How is distance disadvantage for fighters modeled?

[wpurdom]

Does anyone know how combat is modeled for fighters at extreme range in UV and how it will be modelled in WiTP?
One of the reasons the US was able to cope so well with Zeros at Guadalcanal is that at the extreme range operating from Rabaul, they generally flew without radios to save the weight, largely destroying the opportunity for tactical coordination and virtually any damage would result in failure to return. Similarly, at Midway, the USN fighters and pilots on escort duty suffered very high operational losses compared with those defending the task force.
(As you can perhaps tell, I am not one of those who feel that the Zero is generally ahistorically modeled in UV, but I do think that its success at extreme range is ahistorical).
Perhaps others with more hours than I playing UV have a different experience, but it has never felt to me like there were big differences in losses based on the range

[mogami]

Hi, Pilots aquire fatigue for every hex they fly. So even if you send a fully rested group they will have fatigue by the time they engage in air combat (or bomb)
The enemy pilots will not have aquired as much fatigue. (unless they are flying LRCAP at extended range.)

[Lifer]

You're also missing the concept of Time on Station. Say a Zero can fly for five hours. If it cruises for two hours to get to a target area to cover the bombers, then it has only one hour of loiter time at a Cruise Speed (the most economical speed). Once it pushes the throttle to the firewall to engage the interceptors, it's fuel use goes way up and decreases the loiter time even more.

The defenders have more loiter time and can burn more fuel at a higher rate before being forced to land.

What should be modeled is the amount of time escorts are available to support their charges before they have to disengage because of fuel concerns.

Lifer