Quote:
Originally Posted by K_Freddie
Are you saying that the FM does not model fuel usage properly - Come to think of it, it doesn't.. otherwise we'll have people stalling out of the sky second to none  |
Actually, there have been multiple posts and comments on various forums about this subject. You can go search ubi forum for instance or even google search. Even the game designer admitted that IL-2, being a 10yr old game, took a very primitive approach towards fuel management modeling. In the case of P-51, the game only models one big fuel tank; it does not distinguish between wing tanks and fuelsalage tank. As you fly and fuel drains, all the game does is subtract overall weight and prolly do a bit parallel shifting to aircraft's performance curves. But the matter of fact is that's far from accurate for a real life mustang. As I said before, two exactly same mustangs, one with 50gal in fuelsalage tank and another with 25gal each in wing tanks. Although they weigh the same their performances are vast different. But based on this particular game's modeling logics, their in-game performance will be exactly the same. If you own A2A Accu-sim p-51, which is a much more accurate portrait of real life pony than IL-2, you can do the test (just make sure you load more than 20gal in fuesalage tank; anything more than 20 will shift COG significantly). I believe DCS P-51 (FM is very similar to A2A one) can do the same although I am not 100% sure. Back in WWII, the standard procedure for P-51s on long range escort missions was to drain fuelsalage tank first, then drop tanks and wing tanks last. By the time they crossed the channel into France, their fuelsalage tank will be way below 20gal or even empty. And if they are engaged by LW at this moment onwards, they can simply dump the drop tanks and leave a clean and very manuverable plane to dogfight with enemy.