|
|
#11
10-25-2007, 05:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Ramstein,
I'm afraid that the guys above are right. This tankage problem affects all the planes in the sim so everyone is lumbered with the same problem. From reading Oleg's latest posts in this forum the latest and last patch, 4.09, is done and dusted and will be released soon and will consist of some new maps and a few tweaks here and there. Your UBI posts did however generate some really good advice about flying the P-51 in this sim, especially regards trim and prop pitch settings, so there are some workarounds. I could not agree with you more on your point about adding planes that never flew. It seems to me that time could have been more fruitfully spent adding a cockpit and crew positions to, say, the B-17 and Avenger. I appreciate that this is a subject very dear to you as I see your in San Diego and judging from last nights news reports I'd be running for my life right now and bugger a flight sim! Perhaps in a couple of years we'll all be enjoying the P-51, with correct modelling of fuel systems, in SoW. Good luck, Arthur. 
|
|
#12
11-01-2007, 05:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
~S~
I found that the P-51B/C didnt have center fusl. tanks but the P-51D-5 and later models did have and through off the CG of the later models. When the problem of the later models Mustangs was found and the reason that the plane was crashing due to the full center fusl. tanks, the brass higher up order that only 60 to 80 gals of fuel was to be in the center tank, also that the center tank be used and drain off frist before switching to drop tanks according to the offical Army Air Force manual, also for more details on the P-51 Mustangs I suggust reading Squadron/Signal books on the P-51 Mustangs (Walk Around the P-51 Mustangs) and P-51 Mustangs, also In Detail & Scale P-51 Mustang pt.1 and 2 By Bert Kinzey. These are 2 exlcet books, also Squadron/Signal has great books on the Bf 109s and FW 190's. In flying the P-51b/c/d models I like to suggest taking only 25% fuel and 2 75 gal drop tanksI I fly the mustang with this fuel load, just dont forget to drop your tanks before enter combat. 31st_KABAYO
|
|
#13
11-01-2007, 05:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The late production B/C did get fuselage tanks.
|
|
#14
11-01-2007, 12:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Give up already. It is what it is and you will have to deal with it that way. There are a number of issues on both sides of the line that will never be fixed. This is the nature of it all.
On a side note, and this may be a placebo effect, after I got 1946, I set all of my joystick settings back to default and all of the planes seem to respond 100% better than before. Like I said, could be placebo effect but I use those settings for good now.
|
|
#18
11-01-2007, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
 It was your choice to pick a fight with me because I have attempted, over the last few years, to get this porked plane fixed. And an easy fix it is. If it were plane your country and brothers flew that had severe problems, you would whine like a stuffed pig. Get over it.
|
|
#19
11-01-2007, 07:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
So is the CoG of all planes modelled at max takeoff weight or some value less? If I understand correctly all planes are modelled with their fuel tanks right above the CoG so as they empty they have zero effect on the CoG thus stability due to CoG position does not change in game.
Ramstein makes a valid point if the CoG is modelled at some position that represents a full fuel load on the P-51. Althought I do not think he is grasping the concept that multiple tanks are not modelled in game and his request cannot be implemented as he would like.  The only thing that could possibly be done is change the position of the CoG to a spot that represents the rear tank being empty all the time and just give the plane less fuel (ie range) at 100%. Disclaimer: Red & Blue flame away. Personally the P-51 is fine for me, kills things well and also makes a nice target. From most FM comments I swear this game must run differently on each PC.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
