Dev Blog #70: Sights

[LukeFF]

What does a pilot see most often? The gunsight.

It's time to talk about sights and our approach to their creation. For Korea: IL-2 Series, we decided to take a fresh look at their implementation.

You can find out what's new in our approach, as well as what sights, and for what aircraft, we are preparing to add to the game in the article on the official website: https://media.il2-korea.com/news/dd_70

[Avimimus]

Wow! Preserving history there!

Original sight, original bulb... I wouldn't have thought! That is dedication!

[LuftManu]

That bulb working after so much time!! I just changed mine in the garage after 1 month 🙂

Jokes aside, the amount of quality and details you guys are doing is incredible! Great work, team!

[Dash,Polder]

Will the vertical dispersion dials work this round?  Majorly cool there are options to swap sight make and model on some of the aircraft, well done.   

[Swoose]

Wow! Absolutely amazing.  Spectacular attention-to-detail.  I hope the developers or third parties will produce tutorial videos on how to use the gyroscopic and radar-ranging gunsights for the aircraft in IL-2 Series: Korea.

[Mustang_Mike]

"The pilot's interaction with their primary combat tool - the gunsight - has been taken to a whole new level, but this is far from the only improvement in aircraft equipment simulation." Boy I wish I had clickable cockpits so I could actually interact with these improvements properly... whats the command gonna be this time, ctrl+shft+alt+G+U+N? I'll be so immersed when I'm fumbling for my keyboard in VR, or navigating a silly radial menu..

More complexity, a "raised bar" and still the same archaic way of interacting with it, that was already borderline too much in GB. hated flying the late war German jets for the convoluted bindings required to start them, and I'm beginning to suspect Korea will be even worse in that regard.

But hey, at least I'll have a nice pretty view through my gunsight when my engine explodes arbitrarily from a timer! Thats what you expect people to pay $180 for...

[LukeFF]

1 hour ago, Mustang_Mike said:

But hey, at least I'll have a nice pretty view through my gunsight when my engine explodes arbitrarily from a timer! Thats what you expect people to pay $180 for...

Engine timers have been reworked for this new series. 🙂 

Otherwise, regarding the rest:  First, it should be noted that clickable cockpits significantly increase development costs and, therefore, the price. We are certainly looking in this direction, and perhaps in the next iteration, we will get there. Still, for now, we have decided to focus on the affordability of our simulator for a broad audience. Secondly, it is important to note that clickable cockpits are not always convenient; they often don't address ease of control. Cockpit controls are often located in hard-to-reach places (to the side of the seat, on the floor behind the seat, etc.), and reaching them in clickable mode is extremely difficult. Clickable cockpits are also very poorly compatible with displaying the pilot's body in first-person view, as the 3D pilot's hands and knees often obstruct the controls.

Nevertheless, the difficulty of configuring controls and the problem of memorizing button assignments are indeed real issues. In Korea, we are solving this problem with a new control configuration system that includes intuitive dialogues and a special configuration wizard, as well as through a sector menu for aircraft control in the mission, where the player has quick and visualized access to all aircraft control functions and receives quick information about which keys are assigned to a particular control command.

[MajorMagee]

In my case I don't miss having a clickable cockpit because I have an X52 HOTAS with lots of buttons and switches mapped to all the key commands. It's perfect for things like adjusting the range in the Tank Crew gunsight by physically spinning a rotary dial as you would in real life.

Edited April 25 by MajorMagee

[JL1]

Clickable cockpits are fine for ground operations like engine start up but as soon as I take off, I will never take my hands off my HOTAS to click on a virtual switch. It is extremely inefficient and, in a fight, leads to being shot down.  I know I tried it in DCS, and it is just not workable.  In a civilian aircraft flying on autopilot, it does make sense, such as in MSFS, but that is a whole different situation.

Perhaps it would be fun to have a more interactive engine startup procedure in IL2 using a limited set of clickable switches, but I would consider that a very low priority.  There are many other features that are much more important in a combat sim (such as AI and aircraft modeling) that should receive limited development funds first.

Edited April 25 by JL1

[Avimimus]

6 minutes ago, JL1 said:

 In a civilian aircraft flying on autopilot, it does make sense, such as in MSFS, but that is a whole different situation.

I do think there would be a case for it if they gave us an An-2 or an L-20A! Or Li-2T or C-47 as flyable. A bit more busy work to add depth to transport runs. Still, even if a third party wanted to give us the An-2 or L-20A developing an entire new technology (clickable cockpits) just for a couple of aircraft would probably be far from worth it.

I suspect it would be better to use the resources for the SCR-720 and give us the F-82G or F7F (as well as prepare for WWII as the SCR-720 is basically an AI Mk. X).

Anyway, prior to 1955 aircraft systems aren't that complicated - so operating them through a menu rather than memorising what each handle does is perfectly fine for realism (even if it seems a bit less immersive to some) and in some ways it is more realistic - as many of the controls could be operated largely by touch in these less crowded early cockpits (without needing to go 'heads down'). So the simulation might actually be more realistic.

 

[Elem]

Now they are a sight for sore eyes!😉

[MajorMagee]

Dynamic Reticles from CFS3 with AnKor's Shaders have range adjustments and variable light intensity.

[FuriousMeow]

HOTAS > Clicky pitties

[Lofte]

These reticles look too sharp on my taste... They should be more blurry..

[AEthelraedUnraed]

19 hours ago, Lofte said:

These reticles look too sharp on my taste... They should be more blurry..

Do you have a source to back up that claim? The Devs seem to have done a lot of research so I'm inclined to believe the way it's presented in the Dev Blog is correct.

[Avimimus]

The devs seem to have an actual working reticle with an original bulb.

[Dash,Polder]

With user able variable light intensity adjustments the translucent properties will be more user defined.  They shouldn't be blurred, the image is a projection of a reticle, not directly itself the emitting light source. 

If you want more light diffusion off the projected image crank up the intensity, if a more translucent see through reticle, turn it down.  This is going to be a highly useful feature with changing light conditions from the time of day and weather conditions. 

In the current version there's a weird change in the intensity as you move your eye off center, hope that is gone on this version.  That alone will be a huge fix in terms of function and realism.  Be a lot easier to deflection shoot, going to be much more critical in jets with higher engagement speeds and the more head out the cockpit it requires to track and shoot.  

[Aapje]

On 4/28/2026 at 12:38 AM, Lofte said:

These reticles look too sharp on my taste... They should be more blurry..

Put vaseline on your screen.