MadDog-IC

Thinking the same thing, I tried it some months ago based on the VFA stingers MOD of GW Bush US carrier, they have already done all the work for the flight pattern for a proper landing with a human pilot, unfortunately the AI pilot requires about a (6 to 9 mile or 10 to 15 km) line up for landing, not the 3/4 mile as required. So your not doing anything wrong, the AI just isn't smart enough to lower the flaps, landing gear and set the correct AOA when programmed to the required slower speeds and altitude for landing from the abeam paddles contact point and beyond into the groove, when they near final touch down, it panics because it is to low and slow (because it hasn't put flaps down)for its liking, so it bolters before reaching the stern of the carrier. Would be great if they modified it, yes +1 from me. Regards, Ian.

The procedure for take off is different, previous patch version to dcs V1.57.10175 had faulty physics for takeoff, they were corrected with the latest version stated above. Look here for solution, message #12 especially https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193864 Talking about Su-33 Sea dragon campaign: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193864 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193901 Regards, Ian.

I have the default loadout (Rockets, etc) the way it is because the AI I test with works best with that, it may not necessarily be best for a human player (They can change to a different loadout in mission). AI doesn't have good results with cluster bombs. Sure they would, you just have to suspend belief a little: There may have been a malfunction on board the ships and they are unable to fire their weapons. They under estimate the threat and assume they are just mad locals being stupid. (May be similar to the US Cole and other incidents). May have rules of engagement to not engage civilian boats unless intel has verified they are a credible threat. Regards, Ian.

No, and there is no need to do any of that at all, in your mission, give the carrier a speed of 59km/h, point it into a head wind, and give the weather a 10 m/s wind speed or higher, and follow correct take off protocol for the new Su-33 PFM (All listed in the supplied link below). To take off at maximum load, just follow the advice in this thread below: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3256607&postcount=12 Regards, Ian.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193864 Die Dinge haben meinen Freund verändert, ich hatte gerade einen schnellen Test der Su-33 selbst. Kann bei Maximalgewicht 24.600kg (50% Treibstoff, keine Raketen) erfolgreich abheben, Träger am Stand noch 0 km / h ohne Gegenwind. Kann bei einem maximalen Gewicht von 30.000 kg (72% Kraftstoff und schwerste A / A-Raketenladung) erfolgreich abheben, wenn der Träger bei 50 km / h oder höher ohne Gegenwind dämpft. Kann bei einem maximalen Gewicht von 32,633 kg (100% Kraftstoff und schwerste A / A-Raketenladung) erfolgreich abheben, wenn der Träger bei 50 km / h oder höher mit einem Gegenwind von 5-10 m / s oder höher dämpft. Für einen komfortablen erfolgreichen Start aus der vorderen Position 1 oder 2 mit vollem Treibstoff und Raketenladung: Der Träger sollte mit maximaler Geschwindigkeit (50-59 km / h) in Richtung Wind fahren. Die Windgeschwindigkeit des Kopfes sollte höher als 5 m / s sein, (10 m / s oder höher) ist ideal. Ihr maximales Startgewicht sollte unter 30.000 kg liegen, Sie können schwerer werden, wenn der Wind höher als 10 m / s ist. In Ihrem Flugzeug Cockpit bereit für den Start: Stellen Sie die volle Abzugsklappe in die untere Position (dies wird automatisch gemacht, ich vermute). Erzwingen Sie die Motorschutz-FOD-Grills während des Betriebs auf dem Deck (LALT + I), um zusätzliche 10% Leistung für Motoren zu erhalten. Beide Radbremsen werden nicht betätigt (Radbremse START = Lshift + W Tasten) und nicht (Radbremse EIN = W-Taste oder Ruderpedal Zehenbremsen), um Sie gegen die Explosionsklappe zu halten und bis die Motoren den maximalen Schub erreichen und Bremsen nicht Halte das Flugzeug länger. Beschleunigen Sie Gas bis maximal 100%, bis die Nachbrenner einrasten, die durch zwei grüne Leuchten an der Mittelkonsole angezeigt werden. Sobald diese beiden grünen Lichter aufleuchten, tippen Sie auf "Special engine thrust mode" (LShift-e), um den Schub auf 107% zu erhöhen, und das dritte grüne Licht wird zwischen den beiden Nachbrennern angezeigt löste an diesem Punkt alle Bremsen. Wenn Sie den Himmel springen lassen, ziehen Sie die Räder so schnell wie möglich zurück und fliegen Sie wie gewohnt mit dem Flugzeug. Sie werden fast immer in der Nähe der Stallgeschwindigkeit sein, so dass Sie das Gleichgewicht halten müssen, um AOA zu erhöhen oder zu stürzen. Höhe, heben Sie die Klappen und reduzieren Sie Gas aus dem Nachbrenner und los geht es in die Mission. Glückliches Fliegen. P.S danke an alle anderen Benutzer, die mich über einige Funktionen informiert haben, die mir nicht bekannt sind, es wird sehr geschätzt, da (ich bin ein Su-33 noob). Ich habe einfach alle Startprozeduren in einer einfach zu lesenden Liste zusammengestellt. Grüße, Ian.

Have you done what Blacklibrary in message 8 is pointing to, updating the three lua files in the carrier mod. ?? My Process: I got the most recent George Bush carrier mod from the VFA stingers sight at http://www.users.on.net/~jase_ash/http:/www.users.on.net/~jase_ash/styled-14/index.html (Hornet 8.3 file). I removed the following from the GMJE compatible directory structure "\Mods\aircraft\Flaming Cliffs" folder as it has old versions of Su-33 SFM default keyboard and joystick configs, which stuffs the new PFM ones in game. I then applied the (three lua modifications provided by Blacklibrary in forum = Bush.lua, BushRunwaysAndRoutes.lua, entry.lua) into the "Mods\tech\USS George H. W. Bush CVN-77 directory. Tested in game landing of Su-33 PFM onto George Bush carrier with AI and he lands perfectly with no issues and DCS doesn't crash, then tried flying it my self, no DCS crash, and I put the plane onto the carrier deck but missed the wires, didn't disappear through the deck, I just did a bolter back into the air. Didn't test any of the FA-18c mod side of things. However due to my poor flying skills I haven't been able to trap the wires yet in the Su-33 :mad: Regards, Ian.

Stella effort, thank you. Doesn't crash DCS now. Regards, Ian.

+1 Oh, yes please, fix asap. Was thinking of having another go at carrier landings with working meatball.

Always loved your videos, really stir up the emotions, and I am sure they have sold a lot of plane modules for ED over the years. I know I bought some modules solely based on seeing them. Congratulations for being recognized for some stunning work, look forward to seeing more of your work in the future. All the best, Ian.

Yes wasn't sure about those at the time, I assumed they were automatically opened, have since read about the FOD shields and the 10% decrease in power and see that when Ai take off they are closed. Thanks for reminding me, will update post. Cheers, Ian.

Already been talked about in other threads: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193901 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=190526 For take off advice see my hints in here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=193864 Regards, Ian.

Excellent info, this has been a real issue for me trying to understand the whole process of carrier landing. To keep the AOA indexer donut green, do you use throttle, do you change Angle of attack with stick or do you use both. I take it is the same procedure for standard ILS landing on carriers and runways, but instead of following meatball, you are following the ILS beam. So answer is: Set your required AOA with stick before line up with carrier and maintain. Adjust only throttle to to stay on glideslope with meatball centered with datum lights. Thank you so much Regards, Ian.

Whilst it is nice for people to express their gratitude as you yourself have on multiple occations and also a lot of other users, I don't require or expect praise from others, I do what I do because I enjoy things working properly and know that the bulk of other flight sim fans will enjoy them. What else am I going to do when some aspects of the DCS engine or my favourite aircraft module is so broken I can't fly it correctly in missions, I edit missions so when the former mentioned problems are eventually fixed I can fly the fixed missions knowing they are going to perform correctly. I would also say, as much as I would like to write my own campaigns and make money from it, I am mostly incapable of such an endevour as I don't have an artistic bone in my body and don't wish to devote the amount of time required to write a plot line, research actual real life scenarios, learn correct military speak, learn real work applications of assets, and finally make the missions that use all that authentic based info. So in general I never respond to outright negative comments, but constructive feedback on something you think is wrong or may need improving I will take onboard and talk about the pros and cons. My work hasn't gone unnoticed and Eagle Dynamics have been more that generous with a non money form of renumeration, without that there would have been no FC-3 Campaign fixes at all. Regards, Ian.

I wouldn't disagree with you on any of your points, all my testing of any campaign missions I have repaired is done purely with the "Players aircraft" setup as AI with the appropriate commands to fly the missions as a real person would. I do however notice how hard some of them are, but as I didn't make these missions originally, I don't want to change how the missions goals play out, I will sometimes make changes if it blatently ridiculous, but it was only ever about making sure all Briefings are accurate, Aircraft call-signs are correct, triggers work, radio commands work, messaging and voice overs work, mission goals scoring working, and all other issues that subsequently come about from subsequent patches, such as incorrect JTAC frequencies, Artillery fire at points not firing, pathing of vehicles not staying on road, and others to many to list. I have fixed / modified hundreds of missions, at a cost of (Thousands of unpaid man hours), why because most of them never work properly, lacked messaging and or voice overs so the player never had a clue when things were happening or when they could use the radio to call in SEAD or RUNWAY, CAS strikes, also because like all other DCS users I want to actually fly missions that work correctly. Regards, Ian.

Whilst I see your point and know that you can't fail the missions per say if you shoot down at least one enemy flight, this was a design of my making, as it depends on your out look, personally I find it very demoralizing as would a beginner pilot, to play half, two thirds the way through a mission and be shown that you have not accomplished anything of the assigned tasks (Goal of 50% still), I much prefer the player to see the contribution they are making through out the missions and to get the ultimate (Goal of 100%) if the do all that was asked of them, including the landing (Which ultimately shows a fully completed mission). I can only work within the confines of the campaign editor, if you do it your way people complain, that if they don't do everything perfectly they have to re-fly the mission or go back a mission and possibly never advance to the next mission. Do it my way, they complain that they can't re-fly the same mission if they don't achieve the full mission complete (Goals of 100%), but they do advance to the next mission. As with any war, when has all the plans ever worked out exactly the way they wanted it to, doesn't necessarily make the missions a failure if you don't achieve every single objective, you do your best and hope you small battle contributes to winning the war, you don't get to re-fly a mission just because you failed every objective. I see the goals scoring as a performance evaluation as it measures your capability to following orders as instructed, you get (50) for turning up in the plane, (15) for each enemy flight you shoot down, and (20) if you return home and land safely. As in real life, if you died in combat after shooting down the 2 flights of fighters you might be regarded as a hero, not a failure, your effort is still recorded. Their will always be different ways of doing things, in the end you have to choose one, it will never please everyone. Regards, Ian.

Thanks for pointing that out, didn't know about the Wheel brake start, great for carrier and short runway take-offs. I suspect that normal wheel brake (W) and wheel brake axis are for normal stopping and slowing down operations and may have ABS or anti-skid systems so as to not damage tires or cause swerving. Wheel brake start (Lshift+W) applies twice the force to the brakes and therefore should only be used for short runway or carrier take-offs (Hold the plane in position against blast wall until Afterburners reach full power). So I wouldn't call this a bug, it is as it should be. Regards, Ian.

Had similar issues with my Saitek X52 pro sometimes with the Z axis not going to 100%, solution for that joystick is to unplug it with computer going, and plug it back in again, which auto calibrates all axis. Depending on what joystick you have, the only way to fix it would be: First question is, does this happen in most of your other plane modules, or just the Su-33 module ?, if answer is all modules then solution would be calibrate joystick at windows level, if specific to Su-33 only then solution most likely conflict in DCS controller config. Try unplugging joystick in question and let windows re-detect it and hopefully re-calibrate the axis. Re-calibrate and / or test the axis with in windows control panel -> Devices and Printers or with software that came with joystick and make sure the Z axis is going full range (0-100). If all axis are traveling full range in the windows calibrate test, Go into the DCS controller menu for Su-33 Joystick axis and make sure that the Z axis is still traveling full range (0-100) and isn't inadvertently cross linked with another joystick, game pad or steering wheel controller axis as these can have auto centered axis and cause you grief, check there are no weird curves or limitations assigned to the Z axis. Last resort if that hasn't fixed issue, uninstall joystick software and unplug joystick, reboot computer and re-install joystick software and plug in joystick when requested to, then go through steps 2-3 again. Regards, Ian.

In the controls for the Su-33 what is the function called for (LShift-E): "Special Afterburner mode" for the new PFM "War emergency Power" for old SFM So if it doesn't say "Special Afterburner mode" then: You don't have the new SU-33 PFM update of DCS 1.57.10175 You need to delete your Su-33 keyboard and / or joystick directories out of the user saved games config directory, re-run DCS and re-setup your joystick config and let DCS load the defaults for all keyboard commands, etc. And you better not be running any mods Run a DCS clean and repair. Retest Su-33 systems in mission. Let me know how you go. Regards, Ian.

Things have changed my friend, just had a quick test of the Su-33 myself. Can take-off successfully at Max weight, 24,600kg (50% fuel, No missiles), carrier at stand still 0 km/h with no head wind. Can take-off successfully at Max weight 30,000kg (72% fuel and heaviest A/A missile loadout) if carrier is steaming at 50km/h or higher with no head wind. Can take-off successfully at Max weight, 32,633kg (100% fuel and heaviest A/A missile loadout) if carrier is steaming at 50 km/h or higher with a head wind of 5-10 m/s or higher. For a comfortable successful take off from forward position 1 or 2 with full fuel and Missile loadout: Carrier should be at maximum speed (50-59 km/h) heading into wind. Head Wind speed should be higher than 5m/s, (10m/s or higher) is ideal. Your maximum take-off weight should be under 30,000kg, you can go heavier if head wind is higher than 10 m/s. In your planes cockpit ready for take-off: Set "Flaps" up using the (Left CONTROL + F Key). Open the "Engine inlet protection Grids" using the (Left ALT + I keys) to gain an extra 10% power to the motors. Engage and hold the "Wheel brakes - Start" using the (Left SHIFT + W keys) and not the (Wheel Brake ON = W key or rudder pedal Toe brakes) to hold you in position. Advance the throttle to 100% until the "Afterburners" engage, shown by the "Two green lights" on the center console. When the two "Afterburner green lights" come on, engage the "Special engine thrust mode" using the (Left SHIFT + E keys), this will increase the engine thrust to 103%, a third green light will come on, this is situated between and below the two "afterburner indicator lights", you should release all brakes at this point. As you leave the ski jump, retract your wheels ASAP using the (G key or Left CONTROL + G keys). Increase your "Angle of attack" to gain altitude whilst maintaining a climbing speed "above 240 kilometers per hour", climb to "1000 meters" and level off, reduce the throttle slightly to turn off the afterburners and special engine mode. Happy flying. P.S thanks to all other users that informed me about some features I wan't aware of, it is very much appreciated, as (I am an Su-33 noob). I have simply compiled all the take-off procedures into one easy to read list. Regards, Ian.

Just getting around to putting all of your wonderful english cockpit mods into DCSW 1.57.10175 using the pull downs in the special menu to choose language of cockpit. Yes your instructions are very clear and I have never had a problem with installing any of your mods, I have installed all of your english cockpit mods into my DCS "User Saved Games" directory and all but one work correctly: c:\Users\Ian\Saved Games\Dcs\Liveries\ However the "Ricardo A-10c HD v1.2.6" one does not have the new option in the pull down in special menu to select other than default, I have double checked the directories, names, etc, but it just fails to work. c:\Users\Ian\Saved Games\Dcs\Liveries\A10C-CPT\ Is DCS just broken or is there something else a foot. PS: If I install the A-10c Ricardo HD cockpit the old way, in the games own liveries folder it works as advertised, but not from the "User Saved Games" directory structure. I would like to have it work the later way. Update to why this mod was not working in the saved game folders: Turns out my file / directory manager (Total commander) had an option turned on that when I create a directory would change the name of the directory to Uppercase for the first letter and lowercase all the other letters, ie A10c-cpt, this must be in all Uppercase: ie A10C-CPT or it doesn't work. Regards, Ian.

The updated Su-33 english manual (dcs v1.57.10175 stable) is in the games installed directory: ..\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\Flaming Cliffs\Doc\Su-33 DCS Flaming Cliffs Flight Manual EN.pdf Pics of exert on Su-33 (Some features) from Page 135 attached: If you keybindings aren't working for the new features: Backup your controller input config files for the Su-33 to some where else. Delete the folder:- c:\Users\YourUSERNAME\Saved Games\Dcs\Config\Input\su-33\ Reload DCS and reconfigure the Su-33 axis Controls and some keys so that it makes a new set of defaults for the Su-33 aircraft. Retry mission with Su-33 to see if (Special after burner mode) is working. Regards, Ian.

The Su-33 Sea Dragon Campaign will be corrected in short order, the current one supplied in game is most likely already working better due to the resent dcs patch which had a fix for the Su-33 AI takeoff difficulties and Max takeoff weights. The Su-33 AI may still crash until the missions carrier speed is adjusted up from 20km/h to 60km/h though. The completely updated campaign files are now available on ED DCS user files section, as of 24-OCT-2017, not sure if ED are likely to incorporate these into the actual game in the near future. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/?arrFilter_pf%5Bfiletype%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Bgameversion%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Bfilelang%5D=&arrFilter_pf%5Baircraft%5D=&arrFilter_DATE_CREATE_1_DAYS_TO_BACK=&CREATED_BY=MadDog-IC&sort_by_order=TIMESTAMP_X_DESC&set_filter=Filter Regards, Ian.

The Su-33 AI taking off problem is resolved with the dcs v1.57.10175 patch, the only thing that will make them crash into ocean on takeoff, is if the Kuznetzov carrier isn't steaming at 50km/h or thereabouts (I didn't test all speeds). I have updated the Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign on the ED DCS files section that incorperate all of the correct take-off parameters: Ship speed and direction into wind. Wind speed and direction. Flight fuel and missile loadouts didn't need to be changed (ED waved their magic wand and gave the planes extra takeoff weight of approx 30000-33000kg). 19-11-2017 Update: Some short flights fuel load changed to (80% or less to ease takeoff weight of approx 30000-31000kg). Placed some IL-78 tankers in some long missions to help with extra fuel, on return leg of sortie. Multiple small fixes here and there. Tested that a player can actually take off from carrier with assigned payload of weapons and fuel. Mission 14 - made a bit easier against F-14a, hope it isn't to easy. Mission 25 - fixed the refueling grading so that it allows for multiple premature disconnects and reconnects, however you need to stay connected for a solid 2 minutes in one take to pump (40% more fuel), need some one to test that for me as I can't stay connected for that long with my meager skills. I think this is the final version now, re-Uploaded to the ED User files section as listed in previous posts. Regards, Ian.

Even more excellent is that it has been fixed already in the dcs v1.57.10175 patch today 30-09-2017, so long as the carrier is steaming at 50km/h. Got to love those boffins at ED. My first take off and fly around, I tore both wings off, oh well. I have checked the Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign and made a few alterations to some missions, making sure the Kuznetsov is steaming at max speed into wind and that all missions are playable (Uploaded updated campaign files onto the ED DCS files section). Will be checking and updating the SU-33 Sea Dragon Campaign in the near future for compatibility also, I suspect a little more work with that one, as I never played with carrier speeds or wind data last time around. Cheers.

Haven't got around to flying the new Su-33 as yet (I will soon), but I would like to say a big thank you also to the ED team for the update to the flight dynamics and for the extremely quick fix to the AI's carrier take-off issues, that really did make my face light up this morning. Well done all concerned !!!! Kind regards, Ian.