Fuel tank explosions here to stay?

[Praetorious]

10 hours ago, ACG_Cass said:

A 747 holds 100s of thousands of litres of jet fuel in enormous fuselage and wing sections. I don't think what happened to TWA 800 would be relevant to WW2 fighter aircraft.

Yeah sorry, I just brought that up in relation to airplanes blowing up due to gasoline vapors etc,won't happen again

[the_emperor]

two examples:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cs5y-oJo9-o&t=51s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IVtGzNMTfE&t=288s

 

big fireball? oh yeah. 

lethal? most definitely

violent explosion ripping the aircraft apart? no.

[RossMarBow]

I presume its fumes that are exploding

 

Because if you shoot a plane that has empty tanks

 

The chances of it exploding are a lot higher

Than shooting a plane with full tanks

I have a video on my youtube of me getting into a fight with my mustang

I never filled the rear tank - doesn't matter cause the rear tank didn't explode and it shouldn't if its never had fuel in it 

I take damage in the fight and leak fuel

I was already RTB with low fuel
I run out of fuel
Engines turns off
BOOOM my right wing blows up

I exploded (in game)

 

 

Edited June 24, 2022 by brahguevara

[IckyATLAS]

On 6/21/2022 at 9:15 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

All this explosions and fires which are way overdone  are killing immersion, making this Il2 series feel more arcadish, you can set a B26 on fire with just a couple of MG hits, then explodes,  bombers are fragile, planes explode too easy, P47 is a joke, earlier planes do much better.

Maybe a solution here would be that without ruling our the fact that you could have explosions (too many parameters are to happen to make it too often) to have the number of them drastically reduced, and fires small or large should be increased depending on where the hits happen as well as their number or caliber.

 

The gun cameras show also how sometimes how much punishment some fighters or bombers could get without burning or exploding. Bullets rain on them but do not hit any vital elements. The large bombers are a very large surface and structure so better hit right. We see often the fighter pilot aims for engines and wing root hoping to hit the tanks and have the wing break in case of fire, but we can also see that the engines continue running and it is not so easy to have the engine or wing catch fire. Could also be that they had only the smaller calibers firing at this point.

This explains why the german fighters were equipped more and more with heavy guns like MK108 30mm cannon  to bring down the bombers. The F109 had them mounted, the BF110. FW190 etc. The ME262 had four of these and with a mix of explosive, incendiary rounds, it was probably lethal in all conditions for a bomber or a  fighter provided they were hit. But it was too little too late to change anything in the war.

Edited June 24, 2022 by IckyATLAS

[EAF19_Marsh]

Just set up an A-6 vs 4x B-26s on amateur so I could get close. Can confirm that the 2x MG-17s cause wing tank fires fairly easily. Or at least, they were not hard to cause. Subsequent use of cannon resulted in a de-winging via explosion.

 

By no means a scientific test, of course. Other notable effects was loss of control surfaces and various fluid leaks (which is closer to much of the camera footage that I have seen). After these, the bombers tended to lose hight with obvious control difficulties, matching many accounts from

crews. I particularly like - is this a programmed variable - that at a certain point the AI seems to ring the bail-out bell and parachutes start to appear. Nice touch that this occurred some time after I had finished firing.

 

So from this over-my-lunch test, my view is that in general the system seems credible if perhaps some dialing down on the vulnerability to rifle-calibre MGs and a soupçon fewer ‘booms’. 

[firdimigdi]

2 hours ago, brahguevara said:

BOOOM my right wing blows up
I exploded (in game)

 

 

Considering this message at time of death and the part of the wing that got cut off (fuel tank is closer to wing root) I'd say that was an ammo explosion.

[Hitcher]

1 hour ago, Firdimigdi said:

 

 

Considering this message at time of death and the part of the wing that got cut off (fuel tank is closer to wing root) I'd say that was an ammo explosion.

 

That was 100% a fuel tank explosion, ammo explosions dont have the hollywood fireball effect ingame.

[86th_Buzzi]

12 hours ago, Firdimigdi said:

 

 

Considering this message at time of death and the part of the wing that got cut off (fuel tank is closer to wing root) I'd say that was an ammo explosion.

You're proposing that a .50 cal ammo explosion blew the wing off his fighter and instantly killed the pilot?

[danielprates]

On 6/21/2022 at 2:25 PM, Avimimus said:

I'm a bit disappointed by the lack of experienced pyromaniacs in this forum - I honestly thought it'd be higher for some reason.

 

Okay, so a few thoughts:

 

1) High altitude and high airflow speeds might lead to pressure regimes that produce much more rapid creation of vapours than we are used to at ground level

 

2) Aircraft are largely hollow, allowing the propagation of vapours and fuel throughout the wing

 

3) An aircraft under attack is likely to receive multiple perforations of a fuel tank. However, the number, size and distribution is likely to be highly variable.

 

4) The actual detonation would often happen in the context of either other spark or fire sources within the plane, or the detonation of incendiary or high explosive rounds from a second attack by an enemy airplane. There may also be considerable damage to the aircraft already prior to the explosion.

 

5) Aircraft have very specific structures designed to be light-weight and rigid while under fluctuating and relatively high aerodynamic loads. Ordinary ground vehicles are both overbuilt and experience much lower gee forces and smaller cantilever distances than is found in even a small civilian aircraft (let alone a large military aircraft).
 

I think all of these things mean that we lack a point of reference.

 

Yes, obviously Hollywood depicts vehicles blowing up far too often. I know this and even created a mod for Il-2 that removes the explosion fireballs from civilian ground vehicles. However, that doesn't mean this observation translates to aircraft.

 

Lots of aircraft burned and lost control without exploding. Lots of aircraft burned and underwent structural failures without exploding. Lots of aircraft endure flash explosions which blew themselves out and allowed the aircraft to return to base no longer on fire (as is now depicted in Il-2).

 

However, I also wouldn't discount the possibility that some aircraft had rapid vapourisation of fuel after being attacked and then detonated in a way where expanding debris powered by the over-pressure in the tank, when combined with the structural forces already on the aircraft, actually led to a structural failure.

 

I think any attempt to make simple categorical statements or generalizations is very silly.

 

 

 

The shock wave from the explosion producing the pressure would have to reach the other side of the tank and then propagate back to the hole before escaping through it. At a minimum that requires some time to happen.

 

Furthermore the pressure of the heated vapour escaping through the hole would have to be lower than the pressure in the rest of the tank before the vapour in the rest of the tank could escape through the hole. So you need to know the diametre of the hole, the rate at which the gas can escape through it, the pressure the gas is under during that process, and its relationship to the compressibility and temperature of the gas. Anyone with a physics degree (who was actually paying attention) should be able to work that out - but it will differ greatly depending on the size of the hole and the volume of the tank.

 

All of this does allow pressure to build up and potentially rupture the tank (thus creating new holes and chances for the gas to escape). Exactly how much force is involved is the question... but it should be calculable (within various assumptions, such as the completeness of combustion).

 

Anyway, your incredulity is pretty meaningless to me if you aren't planning on doing the work to show me the calculations proving that the overpressure would never become high enough in any tank configuration to be able to propel debris (or even rupture the tank and create additional holes - something you seem to be claiming).

 

I'm with this one. Maybe explosions werent the norm but it is just wrong to say it can't/won't happen. All the elements are there, it just takes a freak combination of all of them at the same time to result in a proper violent explosion. 

 

That's the statistical thing about ww2, there was so much of everything going on everyday, that you can bet sometime, something unusual is going to happen. Didin't a Lancaster rear gunner jump without a parachute from a 1000s of meters height, to survive the fall? The gestapo captors were even 'cool' to give him a certificate when they realized it wasnt a bullshit story.

 

I mean, iirc the USS Maine exoloded due to coal fumes - well, not fumes but fine coal powder mixed with air in the coal bunk. All it took was a spark, powder+air mix and an enviroment filled by it. For some time it seemed the ship had hit a mine!

 

I agree it may happen too much in the game, but for sure it can happen. And guncam evidence or not, it must have happened, albeit rarely.

 

 

[EAF19_Marsh]

5 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

 

 

I agree it may happen too much in the game, but for sure it can happen. And guncam evidence or not, it must have happened, albeit rarely.

 

 

That’s rather the point.

[firdimigdi]

8 hours ago, 86th_Buzzi said:

You're proposing that a .50 cal ammo explosion blew the wing off his fighter and instantly killed the pilot?

I'm proposing that it's a differrent game bug or combination/sequence of issues.

[357th_KW]

17 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

I'm with this one. Maybe explosions werent the norm but it is just wrong to say it can't/won't happen. All the elements are there, it just takes a freak combination of all of them at the same time to result in a proper violent explosion. 

 

That's the statistical thing about ww2, there was so much of everything going on everyday, that you can bet sometime, something unusual is going to happen. Didin't a Lancaster rear gunner jump without a parachute from a 1000s of meters height, to survive the fall? The gestapo captors were even 'cool' to give him a certificate when they realized it wasnt a bullshit story.

 

I mean, iirc the USS Maine exoloded due to coal fumes - well, not fumes but fine coal powder mixed with air in the coal bunk. All it took was a spark, powder+air mix and an enviroment filled by it. For some time it seemed the ship had hit a mine!

 

I agree it may happen too much in the game, but for sure it can happen. And guncam evidence or not, it must have happened, albeit rarely.

 

 

And if it was an extremely rare occurrence in game, I doubt anyone would be complaining.  But when it’s happening practically every other kill, it’s unrealistic and silly.

[danielprates]

On 6/25/2022 at 2:28 AM, EAF19_Marsh said:

That’s rather the point.

 

19 hours ago, 357th_KW said:

And if it was an extremely rare occurrence in game, I doubt anyone would be complaining.  But when it’s happening practically every other kill, it’s unrealistic and silly.

 

Yes I agree. I would also like to see it happen less. And, though this is besides the point, I would also like to see more of the landing gear droping when hit, which in turn I feel happens too rarely.

[Hitcher]

3 hours ago, danielprates said:

 

 

Yes I agree. I would also like to see it happen less. And, though this is besides the point, I would also like to see more of the landing gear droping when hit, which in turn I feel happens too rarely.

Gear lock failures, hydraulic failures and electric failures never happen because they arnt modelled in the game.

[RossMarBow]

On 6/24/2022 at 10:28 PM, Firdimigdi said:

 

 

Considering this message at time of death and the part of the wing that got cut off (fuel tank is closer to wing root) I'd say that was an ammo explosion.

Those messages come up every time you crash or explode.
Because as you can see in the video after exploding my plane was out of ammo.
?

[ACG_Cass]

 

[Stonehouse]

Not commenting on incidence of fuel tank explosions but more as background info another one I've read about which was responsible sometimes for mid air explosions of fighters (and maybe bombers - don't know) was the oxygen bottle taking a direct hit and exploding. Probably smaller than a fuel tank explosion and at least for Allied fighters would probably break the back of the aircraft and presumably generate a reasonable explosion. 

[LukeFF]

I've no set opinion on the matter, so take this excerpt from Jan Horn's book on KG 51 for what it's worth (the plane in question is an Me 410):

 

Quote

Shortly after midnight, the crew of "Mosquito" Mk.XVII (HK319) of No. 219 Squadron, having already had eight false radar contacts, discovers red tracers from a light anti-aircraft gun and requests permission from the control center to reconnoiter it. A few minutes later, after being guided by the ground control center to the vicinity of the target, it can acquire the target at a distance of 7.2 km with its own on-board radar. The pilot P/O Desmond T. Tull and his radar operator P/O Peter J. Cowgill follow the target with their "Mosquito" to an altitude of 300 m, close in and can now identify the target as an Me 410 after visual contact. This destroyer is presumably the Me 410 A-1/U2 (9K + IM; Works No. 420 200) of Fj.-Uffz. Karl-Heinz Mono and Uffz. Hugo Hagel, both of 4./KG 51, which went up to Eindhoven for this mission. From a distance of 150 meters, Tull fires a burst of two seconds from behind and at a height of 30 meters, but nothing happens. The second burst of fire sets fire to the left inner tank and the left engine explodes. Many pieces fly off the destroyer, one of them hits the wing of the Mosquito and the Me 410 crashes into the sea 10 miles east of Harwich. In all, Tull needs 22 rounds from the 20mm autocannons to bring down the Me 410.

 

[ACG_Cass]

10 hours ago, LukeFF said:

I've no set opinion on the matter, so take this excerpt from Jan Horn's book on KG 51 for what it's worth (the plane in question is an Me 410):

Thats the kind of result people are looking for.

 

The issue is the frequency and the size/power of the explosions. They should not be blowing a 7000kg, twin engine aircraft like the Bf110 into pieces and launching the entire fuselage 100 feet into the air.

[ACG_Cass]

On 6/25/2022 at 12:32 AM, danielprates said:

 

I mean, iirc the USS Maine exoloded due to coal fumes - well, not fumes but fine coal powder mixed with air in the coal bunk. All it took was a spark, powder+air mix and an enviroment filled by it. For some time it seemed the ship had hit a mine!

 

I agree it may happen too much in the game, but for sure it can happen. And guncam evidence or not, it must have happened, albeit rarely.

Just to come back to this as it's a point that keeps being raised. The USS Maine was a battleship displacing thousands and thousands of tonnes and probably had multiple boilers and an enormous amount of space + coal. Small aircraft simply don't have the space in them to create the conditions required for a large, powerful explosion.

 

If the aircraft was hit by a large exploding shell, the explosive material can act as an accelerant for the fuel to create a larger explosion. But this would peter out very quickly and would still be localised to a section of the aircraft.

[Enceladus828]

3 hours ago, ACG_Cass said:

They should not be blowing a 7000kg, twin engine aircraft like the Bf110 into pieces and launching the entire fuselage 100 feet into the air.

Agree, in IL-2 1946 whenever you had a fuel tank explosion, it was simply just the wing breaking off and the crew wasn't instantly killed or injured by the explosion. While this may not have been entirely accurate, I would take this over a fuel tank explosion in IL-2 Great Battles.

[RossMarBow]

I have heard of coal dust causing explosions 
But how many cars explode?

 

Another thing I realised from watching replays is that the plane can run out of fuel
the engine stops cause its out of fuel
yet it will still be leaking out of all its holes 
and exploding 

Edited July 8, 2022 by RossMarBow