Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Krusty on January 27, 2007, 11:26:29 AM
-
I was doing some testing in a few aircraft to see what kind of weight differences there was with different fuel loads or ammo loads, and I ran into something funny....
The Ta152H-1 in Aces High has 4 fuel tanks. It has aft, fwd, left wing and right wing.
Only, the right wing has 44 gallons, but the left has 62!!!
Ta152H-1 263 gal total
44 gal right wing
62 gal left wing
96 gal aft
62 gal fwd
Is that a bug? Surely that can't be right.
Avgas in AH weighs 6 lbs per gallon. That's 264 lbs in the right wing and 372 lbs in the left! Why/how is this?
-
right wing - 77l + 80l = 157l (116kg)
right wing - 70l MW50 (52kg)
left wing - 70l + 80l + 77l = 227l (167kg)
would say the weight in each wing almost the same.
167kg left wing to 168kg right wing
-
So, you're saying the real aircraft had 2 tanks per wing? In AH we only have 1 tank per wing, and one side is 50% heavier than the other.
Do you have any documentation for this? Something I could point to in a bug report and say "it should be thus"?
-
no 3 tanks per wing. 3 fuel tanks in the left wing and 2 fuel tanks and a MW50 tank in the right wing
pg 189 of Tank's bio book.
-
So, the MW50 is being left out of the right wing. In the 190A-8 the MW50 tank is used as a fuel tank. Shouldn't it be the same way in the 152? MW50 would drain with time, but now we have a solid weight in the wing that will never drain, even after the fuel drains.
Doesn't seem fair to the unstable 152, does it? The plane's got problems already!
-
The fueslage aux tank in the 152H-1 is used for the GM1.
-
How much does the GM1 tank weigh, total?
That's another weight that would empty over time but does not.
The Ta152 is the ONLY tail heavy plane in the game. I used to visit 8-player rooms with air spawn maps, and you can spawn ANY plane and get it to nose down as you start the engine and pull the gear up -- any plane except the 152H-1. It is impossible to air start because it will fall into a tail spin every time (the CoG is too far rearward -- it SHOULD be in the wing somewhere, it's behind it). This is why it is a terrible dogfighter. This is why I was hoping very much that it would be redone with the 190s. I hope someday they fix this. Hell just make the GM1 tank an aux gas tank. Make the MW50 another aux tank. That way when they're empty they don't fubar the flight characteristics!
-
The weight of the 85l GM take is 63kg. In Hermann's 152 book it is stated that the GM system was dropped from production a/c.
IRL the 152H-1 was tail heavy with full tanks.
The P-51D with its fuselage tank should exhibit the same characteristics.
How does AH model fuel flow from an a/c's tanks?
-
Hrm... I usually leave it on auto, but I *think* it drains the wings first then aft/fwd. I think it toggles evenly amongst wings and fuselage tanks, but I could be wrong.
As for the full fuel weight, the Ta152H-1 in Aces High is horribly tail heavy even when light on fuel. Those 8-player rooms I mentioned usually had 10x ammo but 0.000001 fuel burn, so you'd never take more than 25%. Even so it slid into the ground tail first every time. The air starts on one map started at 15-20k. That's a long time to try and correct. I tried over and over and over. The Dora was a little difficult but possible. Most aircraft were balanced enough that, even if they wanted to tail down, you could roll/rudder/force it nose down. The Ta152 is so tail heavy it drops arse first before you can get a word in edge-wise, then it's too late.
-
Krusty, apply some stab trim.
-
you know I always noticed wing dip in the TA.... wonder if this is something HTC knows about
-
Perhaps manually balancing fuel would counter this? I have recently been trying to manually control fuel flow and have discovered that you can really customise your flight charactoristics just by how you drain the fuel. For example, I have been flying the Typhoon a bit recently, and rather than auto-draining tanks, I drain the left wing first, keeping it 1/8 lighter, thus improving low speed handling. Also, dont trust the damage list as far as how many tanks there are in each spot. The Spitfire mk I has two tanks, bottom and top, but the damage list only lists the bottom tank. It may be that additional tanks are modelled, or used for other things, and they are just not listed.
-
Yes, sometimes draining one wing tank more than another can help you turn in one direction (for example, some drain one wing tank in the F4us and leave the other so they can "turn into the torque" without such severe problems, however this is a problem with the "empty" wing, where the balance and stability of the craft is being screwed with when there's no fuel in the tanks.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Doesn't seem fair to the unstable 152, does it? The plane's got problems already!
problems... BAH I don't see problems I see challenges... where the fun in tree-topping a spitty when you can do it in the 152....
:)
-
Actually krusty, I drain fuel for level flight. At low speed the Typhoon will always drop its left wing, I lighten it to increase stability. But play with your fuel settings and see if you can increase stability. My biggest problem with the Ta-152 is that at low level it struggles, and no one flies at 30k, its best altitude.
-
30k is only its best speed. It still struggles up there. I took it to 40k, all it could do was make a 5-mile-wide gentle turn. If it ran into bombers that high they'd be dead, though.
However, you shouldn't HAVE to play with the fuel to get a stable and competitive performance. What if the P47N had 60lbs extra weight in one wing, and 150lbs in the tail? I'm making these numbers up but I bet it would flop around and fishtail as badly as the 152 does.
Considering it's a late late late model 190, it should FLY similar to one, instead of how it does now. Only heavier, with worse climb, and longer wings. At least, that's my opinion.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Actually krusty, I drain fuel for level flight. At low speed the Typhoon will always drop its left wing, I lighten it to increase stability. But play with your fuel settings and see if you can increase stability. My biggest problem with the Ta-152 is that at low level it struggles, and no one flies at 30k, its best altitude.
Ahem..... BAH
-
Hey, I love Luftwaffe rides, so trust me, im on your side. But looking at all of the other glitches, and how rare it is to actually see one of these, im guessing its not high on HTC's list of priorities.
-
Originally posted by Serenity
Hey, I love Luftwaffe rides, so trust me, im on your side. But looking at all of the other glitches, and how rare it is to actually see one of these, im guessing its not high on HTC's list of priorities.
hehe I am just messing around....
I love my 152 just as much as my FM2 and KI-67.....
But really the 152 can pull off some fantastic stuff if your smooth with her...
-
Originally posted by mussie
hehe I am just messing around....
I was talking to Krusty. Didnt even notice your post until just now ;)
But yeah... I am trying to fly as realisticly as possible. It was only a matter of time until I started manually draining fuel. It can be a b**** to forget to switch to the fuselage before ditching a Drop Tank in combat...
-
krusty would it not have a heavier tank in the left wing to compensate for prop torque?
-
Your rudder and your ailerons compensate for torque, having a 100-lb(?) weight in one wing is just going to destabilize it. Remember that the real thing drained in 10 minutes or so, so it wouldn't ruin performance when it was empty. Ours is always full, even when all the wings have drained. Same for the GM1 in the tail.
-
well as ive seen in the past it is a game and modeled to hitech details not real life
-
The problem is the way HTC modeled WEP. In this game WEP is endless (because we have a fuel multiplier, which would change how long it lasted, thus screwing you if you got into a fight and needed it) so WEP only lasts "X" minutes, or until your engine overheats. Once the engine cools down you can use it again as long as your engine is running.
So, if WEP never drains, you can't model MW50 or GM1 tanks that drain. So what do you do? You have to model the weight of these items, but they don't drain, so they're just dead weight.
It's really like this because they decided to do WEP the way they did.
I think a decent (or at least "more fair") compromise would be to make these tanks aux gas tanks. That way you could drain the gas in them and not be flopping around because your aircraft is unstable.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
The problem is the way HTC modeled WEP. In this game WEP is endless (because we have a fuel multiplier, which would change how long it lasted, thus screwing you if you got into a fight and needed it) so WEP only lasts "X" minutes, or until your engine overheats. Once the engine cools down you can use it again as long as your engine is running.
So, if WEP never drains, you can't model MW50 or GM1 tanks that drain. So what do you do? You have to model the weight of these items, but they don't drain, so they're just dead weight.
It's really like this because they decided to do WEP the way they did.
I think a decent (or at least "more fair") compromise would be to make these tanks aux gas tanks. That way you could drain the gas in them and not be flopping around because your aircraft is unstable.
What about wet wep for allied AC?
Bronk
-
Originally posted by Bronk
What about wet wep for allied AC?
Bronk
I'm guessing it's the same way. Only in US planes they don't tail slide all the time, flop about when at high alt or med alt, or hell even low alt, and they don't have a huge dead weight pulling one wing down all the time :P
I'm sure in allied planes there's also an issue, but the Ta152's case is much worse.
-
Krusty, how many years has the 152 gone unchanged?... There are no surprise about it anymore.
IIRC, you just have to be patient and build speed at high alt, and the energy retention will do the rest.
I did have a spit9 or 13 follow me from pretty much ground level, all the way past 35k, and out perform me at everything but high speed ACM, which we never got to try.
The 152's just a heavy interceptor, with an anemic engine, which means your only advantage is the fuel range, high alt-biased design, clean aerodynamics, and the guns.
As for the 0mph stall, it is a *****, but there is a way to break out of it systematically. I don't remember the details, and it definitely cost you at minimum 5 seconds extra compared to other planes, but it does exist.
-
Originally posted by moot
Krusty, how many years has the 152 gone unchanged?... There are no surprise about it anymore.
IIRC, you just have to be patient and build speed at high alt, and the energy retention will do the rest.
I did have a spit9 or 13 follow me from pretty much ground level, all the way past 35k, and out perform me at everything but high speed ACM, which we never got to try.
The 152's just a heavy interceptor, with an anemic engine, which means your only advantage is the fuel range, high alt-biased design, clean aerodynamics, and the guns.
As for the 0mph stall, it is a *****, but there is a way to break out of it systematically. I don't remember the details, and it definitely cost you at minimum 5 seconds extra compared to other planes, but it does exist.
pffffffffffffffttttttttttt :furious
I must be flying all the other planes Really Really Bad.....
-
It's not about E-retention. It's not about flying an unfamiliar aircraft. Ta152 was may favorite perk plane for a LONG time before it was unperked.
Mussie, you remember that fight we had at 20k, right? I've got it on film somewhere. Anyways, our speeds rarely got below 150mph and we were flopping so bad. We couldn't do a loop without curling around into a curly-fry shape. We could only do half-hearted wiiiiide-as-hell turns, gentle as a baby, and then in the end it was a HO that ended the fight (I gave up, to be honest, wish I'd gone after your lanc pals instead).
Anyways, the plane flies terribly, even if you fly it smart. The wings bounce because of the asymmetrical weight. It's horribly floppy and unstable because there's a huge lump of dead weight in the tail.
I have a feeling it'll never get redone. Why? Because they would have redone it with the 190s if they cared about it. It's got too many problems, too many compromises to fit the early AH1 flight engine, for it to ever be fixed without a major re-coad (starting from scratch would be my best guess).
It's not about weak engine power, or poor climb, it's about floppage. Mucho floppo. Because it's got dead weights inside one wing and the tail, both which are bad for any type of flight other than "level".
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Mussie, you remember that fight we had at 20k, right? I've got it on film somewhere. Anyways, our speeds rarely got below 150mph and we were flopping so bad. We couldn't do a loop without curling around into a curly-fry shape. We could only do half-hearted wiiiiide-as-hell turns, gentle as a baby, and then in the end it was a HO that ended the fight (I gave up, to be honest, wish I'd gone after your lanc pals instead).
Hmmm I see your point on a technical basis, but the fact is I still get more kills in the 152 than any other plane.... except for the FM2.... and the fight I had with you would be the first 152 fight I have had that was higher than about 10K... So I get most of those 152 kills down low...
I know it could be better but It really aint that bad a plane...
EDIT: krusty... Do you really think the end of that fight was a HO... Yeah we were head on but it took us what 5 minutes to get there....
I think its only a HO if its on the inital merge... but thats my opinion
-
Well considering even a 180 took us 2k-3k apart from each other, I'd classify it as a HO, but I didn't care at the time :)
-
You know what Krusty, as early as when squaddies and I really shook down the 152, I do remember feeling that roll-bounce when you really dug into high +G maneuvers.
The tail heaviness from that never-emptying tank, though, I don't see being made the sole exception in the planeset.
I didn't mean that the plane was unfamiliar, but that so late after the present revision's introduction, what could you expect to effect, with less than a talk with HT, supported by hard evidence?
I mentionned its E-retention because (AFAICR) it is really enough of a redeeming quality all by itself.
I do wish it were fixed back to its pre AHII FM.
-
A lot of the aircraft in AH have "WEP" that doesn't require an additive. That is, they just run at higher RPM and manifold pressure, that's where they get the extra power.
Some require a coolant or anti-detonating additive for the increased pressure. The F4u4 uses water, as does the P47N. The 109K uses MW50.
Most of these planes have the reserviors in centrally located tanks, tanks that are well balanced and do not affect flight performance, empty or full.
The Ta152 uses MW50 and GM1, one in the tail one in one wing. Those are two places opposite of "centrally balanced".
I know that no aircraft drains the tanks, but no other aircraft has the same problems with the tanks, so a compromise should be reached with the Ta152, rather than an across-the-board sweeping change.
Oh, and Moot, HTC faculty read the forums regularly. That's part of why I bring up issues like this. :aok
EDIT: In AH1 this thing was a secret monster. However, AH1 had inaccurate air flow and this might have been why.
Hell, I just realized. If it was tailored and tweaked to fly in the buggy code, why don't they tailor and tweak it to fly in the new code? Get the same results but with the new airflow code?
-
Those tanks are where they're supposed to be, so what compromise do you suggest?
And yes, the 152 didn't get the smoothing out that (every, IIRC) other planes got a short while after we got the AH2 FM.
But like I said, you need to make your case to HT & co, not just tug at their skirt.. As I remember it used to work, anway.
I had gotten Skuzzy to grant me one frank question to HT (directly) way back when, but never did take him up on the offer... maybe I still could? :)
-
It's not so much a question. We know the issue, it seems. If anything it would be a request, and as such this thread serves the purpose better (having discussed it better in this thread than perhaps would be possible over the phone).
Save your question for something good :)