Player Card, bottom right, click “arcade battles” and swap to air realistic battles in drop down with the pvp rating, win rate, average team position and stuff.
Ooh I see now, didn’t know that was a thing.
Sure thing buddy, I spend so much time killing bot planes that it only happens less than 1 in 6 matches. Truly I am the destroyer of attacker waves.
1 Like
Test flight with P-51H (2.7-3.3 km, IAS 440-460 km/H cruise speed at 100% throttle, full p-pitch and rads):
100% (90 minute fuel) Needs -10% elevator trim to fly straight without elevator pressure
min (27 min fuel) Needs- 17% elevator trim to fly straight without elevator pressure
“Straight” is “less than 5 m/s climb, but not negative.”
Not a perfect test by any means, especially since I’m inexperienced with the H variant and other planes fly level with just 1-3% positive elevator trim. The H mustang really confuses me.
Equality is to: receive equal (same weighted) food rations (not based on your own maximum weight), equal amount of attention, exact same set of (constitutional) rights.
Not that certain set of populus have 30% more/less rights (because of something).
Every afterburning jet should have 6min minimum fuel, other planes 3 - this is an example of equality.
1 Like
Planes aren’t people. Whether you like it or not, every plane is treated equally with 30% of its max load.
Except it isn’t, because fuel consumption varies greatly. A 109 K-4 will run through “20min” of fuel in just 12min due to increased consumption in WEP, while for example a Bearcat will last for 18min.
That’s 112kg and 212kg of fuel respectively. Even lasting the same amount of time, the 109 will still have 170kg of fuel.
So are you gonna match them on flight time (Bearcat has a relative advantage) or weight (109 has a relative advantage)? Who gets to be arbitrarily penalized?
Nobody forces anybody to take those minimum fuel values to ARB - it is just a possibility, so each player will be able to set preferable amount of fuel according to: plane/stayle/gamemode/spading state of the vehicle without occasional issues like with planes who suffer from too high minimum value.
I will better end our lovely conversation (because you are not j-outing from your Bf 109 K with full fuel load at any circumstances as I see) the same way I started: @PercussionCap, your irrational logic is 🤡 (“funny”).
1 Like
<3
1 Like
Different amounts of fuel = different performance. one extreme example is the f-15a using drop tanks and minimum fuel compared to no tanks and max fuel, the first option is much better to use as using max fuel makes it extremely hard to turn the f-15 no idea why its so extreme with the f-15 but its good as an example
2 Likes
in my opinion it may just be the aircraft they use
That would be a fair argument, however that is not the topic.
You guys seem to be missing the understanding of existing flight manuals dictating required fuel levels for necessary combat sorties. Gaijin works in fairly loose tandem with those, but does pay attention to them - For the most part.
Also, your arguments about it are garbage. The system is fine as it is and doesn’t need any changing - If you’re losing dogfights to heavier aircraft while you’re in a lighter aircraft, that’s a skill issue for you to fix.
2 Likes
are you sure this frase of yours is addressed properly to ppl you noted@? We advocating for making overweighed by fuel planes to be leighter.
The point is still going way over your head.
You could lower it to 5 minutes of fuel - Which isn’t enough to do anything btw - And it still won’t make a difference for heavier aircraft.
A Corsair will still be heavier than a Zero, completely regardless of fuel capacity.
The same applies for all heavy interceptors, interceptors, strike aircraft, bombers and heavy fighters capable of high ordinance loads. No amount of fuel change will change that. They will always be heavier.
That is why you adapt to the aircraft and learn how to contend with lighter aircraft.
And hey, guess what? Sometimes there’s nothing that can be done. Is what it is. If you can’t deal, change aircraft. That simple.
2 Likes
However, it can out-turn a N1K2-J1 and Ki-94-II if flying vertically.
With 40 minute fuel load for EC.
*Not in a sustained turn, but instantenous turn while you got speed.
1 Like
Which is one strength of the Corsair that can be used.
Now, whether all the mentioned aircraft are at reasonable BRs is another argument, but setting that aside to keep my argument as barney-style as possible for the fella here so he can try to keep up.
1 Like
Not surprising with how nerfed the N1K2s are. Don’t have a Ki-94 (wish I did) but with how big and heavy it is, I don’t doubt it either.
The Corsair -4B is much more agile than some think, have had plenty of fun in the regular -4.
40 minute fuel 5.7 corsair can outturn 6.0 japanese planes.
And planes with more fuel likely have far stronger engines too - like the F82E twin mustang.
1 Like
I do love how there’s still no reaction btw to hard data confirming that doubling the fuel load for the Ki-44-II barely makes a difference in climb rate and SEP
(I shall just keep repeating this now until a reaction occurs.)
This went off track very quickly, and for now it will be closed. Derailment this far is simply unacceptable. I would recommend checking this post by Stona for what is acceptable and what is not on overlays etc, and not using a thread about fuel load differences to debate an already answered topic…
9 Likes
I have read all 130+ replies in cleaning up and I have to say, to use your own thread to continuously mock and insult people who are replying and doing a fairly good job in sticking to the conversation is way beyond what we call acceptable. You may disagree, but you may not insult others based purely on disagreement.
The thread will stay closed as clearly it is not going to continue constructively.
7 Likes