AG-51_Razor

I got a big kick out of it! Thanks ED, for keeping your sense of humor during these dark times. It is apprciated!

Thanks Razor!! I don't understand why that skin didn't show up in my search. Anyway, that is exactly whay I was looking for.

I just got through searching those user files and found just one of a VERY fictional Zero skin. Not at all close to a Ki-61 skin. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3315579/

It is a beautiful airplane! It would be a first day buy for me

I would not rely on any published Real Life statistics on any on the planes in DCS to compare how they will match up in this sim. I would say that the only true measure of how they would stack up against one another would be to fly them in the game side by side and see how they match up. The RL stats were influenced by such factors as fuel load, ammunition loaded, instrument calibration, etc, etc, etc.

Well, I'm glad we finally got that sorted out!

I too would much prefer to have an A-6 in the game however that airframe is quite a ways off in the future and is not going to be an ED module. The S-3B, on the other hand, is already in the game as a tanker, currently undergoing a significant graphics overhaul and is in the hands of ED. It is for those reasons that I chose the S-3 to pick on. It just seems to me that if something as significant as making a player flown airframe capable of passing gas to another player flown plane, the S-3 might be the one that ED could do it with most easily (in the least amount of time). The weapons systems you mention, HARPOON, SLAM-ER, Maverick and LANTRIN are also already in the game so I don't see the disadvantage there. And as for the ASW role, the Viking was pretty much out of that business for the last 10-15 years of it's service life. It's just a pipe dream anyway. It probably won't happen in my lifetime.

For Pete's sake man, read the whole post!!

I'm pretty sure that this has been requested before but recently, with the announcement of the C-130 Herc coming to DCS and the mentioning of the POSSIBILITY of developing a human flown version of the KC-130, it occurs to me that a full fidelity version of the S-3 Viking would be hugely popular. I say this for several reasons, not the least of which is that it would be another carrier capable plane, which I think is a big deal. Being able to provide fuel to your squad mates during an online mission is another very appealing factor. And for those that would poo poo an ASW platform in a sim that doesn't really have any submarine warfare to begin with, I'd just say that the Viking was an extremely versatile aircraft capable of several missions besides ASW, such as the anti ship role, air to ground role as well as the AAR role. And did I mention that it has a tail hook?? I really hope that this is at least being considered.

Heck! I'd gladly take a Jeep carrier with the Corsair!!

Very curious as to why you believe this.

Just curious about what, if anything, has been done about the catapult "hooking in" positions on the deck for the various cats. The last time I flew off the Forrestal in my Hornet, there seemed to be a considerable difference in where you needed to be in order to get the cat to accept you after pressing the U key. Not at all a deal breaker by any means, she's still a beautiful piece of work!

I've got to say, the announcement of the Skyraider was the best news I've seen on this forum in quite some time. Although I am not nearly as jazzed about the prospect of a possible map of Vietnam, it would definitely be a first day buy for me. The only map that I am really pinning away for is one of the Korean peninsula. With the Corsair due shortly (LOL!!) along with a straight deck Essex class carrier, the AD will fit in just perfectly........well maybe a little more perfectly if the Corsair were a -4 or -4B but hey, I can exercise my imagination a little now and then. And though I am well aware of the possibilities of missions built around that Vietnam map and the HB Forrestal along with some A-4's, A-1's, F-4's and maybe even some A-6's and A-7's, I'm not holding my breath. As a matter of fact, all those other jets (with the exception of the Scooter) will probably be released before the AD so I'm definitely packing a bottle of O2 around with me for the next year or so!! In any case, it was nice to see and I can't wait to start throwing money at somebody!!

Captain Bob, I believe that it's you that needs to get his facts straight. The AD/A-1 had dive brakes on the sides as well as one on the belly and as for which ones served in Korea and which ones served in Vietnam, the later model AD's that the Navy put in storage after Korea were picked up by the Air Force and were the same airplane. They just got renamed courtesy of Sec Def R McNamara. Some of the versions had the dive brakes removed because of their changed mission such as ASW or AEW or Night Interdiction. It went from the AD-1 to the AD-7 with many changes in systems and equipment over time. This is from Wikipedia: AD-6 (A-1H) Single-seat attack aircraft with three dive brakes, centerline station stressed for 3,500 lb (1,600 kg) of ordnance, 30 in (760 mm) in diameter, combination 14 in (360 mm) and 30 in (760 mm) bomb ejector and low/high altitude bomb director; 713 built I doubt very seriously if you could distinguish an AD-4 that flew in Korea from an AD-6/A-1H that flew in Vietnam.

If the KC-130 is in their plans, along with the ability for a human flown Herc to deliver gas to a jet on the basket, what would be so outlandish about proposing a flyable S-3 Viking with a buddy pack?? It was an extremely versatile carrier plane that could conduct anti shipping, anti submarine, reconnaisance and air to ground attack missions in addition to acting as a tanker. There is no doubt that it would be a big hit amongst the carrier mafia within DCS

Definitely a first day buy for me! I really hope that ED and the 3rd party work out what it will take for a human flown C-130J to pass gas to a human flown fighter.

I'm sorry FoxTwo but you couldn't possibly be more wrong about that. Wave height is NOT entirely determined by wind. Go spend some time at sea to figure that out for yourself!

I absolutely agree with this "wish"!! It seems to me that it would be relatively easy for ED to seperate the Sea State from the wind setting in the ME. In reality, the sea state is influenced by many more things than just the wind. The depth of the ocean, current, weather from a fair distance away, etc.

Thanks for that Donny. Can't wait!

I would!!

Well Donny, if I can manage to give you a cackle for the day, that makes me happy! Thanks for the reply, now get back to work so that we can start throwing money at you!!

That would indeed be a huge boon to the community. ED has added a tremendous amout of Ground to Air threats since this was published. I am rather surprised that ED hasn't put something like this out themselves.

Just curious if this absolutely amazing piece of work has been updated recently. It is one of the most useful documents I have come across for a mission builder.

....you spend the 60-70 bucks on a module that you KNOW you're not going to spend more than 10 minutes in and justify it by telling yourself that it is to suport the DCS community!!

Which in-game radar do we use??