining 1945 and Korean War style scenarios. As far as I know it's an unlikely addition. Maybe if someone starts on it now it might be ready for whatever expansion comes out after "aces"?

Il-10 is worth googling for, for any of you who aren't familiar with the type. Think of an Il-2, streamlined, with La-5FN competative handling and speed. Meow.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

blabla0001
02-18-2004, 01:02 PM
An IL2 on steroids.

Maybe it's for the best it's not in the game since I already saw whine posts about the current IL2 being too good.

1.JaVA_Razer
02-18-2004, 01:04 PM
I thought one DID start work on it at the time of the old IL2 center?

p1ngu666
02-18-2004, 01:21 PM
i figure oleg is saving it for when he returns to eastern front
be great to have tho http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

RCAF_Hawk2
02-18-2004, 02:48 PM
bump

&lt;BR&gt;&lt;BR&gt;&lt;IMG SRC="http://www16.brinkster.com/hawkspage/hawkssig.jpg"&gt;&lt;BR&gt;Your not getting my buffalo wings &lt;BR&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/td&gt;

noshens
02-18-2004, 04:02 PM
replaced Il-2 on production lines by 1944. Aircraft had a greater speed, maneuverability and armor protection than its predecessor. Below 2000 meters the speed of Il-10 was only 10-15 km/h less that of Me-109G-2 and FW-109A-4. First Il-10s appeared in the sky of the eastern front in October 1944. On low altitude this plane had enough speed and agility to perform active combat against enemy fighters. Used during the final stages of WWII and in Korea. 4966 built in the USSR, and some 1200 more in Czechoslovakia.

http://www.aviation.ru/Il/

Crew: pilot, tail gunner
Powerplant: Mikulin AM-42, 2000 hp 12 cylinder V-engine
Armament (fixed): four NS-23 23 mm cannons in wings and one UB-20 20 mm of tail gunner
Armament (disposable): 600 kg of bombs in two small chambers in wings and two points under the wings, 4 rockets
http://free.polbox.pl/l/leszekch/aavb33.html

BfHeFwMe
02-18-2004, 05:40 PM
IL=10's were loved by allied pilots in Korea, and easy and sure kill. They were quickly withdrawn, what was left of them. Don't believe it, take one of the fighters with all the fifties in the wings and shred a few IL-2's. Nothing tears them up quicker.

WUAF_Badsight
02-18-2004, 10:52 PM
do you mean this plane ???

http://img7.photobucket.com/albums/v18/Badsight/IL-10.jpg

the IL-10 was RESERVED by Maddox Games on the list at il2center.com BEFORE Leuthiers web site got attacked by GAY THURBER

yes you read it correctly it was RESERVED by 1C : Maddox games

now if that is true , where has it gone ?

i am VERY interested in the Sturmoviks because of this sim .... the IL10 would be AWSOME if it came to FB

clint-ruin
02-18-2004, 11:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BfHeFwMe:
IL=10's were loved by allied pilots in Korea, and easy and sure kill. They were quickly withdrawn, what was left of them. Don't believe it, take one of the fighters with all the fifties in the wings and shred a few IL-2's. Nothing tears them up quicker.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes of course, 3rd world pilots in a ground attack mission got chewed up by US/UN pilots in fighters - it must really suck ;&gt;

http://home.iprimus.com.au/djgwen/fb/leninkoba.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
02-19-2004, 03:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BfHeFwMe:
IL=10's were loved by allied pilots in Korea, and easy and sure kill. They were quickly withdrawn, what was left of them. Don't believe it, take one of the fighters with all the fifties in the wings and shred a few IL-2's. Nothing tears them up quicker.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well what can you say about such a authorative post

well as a start it should be mentioned that the IL10 was one of the best Prop ground pounders ever

& one of the most heavily defended

2000Hp

500 Kmh at sea level

stronger that a IL2

greater loadout than a IL2


,


nuff said

blabla0001
02-19-2004, 06:47 AM
The Nato designation of the IL-10 was "the Beast"

I really wonder if it was so bad why they called it that?

Luftcaca
02-19-2004, 02:16 PM
I also read that some Il10'S were mounted with a ShVak 20 mm cannon in the turret instead of the UB machine gun.

Poor 109'S heheheheeeh

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

kozhe
02-19-2004, 03:24 PM
I´m sorry but i stoped the Il-10 work a LOT of time ago.

http://kozhe.250free.com/il103.jpg

It was probably the best ground attack plane of ww2. That´s a fact.

BBB_Hyperion
02-19-2004, 05:12 PM
Still looks great. Any chances that the Il10 can be completed someday ? Would be a great loss not only for the Time invested in this Project (that must have been some Hours+) to build it but for the Il2 Community too.

Regards,
Hyperion

WUAF_Badsight
02-19-2004, 10:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kozhe:
I´m sorry but i stoped the Il-10 work a LOT of time ago.

It was probably the best ground attack plane of ww2. That´s a fact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

FOR THE LOVE OF GOD WHY ???????

(in best whining tone) WHHHHHYYYYYYYYY

omfg it would have been cool to have

WUAF_Badsight
02-19-2004, 10:42 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kozhe:
I´m sorry but i stoped the Il-10 work a LOT of time ago.

It was probably the best ground attack plane of ww2. That´s a fact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

btw that screenshot LOOKS REALLY GOOD

YOU HORRID TEASE YOU http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

jurinko
02-20-2004, 05:05 AM
I asked Oleg some time ago about it..

"When will be I-185 and IL-10 released?

Il-10- isn't in Plan. Nobody doing it already long time."

----------------------
Letka.13/Liptow @ HL

avimimus
02-20-2004, 08:05 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by razer3:
I thought one DID start work on it at the time of the old IL2 center?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, Angel of Death was doing it, almost finished the external before he got too busy.

Bogun
02-20-2004, 08:34 AM
kozhe

Do you still have 3DMax files for this project?
Do you mind giving it to someone else?

Regards,

http://bogun.freeservers.com/609_bogun.jpg
"The best fighters I met in combat were the American P-51 Mustang and Russian Yak-9U. Both of those types obviously exceeded all Bf109 variants in performance, including the 'K'. The Mustang was unmatched in altitude performance, while the Yak-9U was champion in rate of climb and maneuverability."

- Walter Wolfrum (137 victories)

p1ngu666
02-20-2004, 09:06 AM
yeah, provide the 3d file to community or something http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

Oleg_Maddox
02-20-2004, 12:27 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BfHeFwMe:
IL=10's were loved by allied pilots in Korea, and easy and sure kill. They were quickly withdrawn, what was left of them. Don't believe it, take one of the fighters with all the fifties in the wings and shred a few IL-2's. Nothing tears them up quicker.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The official looses of this aircraft doesn't confirm your text http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
And why American's gve this plane intersting name: BEAST http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

kozhe
02-20-2004, 01:56 PM
I don´t have any problem to give the files to any who wants to work on it. In fact, i allready gave the model to 3 diferent guys. Any of them did anything with it.

if you want them, please email me at kozhedub2000@yahoo.es, but please only if you really want to work on it.

WUAF_Badsight
02-20-2004, 02:10 PM
PLEASE LET 1C:MADDOX GAMES TAKE THIS UP

P L E A S E ! ! ! !

this plane would be FANTASTIC to get in IL2 : FB

seriously i mean F A N T A S T I C

DDad
02-20-2004, 02:52 PM
Guys, don't think theres anyone more than I who would love to see the IL-10 modeled, but the sad fact is, most people aren't nearly as worked up over a Attack plane as they are over a Fighter.
BTW- while I have no conclusive info one way or the other- suspect that most of the IL-10s in Korea were flown by Koreans- and they tended to have higher loss's no matter WHICH airplane they flew- whether it was the IL, Yak9, or Mig 15

Hartmann.
02-20-2004, 07:33 PM
Kozh,

check mail http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
actually, u msut finish to send the skin http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Tooz_69GIAP
02-20-2004, 07:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DDad:
Guys, don't think theres anyone more than I who would love to see the IL-10 modeled, but the sad fact is, most people aren't nearly as worked up over a Attack plane as they are over a Fighter.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ME, MEMEMEMEME, LOOK, OVER HERE, MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm far more worked up about cool attack planes than fighters. We have tons of fighters, but only a couple real good GA aircraft. The game is called IL2 Sturmovik after all. Surely the natural progression would be to have the IL-10 for the attack on Berlin, and such. With over 7,000 built before the end of WWII it certainly wasn't in small numbers!!

Tooz

whit ye looking at, ya big jessie?!?!

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_tooz.jpg
Za Rodinu!

VW-IceFire
02-20-2004, 08:24 PM
I think the IL10 would be a very interesting addition to the game. IL10's escorted by P-63's in high speed attack runs over Berlin and elsewhere....that sounds great!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!

Gunner_361st
02-20-2004, 09:09 PM
Yes, the IL10 would be great, I learned about it a week ago, and what a plane!

Wouldn't dream of saddling one of those, just strafe 'em and run! Or if you are the IL10, well, time to take out any late war luftwabbles silly enough to get in a turn fight. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif Anyone know sustained turn time of it below 2 KM?

S~

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
02-20-2004, 10:18 PM
ME ALSO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

after IL2-Sturmovik came out i learnt about the Sturmovik family of Ground attackers

& the IL-10 which actually flew in WW2 ! !

EVER since i have been hoping for it to come to FB

once FB was released i thought for sure we will see it sometime soon

here is BADLY hopeing the it may still come !!!!!!!

ajafoofoo
02-20-2004, 11:30 PM
Teh IL-10 was easy target! Many americans in Korea shot them down. In fact 200 were shot down by soldiers using only a colt 1911 handgun.



note: The preceding was complete BS.

kozhe
02-21-2004, 07:51 AM
&gt;&gt;&gt; ""Teh IL-10 was easy target! Many americans in Korea shot them down. In fact 200 were shot down by soldiers using only a colt 1911 handgun.""

Don´t forget the 100 or so that were shoted down by stones. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The Il-10 was as good in horizontal maneuvres than a La-5fn fighter. And it had a rear gunner! So i don´t think it would be too nice to attack them from behind.

WUAF_Badsight
02-21-2004, 12:23 PM
kozhe could you please post some more pics of your IL-10 model

it looks great !

Seafire_LIII
02-21-2004, 01:22 PM
Yes the IL-10 would be great. So Oleg, why not? Pleeeeze.

By the way I wouldn't read too much into the NATO name "Beast". It begins with a "B" for bomber and that's about all you should read into it. The La-9 (can we have one of these too?) wasn't called Fritz because they thought it was German and the IL-2 wasn't called Bark because they thought it was a dog!!!

For those interested in the Korean Air War the site www.acig.org (http://www.acig.org) has some good stuff that is better balanced than the usual "the Sabres blew them out of the sky" stuff.

Urist
02-21-2004, 06:17 PM
Calling the Il10 an easy target for fighters is like calling the A10 and easy target. Or the A1 skyraider for that matter.

Like most dedicated ground attack aircraft, they require air cover to operate effectively. I'm thinking it got left unescorted much of the time with obvious results.

People on the ground certainly wouldn't consider the IL10 a nice airplane to have attacking you.

Hmmm, I wonder, which aircraft is better at its job? The IL10 or the A1.... I don't know much about either of them.

LuftKuhMist
02-22-2004, 03:38 PM
IL10 Sturmovik!!!

We NEED that plane http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif.

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-24-2004, 08:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I think the IL10 would be a very interesting addition to the game. IL10's escorted by P-63's in high speed attack runs over Berlin and elsewhere....that sounds great!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IL10 sustained turntime at 1,000 m with full ammo and fuel (without bombs, but with rockets) was 21-22 seconds.
It was more maneuverable than FW-190A.
The developmetn was based on IL-1 heavy fighter (Special bomber killer fighter, destignated IL-1, but it doesn't went in a serial production, because After Staligrad Germany wasn't able already to recover their amount of usual bombers, so Stalin decided to to do not produce this plane in a series.).

Oleg_Maddox
02-24-2004, 08:53 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ajafoofoo:
Teh IL-10 was easy target! Many americans in Korea shot them down. In fact 200 were shot down by soldiers using only a colt 1911 handgun.



note: The preceding was complete BS.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There were not even 100 of them in Korea http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-24-2004, 08:55 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kozhe:
I don´t have any problem to give the files to any who wants to work on it. In fact, i allready gave the model to 3 diferent guys. Any of them did anything with it.

if you want them, please email me at kozhedub2000@yahoo.es, but please only if you really want to work on it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please send to me. We evaluate the model.
We will make it if there are not any general problems and will ask third party to make a cockpit. Maybe not the absolutely quality, but good.

Gunner_361st
02-24-2004, 09:06 AM
Alright! Its going to be great having the IL-10. The only way to improve on that is to get the A1 Skyraider, but that was a bit too late to see action in WWII, ah well. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg

02-24-2004, 10:24 AM
Cool! I'd love to see a flyable IL-10.

NATO may have called it the BEAST, but the Czechs called it "Kombajn" (harvesting tractor). http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

p1ngu666
02-24-2004, 11:01 AM
lol, one of my lufty friends said
"before the war, those il2's where pulling ploughs"
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

LuftKuhMist
02-24-2004, 11:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Please send to me. We evaluate the model.
We will make it if there are not any general problems and will ask third party to make a cockpit. Maybe not the absolutely quality, but good.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh yeah! The fascist pigs will fear the black death more than ever!

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

MandMs
02-24-2004, 12:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gunner_361st:
Alright! Its going to be great having the IL-10. The only way to improve on that is to get the A1 Skyraider, but that was a bit too late to see action in WWII, ah well. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now that is an a/c(Skyraider) that would put the Il-10 to shame.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.abledogs.com/gallery/images6/War_Birds.JPG
http://www.abledogs.com/gallery/images6/War_Load.JPG
http://www.abledogs.com/gallery/images6/Loaded.JPG
http://www.abledogs.com/gallery/images11/ordies02.jpg
http://www.abledogs.com/gallery/images12/Nam14.jpg

I eat the red ones last.

[This message was edited by MandMs on Tue February 24 2004 at 11:31 AM.]

Tooz_69GIAP
02-24-2004, 12:45 PM
Holy cack!!!! Check out the bombload on that baby!!!

But goddammed, if I ain't getting happier by the minute here!!!

29 flyable aircraft instead of 20 in the expansion pack, B-25, Pe-2, Ju-88 (and maybe an A-20??) on their way, and now, an IL-10 if it passes checks, and a modeller agrees to get the pit done!!!!!

Goodness me, ranting and raving bout bombers for a couple of weeks pays off it seems!!!!!! I'll need to do it more often http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Tooz

whit ye looking at, ya big jessie?!?!

http://www.baseclass.modulweb.dk/69giap/fileadmin/Image_Archive/badges/69giap_badge_tooz.jpg
Za Rodinu!

02-24-2004, 01:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Luftcaca:
agreed
I struggle to understand why the Go-229, the P-80 and NOT the Il10
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have the words right from my mouth...

MandMs
02-24-2004, 01:25 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VO101_Kurfurst:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Luftcaca:
agreed
I struggle to understand why the Go-229, the P-80 and NOT the Il10
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have the words right from my mouth...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because the Il-2 was reserved by 1C/Maddox Games while the other 2 were done by a 3rd party modeller. Not to hard to understand.



I eat the red ones last.

LuftKuhMist
02-24-2004, 02:03 PM
Well the IL10 has a pretty important advantage over the A10...

It served in WWII.

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

Luftcaca
02-24-2004, 02:48 PM
thats good news Mr Maddox
keep up the good work

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

VW-IceFire
02-24-2004, 05:50 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I think the IL10 would be a very interesting addition to the game. IL10's escorted by P-63's in high speed attack runs over Berlin and elsewhere....that sounds great!

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
The New IL2 Database is Coming Soon!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IL10 sustained turntime at 1,000 m with full ammo and fuel (without bombs, but with rockets) was 21-22 seconds.
It was more maneuverable than FW-190A.
The developmetn was based on IL-1 heavy fighter (Special bomber killer fighter, destignated IL-1, but it doesn't went in a serial production, because After Staligrad Germany wasn't able already to recover their amount of usual bombers, so Stalin decided to to do not produce this plane in a series.).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Those are impressive statistics....I guess it doesn't need much of an escort. Drop the bombs and if anyone gets into a turn fight then you have them. From the looks of it...it looks like the Il-2 design fully realized and given the power and aerodynamics it really needed.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

blabla0001
02-24-2004, 05:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MandMs:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VO101_Kurfurst:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Luftcaca:
agreed
I struggle to understand why the Go-229, the P-80 and NOT the Il10
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You have the words right from my mouth...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because the Il-2 was reserved by 1C/Maddox Games while the other 2 were done by a 3rd party modeller. Not to hard to understand.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The IL-2 is not what we are talking about.
The IL-10 was never reserved by 1C/Maddox Games, it was a 3rd party plane as well, but it got dropped a few times.

LEXX_Luthor
02-24-2004, 07:11 PM
OLEG:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>We will make it if there are not any general problems and will ask third party to make a cockpit. Maybe not the absolutely quality, but good.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Awsum! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif I have never seen a "bad" FB cockpit. All are Good. Any reasonably historical cockpit is a Good cockpit if we can Fly it over the FB. http://www.boardy.de/images/smilies/ylflower.gif


you shaddup Leadspitter http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-mad.gif


__________________
RUSSIAN lexx website http://www.lexx.ufo.ru/members.shtml
Stanly is a moron, kai is a walking dead beet, Xev just want sex.
:
you will still have FB , you will lose nothing ~WUAF_Badsight
I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait... ~Bearcat99
Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age ~ElAurens

Wetwilly87
02-24-2004, 07:46 PM
Im thinking that the IL-10 cockpit is almost like the IL-2's cockpit, so if a 3rd party guy picks up the cockpit, he can pretty much copy the IL-2's cockpit, and mabey can find some IL-10 cockpit referenced and see any diffrences.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"

WUAF_Badsight
02-24-2004, 10:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Please send to me. We evaluate the model.
We will make it if there are not any general problems and will ask third party to make a cockpit. Maybe not the absolutely quality, but good.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OMG PLEASE DONT TEASE ME


to really get the IL10 into FB would be MORE THAN AWESOME

GAWD reading comments like that inst cool ...... ITS TORTURE


plz PLZ PLZ PLZ make the IL10 come to FB !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Luftcaca
02-25-2004, 10:27 AM
allright allright keep your panties on
you just talk like if it was a matter of life and death, keep it real

Let Oleg do his job, Im sure he wont let us down

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

BfHeFwMe
02-25-2004, 11:38 AM
http://www.acig.org/artman/uploads/photo4.jpg

Should help to get the armored cockpit protection correct. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Looks like great pilot protection in this one. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Wetwilly87
02-25-2004, 04:38 PM
Why do people keep dissing the IL-10 because of its experiences in the Korean War. Let me give you people a low down on why it didnt do so well.

1. Was operating againt Jet aircraft and way faster Piston aircraft than those WWII prop planes. I think it would be hard to shoot at an aircraft thats going mabey over 100 or 200 miles faster than you. The IL-10 was designed during WWII mind you.

2. Not good pilot training, these are North Korean pilots here people, not to diss them, but they didnt get the best training in this aircraft from their instructors.

3. Probley didnt have any escorts. And if they did, they were North Korean pilots and could have been flying prop planes, like the Yak-9, and were facing Panthers and F-80's.

4. They were facing well trained pilots of the USAF, and the RAF.

So in conclusion, its 75% not the planes fault. It had good armor and good firepower. If these planes were deployed againt the UN with Soviet pilots flying MIG-15's as escorts. The IL-10 would have done some good damage to UN troops and UN ships. But as you know they were recalled from the front before the Chinese and Soviet pilots got involved. End of Speech.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"

MandMs
02-25-2004, 05:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wetwilly87:
Why do people keep dissing the IL-10 because of its experiences in the Korean War. Let me give you people a low down on why it didnt do so well.

1. Was operating againt Jet aircraft and way faster Piston aircraft than those WWII prop planes. I think it would be hard to shoot at an aircraft thats going mabey over 100 or 200 miles faster than you. The IL-10 was designed during WWII mind you.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And what would those 'faster' WW2 a/c be? Oh yes the P-51 and F4U.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
2. Not good pilot training, these are North Korean pilots here people, not to diss them, but they didnt get the best training in this aircraft from their instructors.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup the Soviets were crappy instructors.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>

3. Probley didnt have any escorts. And if they did, they were North Korean pilots and could have been flying prop planes, like the Yak-9, and were facing Panthers and F-80's.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Just like F4Us and P-51s doing CAS being attacked by MiGs. Only the UN was not dumb enough not to send some form of escorts along on most cases.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
4. They were facing well trained pilots of the USAF, and the RAF.

So in conclusion, its 75% not the planes fault. It had good armor and good firepower. If these planes were deployed againt the UN with Soviet pilots flying MIG-15's as escorts. The IL-10 would have done some good damage to UN troops and UN ships. But as you know they were recalled from the front before the Chinese and Soviet pilots got involved.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yup the MiG-15s were to chicken to fly out of sight of the Yalu.



I eat the red ones last.

Wetwilly87
02-25-2004, 06:14 PM
Dude you dont know anything to you.

1. USAF had the twin mustangs, that were fast. They had the P-47 N's that were really fast. The RAF had the Hawker Fury, which was very fast.

2. I dont know about you but trying to teach people that speak awhole diffrent language would be kinda hard. And I just looked at a website that has all the aces there were. And North Korea only had 4 aces, while China had 9, and the USSR had well over 40 aces during the Korean war. WOW, I guess the Soviets didnt teach the North Koreans awhole lot better than they did their own troops and the Chinese. Mabey because they DIDNT TEACH THE KOREANS AT ALL THAT MUCH.

3. Im assuming your saying that they always sent escorts for the IL-10's and the escorts were always escorted by MIG's and by expert Korean pilots, but still got shot down? Note: The IL-10's were used mainly in 1950, but do too loses from the USAF, they were withdrawn, or most got shot down, thats why the North Koreans took them off the front line. Also North Korea started the war with NO MIGS AT ALL. They were using mainly YAKS. They didnt start recieving MIGS till China got involved. Why dont you go research stuff man, stop trying to think your smarter than me, when your clearly not.

4. And like I said before, the IL-10's were taken out of action before the Chinese and USSR got really invloved in the war. And what I mean by that is, when the UN pushed the North Koreans all the way to the Chinese border, thats when Soviet Pilots started to take to the air in their Migs and start shooting down UN planes. IF IL-10's WERE SENT BACK TO THE FRONT, ESCORTED BY VERY WELL TRAINED PILOTS, With SOVIET PILOTS FLYING MIGS, THE IL-10 COULD HAVE DONE SOME DAMAGE. But it was too late, and the USSR didnt want Soviet pilots flying ground attack missions because if one got shot down and caught, it could have REALLY brought the USSR and the UN into WWIII.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"

[This message was edited by Wetwilly87 on Wed February 25 2004 at 05:23 PM.]

MandMs
02-25-2004, 07:29 PM
Oh pillar of knowledge, pray tell what P-47N units were in Korea?

Did Il-10 do night CAS? That is when the P-82 flew.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The contract for the 200 RAF Fury a/c was cancelled with the end of WW2.

The FAA flew Sea Fury a/c in Korea.

Dreaming you are if you think the Il-10 would have been more succesful having a second go.



I eat the red ones last.

Wetwilly87
02-25-2004, 08:03 PM
OK FORGOT ABOUT KOREA, this is about WWII, the IL-10 would have done great in WWII if it didnt end. Ok so lets just forgot about Korea. The IL-10 needs to be in FB.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"

WUAF_Badsight
02-25-2004, 10:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MandMs:

Dreaming you are if you think the Il-10 would have been more succesful having a second go.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

your full of it if you think that koreas record equals the IL10 being a crap plane

think about this ...... it was armoured like a flying tank & could match LA-5FN's in verticle manuervers

i dont think the Luftwaffe pilots thought the LA-5FN was a simple , easy kill ..... do you ?


BTW the IL10 was the best Ground Pounder of WW2 ........... period

MandMs
02-26-2004, 04:04 AM
Dah, blind one, why don't you read all the posts instead of making dumb comments. Never said it was not but was commenting on a second chance in Korea. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/crazy.gif

We saw how blind you were in the P-51 thread in the GD forum. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif



I eat the red ones last.

VW-IceFire
02-26-2004, 06:55 AM
No P-47N's were used in Korea. They were reserved for Stateside units because of an increased concern that the war in Korea would spill out and the Soviet Union would attack the United States directly. This never happened and thus the P-47N's never saw combat in Korea or during that period.

http://home.cogeco.ca/~cczerneda/sigs/temp_sig1.jpg
RCAF 412 Falcon Squadron - "Swift to Avenge"

p1ngu666
02-26-2004, 09:24 AM
read a thing in a mag, sea fury pilot... he fought mig a time or 2, said pilots wherent very good :\
so il10 pilots probably worse..

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

Luftcaca
02-26-2004, 10:56 AM
GRRRRRRRRRRRR

Who gives a BEEP about how bad were the Korean pilots?????????????

*waves*

hello peeps
this is still a WWII game, wake up!
the russians used it in 45, so it belongs to the game, whatever how badly or how good it was in the Korrean airwar.

now stop the ''my father is stronger than yours'' ranting

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

MandMs
02-26-2004, 11:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:

The official looses of this aircraft doesn't confirm your text http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
And why American's gve this plane intersting name: BEAST http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because NATO, not the USA, gave it the name Beast. All NATO designation names for bombers began with a 'b'. Remember, the MiG-15 was called the ***ot.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

............

I think caca is messing his pants.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif



I eat the red ones last.

Magister__Ludi
02-26-2004, 11:40 AM
Il-10 has it's place in this game, it saw action during ww2. BUT it has not the highest priority, Il-10 was only marginaly more performant over Il-2, think of an more streamlined Il-2 with 300HP more power but heavier and with smaller and thinner wing. It was faster (not comparable with a late war fighter though - 500km/h at sea level with no external stores) but less maneuvrable. Why would we need another Il-2 variant?

Those who think that 100km/h more is a significant improvement over Il-2 do not think at Sturmovik's mission: Il-2 was used like assault armor moving at much higher speed, it gave tremendous mobility to soviet forces. It was very easy to fly, easy to maintain and operate, it really was an assault gun in the sky. But like the forces on the ground it needed air cover to operate with reasonable losses. Flying at less than 450km/h loaded it was still very easy to intercept, and with the extensive use of large caliber cannons on latest fighters it encountered, it suddenly became very vulnerable (the armored shell was tough enough to withstand 30mm hits, the wings and fuselage were not)

The highest priority should be given to twin engine planes, many of which saw service from the beginning the last days of war. Those are planes that area really missing, not Il-10. Many of those twins are single seat or twin seats making the difficulty of development somewhere between 1 and 2 fighter cockpits.

Luftcaca
02-26-2004, 11:54 AM
"I think caca is messing his pants"

by reading your posts everyone would http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

LuftKuhMist
02-26-2004, 12:11 PM
Let's all repeat together:

All that is american rules.
American stuff owns every other nation's.
Americans are the best, specially MandMs.
Americans won every war since Tut Ankh Amon.
America is the best civilization since birth of mankind.
We should all be slave of America's coolness.
American planes are authentic and ALWAYS ruled the skies.
50% of Americans are obese so obesity is a good thing.

If we ALL repeat this we'll have one baby who will stop crying.

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

MandMs
02-26-2004, 12:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LuftKuhMist:
Let's all repeat together:

All that is american rules.
American stuff owns every other nation's.
Americans are the best, specially MandMs.
Americans won every war since Tut Ankh Amon.
America is the best civilization since birth of mankind.
We should all be slave of America's coolness.
American planes are authentic and ALWAYS ruled the skies.
50% of Americans are obese so obesity is a good thing.

If we ALL repeat this we'll have one baby who will stop crying.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Luftcaca and LuftKuhMist, are you mentally and emmotionally stable? From your latest posts, it would seem you are not.



I eat the red ones last.

[This message was edited by MandMs on Thu February 26 2004 at 12:04 PM.]

Luftcaca
02-26-2004, 12:27 PM
1. we are off-topic
2. what in my post makes ya believe that I could be ranting?

I fail to see how you jumped to that conclusion...

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/luftcaca.jpg

Formerly ''known'' as Gunther Aeroburst

LuftKuhMist
02-26-2004, 12:47 PM
I am metally stable, I listen to Death Metal...

SATAN IS IN ME!!!! SLAMDANCE!!!

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

WUAF_Badsight
02-26-2004, 11:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MandMs:

We saw how blind you were in the P-51 thread in the GD forum. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

whose the blind one

it was a KI-84 thread dummie

KI-84

Mustang

yes i see how you could get those entirely similer titles mixed up

& if you dont really think the IL10 was a crap plane .......... why are you trying to insinuate that it is ?

LuftKuhMist
02-27-2004, 01:01 AM
Russia should have sold IL10s to the USA it would have been a good plane.

Why do you even waste so much energy here telling us that everything russia builds is junk? Why do you even play IL2, it's a russian product!

http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/MOMS.gif http://www.ifrance.com/boussourir/grab0004.jpg

MandMs
02-27-2004, 04:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MandMs:

We saw how blind you were in the P-51 thread in the GD forum. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/blink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

whose the blind one

it was a KI-84 thread dummie

KI-84

Mustang

yes i see how you could get those entirely similer titles mixed up

& if you dont really think the IL10 was a crap plane .......... why are you trying to insinuate that it is ?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Care to try again oh yee of poor vision? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif

"HOLY CRAP was Snow_Wolf_'s posts detailed !

Kudos dude

& JG26_Red .......... make google your freind : )"

from http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?q=Y&a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=105109642&p=1



I eat the red ones last.

WUAF_Badsight
02-27-2004, 05:48 AM
lol whats the point of posting that reply that i made

you see things wrong with it ?

if you do then get to a eye doc quick dude cause all thats there is compliment to Snow Wulf

MandMs
02-27-2004, 06:12 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by WUAF_Badsight:
lol whats the point of posting that reply that i made

you see things wrong with it ?

if you do then get to a eye doc quick dude cause all thats there is compliment to Snow Wulf<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Yes, because Snow Wulf copied and pasted from the site stated in the post by musickna between his two P-51 posts.http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I also posted this a couple of posts before you compliment post. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

"It is a cut-and-past from the Baugher site.

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p51_8.html

http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p51_10.html" (http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/p51_10.html)

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/mockface.gif



I eat the red ones last.

p1ngu666
02-27-2004, 06:56 AM
stop the bi tchin and flames plz http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

Oleg_Maddox
02-27-2004, 07:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wetwilly87:
Im thinking that the IL-10 cockpit is almost like the IL-2's cockpit, so if a 3rd party guy picks up the cockpit, he can pretty much copy the IL-2's cockpit, and mabey can find some IL-10 cockpit referenced and see any diffrences.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Il-10 had absolutely different cockpit to Il-2.
It was like FW-190 + I-185 and rear seat was like in post war Russian jet planes with rear gunner (especially if equipped with B-20 cannon turret). For 1944 design it was one of most advanced designs. Was possible to use even autopilot (but never was set in a series for that plane), similar to Pe-8 or other Russin bomber autopilots (or C-47 of some modifications)

p1ngu666
02-27-2004, 07:23 AM
that level autopilot with course correction?
id turn it on, go and get a drink and come back and see me fly into a hill i bets http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg

Magister__Ludi
02-27-2004, 07:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wetwilly87:
Im thinking that the IL-10 cockpit is almost like the IL-2's cockpit, so if a 3rd party guy picks up the cockpit, he can pretty much copy the IL-2's cockpit, and mabey can find some IL-10 cockpit referenced and see any diffrences.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Il-10 had absolutely different cockpit to Il-2.
It was like FW-190 + I-185 and rear seat was like in post war Russian jet planes with rear gunner (especially if equipped with B-20 cannon turret). For 1944 design it was one of most advanced designs. Was possible to use even autopilot (but never was set in a series for that plane), similar to Pe-8 or other Russin bomber autopilots (or C-47 of some modifications)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg likes Il-10 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif in just a few days he'll be the best flamer around http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Oleg_Maddox
02-27-2004, 07:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cosmokart:
Cool! I'd love to see a flyable IL-10.

NATO may have called it the BEAST, but the Czechs called it "Kombajn" (harvesting tractor). http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Some Russian pilots also named it as a tractor, but in term that after using of weapon (new VAPs, cartridge bombs, etc ) the ground objects looks like after tractor http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
And starge, but Czech did their own rockets for IL-10M (they had 10M with the drop-grenades from the tail http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif And it was in productio in Czech when in Soviet army they were already not in use... Same with La-7.

Oleg_Maddox
02-27-2004, 08:08 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Magister__Ludi:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wetwilly87:
Im thinking that the IL-10 cockpit is almost like the IL-2's cockpit, so if a 3rd party guy picks up the cockpit, he can pretty much copy the IL-2's cockpit, and mabey can find some IL-10 cockpit referenced and see any diffrences.

http://www.kitreview.com/reviews/images/re2005bookreviewbg_1.jpg "The beautiful fighter of the war"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Il-10 had absolutely different cockpit to Il-2.
It was like FW-190 + I-185 and rear seat was like in post war Russian jet planes with rear gunner (especially if equipped with B-20 cannon turret). For 1944 design it was one of most advanced designs. Was possible to use even autopilot (but never was set in a series for that plane), similar to Pe-8 or other Russin bomber autopilots (or C-47 of some modifications)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oleg likes Il-10 http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif in just a few days he'll be the best flamer around http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes I like the design of this plane. With so geat amount of armor it was maneuverable like a fighter, except vertical maneuvers (climb not so good). The key of armor was that it was not as armor plates, but it was a construction part. And in IL-10 the rear gunner was protected as well (that was originally planned for Il-2 as well and was removed just becasue of stupid order of some VVS officers from High command)

And I know a lot of use, where and how many Russian made or Czech made aircraft... How many were sent in Korea/China and how many IL-2s were shot down in Korea (yes Il-2s, instead of IL-10...).
Also I know that US pilots wasn't able recognize Chinese MiG-9 and were speaking anout MiG-15....
For your sure http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif China was producing by license the MiG-9 for that time....

Still there are a lot of un published docs... from the Soviet and China side. North Korean I don't count.... They shot down so much as all SU, China, US and UN pilots all together http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But I have exact list of confirmed looses from Soviet side as well as confirmed by guncamera AND ground troops shot down UN aircraft. And there are several pilots that had more than 10 kills (nopt only MiG-15 pilots).
Still had not official permission to post this tables.

02-27-2004, 08:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Oleg_Maddox:
Some Russian pilots also named it as a tractor, but in term that after using of weapon (new VAPs, cartridge bombs, etc ) the ground objects looks like after tractor http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gifhttp://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Cool.
http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif :veryhappy http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Wow I can't believe this thread is up to 5 pages already.....

Zapatistas
12-17-2004, 04:31 PM
[/QUOTE] Yes I like the design of this plane. With so geat amount of armor it was maneuverable like a fighter, except vertical maneuvers (climb not so good). [/QUOTE]

Sprottau

Capt V. Popkov (HSUx2 41kills) from 5th GvIAP (at that time HSUx1 37kills)

Vs

Capt Sirotkin

Popkov in his La-5FN and Sirotkin in his IL10.
The 'combat' was conducted at medium-low altitude and included the use of banking turns and complicated aerobatic figures. Only after a number of violent and resolute manoeuvers did the fighter succeed in getting on the tail of the attack aircraft (at the same time the gun camara film registered the La-5FN several times as being caught in the tail gunner's sight).

Popkov: "this is a good attack aircraft, almost a fighter and a worthy opponent to a Lavochkin"

-Yefim Gordon and Sergey Komissarov

_Neveraine_
12-17-2004, 10:08 PM
Zing! you where only 10 months late!

Vipez-
12-19-2004, 07:49 AM
what is the current susteined turn of TYpe 2 and TYpe 3 Il-2s? To me, seems like its not far from that 21-22 sec of IL-10.. infact historical tactics in game with IL-2 never worked as well as in in real life, that is counting in big formation.. real IL-2 was not that manouvarable,, atleast according to Finnish 109 pilots.. they counted on their formation, and only evade for the il-2s was side slip in evading..

Now imaging a IL-10 as agile as La-5 truly sounds terrifying, i would love to see it.. what kind of armor did the IL-10 have compared to Il-2 type 3 ? Did it have a better protected oil radiator? If yes, then it will be extremly hard to shoot down in the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Vipez-
12-19-2004, 07:49 AM
what is the current susteined turn of TYpe 2 and TYpe 3 Il-2s? To me, seems like its not far from that 21-22 sec of IL-10.. infact historical tactics in game with IL-2 never worked as well as in in real life, that is counting in big formation.. real IL-2 was not that manouvarable,, atleast according to Finnish 109 pilots.. they counted on their formation, and only evade for the il-2s was side slip in evading..

Now imaging a IL-10 as agile as La-5 truly sounds terrifying, i would love to see it.. what kind of armor did the IL-10 have compared to Il-2 type 3 ? Did it have a better protected oil radiator? If yes, then it will be extremly hard to shoot down in the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

VW-IceFire
12-19-2004, 09:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vipez-:
what is the current susteined turn of TYpe 2 and TYpe 3 Il-2s? To me, seems like its not far from that 21-22 sec of IL-10.. infact historical tactics in game with IL-2 never worked as well as in in real life, that is counting in big formation.. real IL-2 was not that manouvarable,, atleast according to Finnish 109 pilots.. they counted on their formation, and only evade for the il-2s was side slip in evading..

Now imaging a IL-10 as agile as La-5 truly sounds terrifying, i would love to see it.. what kind of armor did the IL-10 have compared to Il-2 type 3 ? Did it have a better protected oil radiator? If yes, then it will be extremly hard to shoot down in the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I think the IL-10 is considered agile may because of better speed. Our IL-2's are not very fast but they are agile. They can defend themselves in a low altitude, low speed turn fight. But a 109 pilot would be smart to use BNZ manuvers on them. The IL2 has no escape from that. Probably why the Finnish have such an impression.

An IL-10 would be great!

Luftcaca
12-19-2004, 09:36 AM
LOL old thread guys!
Im still longing for the beast tho http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

but heh, do you guys think MandMS finally managed to pull his head of of his butt???

the one million dollar question... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Willey
12-19-2004, 10:47 AM
There will be one, but maybe just for the russian market...