Oxygen

[Arlo]

I take off from the rook side.   Normally as near the front lines as I dare and head toward HQ looking for strat runners.   I actually haven't done it for a while as the weather is getting better and I'm spending more time on the golf course.

 

[ReVo]

Would this limit some air craft to lower altitudes if so then I'm against it. 

Of course you're against having that FM2 limited to lower altitudes.  

That being said I think I am going to have to -1 this as I feel it would add very little to the game and possibly be another thing to frustrate new players.
Give IL2: Cliffs of Dover a shot if you want to micro-manage everything on your aircraft. It's fun but much more difficult.

[Arlo]

Would this limit some air craft to lower altitudes if so then I'm against it. 

Possibly the Storch .... and maybe the C-47. Reckon everything else was designed with an oxy system. Even the I-16.  

[Arlo]

Of course you're against having that FM2 limited to lower altitudes.  

That being said I think I am going to have to -1 this as I feel it would add very little to the game and possibly be another thing to frustrate new players.
Give IL2: Cliffs of Dover a shot if you want to micro-manage everything on your aircraft. It's fun but much more difficult.

Oxy on and off or oxy damage is much more difficult than gear/flaps up/down or damage? Huh. 

[RedBull1]

hmm yes but the planes I fly were made for hi alt

(K4, Ta-152) an I'm a proud astronaut

[Karnak]

While I am against the oxygen being added as something requiring a key press to turn on or off, I think it would be nice as a damageable component with its associated effects.  Would those effects would be reduced in the B-29A, Mosquito Mk XVI and Ta152H-1, all of which were pressurized or did they all depressurize when going into combat?

[Mister Fork]

+1. And we have the correct pilot wound effects to simulate high-altitude sickness until they get below 10'000 ft.  Adding Oxy systems as damagable is a brilliant!

Great idea Alro!

[Arlo]

+1. And we have the correct pilot wound effects to simulate high-altitude sickness until they get below 10'000 ft.  Adding Oxy systems as damagable is a brilliant!

Great idea Alro!

While I have your support.

Spanish Civil War! 

[danny76]

While I am against the oxygen being added as something requiring a key press to turn on or off, I think it would be nice as a damageable component with its associated effects.  Would those effects would be reduced in the B-29A, Mosquito Mk XVI and Ta152H-1, all of which were pressurized or did they all depressurize when going into combat?

I'm under the impression that most pressurised aircraft were depressurised when in combat, that being said I have read of B29's flying their whole mission fully pressurised. If the oxygen was a damageable component wouldn't it explode 9/10 times when hit? And if not, wouldn't ithe large hole in the fuselage, even if it didnt have an explosive effect, pretty much  negate the ability of the aircraft to be pressurised?

[Karnak]

I'm under the impression that most pressurised aircraft were depressurised when in combat, that being said I have read of B29's flying their whole mission fully pressurised. If the oxygen was a damageable component wouldn't it explode 9/10 times when hit? And if not, wouldn't ithe large hole in the fuselage, even if it didnt have an explosive effect, pretty much  negate the ability of the aircraft to be pressurised?

That would depend on the location of the oxygen bottles and the pressurized compartment.  Due to the size of the B-29's pressurized compartment it is likely that your statement is correct.  The Mosquito Mk XVI had a smaller pressurized compartment and the Ta152H-1 a still smaller pressurized compartment.  It is possible that their compartments might be separated enough from the oxygen to survive.

[earl1937]

That would depend on the location of the oxygen bottles and the pressurized compartment.  Due to the size of the B-29's pressurized compartment it is likely that your statement is correct.  The Mosquito Mk XVI had a smaller pressurized compartment and the Ta152H-1 a still smaller pressurized compartment.  It is possible that their compartments might be separated enough from the oxygen to survive.

  The question of "rapid decompressuzation" has long been one of discussion. 1 .50 cal bullet is not going to render a B-29 pressurization system in op! Our pratice had to do with where you were at and at what altitude. Above 15K, at least one crew member in each compartment had to be on oxygen at all times. This was usually traded out among those in that compartment, front or back. I used to fly a DC-6B to San Juan, hauling blue jeans for sewing and labels and all 3 of ours had been hit so many times with fork lifts, around the cargo doors, that after takeoff, the engineer would take wet paper towels and place in the holes around the cargo doors to stop the whistling and help pressurisation. We could hold a 8K altitude in cabin at 15k. Yes, and as towels dryed out and some would fall, the engineer would have to replace them. About all the engineers had to do anyway! LOL

[smoe]

While we are on the subject, why not allow bombs to take hits as well and explode?

[Arlo]

Unarmed bombs exploding from taking hits? Rerferences and statistics?

[Chalenge]

Go ahead and add it. But, if you add this then please model all other systems so that the F4U is finally neutered to realistic levels. I think the automatic controls for the blower and engine management didn't come until the F4U-5? The same for the P-47s. Not just prop and rpm but also blower control, so we can see the noobs and dweebs kill themselves over our strats. And the F4U? You might as well model the CO2 fuel fire prevention system, but make sure to add the emergency gear blow-down bottle right next to it so that if they make that mistake they are stuck with gear down. And controls? Not just surfaces anymore, we should be able to shoot away the cockpit linkages from below, so these furballers get jammed controls and auger like their real world counterparts. Bomber turrets? Hydraulics off of one engine only. Kill that engine, kill all turrets. Gun chargers the same thing.

You could go on and on, so why stop at oxygen bottles? Let's turn the game into a true study simulation so there won't be anymore jumping from plane to plane without an actual pilots manual.

+1 I like it! 

[Arlo]

Go ahead and add it. But, if you add this then please model all other systems so that the F4U is finally neutered to realistic levels. I think the automatic controls for the blower and engine management didn't come until the F4U-5? The same for the P-47s. Not just prop and rpm but also blower control, so we can see the noobs and dweebs kill themselves over our strats. And the F4U? You might as well model the CO2 fuel fire prevention system, but make sure to add the emergency gear blow-down bottle right next to it so that if they make that mistake they are stuck with gear down. And controls? Not just surfaces anymore, we should be able to shoot away the cockpit linkages from below, so these furballers get jammed controls and auger like their real world counterparts. Bomber turrets? Hydraulics off of one engine only. Kill that engine, kill all turrets. Gun chargers the same thing.

You could go on and on, so why stop at oxygen bottles? Let's turn the game into a true study simulation so there won't be anymore jumping from plane to plane without an actual pilots manual.

+1 I like it! 

This!^ would be the post that deserves the 'HTC doesn't want engine micro-management' reply.  A true over-reaction argument.