PDA

View Full Version : Please fix the magical fuel leak bug on the Fws and Ta



Fish6891
03-02-2005, 04:42 AM
You take a hit and get a fuel leak message, and what looks like smoke pours out of your aircraft. You can then watch you're fuel go from 75% to empty in about 2.5 minutes, you can actually watch the arrow in the indicator indicator moving towards the left.
It happens far too frequently on the FWs and Ta.

Fish6891
03-02-2005, 04:42 AM
You take a hit and get a fuel leak message, and what looks like smoke pours out of your aircraft. You can then watch you're fuel go from 75% to empty in about 2.5 minutes, you can actually watch the arrow in the indicator indicator moving towards the left.
It happens far too frequently on the FWs and Ta.

widgeon
03-02-2005, 05:35 AM
Happens all the time.

If minor hit with flak or bullet, and fuel leak occurs, you better be prepared to bail. Fuel rapidly escapes, and within a minute- its gone. I usually carry 50% fuel.

Widgeon

Nubarus
03-02-2005, 06:01 AM
Why don't you guys just mail it to PF@1c.ru instead, like the PF readme states.

This way you don't have to open multiple threads every week about the subject.

From the readme:

"Dear folks, please read it with attention:

1. The address for bug reports:
In readme is shown new one instead of closed old il2beta@1c.ru. So use please only new one PF@1c.ru

2. We can't search at the web for your bug reports. It take too much time. So we will accept the reports that only will be sent to the address shown above.

3. The bug report should contains

a) in case of graphics glitches, sound problems (if its only problems), and other hardware related problems send us please DXDIAG file report witht in attachemnt and with your comments and screenshots (converted in JPG!) that will explain the nature of problem very preciselly and steps to reproduce the case.

b) In case of aircraft data or 3D model "problems", if you think this is incorrect you need to put the source text/photos or blueprints (if it is not the simple drawings) with the exact data and the screen shots (if you think something is wrong ) that are in comparison with the real one. Please take in account that in the only word explanation we usually do not accept such reports. Also, we don'rt model many switches, etc working. So we do not accept it as bugs. We do more working switches only when we have a time and then ussually do not rework that was not done due to limit of time, except real bugs.

c) Bugs that may have a case with Dynamic campaign generator: You need to sent us the generated mission (created witht he proper name in Missions>Campaign>[Airforce side] folder) where was a problem and the Dgen.log, Dgen2.log, Dgen3.log files from the game root directory.

d) Possible bugs that impossible to show us with the screenshots should be repeated by user and recorded in a track (preferable in both formats if possible and exclude COOP mode, becasue currently that option there switched off before official add-on due to too many functions that was implemented during development).

e) If you think that you got something wrong working in a mission - we need this mission with text, shots, tracks explanation that to identify nature or problem. However if it is own user design missions - before to sent us that mission please read manual and readme at first that to compare with the terms that pointed there for the right design.
And we don't accept the "bugs" for user made online missions, where is too large amount of any objects... (In the past once we received the "bad" online COOP mission, that was too slow in online gameplay and had great lags, etc... that was created on Berlin map, and if we will not to count just over 600,000 buildings there, had there thousands tanks, static planes, guns, etc... - it is equal many thousands players on one server!!!.... and we pointed such things in manual, why not to read? Each object on the map has own conditions and data transfers to each player! And if there are thousands such obejcts then all of the data transfers to each player!)"

tigertalon
03-02-2005, 06:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fish6891:
You take a hit and get a fuel leak message, and what looks like smoke pours out of your aircraft. You can then watch you're fuel go from 75% to empty in about 2.5 minutes, you can actually watch the arrow in the indicator indicator moving towards the left.
It happens far too frequently on the FWs and Ta. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My words exactly. Also when flying allies, many times I use machineguns only for Fws. They are enough to get a fuel leak on him, and in most cases then he is doomed, I just have to avoid him for sth like 2 minutes. Easy kill - totally unrealistic.

And when I fly Fw I try to fly it that way, that opponent never even turns his guns to me... Among with bad forwad vision and porked Mg151s, this is a real challenge (in A6 towards SpitIXe for example)

VW-IceFire
03-02-2005, 07:35 AM
Time to get some tracks together...

JG53Frankyboy
03-02-2005, 07:49 AM
olegs knows since a long time.

its "just " a question that he is saying "yes something is wrong" and than as second step that they would fix it.

p1ngu666
03-02-2005, 09:43 AM
happens on ALL planes far as i know. 190 just gets the bad leak easier than other planes.

needs tobe fixed for ALL planes

tigertalon
03-02-2005, 09:51 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
happens on ALL planes far as i know. 190 just gets the bad leak easier than other planes.

needs tobe fixed for ALL planes <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well,

indeed, it does happen on all planes, but not that often. Historically it is accurate to get a fuel leak that drains your entire fuel, from time to time. In Fw190, you get it almost always, unlike in other aircrat. In Fw you are extremely lucky if fuel stops leaking, in other ac you are extremely unlucky if it doesn't.

p1ngu666
03-02-2005, 11:02 AM
the *bad* fuel leaks always emputy the plane, and a light one can emputy a zero...

b25, a single bad fuel leak will emputy all your fuel... has many tanks, is most commen damage u will get aswell http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

i think its more silly for a multitank plane like a b25, which carries lots of fuel, than for a short or medium range 190 with one or two tanks

imo a bad fuel leak should emputy the hit tank, but leave the other tanks fuel unleaked...

GR142_Astro
03-02-2005, 12:10 PM
Fix it for the F4U as well.

One hit to the engine brings smoke and within a minute or two, the fuel is gone. No historically tough Pratt & Whit 2800 Radial and no self sealing tanks.

Not very realistic.

faustnik
03-02-2005, 12:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GR142_Astro:
Fix it for the F4U as well.

One hit to the engine brings smoke and within a minute or two, the fuel is gone. No historically tough Pratt & Whit 2800 Radial and no self sealing tanks.

Not very realistic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Darn right with that one Astro. One Japanese 7.7mm peashooter to the engine and the F4U is going down. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

tolwyn.com
03-02-2005, 12:56 PM
I'm sorry.
But have ANY of you sent these observations to the pf@1c.ru address?

??

Have you followed up?
Have you been polite about it?

faustnik
03-02-2005, 01:33 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tolwyn.com:
I'm sorry.
But have ANY of you sent these observations to the pf@1c.ru address?

??

Have you followed up?
Have you been polite about it? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

YES!!!!

Yimmy
03-02-2005, 01:42 PM
Pfft... this isnt really a bug. Different aircraft in the game suffer from different damage.

The P51 has a weak engine, the Ki61 always gets oil blasted all over the cockpit, the Hurricane is prone to a dead pilot, zeroes burst into flames at a scratch etc etc etc...

Fuel tanks are not well modeled in the game due to an engine limitation. End of, nothing will change.

Longjocks
03-02-2005, 04:44 PM
Those darn Fw pilots letting themselves get shot again? I dunno...

Fish6891
03-02-2005, 11:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Longjocks:
Those darn Fw pilots letting themselves get shot again? I dunno... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not really, but when light shrapnel from a flak puff a safe distance away from your craft forces you to RTB on several occasions you tend to figure somethings fishy.

msalama
03-03-2005, 01:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>End of, nothing will change. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah well, the pathetic whining won't at any rate. Same old BS over and over and over again... you guys sent any mail to 1C's bug reporting address yet BTW? Or you into these public dead-horse floggings just for the h*ll of it?

Korolov
03-03-2005, 03:05 AM
No, they're into dead cougar flogging - here's one in action:

http://www.mechmodels.com/fbstuff/image003.jpg

Fish6891
03-03-2005, 04:36 AM
lol, I won't even ask, Korolov

Diablo310th
03-03-2005, 08:49 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by GR142_Astro:
Fix it for the F4U as well.

One hit to the engine brings smoke and within a minute or two, the fuel is gone. No historically tough Pratt & Whit 2800 Radial and no self sealing tanks.

Not very realistic. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's the same way with the Jug.

faustnik
03-03-2005, 11:20 AM
Diablo,

I agree with you on the Jug. I'm going to try to set up a DM test with all the radials. Maybe flying towards various AAA single guns in FMB, track a single hit in arcade mode and wait for see what happens to the engine. I have the feeling that the BMW801 and M-82 will prove a lot tougher than the R-2800.

The BMW DM effects are really good. You here a .50 hit on the engine and for a change in engine sound. Sometimes you are OK, other times the engine will start loosing power. Several good hits and the engine with quit. It really adds to the excitement of flying the Fw190.

Do you have any good historic accounts of R-2800s surviving heavy damage? If we can get good tests and good data together maybe it can be fixed in the last patch.

p1ngu666
03-03-2005, 01:25 PM
perhaps we should ask for bad fuel leak to reseal for all self sealing planes after so much time or fuel drainage?

faustnik, ill see what i can find http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Diablo310th
03-07-2005, 09:01 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
perhaps we should ask for bad fuel leak to reseal for all self sealing planes after so much time or fuel drainage?

faustnik, ill see what i can find http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah self sealing tanks don't work on some planes either. maybe that's the problem with the FW.

p1ngu666
03-07-2005, 12:31 PM
well, theres 2 types of leak, the white which will seal, eventully for all selfseal planes, and the grey that wont...

u can run out of fuel from white, in coops ive ran a zero dry after leak, and a p38! after i picked up a bunch from explosion.

id really like to see it fixed for all planes tbh

Codex1971
03-12-2005, 02:00 AM
Which planes did have self sealing fuel tanks anyway?

JG54_Arnie
03-12-2005, 04:37 AM
The zero's didnt did they?


As far as I can see there's only a problem with the grey/brownish fealleaks as they never stop and drain tanks in a few minutes indeed.

p1ngu666
03-12-2005, 09:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG54_Arnie:
The zero's didnt did they?


As far as I can see there's only a problem with the grey/brownish fealleaks as they never stop and drain tanks in a few minutes indeed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

early japanease planes dont, rest do i think
a light fuel leak will drain all the fuel if it doesnt seal aswell

its also wrong because it drains fuel from all tanks, so unlike real life, having more tanks is a weakness in fb, because more tanks = greater chance of them being hit http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

anarchy52
03-12-2005, 12:06 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG54_Arnie:
The zero's didnt did they? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Later Zeros did have self-sealing fuel tanks and armor

VW-IceFire
03-13-2005, 06:38 PM
So I discovered that the FW190s fuel tank can be punctured in that serious "4 minute drain" way at dead six from .303s from a Spitfire.

I rarely use the .303s except to scare and as a total effect with the Hispanos. But it was far too easy to doom a FW190 with a second burst. If the .303 can do it, anything can really. Even if the fuel tank is a vulnerable thing...this seems kind of overdone.

p1ngu666
03-13-2005, 07:46 PM
odd thing is, 190A is near imortal onwhine to twin 50 in a b25 turret. wonding if all the armour is wrongly placed in the nose, cos from the rear its not tough really

faustnik
03-13-2005, 08:16 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
odd thing is, 190A is near imortal onwhine to twin 50 in a b25 turret. wonding if all the armour is wrongly placed in the nose, cos from the rear its not tough really <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The BMW 801 does take damage from .50 frontal hits and will loose power rapidly. They do not seem to catch fire easily though, unlike the R-2800s on P-47s and F4Us. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Codex1971
03-13-2005, 08:46 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
odd thing is, 190A is near imortal onwhine to twin 50 in a b25 turret. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Going up against a B25 in the rear quater is almost suicide in any plane...believe me...the A9 does suffer at the hands of the rear gunner. Many times I've had an instant KIA even when diving in on the B25 from above...hell even the A20 can be deadly.

WWMaxGunz
03-14-2005, 01:29 AM
Not modelled seperate tanks.....

If tanks are modelled with pressurized non-oxygen gas filling them like CO2 or as
at least one Russian fighter, cooled exhaust gasses, then that might in the model
force fuel out at a high rate.

Lot of modelling going on but only as able. Problem is, the incomplete models can
have tilted or runaway behaviours if uncompensated or unregulated by code.

purzel08
03-14-2005, 09:55 AM
...and fix the blackout-bug of the 190 too please, I guess u know very well what I mean...

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 10:04 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Codex1971:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
odd thing is, 190A is near imortal onwhine to twin 50 in a b25 turret. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Going up against a B25 in the rear quater is almost suicide in any plane...believe me...the A9 does suffer at the hands of the rear gunner. Many times I've had an instant KIA even when diving in on the B25 from above...hell even the A20 can be deadly. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

sure, the pilot dies, but not the engine, pretty much anything BUT the engine dies from my experience

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 03:24 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by purzel08:
...and fix the blackout-bug of the 190 too please, I guess u know very well what I mean... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
To my knowledge...there is no blackout bug. Blackout happens at the same G level...the FW190 can just induce more G's quicker...like the Mustang and Ki-84 can. This isn't a bug.

The fuel tank is unequivocably one on the other hand.

SlickStick
03-14-2005, 04:48 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fish6891:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Longjocks:
Those darn Fw pilots letting themselves get shot again? I dunno... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not really, but when light shrapnel from a flak puff a safe distance away from your craft forces you to RTB on several occasions you tend to figure somethings fishy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You mean besides the Fishy pilot? Hehe, actually, I hadn't noticed this until recently.

I got hit in my FW-A9, I mean only a slight peppering, and two minutes later I had no fuel. Later in the same sortie, it seemed to leak forever.

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 05:11 PM
the grey leaks do that
i fear that leak more than oil leak actully...

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 06:18 PM
SO I ask the questions...has everyone sent in tracks and data yet? If not, we should try and get information on the protection of FW190s (in standard configurations) and specifically that main fuel tank.

Then send that and a collection of tracks showing the problem.

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 06:45 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
SO I ask the questions...has everyone sent in tracks and data yet? If not, we should try and get information on the protection of FW190s (in standard configurations) and specifically that main fuel tank.

Then send that and a collection of tracks showing the problem. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

good idea
and we could ask for the bad fuel leaks to seal, but take 2-3x longer, with 2-3x the rate of leak as a light one

or some other numbers, that seem reasonable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 08:30 PM
Well I fully agree...when the tank is hit badly then no self sealant is going to fix the problem.

But there is no thin white streak from FW190s. It goes straight to the grey streak and tank is gone in 4 or less minutes.

SlickStick
03-14-2005, 08:33 PM
Ah, maybe that's the deal, IceFire. The FWs only have the major fuel leak modeled and not the minor, sealable one in the DM?

JG52_Meyer
03-14-2005, 08:39 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:



sure, the pilot dies, but not the engine, pretty much anything BUT the engine dies from my experience <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How much Fw experience you have? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
The BMW can easily be damaged with just 1 bullet. Everyone who flies the Fw knows that..

p1ngu666
03-14-2005, 08:44 PM
meyer from my tests it vastly tougher than any other engine...
ive yet to kill a bmw with 1 bullet actully..

JG52_Meyer
03-14-2005, 08:51 PM
how you test it? cos it's kinda difficult unless you pilot the plane, because no smoke or nothing will show, and yet, the engine lose power and it's gone in a few minutes...wanna experience it? fly a Fw in a quick against B25 or Il2, or Li2, or whatever with a gunner; you'll see...

JG52_Meyer
03-14-2005, 08:55 PM
funny thing is that the exact same damaged happens to the Dora, which as everyone knows, have a different engine. That says a lot about the DM http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

faustnik
03-14-2005, 10:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG52_Meyer:
how you test it? cos it's kinda difficult unless _you_ pilot the plane, because no smoke or nothing will show, and yet, the engine lose power and it's gone in a few minutes...wanna experience it? fly a Fw in a quick against B25 or Il2, or Li2, or whatever with a gunner; you'll see... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Meyer,

The BMW801 does take damage and can be killed by a few .50 rounds, but, like P1ngu says, it is far tougher than any other engine. Try flying the P-47 and see what the same hits do to the R-2800. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif The BMW has an appropriate DM, for a tough radial, unfortunately, the other radials don't.

VW-IceFire
03-14-2005, 10:28 PM
I'd say the FW190's radial engine is about as tough or a bit tougher than the La-5FN's radial which, like the FW190s, can be hit, display no visible signs of damage, and then slowly fail.

I think the toughness of the BMW is probably on account to the armor plating. Correct me if I'm wrong. Nonetheless, I think I've hit the fuel tank and caused that nasty leak from the front of a FW190. Pingu, next time one locks your B-25 up...give him some rounds and see what happens http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

JG54_Arnie
03-15-2005, 02:17 AM
Flying the Fw a lot and in dogfighting I hardly ever lose the engine, before that is possible you run out of fuel or have to RTB with wingdamage.

And there is the light fuelleaks in the FW, which get sealed really quick, so you barely notice them. But the brown fuelburn occurs a lot more often.

VW-IceFire
03-15-2005, 08:31 AM
So lets setup some testing criteria and start sending them in.

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 09:08 AM
did test with leadspitter, he cruised upto my b25, and i fired at him at .20ish
tested several planes, 190A was by FAR the toughest, ill see if i can upload tracks...

fish also said "its hard to shoot pingu down because of the rounds hitting my plane and shaking it" or similer...

also i have the feeling defensive fire is bottom priotity on netcode http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

Vipez-
03-15-2005, 12:24 PM
think the fuel leak bug also exists in Stuka, sometimes you get fuel leak, and that grey/**** smoke is pooring out, and Stuka will run out of fuel in matter of minutes..

purzel08
03-15-2005, 02:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by purzel08:
...and fix the blackout-bug of the 190 too please, I guess u know very well what I mean... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
To my knowledge...there is no blackout bug. Blackout happens at the same G level...the FW190 can just induce more G's quicker...like the Mustang and Ki-84 can. This isn't a bug.

The fuel tank is unequivocably one on the other hand. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...Sorry don´t understand this...

StellarRat
03-15-2005, 02:07 PM
I read an article somewhere (I wish I could remember where) that said self-sealing tanks are only effective against smaller rounds and fragments. I believe they had a tough time with .50 hits and didn't work at all on 20mm and above size holes. I could see a tank emptying very quickly with a 1" hole in it and lots of air flow sucking the fuel out.

Mad_Moses
03-15-2005, 02:23 PM
I'm not sure what to think about the fuel leakage issue.

A couple things I do know...

Most times if a fuel cell were to be hit by live ammo it would just blow with the aviation fuel of the era. Either blowing the wing right off or blowing you completely to hell in an instant. So I can safely say that is under modeled on all planes.

If you are leaking out of one fuel cell (on planes that carry multiple) the pilot would cut off the fuel from that tank to keep the engine from cutting out when it went dry. I think this is what is trying to be modeled on some planes that have multiple tanks.... not sure. If you notice sometimes you see "fuel leak" on the warning screen but you have no noticeable leak. It must be when you take a hit in an empty tank.

The 190s have a fuel tank that would be hard to hit but if the whole is as big as a silver dollar on any plane it would leak dry in a few minutes.

Conclusion.... don't let them shoot ya. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Regards,
Mad Moses

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 02:46 PM
nah theres no fuel switch, not even on b25...

and yes, planes dont burn or explode when hit much, like they did irl

Mad_Moses
03-15-2005, 04:01 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
nah theres no fuel switch, not even on b25...

and yes, planes dont burn or explode when hit much, like they did irl <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Fuel tank switch for P-51.

http://members.accesstoledo.com/cmoses/p51_fuel_switch.jpg

p1ngu666
03-15-2005, 04:18 PM
oh, the real things had them for sure, but u cant use it ingame to my knowledge...

Mad_Moses
03-15-2005, 04:34 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
oh, the real things had them for sure, but u cant use it ingame to my knowledge... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhh... I misunderstood your point.

What I was trying to imply was that the physics do it for you.

You will see planes like a Spit or a P-51 with a nasty fuel leak. It leaks badly for a while then gone but engine is still under power. It simulates them switching the tanks... I don't think the stoppage of visible fuel is supposed to represent the tank sealing it's self rather that it is empty. In reality a self sealing tank would seal it's self almost instantly and you wouldn't see the leakage.

I could be wrong, but I think most 109s and 190s had a single fuel cell located behind the pilot. Thus... if you see fuel leaking out then by all means it should be out of fuel after a short while.

So maybe not such a bug after all with 190 fuel leaks.

When I take a fuel leak in any plane I am just thankful I don't explode into a ball of flames like I you see on the historic gun camera footage. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Regards,
Mad Moses

VW-IceFire
03-15-2005, 04:44 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by purzel08:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by purzel08:
...and fix the blackout-bug of the 190 too please, I guess u know very well what I mean... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
To my knowledge...there is no blackout bug. Blackout happens at the same G level...the FW190 can just induce more G's quicker...like the Mustang and Ki-84 can. This isn't a bug.

The fuel tank is unequivocably one on the other hand. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

...Sorry don´t understand this... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well do enlighten....but I'm pretty sure that whatever you're talking about with regards to blacking out is not a bug because there are no bugs in that area to my knowledge.

We're talking about the fuel tank and the DM for the FW190 series.

JG54_Arnie
03-16-2005, 12:39 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mad_Moses:

I could be wrong, but I think most 109s and 190s had a single fuel cell located behind the pilot. Thus... if you see fuel leaking out then by all means it should be out of fuel after a short while.

So maybe not such a bug after all with 190 fuel leaks.
Regards,
Mad Moses <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But the point isnt that these fuelleaks emptying a tank occur, its the fact that they occur after only minor small caliber hits.

StellarRat
03-16-2005, 12:43 AM
Minor hits? 1/2" holes are minor? Go punch a 1/2" hole in your cars gas tanks and see how long the fuel lasts. That's the size of a garden hose. I bet you wouldn't get a mile down the road.

JG54_Arnie
03-16-2005, 01:00 AM
.303 are minor hits arent they? Cause those also cause the fuelburns.... And the fueltank should be able to fix a .50 hits as well no? I mean minor as in no 20 mm round or such...

JG53Frankyboy
03-16-2005, 02:34 AM
the Bf109 has one tank , the Fe190 has two tanks.

nevertheless, when a Bf109 has a fuel leak, most times (in my case actually everytime) a fuel tank leak stops - so the selfsealing tanks are working here.

in a Fw190 , that has actualy ~140 liters more than a 109, it NEVER stopes ! if i haf a fuel leak in a Fw i know, i have to go back to friendly terretory as fast as i can because soon i will be out of fuel.

if that happens on other planes too ,sure on the most japanese thats ok http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif , that should be checked by maddox games.

JG53Frankyboy
03-16-2005, 02:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
Minor hits? 1/2" holes are minor? Go punch a 1/2" hole in your cars gas tanks and see how long the fuel lasts. That's the size of a garden hose. I bet you wouldn't get a mile down the road. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
sry.............but your car has
1. no self sealing rubber in its tank
2. sure less than 540 litres http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Hetzer_II
03-16-2005, 04:10 AM
"2. sure less than 540 litres"

Sure? These american cars are bigggg.... need bigggg tanks...

;-)

VW-IceFire
03-16-2005, 08:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
Minor hits? 1/2" holes are minor? Go punch a 1/2" hole in your cars gas tanks and see how long the fuel lasts. That's the size of a garden hose. I bet you wouldn't get a mile down the road. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Uhhh we aren't talking about your cars fuel tank. This is a generally well protected WWII fighter noted for durability.

If the FW190 is right...then its right but that means there's a whole bunch of aircraft that are wrong. With a very short burst of .303 fire from dead six you can cause a fuel leak that will doom a FW190 in 4-5 minutes. Now apparently the FW190 is supposed to be a well protected plane and all things aside, most aircraft were protected enough in the fuel tank to take that sort of fire. From off angles not so much but from dead six...you'd think so anyways.

Last night I flew the Ta-152H. Interestingly enough, the wing fuel tanks leak a bit slower. About 8 minutes of flight time before they ran everything dry. But then I got hit in the main fuselage tank and everything is dry in 4 minutes. That really doesn't seem to make sense.

Pingu or someone else, we need to hop on HL and test this.

Mad_Moses
03-16-2005, 08:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
the Bf109 has one tank , the Fe190 has two tanks.

nevertheless, when a Bf109 has a fuel leak, most times (in my case actually everytime) a fuel tank leak stops - so the selfsealing tanks are working here.

in a Fw190 , that has actualy ~140 liters more than a 109, it NEVER stopes ! if i haf a fuel leak in a Fw i know, i have to go back to friendly terretory as fast as i can because soon i will be out of fuel.

if that happens on other planes too ,sure on the most japanese thats ok http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif , that should be checked by maddox games. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with this. It's much rarer to get a terminal fuel leak in a 109 than it is in a 190 which doesn't make sense.

MM

StellarRat
03-16-2005, 07:22 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
Minor hits? 1/2" holes are minor? Go punch a 1/2" hole in your cars gas tanks and see how long the fuel lasts. That's the size of a garden hose. I bet you wouldn't get a mile down the road. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
sry.............but your car has
1. no self sealing rubber in its tank
2. sure less than 540 litres http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I was trying to make a point. I know that cars don't hold as much fuel. However, few 1/2" holes could easily drain 150 gallons of fuel in short order. Remember that the airflow over the plane is going to suck the fuel out like a paint sprayer. I'm pretty sure Oleg simulates fuel loss in stages, like minor, average and major, depending on how many hits he calculates your tanks have taken. (This may have nothing to do with how many holes you see in your wings, etc...) .303s while not leaving big holes could certainly leave a lot of holes due to their high rate of fire. Whether or not these seal themselves or how many seal themselves is another issue. It could be that holes are not individually calculated to seal, but taken as a whole and then evaluated as to the overall chance for all of them to close up.

p1ngu666
03-16-2005, 10:20 PM
well, theres 2 issues
1 easy bad or terminal leak on 190

2 bad leak draining all the fuel in your plane, regardless of type (including light leak on japenease planes)


and ice, yeah ill test wid ya http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif or anyone else, long as they are fairly mature http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JG52_Meyer
03-16-2005, 10:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
did test with leadspitter, ..... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Oh, I understand now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
03-17-2005, 12:06 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG52_Meyer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:
did test with leadspitter, ..... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Oh, I understand now http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

gimme email address, and ill send ya tracks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JG52_Meyer
03-17-2005, 09:34 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by p1ngu666:



gimme email address, and ill send ya tracks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


Thanks, but don't need any track.. I know for a fact that the BMW can be damaged http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

faustnik
03-17-2005, 10:04 AM
Meyer,

P1ngu isn't saying that the BMW801D can't be damaged, just that it is much tougher than the other radials.

I've been thinking about this and it should have some advantage over the R-2800 mounted in the P-47 and F4U because of the armored cowling ring. The Fw190A4 through A8 had a 6.5mm armored cowling ring. In the A9 this was increased to 10mm.

That being said, the R-2800 seems much too weak. I don't think it takes a hit any better than a Spitfire's Merlin. So, this is not an issue with the Fw190 DM as much as with the DMs of the P-27 and F4U. Radials were well known for ability to absorb battle damage.

LLv34_Stafroty
03-17-2005, 02:36 PM
What would Amiwhiners think if their beloved cobras, P40:S Ponys and other planes would also have such terrible fuel leaks?? they should have, cos, most of the times, their planes are bounded with 20mm-30mm cannons, which, self sealing tanks were not to seal. They still do seal after short time, wonder why and how.

NorrisMcWhirter
03-17-2005, 02:56 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
f the FW190 is right...then its right but that means there's a whole bunch of aircraft that are wrong. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly my thoughts and what I posted when I first noticed this some time ago.

And you have to ask that question, Strat? The answer is a no-brainer.

Norris

Blutarski2004
03-17-2005, 03:16 PM
Fuel tank damage -

Self-sealingtank technology is a complicated issue, as the following commentary from here:

( http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hangar/8217/fgun/fgun-ar.html )

will show -

QUOTE -
Self-sealing fuel tanks were as important as armour. Early attempts involved covering the inside or outside of a metal tank with some soft material, which expanded in contact with fuel, to seal any bullet holes. But this was not very efficient, and it was soon discovered that the bullet entry holes were a comparatively minor problem. The exit holes made by the tumbling bullets were considerably larger. Worse, the shock of impact and the pressure wave inside the tank caused it to rupture. In the first American tests, the entry holes were small, but the entire rear of the tank was knocked out.[68] The answer was a flexible fuel cell of self-sealing material, with as few seams as possible, and suspended in straps so that it could absorb shocks without rupture. Such a tank should not be in direct contact with the fuselage skin, because the moving tank could cause the skin to buckle, the torn metal skin could cut into the tank, sparks were often generated when the projectiles passed through the metal skin, and the skin might trigger explosive rounds.

Evidently, self-sealing fuel tank installations were costly both in weight and in volume compared with conventional fuel tanks. And of course there was also a limit to their usefulness. The US Navy designed its self-sealing tanks to resist .50 hits and found that they also offered some protection against 20 mm hits. But if an explosive round blasted a large hole in the wall of the tank there was no hope to seal it. For high-altitude aircraft the fuel tanks had to be pressurised, but that made sealing far more difficult. Hence self-sealing tanks were increasingly replaced by integral fuel tankage after the war, despite the higher vulnerability.

The risk of explosion did only exist if there was a suitable fuel/air mixture. A leak would of course provide such a mixture, but there was also a risk if an incendiary or explosive projectile entered the tank. Soviet designers found a solution: The fuel tanks were pressurised with cooled and filtered exhaust gases.
-UNQUOTE


- - - - -


BMW 801 radial engine -

The beloved Colonel Kit Carson pointed out that one of the design faults of the BMW 801 radial, in terms of combat survival, was the routing of it oil lines -

QUOTE -
The BMW 801D was a 14 cylinder, twin-row radial with direct fuel injection. A 10.9 foot diameter, 3-bladed VDM prop was used and was provided with hand lever or automatic pitch control. The 801D radial air-cooled engine first appeared on the Dornier Do 217 and the Fw 190. Its most novel feature was the oil cooler system which was a number of finned tubes shaped into a ring of tubes a little larger in diameter than the cooling fan. This ring was fitted into the rounded front portion of the cowling just aft of the fan.
I don't think this was a good idea. For example, my principal aiming point was always the forward portion of an enemy ship; the engine, cockpit, wing root section. If you get any hits at all, even only a few, you're bound to put one or two slugs into the engine compartment. Having a couple of bullets riccochet off the engine block and tear up some ignition harness is not too bad at all, at least not fatal. But to have all those thin-walled oil cooling tubes ahead of the engine is bad news. Any hits or riccochets in the engine section are bound to puncture the oil tubes. Then the whole engine is immersed in oil spray, and sometimes it would flash over into a fire. All of the 12 Focke-Wulfs that I shot down sent off a trail of dense, boiling oil smoke heavy enough to fog up my gun camera lens and windshield if I were so close.
- UNQUOTE

VW-IceFire
03-17-2005, 09:28 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JG53Frankyboy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by StellarRat:
Minor hits? 1/2" holes are minor? Go punch a 1/2" hole in your cars gas tanks and see how long the fuel lasts. That's the size of a garden hose. I bet you wouldn't get a mile down the road. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
sry.............but your car has
1. no self sealing rubber in its tank
2. sure less than 540 litres http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I was trying to make a point. I know that cars don't hold as much fuel. However, few 1/2" holes could easily drain 150 gallons of fuel in short order. Remember that the airflow over the plane is going to suck the fuel out like a paint sprayer. I'm pretty sure Oleg simulates fuel loss in stages, like minor, average and major, depending on how many hits he calculates your tanks have taken. (This may have nothing to do with how many holes you see in your wings, etc...) .303s while not leaving big holes could certainly leave a lot of holes due to their high rate of fire. Whether or not these seal themselves or how many seal themselves is another issue. It could be that holes are not individually calculated to seal, but taken as a whole and then evaluated as to the overall chance for all of them to close up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So here's the crux of the issue...why doesn't this happen elsewhere? Especially on less protected aircraft?

p1ngu666
03-17-2005, 09:59 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Meyer,

P1ngu isn't saying that the BMW801D can't be damaged, just that it is much tougher than the other radials.

I've been thinking about this and it should have some advantage over the R-2800 mounted in the P-47 and F4U because of the armored cowling ring. The Fw190A4 through A8 had a 6.5mm armored cowling ring. In the A9 this was increased to 10mm.

That being said, the R-2800 seems much too weak. I don't think it takes a hit any better than a Spitfire's Merlin. So, this is not an issue with the Fw190 DM as much as with the DMs of the P-27 and F4U. Radials were well known for ability to absorb battle damage. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

for sure the bmw should be resonbably tough, and well protected, but HOW much better? from what ive done it seems masivly better, easly more than 2x as tough as anything else...

im wondering if the armour is wrongly all up front, hence its weak from the rear...

and yeah, r2800 isnt much tougher than merlin, if u know where to hit, which is actully the wrong place to hit, i think http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

hopefully i can do a test with fausnik http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

faustnik
03-18-2005, 10:15 AM
Well, P1ngyu and I did some tests and he was wrong. The Fw190A is not 2x tougher than any other plane from a frontal attack, it is at least 3x tougher. From the side it is similar to other a/c but, for some reason it is much harder to kill dead on.

The P-47 dies if you spit at its engine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

p1ngu666
03-18-2005, 10:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by faustnik:
Well, P1ngyu and I did some tests and he was wrong. The Fw190A is not 2x tougher than any other plane from a frontal attack, it is at least 3x tougher. From the side it is similar to other a/c but, for some reason it is much harder to kill dead on.

The P-47 dies if you spit at its engine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

JG52_Meyer
03-18-2005, 02:25 PM
No, I wasn't wrong.. I was just saying that the following quotes are not true:

-odd thing is, 190A is near imortal onwhine to twin 50 in a b25 turret.

-sure, the pilot dies, but not the engine, pretty much anything BUT the engine dies from my experience

This is just wrong. I know cos I fly the 190 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Never said the the R2800 is stronger that BMW, because I almost never fly the P47. You know, I don't like to say things about planes which I don't fly, unlike other ppl... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

p1ngu666
03-18-2005, 05:10 PM
i fly all planes http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

to kill 190a motor, id haveto get a LONG sustained burst in, that hits alot, and doesnt get lost in the netcode when it busy, which it is cos some guy in a fw190 is shooting me with 6 guns http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif