Refueling and rearming in airfield

[Agilepig]

I usually fly with Bf109G-2. In some servers, G-2s are placed far from front. I fly to front, fight or flight few minutes, land and go back to the base far from front. It is inefficient and inconvenient. My aircraft is not damaged! I successfully landed, too! I can refly if airfield give me some gasoline and ammo, but I can't. 

 

 

 

I didn't want repairing in airfield(It will conflict with map designer's intention) but I think refueling and rearming are needed.

[PA-Sniv]

If you want instant action, you can fly on dogfight servers (e.g. Lapino map).

 

Cheers,

[Anw.StG2_Tyke]

doesnt even make sense to me, technically.

take off from a far airfield... and land on a frontline airfield, and expect to find the right fuels, the right ammo, the right tools equipment, and the competent people to help you?

Nope nope nope for a dozen reasons.

Ahhh yeah, thats why there are a lot of stories from the Luftwaffe where exactly that happens, because every unit was selfish. Its not like the 109's used the same fuel at that time, its not like they had the same ammo and the same tools and the same competent persons....

 

I tell you something, a Black Man who can refule a He-111 can do so the same with a 109. A black man who can fill Ammo in a 109 F-4 can do it the same in the 109 G-2 and so on and so on.

(Black Man is another term for ground crew)

 

Those guys could change engines at their airfield while the enemy was only some kilometres in distance.... hell the VVS even had to remodell some planes because they were in wrong versions out of the production and you tell us that a mechanic couldn't do that?

 

Oh and guess what, It was pretty common that Pilots landed at airfield of different units because they were carried away or the fuel run short. And guess what, they got refueled by those other units and could fly again.

[=LD=Hethwill]

Any non sanctioned landings on airfields other than the group designed ones will not result on a "automated transfer to that airfield".

 

You will be grounded and your airplane put aside until your CO confirms every detail about the mission which forced you to land on a different airfield. Then you could air taxi back to your base OR be transferred to another unit, but would take more than a few moments for sure.

 

This is correct by any air force standards during WW2.

 

Onto BoS GAME !!!...

 

Rearming and refueling on own squadron AF is a different story. I'd make it 5 minutes long, for the sake of gameplay balance. BoB record stands at 7 minutes ( not 100% fuel though ) and was not the norm. Norm was 20 minutes for BoB, and way more for others.

Edited November 28, 2014 by =LD=Hethwill_Khan

[Agilepig]

I want say my opinion, but my English skill is obstacle...

 

Actually, problem is not limited in incombenience. When I land other airfield, my aircraft will disapper. it is not good for my team. This aircraft is not dameged or crashed. Few minute later(maybe 10min?), it could refueling, rearming, and take off again. If this aircraft cannot refueling at the airfield I landed, it have to go back to rear base. Because It didn't dameged. Decreasing aircraft count cause of landing other airfield is not fair.

Edited November 28, 2014 by gomwolf

[=LD=Hethwill]

I agree with refuel and rearm on the HOME airfield - the one where you spawned. Not on others.

[MarcAnton]

Effin ell...

 

looking further intop it...

the engiines ran on the same fuel...

the bearings differed might need a different kind of grease...?!

ammo... same...

 

 

this specific setup 109F4/109G2 might actually work.

 

 

However, i maintain that for different planes it might not be the case.... not at all.

Yak9T on a Yak9K airfield... only ammo for the MG.

Yak1 on a La-5 airbase... no ammo.

Il-2 on La-5 airbase... only small Bombs, No guns except 20mm... which were the same.

 

All in all, this must be studied in depth - if it is a generic feature, the Simulator loses its credibility fast.

 

 

 

 

 

What is a Yak9K airbase at all ?    Are these airbases are produced together with the planes ?     

[siipperi]

I think we who would like to see it in the game is mainly for gameplay purposes, it's much more interesting and exciting make multiple sorties on the frontline with EXACTLY the same virtual plane that you refueld and rearm within reasonable time. What we don't like is use god damn awful menu and just spawn new plane each time, what a waste! Not like they spawned new plane every time you came to home + this would allow to make really interesting multiplayer fights where sides are given specific amount of ammo, fuel and planes at the start of each mission. And you consume those resources, so instead of consuming new plane that are more limited, just consume ammo and fuel!

 

This game already have so much gameish features so why not make another one that actually would make sense?

 

In DCS I have had 4+h missions using the same plane and just refueled and rearmed it on the tanker and on the ground. Beats spawning fresh plane each time.

[MiloMorai]

How much time is to be assigned for this Rf&Ra?

What is a Yak9K airbase at all ?    Are these airbases are produced together with the planes ?     

 

An airbase that Yak9Ks are assigned to. Not to hard to comprehend.

[KoN_]

I had the same question yesterday after a sucessfull sortie took off and landed same airfield , end mission went to refuel rearm them my aircraft was gone , only He111.... left , if i landed with no damage surly thats my aircraft . or can some one else come in and take while in menu screen refueling  setup  ect ect ???.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

That happens a lot and should be addressed.

I had the same question yesterday after a sucessfull sortie took off and landed same airfield , end mission went to refuel rearm them my aircraft was gone , only He111.... left , if i landed with no damage surly thats my aircraft . or can some one else come in and take while in menu screen refueling  setup  ect ect ???.

[[KWN]T-oddball]

again gentlemen...options! let it be part of the game but let the mission designers choose how it is implemented.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Again I'm favouring both refitting and repairing (I know the OP did exclude it intentionally) on airfields. Especially with such a low player number it might even make more sense to get guys back into action quicly instead of forcign them threw the process of resetting, respawning and restarting their planes again and again.

 

Another strongpoint is it would add more live to airfields. They could also add refueling and rearming points a player has to taxi to first in order to get replenished.

 

And as Oddball says, it's definetly intendet to be optional. There's nothing to fear if it doesn't appeal the mission deisgners intentions.

[AbortedMan]

I don't understand the realism argument behind wanting this feature...people want to be able to R/R their aircraft still warm from combat, but they don't want it to take more than 2-5 minutes.

 

In my time in the USAF at Spangdahlem AFB, Germany supporting F-16's and A-10's I've never seen a hot refuel take less than 20 minutes from landing to taxiing again...and that's without rearm. I think 12 minutes for rearm alone was the record for A-10 full load during one of the stateside dog and pony show exercises in 2004/2005...and that's with planned, peak conditions intentionally using the most trained and able personnel basically in a "performance vacuum". I can't imagine the rearm/refuel technology and procedures back in the 1940's were easier and quicker than what we have today, and under combat conditions things never go as planned whether it's a logistics/supply problem or the enemy lobbing shells and firing bullets over the fuel bowser while it's being wheeled to the aircraft.

 

If you're asking for R/R at an airfield in the name of realism, be prepared to wait about a half hour staring at your screen twiddling your thumbs.

[Leaf]

I don't understand the realism argument behind wanting this feature...people want to be able to R/R their aircraft still warm from combat, but they don't want it to take more than 2-5 minutes.

 

In my time in the USAF at Spangdahlem AFB, Germany supporting F-16's and A-10's I've never seen a hot refuel take less than 20 minutes from landing to taxiing again...and that's without rearm. I think 12 minutes for rearm alone was the record for A-10 full load during one of the stateside dog and pony show exercises in 2004/2005...and that's with planned, peak conditions intentionally using the most trained and able personnel basically in a "performance vacuum". I can't imagine the rearm/refuel technology and procedures back in the 1940's were easier and quicker than what we have today, and under combat conditions things never go as planned whether it's a logistics/supply problem or the enemy lobbing shells and firing bullets over the fuel bowser while it's being wheeled to the aircraft.

 

If you're asking for R/R at an airfield in the name of realism, be prepared to wait about a half hour staring at your screen twiddling your thumbs.

 

Yeah, I think the "for realism" argument is flawed, because there's a hell of a lot of stuff that's realistic, but not really feasible/fun.  

I just think it's just a bit more engaging to wait on the airfield to rearm/repair than to hit exit and re-spawn every time my plane's out of fuel.

It'd just be a more smooth experience to wait on the tarmac for 2 mins; for the sake of immersion rather than realism, I think.

[Bearcat]

This has been discussed many times:

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11387-rearm-and-refuel

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/4932-rearming-and-refuelling-aircraft/

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/7746-re-arming

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/5762-rearming-guns

 

 

Yes it has.

 

Personally I could take it or leave it.

[Anw.StG2_Tyke]

I don't understand the realism argument behind wanting this feature...people want to be able to R/R their aircraft still warm from combat, but they don't want it to take more than 2-5 minutes.

 

In my time in the USAF at Spangdahlem AFB, Germany supporting F-16's and A-10's I've never seen a hot refuel take less than 20 minutes from landing to taxiing again...and that's without rearm. I think 12 minutes for rearm alone was the record for A-10 full load during one of the stateside dog and pony show exercises in 2004/2005...and that's with planned, peak conditions intentionally using the most trained and able personnel basically in a "performance vacuum". I can't imagine the rearm/refuel technology and procedures back in the 1940's were easier and quicker than what we have today, and under combat conditions things never go as planned whether it's a logistics/supply problem or the enemy lobbing shells and firing bullets over the fuel bowser while it's being wheeled to the aircraft.

 

If you're asking for R/R at an airfield in the name of realism, be prepared to wait about a half hour staring at your screen twiddling your thumbs.

Yeah, but it was pretty common in the "Reichsverteidigung" that 190's landed on different airfields which were not their home-airfileds, got resupplied and tried a second attack on the Bombers...

 

But anyway, the current way wouldn't be realistic too, I mean land the plane. Get out of it and jump into a new spare plane, that wouldn't be possible at the Luftwaffe. Planes were there pretty private, some Pilots swapped planes but in the majority a Pilot had his "own" plane. So the Rearm/Refuel option wouldn't be more unrealistic as the current way, but It would be somewhat realistic based on the Luftwaffe practice and it would greatly improve the gameplay.

[KoN_]

Germany did it many times Hans Rudel landed took off hit ground targets relanded rearmmed took off and hit same ground tartgets over and over . when his squadron airfield was going tobe over run . i think its a plus for the game . with an option to respwan

Edited December 2, 2014 by II./JG77_Con

[AbortedMan]

Yeah, but it was pretty common in the "Reichsverteidigung" that 190's landed on different airfields which were not their home-airfileds, got resupplied and tried a second attack on the Bombers...

 

But anyway, the current way wouldn't be realistic too, I mean land the plane. Get out of it and jump into a new spare plane, that wouldn't be possible at the Luftwaffe. Planes were there pretty private, some Pilots swapped planes but in the majority a Pilot had his "own" plane. So the Rearm/Refuel option wouldn't be more unrealistic as the current way, but It would be somewhat realistic based on the Luftwaffe practice and it would greatly improve the gameplay.

No one is debating whether or not the current way is realistic or not...of course it isn't. You land, dematerialize, then materialize again in a new plane on the ramp or end of the runway because it's a video game. If what you're looking for is some sort of taxiway meta-game that gives incentive for players to land their aircraft and taxi to a certain point to complete some sort of goal, that can be accomplished right now with the mission editor. I added that in the Frontline mission that is playing on some custom servers right now.

 

If you're looking for a 2-5 minute rearm and refuel in the name of realism, then you're going to be disappointed.

[JG27_Chivas]

Rearming and refuelling is basic feature of any air war. Not having it as an OPTION quite frankly ignores a feature that can greatly enhance the game play of any combat flight sim for a large portion of its community. The time required to RRR should be a selected OPTION that suits the gameplay needs of individual pilots offline, and a server set OPTION online.

Edited December 2, 2014 by JG27_Chivas

[MiloMorai]

What was the most multiple sorties/day in RL?

 

Afaik there wasn't one fuel bowser for each a/c so if you are not the first to land you will have to wait your turn.

 

I keep reading the word simulation so R&R should simulate RL.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Is it really nessecary to argue about realism again? If such a feauture was the only thing bugging you in terms of realism in BoS you must be a very special person.

 

As said multiple times it's a basic feauture of every common flight sim. Even DCS has it and it definetly adds to the authenticity only becazse players use their efforts to taxi back to their parking spot to rearm and go on.

 

BoS is even better suited for such a mechanic. Not only because ut feautures special ground handling but also because most servers feauture limited aircrafts which cant be refilled in time usually.

 

Its just unreasonable to fly with a mate, return to your airfield, land and leave the plane with minor damage only ti discover your planes are "lost" and out of stock.

 

I'd much preferr to keep my plane and get into action again via R&R at the airfield, even if it took 2 min (taxi gime not included).

 

If you feel it's unsuitable make it abserver setting, let the host decide to use it.

[MiloMorai]

2 minutes for R&R?

 

It is not an airplane Formula 1 pit stop.

 

Go ahead and game the simulation.

[Sokol1]

If I remember correctly the word "simulation" was replaced for "game" some mounts ago.  People want "R&R" is for sake of gameplay fun, not "realism"...  

[Bearcat]

It never ceases to make me go when people talk about "realism" while "flying" a warbird from their desk.

[=LD=Hethwill]

R&R is valid. IIRC the beginning was IF one should or not R&R at non-home base airfields.

 

For fun and game sake we could say YES and balance it with the need for taxi into the AF dumps.

 

For realism and simulation sake we could say YES and balance it with R&R only at home base.

 

In both cases less than 5 minutes would feel strange and too much "arcade" mini game.

 

BTW I am talking multiplayer only. SP takes care of it, 1 mission = 1 sortie.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

It isn't realitsic for you, ok. You knwo this game isn't realistic already? Where are your 100 hours flight lessons allowign you to fly the 109? Where's you headset and how do you make comms to the tower for takeoff clearance?

Why are you not being dismissed after several 0 kill sorties as a fighter pilot and excluded from multiplayer? WHy aren't you baned form the game once killed cause your realistic single character is dead?

 

Don't make me take it further, pls. Simulation is a abusive term these days and most guys that dislike feautures just call it "unrealistic" to cover their opinion, which might be arguable.

 

Let's say this gets ingame nder following conditions:

 

- R&R can be enabled/disabled by mission designer / server host

- R&R time limit can be freely set by mission designer / server host

- R&R zone location can be set by mission designer / server host

 

Would you like it more? There are many servers up and I'm sure some of them support your goal for absolute truely realism (sry for sounding sarcastic) and we might get some for us "pit stop race car" pilots that enjoy being on live filled airfields with guys taxiing instead of plain strips?

Edited December 3, 2014 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[=LD=Hethwill]

Agreed, when Server build is open to everyone we will see the quality around and the amount of different setup for all tastes. So far I see Expert servers with most population at all times. Wonder why...As I see it BoS is easy enough even for a non-simmer coming from War Thunder RB or Airfix Air Combat, and that is why IMO.

 

Plus the "Weekly 1 Life Events" have a long line of success in the sim world. From Il2, to AH, ... because time is scarce, meaning it is better for a family guy to play 1 good historical mission lasting 2 hours on a Sunday evening than spending 1 hour everyday in a spawn/die cycle. ( and then complain time is scarce and etc ). Yep, 1 life, dead is dead. Makes it way more interesting.

 

Actually even a Clod SoW patrol lasting hour and a half on my own, even if I don't get to intercept any formation ( mostly due to my astonishing bad navigation skills ) it is more fulfilling, as a WW2 air war simulator player, than a furball galore with non stop action. 

 

Server owners and mission builders. AT LEAST they will have the trouble of editing their server and missions to host whatever options the populace wants. And as you see there is a difference in gratuitous tick box in options and having the trouble to make it work in a server environment - IF it ever comes to happen.

 

But that is just me and sharing opinions shouldn't have an adverse effect on a community. Had no intention of rubbing salt on but if it did any damage, my pleasure.

[[KWN]T-oddball]

If you're looking for a 2-5 minute rearm and refuel in the name of realism, then you're going to be disappointed.

some of us are drinking and need to go pee...,AND get another beer

 

I think we need to remove the word realism from the BOS vocabulary and replace it with immersion and difficulty options.

Edited December 3, 2014 by T-oddball