Matrix Games Forums

-Scenario seems to be running well. All troubles I noticed were corrected and the initial forces disposition is more rational.
-Range of Ki-43 I in all RHS scenarios is too small. Is that intentional???

-Simirlarly, I looked at the editor and noticed that Zeroes A6M3, A6M5 and A6M7/8 have very small endurances, about half of the original Zero, and, with a cruise speed only 15% higher, this will give a range of about 5 to the A6M3. Is that correct (A6M3 doesn´t appear in the RHSEOS scenario, I looked to the others)? Actually the F4F-4 will have a somewhat bigger range than the A6M3. The P-51D also have a very small endurance that will result in a range worse than the A6M2 (about 8) while the opposite was true. As a whole, endurance for all fighters seem to have been dramatically reduced.

Drop Tanks?

-But how exactly are they working in RHS? If you look at the Oscar I, it has a normal range of two and a extended range of three. How to make the drop tanks work????

It's part of the loadout, if I recall.
 

The ranges are correct - not only to the nearest hex - but to the nearest minute.

However, if you look at the endurance rating of an aircraft (as opposed to its actual range)

AND IF that aircraft has drop tanks

you need to add 1 minute per gallon of drop tank(s) to get the real endurance.

Perhaps this is confusing you?

The range of the Zero is actually too great - it was intentionally increased to permit historical raids one hex longer than normal calculations in code permit at the time we increased bomber and transport and recon ranges by 9% (because operational ranges should be 42% of transfer vice the 33% of stock). Fighters, however, remain at 33% - because they need to fight and/or patrol. A zero has 5 minutes too much endurance at operational range - 15 minutes too much at transfer range. So whatever gives you the impression it isn't enough is wrong. The endurance is 500 minutes for the plane plus 330 minutes for the drop tank = 830 minutes - when IRL it should be about 15 minutes less than that.

I reviewed ranges and drop tanks. Most JAAF fighters somehow got downrated from 200 litre to 130 litre tanks.
This may be because they didn't exist before? A few also had the wrong encurance - for whatever reason.
I also changed one bomb load.

ORIGINAL: el cid again

The ranges are correct - not only to the nearest hex - but to the nearest minute.

However, if you look at the endurance rating of an aircraft (as opposed to its actual range)

AND IF that aircraft has drop tanks

you need to add 1 minute per gallon of drop tank(s) to get the real endurance.

Perhaps this is confusing you?

The range of the Zero is actually too great - it was intentionally increased to permit historical raids one hex longer than normal calculations in code permit at the time we increased bomber and transport and recon ranges by 9% (because operational ranges should be 42% of transfer vice the 33% of stock). Fighters, however, remain at 33% - because they need to fight and/or patrol. A zero has 5 minutes too much endurance at operational range - 15 minutes too much at transfer range. So whatever gives you the impression it isn't enough is wrong. The endurance is 500 minutes for the plane plus 330 minutes for the drop tank = 830 minutes - when IRL it should be about 15 minutes less than that.

It´s hard to look at real ranges, because the database doesn´t show them until the aircraft is active. But the real range of the Ki-43 I in the scenario is only 3. Less than that of a Nate. Are the drop tanks actually working? P-40B´s also had the range decreased to 3(normal) and 5 (extended).
On your calculations, I have a doubt. You say that 1gallon=1 minute, but the Zero has a 330l (75gal) tank. So the corrected endurance for the A6M2 would be 575, not 830 as you argues (however, this 575 will give the plane its stock range). Maybe this explains the trouble with the fighters? Similarly, the A6M3 would have a corrected endurance of 292 (217+75 for the drop tank), which is 30% less than in stock and will give a range close to 6 (half of the A6M2). The poor Oscar would have 154 + (2x32)=218 (slightly above half the stock endurance). What is the value that defines how a drop tank works?

Few matters are more confusing than drop tanks in WITP. And I didn't quite put it correctly above - because 330 liters is not 330 minutes - but 75 minutes. 1 minute per gallon is the WITP system - but 330 liters is not 330 gallons! The range of the Zero is 33 hexes.

Do not talk about operational ranges - talk about transfer ranges. Everything in WITP is based on these. Extended range = 33% of transfer range = 11 hexes for a A6M2. Normal range = 25% of transfer range = 8 hexes for a A6M2. The range in CHS is not a factor - we went to source for every range. It is wrong only where a technical error occurred in the many editing passes by several people. And - as I said above - the Zero range is actually slightly too much - because we added 5 minutes at extended range and 15 minutes at transfer range - for a variety of reasons - at the time we increased NON fighter ranges by 9% (since they couldn't run normal missions to 42% of transfer range as IRL).

The range for an Oscar I (Ki-43 I is how I say it) should have been 12 hexes transfer range (= 4 hexes extended and 3 hexes normal). It wasn't - the drop tanks were too small - and as noted above this will appear in corrected form at x.699 level - which also affects a number of JAAF fighters (also with too small drop tanks). J1M1 and N1K1-J gain drop tanks (but no range).

-What about the A6M3 and A6M5? Aren´t their range too small too? They will have a range close to 50% of version A6M2.

The range reduction is indeed dramatic. One reason is the fitting of a larger engine which was less efficient in terms of fuel per unit distance. Another reason is the A6M5 did away with the drop tank - replacing it with a centerline bomb (250 kg) of about the same weight. The A6M3 is not any better in terms of speed or tactical performance in any way that matters to us - so adopting it is not a good idea. The A6M5 is not intended to be a fighter plane at all - but a fighter bomber - a replacement for dive bombers later in the war on ships too small to carry new carrier bombers (then).

Thank you for info, el cid, but 50% seems to be somewhat overestimated, I don´t have your knowledge, however.
Another issue
-It seems that some of RHS versions have 2 slots for the conventional George, while only RHSEOS has both the George and the Rex. It seems to be a mistake.

OK -

here my system of using official designations apparently got me in trouble

Rex is N1K1

George is N1K1-J

when I updated the latter for drop tanks - I put it in the N1K1 slot vice the N1K1-J slot

It is wrong in every scenario at all levels

I will upload x.99 today to fix this - among other things