AndyJWest

Yay necrothread!

The maximum draft for passing through the Sound (where the Øresund bridge is) is 7.2 m. A CVN (11.3 m draft) would have run aground before it got there. https://www.sjofartsverket.se/en/services/pilotage/deep-sea-pilot/ Same issue as above (QE's are 11 m draft)

You'll need to be a lot more specific. Did you buy it from the DCS store, or Steam? What product? How long have you owned it? Why do you think you are entitled to a refund?

Excellent stuff: the only proviso I'd make is that 'aiming at, or short of the threshold' will only apply if you intend to flare. If you're in an F-14 or F/A-18, and intend to land hard, carrier-style, your velocity vector wants to be on your intended landing spot so you stay on AoA, and on the intended glide path, until impact.

Good luck finding any documentation...

Did they? Admiral Helsey, who was ultimately responsible for the decision to press on into the storm, and not to take precautions earlier (to be fair, weather reports were contradictory), got away with no real sanctions for his 'error of judgement'. If anyone else got punished, that would seem unfair. In addition to the many damaged ships, three destroyers were sunk, 802 seamen lost, and 146 aircraft destroyed - most due to breaking loose in hangers due to extreme rolling. USS Monterey (CVL-26) suffered a fire as a result, fortunately brought under control. I suspect most DCS players think little about this aspect of warfare: extreme weather, or even just enduring cold for armies ill-equipped for it, sometimes inflicts more damage than the enemy. Not something you can simulate, or would really want to (though proper pitching decks for CVs would be nice), but a sobering thought.

The Essex-class USS Hornet (CV-12) had to do this, after being damaged in the 1944 Typhoon Cobra, which left her with a very battered bow: She managed to participate in an attack on Kanoya Air Field, before heading off for repairs. According to this website this was the only wartime occurrence of the practice. The website has a photo showing a Hellcat taking off astern, but I think there may be Corsairs amongst the aircraft in the background.

You've got to be kidding me...

Looks entirely authentic to me, though it could do with the guy in the asbestos suit and a few other deck crew rushing forward to help.

No, I don't have an iPhone. And comparing DCS to some random smartphone sim tells us nothing of consequence. And you haven't answered my question: what do you consider to be incorrect regarding the arresting wires. Incorrect, that is, in comparison to how the real-world arrestor cables behave, which is the only thing that matters.

As anyone familiar with the MiG-21 nuke will confirm, simulating even a vastly-underscaled nuclear explosion is problematic due to the amount of simultaneous destruction involved. Possibly acceptable in single player, to people that don't mind an obvious long-duration stutter, but clearly unacceptable in multiplayer (using the MiG-21 nuke will get you banned from several servers)

What do you consider to be incorrect regarding the arresting wires?

As fascinating as the Yak-38 is, I really can't see it coming to DCS, never mind being some sort of 'saviour' for it. I suspect that finding adequate documentation would be problematic, and its operational capabilities seem to have been rather limited.

The AI Mig-15s have very unrealistic FMs.

Because it hasn't been released yet.

Even ignoring the obvious other issues (starting with file size), a map that large would run into serious distortion problems with the existing 'flat Earth' modelling DCS uses. You'll have to wait until spherical mapping is implemented...

Yup. Sources say by 8 inches - not sure if that's per tip, or overall. Either way, it was because some RN carriers had hangers which were just too low to take an unclipped Corsair with wings folded. There are a lot of myths floating around with regard to RN Corsairs, and the idea that this minor modification was made for any more significant reason is one of them. The RN also operated land-based Corsairs, unclipped, so they clearly didn't think it mattered otherwise.

I'd be surprised if the small change to the wingtip profile made any meaningful difference to performance in real life. Maybe with very careful testing they might have been able to detect a difference, but why would they bother? It needed to be done (to fit some RN carriers), so they did it. Pilots who expected a difference might have thought there was one, but given all the other variables, there's no particular reason to assume this was more than imagination. And even if there was a difference, we don't have data on it...

Seems highly unlikely they'd form at typical wind over the deck speeds. If this were possible, with any carrier-borne aircraft, I'm sure we'd have seen photographic evidence.

The mixture control in a Hornet is the big lever on the left-hand side. For some obscure reason, jet-jockeys call it a 'throttle'.

Previous thread on wearing helmets in C-130s: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/377124-herk-pilots-dont-wear-helmets/#comment-5677838 Short answer: it depends, but more likely to be seen in a combat situation.

I'll believe it when I see it. Let me know how progress is going in 2030...

Or make us an entirely-new high-fidelity air combat simulation? For free. With an 'add new aircraft' button so nobody has to wait for pesky developers to make stuff. You want a XB-70 Valkyrie, but can't find it in the mission editor? No problem. ChatGPT will have it ready for you in a few minutes. Yeah, that'll happen... Meanwhile, in the real world, ChatGPT is still struggling with basic concepts like the difference between looking something up in a cited source and inventing fictitious but plausible-sounding citations.

It's easier to keep the F-14 straight after touchdown with differential spoilers (i.e. stick left/right) than with rudder, in my experience.

It would help if the lights weren't almost invisible.