Fuel issues with aircraft (Bingo, Tankers, etc.)....

[nocacounsel]

Hi, All-
As has been mentioned in Post 5+ of the "Aircraft RTBs on a straight line entering hostile SAM envelopes" thread (since I can't apparently link to that thread and lost my prior new thread because of this limitation), I can confirm the AI continues to supersede our Unassign (U) command in build 573 (i.e. 1.05, beta 2) after an aircraft initially reaches "Bingo Fuel" and is ordered Return to Base/RTB (Bingo Fuel) (though it was happening in build 570, 1.05, as well).
It used to be that I'd get a message of "you better know what you're doing!" when an aircraft was RTB (Bingo), but now I don't see the message.

Alternatively, is there a way to 'reset' the Bingo calculator? Often I have aircraft reach Bingo when I have them on afterburner; changing the fuel burn rate gives back hundreds of miles of potential distance the aircraft can travel (not that it currently matters given the above).

Also and somewhat related, is there a way to manually assign the tanker from which an aircraft will refuel? I prefer to keep my "Use Refuel/UNREP" setting to NO and micromanage but it seems I have to toggle this to YES to even have an aircraft (automatically) seek a tanker for refueling. I'd love to keep the refueling setting a NO and then choose when (and from which tanker) it should occur, but that doesn't seem possible.

Finally, is there a way to prevent Allies from taking fuel from one of my tankers? I leave the tankers hanging around for the most desperate of situations (and, again, UNREP to NO), but I find I'm only refueling my ally's aircraft instead and can't stop him!

All of these issues/questions stem from the Med Conflict (1990) scenario (I started playing the 9/14/14 version and went from build 570 to 573 during the middle of it in case any of that matters). If anyone wants the save file I have one handy.

Thanks to anyone in advance for a reply. And to the developers for such an amazing sim! The praise is understated!

[Schr75]

Hi Phatstar

I solved the problem of allied planes sucking my tankers dry, by starting the scen in editor mode, and changing the allies posture to no unrep.
If you don´t wan´t to play in editor mode, simply save the scen and restart in game mode.

Regarding the rest of your questions. Sorry, I have the same problems.

Søren

[Rongor]

I suggested some time ago that I would like a RoE setting "RTB when Bingo" to set it to no and stop aircrafts suddenly deviating from routes in pretty critical situations and very often heading to courses that mean their deadly fate. We should have a chance to micromanage this. Especially in cases in that we plan to bring in tankers just in time, because the AI simply will be unable to understand the concept we may have figured out for this task.

Air refueling vs RTB

[nocacounsel]

Thanks for the thoughts, Soren.

It's nice to have the 'fail-safe' of an aircraft heading home after it reaches Bingo in case we're not watching or wish to leave everything to the AI, but we should be able to manually override the order at any time (whether by a calculation Bingo 'reset' or simply pressing U once to unassign the aircraft and not have the AI supersede our judgments, both options ideally).


Understandably, specifics are probably necessary to have a developer reply. So here they are:

Jolly Rogers 3 & 4 are heading to the carrier as they are Bingo fuel. Press U, give them an order, and watch as they supersede your command five seconds later. Thus, any Bingo fuel (even if premature due to afterburner being used) takes the piece out of the game for potentially hours.

Jolly Rogers 8 is heading to Pikeman 1 (some 165nm away) instead of Pikeman 3 (35 nm away).

Wizards 7 (near Pikeman 1) refuses to "Refuel (if possible)" though global & aircraft-specific "Use Refuel/UNREP" is set to YES.

As stated above, I'm on 1.05 Beta 2 (Build 573) and the scenario was last edited 9/14/14.

Thanks, again!

[nocacounsel]

I noticed a couple of things recently while playing the Goodnight Irene scenario and using KC-135s with some F/A-18s:

-Tankers must have their throttle set to Loiter to offload their fuel (which sorta makes sense). However, I have found that sometimes when an aircraft reaches the end of its assigned waypoints it doesn't always revert to Loiter when it is circling and, well, loitering. So, if a tanker's throttle is still in Cruise or Full mode (because that was the throttle setting I gave it to get where it did), another aircraft won't be able to hook up to refuel. Then manually assigning the tanker's throttle to Loiter allowed another aircraft circling with the tanker to immediately begin to refuel.

-Unassigning (U) an aircraft that is receiving fuel from a tanker before it has finished filling its fuel tanks (in order to cancel the refueling because I want the aircraft to just receive enough fuel to get home safely) results in the aircraft disconnecting from the tanker & able to immediately take commands (e.g. fly a waypoint); BUT the aircraft KEEPS receiving fuel despite being disconnected from the tanker and will fill its tanks entirely! Furthermore, once the aircraft fills up entirely it then loses the command I gave it and starts to circle/loiter (such that I have to issue the command to fly away again).

As is typical in my scenarios, I had the global "Use Refueling/UNREP" to NO but set the specific aircraft I wished to seek refueling to YES.

Has anyone found these minor bugs as well (or can reproduce them to report them)?

Thanks!

[Tomcat84]

ORIGINAL: phatstar

-Tankers must have their throttle set to Loiter to offload their fuel (which sorta makes sense). However, I have found that sometimes when an aircraft reaches the end of its assigned waypoints it doesn't always revert to Loiter when it is circling and, well, loitering. So, if a tanker's throttle is still in Cruise or Full mode (because that was the throttle setting I gave it to get where it did), another aircraft won't be able to hook up to refuel. Then manually assigning the tanker's throttle to Loiter allowed another aircraft circling with the tanker to immediately begin to refuel.

I usually make sure my tankers are on some kind of support mission rather than loitering, because not only does the speed play a part but also lots of planes do not like it when the tanker keeps circling and have trouble hooking up (might be mostly non fighter aircraft e.g. an E-3 or a C-17).

And then I put that support mission on a loiter speed.

However I recently did some testing with the tanker mission being set to cruise or higher. What I found was that when the fighter came close the tanker would automatically go to loiter speed, even if that was not its mission setting, for the hookup. The only thing was that if I was running this at high time acceleration (e.g. 1 min or greater) there would be a lot more difficulty and it might take much longer to hookup. It seemed a bit random though and I have not been able to pin it down exactly.

ORIGINAL: phatstar
-Unassigning (U) an aircraft that is receiving fuel from a tanker before it has finished filling its fuel tanks (in order to cancel the refueling because I want the aircraft to just receive enough fuel to get home safely) results in the aircraft disconnecting from the tanker & able to immediately take commands (e.g. fly a waypoint); BUT the aircraft KEEPS receiving fuel despite being disconnected from the tanker and will fill its tanks entirely! Furthermore, once the aircraft fills up entirely it then loses the command I gave it and starts to circle/loiter (such that I have to issue the command to fly away again).

As is typical in my scenarios, I had the global "Use Refueling/UNREP" to NO but set the specific aircraft I wished to seek refueling to YES.

Cant access the software right now to run some tests but, when you told it to unassign, did you also switch its Use refueling doctrine back to No? If not I would test out if that makes a difference, both if you go unassign, then refuel doctrine no and also first setting the doctrine to no, and then unassigning.

I use the same technique btw of having everyone to NO for the doctrine until I need someone to tank.

I'll see if I can play around some more with tankers during the weekend.

[nocacounsel]

Thanks for the thoughts, Tomcat.

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84

I usually make sure my tankers are on some kind of support mission rather than loitering, because not only does the speed play a part but also lots of planes do not like it when the tanker keeps circling and have trouble hooking up (might be mostly non fighter aircraft e.g. an E-3 or a C-17).

I have noticed this, too, and thus it must explain why I've seen some E-3s take a long time to actually make the hookup. I almost thought it was a bug and was about to report it, but eventually after loitering for 25 minutes on top of each other the two aircraft made the hookup.

And then I put that support mission on a loiter speed.

However I recently did some testing with the tanker mission being set to cruise or higher. What I found was that when the fighter came close the tanker would automatically go to loiter speed, even if that was not its mission setting, for the hookup. The only thing was that if I was running this at high time acceleration (e.g. 1 min or greater) there would be a lot more difficulty and it might take much longer to hookup. It seemed a bit random though and I have not been able to pin it down exactly.

Thanks for this suggestion--it's undoubtedly a better way to proceed than what I've been doing (and more realistic!).

Cant access the software right now to run some tests but, when you told it to unassign, did you also switch its Use refueling doctrine back to No? If not I would test out if that makes a difference, both if you go unassign, then refuel doctrine no and also first setting the doctrine to no, and then unassigning.

I use the same technique btw of having everyone to NO for the doctrine until I need someone to tank.

I'll see if I can play around some more with tankers during the weekend.

Based on your suggestion I tried exactly this (i.e. set "Use Refuel/UNREP" to NO right after the Unassign/disconnect)--no change in the outcome. Thus, one can 'cheat' and right after the hookup press U and then do what you like with the aircraft. Once it finishes refueling you'll have to give it the same orders again, but you'll be that much further along. I guess it's a bug...?

[Tomcat84]

ORIGINAL: phatstar

Based on your suggestion I tried exactly this (i.e. set "Use Refuel/UNREP" to NO right after the Unassign/disconnect)--no change in the outcome. Thus, one can 'cheat' and right after the hookup press U and then do what you like with the aircraft. Once it finishes refueling you'll have to give it the same orders again, but you'll be that much further along. I guess it's a bug...?

Hmmm interesting. Hopefully I can do some testing tomorrow.

I am curious: what happens if another flight comes to refuel? Do they wait to hookup until the runaway hookup is done refuelling or do they kick him off, or do they refuel at the same time?

Worthy of testing

[Tomcat84]

Did some testing and posted in the closed beta forum to report to the devs.

What I found: the only way to prematurely stop the fuel flow is by unassigning the tanker itself.

a second bug I found is that if you unassign the receiver first, and then unassign the tanker, it also stops the flow, but it also means that if you reorder the receiver to take gas it will not and stays stuck on maneuvering to refuel. My theory is that it is in a queue with itself, because if you order a second plane then to refuel, it will also act as if its in line, until the first one runs out of gas and then the second one tanks fine.

Also added in the request to get an RTB when bingo yes/no doctrine.

Hopefully the devs take note and find an opportunity to look at it, but knowing them for a little while now, they will [&o][&o][&o]

[mikmykWS]

Issues logged. We'll take a look. Thanks all!

Mike

[nocacounsel]

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84

Did some testing and posted in the closed beta forum to report to the devs.

...

Also added in the request to get an RTB when bingo yes/no doctrine.

...

Thanks so much for doing more/better testing, Tomcat!

The game/sim is just beyond amazing, but fighting the AI for aircraft over fuel issues (when there is no danger of running out) is really frustrating and makes it hard to fully use my assets (before the AI 'marks them for death', either by just sending them home prematurely or having them climb to 40K feet in enemy space that I can't seem to override!).

Thanks for noting the thread, Mike.

[nocacounsel]

Another fuel issue I've seen is occasionally an aircraft tagged as "RTB (Bingo Fuel)(Priority landing, critically low on fuel)" will simply loiter over the landing pad until it finally runs out of fuel and is lost.

In the attached scenario, Cow#1 is attempting to land on TF51.1 (in the Gulf of Aden) and loiters until it crashes.

I've seen this issue before but figured it was an isolated incident. I don't believe all "critically low on fuel" craft crash, but I haven't been watching enough to fully know.

Is this a bug or can someone explain why this might've legitimately happened?

Thanks!

[Tomcat84]

Well first of all, if somebody sent me up with a ridiculous callsign like Cow 1, I would crash myself too [:D]

Is it only happening for helicopters? Cause in build 574 and beyond (still closed beta) they fixed an issue with non-landing helos. For me, running build 580, your savegame loads and the helicopter lands no problem. So I believe it is fixed as also reported in this thread. Just gotta be patient till the next public patch!

[nocacounsel]

ORIGINAL: Tomcat84

Well first of all, if somebody sent me up with a ridiculous callsign like Cow 1, I would crash myself too [:D]

Is it only happening for helicopters? Cause in build 574 and beyond (still closed beta) they fixed an issue with non-landing helos. For me, running build 580, your savegame loads and the helicopter lands no problem. So I believe it is fixed as also reported in this thread. Just gotta be patient till the next public patch!

Thanks for testing this out, Tomcat. And I now see this was already reported ( fb.asp?m=3723037 ) so my apologies on bringing it up again.

On another scenario and something like three weeks ago (maybe around that transition time between 1.04 and 1.05), it happened with an F/A-18 or F-14 attempting to land on a carrier after being marked as "critically low on fuel"--I lost that aircraft, too. I haven't seen it since and by now I must've had a few fighter craft critically low on fuel, so we can hope the issue is resolved entirely at this point.

I guess I now wait for the next build to emerge before playing further on this scenario or bribe one of the beta testers! [;)]

[Tomcat84]

We have all been through torture testing by Jack Bauer and Chuck Norris. There is no bribing us [:'(]