Heavy Bomber Bombing Speed

[Brooke]

In combat fighters did "tool around" at 100% MIL, or even WEP.  American, British, German, Japanese and Italian bombers maintained cruise settings (other than oddballs like the Mossie bombers) even while under fighter attack.  It is misleading to paint them as equivalent like you did here.

"In combat" is only a very small percentage of flying around.  WWII fighters often were at cruise-like settings and, only upon seeing the enemy, would go to full power.  That is very different from fighters in the MA that are at 100% power long before combat.

I don't think that anything I posted was at all misleading.  Especially that use of flaps, stallfights on the deck, weather, and GPS are all much farther from typical than is a bomber flying at full throttle instead of cruise.

[Karnak]

"In combat" is only a very small percentage of flying around.  WWII fighters often were at cruise-like settings and, only upon seeing the enemy, would go to full power.  That is very different from fighters in the MA that are at 100% power long before combat.

It isn't a small percentage of the flight time in AH.  It also wasn't a small percentage for a lot of defensive sorties for Spitfires and Hurricanes and later Bf109s and Fw190s.  That persistently stated fact is misleading because it makes it sound equivalent when it is not.  Fighters used cruise out of combat and MIL/WEP in combat.  Bombers used MIL for takeoff, a climb setting for climbing out and then cruise for the entire sortie.  Except the Russians.  They just used MIL.

[Brooke]

It isn't a small percentage of the flight time in AH. 

Yes, that's part of my point.  There are big differences between WWII and MA in some aspects of how planes are used because there are big differences in circumstances.  Being in combat or not is only one circumstance, and one that doesn't matter as much to bomber power settings.  What matters more in bombers is whether or not you need to create and maintain a large, tight formation; and what matters in both is whether or not you need to conserve fuel (which you don't in MA but usually did need to do in WWII).

It also wasn't a small percentage for a lot of defensive sorties for Spitfires and Hurricanes and later Bf109s and Fw190s.

I think it was a small percentage overall.  Of any statistical distribution, you can find one end of it or the other, but we're talking about what is typical or average.  Out of 100% of flying time in WWII fighter sorties, I'd be willing to bet that more than 80% or more of it was not at full power.  Spitfire scrambles during Battle of Britain or LW scrambles for late-war bombing does not take into account sorties of Spits to the Continent, 109's and 190's on combat patrols, American planes on bomber escort, allied planes on combat patrols, naval operations, etc. that made up probably a large majority of total flight time.

MA lets us fly realistically modeled planes in an environment geared toward quicker action (which is not how it usually was but which is necessary for the arena to be enjoyable).  That means lots of things are done here that were not typical for WWII -- not just typical bomber power setting, not just typical fighter power setting, but typical use of flaps, typical style of fights, typical altitude of fights, typical ease of navigation, typical weather, etc.

[Karnak]

Ok, fine.  You win.  Fighters never used MIL or WEP.   They flew and fought at cruise settings, completely the same as bombers.

[Lusche]

 

[Brooke]

Ok, fine.  You win.  Fighters never used MIL or WEP.   They flew and fought at cruise settings, completely the same as bombers.

Yes, that's exactly what I was trying to say.

But no, I can't accept.  You are being too gracious.  I must insist that you win.  Fighters always used MIL or WEP at all times.  They flew from takeoff to landing at full throttle, even on escort missions and air patrols, completely the same as bombers in the MA. 

[LilMak]

My point was not if they (bombers) could or could not fly around at Mil or WEP, it's about the impossibility of maintaining a formation at 100% power. The rear planes are constantly making corrections and bleeding speed while they do to stay with the leader. If the leader is 100%, eventually he will pull away from the rest of the group.

[Brooke]

But the followers can have slightly less drag (like geese in a flying V). . . . 

[LilMak]

But the followers can have slightly less drag (like geese in a flying V). . . . 

LOL! Knew that was coming. Geese don't generate as much wake turbulence or prop wash as a B-17.

[Stellaris]

I use reduced power settings whenever I fly the La-7.  It's biggest weakness is lack of fuel on full power (to say nothing of WEP), but its biggest secret is that it floats like a glider when you dial it back.  You can get clear across the map on reduced settings.  Typically I set up a gentle climbout on reduced power to optimum cruise altitude, cruise to where I'm going, go to full power to climb to combat altitude, have the fight, and then I have enough fuel to go home on full power, just in case someone wants to chase me.  That's assuming I don't get shot down first.

So if you want to see people doing more realistic fuel/throttle management, you either have to make the missions longer, or increase the burn rate so that more planes are in the La-7s shoes, with marginal reserves for typical missions.  Even so planes like the 51 with its huge range will just carry more fuel and fly full throttle.

And BTW - even if you just keep the throttle open all the time, if you just autoclimb from the runway to altitude you're wasting both fuel and time.  You'll get there faster with a bigger reserve if you climb gently to the altitude where you get the best tradeoff between TAS and climb-time, cruise at that height till you're where you want to be and do your final climb there, when you're lighter.  Otherwise you're just burning fuel to lift fuel, and wasting time doing it.

[colmbo]

Bombers used MIL for takeoff, a climb setting for climbing out and then cruise for the entire sortie. 

That is how Lead flew.  The guys in back are anywhere from idle to Takeoff Power trying to stay in formation.  The station keepers always use more power, burn more fuel.

[Paladin3]

Drano - it isn't he internet lag. We fly and I tell wingmen all the time what manifold I am pulling. It is the fact that people do not realize that they cannot set that manifold until they look out their cockpit and realize they have matched speed first. It is handy to know what power settings someone is pulling after that. I have no idea why folks find it so hard to realize that if they are lagging behind that they need to add power 

[Drano]

I have no idea why folks find it so hard to realize that if they are lagging behind that they need to add power 

Yeah me either. Seems easy enough on my end when I'm just keeping formation. I try to make it easy on others when leading by flying at reduced power to the point where I don't see anyone lagging too far behind. It's as much the leader's reponsibility to notice this happening as it is the follower's. I slowed down, so you speed up. Just do what you have to do to keep station. If the leader is walking away from the group and they're all at 100% somebody needs to let him know that's happening before your group is strung out beyond icon range (which ain't much by design in events).