AG-51_Razor

Air Group 51 has a few open slots to fill and our recruiting door is now open. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=265179

Harrier, Hornet and Tomcat - routine. I struggle with the Mirage however and can't figure out how y'all manage the boom! My hat is definitely off to you Air Force folks! :notworthy:

.....to get them to get back on board for extraction?

"Would it be possible to have a/c scheduled for a Ramp start, to NOT spawn on the catapults?" I am asking if it would be possible to keep a/c that are planned to be a ramp start not to spawn on the catapults.

Would it be possible to have a/c scheduled for a Ramp start, to NOT spawn on the catapults? This happens quite a lot in our squad MP missions and it sometimes becomes quite a problen to get the chalks removed such that you either launch and go into the drink or you have to respawn to hopefully show up somewhere else on the deck. It doesn't seem like this would be too difficult a change to impliment since no plane intended to launch from the runway will EVER spawn on the carrier deck anywhere else other than a catapult. It seems like a logical step to prevent any a/c scheduled for a ramp start from spawning on a catapult. Thanks.

While they're at it, how about a few more callsigns for the Tankers?? We have about 6 or 7 available for a JTAC and only 3 for the tankers??

++! :thumbup:

Great flick! Thanks for sharing :thumbup:

I'd love to participate in this survey but not enough to open an account on google :mad:

Thanks for the update! :thumbup:

How much of the Mediteranian is part of the map? Will we be able to operate off a carrier on this map??

The best I have seen yet is for the search/track radar to turn in the direction of the incoming missiles, but no reaction from the launchers. So, it appears that the Patriot is somewhat aware of the threat but has yet to do anything about it. :cry:

Has anybody been able to get a Patriot missile battery to engage an incoming scud?

As I recall, back when I was involved with a game simulating aviation in the WWII Pacific Theater of Operations, we were told that the TBF Avenger could not be done because the publisher used the name "Grumman" in association with the TBF on their box art. I could be wrong about that but that is how I recall it being explained. Who knows, it may have been a massive coverup to hide the fact that they did not have all the data necessary to accurately recreate the operation of the rear turret! After all, we did have the F4F Wildcat and F6F Hellcat. It seems to me that when taxpayer money is spent to create a machine at the request of the government, the only thing that the manufacturer has to protect is their name. The machine itself, and all the data that goes into the design and manufacture of it should be considered to be in the public domain - assuming of course, that it is now obsolete and no longer considered a national security asset. I could be accused of being a little biased and very ignorant though! :doh:

That's interesting. You may well be right. Have you tried it off the Tarawa? Not sure if it can go fast enough though.

I am curious as to why you believe this to be true. I would be very surprised if the A-4 could successfully deck launch even if it were empty with mere fumes in the tank, much less with any kind of useful payload. Now, if the Essex class CV that M3 LLC is building uses a realistic hydraulic catapult with a bridle system, it might just work but even that was inferior to the type used on later Essex class carriers modified with angled decks.

I couldn't possibly agree more with this wish....unless of course, it were a choice between this and the Turkey. I'd have to go with the Grumman Avenger. Having said that, I can't see arguing against ANY a/c with a tailhook installed - Allied OR Axis!! :thumbup:

Hey man, it's an opinion. Get over it. I'm certain that ED is quite capable of determining what time and resources they wish to apply to their product.

I'm sorry but, am I correct in thinking that some in here are arguing in favor of using unlimited fuel as a workaround for AAR as it is modeled now, rather than ED coming up with a more relaxed option for those that would like to have it a little easier behind the tanker? And that is because why??? Realism??? :megalol:

I think it's a bit like some developers that get it into their head that because they once saw a bit of plexiglass with some crazing in it, that every canopy in the game has to have that same problem, only magnified x10 in order to accentuate the realism! Somebody probably read something in a meteorology book somewhere that said the wind velocity at ground level was a little less than that at 1600 feet due to friction caused by obstructions on the surface. I don't have an issue with that kind of thinking but the arbitrary amount is a bit disturbing. The difference they use is almost a factor of 2 which is way out of line with reality. If a breeze of 10 knots is blowing at the surface, it doesn't follow that at slightly above pattern altitude it is almost twice that! And out over the ocean, there is very little to obstruct the wind on the surface. I just hope that this will be addressed with the coming overhaul of the weather system that ED is planning.

I voted Yes. I would not use it because I enjoy the challenge of "doing it the HARD way!" :megalol: However, I wouldn't begrudge anyone else of getting it done any way they can. For all of you Realism enforcers out there, take a look at the Options section of the GUI (which I believe stands for Game User Interface) and go to the GAMEPLAY page, where you will find all sorts of options that affect the way one would interact with this game. Options for labels, views, G tolerance, immortality, wake turbulance, etc.etc.etc. Why would ANYBODY in this community vote against an option that obviously many folks would like to have?? It's not like you would be forced to use it. As a host you would most likely be able to not allow the clients to use it. I mean after all, it is your sand box and by God, EVERYONE is going to play it the.....er fly it the way you want them to! Sheeesh!! :doh:

+1 I agree with Eightball, a pilot or two would be nice to have preflighting their bird and it seems that it wouldn't be too difficult to do since they are already modeled. They even have their helmet on when up on the flight deck prior to getting in the cockpit.

+1000!!!

She's beautiful! I would definitely have lost a beer over this had I not looked her up in Google! I would have bet that the last LSD's were mothballed shortly after WWII and replaced by LPD's. She will be a great addition to the fleet! :thumbup:

I would add here that, while in the Marshall Stack, the only requirement that absolutely MUST be observed is your altitude assignment. Think of this approach procedure as a way of parking you in a spot where you are safe from mid-air collisions with others waiting to make their approaches. The second most important thing is to be at the approach fix (that Tacan bearing and distance from the boat) on time to "commence" your approach. How you get there is not so important. :thumbup: