Fixed (non-drop) External Fuel Tank Limitations?

[Franco Lucchini]

Looking at scenarios where the Zeroes have fixed external fuel tanks (i.e. can't be dropped). Realize the the next WGS set will have some sort of drop tank rules, but the zeroes and wildcats I plan on using won't be these hot-rods, and these are not drop-able.

What additional rules would be appropriate for these aircraft?
- Slow speed above a certain altitude?
- No stalls?
- Extra A damage every time they are hit?

Looking for creative thoughts that won't break the scenarios, but would give a fun yet historical-feel.

[Gotham Resident]

I would say treat em like bombs or torpedos? Slow only and no Immels?

[Lord_Ninja]

So I have a couple of thoughts on this.
When are the planes committing to battle in relation to their flight time?
Early? Late?
Early in the flight means more fuel alongside the drag. Count plane as overloaded
Late in the flight means the tank is empty or nearly empty, all there is is a drag penalty. Fighter isn't over loaded but maybe limit some of the other maneuvers such as steep side slips?
This will be important when deciding how hampered the plane is in flight.
Also why would the drop tanks be fixed?
I know that the Zero was designed being able to drop it's tanks from the ground up and I don't even know of any planes being equipped with tanks that couldn't drop.
A tank that can be dropped is an easy fix in relation to existing rules. Have two groups of fuel tokens, fighter is counted as overloaded as long as second group of fuel tokens is used. If second group of tokens is discarded than fighter loses overloaded.

[Franco Lucchini]

I would say treat em like bombs or torpedos? Slow only and no Immels?

Thanks Mischa, but that might be a bit severe. The scenario calls for only 6 Zeroes vs. 4 Wildcats. With slow only, they'd be sitting ducks for the cats (sitting mice?) Dog-fighting with drop tanks wasn't completely atypical. So, they were able to get some success.

So I have a couple of thoughts on this.
When are the planes committing to battle in relation to their flight time?
Early? Late?
Early in the flight means more fuel alongside the drag. Count plane as overloaded
Late in the flight means the tank is empty or nearly empty, all there is is a drag penalty. Fighter isn't over loaded but maybe limit some of the other maneuvers such as steep side slips?
This will be important when deciding how hampered the plane is in flight.
Also why would the drop tanks be fixed?
I know that the Zero was designed being able to drop it's tanks from the ground up and I don't even know of any planes being equipped with tanks that couldn't drop.
A tank that can be dropped is an easy fix in relation to existing rules. Have two groups of fuel tokens, fighter is counted as overloaded as long as second group of fuel tokens is used. If second group of tokens is discarded than fighter loses overloaded.

Thanks Lucas. This is Guadalcanal during the first iteration of the Cactus Air Force at Henderson Field (1942). So, most of the Zeroes are flying out of Rabaul, until the IJN fast carriers can get close enough without too much USN harassment.

This is a limitation in the CY6 scenario book. Not sure why. Perhaps:
- Were the external tanks fixed, and thus not actually "drop" tanks?
- Were the Japanese under orders to conserve resources, and thus bring the drop tanks home?
- Did they need the extra fuel to make it back to Rabaul?
- ...or something else?
Asked on the CY6 forum looking for historical justification.

I fear that treating them as overloaded would give Major Smith's Marine forces a bit too much of an advantage in WGS. Do agree that it is a drag penalty making it harder to climb and come out of stalls as easy at least.

[Teaticket]

Tonight I'll see what the CY6 rules do about drop tanks.

[Franco Lucchini]

Tonight I'll see what the CY6 rules do about drop tanks.

Thanks Peter!

"Guadalcanal, the Cactus Air Force" provides a unique control sheet for A6M2s with drop tanks attached. Following this logic, perhaps changing from a C deck to...

The CY6 rule book rules limit aircraft performance and capabilities along the lines of what Mischa and Lucas suggested.

This difference is discussed lightly on CY6's yahoo-group.

Looking forward to what you find.

[Teaticket]

First thought I would suggest with fuel tanks maybe just use the C deck as is and not add in the house rule sharp turns and wide side slips.

[Franco Lucchini]

First thought I would suggest with fuel tanks maybe just use the C deck as is and not add in the house rule sharp turns and wide side slips.

Brilliant! We don't use the house rules for additional early-Zero maneuvers. Adding them for the few times A6M2 launch from nearby carriers, sans-tanks, (and we get to play with the extra maneuvers) is perfect for us. Thanks Peter!

http://www.wingsofwar.org/forums/sho...ghlight=zeroes

[Naharaht]

Sources I have read always refer to the external tanks on Zeros as 'drop tanks' and their capacity was less than the internal fuel, so they would very probably have been empty, or nearly so, by the time the Zeros reached the combat area. So, I would not penalize the Zeros movements, unless you ambush them shortly after they have taken off.

[Franco Lucchini]

That would be my thoughts too David.

The CY6 Guadalcanal book is quite direct that the A6M2s out of Rabaul keep their tanks. Just can't seem to find what would lead them to think that.