Jump to content

Logo

Photo

Tanker aircraft landing error


  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 Maromak

Maromak

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 2 posts

Posted 14 March 2008 - 04:12 AM

Defect Name: Tanker aircraft landing error
Build: HCE 2008.024
Repeatable: Y
Operating System: XP
DB used: HCDB-071223
Scenario used: startirantwo7.hpi
Long Description: Shortly after starting the game one of the tankers (group EQA) splits from its package after completing refueling. The usual box opens and there is the option of where you want the a/c to land. Although I have two carriers within range only one option appears. So I select this option but the a/c goes to the furthest carrier even though the correct distance is displayed for the closer of the two carriers.

Sequence to reproduce:
1. Load game and wait for approx 1-2 minutes in game time.

Expected behaviour: Two landing platform options are displayed. The closest, and in this case 'parent', carrier is selected and the tanker plots an RTB course back to its home carrier.
Observed behaviour: Only one platform (carrier) is displayed. The distance displayed would indicate that the closer platform is selected. After selecting this platform and clicking OK etc, the tanker has plotted a course to the more distant carrier for RTB.

Attached Files


Edited by TonyE, 07 December 2010 - 02:12 PM.
TonyE, saved game added


#2 TonyE

TonyE

    Advanced Member

  • Staff Pukes
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,406 posts

Posted 15 March 2008 - 11:26 AM

Playing in 2008.027, my first tanker split prompt lets me choose between either carrier, the more distant carrier is selected by default for some reason, I select the closer one and the empty tankers go to the closer one.

The second set of tankers split from the group again showed both carriers for landing and this time the closer carrier was the default. Is there any chance the first set of tankers really took off from the more distant carrier? I found the situation strange in a few ways, we already knew tanking is still rather wacky, but have tankers split twice from a group is a new one on me.

#3 TonyE

TonyE

    Advanced Member

  • Staff Pukes
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,406 posts

Posted 27 November 2009 - 04:57 PM

Fixed in some other tanking code changes sometime before 2009.049. Checked in 2009.049 and landing choice is correct and correctly honored.

#4 donaldseadog

donaldseadog

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 622 posts

Posted 05 December 2009 - 11:47 PM

Playing in 2008.027, my first tanker split prompt lets me choose between either carrier, the more distant carrier is selected by default for some reason, I select the closer one and the empty tankers go to the closer one.

The second set of tankers split from the group again showed both carriers for landing and this time the closer carrier was the default. Is there any chance the first set of tankers really took off from the more distant carrier? I found the situation strange in a few ways, we already knew tanking is still rather wacky, but have tankers split twice from a group is a new one on me.

I'll have a look too to see if it fits with what I know. I've seen tankers split twice, I've set them up to do so. If the tankers are in different units refuelling seems to take place from the loweset numbered tnaker unit (all tankers in unit), when more fuel is needed later tanker units do the job.
(I sometimes split tankers and rejoin the group to get them into separate units)
I suspect that if two carriers are in the one group and tankers are selected from each carrier (at the time of launch) they would end up in different groups too. As you say tankers are a world of their own and difficult to understand.
Don Thomas
(edit Don Thomas, in reply to self)
Yep, the tankers are in separate units (different tanker platforms). The lower ID unit refuels first, then a bit later (when refuel trigger occurs again) the second tanker unit refuels). I found this some time back when doing a lot of refuelling and set up a number of tests.
Other aspects seemed to work OK.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users