Profile image

INFINITE FUEL--DUMBEST THING IN SP

29.8k ChiChiWerx  7.0 years ago

OK, I know many of you builders use this mod: Infinite Fuel. Dumbest thing ever in SP. There's only one caveat for using this, which I will mention later. But first, let me rant:

Along with "speed is life", i.e., don't stall the plane close to the ground while landing and "push forward, trees get bigger, pull back, trees get smaller", fuel awareness is in most instructor pilots' top three things they teach a new student. All pilots, save glider pilots, are hyper-aware of their fuel status. They should be, after all Francis Gary Powers lost his life when he ran out of fuel in his helicopter. While reporting on the traffic. Let that sink in. However, infinite fuel gets rid of that concern/lesson for any build using this trick. Not to mention, it unrealistically modifies fuel and gross aircraft weight, which drastically changes an aircraft's basic flying characteristics. It's unrealistic.

In fact, it's so unrealistic, I withhold upvotes for aircraft with infinite fuel. I've seen many fantastic builds, but whose builders simply alleviate their need to plan for fuel by using this trick. I agree, some are fantastic builds, but they're simply unrealistic in my opinion.

OK, I am sure I will get lots of hate for this post, so let me provide a caveat: Infinite fuel makes sense if you're building the Starship Enterprise, a [nuclear powered] ship or a solar-powered aircraft...if the real-life model doesn't have fuel concerns, then it makes sense to use infinite fuel. But not for an F-18 or a T-38 or an F-16...in real life, those jets are min fuel as soon as they retract their landing gear. If a builder wants to provide a realistic experience to a player, then they should never use infinite fuel. The same for a bomber or airliner, for that matter.

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image

    @ChiChiWerx so I see your a real u-2 pilot, how was your service, what was it like to fly such a plane?, What other aircraft have you flown?

    one year ago
  • Profile image

    Ah! Good to know..
    Thanks for the info! @ChiChiWerx

    1.9 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @LegendaryPilot yes, he is! Shot down over the Soviet Union on 1 May 1960 by an S-75 Dvina (SA-2 Guideline) missile while cruising above 65,000’. After his bailout and subsequent imprisonment for espionage in the USSR, he was repatriated in 1962 in exchange for Rudolf Abel, a British-born KGB spy who was captured in the U.S. After repatriation and testimony before Congress and much criticism for not having taking his issued “suicide pill”, Powers left the CIA, worked for Lockheed and finally wound up piloting a news helicopter in Los Angeles in the 1970s. In 1977, Powers and his cameraman were killed when his helicopter ran out of fuel short of Burbank airport. So, yes, same Francis Gary Powers.

    1.9 years ago
  • Profile image

    I'm sorry, but isn't Francis Gary Powers that one CIA Agent who was shot down in a U-2?

    2.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    I respect your opinion of course, and I have no problem with the idea of total realism, but as many others have stated, it is a game, and not all users find total realism fun, as all games are meant to be some form of fun for any specific audience. I also felt the need to state that you do realize that all you need to do to a build that has infinite fuel to make it great in your eyes is hunt down the infinite fuel, delete it, and add a limited source instead, of course, the realism kicking in, and probably making it look completely different, and very heavy depending on how much fuel it uses. I can see that a person like you could see that as a fun challenge even, so I don't understand why you would not upvote a buIld simply for having infinite fuel when you could end up having more fun than the regular user by putting your tactical fuel placement skills to the test with build you enjoyed enough to download in the first place. Once again, I totally repect your opinion.

    +2 6.8 years ago
  • Profile image
    6,005 Lahoski107

    guys just wait till we use antimatter instead of jetfuel. 1 ounce of antimatter is about 300,000 gallons of jetfuel

    +1 6.8 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @Benkelmans that does seem to be the case from time to time. The resizeable fuselage blocks seem to be a bit heavier than necessary, so they are not perfectly modeled to match real life (besides, they don't even have "resizeable fuselages" in real life!). I can certainly see the dilemma there, perhaps along with the option of selecting an "afterburner" setting, a future update to the game might lower or adjust the size of SP structures.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @Sauce well, ok, fair enough. All caps is a little over the top, as is the "dumbest thing ever" comment, but I accept that you have a different view. I'm not offended, I don't really offend that easily, but I do think we should keep it civil...besides, as you tell me, you don't like infinite fuel either, so I guess we DO agree, don't we? In my community, we call that being "in violent agreement." I guess that's a good way of describing it, right?

    Besides, I love your tiger series aircraft, they're fantastic!

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    48.0k Sauce

    @ChiChiWerx man using infinite fuel is a CHOICE, you choose to either use it because you like it or you don't use it because you don't, i personally don't like infite fuel that much either, as a matter of fact i stopped using it on my recent planes.
    If you don't like its totally fine, it is fine to leave an opinion on it, but its not fine to say that others shouldn't simply because you didn't like it. Basically it's like a youtube channel, you like some of them, you dislike some of the, it's totally fine to leave your opinion on the channel, say that you dont like it etc., but it is not ok to say that others shouldn't because you don't


    YOU MADE A PUBLIC RANT/POST, THUS MAKING IT COMPLETELY OPEN TO ANY KIND OF OPINIONS ON THE TOPIC GIVEN BY YOU, FELLOW USER, PLEASE DO NOT TAKE THIS AS AN OFFENSE.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @MrMecha ok, perhaps "most unrealistic thing in SP" would have been a better choice of words. Not sure I would have gotten the same response by that post.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @Sauce wow, really?

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    48.0k Sauce

    watsap guys it's ciciwerx here welcome to my plane where fuel awareness is number 1 pyayoyity if de fuel ran out and you aint near landing strip you are gonna crash and probably will be in no harm whatsoever because the of this plane cockpit is indestructible
    yeah i get it the fuel awareness is an important thing IN REAL LIFE
    but don't you think that you're making a big deal off of a kids game?

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    48.0k Sauce

    yeah infinite fuel was the dumbest thing in SP...... but then you made this post

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    Thank you, I love your builds too :D clever conversations and debates are fine ...they benefit both sides with different views or even facts in other kinds of debates ..the point is some planes require less Fuel hungry engines or tonnes of fuel gallons ...Simple planes have no limits ...especially when it's XML modded ..but sticking to realism is greater and @Mrmecha is right

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @AstleyIndustries and that makes sense, right? Science fiction envisions the use of unlimited fuel supplies.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    Mod DeezDucks

    @ChiChiWerx Yeah acceleration speeds and more options on fuel burn and engine rpm would be great. A fighter jet shouldn't have two mini GE90's to get to it's realistic top speed.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    I use the infinite fuel for futuristic aircraft (i have a fictional scientific basis for them)

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @Flightsonic no worries, guess I'm one of the few clinging
    to limited fuel.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @BaconAircraft hmm, you're probably right about that. Those are practical reasons which make sense. Much better than the "it's a game" position taken by others. My most recent build is 140,000 lbs and flies like a 140,000 lb airplane, kind of lumbering and slow, but I thought it was a fun challenge. Guess others, not so much, preferring more sprightly builds.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    49.1k Flightsonic

    @ChiChiWerx ah I understand, no hard feelings (and I'm guilty of being lazy and using infinifuel lol)

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @ChiChiWerx To be honest, I'm not surprised that this thread is being bombarded by other users. Infinite fuel does help airliner and larger aircraft builders like me or BaconEggs a lot due to the impractical aspect of realistic fuel without making it fly like a brick. I think people mainly use infinite fuel to reduce weight, improve flight characteristics and produce less lag once over 700 parts; which i see nothing wrong in. ...and I get why people may get triggered by this post due to that.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @BaconAircraft well, thanks. I've been getting many opposing opinions from many high ranked users, which surprised me.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image

    @ChiChiWerx I agree. Also realistic acceleration. I have to mod the engine power and MaxMin settings to make sure my 256 feet airbus a340 doesn't have the acceleration of a Mclaren p1.

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @BaconAircraft @DeezDucks @AdrianFlyingAce I like the suggestion made below to either add a definite afterburner selection or revise the fuel consumption in SP be made in a future update...thoughts?

    7.0 years ago
  • Profile image
    29.8k ChiChiWerx

    @AdrianFlyingAce you're already planning on using infinite fuel?

    7.0 years ago
  • Log in to see more comments