Northstar98

Nah, they (or rather cameochemicals) are good . The data sheet I used had a table of densities vs temperature - I simply picked one and worked out the mass from a given volume (300 US gallons).

There's been a change compared to 2.9.1, but there's still some funny business going on with how much fuel the S-3B tanker has available and how much it weighs. Though haven't tested how much fuel it dispenses.

Looks like this issue was somewhat-ish addressed recently, though there's still some funny business going on: The non-tanker version can now carry 13144 lbs/5962 kg of fuel internally, with a total aircraft mass (with no other stores) of 39793 lbs/18095 kg. With a single drop tank those figures change to 15159 lbs/6876 kg and 41919 lbs/19014 kg respectively. With 2 drop tanks the figures are 17174 lbs/7790 kg and 44044 lbs/19978 kg respectively. The tanker can now carry 15183 lbs/6887 kg of fuel at a total mass of 41833 lbs/18975 kg. So, larger than just internal fuel, but the A/A42R-1 air refuelling store seems to only carry an extra 24 lbs/11 kg of fuel but somehow removes mass, compared the S-3B with a single drop tank. EDIT: Actually, this disparity in weight could just be the result of the ASW deconfiguration program, which removed much of the ASW equipment. Depending on the weight of the removed ASW equipment a post ASW deconfiguration program S-3B with a drop tank and refuelling store might weigh less than a pre-ASW deconfig. S-3B with a single drop tank. EDIT 2: Though it should probably carry more than just 24 lb of fuel in the air refuelling store - sorry Flappie I'm not sure how much the A/A42R-1 weighs, nor how much fuel it carries; but the predecessor D-704 pod (with a very similar size and configuration) carries ~300 US gallons of fuel and weighs ~700 lbs (unsure if this is full or empty, though I'm leaning on empty as 300 US-gals of JP-5 is somewhere around 2050 lbs at 20°C) according to the source above.

Aviastorm update, from Discord:

Looking at the guide, it has surface winds be 70% of the 2000 ft winds over sea (or put another way, the 2000 ft wind speed should be ~1.43× the surface speed, right now DCS is locked to ~2.125×). You did mention this above, but as this thread is primarily concerned with winds over sea, it doesn't make sense to have the 1600 ft setting locked to just over double the 33 ft setting. As for backing and veering, that isn't possible in DCS either as the setting is locked to be the exact same direction. Given that some locations in DCS are indeed areas where (at least from those forecasting models) there are exceptions, I'm personally much more on the side of having the setting be able to be set by the mission editor (as with other wind layers).

Well, forecasting models operated by various agencies (NOAA, EMCWF, MET office etc) don't show anything like what DCS does, where you're locked into having just over double the speed of the winds at 33 feet, 100% of the time in absolutely all circumstances. Yes, sometimes you see a doubling, but I've also seen a quintupled and sometimes I've seen it be half of the surface speeds (depending on terrain, location etc).

Agreed - as someone who likes to fly low, IMO high resolution terrain mesh trumps high resolution textures.

Just checked the .edm and lods files of the F-14A and B and yep, doesn't seem to be there either.

Yeah doesn't look like it's in - I can't find the model in either the F-14's shapes folder in CoreMods or the main Bazar folder either.

VIAF 2023 - Heatblur Interview:

That one is probably more of a minor thing - at least the main item is fixed

Well, there would still be a lot of geometry to do. Another thing is that the Phalanx that they should have (and all of them were lated upgraded to have it) - DCS only has the Block 1B, when the Phalanx that's accurate to the 42s (and also Invincible from September 1982 - 1986, HMS Ark Royal from 1990 - 1999 as well as the current Condell's in their current configuration) is the Block 0 (later upgraded to Block 1A). The difference isn't trivial from either an artwork perspective or a weapons modelling perspective. So, the only things that are really there are Type 909, Sea Dart and the Type 1022 (which also came to Batch 1 ships following refits).

It's the icon that looks like an open switch, just below the button for the weather settings. Once that's open, add a new trigger (leftmost "ADD" button, set the type, name, event and colour as desired), add a condition for the trigger if appropriate (middle "ADD" button) and then add the SET CARRIER LIGHT MODE action (rightmost "ADD" button, set the type to "SET CARRIER LIGHT MODE", set "UNIT" the unit you want the setting to apply to and set "MODE" as desired).

Well, with Mount Pleasant and the larger runway at Stanley is definitely post-war (mid 1980s onwards, there's probably some other stuff that's more recent - such as the wind turbines), the RRHs on Mount Kent, Mount Alice and Byron Heights are also post-war. The only real modern assets we have in the pack so far are the Condell-class and HMS Andromeda, everything else fits the timeframe. Some of the WIP screenshots above do show more modern vessels though - that Invincible/Illustrious shown is early 2000s (no Sea Dart), the 23 looks to be late 2010s (Type 911 deleted, suggesting CAMM(M)/Sea Ceptor and Type 997), this Type 22 is a batch 3 - which is late 1980s at the earliest (first screenshot shows either a batch 1 or 2, the former is accurate to the war).

Yeah, I've been to Dartmoor (and Bodmin Moor) a few times, looking at photos the terrain at least is farly similar.

What's odd about it? The Invincible also represents as it was during the Falklands War (1980 - 1982 fit), the Castle-class also represents an early 1980s to late 1980s/1990 fit (though with completely the wrong gun). Although the latter was used as despatch vessels and guard ships for Ascension Island. The LARC-V also fits the war. The only assets we have that don't fit the war are HMS Achilles, Ariadne (never took part, but would've been around in the fit they're in at the time) and the Condell-class (which are in an upgraded fit (though with the wrong Phalanx Block), not sure when (Almirante Lynch still had Sea Cat circa 1999 so presumably some time later). Andromeda did take part in the war, but not in the fit it's in (which is accurate to 1968 - 1977), from 1977 - 1980 it was substantially upgraded.

I'm assuming they're referring to the lack of surface clutter (which can be quite noticeable).

Yeah, good idea. If it could work, in principle, to some deprecated units (such as the CVN 70 Carl Vinson) where it's still present in the files, but removed from the unit list - allowing existing missions with it to function, then that would be ideal as what I'm describing would be a massive change.

This the main thing for me - if we could have multiple coalitions beyond just 2 belligerents and a non-combative neutral (who is just everybody that’s unassigned) then the insurgent “country” would be fine. The panacea for me is something like C:MO where you can add, edit, rename and delete coalitions/sides completely at will. Instead of having “countries” assigned to a coalition, they’d instead just be an optional way to filter units with a selection to determine the coalition/side.

In the trigger menu (open switch symbol) actions -> SET CARRIER LIGHT MODE.

@Flappie The problem isn't that the doors only partially open (as it should with single stores on the rotary launcher) it's that, when the GBU-31(V)1/B, GBU-31(V)3/B or GBU-38(V)1/B is carried, the doors open as soon as the waypoint with the bombing task(s) is reached, even if the target is nowhere near in range. With the GBU-38, the doors open fully (as they should, though note that in DCS, the B-1B can carry far more GBU-38s than it could IRL before the MPRL upgrade). In the tracks below I have the B-1B starting close to the western extremity of the Black Sea, a waypoint with the bombing tasks is located ~8 nmi ahead (or about a minute into the track), with a target located in Tuapse ~480 nmi away from the B-1B's starting position. When the B-1B passes the waypoint with the bombing tasks, the doors open immediately, despite the aircraft being far out of range (it's not until ~50 minutes into the track, where the aircraft is in range to drop - don't worry, I have been fairly liberal with the time acceleration). B-1B_doors_GBU-31V1.trkB-1B_doors_GBU-31V3.trkB-1B_doors_GBU-38V1.trk Another few items to note: In DCS, it's either all bays open or all bays closed, even for bays that are unloaded or empty. IRL, it's possible for only doors of the required bay(s) be open, while others remain closed - see this image of a B-1B releasing an AGM-158C LRASM from the forward bay - the intermediate and aft bays remain closed. When a bombing task is completed the bomb bays start closing despite there still being bombing tasks to complete that are in range (as seen in the above tracks), this leads to the doors beginning to close only to immediately open again, over and over again. It would be better if the doors remained open so long as a bombing task is in the queue and the bomber is either approaching or is in-range (this bug also applies to the B-52H). EDIT: So instead of just closing immediately upon completion of the bombing task, first check to see if there's another in the queue and if there are, check to see if the target is in-range. If there isn't another in the queue, or if there are, but they're out of range, or if the bomber is engaged defensive, then only then should the doors close.

So far, in my (albeit limited) testing, “OFF” behaves as expected apart from when “AC RECOVERY” is the previous mode set, whereby they’ll be a delay (~11 seconds) before it fully takes effect and in the case of CVNs 71-75, the below deck lights come on.

Part of that issue though is that in DCS, the S-3B tanker unit only has internal fuel available - both the air refuelling store and the buddy store contain 0 fuel and there's no way of adding fuel to them (they should both add 300 US gallons of fuel (~2000 lbs) each). In addition they're also treated as if they're massless looking at the rearming and refuelling window.

Speaking of radars, looks like Forrestal is also missing its AN/SPS-64 surface-search/navigation radar. It's diifcult to see in RL images (I only found one from Forrestal where it's clearly visible), but at least on publicly available CV 60 plans (see the first page for the distribution statement) it's in front of the AN/SPS-48 antenna: In DCS though, it looks like the mount is there(?) but the antenna is not: The AN/SPS-64 version the Navy uses is the AN/SPS-64(V)9 (the RM 1120 6X is a civilian version), which has an antenna 6 ft wide (this example is from CVN 71):

Just CASE III landings from a player aircraft, might be worth trying with the lights set to "AUTO" and another set to "AC RECOVERY", just to see if there's any difference. Although the behaviour should be the same between the AI doing it (which I can test myself) and the player. EDIT: Looks like there's no difference between "AUTO" and "AC RECOVERY" for an AI aircraft. As soon as the the carrier is set for recovery, the floodlights come on and the below-deck lighting switches off. The IFLOLS though only illuminates with an aircraft actually landing. The Forrestal though is somewhat different. When set to "AC RECOVERY" the floodlights are off and they'll never come on unless another mode is set. In "AUTO" though once an aircraft has been recovered the floodlights come on as the aircraft begins to taxi off the landing area.