Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Naudet on August 27, 2002, 02:46:57 AM
-
1st thing, is the fuel tank sequence in the AH FW190 still FWD-AFT (or AUX-FWD-AFT in A8), if yes it is wrong.
I got to read a report on the fuel system of the FW190, and the system worked in the following order:
DROP-AFT-FWD
the fuelpump would only be able to use the FWD tank if the aft was totaly dry.
This also matches the behavour of most FW190 AH jockey that manually switch to AFT 1st and than go back to FWD when the AFT is down to 25%.
So HTC should change the FW190 fuel tank sequence to its historical correct order.
-
I second that.
-
punt
-
I've always heard and flown...ext,aft,fwd on 190's
-
i use aft, ext, fwd..so il aggree
still suck in it, but suck less if i empty aft first :D
-
Yep plz plz plz HTC change this, would be really great.
-
when taking off in my target-drone-dora, i switch to aft tank then cruise around. i just hate it when i'm in a furball and the engine suddenly dies, oops forgot to switch it back to forward.
i hope this wouldnt be too much of a problem for HT to modify fuel tank order of usage, in the next patch coming out in 2 weeks ya'll think?:)
-
Punt.
-
Are you saying the Fw-190 had automatic fuel tank switching? Or just that the automatic switching in AH is different from RL pilot practices in the 190?
A similar situation exists with the F4U-1, where the main tank is used before the wing tanks. I believe in RL the wing tanks were used first. The answer is to not use the AH automatic tank switching.
-
He said Fw 190's fuel pump wouldn't work in the order it does in AH that it simply wasn't possible. AFT _had_ to be used first before the fuel in FWD could be used.
// fats
-
Sucks to always have to work harder for lesser results than almost every other fighter pilot out there.
-
Sucks to always have to work harder for lesser results than almost every other fighter pilot out there.
Are you kidding? How freaking hard is shft F?
I prefer it the way it is. I like more to do.
F.
-
:cool: can't we get a shortcut for shift-f? its alot to type.
-
Auto-tank sequence in AH should be historical correct, and in the FW190 the real order also optimizes the CG.
Or HTC should just give us the oportunity to "program" our own fuel tank sequence, this would also be fine.
@ra: yes the FW190 had some kind of "autoswitching". I try to describe it here.
Internaly the FW190 had FWD and AFT tank (in later versions an internal AUX tank was optional, but i will not include it here) and externaly one DROP tank.
The fuel system would use up the following way.
DROP-AFT-FWD
and the system worked the following way:
The mainfuelpump sucks the fuel through two fuellines (one from each tank).
With a second fuelpump the fuel from the DROP tank is pump into the aft tank, so if fuel is used from the AFT tank it will be immediatly supplemented as long as there is fuel left in the DROP tank.
And also the mainfuelpump pumps more fuel than the engine can use up, the excess fuel is redirected to an unidirectional restrictor valve (hope that is the correct term) that closes the fuel line to the FWD tank as long as there is still fuel coming from the AFT tank.
This ensures that the FWD is not used before the AFT tank is empty.
This way, the order DROP-AFT-FWD is ensured.
Also you can see that the fuel system will not lead to any fuel shortness through a shot through tank.
If DROP is hit, it will simply not give any more fuel to AFT and AFT will be used up.
If AFT is hit, it will be used as long as there is fuel left in it, than the system switches to FWD.
If FWD is it, it will never be used, but AFT will also not lose any fuel, as there is not direct connection between FWD and AFT.
-
Naudet, are you related to RAM?
-
Great post thx Naudet
-
Naudet, in that case you are right, it's no big deal but the autoswitch should be changed to use the aft tank first.
"Sucks to always have to work harder for lesser results than almost every other fighter pilot out there."
Moot, If you are getting lesser results in a 190 maybe you should switch to the Niki. The 190 consistently gets one of the highest K/D's of all the non-perked planes.
ra
-
absolutely agree. I fly EXT-AUX(190a8)-AFT-FWD on all 190s and its annoying having to do it manually.
Escpecially when the original WW2 order was EXT-AFT-FWD.
Why is it this way around?
-
Originally posted by moot
Sucks to always have to work harder for lesser results than almost every other fighter pilot out there.
\
Fly something else, whiner.
-
"optimizes the CG"
Mularkey
Aft CG gives more maneuverability and less trim drag.
Anyways the two tanks are right next to each other and they are both directly over the wing. There is not going to be a big change in static margin by draining one tank or the other first.
Dollars to donuts you geniuses can not quantitatively demonstrate any difference in aircraft behavior with FWD or AFT tank draining first.
Yes the sim plane should drain in the same order as the real plane, but get a grip and quit yer whinin.
-
Tell us what you really think Funky ;)
-
OK maybe I had a little too much caffeine. I apologize to anybody I offended. Time to get back to work. :)
-
hey funked , in your explication it looks like plane loadet with 1 big funkedup wil fly same like lodet with 5x funkedup and whole family ? :D
nothing wrong with kofein , you just need more sex !:D
-
funked, stick to coffee.
furious, it's pretty hard, i have really fat fingers, but that's not the point; the said other planes always outturn you given equal pilots in both, and some of them without having to bother with cg managment & co. I will not engage a p47 or p51 or spit9 etc that looks like a proper pilot in it unless I have at least fwd=2aft.
-
just read your second post.
If you are already in plugged-ears mode, this is useless. otherwise I will tell you the 190 stall is less sharp with aft drained. 152 is then much closer to what you'd expect a following of the 190 series to be, even more so without the famous wing tanks.[grammar edit]
-
same thing as funked,
I'm not going to fly the planes I don't like flying; the point is said planes have the game setup in easier optimisation than another that either has fuel tanks in an order that makes tight furballing (which said planes almost always have to resort to once past first stage of bnz VS tnb encounter) hairy (stall twitchier than with said optimised CG by quite a bit) or dangerous (wing tanks braking wings left and right) or both.
Then someone shows evidence for it not being so in RL, of course I revendicate it changed.
If I wanted to fly N1K and have it easy I would, but that's not what this is about.
[edit
Take up a 100 fuel 190, drain the aft on one flight (you can use offline fuel mult to accelerate this; or be patient like others have to), and drain the fwd on the other. say, then, that there is no quantifiable difference in (if not more than just) stall behavior.
]
-
Hmm... Considering these Conventional Gear aircraft have an AFT CG from the start burning the FWD would certainly shift the CG AFT of the AFT limits. It will give it much more speed and seem more maneuverable because it reduces the wingloading and in theory would accel/ have a faster top speed but it will be much less stable and much more stall/spin prone than with a FWD CG especially when you're setting up those tough deflection shots.
Funked, even if they would seem side by side in a diagram,although I'm not quite familiar with the placing It would make sense that the further away from the Datum , giving more weight to the back of the aircraft would make the CG indeed change, taking into account how rapidly we burn the fuel in the MA the weight shift would be noticeable.
I think it's a small thing to ask for since, it has been asked for other aircraft in AH and those have been corrected.
Moot yes the famous wing tanks in the Ta152 that shouldn't be filled with fuel for regular flights. Ever since I read the intended purpose for the Wing tanks on the H-1 was for long range flights
which would be burnt first leaving those unprotected tanks dry then continue the sequence like it was in the other 190s, I posted a while back with suggested fuel loading for 25% to 100%
redistributing the fuel from the secondary wing tanks to the primary FWD and AFT tanks instead leaving those tanks full for when you indeed intend to go on a long range flight similar to the P51's Aux in AH is loaded.
-
What Glasses said ^^
From all that I have read, it just seems like the wing tanks on the 152 were just bascially rubber bags kinda. They had no protection what so ever, and were only used for long range flights. Most sorties in AH wound't be considered "long range"
About the 190 fuel sequence...it's a small and easy fix, and it's only historically correct, so I would like to see it :p
-
What Glasses said ^^
From what I have read, It just seems like the wing tanks were unprotected bags kinda (rubber I think), that were only used for long range flights. Most AH sorites arent considered "long range".
About the 190 fuel order...I would like to see it fixed...only becasue it's historically correct
-
A little addition about fuel tank placing in the FW190.
both tanks are next to each other, but they are not located centered on the CG.
They are placed a little bit further aft.
The FWD tank sits pretty much on the centerline of the wings.
The AFT tank moves out aft over the rear wing edge and the internal aux tank is place again further back.
So if the FWD tank is used 1st the CG will actually move towards the rear wing edge, which is in a plane with a nasty high speed stall not the best thing to do i guess.
Also in level flight the FW190 had a nose down attitude (about 5°), so why move the CG further aft in a plane that already needs to fly nose down to stay in level flight and not to start to climb.
All ACM that need a "forward CG" such as hammerhead or wingover are much much easier to fly if AFT is drained 1st.
-
punt
-
up
-
Agree with that fix (this matter has been discused since first release).
Also, I would like to take off with a 190A8 with NO AUX TANK, FWD 100% and AFT 50% (AFT is bigger than FWD).