Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: EagleDNY on March 21, 2011, 07:03:41 PM
-
It would be nice to know the base weight of the aircraft, and then the weight we are adding with each variation in fuel and ord. Display this on a chalkboard in the hanger maybe?
Just a thought....
$.02
-
or... you could be like me and head to the TA test the weights for each typical load out.
A Mossi w %50 fuel, large ammo load, and:
4x500 lb bombs=
20,517 lbs
2x500lb and 8x60lb rockets=
20,223 lbs
Which other plane do you want to know about???? :D
-
+1 :aok
-
or... you could be like me and head to the TA test the weights for each typical load out.
A Mossi w %50 fuel, large ammo load, and:
4x500 lb bombs=
20,517 lbs
2x500lb and 8x60lb rockets=
20,223 lbs
Which other plane do you want to know about???? :D
lets see B-17 with 100% fuel and whatever bomb loadout you want :lol
-
or... you could be like me and head to the TA test the weights for each typical load out.
A Mossi w %50 fuel, large ammo load, and:
4x500 lb bombs=
20,517 lbs
2x500lb and 8x60lb rockets=
20,223 lbs
Which other plane do you want to know about???? :D
That dont make no since...
-
the weight of a 190a8 no dt with 4 20mm vs the 30mm option both with 100% fuel. k go
-
you guys are.. what's the word... let me think about it.
while I think about it, let me mention the only two things I want to know about any airplane.
1 is the con in front of me.
2 is the con behind me.
semp
-
Wow. So how the con performs compared to yours doesnt concern you? :bhead
-
Wow. So how the con performs compared to yours doesnt concern you? :bhead
doesn't concern me...it's the person twisting the stick that makes the difference...a toon that gets flown badly goes down just as easily as any other.
-
the weight of a 190a8 no dt with 4 20mm vs the 30mm option both with 100% fuel. k go
Easy peasy!
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,197645.msg2309919.html#msg2309919)
4 guns with 169 gal = 9682 lbs
2x30 with 169 gal = 9891 lbs
Our airframe is overweight, our 4x20mm underweight, and our 2x30 loadout again overweight.
Note that thread was from January of 2007. Did it offline with E6B, just spent a few minutes, took down the numbers, did the math.
-
Wow. So how the con performs compared to yours doesnt concern you? :bhead
You load out the plane to get the job done. Whatever that job is dictates the loadout. You don't take 25% and no bombs in a Ju88 if you're going to bomb a strat. You might if you wanted to dogfight for kicks and grins as base defense.
You're not going to take bombs into a dogfight, or 3000lbs or ord on a Jug then 25% fuel.
So essentially any weight only helps YOUR frame of reference. The other guy's weight means nothing, compared to his E, alt, starting position, plane performance capabilities, etc...
Weight helps you load your own ride, has nothing to do with the other dude. You can't know what loadout he has.
-
Back when I was flying the -17 and -24 I asked a WWII veteran B-17 pilot what their average takeoff weight was. His reply was "they filled them with gas and bombs and went" -- "weight didn't matter, we were going regardless".
-
Yes, we could all head over to the training arena with a spreadsheet and figure it all out. That doesn't make it easy for a new player though does it? Having the weights displayed in the hanger would show people clearly why you don't just load up 100% fuel for every jaunt, or the effect of loading up all that junk on the floor of the hanger on your Jug. HTC has all this data available, and it is a pretty easy programming job to show 'Base Weight, Fuel Weight, Ord Weight and Total' on a clipboard for us.
I switch rides a lot - I like to try out different rides, see their strengths and weaknesses. Often, I am confronted by the "less fuel and a drop tank" or "take a bomb" choice. I just wish I had more data on what that means to each ride. I'd like to know fuel duration and wing loading as well - the way I see it, the more information I have on a ride, the more likely I am to be successful in it.
$.02
-
considering all the questions new people have when they first come in...do you seriously believe even a small percentage are going to comprehend what all that data is going to mean when they pick a plane?
-
Maybe not all - but I think that enough of us are WW2 aviation geeks in this game to warrant it.
-
Also range on MIL @ SL and/or 10/15k for chosen fuel load.
-
I would at least like a message if my combination of fuel/ords/ammo put me over the rated weight. Perhaps auto-select less fuel if I want more bombs or fewer bombs if I want more fuel.
-
Right now it really doesn't matter, every airfield has very long runways, with no wind it does matter what the loaded aircraft weight is. If in the furture , the small airfields had small runways , that limited the ability of an aircraft to carry a full load , that actually had an effect on the ability of pilot to clear the trees at the end of the runway. That might add something to the game play. Large fields having very long runways. Medium fields have shorter runways and Small fields having the shortest runways.
-
or... you could be like me and head to the TA test the weights for each typical load out.
A Mossi w %50 fuel, large ammo load, and:
4x500 lb bombs=
20,517 lbs
2x500lb and 8x60lb rockets=
20,223 lbs
Which other plane do you want to know about???? :D
Some of us have lives
-
Right now it really doesn't matter, every airfield has very long runways, with no wind it does matter what the loaded aircraft weight is. If in the furture , the small airfields had small runways , that limited the ability of an aircraft to carry a full load , that actually had an effect on the ability of pilot to clear the trees at the end of the runway. That might add something to the game play. Large fields having very long runways. Medium fields have shorter runways and Small fields having the shortest runways.
For takeoffs that is true, but we do now have the B-29 which can be easily overloaded and crashed on takeoffs at short fields. I'm usually playing with the weights so that I can be as lightly loaded as possible when I arrive at a furball, or so I don't pack so much extra fuel into a bomber that it really nerfs the climb rate for no good reason.
Just as a WW2 aviation geek, I like seeing as much info as possible - weight, wing loading, range, etc. so that I can get more of a feel for the differences in the rides. The more of that I can see in the hanger when I am fitting out the better.
-
For takeoffs that is true, but we do now have the B-29 which can be easily overloaded and crashed on takeoffs at short fields. I'm usually playing with the weights so that I can be as lightly loaded as possible when I arrive at a furball, or so I don't pack so much extra fuel into a bomber that it really nerfs the climb rate for no good reason.
Just as a WW2 aviation geek, I like seeing as much info as possible - weight, wing loading, range, etc. so that I can get more of a feel for the differences in the rides. The more of that I can see in the hanger when I am fitting out the better.
It would be nice if they corrected the gaming model to include Density Altitude. Density Altitude has the greatest effect on aircraft performance and it's not modeled into the game, except for Standard Density Altitude. Every day in AH is a Standard day density altitude wise. My Dad flew P47's and later P51's out of England and France and told me that there were some days in the summer of 43 that because of density altitude they couldn't take on full loads of ords or fuel and get out of the little fields that they originally used. They had to dead head to larger fields with paved runways.