Repair Hanger

[Ghosth]

Realisticly, no, rearm for planes would take hours rather than half a minute.
But, as a bone to gameplay, for those to choose to do it knowing they are taking a risk.
Its really not so bad.

But a repair hanger, instead of compressing an hour or 2 into 30 seconds.
Now your compressing days up to a week into that same 30 seconds.

You don't see the difference?

At some fields in the Pacific people flew 3 - 6 sorties a day between CAP and Close air support.

[PJ_Godzilla]

No no no... we need a real O Club first!  Music on the jukebox, cold beer on tap, marines and sailors slugging it out and breaking tables, and cute waitresses!  Right now the O Club looks like a jail cell. 

Oh, and if we get a real O Club, we will need MP's and SP's roving the base in jeeps!

with Hookers, please!!! hookers with great big ta-tas! I want everyone to form a line! I'll go first.

[Shifty]

If you guys don't want a repair hanger then get rid of the re-arm pad, because they both have the same excuses.

Actually the re-arm pad is in line with reality. What's known as a combat quick turn or a hot turn where the pilot doesn't exit the cockpit he keeps the engine running and the aircraft is refueled and rearmed for immediate takeoff.
Having the pilot remain in an aircraft while battle damage is repaired so he can take off again in a few minutes is totally out of reality.

[HighTone]

I keep seeing all these wishes for guys flying FSO that want to repair stuff.

I don't get it, you guys don't see that if you can repair, so can the other side?

The whole idea of a 1 life event is to try to FORCE you into flying more realistically.
If you knew you could repair a shot up plane, half of that goes out the window.

I'm sorry but to me this truly is a "Duh" moment.

You really think that planes that were shot up in WWII went back up again without a "Full" inspection of everything?
I mean every cable, every hydraulic hose, every hinge, all of it would all have to pass muster before that plane would be allowed up again. You can't do that in 15 min.

If you flew an FSO frame, engaged the enemy, took damage, and managed to land, you just won the lottery!

Call it good, park it, and try again next week.

Agreed 

[AWwrgwy]

Actually the re-arm pad is in line with reality. What's known as a combat quick turn or a hot turn where the pilot doesn't exit the cockpit he keeps the engine running and the aircraft is refueled and rearmed for immediate takeoff.
Having the pilot remain in an aircraft while battle damage is repaired so he can take off again in a few minutes is totally out of reality.

In line with reality other than if one's aircraft were damaged, he was finished for the day and felt lucky to be alive.

I would go so far to contend that other than damage that was simply and quickly repaired, quickly being a few days at most, a damaged aircraft was usually "retired" as scrap or spare parts.


wrongway

[DakOne]

At least have a pad or aircraft supplies for an M3 that would partially refuel and rearm and do a quick repair. Nothing major just 25 to 50 percent gas, ammo load and fix an oil and or fuel leak. Major control surface damage and gun damage would remain.

[Shifty]

At least have a pad or aircraft supplies for an M3 that would partially refuel and rearm and do a quick repair. Nothing major just 25 to 50 percent gas, ammo load and fix an oil and or fuel leak. Major control surface damage and gun damage would remain.

Repairing an oil or fuel leak on an aircraft does not constitute a quick repair, especially if the cause was battle damage.  Fuel leaks require flushing the fuel system, repairing then curing of the repair. Oil leaks require engine tear down and maintenance followed by operational checks. Why the big push to have your plane repaired instead of towering out and getting a new one?

[AWwrgwy]

Why the big push to have your plane repaired instead of towering out and getting a new one?

+1

 


wrongway

[guncrasher]

it helps your score not the war effort to repair the plane.  If people really wanted to defend a base, area they would auger or ditch the damage plane and get a new one since its faster (I auger or ditch a lot, but that's my choice).  Call it whatever you want but this option is only to help your score.

semp

[gyrene81]

Just in case you couldn't do the search yourself:

BTW my reasons for not implementing the repair have absolutely nothing to do with realism, it is all about game play.

Trying to put up a big kill sortie by rearming requires you not to take damage.

I would be willing to implement repair, if it also terminated your sortie,and hence  worked just as if you had towered out and back.

HiTech

No one has come up with any better arguments here than they did on this thread:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,194046.0.html

[Boozeman]

I have an idea. You have to pay perks for repair. The more damage, the more you pay.

This would have the following effects:

1. People who want big kill sorties can have them - but not for free.
2. A second reason to spend perks, when none of the perks rides float your boat.
3. Encourage less timid flying while on the big kill sortie and thus reducing complaints about lame gameplay.   

[PJ_Godzilla]

At least have a pad or aircraft supplies for an M3 that would partially refuel and rearm and do a quick repair. Nothing major just 25 to 50 percent gas, ammo load and fix an oil and or fuel leak. Major control surface damage and gun damage would remain.

How about the rendezvous, off-base, with a fueler M3 that could give you a quick boost of fuel and a belt or two? Now that'd be nice, vulnerable, and realistic, given that fuel trucks were always a fat target that'd go boom.

If you could land off-pavement and also take off from the same surface and coordinate with a gv-wielding squaddie, it'd definitely throw a bit of "commando option" into the game. Imagine setting up a partially hidden refuel/rearm station this way as a convenient waystation/means of helping to pork a base...

[guncrasher]

Just in case you couldn't do the search yourself:

No one has come up with any better arguments here than they did on this thread:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,194046.0.html

I like high tech's argument better.  I kindda think he might win this one  .

"BTW my reasons for not implementing the repair have absolutely nothing to do with realism, it is all about game play.

Trying to put up a big kill sortie by rearming requires you not to take damage.

I would be willing to implement repair, if it also terminated your sortie,and hence  worked just as if you had towered out and back.

HiTech"

semp

[RedTeck]

"Repairing an oil or fuel leak on an aircraft does not constitute a quick repair, especially if the cause was battle damage.  Fuel leaks require flushing the fuel system, repairing then curing of the repair. Oil leaks require engine tear down and maintenance followed by operational checks. Why the big push to have your plane repaired instead of towering out and getting a new one?"

Replacing a turret on a tank would take what, a day? Tracks would be a couple hours. Engine, on an M4, could be changed in hours I think. Just loading 50 new rounds is 1/2 hour minimum I'd guess. But it all takes place in the game in the time it takes to click a button. Why are we citing realism?

[Shifty]

Replacing a turret on a tank would take what, a day? Tracks would be a couple hours. Engine, on an M4, could be changed in hours I think. Just loading 50 new rounds is 1/2 hour minimum I'd guess. But it all takes place in the game in the time it takes to click a button. Why are we citing realism?

You're right that's one reason the whole vehicle thing is a side show and not the primary attraction of the sim. The vehicle supply option was probably added becuase of the length of time it takes to return in a vehicle to the fight compared to getting a new aircraft. It's lame just as you described and should be tossed. The flying part of the sim really doesn't need to get any easier by adding aircraft repairs with the pilot in the cockpit. If you want your name in lights earn it.