Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by AG-51_Razor

  1. Is that when you're going to start flying with us again?? Can't wait my friend. Stay close to the AC Hoss, I hear that it occaisionally gets a bit warm down there in the valley
  2. It might also be important to keep in mind that the USAAF was able to "retire" the Jug from the pure air to air fighter role with the introduction of the P-51D and assign it to a fighter-bomber role, which it accelled in. The US Navy didn't have the luxery of large air bases with acres and acres of parking for several types of aircraft specializing in various roles. The Corsair showed itself to be every bit as capable a pure fighter as the Hellcat but was just a little late to the party having to work out the carrier suitability issues that plagued it early on, consequently most of the deck and hangar space was already spoken for by the F6F, TBM and SB-2C. As the war dragged on though, the Navy decided to begin cutting down on the number of SB-2C's and TBM's assigned to the air group and placed Corsairs aboard that could fulfill both roles as a fighter and bomber.
  3. Yeah, me too and it just dawned on me that the markings on that Wildcat put it in Operation Torch yet it is obviously sitting in a tropical setting, like the Marianas. No matter, it will still be awesome to fly it regardless of how it's painted!!
  4. I seem to recall that quite a while ago, it was announced that the F4U was going to come with a Pacific map and that it was most likely going to be Iwo Jima. But that was a very long time ago and I've not seen anything about it in quite a while. Personally, I can't think of a more useless map to spend time on.....for any module, other than maybe an LCVP or AMTRAC but especially for the Corsair. I suspect that it might have been because a very famous battle was fought there and the makers possibly figured that it might be relatively easy to build, given the small amount of surface area it covers. I don't know.
  5. Thank you for the great update Hiromachi. Have a wonderful summer.......while you work your heart out on the Corsair and hopefully the Crusader!!
  6. I'd gladly pay extra for a -4 or -4B!
  7. I'll take VF-17, The Jolly Rogers please.
  8. In much of the historical material that I have read about the US Navy's war in the Pacific, the Hellcat's appeal came from a couple different areas, especially when compared to what it was replacing. It was relatively fast, had a very good rate of climb, was every bit as rugged as the Wildcat but possibly just as important as all of those attributes, and maybe more so, was it's handling characteristics around the boat. It was very well behaved in the landing configuration, which was extremely important when you consider the relatively low experience level of most of the junior officers in the cockpit. Compare this with the Corsair and you might see why the Hellcat was so loved by those that flew it. I don't think that there is any question about the Corsair's superiority over the Hellcat but at the time, the Hellcat was in the right place at the right time and kicked some serious a$$!!
  9. What Mogster said!! +1
  10. Rayrayblues, you are right but then one could make a similar argument about the invasion of the Marshalls or the Carolines, Kawajaline or going back to the Philippines. The Solomon campaign started with the invasion of Guadalcanal in Aug of '42 and ended with the taking of Bouganville in November of '43. Some say it ended with the conclusion of hostilities of WWII in Aug of '45. The thing about the Solomon Islands is that it encompasses a fairly large area that was faught over for more than a year in some of the most brutal battles seen in the Pacific. There were air battles, land battles and naval battles. For our purposes in DCS, it provides an almost infinite number of possibilities for the mission builders and fertile ground for the module builders.
  11. I believe that, back when they mentioned that it was fairly close to release the last time, they then announced a little later that it was decided that the external model wasn't up to par and they decided to completely redo it. I have no doubt that caused a considerable delay.
  12. I can't say I've ever noticed an issue with that but then again, by the looks of your post, you are flying the pattern with a lot more attention to detail than I am. If putting the wind 9 degrees off the BRC works for you, I say drive on!
  13. .....with slide rules, T-Squares and French curves! No CAD-CAM back then
  14. Hosted the mission for my squad last night after everybody (including the server) was patched up. Small, relatively simple mission involving a Case III recovery. There were 4 of us in the Hornet and not one could get the ACLS to lock on at 6 miles. At no time did any of us receive a flashing DATA message in the HUD nor did any of us get the "tadpole" symbology on the HUD. Afterwards, I ran the mission on my gamer in single player and everything works as it was supposed to - just exactly as it did in Wags' video. If I get some time today, I'll try to get some track files put together. The mission had no scripts running at all and the Military Aircraft Mod is the only mod running. The server is just a regular version of DCS, not a dedicated server. This has all been reported by another squad member who said his mission ran as advertised in single player. On a brighter note, the light wands are AWESOME!!
  15. Yes, it works perfectly in Singleplayer.
  16. Has anybody noticed the ACLS not functioning while in multiplayer? While in a MP mission with several of my squaddies, I have the Link4 set to 275.0 and associated with the Teddy Roosevelt as well as the ACLS, Tacan and ICLS. On start up, Link4 is set to 275.0 and the rest of the D/L is turned on. Upon entering the stack after receiving a clearance, the ACLS page is displayed on the left with the HSI on the right. The test is apparently successful as the ACL 1 message appears. From this point on, the ACLS doesn't seem to be working at all. Never does the DATA message flash on the HUD nor do I see anything following the advisories for airspeed, altitude or Rate of Descent on the ACLS page. These same indications were reported by all the rest of the squad members flying the Hornet. Is this a Multiplayer vs Single player thing?
  17. Go into the ME and click on the tanker, find the waypoint that has the Tacan information in the Advanced (Waypoint Actions) and click on that. The tab that comes up to the left has a check box next to Bearing. For all of the tankers, make sure that this box is UNCHECKED. While in the mission, when you enter the Tacan channel, DO NOT select A/A, keep it on T/R. Now you will find that the Tacan for the tankers is functioning "normally" or rather, as you would expect it to.
  18. I realize that this doesn't actually fall in line with the original post/wish but I thought that this is as good a place to ask as any - has there been any work done on improving the physics of the refueling basket yet? As I recall, Wags mentioned quite some time ago that ED had plans for working on the interaction of the basket with the receiving a/c and probe. I'm not thinking about interaction with the "bow wave" or any other aerodynamics involved but rather, just making it so that the basket doesn't end up in your lap or face when you miss it with the probe just a little bit. Can there be some kind of collision box developed so that the basket and airframe see each other as solids? Not a big deal, just curious if this is even still on the back burner or has it completely gone away?
  19. I too am a bit puzzled by the limitation on the KC-135MPRS to service Probe and Drogue as well as Boom recievers. The game certainly knows what you're flying so there shouldn't be any confusion on the part of the tanker when you call up "Ready for Precontact". If you've got a probe he'll extend a basket and if you've got a receptical he'll lower the boom. I do understand that the MPRS is a RAZBAM product but I fail to see the logic in ED witholding the code to allow both systems to function. While on the subject of tankers, would it be so difficult to throw in a few more callsigns for them?
  20. I'm a bit curious about the setting up of the carrier in the ME. I noticed that Wags sort of glossed over the command to activate the Tacan yet it was there once we were in the cockpit and what about the command to activate the ICLS for the carrier? Were we just supposed to assume that those mission builder actions are taken for granted or are they no longer necessary with the advent of the Link4?
  • Create New...