Question on advantages of Drop Tanks for Fighters

[cverbrug]

Apart from extneding the range of escort or sweep for fighters, are there advantage for drop tanks for CAP.

E.g. for CAP on the home base, if you equip your fighters with drop tanks, does it means they can stay longer 'airborne' (without a need for refuelling) and that hence you have a higher number of fighter constantly in the air? or is there no effect on this?

Additionall, are there any disadvantages?

Is you have an escort mission with drop tanks, is there a negaitve effect on the fighting cababnilites in AA or in AA weapons for the fighter if he is using drop tanks? or again, no bad effect whatsover on using drp tanks?

Gallo

[zuluhour]

Just a noob 2 cents: I think in the CAP situation they will just fatigue faster. CAP only have a percentage of the player selected percentage "airborn" at any one time. Radar/Early warning will get more fighters in the air for CAP faster. I am unsure about offensive missions, I believe they just fatigue faster also due to the flight time/distance covered. I do not believe there to be any ill effects on offensive missions as fighters are assumed to have "dropped tanks" when they encounter the enemy.

[jcjordan]

The only thing I can think of that would be of benefit for CAP w/ DT, would be in bleed over to another hex for cap. Say you have base A & base B 2 hexes away & the a/c has a normal range of 1 but 2 w/ DT, it might be able to bleed over into B to help CAP that base w/ DT on. Otherwise I don't think it'd have any more effect on it's base.

As to disadvantages, I've always wondered if there's some kind of manuever rating cost to having DT when in A-A combat even though the tanks would have been dropped before combat.

[dr.hal]

I'm not a pilot, so this may sound dumb but, it is my understanding that a "belly tank" for extra gas is used up first and at some point the plane is toting around an extra tank. The tank is NOT automatically jettisoned as it is relatively expensive and it doesn't grow on trees (wood makes a very poor container for gas). Also it makes sense that the squadron supply officer would like them back. However if a fighter is about to be engaged, dry or not, pilots will jettison the tank (and ordinance if any) in favor of increased mobility. So their range most likely stays the same, as this gas is used first and the plane is usually on internal tanks once combat is joined. Do I have this right? Some of you airdales might correct me if I'm wrong. Hal

[geofflambert]

Shouldn't pilots have honed their ground attack skills attempting to drop their "drop tanks" on the Quartermaster?

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

Shouldn't pilots have honed their ground attack skills attempting to drop their "drop tanks" on the Quartermaster?

Here I am trying to have a serious discourse and I get blindsided by a Star Trek monster. As Spock said to Kirk, "It's life Jim, but not as we know it!"

[Commander Stormwolf]

always thought there was a built in mvr penalty for drop tank equipped fighters (might be wrong)


real problem is the ranges are a bit wrong (example lightning gets more than double its range with drop tanks)

guess it's based on the example of some P-38 pilots fighting with drop tanks attached (McGuire for example)


logically the maximum possible range a fighter is supposed to have is 2x(range on internal fuel)

since plane with drop tank attached will use up more fuel per the same distance (drop tank's extra weight and drag)

plane without a drop tank attached will use less fuel, but needs more fuel to actually spend time over the target

*example Ki-43 oscar carries 400L internal fuel giving it 6 hexes range, and 2x200L external giving 12 hexes

put 2x330L drop tanks on the Ki-43, and you wont get any more range out of it..

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

I'm not a pilot, so this may sound dumb but, it is my understanding that a "belly tank" for extra gas is used up first and at some point the plane is toting around an extra tank. The tank is NOT automatically jettisoned as it is relatively expensive and it doesn't grow on trees (wood makes a very poor container for gas). Also it makes sense that the squadron supply officer would like them back. However if a fighter is about to be engaged, dry or not, pilots will jettison the tank (and ordinance if any) in favor of increased mobility. So their range most likely stays the same, as this gas is used first and the plane is usually on internal tanks once combat is joined. Do I have this right? Some of you airdales might correct me if I'm wrong. Hal

In ww2 drop tanks were frequently made out paper. I'd imagine today they could be made of celluloid. As drop tanks were lined with rubber or some form of plastic, you probably could make them out of wood.

But essentially you are correct. Some later planes with "tip tanks" like the F-104,T-33,and F-80 flew with their drop tanks on all the time. (Unless combat required dropping them).

[jcjordan]

Here's a pretty good history on DT Drop Tanks

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Here's a pretty good history on DT Drop Tanks

Good find! Interestingly the info doesn't mention what the tanks were made of! I was interested in seeing how "paper" drop takes were incorporated. Steve, where did you find that information? Hal

[Lomri]

I haven't used drop tanks on CAP because I assumed it would increase intercept time. Extra weight, slower climb. I have no data to back this up.

[AW1Steve]

ORIGINAL: dr.hal

ORIGINAL: jcjordan

Here's a pretty good history on DT Drop Tanks

Good find! Interestingly the info doesn't mention what the tanks were made of! I was interested in seeing how "paper" drop takes were incorporated. Steve, where did you find that information? Hal

I'd read about it years ago, then on another occassion interviewed a couple of pilots who talked about having used them. I just dis a Yahoo search and found a bunch of stuff on paper drop tanks. BTW, they were painted with a "silverized" paint , so you've probably looked at them on photo's and didn't know it! And supposedly there were some tanks made of wood! Let me know if you have trouble finding it. [:)] Just search "paper drop tanks". Here's a good source http://www.bellytanks.com/?p=199

[Sardaukar]

Using drop tanks use extra supply in land bases.

No idea of effect on CV planes.

[dr.hal]

Ok, thanks Steve... live and learn!!!

[dr.hal]

ORIGINAL: Lomri


I haven't used drop tanks on CAP because I assumed it would increase intercept time. Extra weight, slower climb. I have no data to back this up.

In the real world you are correct, but I doubt this level of detail is covered by the game mechanics.... Hal

[offenseman]

ORIGINAL: Sardaukar

Using drop tanks use extra supply in land bases.

No idea of effect on CV planes.

IIRC Using DTs on CV a/c uses more sorties from the sorties available

[Icedawg]

I've been using drop tanks on ALL my fighter units set to CAP thinking that the drop tanks will increase the time aloft, thereby reducing the number of rotations of planes, thereby reducing the likelihood of getting caught with my pants down (no, or relatively few, fighters in the air). I don't know if this logic works, but since I've been doing this, I've noticed what seems to be an improved effectiveness of my CAP - pretty much no instances of raids sneaking through 50+% CAP with no intercept and just a higher number of planes engaging the enemy.

[moonraker65]

I find them useful for moving Fighters quickly to a new base once unloaded from Ships. Instead of the 1 or 2 day delay of sending them by rail (particularly in the CBI theatre) you can just add drop tanks and fly them in

[crsutton]

Not sure what the effect of using drop tanks on a CV are. I should check on that.

Using drop tanks at a base cost extra supply. Otherwise, I see no disadvantage or benefit to drop tanks other than increased range. You do not need drop tanks on CAP as I don't think they have any effect or give any bonus.

[zuluhour]

GO O's!!