<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