AG-51_Razor

Sorry Art-J but I have to disagree with the last part of your post here. History geeks notwithstanding, I do believe that there is a huge part of the DCS World customer base that are "Carrier Geeks" (myself being one) and I feel like there would be a tremendous attraction towards the Independance class CVL due to the smaller size and attendant degree of difficulty in operating from its smaller flight deck. Their flight decks were just slightly longer than a Jeep carrier's and actually a few feet narrower. Their only advantage being their ability to keep up with the fleet carriers. I, for one, would have been far happier to see ED develop any one of the CVLs in lieu of the famous, highly decorated Enterprise. But that's just me.

All 3 attack aircraft that flew off of US Navy carriers during WWII (SBD-5, TBM-3 and SB2C-3) had surface search radar installed by the end of the war.

......or at least a healthy sense of self preservation!

OH MAN! I was afraid that was the case. You're right, it is exceptionally annoying! I am surprised that the Navy accepted it that way. Thanks for the response!

I am having a problem with the RAID/FOV button when carrying Mavericks. If I am just carrying GBUs or LGBs or any other weapon, the TGP functions normally, allowing me to control the FOV and switch between TV and IR via my HOTAS but if I have either model of Maverick on board, the hat switch assigned to RAID/FOV no longer functions and I have to manually select those functions from the DDI with the targeting pod displayed. Has anyone else encountered this problem? I am using a TM Warthog HOTAS with the Realistic TDC Slew box checked.

That's it in a nutshell

I am experiencing the same thing. I have a 10mm extension on a Warthog stick and have always been quite comfortable behind the basket, day or night but now I am almost totally incapable of getting plugged in, much less staying in! I had a +20 in the pitch curve and bumped it to 25 with no appreciable effect and have tried 30 and now 35 and am still having problems. It is really quite frustrating! All the rest of the changes to the FM seem to be very nice though.

I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that the Navy wasn't the only branch of service to use this technology for getting the planes back home. I believe that the Army Air Corps also used a similar, if not identical method of allowing their planes to navigate their way back home. If ED could figure out a way to make this happen for the upcoming Magnitude 3 LLC F4U-1D, it shouldn't be too difficult to make it available to the rest of the planes as it only involved tuning in a radio frequency, there were no cockpit instruments involved. It would be nice to be able to get around without having to use the F10 map. And before y'all jump on me like a duck on a Junebug, I am aware of the method of time, distance and heading (dead reckoning).

Not that I am a big user of the Combat Arms module but I think that it would be absolutely awesome if a Pacific Theater of Operations WWII assets pack were developed, it included a drivable AMTRAC. Landing Vehicle Tracked - Wikipedia

Nice! Thanks for sharing.

Another quick observation to this problem; I set the weather to below VFR conditions to see if it had anything to do with Case 1 vs Case 3 and the helo went right back to the screening DD as directed. I am very confused by this.

Same here

This is exactly how I manage my P-47 also! Once the RPM is set, there's rarely a time to mess with it until back in the landing pattern.

Don't hurry on my part =Katze=, I'm just glad to hear you're still hard at it!

+1000 !!

How's the Panther coming along =Katze=?

Bozon, there is no arguing with your statement that the Hellcat was there when the battle happened, which made it more significant however that doesn't make it the better fighter of the two. The fact that the Corsair carried on from late in WWII throughout the entire Korean War while the Navy relegated the Hellcat to the Training Command, Reserve squadrons and other yeoman duties, I believe is a fairly clear statement that the Corsair was the far better plane of the two. It was faster and was eventually capable of carrying far more ordinance. This is not to denigrate the Hellcat at all. When the two planes came out of their experimental flight testing, the F6F was a far better CARRIER plane than the F4U and that is what the Navy needed at that time more than anything. One that the 3-400 hour nuggets could get aboard the carrier without much drama. Once the Corsair's teething problems were solved, it became more of a logistical issue of supporting it at sea where the Hellcat had already made a home for itself in the previous year aboard a rapidly growing fleet of CV's.

I'm pretty sure that Silver Dragon was referring to the livery of birds assigned to ETO vs those assigned to the PTO.

I apologize if this has already been "wished for". I went back 4 pages and saw nothing regarding trigger zones. First off, let me thank the ED team for giving us the ability to make trigger zones that are circles OR trapezoids. That has been a huge boon to mission builders everywhere I'm sure. What I am asking for is to give us the ability to define the trigger zone in the vertical by allowing us to set floors and/or ceilings to the trigger zones. As it is now, if we wish to keep players above or below a given altitude, the trigger has to include EACH UNIT that may possibly violate that altitude limit within a zone. I feel like this would make the process much more streamlined and easier to accomplish. Thanks for taking the time to consider this.

Absolutely agree with these comments!

Yes PLEASE, the TBF Avenger!!!

I'd be more than happy to just see the ships get some kind of AI that would let them take evasive maneuvers when being attacked by aircraft

The only thing that could top this would be them bringing an IJN carrier out along with the Zeke!.......well. maybe not thoe ONLY thing that could top it, but fairly close

"Damage must be seperated from flooding (buoyancy), meaning a "destroyed" ship can still float and a "not destroyed" ship can still flood and sink" I get the first part, about a "destroyed" ship could still remain afloat, but the second part about a "not destroyed" ship can still flood and sink doesn't make any sense to me. I recon that the whole point of attacking a ship is to sink her, thus "destroying" her. That said, I do agree with your comments over all. ED could definitely use some improvements in the shipping department as far as damage is concerned.

Just a quick addendum to this; I found that the helicopter will come back to land on the SC at night. The pisser is, it lands in the forward part of the landing area thus blocking any fixed wing from recovering for the remainder of the mission since the helo doesn't disappear after shutdown.