Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyJWest
Sorry, Ramstein, I don't think TD work that way. I certainly wouldn't. If somebody requests a change to an aircraft FM, it is down to them to provide the data to explain why. Do you expect TD to be experts on 5 years of postings on half-a-dozen different forums?
As for the specific question of the P-51 handling changing due to fuel balance, I've seen no evidence that IL-2 models this. Certainly manoeuvrability increases with reducing inertia (and maximum speed increases too, though only noticeably at high altitudes, as should be expected). I can't detect any obvious stability changes with fuel load in the P-51, and if this is correct any change to the FM CoG is either going to reduce stability or manoeuvrability under all fuel loads. Which is it you want?
|
Ramstein has had this discussion with people several times... you're not the first if my memory serves
According to what Oleg said years ago the CoG does not change with different levels of fuel in the tank. The weight does change and so the handling of an aircraft certainly does change overall but the CoG does not shift. Again, this is what I had heard so I'm relaying the information third hand but it was from a first hand source originally.
The fuel tank indicator in every plane is therefore (unless new information is presented)
graphical only. The same "issue" exists for any aircraft with multiple fuel tanks. The Tempest for instance empties out of the main tank first with the wing tanks still having fuel available but the CoG never changes.
This had been explained ad naseum years ago but some are still convinced that the graphical indicator has an impact on flight model.
The CoG of the Mustang could still be wrong... but the fuel tanks are inconsequential.