New update 2.008 Size 1.00 gb :slight_smile:


No VR. Two more weeks?


To be fair, they said March for VR… IL-2 BoS/M/K awaits VR implementation on my SSD…! :wink:


I know, but I can’t hope for an earlier release? :relaxed:


Found today some weird thing with the 109 F4 … when u add 20 mm Cannons on the wings it doesnt seem to effect maneuverability, maybe its because i was on arcade server gonna try it out later on and i will keep you guys posted …


From The IL-2 FB page:

Today is an important day for the project - we start VR alpha test. It will take 1-2 weeks, then we’ll finalize the functionality, perform the beta testing run and then, hopefully, we will be able to release the update with Open VR support before the end of March.
VR support turns out to be tricky not because it is complex by itself, but because this technology and API are still relatively immature - there are no beaten paths and in some parts we were moving forward almost blindly. A large chunk of time was spent on finding new ways to optimize performance to make VR experience more fluid, many improvements were made in this field. Another big task we needed to complete was adapting the user interface for VR to make it usable. For a while, we were a bit puzzled how to make optical sights (like Pe-2 lower UBT MG gunsight or tank gunner sight) function in VR realistically, and we decided to show the gunsight only for one eye while another eye should be closed (like in real life). In our opinion, Oculus Rift cv1 has slightly better lenses and more effective usage of the display matrix (pixels in front of you are placed a bit tighter, but overall field of view is narrower). On the other hand, HTC Vive has more advanced tracking tech, slightly wider FOV which feels less like looking through binoculars, much larger possible play area (not like it is useful for a flight sim though) but its lenses have visible peripheral moire effect. In short, both devices have their pros and cons and if you plan to buy one, it would be ideal to demo them both to find out which one suits you better (but be mindful of a possibility of wearing a VR unit in a public place after someone else who may have had red-eye for instance). All in all, we like how VR works in our sim, it’s on par or even better than in other sims.


This last line looks promising!


That’s a nice post by Jason or however handles FB updates. It lacks the “we know better than you” cocksuredness that previals in this little genre of ours. I have been getting my ass handed to me on Expert servers, but the game is so darn beautiful that I am taking death in stride.


Some dev news and gorgeous pictures here:

More in the link above.

Still very excited by the VR release on this. :vr:


ohh dude that pic of the mountains… i can see my self flying there xD


OMG!!! That does look Gorgeous,I can not wait to see all this Beauty in VR Splendor!!!


I’m interested to see how they handle the maps and HUD information with VR. Does anyone know of any mods or utilities that let you edit what’s displayed on the screen? It was probably through lack of familiarization, but I had a hard time tweaking the UI to display exactly what I wanted, namely an Il-2: 1946 or DCS-like kneeboard map with just route and position.

I feel like the BOS map is close, but a little bit cumbersome.



Hello everybody,

While we were preparing this Dev Diary, sad news arrived - Soviet test pilot Stepan Anastasovich Mikoyan who fought in the battle of Stalingrad passed away in Moscow at age 95.
It is very sad that such a veteran is no longer with us. We are grateful for his defense of the Motherland and his enormous contribution for aviation development.We are proud that we knew him and he helped us in the development.

While our VR implementation is going according to the plan, we have good news from the engineering department and its head AnPetrovich for you. As we mentioned earlier, we decided to spend a huge chunk of time on flight model corrections and improvements on a very important and big task - improving the aircraft reaction to rudder inputs. This is a very complex task since FMs in our project has many physical interconnections which weren’t supposed to be altered - when you change any one parameter it affects many things you never planned to change or sometimes even expected to change. The challenge for us was the fact that we attempted to solve this issue several times, but we finally found the real physical cause for it and a possible way to fix it only in the end of the last year. Since the solution for it requires fundamental changes to fuselage aerodynamics calculations, it means that we need to correct the aerodynamics of all the aircraft that exist in the game to this day. Therefore, a total revision of all stability and handling parameters of all aircraft in the game is happening right now. Of course, such significant and fundamental changes affect not only the way a rudder affects an aircraft, but many other things. Base flight characteristics like speed, climb rate, turn time, etc. won’t change, but many others will. Here’s the short list of improvements we all will benefit from when this task is completed:

  1. Flight stick movements along the roll axis required to compensate for the roll drift during slide reduced significantly;
  2. While a strong rudder input is given, aircraft will tend to ‘plow in’ while making a barrel roll;
  3. Flat turns are now possible almost at any speeds, including near stall situations (ailerons input is enough to keep the aircraft level and the flat turn itself becomes more effective);
  4. Forward slip results in more drag - it is possible to use this maneuver to reduce speed and descend more effectively while landing, for example;
  5. Aircraft became more stable in the airflow, parasitic oscillations are reduced;
  6. Aircraft became more stable during takeoff and landing runs;
  7. Aircraft airflow modeling improved at critical flight modes (stall and spin). Stall became more apparent and results in more severe loss of control than before. Recovering from a spin requires more aggressive and confident actions.
  8. Aerodynamic hinge moments affect pilot’s ability to control flight stick and pedals more. It takes more time to overcome these moments at higher speeds;
  9. Bf 109 F-2/F-4/G-2/G-4: roll axis controls became significantly heavier at high flight speeds;
  10. Bf 109 F-2/F-4/G-2/G-4: pitch balance and elevator trim effectiveness corrected;
  11. Bf 109 F-2/F-4/G-2/G-4: pedal load slightly corrected for the entire speeds range;
  12. Ju 87 D-3: propeller backwash affects the aircraft much more severely, requiring increased rudder input during takeoff run;
  13. Ju 87 D-3: pitch balance corrected, resulting in less elevator trim effectiveness;
  14. MiG-3 series 24: pitch balance corrected, resulting in less elevator trim effectiveness;
  15. LaGG-3 series 29: pedal load slightly corrected for the entire speeds range;
  16. LaGG-3 series 29: pitch balance corrected, resulting in less elevator trim effectiveness;
  17. Yak-1 series 69/127: flight stick load neutral position along the roll axis corrected for non-FFB devices;
  18. Yak-1 series 69/127: flight stick load slightly corrected for entire speeds range;
  19. Yak-1 series 69/127: pitch balance corrected, resulting in less elevator trim effectiveness.

While we correct aerodynamic parameters of one aircraft after another, we will be making additional changes - we’ll tell you about each plane in detail.

To summarize, we would like to point out that these news don’t mean something like ‘flight model was wrong and now we’re making it to be correct’. No. This is a process of evolving the aircraft physics model, it is endless in fact: one can improve a physics model indifinitely and never achieve absolute accuracy. The real indicator of the flight model quality is how close it represents the characteristics of a real aircraft and its handling in different situations compared to other avia simulators. What we wanted to tell you by this Dev Diary is that while our project is leading in FM department now, we strive not to ‘rest on our laurels’, but work in advance as much as we can and invest our resources and time into developing one of the critical components of the project - flight physics - further.

Thank you for reading this wall of text. For a welcome change from it, here are IL-2 mod. 1943 (which flight model is being developed right now) skins our artists prepared:


This is why I dove so deeply into RoF years ago. Nothing I had flown to that point captured the flight environment quite like it. No combination of speed and control input felt scripted. It played like a sim written by someone who loved to fly so much he could taste the air in his sleep. Now I am starting to dive into IL2 with some of the same seriousness and see much of the same love. They are absolutely right that none of the planes feel quite right in sideslip. Roll coupling with rudder in one direction should be easily accurately overcome with aileron in the other at all but very slow speeds. Currently I still think the physics feels more convincing than DCS: Props but to learn that it will get even better is pretty exciting.


I must have tried a different sim, I can generally turn the 109 into a throwing star :smiley:

I think IL2 is a fun game, and I am glad to see them making right by the CoD owners, but I think they still have a lot of FM work to do, or maybe they dont, I dont think they are aiming for the same chunk of sky as ED, so I dont spend much time comparing them, like WT, I enjoy the game, but I wouldnt put it vs DCS, I enjoy them for different reasons.


I guess we really are playing two different sims :grin:

I can go over what is wrong with DCS: Props from my perspective but I hate playing the roll of troll. My chunk of sky is one where the world depicted on my monitor is faithful to the world outside my canopy.


I thought you just did :wink: And in an IL2 thread of all places… I am just glad that there is some growth out there in the sim world, its always a worry it will just go away. IL2 has had some bumps, I am glad they seem to be smoothing them out, and finally trying to patch old wounds.


Ah! A flightmodel debate…! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

Problem with simulating flight on a computer is that not even the best aerodynamicists can explain aerodynamics with a 100% certainty.

So 1C/777 got that right! It will never be perfect.

Nor will EDs flightmodels…
And while I agree that the flightmodels in DCS are perhaps more complex, they aren’t necessarily more realistic.
We flightsimmers have to cope with these flightmodels, sitting absolutely still, fixed to a desk, controlling very realistic flight parameters, with a sloppy joystick. A joystick that may or may not have a twist rudder grip. Nerdier flightsimmers have better sticks and rudder pedals, which makes the experience more like real, but still stuck to a chair, that won’t move much, besides sliding backwards and swivel a bit.

So, coming to a forum talking about realism in flightmodels… Please! :joy:

It’s not like real life flying. Sure, it goes a long way, and flightsims today have very impressive flightmodels, don’t get me wrong. For the most part the flight model behaves like a real flight envelope but there are almost always parts around the edges of the simulated envelope that doesn’t add up, or even goes stir crazy…
And a real aircraft provides the pilot with a heck of a lot of feedback, that the office chair won’t.
At the end of the day, the flightsim has very few means of conveying a flying experience.
The feeling of flight, stuck behind a desk, in a chair, with a joystick…

The flightsimmer need serious controller hardware to be able to appreciate the intricacies of the DCS Spitfire, for instance. A “realistic” flightmodel can be very unrealistic to many users, simply because they don’t have the proper controllers to handle it.

I think that the feeling of flying Rise of Flight is one of the best renditions of flight on a PC. Sure, it simulates relatively slow moving aircraft without overly complex compressibility factors. The new IL-2 series are also very good. Not as complex as the DCS WWII offerings perhaps, but maybe a better simulation of how your performance would be if subjected to the real forces of flight.
Can’t wait to try it out in :vr:, which, to me, is where DCS provides the superior flying experience today.


No debate here, I fly both, they both have their good points and bad points. I dont think they are comparable, for instance ED simulates the cockpit complexly totally, where as IL2 has opted to go with a simpler approach.

No simulation will ever be perfect, and no one ever said they would be, but most of the imperfections are because of us, like you said, sitting at a desk, with ridged short controls, no sensation of flight can be communicated that well with what we can buy, etc, etc…

SO no debate, but I would rather see IL2 threads talking about IL2 and DCS threads talking about DCS… funny that there are a lot of buddies between the two companies, there are previous employees of one working for the other… yet the sim community likes to pick these sides…

Sometimes it just feels like people arent coming here to discuss realism in flight models, but rather taking shots at companies they arent currently happy with. Anyways, I will step out now unless I have more IL2 stuff to talk about, I do like the game, I just dont have much time to give it these days. And as I said, glad to see them patching some old pot holes… I flew a lot of intercept missions on ATAG’s server back in the day :slight_smile:


You forgot to quote the :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye: which indicated my seriousness, or lack thereof, in my opening statement.

Flightmodel debates are, as you know, not uncommon and will always turn out in a flamewar. :slight_smile:

I too enjoy both sims mentioned here, and others. Not IL-2 as much today, but that’s because I’m absolutely hooked by VR. I’m really looking forward to try VR in IL-2. While on that note, I’m also sad that RoF won’t get the same VR update :frowning:
I’m not taking shots at any company. All I’m saying is, sort of, YMMV when it comes to flightmodels in flightsims.