Spitfire Fuel Gauge

[FTC_Cule]

On the spitfire, where is the key mapping that presses the button on the fuel gauge to read the fuel capacity? Otherwise the fuel gauge indicates zero.

[LukeFF]

There isn't one. It's automated when flying straight and level.

[Herne]

On the spitfire, where is the key mapping that presses the button on the fuel gauge to read the fuel capacity? Otherwise the fuel gauge indicates zero.

 

Your guy presses it every 30 secs I think. it only shows you the level of the reserve tank, so you wont see any change until you are getting low on fuel

[curiousGamblerr]

On the spitfire, where is the key mapping that presses the button on the fuel gauge to read the fuel capacity? Otherwise the fuel gauge indicates zero.

 

AFAIK there is no button. The I-16 works the same way, and the pilot presses the button (or pulls the knob in the I-16 case) from time to time to get a fuel reading.

 

It's hugely annoying you can't do it manually to get a reading quickly when you need it (e.g. just before entering combat) but many folks have made this suggestion in the relevant forums, so not much to do about it.

 

Perhaps when we get an API outputting gauge data it will include the fuel gauge and this problem will either go away be improved by a 3rd party app. 

[FTC_Cule]

Thanks for the replies. I don't think this is a good system, the user should be able to press the button whenever he pleases. It should be mapped in the controls IMO. 

 

On the bright side the Spitfire handling is quite spot on in this game.

[Sokol1]

Thanks for the replies. I don't think this is a good system, the user should be able to press the button whenever he pleases. It should be mapped in the controls IMO. 

 

 

Thing is, for every one that want press the button will be 10 players against, saying that they should be scanning the sky and not pressing buttons to see fuel level.

[FTC_Cule]

Thing is, for every one that want press the button will be 10 players against, saying that they should be scanning the sky and not pressing buttons to see fuel level.

 

I don't see your point. If they want to scan the skies so be it, in my opinion this is irrelevant. But If they want to check their fuel gauge, after or before or without having scanned the skies, they have 3 options:

 

a) Always show fuel amount which is unrealistic because you had to press the button to see it in real life

b) Assign a key bind like on other simulations.

c) Every x seconds show the fuel gauge being read but you cannot control the period of the check and at the very instant when you do want to check it, it's the luck of the draw whether it's going to be pressed or not.

 

Devs have discarded a so between b and c I'd go for b

[curiousGamblerr]

 

 

I don't see your point. If they want to scan the skies so be it, in my opinion this is irrelevant. But If they want to check their fuel gauge, after or before or without having scanned the skies, they have 3 options:

 

a) Always show fuel amount which is unrealistic because you had to press the button to see it in real life

b) Assign a key bind like on other simulations.

c) Every x seconds show the fuel gauge being read but you cannot control the period of the check and at the very instant when you do want to check it, it's the luck of the draw whether it's going to be pressed or not.

 

Devs have discarded a so between b and c I'd go for b

 

+1, and if its a huge issue for people to lose option b, leave it in addition to adding a manual option... having both really shouldn't be a problem (with the usual disclaimer that I haven't seen the code)

Edited August 11, 2017 by 19//curiousGamblerr

[ZachariasX]

I don't see your point. If they want to scan the skies so be it, in my opinion this is irrelevant. But If they want to check their fuel gauge, after or before or without having scanned the skies, they have 3 options:

 

a) Always show fuel amount which is unrealistic because you had to press the button to see it in real life

b) Assign a key bind like on other simulations.

c) Every x seconds show the fuel gauge being read but you cannot control the period of the check and at the very instant when you do want to check it, it's the luck of the draw whether it's going to be pressed or not.

 

Devs have discarded a so between b and c I'd go for b

At some point, you have simply too many buttons to be mapped. In consequence, you had to map a button for every single function of each aircraft. Sometimes they are the same between different aircraft, sometimes they do different things. We have a lot of aircraft in this sim. Try to label all functions of all aircraft on your HOTAS and keyboard. DCS has a lot more mappable functions than BoX, making you end up with assignements like "LCtrl LShift p" (or, how convenient, use clickspots).

 

For me, your c) is fine for BoX.

[19//Moach]

AFAIK there is no button. The I-16 works the same way, and the pilot presses the button (or pulls the knob in the I-16 case) from time to time to get a fuel reading.

 

It's hugely annoying you can't do it manually to get a reading quickly when you need it (e.g. just before entering combat) but many folks have made this suggestion in the relevant forums, so not much to do about it.

 

 

yes, it is profoundly disconcerting that there is basically no way at all to check your fuel while in combat (or doing anything more exciting than cruise)

 

now, this is something of a critical shortcoming here - it is not simply a case of usability and convenience... a fuel check in combat can easily be the key to deciding whether to pursue a target or disengage.

 

this "button presses itself" nonsense leaves us practically without a fuel indicator in the vast majority of times when you really needed to know how much there's left.

 

 

 

at least for myself, I find that in over 90% of cases where I needed to check my fuel, I was simply unable to do so...  the scenarios in which this gauge is needed the most are also the same in which it will not operate.  

 

for instance, it is NOT practical to level off and hold steady, looking down inside the cockpit for some 30+ seconds, waiting for the damn needle to budge, in the middle of a dogfight...  

 

and god forbid you spring a leak from all the shooting.  it'll be a matter of sheer dumb luck, choosing a time to run for home.

 

 

 

a key binding for fuel checks is urgently necessary.

Edited August 11, 2017 by 19//Moach

[FTC_Cule]

At some point, you have simply too many buttons to be mapped. In consequence, you had to map a button for every single function of each aircraft. Sometimes they are the same between different aircraft, sometimes they do different things. We have a lot of aircraft in this sim. Try to label all functions of all aircraft on your HOTAS and keyboard. DCS has a lot more mappable functions than BoX, making you end up with assignements like "LCtrl LShift p" (or, how convenient, use clickspots).

 

For me, your c) is fine for BoX.

 

I can understand your concern for simplicity, but: If you or the devs do not want a key-mapping for the fuel gauge of the Spitfire for the sake of simplicity, why inlet and outlet key mapping for specific radiators like those on the LA-5 (not using the generic mapping for axis-gradual radiators), custom stabilisers for the 190, toggling altimeter comparison pressure, and functions like these?

 

Don't get me wrong, I love all those sort of things and I'm happy and proud that they were made, in fact I'd like many many more things to be made like that, but the presence of the above examples sort of contradicts the argument that it was made for simplicity and so that people have an easier time getting into each aircraft.

 

Maybe different people have different views about what custom aircraft controls are simple enough or not to be built into this game, but I feel the spitfire/I-16 gauge is as important as those mentioned earlier, and aside from this debatable simplicity argument I do not see any reason why not to implement the feature.

Edited August 11, 2017 by 5./JG54_Cule

[19//Moach]

it was probably reasoned that in order to remove one not-so-obvious key binding, they'd make it operate by itself, for the sake of "simplicity"....

 

unfortunately, this approach has completely backfired.

 

 

the whole concept of "wait for the button to press itself... hold the plane steady, or it doesn't do it" goes against the principle of least astonishment - that is:

 

 

"you gotta press <key> to check your fuel"

 

is a MUCH simpler answer to give a new player asking how it works than:

 

"it normally reads zero... but every now and then it presses the button by itself, but only if you're flying steady. so pay attention to it for a while and don't do any hard turns"

 

 

 

there is no reason why this should stay the way it is... the whole notion has proven itself wholly inadequate for the purposes of user-friendliness and usability

 

we need a button,  hands down

 

 

 

 

in fact, this one same binding could easily operate ALL fuel indicators in all aircraft, doubling as the tank selector in planes like the Bf110 or He111 

 

just one single button: "check fuel" ...problem solved

Edited August 11, 2017 by 19//Moach

[=SqSq=Sulaco]

Or it just stays on, though not historically accurate it would make more sense from a gameplay perspective than the current setup.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

How often does it update? The Il-2 has the same system but the needle goes on pretty often and I think it's stable during manoeuvres.

[19//Moach]

the IL2 has two tanks (top and bottom) - that little "paddle" thingy shifts regularly back and forth whenever there's fuel in both tanks...  it alternates about every 10~15 seconds, I think.

 

which is oddly pointless, seeing how one tank will always empty out before the other starts draining...

 

 

the "check fuel" key binding I proposed would operate this function in the IL2 as well, alternating between both tanks whenever pressed. 

 

 

such a button is really the only sensible alternative to having these gauges stay on all the time - anything else is a bigger problem than that which it tries to "solve"

Edited August 11, 2017 by 19//Moach

[ZachariasX]

We have simplifyed things, most notably engine startup/shutdown, therefore we are devoid of in depht systems modelling. I think think this is ok in this sim, as it is a combat sim more than a flight sim. And in regard of what I consider extremely competitive pricing. Thus, there have decisions to be taken where to cut corners.

 

We have a simplified tank reading, simplified compass management, etc. Doing this "fully realistic", would it add to the gameplay of a combat sim? How many of combat sim players would get more out of that and how many players would be confused further with having an even steeper learning curve?

 

And when you do cut corners, how to give a "realistic" impression? What we have in the Spit is utterly as fuel gauge impractical. But so was the fuel gauge in reality as well. Simple... I guess it is simple once you understand the whole plane. If not, nothing is simple. Even if it just kept showing the tank content, "why does it remain on full, I'm flying for half an hour??"

 

I love fully detailed planes a lot myself, and I love them enough to mostly fly them in traditional flight sims. But to truly learn to operate such a plane, you require a lot of time and real manuals, much more than could reasonably be provided here. It it a fantastic testament to this sim that real plane manuals can be used well to operate the planes. But this is the bare minimum documentation you'd require if you had a button for everything and required proper operation. For the sake of the game, one should be able to do with less I think.

 

Edit: thank God, we're almost never have sorties where we fly long enough for tanks to run dry. Unless getting perforated, of course. So why check fuel anyway?

Edited August 11, 2017 by ZachariasX

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Zack, try a Pe-2 escort on FNBF. We landed on fumes almost every time with the LaGG!

[ZachariasX]

Zack, try a Pe-2 escort on FNBF. We landed on fumes almost every time with the LaGG!

If I only lasted that long. But I keep on trying.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

The trick was being sneaky, which led to some 280-300km of flight at combat speeds, 5000m. The Pe-2s are super fast so we had to gun the engine to keep up. Fun, if a little tense.

[Sokol1]

 

Sokol1, on 11 Aug 2017 - 13:41, said:

Thing is, for every one that want press the button will be 10 players against, saying that they should be scanning the sky and not pressing buttons to see fuel level. 

I don't see your point. If they want to scan the skies so be it, in my opinion this is irrelevant. But If they want to check their fuel gauge, after or before or without having scanned the skies, they have 3 options:

 

Think this post explain what I try say: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/30529-spitfire-fuel-gauge/?do=findComment&comment=497925

 

BTW - Like you I will prefer press the button to see the gauge like in the real plane - like I do in Spit IXe in other game and this don't cause any issue, but we know, actual games need "lead by the hand" the players (I just turn off that "technochat" thing).  

Edited August 11, 2017 by Sokol1

[Herne]

Think this post explain what I try say: https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/30529-spitfire-fuel-gauge/?do=findComment&comment=497925

 

BTW - Like you I will prefer press the button to see the gauge like in the real plane - like I do in Spit IXe in other game and this don't cause any issue, but we know, actual games need "lead by the hand" the players (I just turn off that "technochat" thing).  

I now fly without tips and technochat as well, but there is no denying that it helps to make a new comers life a little easier as they get used to the sim. I just came here from another thread, where a guy was saying that there were too many buttons and he couldn't map them all to his stick. It is a little daunting to all but the most hardcore of simmers.

 

Devs have done a fine job in my humble opinion, of making the game accessible, but also appealing to the sim crowd. 

[Guest deleted@50488]

It's like the gyro, and I find it very interesting the way they implemented it.

 

It should be caged by the pilot whenever aerobatics / high G n«maneuvers were going to be performed. Only useful in pretty much cruising / navigation type flying, so, the virtual pilot cages it whenever you start wooooping around :-)

 

What would be the purpose of assigning a key to it if in the end the system is not simulated to the point of realistic damage being inflicted in case you forget to cage the gyro ? ( same applying to other systems that IL-2 Battle of.. simulates in this way..."

 

It's a development decision, and we either like it or not. I do like it, as tbh I never use 90% of the systems controls assignements in the other sim mentioned in this thread, and I use Win-HOME to start my engine when I enter a MP session :-)

 

I do prefer that any expenses in modelling this go, for instance, into the much heavier, but also much more realistic use of the same flight model I use by the AI... and playing against smarter AI....This does matter to me !

Edited August 12, 2017 by jcomm

[Herne]

It's like the gyro, and I find it very interesting the way they implemented it.

 

It should be caged by the pilot whenever aerobatics / high G n«maneuvers were going to be performed. Only useful in pretty much cruising / navigation type flying, so, the virtual pilot cages it whenever you start wooooping around :-)

 

What would be the purpose of assigning a key to it if in the end the system is not simulated to the point of realistic damage being inflicted in case you forget to cage the gyro ? ( same applying to other systems that IL-2 Battle of.. simulates in this way..."

 

It's a development decision, and we either like it or not. I do like it, as tbh I never use 90% of the systems controls assignements in the other sim mentioned in this thread, and I use Win-HOME to start my engine when I enter a MP session :-)

 

I do prefer that any expenses in modelling this go, for instance, into the much heavier, but also much more realistic use of the same flight model I use by the AI... and playing against smarter AI....This does matter to me !

 

AI is a difficult nut to crack. A challenge for you may be virtually impossible for others. They need to be able to be capable of making mistakes just as we, or at least I am

 

Will be kind of important for the career mode though. I'll probably play it the same way I did RoF. If my pilot dies, or is captured, assuming that is a thing. I intend to roll a new pilot at the same squadron, the day after he died as a fresh battle casualty replacement. I fully expect to be frequently rolling new pilots.

[Guest deleted@50488]

AI is a difficult nut to crack. A challenge for you may be virtually impossible for others. They need to be able to be capable of making mistakes just as we, or at least I am

 

Will be kind of important for the career mode though. I'll probably play it the same way I did RoF. If my pilot dies, or is captured, assuming that is a thing. I intend to roll a new pilot at the same squadron, the day after he died as a fresh battle casualty replacement. I fully expect to be frequently rolling new pilots.

 

Very interesting idea!

[sergio_]

Edit: thank God, we're almost never have sorties where we fly long enough for tanks to run dry. Unless getting perforated, of course. So why check fuel anyway?

Maybe you want to check how heavy your plane is before an engagement.

Maybe you only filled half tank expecting a short flight and it took longer.

 

Add me to the list of those who think checking the gauge on demand is convenient enough and not that difficult to implement a key bind.

There are flight Sims with way more commands and plenty of room in the keyboard for it. Some may not be very important, but I think a fuel gauge is.

 

Same goes for the compass btw.

 

Yet, congrats to the devs for this awesome bird.

[19//Moach]

We have simplifyed things, most notably engine startup/shutdown, therefore we are devoid of in depht systems modelling. I think think this is ok in this sim, as it is a combat sim more than a flight sim. And in regard of what I consider extremely competitive pricing. Thus, there have decisions to be taken where to cut corners.

 

We have a simplified tank reading, simplified compass management, etc. Doing this "fully realistic", would it add to the gameplay of a combat sim? How many of combat sim players would get more out of that and how many players would be confused further with having an even steeper learning curve?

 

 

this may have been the original reasoning for having the automated push-button sequence designed in the first place...

 

but in practice, a "check fuel" button is not the same as a self-performing startup/shutdown... the nature of these elements is very different indeed

 

 

it makes sense to have automated startups, for instance, I agree very much with those.   this because such a procedure is something which has to be performed under the same or very similar conditions every time, and all the steps performed must be done ideally in the same sequence every time as well.  

 

if they were to simulate each step (like DCS) - they'd end up with a huge amount of what-if scenarios for every combination of factors that could result from performing each individual step incorrectly, or neglecting any one of them along the way.   

 

this would lead to many frustrated new players, and bored experienced ones, after a great number of repetitions...  it'd really be something that's enjoyed only a couple of times as one finally learns the proper ways of doing it.

 

therefore, the automation for such complex and monotonous procedures makes more than perfect sense. and it also allows simper development, as a very cleverly cut corner that eliminates the near-infinite complexity of full-systems interaction, which would be necessary just for the sake of simulating things that should never actually happen, and add very little to the game's enjoyment in the end.

 

 

 

a fuel gauge, however, is NOT the same as a startup procedure.   if the idea was to reduce the workload and complexity by not having a "fuel check" button, then by all means:  make the damn gauge stay on all the time, like it was on the early IL2 titles.

 

this "half-way" solution is no solution at all, for it fails to be "simpler" in over 95% of all times, especially in those times when its use is the most critical.

 

 

the argument of "most missions are usually short and don't need this" is one that is contrary to the whole concept of a simulator, for it is based on an assumption about scenarios which is circumstantial at best, if not wholly incorrect.  

 

but as I've said before, the actual "simplicity" of the automated push-button falls very short of expectations, being in practice MORE complex and much less user-friendly than if there was a button proper.

 

 

I even recall when I first picked up the game, it took me considerably longer to realize what was happening and how fuel gauges worked than it would have taken to notice a "check fuel" key binding was available.

 

but even if it weren't actually SIMPLER to have a button, with the already existing technochat hints system, it would be fairly trivial to add one hint saying "press <key> to check your fuel"... this would remove any remaining potential for confusion, making the "check fuel" button a very clear proposition.

 

 

so PLEASE, let us have a button for this.  it's such a simple thing, and it would be so much better than the cumbersome way it is now

Edited August 12, 2017 by 19//Moach

[Jizzo]

Or just make the time between button/lever push/pulls, half as short as it is currently, would make all the difference in the world already.

[Sokol1]

What would be the purpose of assigning a key to it if in the end the system is not simulated to the point of realistic damage being inflicted in case you forget to cage the gyro ? 

 

What happens is that compass and DG became misaligned and will take time to re-stabilize, but not damaged.

 

TMDE book say that this happens with Hugh Dundas over Dunkirk, he was engaged in combat, panicked and fly "blind" for a while, by luck in North direction until see some RN destroyers, and only then calm down and became able to set their compass to return home - if had try set in combat area could end jumped by some 109's.

 

"Virpi'lots" don't want take this risk messing with "unimportant" keys/buttons (fire buttons is what count), so lets the "AI auto set" do the work.

[19//Moach]

What happens is that compass and DG became misaligned and will take time to re-stabilize, but not damaged.

 

TMDE book say that this happens with Hugh Dundas over Dunkirk, he was engaged in combat, panicked and fly "blind" for a while, by luck in North direction until see some RN destroyers, and only then calm down and became able to set their compass to return home - if had try set in combat area could end jumped by some 109's.

 

"Virpi'lots" don't want take this risk messing with "unimportant" keys/buttons (fire buttons is what count), so lets the "AI auto set" do the work.

 

 

actually, it doesn't take time at all to get it re-stabilized... BUT, one can only reset the attitude gyro by caging it (forcing it straight) and uncaging in level flight.  and the gyro compass has to be manually spun back into alignment with the proper magnetic bearing by turning of a knob adjacent to the gauge.

 

the slow self-alignment 'feature' seen in CloD or in the P40 gyros here, is really another compromise - but there, instead of caging the gyro during maneuvers, it was decided to add a gradual correction factor to it, so that it'd sort itself out over time.

 

this is another little thing which I'm generally fine with having automated (though the spitfire limits feel somewhat low, with the gauges caged much too easily)

 

 

but the fuel indicator is "one button too far", I'd say.  for there isn't really any possibility of operating it incorrectly - the lack of such feature is nothing other than a loss with zero gain. 

 

this same button could even be introduced WITHOUT removing the automation, offering a much needed alternative for when you it gotta check it right now

 

 

vir'pilots don't wanna take the risk of not being able to know their fuel status without having to hold level flight for extended periods of not looking outside for trouble

Edited August 12, 2017 by 19//Moach

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I think the fuel gauge should be mapped but holy cow that's a lot of angsty paragraphs for what should be a simple request/suggestion.

[19//Moach]

it is a simple request/suggestion - which is also on the aptly named "suggestions" board... see here

[69th_chuter]

How about if the fuel gauge was constantly on (one would likely only look at it with the button pushed anyway) but it wouldn't give a reliable quantity reading unless a period of time had passed in stable, level flight?

[Nibbio]

We have the same automated procedure for the I-16 fuel gage, haven't heard any complaints about that though

[curiousGamblerr]

We have the same automated procedure for the I-16 fuel gage, haven't heard any complaints about that though

 

Well you haven't been listening then 

[Nibbio]

Well you haven't been listening then 

 

Strange, I really can't find any discussion about the I-16 fuel gage. Link?

[AKA_Relent]

If the devs would make the frequency of the button being pressed as often as the I-16 I'd be happy. When flying that bird, seems that I only have to hold relatively steady and look down for just a few seconds and the gauge needle moves to the fuel level. With the Spit, I tend to have to look down for quite a bit longer (10-15 seconds), which makes me quite nervous .

 

Besides that, the rear view (with Track-IR) on the I-16 is great, so I can at least see if someone is sneaking up on me. The rear view on the Spit isn't good, so I feel very vulnerable during these times.

[ZachariasX]

Constantly on for Normal mode, button press for 'Expert' please!

 

It's little things like the fuel systems that give little differences, and advantages, between the aircraft.

 

Things like the ammo counters, and fuel warning light are there for a reason on the 109, they are good design features; if they give an advantage to the pilot (or just make life easier) then that is how it should be.

 

Having to push a button, or look out on your wings (!), is a not as good design ( in my opinion) but should be reflected in the game. Just like supercharges, rpm settings etc.

 

(And regarding available keys, when you use Alt and CTRL as modifiers I've still got plenty of space)

There's plenty of real world flying issues that may make you *not* choose the same plane in the real world as in the "simplified" sim. For once, fly open cockpit. In winter. At 20'000 ft. Then same with a closed cockpit. Then I'm sure I know of an aircraft that you don't touch even with a stick again should you be commanded to fly in that fashion further on a regular basis and had the alternative. I don't like to go higher tham 3000 ft. in open cockpits if I don't have to, and I don't know of anyone that would.

 

So, yes, controls. Having to play the Wurlitzer is certainly adding to the charm of some AC (did I say Ju-52?). Pressing the fuel gauge for reading may add to the quirks, but much more so is systems management. We don't have that here fully. For good reason. So, part of the joy is axed anyway, just because combat sim folks on average don't pay what it costs to implement everything. We just spend 10 bucks per plane. Pushing a button to read a fuel gauge is not trivial for common players. Maybe to Bentley drivers checking their oil levels...

 

But surely, mapping all functions (and having it implemented fully) would be best. You have plenty of keys. 102 or so, plus modifyers. It gets even better, you can daisychain up to 128 of them via USB! So, true, we never run out of keys... To map all keys of a 777 (from PMDG) I guess I need some more keyboards. Maybe I should go on infowar and order some keyboards against German imigrants. Plus some memory supplements help remembering me on which key on which keyboard and with which modifiers I used to map the "APU Bleed". Oh, clickspots. Right.

[ZachariasX]

Sorry ZachariasX, I don't really understand what you're trying to say.

Ah... too wordy for "too many buttons (for this sim)". Sorry. But, in principle I like having all the buttons.

 

Replace "buttons" for "notes" and this thread is a movie scene:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H6_eqxh-Qok

 

[dburne]

I must be missing something here.

 

To check fuel in this Spit requires a press of the fuel guage button.

IL-2 BoS does not support clickable cockpits, therefore we can not press the button.

Therefore they modeled it to give a reading every so often during level flight.

 

Similar to some of the levers and buttons need to be pressed/moved for startup procedure, that is automated as well.

[curiousGamblerr]

Ah... too wordy for "too many buttons (for this sim)". Sorry. But, in principle I like having all the buttons.

 

Replace "buttons" for "notes" and this thread is a movie scene:

 

 

    I love that movie... would watch it tonight if it wasn't so stinkin' long!