Why fuel burn is back to 2 ?

[straffo]

Originally posted by Pyro
That's not as big of a factor now that fuel burn rate changes with altitude.  Once you get up to high altitude, you're burning a lot less fuel.  With a 2X burn rate, I can climb at mil power in a 109G6 up to 30K and have 20 minutes of fuel remaining at mil power.  If I switch to cruise, I have a lot more and that's not even considering what adding a droptank would do.

People will initially be surprised how quickly fuel is burned in AH2, but if they look, they will find a secondary surprise in how well they can conserve it.

I can't disagree with that

My concern is more in some planes you don't have the option to go to 30k , the slow climbing Typhoon is a perfect example of this (add to this the fact the typhoon is really not an high alt fighter).

For example a p51 with 75% can have the option to use full power to got to cruise alt using perhaps 25% fuel.
Next he will have plenty of fuel left to patrol.

A typhoon cannot


Bozon you're right , but if you look at my example with the p51 you will notice a tactical advantage for it compare to my beloved typhoon.
IRL one of the advantage the typhoon had was is fast cruise speed , this advantage don't exist.


Plus I'm not sure if it has an influence on trimming and so stability intuitively I would say yes,but I'm far to be a real aeronautical ingeneer so I' not sure.

Mathman even if your reason look plausible I won't buy it

[Tilt]

My preference is for a FBR of 1.0

Then folk can fill up and have long flights but suffer the penalty of heavier AC or folk can put less in the tank and conserve fuel. using the rpm and manifold wisely.

FB's of 2 really penalise short legged (lower alt) rides..........particularly those that now have the correct fuel model in AH2 where they had erroniously longer legs in AH1.


The essence is the same approach to combat trim and manual trimming............you get a benefit if you use the feature (lighter combat weight) but no percieved penalty if you don't.

[Ack-Ack]

Originally posted by 214thCavalier
Full throttle all the time is not the only way to fly.

Really?  Works great for me.



ack-ack

[frank3]

I usually have fuelburn 1.5 in my (h2h) room. It works great!

Normally people don't fly very long during 1 flight (about 10 min.) Having fuelburn 1, people only have to take 25%
Then why would we need drop tanks?

Setting abit higher fuelburn will increase the advantage of long range fighters like P-51, P-47 etc and decrease advantage of the spits/other n00b planes' range.

[Replicant]

Well there must be a better compromise.  As it stands you only ever use 75% fuel in a P51D and it still goes on forever.  Whereas in a Typhoon you need 100% and it drinks fuel like it's going out of fashion.  I often only bother climbing to less that 10k because it's a waste of time climbing higher, if heavy, because you don't have any loiter time.

I definitely would not like to see fuel consumed at a faster rate than AH1.

[Eagler]

engine overheat shoulda be modeled in. this wouldn't be an issue then.

can we trade a bloody cockpit pilot wound for an engine temp control?

[GScholz]

Originally posted by Pyro
That's not as big of a factor now that fuel burn rate changes with altitude.  Once you get up to high altitude, you're burning a lot less fuel.  With a 2X burn rate, I can climb at mil power in a 109G6 up to 30K and have 20 minutes of fuel remaining at mil power.  If I switch to cruise, I have a lot more and that's not even considering what adding a droptank would do.

People will initially be surprised how quickly fuel is burned in AH2, but if they look, they will find a secondary surprise in how well they can conserve it.

Thanks for the input Pyro.

[vorticon]

Originally posted by GScholz
Thanks for the input Pyro.

i beleive that was output...what we the end users do is input

[Mathman]

Originally posted by vorticon
i beleive that was output...what we the end users do is input

Wow, someone who likes to argue semantics.  Isn't Pyro putting his reasons for the multiplier into the discussion?  Isn't that input?

[Pyro]

The larger fuel burn rate is not just there to give a purpose to managing your engine and fuel.  Range and endurance are crucial characteristics of these planes.  We want that to be a factor in the game but we don't want people to have to fly for an hour or more just to get into a fight.

[fluffy]

It's possible to adapt to any fuel burn rate. The most important thing to remember is that it affects everybody in the arena. In AH2 right now I usually set my fuel to a comfortable fighting weight - say 50%, and then add a drop tank which I use until I approach a danger zone. I also use the throttle and rpm adjustments to 'cruise' long distances once I'm at altitude. Once I've dropped my tank(s) I make sure I leave (if I can) for the trip home with enough gas left to ge there. It is amazing how far you can stretch those last few pounds of fuel with a bit of alt, low rpm and patience.

[SlapShot]

Originally posted by Mathman
Wow, someone who likes to argue semantics.  Isn't Pyro putting his reasons for the multiplier into the discussion?  Isn't that input?

Vort never really has anything constructive to say.

He likes to pop into threads and dump some cute witty little **** (in his mind) and then leave.

[vorticon]

Originally posted by Mathman
Wow, someone who likes to argue semantics.  Isn't Pyro putting his reasons for the multiplier into the discussion?  Isn't that input?

hes putting his reasons into a discussion about what his reasons are...someone asked a question (input) he answered (output)

Vort never really has anything constructive to say.

of course not...i find that when i do try to say something constructive i end up being gangbanged by a bunch of HO dweebs in mosquitos to put it loosely...

[frank3]

Vort you never fly

[vorticon]

Originally posted by frank3
Vort you never fly

correction...i never fly with you