AG-51_Razor

After carefully following your instructions, it worked like a charm!! Thank you very much.

I keep reading responses like this one from tekwoj and I have to wonder how it is that their experience in the Corsair can be so completely different than others? Tekwoj, if you were to jump into a Jug and begin taxiing straight ahead at the speed of, say a brisk walk, then unlock the tailwheel and ever so lightly tap on either brake, you would see that the P-47 will do a complete 360 degree turn without any additional input from rudder or throttle whatsoever. Try the same thing in a Corsair and you will see your direction of travel change slightly towards the brake you tapped but then continue on. If you hold the brake pedal down, the result will be the slight change in direction and then the plane will just come to a halt, as if you had clamped down on both brakes. This is not anywhere close to being normal or realistic. Go to the F2 view and, while in the P-47, you will see the tailwheel turn 90 degrees as the plane begins its turn. Do the same in the Corsair and it appears to deflect only about 20-30 degrees. I'm not saying that this is what is causing the problem however it certainly looks like it. I am really curious to know if you are not seeing this same behavior.

Thanks for the response. I am unable to read that .rtf file. What is that? Also, I went into my Saved Games>Mods>Aircraft folder but there is no carrier capable aircraft folder there. Do I make one and place the lua file in there?

Not sure exactly where this should go, so I just took a stab at this. My "Wish" is for ED to allow the mission builder to place an AI or even client flown aircraft to be placed aboard an aircraft carrier. One example for this request would be the RL transport of P-47's to the invasion of the Marianas where they were flown off to recover on the newly captured airfield on Saipan. Spitfires were taken to Malta and flown off the carrier. Let's not forget the famous Doolittle raid using B-25's off the Hornet (A-20's might make a suitable stand in). These are just a few examples of what happened in real life and there are few limits to a mission builder's imagination in DCS if we could do this.

It would be very nice to have trains (moving of course) show up on the GMT radar display.

I just downloaded the F9F Panther, a very beautiful model BTW, but after installing it into my Saved Games>Mods>aircraft folder, I can't get into the cockpit. I placed it on the USS Essex as a client flown a/c but no go. It is ver 2.8.7, am I missing an update?

I completely understand that and I am not advocating for a quick/half a$$ed fix however, when you look at the big picture and realize how long this module has been in development and take into account that this is the second month since M3 has not had an update, it is even more bewildering that M3 sees fit to sit back and say nothing to a rather large groups of paying customers.

This latest update is UNBELIEVABLY DISAPOINTING!! I don't know which is more infuriating, the lack of any kind of improvements or the absence of any comment from M3.

Absolutely beautiful work!! "Hopefully the next update will have more button binds included." After all that effort, I would hope that you'll be able to actually taxi out of a revetment to the runway after the next update.

I don't think so Mr_sukebe. The Essex class carriers could easily generate 30 knots of wind over the deck, even in a dead calm. The Air department would then decide, based on the number of a/c that were spotted on the deck at the beginning of the launch cycle and the type of a/c and its load out to be launched, whether or not to use the catapults. The Navy had a desired wind velocity over the deck, 30 knots, that they would achieve using a combination of ambient wind and ship's speed. This was for launch as well as recovery. I have read stories about Jeep carriers (CVE's) that could not conduct flight ops due to lack of wind, and it wasn't because they couldn't launch them - they had a catapult, it was because it was deemed unsafe to recover the a/c with only 18-19 knots of wind over the deck.

After installing this latest update, I have found absolutely no change whatsoever with the Corsair's behavior on the ground. Tailwheel still does not swivel and the plane is unable to make a 90 degree turn to the right with 10 kts of wind from the left. I was using enough power to lift the tailwheel off the ground with the stick back against the stop and still unable to make it turn right! What a shame!!

I'm getting a "Curl error (52): Server returned nothing (no headers, no data)" I am in Medford, OR and my computer is showing the correct time and date.

As a former owner of an RV-8, a home-built tail dragger approximately the same size and weight of an Eagle, I can tell you that the M3 Eagle is nowhere near accurate in the modeling of its ground handling and suffers from similar problems that their Corsair has.

primus_TR, as the original poster of this thread, I can absolutely assure you that my point was not at all about taxiing in a crosswind. I was just trying to express the opinion (in a fairly self-deprecating manner) that there is something wrong with the Corsair's ability to maneuver on the ground with the tailwheel unlocked while using differential braking. Visually, it's pretty obvious that the tailwheel is not allowed to swivel past about 15-20 degrees, which @-Rudel- has indicated is merely a visual issue and that the tail wheel is in fact able to swivel fully 360 degrees. Additionally, while taxiing forward at slightly faster than a brisk walk, application of either wheel brake results in the beginning of a turn but before less than 30-45 degrees of a turn is completed, the plane comes to a halt. Now, this is with no wind at all and it is just not right. As for flight operations aboard ship, the reality of it is that the pilots never turned around on the deck after landing to taxi back and park or launch again. That was all done after the plane was shut down and it was pushed back by ground crew or a tractor after all of the planes had been recovered. @Holbeach is correct when he said that the planes just took off from a position forward of the barriers if they were performing multiple traps in one flight. Maybe M3 and ED can figure out how to re-spot the deck after everyone has come back aboard although, in a MP server type environment, I can see how that might be very difficult. There is a thread concerning this subject over in the Wish List forum.

I am of the opinion that wind vaneing has absolutely nothing to do with the problem. The Corsair is not much easier to turn around without any wind at all. Just compare it to the P-47 under the same conditions. These two airplanes are fairly close to each other in weight and power and both utilize the same method of maneuvering on the ground and yet, they could not possibly be more different as they are modeled in DCS World. I wish that M3 and ED would put their heads together and figure this out. This doesn't serve either organization to have this kind of obvious problem go on unresolved.

There is a thread over in the Bugs section about ground handling with the use of differential braking that has really spilled over into some other areas that I believe could be addressed with this suggestion and that is taxiing in strong winds aboard the carrier after landing. The reality of it is that, up to the mid 50's when the angled flight deck began showing up, planes came aboard and trapped, then taxied forward to where the deck crew wanted them and they were either chocked and tied down or struck below via the elevator. There was no taxiing around on the flight deck to get back to the stern for another takeoff. My suggestion is that there be an F10 menu item for the pilot to request a "push back" to get him back to the aft end of the flight deck. We see a sample of what I'm talking about on the Super Carrier, where after being directed to taxi out of the landing area and into a parking spot, you are shown a small menu of choices to continue on or just shut down. Now, for a WWII straight deck carrier, I can see where this could be problematic, especially in a MP mission but I have no doubt that between M3 and ED, they could come up with something usable.

I was under the impression that that switch just determined whether or not the rocket would go "boom" once they hit their target - sort of like a safety switch for the rocket itself.

I'm pretty sure that I have never flown the Corsair in the dark, everyone knows that there's no lift at night! Is that light bright enough to see in the daylight?

I have never seen that light come on either.

Are both maps being worked on by the same team or are there two separate teams? I love the Afghanistan map but like @Mongo1193 , I feel that the Iraq map, once it is completed, will be a far better map for those that have enjoyed the PG map trying to recreate the Gulf War.

Although this problem is made worse by a wind over the deck or cross wind, that is totally moot as the problem still exists with no wind at all, sitting on a ramp at Nellis AFB on the NTTR map. The plane should be able to turn (with the tail wheel unlocked obviously) about the axis of the inside main landing gear with little more than the power required to taxi. It doesn't. In fact, it merely comes to a stop. This behavior is not realistic, not correct and very annoying. I really hope that M3 is able to fix this issue and I doubt very seriously that it has anything whatsoever to do with ED's new suspension system. The P-51 and the Jug have been able to do this since the first day they appeared in the game - years before "the new suspension" was adopted. The only progress towards solving this problem that I have seen is @Rudel posting on this thread acknowledging that it even exists. At least that is a start.

Well said sir!

As the original poster, I can assure you that "feelings" have nothing to do with it. I suggest that you jump into a Jug and take that for a spin around the ramp area and then do the same in the Corsair. They are as different as night and day. The Corsair is just not right. Over all, I don't see it as a total deal breaker but I am very disappointed and look forward to M3 fixing the problem.

I reinstalled the Christian Eagle to have a look at how it operates on the ground and low and behold, it doesn't handle any better but apparently because of a problem with the modeling of the brakes, not the tailwheel. As the plane is taxiing forward at the pace of a brisk walk, applying either brake will just bring the plane to a stop after causing it to very slightly begin a turn. With full brake applied on either side, you can get the plane to turn and the tailwheel does castor 90 degrees but this is only after applying a significant amount of power, almost identical to the problem with the Corsair. I don't know which is more annoying, the problem itself or the lack of M3 even acknowledging that the problem exists. -Rudel- has commented in several of the bug reports that they will look into it but absolutely nothing from them on this. I am a very disappointed customer to say the least. I don't mind being a bug tester during "early access" but it galls me to see this problem ignored.

It looks AWESOME =Katze=, especially now that you have a carrier to base this beauty on!! Love the skins too. Thanks man!