Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: FDutchmn on June 12, 2004, 09:13:00 AM
-
Please place Burn Rate as it was in AH1, Reason: Current Burn Rate of 2.0 will severely limit climbing time of Fighters at full throttle, thereby limiting intercept capability on high alt bombers. Please give it a thought. :)
-
the FBM was 2 in AH1, fuel consumption has been reworked on some of the planes for AH2 some burn more (like the la7) some burn a bit less (109s).
BTW I think its a bit high myself but I had my say on that in another thread...
-
I don't think it's a problem, FD.
I've noticed that it's now a little risky to fly medium bombers such as B-26s with only 25% fuel. So, the medium bombers do have a bit o' weight problem if they carry 50% fuel.
The B-17s and Lancasters still fly very long with 25%, but most planes reach over 20k around 6~7 minutes. And then you can almost double your flight time by cruisng at that altitude with most planes. Almost triple the flight time if DTs are on.
The burn rate does present a problem that you cannot directly chase after a buff formation passing over, and get into a long, climbing chase and then engage it.
However, come to think of it, that should mean that an interceptor must be prepared to deal with a threat at least 6~7 minutes before it reaches its target destination - it simply means people have to learn to plan ahead, and I can accept that as new game play.
....
If there is something that should be looked upon - it's the low-level deck bombing. Buffs coming in at low altitudes, crapping it's load 1000ft AGL, and then getting shot down. It's deliberate suicide.
While the fuel porking is now a non-issue, unfortunately, the new realistic field layout has lined the FHs and BHs up nicely, and a couple of suicidal formations can knock stuff out real fast.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
I don't think it's a problem, FD.
I've noticed that it's now a little risky to fly medium bombers such as B-26s with only 25% fuel. So, the medium bombers do have a bit o' weight problem if they carry 50% fuel.
The B-17s and Lancasters still fly very long with 25%, but most planes reach over 20k around 6~7 minutes. And then you can almost double your flight time by cruisng at that altitude with most planes. Almost triple the flight time if DTs are on.
The burn rate does present a problem that you cannot directly chase after a buff formation passing over, and get into a long, climbing chase and then engage it.
However, come to think of it, that should mean that an interceptor must be prepared to deal with a threat at least 6~7 minutes before it reaches its target destination - it simply means people have to learn to plan ahead, and I can accept that as new game play.
....
If there is something that should be looked upon - it's the low-level deck bombing. Buffs coming in at low altitudes, crapping it's load 1000ft AGL, and then getting shot down. It's deliberate suicide.
While the fuel porking is now a non-issue, unfortunately, the new realistic field layout has lined the FHs and BHs up nicely, and a couple of suicidal formations can knock stuff out real fast.
no no, my point is that fighters cant get alt with this burn rate.
-
Just how much alt are we talking about? The flight time changes as you get higher - even at full throttle.
True, it takes a huge gulp of fuel to push planes upto 30k now - and usually planes with internal load only will meet some problems..(unless it's something like a P-51). However, I don't think there's any plane that 'can't' get to alt at all in the first place.
(Well, for some planes like La-7s and Yaks, it's indeed a problem. But they shouldn't be at that alt anyway.)
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
Just how much alt are we talking about? The flight time changes as you get higher - even at full throttle.
True, it takes a huge gulp of fuel to push planes upto 30k now - and usually planes with internal load only will meet some problems..(unless it's something like a P-51). However, I don't think there's any plane that 'can't' get to alt at all in the first place.
(Well, for some planes like La-7s and Yaks, it's indeed a problem. But they shouldn't be at that alt anyway.)
how about the 109s, there will be very little time left for them to scout around at alt, or the 190s. The only planes left that can intercept high alt buffs will be the fuel efficient n1k2s or ki61s.
-
FD, with only internal fuel I can go to 25k and set it into cruise mode, and fly for about 25~30 minutes max.
The 190s can do pretty much the same, except it takes longer time to get to 30k since it starts suffering poor climb over 22k.
I'll try a flight and get a screen shot of the available time.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
FD, with only internal fuel I can go to 25k and set it into cruise mode, and fly for about 25~30 minutes max.
The 190s can do pretty much the same, except it takes longer time to get to 30k since it starts suffering poor climb over 22k.
I'll try a flight and get a screen shot of the available time.
the point kweassa, how much lee way can we give to the fighters to adjust the course of intercept. LW fighters are gonna suffer if they up from a wrong base
-
FD, with only internal load, no DTs, take-off, WEP climb to 25k and level:
* The Bf109G-10 has 25 minutes of flight time, 112miles(4.5 sectors) range. Cruise setting extends 19 minutes of flight time to 25 minutes at 25k.
* The Fw190D-9 has 43 minutes of flight time, 198miles(8 sectors) range. Cruise setting extends 18 minutes of flight time to 43 minutes at 25k.
The range and flight time isn't a problem. Like I said, the problem is spotting them out early so we don't need to gasp at all the misinformation and fly to new intercept locations at max throttle all the time.
It's more of player cooperative issue, than a real fuel issue. Don't get me wrong - I personally would also prefer someting about 1.7~1.8 fuel burn. Im just pointing out it is possible, if the need really presents itself.
-
2.0 too high me thinks anyway
-
FDutchmn, I took a G2 with 100% and DT, chases a P51 a sector away to his base (he landed...) at full throttle and wep 15k alt. then I set it on "normal" setting which gives a speed of ~330 mph and still had 54 min of flight. Flew another 1.5 sectors to find action - no one came to fight so I flew it into the ground.
and still had fuel in the DT.
Bozon
-
Originally posted by bozon
FDutchmn, I took a G2 with 100% and DT, chases a P51 a sector away to his base (he landed...) at full throttle and wep 15k alt. then I set it on "normal" setting which gives a speed of ~330 mph and still had 54 min of flight. Flew another 1.5 sectors to find action - no one came to fight so I flew it into the ground.
and still had fuel in the DT.
Bozon
how the 109F, we not gonna see that in the arena with this burn rate. well, anyway, as Kweassa rightly up, the issue probably should present itself. But I think 2.0 is too high.
-
Has it occured to you why they added the new fuel model? Perhaps to keep people from flying full throttle all the time? Now you complain because you cant fly full throttle all the time? How is that going to get the fuel multiplier dropped?
Personally I love it. I like taking a g6 up without the drop and having to watch my speed depending on how far I am traveling. Then making sure I throttle up in time to have a good speed advantage when I get to a combat situation. Once in combat, you have to just forget about the fuel, otherwise you will be dead from other things. Only thing to remember is leaving enough to get away, which is much easier now, cause low rpm and throttle settings increase mpg immensely, and you know exactly how far you can travel on what you have left.
fyi I have not found an issue getting to 20k and having plenty of fuel for buff chasing or interepting. I dont understand how this has reduced your ability to climb. You can still cruise at 340 mph in most planes worth using as an interceptor, which is easily fast enough to catch any buff.
Yak 9u is pretty restricted in the fuel department, but heck, its got like a plastic 5 gallon tank under the pilots seat right? What do you expect. It also has a very good cruising speed.
-
as far as burn rate go( or any other perfomance factors) i would like realistic levels...please please please:aok
-
If the fuel modifier is lowered to 1.5 or 1.8, I believe engine management will only be used by those planning on flying for 2 hours, not everyone. As it is, everybody has to worry about it.
Yes I know the late american planes have an advantage here, but they are also pigs when fully loaded with fuel. p51 pilots HAVE to drain the aux tank before they can relax, or even think about maneuvering, and p47 are not exactly nimble with a full tank either. I would not want to tangle with a 109f at half a tank, with a p47 with 75%-100% fuel on board, no matter how fast the p47 was.
-
Originally posted by ergRTC
Has it occured to you why they added the new fuel model? Perhaps to keep people from flying full throttle all the time? Now you complain because you cant fly full throttle all the time? How is that going to get the fuel multiplier dropped?
...
If the fuel modifier is lowered to 1.5 or 1.8, I believe engine management will only be used by those planning on flying for 2 hours, not everyone. As it is, everybody has to worry about it.
Yes I know the late american planes have an advantage here, but they are also pigs when fully loaded with fuel. p51 pilots HAVE to drain the aux tank before they can relax, or even think about maneuvering, and p47 are not exactly nimble with a full tank either. I would not want to tangle with a 109f at half a tank, with a p47 with 75%-100% fuel on board, no matter how fast the p47 was.
Point well taken, but what is the point of having all these fuel selection in the hanger with this burn rate?
-
Well, the fuel selection is there for the planes that carry more than 100 gallons (which is suprisingly few!). Also the bombers of course. One thing i keep mentioning which straffo brought up is essential for this new model to work. They have to restrict the drop tank load out to planes carrying 100% fuel only.
-
ok, wait, the model works, as we know it. Kindly separate that with issue of "flight duration (more rightly put the need to climb)", cuz we gotta have that to to play the game. Burn rate can change and the model works.
-
I'm more than satisfied with the model and the burn rate. But then, I don't often climb over 10k, so I Imagine that effects my judgement.
I fly the Yaks (and Dabble in 109s) and FB2 works for me.
-Sik
-
Try Bomber hunting at very high altitude with an 190A8, you'll be sucking fumes by the time you get to those 30K pilots, then you have to chase them down. You surely cant cap the HQ now as I used to in AH1. If the fuel burn multiplier is 2X then make the climb rate 2X! (Guys - I already know that last part was ridiculous) But you cannot compensate a bomber interceptor pilot fairly any other way... I try to watch the map and launch to intercept as soon as I have the suspicion that a dot on the radar map is a bomber. Sometimes 2.5 sectors out, that gives me time to get altitude, speed, location working for me. With sufficient gasoline this is possible, I am sure that since the FW190A8 is such a heavily gunned beast that it was used in the bomber interceptor role. The fuel burn multiplier is taking the advantage of time away from the close range interceptor to pick his position and plan of attack.
And no, i do not plan to switch to P51s instead! LOL
just my opinion fellas....
-
fuel burn rate was 2.0 in ah1? i always thought it was 1.5.. or maybe that was just for events
-
Originally posted by moose
fuel burn rate was 2.0 in ah1? i always thought it was 1.5.. or maybe that was just for events
On AH1, it was 1.5 as far as I recall.
-
I love the way it is now, really love it.
As far as climbing goes, it is not an issue IMO, if you have a plane with that little fuel, (LA, Yak or just not a DT on a 109 or spit) you can use cruise settings, will get you up there aswell just not quite as fast. The higher you come the less fuel you consume.
A 109 can get to 30k in less then 10 minutes, 100% and DT. This will give you plenty of time to fight at that high altitude, specially if you have throttled down before the fight.
-
If the burn rate is going to be 2.0, can we leave the pizza map out of circulation? It's not gonna be easy for folks playing in the morning hours on the East coast.
-
Originally posted by 6GunUSMC
Try Bomber hunting at very high altitude with an 190A8, you'll be sucking fumes by the time you get to those 30K pilots, then you have to chase them down.
Was bored with AHII being down, so I checked it out offline. How much time do you want? I took the A8 up to 30k from the deck, fuel burn 2, zero wind. Plane was loaded with 2x20, 2x30, 2xdecorative mg, DT.
At 30k The plane had 44 minutes of flight time at MIL power.
(http://www.warszawa.hailcesarz.com/images/mil.jpg)
By reducing RPMs by ONE click, it stretches out to nearly an hour of flight time at that alt.
(http://www.warszawa.hailcesarz.com/images/mil-1.jpg)
And by going crazy and reducing rpms even more (you wont be chasing anyone at this setting lol) you can stay on station almost forever.
(http://www.warszawa.hailcesarz.com/images/lean.jpg)
But I think the real issue here isn't the fuel burn rate, but rather, the fact that the A8 is a dog at this alt. I believe the 109G-10 and 190D-9 would be much better suited to buffs over 20/25k.
YMMV of course.
-Sik
-
Good test Sikboy and thanks for the screens, this pretty much proves that flying time is not an issue when Engines are used the right way, also, as stated before, the higher you go the less fuel you burn. if 50% may last for 20 mins at the deck it may very well last for 30 or even 40 at high alt.
Btw, were you able to keep your alt on the second economy settings?
-
Originally posted by Wilbus
Btw, were you able to keep your alt on the second economy settings?
Yeah, it seemed a bit odd, but I had the plane on auto-level, and it was able to maintain alt, even at the rediculously low settings on the last screenshot. My intention was to keep dropping RPMs until I started to lose alt, but by the time I got to over 2 hours of flight time, I figured that was good enough.
One thing that I found very interesting, is that the A8 showed 46 minutes flying time at takeoff (IIRC), and 44 minutes at Alt. The effect of alt on fuel consumption is that drastic.
-Sik
-
Interesting..... very interesting....
-
I wonder what the flight time for the flying gas tank, the TA-152H, at 35K with ecomomy settings would be? It must be close to 6 hours!
-
betcha the 152 just sucks down the gas at wep though. Maybe the mossie will be a more effective buff hunter these days.
-
Originally posted by FDutchmn
On AH1, it was 1.5 as far as I recall.
No, AH1 was 2.0 as well. Only some planes have had their consumption changed, and all now use much more fuel when WEP'ing. (In AH1 100% throttle and WEP used same fuel)
-
On many aircraft (all?) the most fuel efficient engine setting for climbing was full power. If you climp on cruise you will actually burn more fuel to get to your target altitude than you will if you climb on MIL power.
I do not know if FBM2 changes this or not.
Ah well. I'm not affected anyways. My aircraft is a flying fuel tank.
-
Yeah karnak, its nice to see that as an advantage for once.
I bet the cruise vs mil climb is still appropriate. I have tried in hurricanes and it seems to make the most sense to climb at mil. At first it seems like you are an idiot watching the time remaining drop down to 10min before you hit 20k but After you are at alt, your cruise speed is A) much better mileage, and B) you are going much faster at cruise than you would be at 10k. Very important difference. Not only does your gph decrease at high alt cruise, but your (actual ground) speed is nearly twice as fast in most later war planes.
-
Both the Ta152 and the P51 will proabrly have a very long endurance at high alt.
-
Originally posted by LLv34_Snefens
No, AH1 was 2.0 as well. Only some planes have had their consumption changed, and all now use much more fuel when WEP'ing. (In AH1 100% throttle and WEP used same fuel)
aaarrrggghhh... there's the cause of me pre-whine... Thanks Snefens.
And thanks Sikboy for running the tests. It clarifies a lot of things... Gotta get the old habits to die...
-
Just for the heck of it I flew a Mossie around Mindanao tonight at 25K (while eating dinner and messing around the house). Two hours later I had circled almost the whole island and still had 30 mins left. I was using +2lbs boost at about 2400rpm, was crusing so fast no one intercepted me despite flying across the length of two enemy countries while afk.
I think the whole fuel burn thing is great. If you fly correctly you can fly a lot farther than you could in AHI.
And thank you HTC for finally fixing the range on the Mosquito!
-
FBM2 has reduced Lavochkins non defensive combat time considerably IMO.
To look for combat over an enemy field........
On a full tank I would climb out at mil power to 17K (where for some reason both Lavochkins MP gauges report full boost). Go level, gather some speed and then throttle back and reduce rpm to cruise (if not even lower).
At a sectors distance from home I have one decent fight before having to consider rtb.
I note I am beginning to some times realise I have insufficient fuel to exit combat to rtb and so just remain in combat till the inevitable occurs. This (I note) increases my tendancy to do suicide stuff, as survival is not an eventual option anyway.
My point is that the Lavochkin range is now so short that there is no option to use fuel conservation to any great effect.
-
The whole point of the fuel burn rate is REALISM! Ya cant up, hit max manifold, and keep it there 45 minutes--they couldnt do that in real life, neither should we. The 109F, during Battle of Britain, could fly to London, spend like 15 minutes dogfighting, and barely make it back to France on fumes. (It could stay in the air for 90 minutes. ) Dweeb rides like La7 will be somewhat restricted, but they were in RL as well. IF the fediddlein things are still the fastest non-perk rides in AH, they still better than they deserve to be. There are only a few planes that have decent range sans drop tanks (P51, D9, Niki, F4u1....P38?) The rest will have to employ a little more thought than before, and bombers might actually be able to get to a target at 20k without 15 spits peckin away at em. Makes whole game FAR more interesting, I think. High-alt rides like Jug may actually only encounter other historically hi-alt rides...this could be fun.
-
I just checked in AH1, in the Map room it says fuel 125%
I assume that means the burn rate is 125% of real?
were we are now in AH2 running 200%?
I like it mind you. It will stop all the perk wines about the LA7, no need to perk it, it has short legs now.
Great for close range stuff, IE, going from one base to another close one, but it is not going to spending much time in the air.
Did I mention I like the new gas model? I used to throttle back in AH1 all the time if the fight I wanted evaperated.
-
Nuh-uh, Gtora2, "125%" means the field is available with 100% fuels + DT. Fuel burn rate can be checked with the E6B.
-
just fly a TA152 instead of the 190a-8 for that
wow
:eek:
they fixed the Mossie
anyone know how far it should fly on full tank? in AH2
-
Kweassa
Not in AH1! lol
Well I learn something new everyday hehe
-
Originally posted by bj229r
The whole point of the fuel burn rate is REALISM!
No, the new engine management modelling is Realism. Burn Rate is something to adjust to make the game playable.
Let's be clear on one thing... I am not complaining about the new model of engine management. And I already changed my stance on the burn rate itself. If there is a problem, which I thought I saw at the time, it will present itself.
Now that we need to keep a sharp eye on the manifold pressure and engine revolution, I wish the indicators were bigger. Some of them are kinda small.
-
Originally posted by simshell
they fixed the Mossie
anyone know how far it should fly on full tank? in AH2
All the way from mindnao to ndisles.
Bozon
-
yah, I have same sentiments about guage size...I'm assuming ya need to have a 21" monitor, or be 20 years younger;
-
I know its gamey as hell, but i have not looked at a fuel gauge for months.
erg
-
Two points:
1.) In AH1's MA the FBM was 1.5, it was changed for some scenarios but it was 1.5 in the main.
2.) Pyro has already stated that in AH2 MA you MUST have 100% fuel load before you can add a DT, so no more taking 25% and dual DTs.
-
2.) Pyro has already stated that in AH2 MA you MUST have 100% fuel load before you can add a DT, so no more taking 25% and dual DTs.
BOOO..i hope thsi isnt true...
what they dont wan tus to waste DTs?...lolol
nothen bettr then 50 gas and DTs:)
and btw.i hav ehad to eeek hoem many times with a pokt full of kills....and usn the old e6b every mile..wacth my six sayn..dam im goin slow....come on squeeeze this thing hoem e6b!!!
Love
BiGB
xoxo
-
BGB, Pyro explained the reason in the other thread.