Author Topic: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35  (Read 1498 times)

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2010, 05:17:57 AM »
ok that might work
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline uptown

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8566
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #16 on: March 06, 2010, 08:28:45 AM »
Just climb to 50K and you can save even MORE fuel!!!  :aok What this amounts to I suspect is he wants to fly noe to the scorpion farms on the other side of the map and back to milk up some points.

Does Metavoss actually think people are going to fly 4,6,or 8 hr missions? :rolleyes:

A guy named Jerry Clower once said, "some folks are educated beyond their intelligence".  Why not ask for HTC to change the fuel burn by 1.0 and be done with it? Instead of asking for changes in design, graphics and flight modeling......Enstein  :headscratch:
« Last Edit: March 06, 2010, 08:49:15 AM by uptown »
Lighten up Francis

Offline AWwrgwy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5478
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #17 on: March 06, 2010, 09:45:01 AM »
I did read it Guppy and I know if this group had these types of missions more often than they did escort then so did the other groups. The point that this was the last two months of the war means nothing. They did in fact fly them and in numbers which is something you tried to gloss over before as if it never happened or happened maybe once or twice.

I sure hope you dont write history books.


You see those Mustang profiles on the site?  I did those long time ago for the 506th guys.  You want to talk 506th I can go for a long time :)


Practical use or not the point is the tanks were available and I suspect that digging a little deeper we would find ten rocket sorties also. Whether the units were able to use the weapons effectively or not doesnt matter (I mean look at the 152 and 262) the point is they did use them. The 506th reported honestly on their use and effectiveness and Im betting you learned quite a bit from that website that you will ignore.

Karnak I can think of a lot of ways to use drop tanks effectively that you obviously have not considered.

They were available.  Point is they were used so rarely as to be inconsequential.


wrongway
71 (Eagle) Squadron
"THAT"S PAINT!!"

"If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through."
- General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay

Offline Karnak

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23047
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #18 on: March 06, 2010, 12:55:15 PM »
Karnak I can think of a lot of ways to use drop tanks effectively that you obviously have not considered.
No you can't.  You can think of gamey things that you would like to exploit.

To clarify, you have not come up with a single rational reason to spend dev time on bigger drop tanks for your precious Pony in any of the threads you have posted.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2010, 12:57:02 PM by Karnak »
Petals floating by,
      Drift through my woman's hand,
             As she remembers me-

Offline Guppy35

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 20385
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #19 on: March 06, 2010, 01:57:22 PM »
I did read it Guppy and I know if this group had these types of missions more often than they did escort then so did the other groups. The point that this was the last two months of the war means nothing. They did in fact fly them and in numbers which is something you tried to gloss over before as if it never happened or happened maybe once or twice.

I sure hope you dont write history books.

Practical use or not the point is the tanks were available and I suspect that digging a little deeper we would find ten rocket sorties also. Whether the units were able to use the weapons effectively or not doesnt matter (I mean look at the 152 and 262) the point is they did use them. The 506th reported honestly on their use and effectiveness and Im betting you learned quite a bit from that website that you will ignore.

Karnak I can think of a lot of ways to use drop tanks effectively that you obviously have not considered.


As I told you before, the decision on DTs isn't mine to make.  I don't think they are needed as they were used so little.  As for the 10 rocket sorties.  Please find them.  We already know they didn't do it with the Iwo birds, and only one group had rockets and they didn't have enough for training and effective use.  I can't find any in Korea. but you feel free to keep digging.  I didn't know we were in a I win or you win situation.  Please enlighten the rest of us with your research
Dan/CorkyJr
8th FS "Headhunters

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2010, 03:39:21 PM »
I'd like to see our P-51D rockets reduced, personally. The evidence just isn't there to support 10x loads.


how would that help release droppies? :headscratch:

Maybe the force of the shells ejecting left and right of the pylon "pinged" into the tank giving it a push off the pylon?
EDIT: Or the exhaust gasses venting below the wing helped "blow" the tank off?

But I think Bat's answer of "vibrations" is also a good one.

Offline RTHolmes

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8260
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #21 on: March 06, 2010, 04:25:49 PM »
interesting about the 10 rkt pony loadout, if it stays maybe we should have the 12 rkt option for the Typhie :devil
71 (Eagle) Squadron

What most of us want to do is simply shoot stuff and look good doing it - Chilli

Offline mensa180

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4010
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #22 on: March 06, 2010, 07:02:40 PM »
I would really like the bigger drop tanks, I've read stories of the P-38 jocks with the 5000 gallon DTs staying in the air days to weeks when at correct fuel saving altitudes (generally 30k+).
inactive
80th FS "Headhunters"
Public Relations Officer

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #23 on: March 07, 2010, 11:02:48 AM »
EDIT: Never mind, mensa was being sarcastic, my bad.

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #24 on: March 07, 2010, 01:23:35 PM »
EDIT: Never mind, mensa was being sarcastic, my bad.
LOL ya think. :D
See Rule #4

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: Wish for larger drop tanks revisited - ATTN: Guppy35
« Reply #25 on: March 07, 2010, 02:59:56 PM »
It was nothing, I was making my own sarcastic comments about not having a bathroom for "days to a week" but I realized double sarcasm just didn't fid, so I edited my post  :aok