BarTzi

But is it the weather in the map, the weather around the carrier at the time of the call or expected weather around the carrier when the pilot lands? These are all different things.

According to this there's not a chance for CASE II with precipitation, but this is what happens to me when I use any of the light rain weather presets. Are you sure it is taken into account? Weather was changed with time to be more dynamic and rain can come and go. How often does the ATC check for conditions around the carrier?

Thanks Nealius. I think the only time it doesn't mess up the switch from I to III is when the sun sets. I wonder what ED has to say about this. @BIGNEWY Can you shed some light on this, please?

I understand there are real life documents that cover this, but it's not my question. I'm asking about the DCS implementation. I often find myself wondering if the ATC is wrong when it initiates a case II recovery when the conditions near the carrier clearly don't favour the last part of the landing (which is pretty much a case I), especially if the carrier is hard to spot due to rain, light fog or clouds. So my question is - does the ATC take weather into account accurately, other than the clear case of heavy rain (which is clearly case III)? It's worth noting that I have those issues only during the day. It seems like TOD is taken into account correctly, and case III is initiated properly during night time operations.

This was reported a long time ago, and wasn't fixed. The hit is what matters. Everything else is not synchronized between clients, and this is true for most standoff weapons (Harpoon included)

Well made I suggest you also take a look at MOOSE squadron / chief / airwing (mainly for ideas, since I assume you intend to keep it standalone) - as it can enhance your concept (it does all of the above and has some of your planned features).

Yeah, all the while being disrespectful himself: Does anyone have a baily bridge unit so we can make a bridge over the river of tears that are flowing in this thread. ED should feel honoured there's so many real F35 pilots in here who can point them in the right direction.

The reason why is that they base their modules on real documentation. Do you see the problem with the F35 now? They have not, and will never acquire said information. It will be a clickable FC4 level aircraft at best. This is great, but let us know ahead of time please, and not two years into the future in a hidden youtube comment by Wags.

@NineLine Can you guys consider adding multiple types of modern high-digit sams and EW radars (S-400 for example, or more variants from Iran and China), when you launch the F35, to give it a more fitting, challenging environment to operate in?

Both Hornets. The inverse works fine. That's not what I want to do. I want to be able to use all cats. I can't block cat 2.

3D model is already in the game. It's a matter of priorities.

They simply changed what FF means. Now there's nothing ED can't do, so I hope they throw away their excuses for not making a super hornet.

I was wondering if it's realistic that having a hornet on cat 2 blocks other pilots from using cat 1. As it stands, the deck crew orders other aircraft to hold position behind cat 1 until they launch the jet from cat 2. This used to be possible before the deck crew was added.

I agree. It should also mark all parking spots for SP and MP.

I don't even know if it's supported by the JSOW itself irl. It might be correct as is, I have no idea.

I don't think it's working at all. It might work for some other bombs (some variants of JDAM IIRC), but it does not work for JSOW.

Any news on this?

You might want to use the pinky switch on the throttle to turn them on. There's nothing wrong with the external lights of this module, so there's no bug.

Is there a way for a dynamic slot to inherit the country of the template aircraft? It's currently set to Switzerland no matter what I do

This can be said on many things. Walleye is one example.

NVG and thermals - that would be great.

I can't spot those 17 new airfields in Israel... it looks like they only added helipads.

I got in touch with a WSO, and he said that he does not know about any procedure preventing the aircrew from launching the AA missile in the configuration mentioned above (PANIC isn't needed). As Kurnass1977 mentioned, there are similar configurations used by the US Navy - so given the right type of spacer\ter, you can achieve this (which is probably what the IAF did). This request can be considered unrealistic for this specific variant of the jet.

Ok, so what happens if you forget to jettison the TER and then fire the missile? What if the TER hits the missile while coming off the mounting point? This seems like a big deal and I don't see it mentioned anywhere in stories from the early 70's. I can try and contact some Israeli WSO's who flew back then to get that answer.

Thank you for looking into it, ben_der! I didn't even think about the spacers initially, so that makes sense. The thought of arming a plane in a way that allows launching a missile only after you jettison the ter seems odd. However, if you ever decide to include those more spaced-out variants of the LAU-7 - that would be greatly appreciated (like the Iranian Tomcat).