Author Topic: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck  (Read 3551 times)

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #30 on: July 27, 2013, 04:15:34 PM »
I have serious doubts about flaps in real life vs what AH models. I tend to agree with your comment there.

That said....


TAKE LESS FUEL!

anything over 10,000 lbs you cannot take 100% fuel or you're overloaded. For perspective, it took just over an hour to get to altitude at REDUCED throttle in the real plane, when following the real maximum weight limits. Requiring 75 minutes at FULL power is absurd. In real life you'd melt the engines in 30 minutes at that power setting. You're burning more fuel and wasting way more time, when you'd just climb to alt faster and get the job done.

Once your weight goes past a certain point it takes you longer to get anything done, requiring more fuel, burning more just to move all that extra weight... Just try it lighter. Honestly. You may love it. You'll climb better, level faster, get on target, and you can even level out and cruise if you want. Then when you drop you can nose down to descend while saving gas while RTB.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23876
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #31 on: July 27, 2013, 05:31:34 PM »
This thread needs more facts, so I'm going to publish a number of updated climb profiles for the B-29 early next week, monday or tuesday. They should come in handy for mission planning as well.

Stay tuned  :airplane:
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23876
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #32 on: July 28, 2013, 05:15:06 AM »
Once your weight goes past a certain point it takes you longer to get anything done, requiring more fuel, burning more just to move all that extra weight..


Uh, no.

Even though you get somewhat diminishing returns, you will always get more flight time at altitude by taking more fuel. At no point it will take you that much more flight time to reach 30k than the additional fuel did give you. It's another question if it's really necessary to load yourself up that much, but it works.

For example
- 75% fuel and 40x500 bombs -  ~55 minutes to 25k and ~60 minutes to 30k
-100% fuel and 40x500 bombs - ~43 minutes to 25k and ~75 minutes to 30k

i.e. you take 15 minutes longer to reach 30k for about 42 minutes longer endurance, resulting in a net gain of 27 minutes of flight time at 30k

And there are - rarely though - situation in which you need all that fuel: When you are attacking retreated strats on a large map. Been there done that. Mostly with lesser bomb loadouts, but I have taken the ultra heavy 40x500+100% setup when I figured I would be the only raider on those strats for hours.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2013, 06:28:14 AM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23876
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #33 on: July 30, 2013, 11:44:00 AM »
As promised:

Climb Profiles for the B-29 in various loadout states



First an overview of the bomb/fuel combinations:



The three bolded loadouts are the light/medium/heavy variants I'm now going to present in the form climb profiles. All tests had been conducted at fuel burn 2.0 (MA standard), no wind, full WEP at takeoff until it runs out.








Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline flatiron1

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1682
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #34 on: July 30, 2013, 04:25:00 PM »
have you tried auto takeoff?

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #35 on: July 30, 2013, 04:48:32 PM »
So, for the loadout in question (40x 500lbs, 20,000 lbs total) taking an overload of fuel nearly doubles the time to climb to 25k (a reasonable, average alt). You were right that my theory of diminishing returns wasn't accurate, but the extra time duration doesn't help if it takes you almost an hour (~55min) to get to 25k, when going to 50% takes 35 minutes for the same alt.

I assume that 2.8h means 2.8 hours at full throttle... It seems a bit misleading if you have to spend 1 of those hours climbing laboriously up to alt (or more than an hour if you go up to 30K, which most B29s are tempted to do). Meanwhile the guy at 50% has already leveled out, and at speed is covering a new full sector in less than 5 minutes. At 300mph you cross a 25mi sector in 5 minutes, and he's going much faster than that at 355mph off-wep. He can climb to 25k, level out, and then cross 5 sectors at full speed in the time it takes the full load to even level out. Meanwhile he still has 30-40 minutes left at the 1 hour mark, in which he can then cross bare minimum 8 more sectors. That's all at full throttle. Lowering the settings even a tad will extend this noticably and gentle descent while rtb increases speed while decreasing fuel use, extending range much more as well.

Even if you absolutely wanted to loiter around after your bombs were gone, 75% would be the max you should ever take with those 40x 500lb loads.

This enlightening data reinforces my opinion that the historic weight limits are also the best limits for use with our game's B-29.

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23876
      • Last.FM Profile
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #36 on: July 30, 2013, 05:17:35 PM »
So, for the loadout in question (40x 500lbs, 20,000 lbs total) taking an overload of fuel nearly doubles the time to climb to 25k (a reasonable, average alt). You were right that my theory of diminishing returns wasn't accurate, but the extra time duration doesn't help if it takes you almost an hour (~55min) to get to 25k, when going to 50% takes 35 minutes for the same alt.

(...)

Even if you absolutely wanted to loiter around after your bombs were gone, 75% would be the max you should ever take with those 40x 500lb loads.


Of course % is much lighter and thus faster at alt no doubt. And I'm surely not advocating taking max fuel and I'm not even advocating max bombload all the time  (depending on target the other loadouts can be more effective). In fact, 40x500 is a rare choice for me only used in special cases.

However, there are times, when it is all about the range. Sometimes the target (I'm thinking almost exclusively of the strats) is very far away so that 50% will be way too little to reach it. Even 75% can be very tight of a budget if you are making many passes over the strats, as the 56x250, 80x100 (city busting loadouts) or 40x500 do require. Unless you are not going for precision and just carpted everything, possibly even with .salvo. I never do that, if I'm going on a such long ride I want to make every bomb count as much as possible. A regular city busting attack requires 4-6 passes over the strats. And turning around an recalibrating takes a lot of time in the Superfortress.


For the record, this is not only a result of academical tests, but also of 186 B-29 missions I have flown since 9-1-2012, with more of 90% of them being strat runs. And I kept very detailed logs on all of them, including loadout, fuel, altitude and mission duration. So I gathered enough data to see how long my missions really were, and how much time I had to spend over my targets and what kind of problems I was running into.

So for the average strat run, my fuel loadout is 75% for the 20x500, 12x1k, 2x8k or 4x4k bomb load... I often could do with 50%, but there ain't much of a margin if you run in trouble (for example a fuel leak, or a persistent long range fighter who's only waiting to vulch you while landing). When I go city busting, with 80x100 or 56x250 (preferred), I take 100% fuel, as this mission can easily reach 2.5 hours for me (depending on distance to the strats and fighter defense).
My longest mission ever took me 2 hours and 50 minutes, attacking retreated strats with 12x1k.



For informational purposes: These are the bomb/fuel combinations and resulting takeoff weights of all but the last of my B-29 missions:



Note that unlike many others, I almost never fly at altitudes above 30k, in fact 30K is usually the altitude I do fly in Komet Kountry only. My average B-29 in all of these sorties was 28K.





And the resume of all that?

Plan your mission.
Know what you are going to hit. Select the best, and necessarily not the biggest load of bombs. Plan your route (use the charts above for optimum climbout phase) and flight level and select the appropriate fuel percentage. Drain the center fuel first, 'cause that's the one most likely to get hit by the puffy ack.


« Last Edit: July 30, 2013, 05:37:05 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

Offline Babalonian

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5817
      • Pigs on the Wing
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #37 on: July 31, 2013, 05:35:29 PM »
AWESOME charts Lusche!!!  *files them away for later*
-Babalon
"Let's light 'em up and see how they smoke."
POTW IIw Oink! - http://www.PigsOnTheWing.org

Wow, you guys need help.

Offline Rodent57

  • AH Training Corps
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 720
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #38 on: July 31, 2013, 08:00:34 PM »
Concur,

Excellent work Sir Lusche!

It is rare that I don't do the comps myself, but in this case it would be a complete waste of time.

Recorded for future mission planning...TY,

-Rodent57
 
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new
Setting an example is not the main means of influencing others; it is the only means
-AE

Offline RotBaron

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3518
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2013, 11:49:31 AM »
Superb charting Lusche!  Thank you.
They're casting their bait over there, see?

Offline icepac

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6911
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #40 on: August 02, 2013, 09:41:25 AM »
You clowns discussing geometry realize you can't spawn a B29 on the short runways at a large or medium field?


Offline Rodent57

  • AH Training Corps
  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 720
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #41 on: August 02, 2013, 01:20:47 PM »
I never once got the impression that they were discussing launching from the short runways on a med or large field....they were pointing out that the longer runways would offer a better chance of getting airborne,  and fundamental Euclidean geometry.  Anyone with much experience launching buffs is likely to have noticed the runway restrictions. Those that haven't got some free experience (kinda like bartalk in the old days).

At worst, some folks reenergized some neuropathways that they haven't used in several decades thinking about right triangles.

On the positive side, a lot of people got free lessons in B29 loadouts, history of ops, tactical considerations in choosing departure bases, and time/distance performance charts.

I'd say it was a very useful thread (unlike the majority of threads)

- Rodent57
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new
Setting an example is not the main means of influencing others; it is the only means
-AE

Offline RotBaron

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3518
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #42 on: August 04, 2013, 04:38:17 AM »
Thank you Lusche again.

And yes Rodent, rather enlightening and useful even though those neurons hadn't fired across that synapse for a few years. 
They're casting their bait over there, see?

Offline donna43

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 233
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #43 on: September 12, 2013, 02:10:24 AM »
have you tried auto takeoff?

I have used it offline on MED field it works when you get close to EoR, don't know if it'll work online.
DrPhloxx

Age is strictly a case of mind over matter.
If you don't mind, it doesn't matter.

Offline Babalonian

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5817
      • Pigs on the Wing
Re: B-29 full fuel & 40 500#ers takeoff wreck
« Reply #44 on: September 12, 2013, 02:28:43 AM »
You clowns discussing geometry realize you can't spawn a B29 on the short runways at a large or medium field?



You realise your foot is hanging out your arse because we are only referencing to them as a reference?...

Go ahead, figure out for yourself the short runway that you can't spawn bombers on at large and medium fields is only as long as the single runway at small airfields, I really don't care if you loose your bomber perks figuring out things your/a better way.
-Babalon
"Let's light 'em up and see how they smoke."
POTW IIw Oink! - http://www.PigsOnTheWing.org

Wow, you guys need help.