Author Topic: 44-1 Fuel  (Read 1157 times)

Offline bustr

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12436
Re: 44-1 Fuel
« Reply #15 on: May 07, 2014, 05:42:38 PM »
I can see the problem as Bustr pointed out but the coin does have two sides.  If the 44-1 fuel is not used then neuter or perk those non American-British planes put into service after the use of 44-1 if there is any other than the 262 and 163. Kind of fair play since a major technology has been discounted.

The Tempest is perked and it's WEP boost is 10lb while the performance site shows 10.5lb and 11lb as two results of 150oct. I seem to remember the Tempest being reduced a smidge in perform ace back when the La7 was. The XIV is using 130oct which home based fighters were restricted to until the very end of the war.

And if you want an allied jet that just barely meets the games inclusion requirements in the minds of some players. Lobby for the Meteor.

Here is a question for you. Why does the gonzoville K4 vs XIV performance charts look different than the 18lb vs 1.8 ata climb chart at spitfire performance?

http://www.gonzoville.com/ahcharts/index.php
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14v109.html

This chart of British late war fighters 130oct and 150oct speeds SL to 4000ft is why we are doing fine at 130oct in the MA. Unless you simply want to become untouchable and uber to thumb your nose at everyone without having to suffer the learning curves to become skillz uber.

The Mustang MkIII is our P51D.

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/tempest/150-grade-boost-increase.jpg
bustr - POTW 1st Wing


This is like the old joke that voters are harsher to their beer brewer if he has an outage, than their politicians after raising their taxes. Death and taxes are certain but, fun and sex is only now.

Offline Butcher

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5323
Re: 44-1 Fuel
« Reply #16 on: May 07, 2014, 06:12:48 PM »
And if you want an allied jet that just barely meets the games inclusion requirements in the minds of some players. Lobby for the Meteor.

I was one who was against the meteor for a while, but honestly my judgement of "Combat" was slightly off back then, the Meteor was in squadron strength and flew combat sorties. Unlike the "Tigercat" which was enrouted to Okinawa on ships - not even in squadron service yet, or seen combat.

Anyone who believes it "barely" meets the requirements, probably just wants a reason to put it down on the list and something else up. Reminds me of Tank-Ace who would vouch for a Luftwobble plane over anything else.
JG 52

Offline Randy1

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4216
Re: 44-1 Fuel
« Reply #17 on: May 08, 2014, 06:01:44 AM »
What it gets down to is the 44-1 fuel gave the Allies a big advantage across the board and would be less than fair to the German planes in the game that use different technology for performance.

One thing I had not thought about and maybe a bigger deal breaker was the availability of the 44-1 fuel in the pacific theater.  Was the fuel widely used there?   

Offline Xavier

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 249
Re: 44-1 Fuel
« Reply #18 on: May 08, 2014, 09:25:01 AM »
Started from the bottom...still at the bottom.