To quote Timtom,
We're limited to 20 engine slots unfortunately, so some fudging has been necesary.
and all those slots are in use, did you overwrite one of the existing engine slots or define a new one for the Ha-39? Because an additional engine slot is not going to work. Anyway, maybe you should probably use the Aichi Ha-60 (Atsuta), the Navy version of the DB 601.
As to inferior fuel, all German engines (including the DB 601) were designed for 87 octane (B4) fuel. I don't think the Japanese used worse fuel qualities, at least not at the beginning.
Thanks for the heads up on the slot limitation, I had no idea. Rather dissapointing, as I was planning of splitting up the engine industry even further.
The early versions are now using the Ha-60.
I'm also unhappy about the ranges you propose:
Max Range 495
Ext Range 380
Nor Range 300
The editor automatically halves any input in the RNG EXT, RNG NORMAL, RNG EXT DT & RNG NORMAL DT fields, but not in the RNG MAX & RNG MAX DT fields. The DT fields are range w/ drop tanks. All ranges are in presumed to be in nautical miles 'cos this is the measurement used for the map, but the editor doesn't automatically adjust for this.
RNG MAX is the transfer ranges while the RNG EXT, NORMAL are the tactical ranges.
Enter 392 (2x196) in the RNG NORMAL field (or RNG EXT if you think this number represents a reasonable maximum tactical range). If this was an "official" AE bird the RNG NORMAL would be 80% of RNG EXT, ie RNG EXT = 392/80x100 = 490. This makes the assumption that it'd possible to push the a/c somewhat further on the same fuel load but at greater risk. But you can enter whatever value you like in the range fields obviously.
(this was an example for an aircraft with a tactical radius of 196 miles)
The He 100 had a longer than usual range for an European type interceptor, I think that should be reflected here.
So my proposal for the initial version would be:
max range 990
ext range 486
normal range 440
As this version does not have external stores, the difference between normal and ext range would be minimal, just to represent a fuel-conserving flight profile.
Ill review the ranges, but as data for a production version of the He100 is rather scarce, I improvised. I am aware of how the ranges work though, and the ratio of Ext/Nor should be the same regardless of DTs.
I've also thought of a different armament progression, a bit more extreme. The purpose of the aircraft was mainly defensive, that is protecting bases against enemy bombers. The original armament (1-20mm + 2-7.7mm) looks a bit underpowered for that, so I thought that a logical mod would be swapping the 7.7 mm MGs for 20 mm Type 99s and maybe the centerline 20 mm for a 13 mm MG after a few months of combat experience, and a later model might reintroduce MGs in the engine cowling, so maybe
J100K1 1-20 mm Type 99 CL, 2-7.7 mm Type 89 F 1/42
J100K1a 1-20 mm Type 99 CL, 2-20 mm type 99 F 4/42
J100K1b 1-13 mm Type 2 CL, 2-20 mm type 99-2 F 6/42
J100K2 1-20 mm Type 99-2 CL, 2-13.2 mm Type 3 CL, 2-13.2 mm Type 3 F, 1 DT CL 3/43
J100K2a 1-20 mm Type 99-2 CL, 2-13.2 mm type 3 CL, 2-20 mm Type 99-2 F, 1 DT CL 6/43
The -2 versions would have to take a performance hit, of course.
An interesting thought, though I would not switch to the Type 3 13.2mm until 44 as it was not in wide use until then. I'll see about splitting it up further as per your suggestions however.
< Message edited by JuanG -- 8/21/2009 3:34:43 PM >