AG-51_Razor

Apparently not. What a bummer. That KC-10 Extender is a beautiful model.

This is such an awesome mod!! Thank you to the devs! Has anyone come up with a lua fix for the position of the refueling hose and basket off the KC-10 -d yet? I have been able to successfully refuel from it in a Hornet but the basket is always out in front of the probe by several feet, wobbling around in space. Other than that, and it's KC-130 like fear of receivers getting too close, it's perfect!!

Not looking for an update here or any predictions on release date/year, just a question about your intentions. Are y'all even remotely considering the possibility of parlaying your model of the Essex class CV that is coming out with the F4U-1D into a modernized, angled deck version for the Crusader?

+100 !!!

While I agree with that sentiment, consider this; you could conceivably say the same thing about the F-4E coming out (just slap a navy paint job on it) but imagine the bummer of having to cuddle up behind a KC-135 for some fuel. The problem would be exactly the same for the A-7D enthusiasts only in reverse.

+1000%

Thanks a lot MustangSally!

Just upgraded my computer and installed Windows 11 and now, I can't get SimAppPro to load and function to make the back lighting work. I get an error notice saying that there are runtime errors occurring.

I have to agree with Baco for the simple reason that the -4 fits into late WWII scenarios as well as Korea and any conflicts it participated in afterwards. But most of all, I just think that the Corsair looks so much better with 4 blades than 3 blades. Silly, I know, but it is what it is.

Agreed!

So was the F-4 Phantom, what's your point?

We are able to assign a specific a/c to a specific catapult for use when starting on the runway, it doesn't seem to be too much different to be able to assign specific parking spot to a specific a/c when starting on the ramp.

Hopefully, by the time the A-7 drops, HB will have figured out the issues with the various catapults on the Forrestal. Additionally, it would be cool if they (HB again) followed through with their commitment to bring out the Sara.

All said above is true but, once someone in the map/terrain community gets their thumb out and decides to build a map of the Korean peninsula, the inpetus to get a -4 out the door to go along with the Skyraider, F-51, F-86 and Mig 15 will be significant! Don't be a buzzkill and take my dream away with logic.

Boy! If I didn't know better, I'd be inclined to think that this particular FAA Corsair was attached to VF-51 aboard the CVL-30 San Jacinto Thanks for the one stop shopping of videos

AH Men!! Being able to pass gas to my squaddies would be epic, whether it's from a KC-130, an A-6 Intruder or an A-7 Corsair. It's just one more bit of reality we will be able to simmulate in the world of DCS!

Part of this issue would take care of itself if ED would, as they said they would so long ago, just make the clouds as hard to see through for the AI as they are for us humans.

You are correct Gunfreak but keep in mind that, just because there are one or more flying airframes of the plane you wish to see in DCS, that doesn't mean that the data necessary or required to replicate it in a simmulation is readily available. There is a tremendous amount of work involved with instrumenting a plane with the necessary sensors required to record the data you need to come up with a flight model for a simmulation. It's not only very difficult to do, it really fargging expensive in terms of equipment rental/purchase, engineering services, computer time and possibly most of all, flight time. I worked for a company that investigated the possibility of developing a simmulator for a helicopter we were operating and the flight time alone was going to be around 250 hours!! I have no idea what a warbird costs to operate beyond the cost of gas at around 100+ gallons per hour but for the helicopter we were trying to get a simmulator built for, the direct operating cost per hour was around $5000.00 so you can see how it can get pretty damn expensive pretty quick to attempt to grab the data you need for a decent EFM or PFM or whatever they call it in order to come up with a flight model that half the population of DCS will scream bloody murder about because it doesn't agree with their own assumptions of what it should, or shouldn't be able to do. It's a hard nut to crack.

I'd be willing to bet on the A-4 coming to DCS as a FF module. Fingers crossed!!

I absolutely couldn't agree more with this thread!! The Korean peninsula is a most versatile map. It was fought over during WWII, then the Korean War and now, it is the possible location of the next big conflict. This would be a mission builder's dream come true!!

I believe that ED should allow the Mission Builder to decide what velocity and direction the wind is blowing for every level that is available to make changes to. The surface wind does not mathmatically determine the wind at any level above by some formula. It's actually the other way around but there are so many variables that even today meteoroligists are hard pressed to give an accurate forecast of what the winds/weather will be just a couple of hours from now! Let the Mission Builder decide.

Those are planes from VF-17, the original Jolly Rogers. I believe that #29 was assigned to Ira Kepford.

I couldn't find a logical thread to place this in so my apologies if I missed it somewhere along the way. I want to say thanks to the developers for toning down the light bloom from the tankers' navigation lights during nighttime tanking operations while using NVGs. I just noticed this yesterday and confirmed it tonight during a squad MP mission. Not having ever done anything like AAR, much less during the night with NVG's on, I can't say one way or the other how realistic is was before or is now but I can say that this new version makes the NVG's much more valuable (useful) and I have to say Thank you for that!! Please keep up the great work y'all are doing on the core of the simulation. It is noticed and very much appreciated.

I withdraw my complaint sir.

I would not consider the Samuel Chase, the Liberty Ship in the WWII Assets Pack, a deep draft vessel but I have found that it has a fairly narrow corridor between France and England through which it can be placed without getting an error message saying that the water is too shallow and is not able to be placed in the Dunkerque harbor.