Rearm pad at a vbase

[Midway]

Hey guys, Midway has a point.

We should all know that a crack pilot can always find a place to refuel.  Remember when Clint Eastwood stole the Firefox Hypersonic Stealth Fighter from the Soviets?  He had no trouble refueling over the polar ice cap.
(Image removed from quote.)

      

[icepac]

I think you should blow up if you land gear down over 150mph 50% of the time with the percentage being lowered as your touch down speed decreases to where you would die only 10% of the time for a full stall landing.

[Midway]

I think you should blow up if you land gear down over 150mph 50% of the time with the percentage being lowered as your touch down speed decreases to where you would die only 10% of the time for a full stall landing.

  Hijack!!!  That's another wish!

Now... about that rearm pad at the vbase....   

[Rob52240]

I think you should blow up if you land gear down over 150mph 50% of the time with the percentage being lowered as your touch down speed decreases to where you would die only 10% of the time for a full stall landing.

Clint Eastwood would never allow this thread to be hijacked with mumbo jumbo about landing speeds.
A crack pilot would find some ice to land on to reduce friction on the tires.

[Karnak]

  An afront to the highly efficient military planning machine!

How about compromise?  VH ream pad takes 60 seconds instead of 30. 

Nope, six hours or you won't get my support.

[matt]

+1

[Vudu15]

Yes to vbase rearms but only for fighters over 15 eny and only guns and fuel.

[USAF2010]

Ice generates a lot of heat when friction is applied though....aka blowin' yo tias lol

[EagleDNY]

High performance fighters cannot use the fuel that vehicles use.

The late war allied hi-altitude monsters using 150 octane might not be using fuel that vehicles use, but there are plenty of other aircraft using pretty ordinary gasoline.   German B4 is 87 octane, and you can find plenty of pictures out there of them refueling 109s from drums or performing extensive maintenance (engine pulls, etc) on open fields in Russia.  You can find late war pictures of 190Ds operating from roads, and parked under trees getting refueled. 
http://thirdreichcolorpictures.blogspot.com/2010/01/messerschmitt-bf-109.html has some lovely pictures of 109s being refueled in the desert from a pile of fuel drums. 

The Soviets were probably the masters of operating in primitive airfields early on - using frozen lakes, packed snow, etc. to create airstrips - and successfully refueled and rearmed under conditions vastly more difficult than any we are discussing here.  The USMC did the same thing in the Pacific - operating on strips that were literally bulldozed out of jungle and then flying in fuel, ammo, and parts for the fighters in goons. 

The real question for me is not whether we should have a rearm pad at a v-base, but whether we should allow resupply in the field and how it should work.  Frankly, I think that vehicles getting rearmed and repaired instantly in the field by a jeep with supplies is way too gamey - if the aircraft have to wait 30 seconds for re-arm at a pad, the vehicles ought to have to do the same thing (wait 30 seconds for repairs and ammo) in the field.  If vehicle supplies work for tanks, they ought to work the same way for planes. 

[Midway]

The late war allied hi-altitude monsters using 150 octane might not be using fuel that vehicles use, but there are plenty of other aircraft using pretty ordinary gasoline.   German B4 is 87 octane, and you can find plenty of pictures out there of them refueling 109s from drums or performing extensive maintenance (engine pulls, etc) on open fields in Russia.  You can find late war pictures of 190Ds operating from roads, and parked under trees getting refueled. 
http://thirdreichcolorpictures.blogspot.com/2010/01/messerschmitt-bf-109.html has some lovely pictures of 109s being refueled in the desert from a pile of fuel drums. 

The Soviets were probably the masters of operating in primitive airfields early on - using frozen lakes, packed snow, etc. to create airstrips - and successfully refueled and rearmed under conditions vastly more difficult than any we are discussing here.  The USMC did the same thing in the Pacific - operating on strips that were literally bulldozed out of jungle and then flying in fuel, ammo, and parts for the fighters in goons. 

The real question for me is not whether we should have a rearm pad at a v-base, but whether we should allow resupply in the field and how it should work.  Frankly, I think that vehicles getting rearmed and repaired instantly in the field by a jeep with supplies is way too gamey - if the aircraft have to wait 30 seconds for re-arm at a pad, the vehicles ought to have to do the same thing (wait 30 seconds for repairs and ammo) in the field.  If vehicle supplies work for tanks, they ought to work the same way for planes. 

 

[Karnak]

Stuff

RAF fighters last use 87 octane in the Battle of France.  By the Battle of Britain, Fighter Command had switched over to 100 octane.  150 octane shows up in 1944, and not only for your high altitude monsters, Mosquito Mk VIs, Mustang Mk IVs, Spitfire LF.Mk IXs, Spitfire Mk XIVs and Tempest Mk Vs were all fueled with 150 octane to go after V-1s, which flew at about 2,000ft.

The fact is that a Spitfire, P-51, P-47, Typhoon, P-38 or Mosquito will not run very well, if at all, on the fuel that was put into jeeps.

[EagleDNY]

RAF fighters last use 87 octane in the Battle of France.  By the Battle of Britain, Fighter Command had switched over to 100 octane.  150 octane shows up in 1944, and not only for your high altitude monsters, Mosquito Mk VIs, Mustang Mk IVs, Spitfire LF.Mk IXs, Spitfire Mk XIVs and Tempest Mk Vs were all fueled with 150 octane to go after V-1s, which flew at about 2,000ft.

The fact is that a Spitfire, P-51, P-47, Typhoon, P-38 or Mosquito will not run very well, if at all, on the fuel that was put into jeeps.

Maybe not, but that never stopped the Luftwaffe from running on 87 octane.  I doubt the USMC's Wildcats or Corsairs used less than premium gas either, but they certainly managed to get it into the jungle to get them refueled when needed.

If someone wants to run vehicle supplies out to an empty field to resupply aircraft, I don't see where it harms this game. 

[talos]

RAF fighters last use 87 octane in the Battle of France.  By the Battle of Britain, Fighter Command had switched over to 100 octane.  150 octane shows up in 1944, and not only for your high altitude monsters, Mosquito Mk VIs, Mustang Mk IVs, Spitfire LF.Mk IXs, Spitfire Mk XIVs and Tempest Mk Vs were all fueled with 150 octane to go after V-1s, which flew at about 2,000ft.

The fact is that a Spitfire, P-51, P-47, Typhoon, P-38 or Mosquito will not run very well, if at all, on the fuel that was put into jeeps.

so make it plane specific

and i think most of those planes did not fly with 150 octane all the time

[Tank-Ace]

I say +1, but only because of the storch. However, I think it should only REARM your fighter (its not a re-fuel pad), and only the guns on your aircraft that share a caliber with one of the GV's.

Basicly the only planes we couldn't rearm would be ones that carry hispanos, russian 20mm, russian 23 or 37mm, russian 12.7mm, 30mm,  or specialty weapons such as the 57mm, or 50mm BK.

[PFactorDave]

Hey guys, Midway has a point.

We should all know that a crack pilot can always find a place to refuel.  Remember when Clint Eastwood stole the Firefox Hypersonic Stealth Fighter from the Soviets?  He had no trouble refueling over the polar ice cap.
(Image removed from quote.)

I want to know how the helicopter got to the polar ice cap in that picture...