AG-51_Razor

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$$!!

What Mogster said!! +1

What's not to like??!!

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.

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.

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!

.....with slide rules, T-Squares and French curves! No CAD-CAM back then

Correct

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!!

Yes, it works perfectly in Singleplayer.

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?

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.

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?

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?

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?

Any news about the "Man eater"??

Nealius, the amount of difference between the carrier's heading and the wind is dependant on the wind's velocity as well as the carrier's speed. If it is your desire to have the wind "right down the angled deck", then it probably going to be more like a difference of 20-25 degrees. The best way to figure this out is to use one of the Super Carriers. You need to have an idea of which is of higher priority, carrier speed or carrier's heading (given a fixed wind direction and speed) in the mission you are building. I would start with a wind speed of 10 kts and set the carrier's heading 20 degrees to the right of the wind's direction. So if the wind is coming from the north ( 180 in the ME) I would set the carrier's heading to 020 and speed to 25 kts. Run the mission and go to the LSO's position to see what the wind over the angled deck is. An "S" or "P" will tell you how much of a crosswind component you have and from there it's just a matter of a little trial and error (or vector math) to come up with a "wind right down the angled deck". Any change of carrier speed, wind speed, carrier heading or wind direction will throw it off a bit. Once you have the right combination of wind and ship speeds and directions, just swap the SC out for the Forrestal

Same here

Never mind, I finally figured it out. It is "AH-64D_BLK_II"

I guess I'm always going to be asking this question until someone can explain to me how to go about figuring it out for myself. What is the correct label for the Apache skin file? Is there an easy way of determining this for myself?

That's awesome Jojo, thanks for the heads up!

Thank you very much Rudel_chw

The title pretty much says it all. What is the correct label for the P-47 skin folder in Saved Games?

Awesome find Jojo! Thanks. I do believe that the paint scheme would actually look pretty good on this Army warhorse

I will preface this request with the understanding of how abhorrent to both the Army and Marines this may sound but hey! it's just a small fantasy Hughes actually did propose a naval variant of the Apache quite a long time ago. I saw an artist's concept drawing of it flying off a DDG (I believe) with it's landing gear retracted (presumably to give it that WOW factor to Admirals and USMC Generals) and AIM-9's loaded on rails out on the tips of the wing stubs. Knowing that, a. the chances of us ever seeing an AH-1Z Viper in this game are non existant or, b. if it does get developed I'll be long dead and gone by the time it enters Early Access, I'd like to place the AH-64 aboard the Tarawa with a Marine uniform inlieu of the Army OD. Is there anyone in this community that feels the same, that might give it a shot?