Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[damawo]

Thanks, Damawo, This Carrier is faster like Ise, Both Ship are Hybrid. 100 Kmh like Ise.

Hmmm? Taiho and Ise run at 100km/h when using slower setting at FMB?

[damawo]

Version (15/11/10) is released now.

Taiho : Vanished polygons are fixed. Textures are changed.
Kai-taiho : newly added.


Link
https://www.mediafire.com/download/8env14cq7wc1125/Taiho.rar

For Taiho(previous version) user :You will need to rewrite the taiho's section of ship.ini.

[deSAD]

... Kai-Taiho was planned and canceled aircraft carrier. So she is what-if.

And what he was supposed to be different from "Taiho"? I tried to find information on this subject, but unfortunately to no avail

P.S.
Thank you for your labor

[western0221]

... Kai-Taiho was planned and canceled aircraft carrier. So she is what-if.

And what he was supposed to be different from "Taiho"? I tried to find information on this subject, but unfortunately to no avail

When you can use some machine-translate service like Google / Chrome, how is Japanese wikipedia?
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%94%B9%E5%A4%A7%E9%B3%B3%E5%9E%8B%E8%88%AA%E7%A9%BA%E6%AF%8D%E8%89%A6

A bit (4 meters) longer hull and flight deck, a bit wider flight deck usable space (the super structure moves to outside), increase AAA etc. etc.

[damawo]

The most important difference(in il-2) will be AA armaments.
Taiho has 6 X 10cm-twin HAG and 17 X 25mm Triplet MAG.
Kai-Taiho has more AA power, 8 X 10cm-twin HAG and 22 X 25mm Triplet MAG.

[deSAD]

Thanks for the information, Kameraden

When you can use some machine-translate service like Google / Chrome, how is Japanese wikipedia?
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%94%B9%E5%A4%A7%E9%B3%B3%E5%9E%8B%E8%88%AA%E7%A9%BA%E6%AF%8D%E8%89%A6

Japanese ... scares me a little

[KingTiger503]

Taiho means great Phoenix

[flyer138]

Thank you damawo for the two wonderful aircraft carrier models. Excellent work indeed. Both work fine in my 4.13 based SS MODACT 6.1 environment.

Nevertheless there is one thing that makes me wonder: on take-off the bombers get arranged in front of the fighters. I think that is unusual and differs from your picture on the first page.

Please see the screenshot below. This what results from my configuration:




Do you have any recommendations how to change the way aircraft are aligned?

[western0221]

Nevertheless there is one thing that makes me wonder: on take-off the bombers get arranged in front of the fighters. I think that is unusual and differs from your picture on the first page.

In general of IL-2 1946 games, earlier assigned (by you in FMB) aircraft object is set in front of the carrier deck and later assigned aircraft is set in tail.

[flyer138]

western0221 you are right. I did not arrange the planes in the correct order. Your hint solved the problem. Thank you.

In fact, the planes get arranged on a carrier according to their ranking / position in the [wings] section of the mission-file. The higher a flight stands in that section the earlier it will take-off from a carrier it is assigned to.

[Whiskey_Sierra_972]

Anyway as bombers are slower than fighters you can make them take off first and then reach them in route to target....and this is even historically correct....

[western0221]

Anyway as bombers are slower than fighters you can make them take off first and then reach them in route to target....and this is even historically correct....

I think they are in different situations USN/RN catapult available carriers or IJN non-catapult carriers (and USN Yorktown class without catapults).

IJN bombers needed longer take-off running length by themselves than light fighters.
And to keep that running length on the deck, all the aircrafts want to deploy the mission had been lined-up in the beginning.
By those reasons, IJN carriers lined-up their aircrafts from the bow -- light fighters / middle heavy dive bombers /  heavier torpedo bombers -- to the stern.
So, as same as flyer138 said.