Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: milesobrian on July 19, 2010, 01:47:16 PM
-
I dont know if this has been wish for already. but i was simply wondering how practical and worthwhile the ability to be able to choose the amount of fuel beyond the 1/4 intervals. Im not being able to assign the exact % of fuel you want though that would be neat, but might take more effort to "coad''. Simply maybe even have the fuel selection be in interval of 1/8th would be useful I think...what do you guys think. Or is 1/4 intervals of fuel good enough?
DISCUSS
-
:aok
It would be great if you could type in the amount of fuel you want in each fuel tank.
Perhaps leave the basic option for the new guys (25%, 25% ect..) and have an advanced option witch allows you to type in the amount of fuel in % of gallons.
-
Amazing how the main arenas spawn so many unusual wishes.
-
It would be kind of cool to have the ability to really plan out your flight before hand and do the math for how much fuel you would need.
However, I can understand how that is more of a flight simulator thing rather than a combat simulator thing, the game just isn't designed around that style of play. I've got FSX for that. :aok
-
33%, 66% or 100% :rofl
-
33%, 66% or 100% :rofl
that would also be a good alternative in addiction to what we have now 33% and 66%
-
33%, 66% or 99% :rofl
:rofl
-
It would be kind of cool to have the ability to really plan out your flight before hand and do the math for how much fuel you would need.
However, I can understand how that is more of a flight simulator thing rather than a combat simulator thing, the game just isn't designed around that style of play. I've got FSX for that. :aok
Yeah but this is till a simulator. It maybe a combat simulator but you still need to plan your fuel to get to the target, do what ever it is you got to do, and get home.
-
+1 on this, provided you don't have to type it in. If there were a slider that you could drag to set the amount of fuel, I would far prefer that.
-
Whats wrong with climbing out in the opposite direction for a few more minutes? Gets you more alt and you can head in with the amount of fuel you want.
-
I'm with minke on this but still +1...
I mean seriously. take the extra 5 minutes to climb another 5k feet...you'll need it
-
Yeah but this is till a simulator. It maybe a combat simulator but you still need to plan your fuel to get to the target, do what ever it is you got to do, and get home.
Have you seen what I do:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,283993.msg3592819.html#msg3592819 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,283993.msg3592819.html#msg3592819)
:aok
-
+1 on this, provided you don't have to type it in. If there were a slider that you could drag to set the amount of fuel, I would far prefer that.
If you put a slider in for the fuel, please also add a text box input so I don't have to use the slider.
-
Have you seen what I do:
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,283993.msg3592819.html#msg3592819 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,283993.msg3592819.html#msg3592819)
:aok
I just use an E6B (A real one, with a lot more features than AH2 one).
-
I mean seriously. take the extra 5 minutes to climb another 5k feet...you'll need it
It depends on the aircraft, that extra 5 minutes in a Mossy will be extra 15-20minutes and extra 20K
-
You should be required to take 100% no matter what.
You could get fogged in.
:noid
wrongway
-
You should be required to take 100% no matter what.
You could get fogged in.
:noid
wrongway
What?
Some aircraft can't even carry all their ord with full tanks (realistically).
-
You should be required to take 100% no matter what.
You could get fogged in.
My guess, this is closest to reality.
-
My guess, this is closest to reality.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
We have a winner!!
:aok
Actually, I like thins the way they are and think, "I'd like 34 gallons in the left wing tank and 42 gallons in the right wing tank" is rather obsessive and silly.
:bolt:
wrongway
-
Ding! Ding! Ding!
We have a winner!!
:aok
Actually, I like thins the way they are and think, "I'd like 34 gallons in the left wing tank and 42 gallons in the right wing tank" is rather obsessive and silly.
:bolt:
wrongway
Obviously you never flown a real plane. (no offense)
That is exactly what you do. You would not want your wings tanks to be different but forward and rear full tanks you would. Also most aircraft can not carry all the ord we have available + 100% fuel, they would simply be to heavy. And when your going on a short flight you would not full your plane up to 100% because it would climb better and handle better with less fuel.
-
It would be kind of cool to have the ability to really plan out your flight before hand and do the math for how much fuel you would need.
However, I can understand how that is more of a flight simulator thing rather than a combat simulator thing, the game just isn't designed around that style of play. I've got FSX for that. :aok
:rofl Quoted for truth. Some people just never ceases to amuse me with their crazy wishes.
-
Obviously you never flown a real plane. (no offense)
That is exactly what you do. You would not want your wings tanks to be different but forward and rear full tanks you would. Also most aircraft can not carry all the ord we have available + 100% fuel, they would simply be to heavy. And when your going on a short flight you would not full your plane up to 100% because it would climb better and handle better with less fuel.
Obviously you have never flown real combat.
Show me one instance of a military combat flight where less than 100% fuel was taken. Not a test hop or a ferry flight.
I understand the "real plane" argument where you know where you're going and take enough fuel to get there and a reserve for emergencies.
I'm probably wrong, but I don't think combat flights are that simple.
Any military pilots about? Take off with less than 100% fuel? If so, why?
I am not arguing for 100% fuel by the way. I fail to see the point of 32%.
wrongway
-
Obviously you never flown a real plane. (no offense)
That is exactly what you do. You would not want your wings tanks to be different but forward and rear full tanks you would. Also most aircraft can not carry all the ord we have available + 100% fuel, they would simply be to heavy. And when your going on a short flight you would not full your plane up to 100% because it would climb better and handle better with less fuel.
You're wrong on several points. Other than short range ferry flights out of harms way, combat aircraft carry as much fuel as the plane will hold, including drop tanks if needed. Few combat missions were "short range" and even then the only aircraft that didn't carry 100% fuel were the ones that hadn't been fueled since the last sortie, and the pilot who took off in a plane with less than full tanks was calculating his chances of returning to base from the second he got off the ground and sweating every minute in the air.
The aircraft capable of carrying ordnance in real life could carry the ordnance packages available in AH with 100% fuel.
Research, it pays.
-
okay, lets start with this. Do you understand that airplanes have a weight limit? They can not carry as much ordnance/cargo if they have 100% fuel, they will be overweight and to heavy to take off.
2nd, If your going on a two hour patrol mission would you really take eight hours of fuel? So you aircraft will be heavy and unresponsive. You would probably take enough fuel for 4 or 5 hours but not 8 (if 8 is 100%).
You see my point?
-
okay, lets start with this. Do you understand that airplanes have a weight limit? They can not carry as much ordnance/cargo if they have 100% fuel, they will be overweight and to heavy to take off.
2nd, If your going on a two hour patrol mission would you really take eight hours of fuel? So you aircraft will be heavy and unresponsive. You would probably take enough fuel for 4 or 5 hours but not 8 (if 8 is 100%).
You see my point?
You need to quit playing video games and go talk to some real life pilots.
Fact:
The weight limits are calculated with 100% fuel.
Absolute fact:
SOP is/was to take 100% fuel because the pilot never knowingly took a chance on running out of fuel in a fight or trying to get back to base.
You can continue to try using cartoonville logic or you can go educate yourself.
-
You need to quit playing video games and go talk to some real life pilots.
I am a Pilot.
Fact:
The weight limits are calculated with 100% fuel.
Wrong, weight limits are calculated with the amount of weight your airframe can carry. Fuel is "cargo" witch has weight that needs to be calculated.
Absolute fact:
SOP is/was to take 100% fuel because the pilot never knowingly took a chance on running out of fuel in a fight or trying to get back to base.
That depends on the aircraft.
-
I am a Pilot.
Obviously not a combat pilot or you would know this stuff better than I do.
Wrong, weight limits are calculated with the amount of weight your airframe can carry. Fuel is "cargo" witch has weight that needs to be calculated.
Read again, "empty weight" is zero fuel..."maximum take off weight" is calculated with full fuel.
Example, P-51D:
Specifications (P-51D):
Engine: One 1,695-hp Packard Merlin V-1650-7 piston V-12 engine
Weight: Empty 7,125 lbs., Max Takeoff 12,100 lbs.
Wing Span: 37ft. 0.5in.
Length: 32ft. 9.5in.
Height: 13ft. 8in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 437 mph
Ceiling: 41,900 ft.
Range: 1300 miles
Armament: Six 12.7-mm (0.5 inch) wing-mounted machine guns, plus up to two 1,000-lb bombs or six 127-mm (5 inch) rockets.
Example 2 - B17G:
Specifications (B-17G):
Engines: Four 1,200-hp Wright R-1820-97 Cyclone turbocharged radial piston engines
Weight: Empty 36,135 lbs., Max Takeoff 65,500 lbs.
Wing Span: 103ft. 9in.
Length: 74ft. 4in.
Height: 19ft. 1in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed at 25,000 ft: 287 mph
Cruising Speed: 182 mph
Ceiling: 35,800 ft.
Range: 2,000 miles with 6,000 lb. bomb load
Armament:
13 12.7-mm (0.5-inch) machine guns
Up to 17,600 pounds of bombs
If you honestly believe the max take off weight is exceeded with full fuel tanks plus maximum ordnance packages, you need to give up your pilots license.
That depends on the aircraft.
We are talking about combat aircraft so it applies to all combat aircraft on a combat mission and all observer/scout aircraft flying a combat mission.
-
I think DT's should be not allowed until %100 fuel is taken. There was a reason combat aircraft in WWII did NOT take off without %100 fuel. Taking up %25 or %50 fuel and a DT is obviously an arcade player's tactic.
From there, what HTC does with the amount of fuel allowed is immaterial, imo.
-
Obviously not a combat pilot or you would know this stuff better than I do.
Read again, "empty weight" is zero fuel..."maximum take off weight" is calculated with full fuel.
Wrong. Empty Weight is the aircraft without pilot, cargo, ord, and fuel. Maximum Take Off Weight is the the maximum wight the airframe can (safely) carry.
If you honestly believe the max take off weight is exceeded with full fuel tanks plus maximum ordnance packages, you need to give up your pilots license.
Or you need to take some physics classes. Not all aircraft can carry 100% + max ord.
We are talking about combat aircraft so it applies to all combat aircraft on a combat mission and all observer/scout aircraft flying a combat mission.
Each combat aircraft is different.
I really do not see what your p-51 and B-17 examples prove. It only shows the numbers for each aircraft.
-
I only carry 50% fuel and dts in my spit. I make that last for about 1hr or drop dts and got 20 min of full throttle.
Semp
-
The 1/4 system is ok, but I would like to see the total number of minutes of flying time under full combat power while in the hanger for each fuel load.
-
I know i have read that certain configurations of ordnance would limit the amount of fuel the plane could carry. Though it may have been limited to certain planes , regardless it is still is a factor that is relevant to this game.
-
Wrong. Empty Weight is the aircraft without pilot, cargo, ord, and fuel. Maximum Take Off Weight is the the maximum wight the airframe can (safely) carry.
At least you're reading now. Now I'll dummy it down for you.
P51D empty weight:
7,125lbs
Internal fuel capacity:
1845 U.S. gallons
1 gallon of gas weighs:
5.93 to 6.42 lbs - say 6 for an even number
184 gallons of gas x 6 lbs per gallon = 1104 lbs of gas
Machine gun ammunition:
1880 rounds of .50 caliber weighs ~665 lbs
1 pilot (average weight) ~170 lbs + 184 gals gas 1104 lbs + 1880 rounds of .50 cal 665 lbs + 2000 lbs of ordnance + 7,125 empty plane weight = ~11,064 lbs total take off weight.
Maximum take off weight:
12,100 lbs
Looks like there is room to spare on take off.
Or you need to take some physics classes. Not all aircraft can carry 100% + max ord.
Yeah, you're right. They were actually under engineered and the aircraft specifications only allowed for small amounts of fuel if maximum ordnance was carried.
(http://mywarhistory.com/uploads/myWarPictures/400-Chance_Vought_F4U_Corsair_and_-_are_line.jpg)
Maybe someone should have told those guys they couldn't take off from a carrier with those bombs and drop tanks.
Real genius there.
-
This:
P51D empty weight:
7,125lbs
Internal fuel capacity:
1845 U.S. gallons
1 gallon of gas weighs:
5.93 to 6.42 lbs - say 6 for an even number
184 gallons of gas x 6 lbs per gallon = 1104 lbs of gas
Machine gun ammunition:
1880 rounds of .50 caliber weighs ~665 lbs
1 pilot (average weight) ~170 lbs + 184 gals gas 1104 lbs + 1880 rounds of .50 cal 665 lbs + 2000 lbs of ordnance + 7,125 empty plane weight = ~11,064 lbs total take off weight.
Maximum take off weight:
12,100 lbs
and This:
Specifications (P-51D):
Engine: One 1,695-hp Packard Merlin V-1650-7 piston V-12 engine
Weight: Empty 7,125 lbs., Max Takeoff 12,100 lbs.
Wing Span: 37ft. 0.5in.
Length: 32ft. 9.5in.
Height: 13ft. 8in.
Performance:
Maximum Speed: 437 mph
Ceiling: 41,900 ft.
Range: 1300 miles
Armament: Six 12.7-mm (0.5 inch) wing-mounted machine guns, plus up to two 1,000-lb bombs or six 127-mm (5 inch) rockets.
Is not the same info, so don't BS.
Looks like there is room to spare on take off.
I never said there is no room in P-51's case.
Yeah, you're right. They were actually under engineered and the aircraft specifications only allowed for small amounts of fuel if maximum ordnance was carried.
(http://mywarhistory.com/uploads/myWarPictures/400-Chance_Vought_F4U_Corsair_and_-_are_line.jpg)
Maybe someone should have told those guys they couldn't take off from a carrier with those bombs and drop tanks.
Real genius there.
There is a reason in that picture you posted that the ground crew is putting only that much ord on the plane, and not twice or three times the amount.
-
I'll make you an example with C172R (as I believe this is the most basic way I can explain it). C172 has a empty weight of 1639lbs and a max take off weight is 2457lbs, that means your useful load is 818lbs. Now it can carry 56 gallons of fuel and has room for 4 people + cargo. Each gallon of 100LL weighs 6lb, 56x6=336. Lets take an average person weight of 170lb, 170x4=680. 680+336=1016, so 100% fuel + 4 people (it has 4 seats) weighs 1016lbs. So again the empty weight is 1639lbs, 1639+1016=2655lbs. Therefore we have an aircraft that can fit 2655lbs (of fuel and people) when the max take off weight is 2457lbs, your 198lb overweight. Keep in mind we did not add any cargo, and there is still room for it.
So my point is that even if you have room for fuel, people, cargo, or ord does not mean your aircraft can lift it. Gyrene, can you tell me if you understand or do not understand, and agree or disagree with my last sentence?
BTW I do not fly this aircraft so my number may be a little off, but if you really want I have the POH and can confirm them.
-
You're actually trying to compare the actual capacity of a civilian passenger plane against a combat aircraft?
You better look at that photo again, the Corsair is getting 6 500lbs bombs plus the drop tanks. There are already 3 on the left wing and the crew is putting more on the right wing. That's 3,000 lbs of bombs plus the drop tanks. Now you're going to try and tell me that plane isn't going to take off from a short carrier deck with 100% fuel?
LMAO, Elvis has left the building...
-
You're actually trying to compare the actual capacity of a civilian passenger plane against a combat aircraft?
Same world, same physics.
You better look at that photo again, the Corsair is getting 6 500lbs bombs plus the drop tanks. There are already 3 on the left wing and the crew is putting more on the right wing. That's 3,000 lbs of bombs plus the drop tanks. Now you're going to try and tell me that plane isn't going to take off from a short carrier deck with 100% fuel?
What I see on that photo is 3 250lbs (maybe 500lb, I don't believe you can tell form this angle) on each wing, and one drop tank. I don't know where you got the 6 500lb and I don't know about you but I can't see the internal fuel tanks to know that they are 100% full, + I don't see it taking off.
Also as far as I can see this is at least an F4U-4, maybe even F4U-5. So I don't see what your trying to prove with this picture at all.
-
I think DT's should be not allowed until %100 fuel is taken. There was a reason combat aircraft in WWII did NOT take off without %100 fuel. Taking up %25 or %50 fuel and a DT is obviously an arcade player's tactic.
From there, what HTC does with the amount of fuel allowed is immaterial, imo.
If fidelity to real-life is the goal of AH, then I concur.
Personally though, I hope the goal is good game play.
-
Yeah let's all take 100% fuel with dts and fly for 2-6 hours to find a fight somewhere. After all this is how it happened in WW2.
Semp
-
(http://mywarhistory.com/uploads/myWarPictures/400-Chance_Vought_F4U_Corsair_and_-_are_line.jpg)
Is that a Bearcat in front of that Corsair?
-
I think DT's should be not allowed until %100 fuel is taken. There was a reason combat aircraft in WWII did NOT take off without %100 fuel.
combat aircraft didn't always take off with full fuel loads. Fuel loads was often dictated by the mission parameters. For example, the bombers that took part in Operation Cobra were able to carry a lighter fuel load so they could carry maximum bomb payloads in support of the break out of Normandy.
ack-ack
-
Is that a Bearcat in front of that Corsair?
AD-1 Skyrader.
No Bearcats saw combat, remember?
combat aircraft didn't always take off with full fuel loads. Fuel loads was often dictated by the mission parameters. For example, the bombers that took part in Operation Cobra were able to carry a lighter fuel load so they could carry maximum bomb payloads in support of the break out of Normandy.
ack-ack
This is about the only instance I can recall this happening. And, they were still maxed out payload wise. The reduced fuel wasn't in order to climb faster or greater top speed. They couldn't carry more fuel.
So, in effect, max fuel again.
wrongway
-
This is about the only instance I can recall this happening. And, they were still maxed out payload wise. The reduced fuel wasn't in order to climb faster or greater top speed. They couldn't carry more fuel.
So, in effect, max fuel again.
wrongway
if they didnt have max fuel then they didnt have it. so in effect NO max fuel AGAIN.....in effect they took less fuel so they could take more ord. Not in effect they took max fuel. especially when you stated that wasnt the case
Ok so now that we established that these planes didnt always take off with 100% fuel, which even at first seem to be obvious(to say something is ALWAYS the case is foolish at best). Their would be no way that they would force planes to Lets get back to the discussion about having the amounts of fuel in addition to 1/4 intervals be available in 1/8 and or 1/3. To accommodate all the different circumstances, that we might encounter. How many times do we have to say that what happened in real life has really no bearing on what SHOULD happen in game.
-
if they didnt have max fuel then they didnt have it. so in effect NO max fuel AGAIN.....in effect they took less fuel so they could take more ord. Not in effect they took max fuel. especially when you stated that wasnt the case
Ok so now that we established that these planes didnt always take off with 100% fuel, which even at first seem to be obvious(to say something is ALWAYS the case is foolish at best). Their would be no way that they would force planes to Lets get back to the discussion about having the amounts of fuel in addition to 1/4 intervals be available in 1/8 and or 1/3. To accommodate all the different circumstances, that we might encounter. How many times do we have to say that what happened in real life has really no bearing on what SHOULD happen in game.
OK, max payload then, including fuel.
:devil
wrongway