Cacetudo

This is excellent work. Thank you for sharing the results so far - I took a shot at this last night, but found that DCS kept crashing. I think I will wait to see your results before I do any more work on this! ED and @BIGNEWY please take note of the above video, and ideally provide a map of the coordinate points for these taxi routes! EDIT: never mind the bit about the coordinates, this is available in the model viewer.

This would be RJAW which can be seen here: https://goo.gl/maps/4pPML9obzZZYdHrp7 It's 629 nm / 724 mi / 1,165 km from there to Saipan PGSN. This could get it into the upcoming Marianas map, for example, but I'm unaware of the exact location of the map's bounding box. I've read that there are 400x400, 1000x1000, and 1000x2000 km possibilities. It would suit all carrier aircraft in the Marianas map, of course - not just the Hornet/Tomcat/Goshawk/etc.

+1, I would pay for an add-on that had this and a few other airports in the map

I've also got the Navy Equipment Mod and have set up the IFLOLS trailer and the associated runway lighting (and assorted other static vehicles nearby) in the Caucasus theater. It looks pretty good, but I've never been able to get the IFLOLS lights on. I think the trailer (with the correct glideslope, etc) should be a default DCS component, along with FCLP training missions at one of the airfields in each theater. ATC could be optional for touch & go FCLP. This would be a great minor upgrade to suit the upcoming T-45 Goshawk as well as the Hornet.

+1

I wonder if a quick review of the MOOSE AirBoss functionality for automatically steering the carrier into the wind might be of use. I set the start time at 5:15 to show the effect that the MOOSE ship-steering logic has on the carrier's journey along its defined waypoints, but the entire video might be worth watching. I recall reading somewhere that there is a conflict between AirBoss and the Supercarrier, particularly concerning ATC comms. But this sort of intelligent steering to get the right wind over the deck for launch/recovery ops seems like it would be a great feature to have within the mission editor so that scripting knowledge isn't required of mission designers. The relevant MOOSE module page is here btw: https://flightcontrol-master.github.io/MOOSE_DOCS_DEVELOP/Documentation/Ops.Airboss.html

Well done, this will be helpful to me. Thank you!

I will definitely be buying this module when it hits EA. I haven't flown an Apache sim since LHX Attack Chopper. And please, don't rush it out early - I'm still learning the DCS Hornet!

+1 on this request, and I like the way your single-player mission is looking too. I've been trying to do something similar but haven't gotten quite that far yet, other than creating a bunch of custom static templates for the SC (and some other ships) as well as the necessary Lua scripting/mission triggers to move things around.

Yes, thanks, I was aware of that and that's what I usually do once the overlay appears. Alternatively, I ignore it completely and use the ICLS needles, so I don't have to pause DCS and take my hands off the HOTAS. In the latter case, it would be better if I could switch the overlay off without having to build a custom mod (to persist through DCS updates). The behavior I mentioned is that every time I start a new mission it happens again. I'm sure there's some Lua file I can edit that will fix this, but I've been trying to spend time learning the Hornet's weapons & systems instead, or how to use the mission editor better, or MOOSE stuff, or reading NATOPS manuals, etc. I believe this happens because I have a 3x1 setup. I also see image cropping in the mission startup screens, etc. Let me know if you want some screenshots - as the saying goes, a pic is worth a thousand words. Regardless, I appreciate the very quick reply. From my viewpoint this is a minor annoyance and I'm really happy with the DCS modules I've got.

Thanks +1 I find it easier to read the ball off of the overlay due to the low visibility of the ball position on the carrier itself (which I understand may be improved at some point). However, with my 3x1 monitor setup (5760x1200 when merged), the overlay appears way out on the left side of my cockpit view by default. I'm looking forward to this and other SC improvements coming down the pipeline!

Totally agree with this. I'd like to see each of the cats with the ability to enable/disable in the mission editor, and more importantly via Lua scripts.

Try "vf-24 renegades" I had the same issue and for some reason the names are not consistent. I ended up adding a static Tomcat in the mission editor, saving it, and then opening up the mission file to find the exact livery description for that static Tomcat's UnitID. From what I've seen, the names are usually, but not always, consistent.

+1, including helicopter traffic, and especially in the airspace within ~5nm of the boat. For any Case you choose, all AI aircraft, in my experience so far, climb well above 500 feet after they take off. This occurs even if you assign their first waypoint to be 7nm out at 500 feet - they climb up to 1000+ feet before descending. The problem with that arises when you or other AI arrive at the Case I/II overhead break at 800 feet to find AI traffic climbing through your own altitude, colliding or otherwise interfering with the inbound aircraft. Basically, the AI should have some basic awareness of default NATOPS traffic patterns when departing the boat. It may be a limitation of AI aircraft in general, but this capability doesn't seem to be present at the moment.

From what I have read in the NATOPS manuals, carrier aircraft are only manned by naval aviators once the aircraft is spotted on deck. They do not man their aircraft on the hangar deck and ride the elevator from the cockpit, nor do they go the other way, but rather they dismount from the aircraft while it is on deck.

I read elsewhere on the ED fora that it does, but I do not know personally. I may make a slight tweak or two to suit my steam preferences but this is a good improvement from the default steam IMO.

Plus 1 I think this would make a pretty big positive difference for any Case I or II landing scenario. And with the modern Marianas map (which I understand is in development) it might make an even bigger positive difference. Thanks.

Outstanding work, thank you very much! At 72dpi, the long edge of this image would be a hair over 6 feet (183cm) long. I think it would look great on a wall and as a learning tool.

This is looking great so far and I'm looking forward to seeing it in DCS. I'd be happy to modify my Supercarrier static template sets (see pics) to include this, whenever it's released. Thanks for all the work on it!

84 more templates - thanks! RedKite, thanks for this forum post and your YouTube video. It made a lot of sense and I have been able to apply those techniques as well as extend their functionality somewhat, using variables in each of the Lua files to apply custom liveries. I applied the mass launch & recovery templates in the package, but after checking them out I decided to see if I could add some more atmosphere. I therefore divided the carrier deck into 9 different areas for static sets, and designed various templates for each area that are compatible with the others, regardless of aircraft type. There are plenty of complementary objects included as well - this requires the US Navy equipment and military aircraft mods, obviously in addition to the Community A-4E mod. What you see below are a total of 44 statics in some chronological pics from a training mission I've created, which includes Hawks, Skyhawks, Tomcats, and Hornets (static or active) in a variety of USN/USMC training liveries: I'm seeing very little impact on frame rates at mission start, or whenever the static templates are switched. However, while the Skyhawk will "take off from runway" on the Supercarrier just fine, any other kind of start results in no cat hookup (not complaining - just an observation). As an example, here's the Lua at the top of the Cat2 file, showing the livery variables and the A-4 at the bow: [font=Consolas]-- Set livery variables here StaticLivery1 = "trainer usn vt-7 eagles"-- A / VT-7 CTW-1 StaticLivery2 = "trainer usmc vmat-102"-- SC / xxxx -- ******************************************************** local staticObj = { ["name"] = "CarrierStaticUSA Cat2 Skyhawk 1", -- unit name (Name this something identifiable if you wish to remove it later) -- Copy and paste over this with the units information ["livery_id"] = StaticLivery2, ["category"] = "Planes", ["type"] = "A-4E-C", ["offsets"] = { ["y"] = -9.9126949063903, ["angle"] = 59.260074062465, ["x"] = 162.57322919126, }, -- end of ["offsets"] -- Copy and paste over this with the units information end -- these can be left as is, but is required. ["groupId"] = 1, -- id's of the group/unit we're spawning (will auto increment if id taken?) ["unitId"] = 1, ["y"] = 0, -- The initial location of the unit (required else unit will offset on origin of map) ["x"] = 0, ["heading"] = 0, ["linkUnit"] = CarrierStaticUSA_ID, -- Set in mission editor with DO SCRIPT "CarrierStaticUSA_ID = #" where # is the id of the carrier ["linkOffset"] = true, ["dead"] = false, } coalition.addStaticObject(country.id.USA, staticObj) -- makes the object[/font] You may note that the name of the static begins with "CarrierStaticUSA" - this is to enable easy bulk removal of statics on the carrier. Next, note the "["livery_id"] = StaticLivery2," line, which sets the livery for that aircraft to the USMC livery defined above. Third, note the line near the end with "["linkUnit"] = CarrierStaticUSA_ID" - this is to allow future static sets to be applied to/removed from multiple ships. This can be done on the Tarawa too, as well as any of the other warships on their helo decks, and I can't think of any reason it wouldn't work with Russian or other ships either. But I'm new around here, so not 100% sure yet. Next up, I'll post some images of a combat launch with this kind of a packed deck, but with different combinations of aircraft. I'm working on a short video for this project as well. I'd welcome any feedback in the meantime, before I wrap up these Lua templates and make them available in the user files section.

Stand by for a fighter pilot Greetings to all! I have arrived completely new to DCS, just within the last couple of months. I first noticed DCS via YouTube videos from ED and others, and specifically liked the way the Hornet looked and the high quality of the graphics in general. Once I had the right graphics hardware, I tested out the Community A-4E to verify acceptable performance and to convince myself it was worth the plunge to take on another learning curve with a new sim that had fairly accurate modeling of the Hornet's systems. It's been a considerable amount of time since I last delved into any flight sims. I've been a prior user of MS Flight Simulator, from its earliest versions to the relatively large and customized FS2004 install which I last updated several years ago. I've created several minor mods for MSFS AI traffic, and done some custom repainting/reskinning work too. The flying I did in that platform was almost all single-player civilian airliner ops, with copious amounts of custom AI traffic installed by hand using text editors and config files. On the combat sim side, I've used Jet, After Burner and other "game sims" for fun, LHX Attack Chopper, various Jane's aircraft, etc. I used the early versions of Falcon, ending up with a Falcon 4 BMS install in which I flew several campaigns and learned a pretty good deal about the F-16 systems & weapons. My prime interest within DCS is (Super)carrier-based Hornet ops, likely with mission design/scripting to bring life to the default world which only awaits the Langoliers. I've got a bit of a technical background to go with some real-world piston flying time, and I've already figured out how to integrate basic MOOSE and Lua functionality into my custom test mission, as well as nail one _OK_ pass onto a moderately pitching deck in Case I. And I've learned how to deploy the Hornet's simpler ground attack weapons effectively too. Once I free up some additional disk space I will definitely be getting the Persian Gulf and Syria maps. If a AH-64D Longbow Apache module were to appear, I would be all over that too. I have not contemplated any multiplayer stuff yet - perhaps in the future. I'm evaluating the available VR options and may make that move in the near future. Anyway, thanks for reading, and I hope to be able to make a small contribution towards improving this sim that has impressed me so far.