Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Climb rate V altitude

  1. #1

    Default Climb rate V altitude

    I got into a discussion today with a friend from our gaming club.
    It was in relation to Stacked Bombers and Fighters flying through them.
    Currently the problem is that this would cause the bases to overlap and as such there would be collisions all over the place. However in reality aircraft did fly through stacked bombers and yes some collisions did happen but mostly they weaved their way through.
    What we came up with was that if you relate Climb rate with metres climbed per Climb Counter.
    Assuming that one Altitude peg represents 1000m (3250Ft)
    Then an aircraft with a climb rate of 2 covers 500m per climb counter and an aircraft with a climb rate of 10 would climb 100m per climb counter.
    See graph below


    Now to reduce collisions and allow aircraft to pass though bomber stacks use the graph and calculate the altitude of the attacking aircraft by the number of climb counters and then calculate the altitude of the Bomber/s that the attacking aircrafts base overlaps. If the Altitudes are the same or within 50m then a collision has occurred. Follow standard collision rules. If the altitudes are over 50m apart then it is considered that the aircraft missed. That means no collision and therefore the aircraft can fire on each other or others.
    Example 1
    Fokker DVII Climb rate 2 with one climb counter is on 500m
    HP 0/400 Climb rate 8 with 4 climb counters is on 500m
    Therefore they collided
    Example 2
    Fokker DVII Climb rate 2 with one climb counter is on 500m
    HP 0/400 Climb rate 8 with 5 climb counters is on 625m
    Distance between aircraft is over 50m therefore no collision.

    This assumes all aircraft have the same number of pegs.
    It also allows bombers to be stacked within a peg altitude with bases overlapping. Formation flying.

    I would like to know your thoughts on this
    Linz

  2. #2

    Default

    Dirties the system up a bit, but adds a good spot of realism. I like it.
    Karl

  3. #3


    Users Country Flag


    Name
    michael
    Location
    devon
    Sorties Flown
    73
    Join Date
    Jun 2013

    Default

    WW2 is what I play at the moment I will be playing WW1 eventually. This system will work with WW2 and I intend to use it. WW2 aircraft climb faster but the important part is their relative climb speed a Val(6) takes twice as long as a Zero to reach 1000M so the game turn is shorter.

    Mik the stick

  4. #4

    Default

    Lindsay,

    good solution and thanks for sharing.

    But I must notice that some columns at rates 3 and 6 should have same values (unless you have chosen those values deliberately, for further reduction of coliding oportunities). For example 1/3 (or 2/6) of 1000 is 333,3333 etc. So, respective values should be 333m or 334m in both cases, but the same, as planes should be on the same altitude. Same goes for 2/3 (or 4/6), which is 666 or 667, or 1/2 or 3/6, which is clear 500 (not 501) etc.

    I have started working on similar system and was thinking about making some kind of altitude stand. Full (up to climb rate 10) it would have 30+ "minutes". Reduced to climb rate 6 it would have less. Such reduced altitude stand would be easier to track - but it would be much of "fighters only" in effect.

  5. #5

    Default

    Here is a collision chart by tonyc206 that may help:



    discussed on this thread



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •