Drop Tanks.

[m10bob]

biggest thing I see that you keep missing, is drop tanks in combat are only as good as the internal fuel load, you load a plane with external fuel load that is greater then your internal, once you drop tanks, you are never going to make it home

Most tanks are not greater than the internal cells, but again, the drag is also reduced with the loss of exterior tanks.
A pilot on a planned mission, (as EVERY flight is supposed to be, civilian and military) should already have the fuel allotment compensated for.
If they run out in combat, well, it happened.
It's part of the attrition number.
Sorry, nothing to throw..[:D]

[Daniel Oskar]

I am really glad to see the range issue being tackled as it is inconsistant at best in stock and CHS. I just wanted to through in my two cents from the real world. Without exception every source I have lists aircraft range in a measure of only distance. In addition, if you look in several different sources you will find several different opinions as to an aircrafts range. There is generally no mention of configuration (clean or with external tanks), or if the range stated is to splash, or contains a reserve. The numbers that are important are seldom if ever included in the data. At what speed and rate of climb (cruise climb) does our aircraft use to get to its most efficient cruising altitude? What is the fuel burn in gal/hr? In cruise we can often find cruise speeds, but are they max range or max endurance? Are they clean or with external stores? What is the max range profile fuel burn? We can often find external fuel capacities, but internal fuel is not so easily come by.
To be accurate in measuring range you need internal and external fuel tankage available, burn rate in cruise climb and at max range, as well as the doctrinal reserve for the type mission being flown (escort, bombing, ferry, ect...). What I am saying is that short of getting the applicable pilots manuals or performace charts from a museum the actual no $hit ranges may be beyond the scope of the forum to produce.

[el cid again]

Max range

combat max range ?
peacetime max range ?

biggest thing I see that you keep missing, is drop tanks in combat are only as good as the internal fuel load, you load a plane with external fuel load that is greater then your internal, once you drop tanks, you are never going to make it home

now ferry tanks and ferry ranges can be much greater, as you do not need to worry about your internal fuel load, as you are not going to be dropping your tanks
(so when you see a statement like, 400 miles clean and 1300 miles with X tanks, that is not combat)

There were (and may still be) errors in the data. However, in theory,
we are supposed to use cruising speed times endurance for ferry range (which we rename transfer range). There is actually a range of possible cruising speeds for all aircraft, so we use the one selected as "normal" and published - whatever that may be - and not always the optimum one for range. Thus in CHS and RHS the A6M2 Zero cannot make 11 hex range - although real Zeros really flew it from Rabaul to Guadalcanal. Not all could do that - and those that did flew just above stall speed - something not desireable for most missions. We must compromise, and the CHS and RHS teams strongly (after some bloodletting) decided not to bow to JFB pressure - the difference between RHS and 11 hexes is only 15 minutes flying time - 5 of them each way and 5 for whatever. But we didn't cheat and give the planes that extra 10-15 minutes - in ANY case. [But if 1 minute would do a hex change - yeah - we cheated - it is called compromise to fit the data set scale. You don't have to live with 99% ain't good enough.] Combat range is 1/3 of ferry range - that is extended range. Normal range is 1/4 of ferry range. These are not really right - but they are outstanding compromises by the Matrix designers - true enough rules of thumb. Lots of exceptions to this - but for a simple system - it is rather good.

The combat range is so much less because you fly both ways - transfer is one way - and so you can burn gas in maneuvers. The fuel in the drop tanks is used first - so you can still go home if you drop them. Sometimes there is a lot of fuel in the drop tanks - and it IS a combat mission - see the Mossy recon bird with two 200 gal tanks! Risky it may be - but what could catch a Mosquito? Not much.

[el cid again]

Without exception every source I have lists aircraft range in a measure of only distance. In addition, if you look in several different sources you will find several different opinions as to an aircrafts range. There is generally no mention of configuration (clean or with external tanks), or if the range stated is to splash, or contains a reserve.

Not to mention load is to not say anything. ONLY references with BOTH load and range and cruising speed are used by me. From that I can calculate anything I need to know - close enough. Used to work as "resident computer engineer" for USAF "software integration laboratories" at Boeing. [Which, oddly, I did as an employee of a major defense contractor - not USAF or Boeing - and I had better parking than either of those - right next to the door - like a Boeing Vice President!]

[el cid again]

In cruise we can often find cruise speeds, but are they max range or max endurance?

This is another reason the game cuts transfer range for real missions. It is not a bad system really - good rules of thumb (25% and 33% with less load or - drop tanks).

[el cid again]

To be accurate in measuring range you need internal and external fuel tankage available, burn rate in cruise climb and at max range, as well as the doctrinal reserve for the type mission being flown (escort, bombing, ferry, ect...). What I am saying is that short of getting the applicable pilots manuals or performace charts from a museum the actual no $hit ranges may be beyond the scope of the forum to produce.

Correct. The database only allows ONE entry for endurance and ONE entry for cruising speed - and this is used to figure out everything else BY CODE - not by us. We give the code max range at cruising speed - and that is ALL we do. I favor reducing this value by 5% (for operational reserves) - but NO ONE EVER backed me up on that. Any takers?

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

And NOTHING EVER carries maximum load to any range. Max load is ONLY used to define the base size requirement - and that is official.

Just curious. What determines what is normal load and extended load if max load is only to define base size? The standard loadout on the file? I thought that loadout is only effective against naval?

[Herrbear]

Sid --

How are you handling the instances when a fighter could use either drop tanks or bombs but not both?

[Iron Duke]

Hi

taking into account fuel reserves by reducing by 5% sounds fair.

How are you deciding on what size drop tanks to assign to different a/c , as in real life the a/c's mission sometimes dictated which size drop tank was fitted i.e LR Escort would fit large 360 gal drop tanks where as a Sweep mission would require only 75 gal tanks or will you be just concentrating on max[transfer] range missions?

What range of sizes of drop tank are you planning on using

Cheers

[Hard Sarge]

Hi El Cid
over all I agree

still got to push the idea, you can't carry 300 gallons of gas in drop tanks if your internal fuel is only 150, but in WitP that is a moot point

one advantage in my set up (BoB/BTR) I can change the code

see the Mossy recon bird with two 200 gal tanks! Risky it may be - but what could catch a Mosquito? Not much.

ahhhh, I hate this statement !

almost any GE fighter, could catch a Mossie !, the thing was, if you were on the ground and then the Mossie showed up, hit or took some pics and headed home, you were not going to be able to take off, climb and then run it down, but, if you were at co alt, or above, and seen it coming, it was in trouble, they were fast, but they wern't that fast

[Sardaukar]

ORIGINAL: el cid again
Correct. The database only allows ONE entry for endurance and ONE entry for cruising speed - and this is used to figure out everything else BY CODE - not by us. We give the code max range at cruising speed - and that is ALL we do. I favor reducing this value by 5% (for operational reserves) - but NO ONE EVER backed me up on that. Any takers?

I think operational reserves should be 10 %..but I'll be happy with 5% too...

[el cid again]

Just curious. What determines what is normal load and extended load if max load is only to define base size? The standard loadout on the file? I thought that loadout is only effective against naval?

Normal load is "normally" (pun intended) defined by what we write in the database for aircraft -

BUT it CAN BE modified IF die rolls permit it OR IF the mission requires it (thus a torpedo loadout switches to bombs if you go for land targets, and a 1000 lb bomb may replace 2x500 pound bombs if you are "lucky")

Extended loadout is determined by code - not by us - and it does so by picking slots - so don't change bomb slots or it will produce bizzarre results.

[el cid again]

Sid --

How are you handling the instances when a fighter could use either drop tanks or bombs but not both?

That one is (unusually) easy: Just define max load = drop tank weight total. Then there is no load left for bombs. IF a fighter can carry bombs as well - an A6M2 carries two 66 pound bombs plus one drop tank - the max load is defined as 132 pounds more than the drop tank - AND the standard loadout shows BOTH the drop tank and the bombs. Note this will ONLY be carried to normal load range - at extended range it will probably carry no bombs - or only one - it is up to the AI.

[el cid again]

How are you deciding on what size drop tanks to assign to different a/c , as in real life the a/c's mission sometimes dictated which size drop tank was fitted i.e LR Escort would fit large 360 gal drop tanks where as a Sweep mission would require only 75 gal tanks or will you be just concentrating on max[transfer] range missions?

What range of sizes of drop tank are you planning on using

We ONLY can define ONE case - so it is the maximum case. If less range is needed, you carry no tanks, or smaller tanks I suppose - but that is abstract and up to AI - not something we define.

Most drop tanks were already in the device file - just not used. I added one or two - but mostly just use the closest one in the existing list. There are no slots to add any more.

[el cid again]

see the Mossy recon bird with two 200 gal tanks! Risky it may be - but what could catch a Mosquito? Not much.

ahhhh, I hate this statement !

almost any GE fighter, could catch a Mossie !, the thing was, if you were on the ground and then the Mossie showed up, hit or took some pics and headed home, you were not going to be able to take off, climb and then run it down, but, if you were at co alt, or above, and seen it coming, it was in trouble, they were fast, but they wern't that fast

This is my meaning - a recon bird comes in high and fast - and you don't usually have any shot at all against her. She also runs if challenged - these are unarmed ships - and they win if they survive - no macho nonsense about shooting the enemy when you have no guns! They operated successfully over Italy from UK - and over Burma, Thailand, Singapore and even Java from India - because of these two huge drop tanks. A late war version we don't have - PR.34 - became a Cold War era ship of import - with even more range.

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Sid --

How are you handling the instances when a fighter could use either drop tanks or bombs but not both?

That one is (unusually) easy: Just define max load = drop tank weight total. Then there is no load left for bombs. IF a fighter can carry bombs as well - an A6M2 carries two 66 pound bombs plus one drop tank - the max load is defined as 132 pounds more than the drop tank - AND the standard loadout shows BOTH the drop tank and the bombs. Note this will ONLY be carried to normal load range - at extended range it will probably carry no bombs - or only one - it is up to the AI.

Then the tradeoff is that the plane can now never use its bombs at normal range because it is always assumed that the drop tank is loaded. Is that correct?

[el cid again]

Then the tradeoff is that the plane can now never use its bombs at normal range because it is always assumed that the drop tank is loaded. Is that correct?

Nope. Somehow I have confused you:

It carries bombs to normal range - because its normal loadout SHOWS the bombs - it REDUCES the bombs to extended range. Probably to zero in the case of the Zero (pun intended).

[Herrbear]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

Then the tradeoff is that the plane can now never use its bombs at normal range because it is always assumed that the drop tank is loaded. Is that correct?

Nope. Somehow I have confused you:

It carries bombs to normal range - because its normal loadout SHOWS the bombs - it REDUCES the bombs to extended range. Probably to zero in the case of the Zero (pun intended).

Thanks cid.

I think I understand. Example: Plane can carry 500lb bomb or one drop tank (device 218 - 75 gal drop tank(witpdev40)). Max Load = 500. Plane loadout lists drop tank and 1x500lb bomb.

Plane will carry the 500 lb bomb to normal range and cannot carry the bomb to extended range because the load cost of the drop tank equals the max load for the plane. Is that correct?

[m10bob]

ORIGINAL: el cid again

see the Mossy recon bird with two 200 gal tanks! Risky it may be - but what could catch a Mosquito? Not much.

ahhhh, I hate this statement !

almost any GE fighter, could catch a Mossie !, the thing was, if you were on the ground and then the Mossie showed up, hit or took some pics and headed home, you were not going to be able to take off, climb and then run it down, but, if you were at co alt, or above, and seen it coming, it was in trouble, they were fast, but they wern't that fast

This is my meaning - a recon bird comes in high and fast - and you don't usually have any shot at all against her. She also runs if challenged - these are unarmed ships - and they win if they survive - no macho nonsense about shooting the enemy when you have no guns! They operated successfully over Italy from UK - and over Burma, Thailand, Singapore and even Java from India - because of these two huge drop tanks. A late war version we don't have - PR.34 - became a Cold War era ship of import - with even more range.

A fact seemingly unknown to many air history buffs is that nearly every day of the Battle Of Britain, the Germans were flying high altitude Ju 86's for photo recon over all of the British Isles, and the Brits were rarely able to intercept them, because to do so required "guessing" the route of the enemy plane, the cost to dedicate high altitude interceptors to that path, the fuel to keep them up there, not to mention having to then intercept them!
It was soon decided the Germans could take their pictures, and the Brits would use their recources intercepting the bombers coming in.
I believe this was recounted in both Douglas Baders' book, "Reach For the Sky", and Johnny Johnsons' book, "Wing Leader",IIRC..
I have tried to replicate this high altitude with the PR planes in WITP, and while interception is very rare, the morale of the PR pilots goes to the toilet immediately!!??
I really don't understand why??????[:D]

[el cid again]

Thanks cid.

I think I understand. Example: Plane can carry 500lb bomb or one drop tank (device 218 - 75 gal drop tank(witpdev40)). Max Load = 500. Plane loadout lists drop tank and 1x500lb bomb.

Plane will carry the 500 lb bomb to normal range and cannot carry the bomb to extended range because the load cost of the drop tank equals the max load for the plane. Is that correct?

He's got it! By George, he's got it!

Except in the movie version, it was "she's got it" {My Fair Lady}