Intermediate amouts of fuel

[smoe]

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.

[milesobrian]

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.

[gyrene81]

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.


Maybe someone should have told those guys they couldn't take off from a carrier with those bombs and drop tanks.


Real genius there.

[MachFly]

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.

(Image removed from quote.)
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.

[MachFly]

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.

[gyrene81]

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...

[MachFly]

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.

[Stalwart]

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.

[guncrasher]

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

[caldera]

(Image removed from quote.)

Is that a Bearcat in front of that Corsair?

[Ack-Ack]

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

[AWwrgwy]

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

[milesobrian]

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. 

[AWwrgwy]

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.

 


wrongway