[Billfish]

Hi All;

Are "drop tanks" part of the ban on weapons discussions being part of the "loadout" aspect of the sim. If not I'd like to discuss the "correct" addition of another option very often used on dual bamboo drop tanked aircraft (ex. Ki-43/61/etc.) that being the use of only a singular tank on the proper side to offset torque (would not be altered) so a "new" add to loadouts and the missing droptank loadouts of the same type used on Ki-43-II.

The droptanks are already in the sim (though wrong color)......However quite often in fact more then not only a singular drop tank was used placed on the left side of the aircraft to offset the imbalance with torque. This should do nothing to affect the aircrafts abilities past range (to be half the improvement of dual droptanks clearly).....Though for simplicity should simply retain the dual drop tanks aircraft performance losses as to drag and weight.

Though doubtful that it could be included, in reality being that one side or the other of dtanks or bombs could be released (could drop just one at a time retaining the other)...Quite often aircraft flew with a single droptank on the left, and bomb on the right.

Lastly..........The Ki-61-I Ko & Otsu NEVER carried bombs of the 250kg range...The wings not designed to carry such loads. The Ki-61-I-Hei however was reinforced to do so....However it's ordinance also included carrying a pair of 100Kg bombs INSTEAD of only the 250 we have in the sim.

(issues as to air to air "gravity/unpropelled" phosphorous clusters/bombs not touched on due to that being a weapon so no doubt exceeding the standards of AAA).

So, are "droptank" loadouts adjustable or do they fall under the weapons restrictions due to placement?..................Further justification to be supplied pending response.

K2

[Forager]

Billfish, look here: viewtopic.php?t=6205&highlight=drop+tanks

OK, here is a what if that might upset onliners:

We are in a DF server and have same planes, I have normal tank configuration but you have one tank countering torque, are you cheating?

I know everyone should drop tanks when engaging but sometimes it does not happen and if we both keep tanks you have advantage.

Now many may consider this a silly argument but given the recent and to a point, ongoing suspicion of mods from AAA it is better to err on the side of caution.

AAA policy is no loadout changes to stock planes, only New planes in New slots.
(The link is inoperative)

[Billfish]

that being the use of only a singular tank on the proper side to offset torque (would not be altered)

[RAF_Magpie]

If it would be done as purely cosmetic- then that would be ok. If, of course, the aircraft had one drop tank all we need to do is to nudge it into the correct spot... The other option is, if its a dual drop tank configuration; making the other tank 'invisible'...

However, should the aircraft in question not have drop tanks stock - than it wont happen.

[Billfish]

Well drop tanks were common with all Japanese aircraft...Those I speak of and the type of tank most deffinately. Though my request would be with a single Dtank, only half the fuel added of 2 YET FM change would remain as with 2 (so really no change using dual tanks), and drag would remain the same as well as weight as 2....Torque to be untouched.

As tho the Ki-43....No drop tanks is just wrong...very wrong....The ERRORS in bomb loadouts (having bombs at all in the Ko and Otsu Ki-61 wrong, Hei could also be 100Kg or for many planes using one bomb and one tank) a weapons issue.....SO though again costing the plane as to weight and drag with less punch, never the less to cagey to broach.

So just a single tank option on the Ki-61 and Ki-43 to be mounted on the left wing......and drop tanks added to Ki-43-II.

K2

[Th!rdeye]

And API belting was common on USAAF planes after 43'. And the P-47 needs a correct loadout with 2 1000lbs boms and 1 500lbs. And the ammo count on the Hellcat is wrong. And the blah blah needs blah blah.

Their are tons of loadouts that are wrong.. Just because it needs to be fixed doesn't mean its okay to fix.

It is a loadout change. A loadout change is a Weapon Mod. Weapon Mods are forbidden. End of story. I know what does into making this, and it is most definatlely a weapon mod.

[RAF_Magpie]

However Th!rdeye, as I said in my post above, which pretty much outlines all that is possible without breaching AAA guidelines;

If it would be done as purely cosmetic- then that would be ok. If, of course, the aircraft had one drop tank all we need to do is to nudge it into the correct spot... The other option is, if its a dual drop tank configuration; making the other tank 'invisible'...

However, should the aircraft in question not have drop tanks stock - than it wont happen.

That is it, unfortunately Billfish if the aircraft doesnt have the Drop Tanks as stock, such as the Ki-43, then its not going to be added.

[fly_zo]

... there is a possibility for adding new ki 43 ( new slot ) to the game ( kind of field mod or similar) so historical payloads ( and the rest of stuff) can be modeled/edited .

cheers
Z

[Billfish]

That is it, unfortunately Billfish if the aircraft doesnt have the Drop Tanks as stock, such as the Ki-43, then its not going to be added.

By "stock" are you saying;
"stock" as was used on real Ki-43
or
"stock" as is in the sim
?

K2

[RAF_Magpie]

as in sim But as the Croatian said, we can clone the '43 into her own slot...

[High Plains Drifter]

ahh just give the old lady what see wants guys and maybe she will finally be nice to us.

[Billfish]

as in sim But as the Croatian said, we can clone the '43 into her own slot...

Ah rgr......Very well then......I drop this request, thanks for your responses.

K2

[Billfish]

And API belting was common on USAAF planes after 43'. And the P-47 needs a correct loadout with 2 1000lbs boms and 1 500lbs. And the ammo count on the Hellcat is wrong. And the blah blah needs blah blah.

Their are tons of loadouts that are wrong.. Just because it needs to be fixed doesn't mean its okay to fix.

It is a loadout change. A loadout change is a Weapon Mod. Weapon Mods are forbidden. End of story. I know what does into making this, and it is most definatlely a weapon mod.

and p.s. to this..................You're speaking of weapons that have an effect on other players directly. I'm speaking of a fuel tank that would actually detract from the users performance with no gain (as in it really ends up being a cosmetic adjustment yet to insure drag and weight are increased utilizes the 2 tank condition).

K2

[RAF_Magpie]

but we can do you a field mod clone for the 43 & make the one sided tank configs on the others - but technically they would still be dual equipped 1 simply invisible. request still valid

[Billfish]

Naw, N/p.....That's a long walk for just a look and falls under my muttering about other aspects of the sim.

A good example being.......Ki-43-I-A/B/C....There was no such set of beasts really. It all a Ki-43(-I) with different armament selections (though aspects that did change over time I'd bet NOT moddeled).

What it should be is a singular Ki-43(-I) with the following loadout options.
2x 12.7mm (Default)
2x 7.7mm
1x 7.7mm + 1x 12.7mm
Empty

The ability for folks to "lock out" loadouts resolving any issue as to what folks should use in a particular coop....Yet such minor things simply perpetuating mis-understanding of an aircraft. This sim in many ways what teaches (or at least introduces) folks to what was out there. However if you needed slots that's one way to find 2.

K2