Forum Message
| City: | Ottawa  | | Personal Data: | Male, born: January 09 1954 | | Membership | 18years 135days ago. | | Last Login | 16years 43days ago. | | Last Move | 16years 163days ago. | SteveMartin is currently  | Send a mail to SteveMartin |
| Message header | Area/Game: | Blue Max | | Topic: | Suggestions, improvement, critics | | Subject: | Re: Fixing German Fuel Tanks | | Posted by: | SteveMartin  - 16years 260days ago. |
|
|
| Message text Regarding your first point. I don't have time to do any detailed research on the causes of death of World War One flyers, but a VERY cursory examination of ONE source
http://www.theaerodrome.com/aces/
shows that of the ten top aces of WW 1, at least one died from a PK chit and a second probably died from a FTE chit (in game terms,) specifically these two were Von Richtofen and McCudden. Two others were killed in flying accidents, one a mid air collision and the other from stalling during take off.
Two of Ten works out to 20 percent of the sample, even greater when you consider that many of those aces listed did not become casualties. I am at a lost to recall the exact number of chits available for a draw, but i suspect that the odds of drawing a PK chit or FTE chit are not quite so high. Now, in my opinion a sample of ten is not statistically relevant, but does serve to illustrate my opinion that those chits should not be removed from the mix. How many of ALL casualties were cause by such occurences is probably impossible to know, but given the flimsy and open nature of these aircraft I think we can assume that the odds are well reflected by the counter mix.
On to point 2. Realism. Well the reality was, German aircraft have less enduance. All of our combats are assumed to be over the front lines, not on one side or the other. Now this very fact is of course a fallacy as battles were more often than not behind one side or the other. Specific scenario rules (and I am not opposed to these,) could be generated to reflect such a situation and fuel loads could be altered to reflect flight to the target area. It would never result in the Germans being given a larger fuel load, only in the Allies having less. The game as it stands, however, does NOT assume that the combats are going on anywhere other than over the front line.
Point 3. Godwin's Law. Bah. History may often be rewritten, but it can never be altered. To be critical of one side or another is to be expected. There is no denying that there are some players who find it "Cool" to play the Germans for whatever reason they may have. I know personally of one game designer ex of Avalon Hill who had a very strong German fetish, because he thought that their uniforms were
"pretty neat." At the same time, you very rarely see the same level of coolness being applied to the Russians or the Japanese or the Italians.
The 4th Point. My initial post was sarcastic and you are quite right, it does nothing to detract from the merit of the original assertion.
What it does serve to do though is to point out that original assertion had very little merit to begin with.
Point 5. Ask ANY pilot which he would rather have, a full tank of fuel or half a tank.
You are labouring under a misapprehension about aircraft loading. A full load of ordinance hanging from your wings certainly makes a big difference to your performance. A "CLEAN" configuration is the optimum for air to air combat. If you are as informed about flight mechanics as you say you are, then you should know that CLEAN configuration means full INTERNAL fuel.
Our little planes here do not carry the thousands of pounds of fuel and or weapons that modern aircraft carry, indeed the internal fuel load of the F18C alone is more than FIVE TIMES the weight of a fully loaded SE5a (4900 kg vs 900 kg.) The principles of Energy loss and retention are the same, but the effects are nowhere near as pronounced. An Albatross weighing in at just over 1000kg is simply not going to gain the same amount of energy as an F18 weighing 16600kg, when it dives.
Those considerations aside, Fuel State is still a primary determination when it comes to a decision to accept combat or not and the pilot who does not watch his fuel gauge will soon find himself walking home.
Point 6. I assume you must come from Missouri. Are you seriously trying to suggest that German aircraft had adequate endurance to allow them to hang in there with the Allied aircraft, unless the battle was over their own airfield ??? Perhaps the ME 109s had the same endurance over London than the defending Spitfires. Maybe the P47s could fly all the way to Berlin and fight for half an hour and still be able to make it back to base. There is MORE than enough technical information available to be able to see the obvious facts unless you just don't want to believe them. |
|
|
|
|
Donate
Leagues
Gonzaga
Blue Max
Cartagena
Wooden Ships...
King Me!
VampiRing
