BarTzi

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).

Interesting. I will try to dig deeper. From what I can currently tell, they used to carry the missiles on the ter (as shown in the picture I attached) or use asymmetric loadouts. Here's another picture, this time with cluster bombs.

The attached picture is of an Israeli F-4E during the 73 war. As you can see, the bombs on the ter are mounted in such a way that allows carrying a heat-seeking missile without using the special weapons adapter. I don't think this was specific to the IAF, or a modification that was made at the time. I was wondering if this was ever considered as a possible loadout option.

Please confirm this will be a hotfix we won't be forced to wait another year for.

Ramat David was never a part of this map

Yeah. It's a shame every route is not a different file, sorted into folders named after the terrains.

Not really. Routes are inserted into files that are named after the terrain (every route in Sinai for example will be inserted into a file called Sinai.lua). This makes it harder to share routes, since instead of just dragging a file into a folder, you have to copy a route into a file.

Israel is such a small country, that dividing it like that is one of the dumbest things you can do. Sure - they will overlap, but who cares?

Did you look into restoring access to db_callnames? It's a shame to lose the ability to create custom names

Tacan issues, ILS issues, airport issues, AI taxi path issues - and I can count a few more.

Are you aware of the amount of bugs this map has? It has no fixes for more than a year - do you think that's acceptable?

A. This is indeed wrong, and falsely implemented. B. I will point it out in DM's, if my post bothers you.