Andrew8604
-
Posts
326 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Andrew8604
-
-
On 5/20/2024 at 5:39 AM, Silver_Dragon said:
Has many modules incoming / on develop by ED & 3rd parties and always coming with propper AI Units. Make propper AI units, take many time and remember ED require a Quality standard before integrate them and suport.
Sa-3 units has present into DCS World AI units, other units has on progress by ED, and some 3rd parties has making more objects.Heatblur has making the A-6E and the KA-6D Tanker. AI units require "AI teams on develop studios" outside of the module version building, and many 3rd parties only centred on propper AI units based on the module version, no outside with some exceptions.
Silver_Dragon are you a member of ED or 3rd party dev? I thought you were, but now your profile doesn't look like it. Maybe I was mistaken.
I think what you're saying is that ED and 3rd party devs are NOT going to make an AI version that is a different variant of the module they are making. I understand that. I was hoping that if FlyingIron, just for example, while making the A-7E full module, could possibly give us an AI & static version well in advance of the full module being finished...if that's not too much work and is along the path of creating the more feature rich AI they will eventually release with their full module anyway. They may have reasons why they would not. That's ok. The A-7E has complex weapons delivery modes. So, I was thinking, what if they gave us a simplified A-7E that can only do basic dumb-bomb, rocket and a/g gun delivery and maybe AIM-9 Sidewinder self-protection. If they don't want to give the full A-7E AI yet, perhaps a USAF A-7D? That would give us an AI-only version to play around with until their full module is ready. Maybe it makes no sense from their point of view. It was just a thought. I have no idea if FlyingIron will make other versions of the A-7 besides the A-7E. Likely not. Although, I would purchase each of the A-7B, D & E versions if they made them all. Or just the D & E versions. But if they are ONLY going to make the E version as a full module, it's very unlikely anyone else would make the USAF A-7D version. Maybe they would be kind enough to make an AI version of the A-7D, which could be functionally the same and very close in 3D model to the E version. The A-7B may just not be worth the effort even as just an AI version.
Has Heatblur said they will make a full module of both the A-6E and the KA-6D? Or is that a full module of just the A-6E with AI version, and an AI-only "DCS tanker" version of the KA-6D? I think the latter is more likely.
Same with the others. It would be cool to get a limited-functionality AI-only and static version of the modules at some point in advance of the full module being ready.
-
1
-
-
Currently, AI aircraft can fly the overhead approach, enter the pattern, intercept final smoothly and make a landing pass only to the carriers. Does the Supercarrier Module do this, or is it in basic DCS?
I don't know about other countries, but at US airbases, when weather permits, fixed-wing aircraft generally return to the base for landing by flying a high-speed visual approach to an overhead break, enter the landing pattern on the downwind, lower gear and flaps and fly smoothly to final and make a nice, quick, graceful landing from flights of 1 thru 4 aircraft. ...just like AI makes to an aircraft carrier, now. Can we get that? Can we also get the option to put AI aircraft in a practice PAR pattern in VFR conditions and actual PAR pattern in IFR conditions at airbases? Also, can the AI aircraft do a realistic, long, smooth roll-out after landing instead of the current touchdown and "super-braking" and "super-accelerating"?
Can we also have an option in ME to set AI aircraft into a bombing pattern, as described starting at time 12:36 to 15:15 in this video, "U.S. AIR FORCE F-4 PHANTOM CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS DELIVERY DIVE BOMBING TRAINING FILM 68924". This is perfect for a flight of 4, but could also work for 1, 2 or 3 aircraft, where a user-piloted plane could be flown in an open position in the flight, if desired. I've read accounts of this and similar patterns being used in Vietnam to attack targets. I think generally on lightly defended targets, though. This is an example of a simple dive-bombing deliver. There could also be a similar pattern with a low-level, 500' AGL approach from base-leg to final with a 45-degree offset final to a pop-up maneuver to make the dive delivery, and a jinking climb to pattern altitude after pull-off from the dive delivery. These patterns probably work primarily in lightly defended environments not defended by modern SAM systems.
-
2
-
-
I don't know...is tanking too easy for you guys and you're bored? I have a hell of a tough time as it is.
Just a wee bit of back-n-forth wander and the puff of fuel at disconnect might be cool. But I'm going to need the "magnet" effect, at least as an option. Option settings are GOOD. I know you're all Sierra Hotel pilots and all, but this Whiskey-Delta pilot likes to have fun, too.
-
AI modules: Since an A-6E may eventually become a full module, I'd say the A-6A (can Heatblur give us an AI A-6A?...and, the KA-6D as another carrier-based tanker?) Also, the KA-3B Skywarrior as a carrier-based tanker! The RA-5C Vigilante and RF-8G Crusader as carrier-based, cold-war reconnaissance birds. And an F-8E Crusader (although, there is a modded version of this one being worked on.) Can FlyingIron give us an AI A-7B and A-7D? Maybe Crosstail Studios can give us some AI Skyraiders? There is a community mod F9F-2 Panther. Just as an AI aircraft, that is pretty cool looking.
There needs to be a full, flyable module of an F-111 made, too. I don't know which version would be coolest. Probably the F-111F. That would probably be suitable in a Vietnam map. Maybe Heatblur could make it because they supposedly will make the mission-similar A-6E Intruder. Or RAZBAM (are they still with us?) because they made the progeny of the F-111, the Strike Eagle. Or maybe even FlyingIron, after the A-7E. Long way off...maybe by 2030?
-
1
-
-
Is it already reported that it seems that whenever the A-4E is in contact with the deck of CV-31, it's registering "hits" and "bda" on the carrier? I'm worried that if I do my 3 cat-shots and traps, I might sink her.
Also, I encountered a situation in "U" connecting to the cat where it bounced my A-4E on its tail and damaged the engine, which failed after a minute or less. I was slightly ahead of the shuttle and pressing U backed me up a bit, but my feet were on the brakes. I think that's what happened. Of course, I'm not sure that doesn't happen on other carriers with the A-4E.
BTW, it would be cool if you could make both a 1964 and 1944 version of Maddox. A 1944 version should be good to model as any of dozens of Sumner-class destroyers like Maddox, in the WWII time period. One problem is that there were several different modifications to the Sumner class over the years. 1. During WWII, removal of one of the quintuple 21" torpedo mounts to add a quad 40mm mount. 2. Post WWII removed 20mm mounts and replace 40mm mounts with a pair of twin 3"/50 mounts. Replace single mast with tripod mast and heavier radar antennas. One depth charge rack removed, and two hedgehog mounts added. That's probably how they would have been for Korean War era. 3. FRAM II modification in 1960-65, which removed the 3"/50 guns, the 21" quintuple torpedo mounts and added a hangar and landing platform for the DASH ASW R/C helicopter and triple torpedo tubes. Maddox did not get the FRAM II modifications, so it probably looked like it did around the Korean War, or possibly with some new radar antennas added. Its midships quintuple 21" torpedo mount was replaced with a pair of 12.75" torpedo triple-tube launchers, though. USS Brush, DD-745 might be another configured the same as Maddox in the 60's.
-
On 5/11/2024 at 10:36 AM, TeTeT said:
Thanks Andrew, I've read about the different sub-classes of Essex carriers, but we have no model to support the CVS species, the different elevator position, or the straight deck earlier version. So for now we have to stay with this one presentation of Essex class carriers of the Vietnam War era. Knowing my own deficiencies when it comes to modeling, I'll make no promises if we've ever include those variants. But thanks for raising awareness!
TeTeT,
Did you make this carrier 3D model? I there any chance I could try to work on modifying one? What software did you use the make it?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Beldin said:
Here's a good breakdown on the Essex class refits.
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/cv/scb27cl.htm and http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/cv/scb125cl.htm
Darn! The links don't work for me. "page not found". I tried searching that site for SCB-27 but it didn't come up with much.
Do I have anything wrong? I think I've got a pretty good breakdown from searching wikipedia. I know that's not always the best source, but it seems pretty good in this case.
SCB-27, first applied to the Oriskany (which delayed its commissioning until 1950), gave the following major upgrades to the Essex Class:
Reenforced flight deck, larger stronger elevators, stronger hydraulic H-8 catapults, stronger Mk-5 arresting gear, replaced all 40mm gun mounts with twin 3-inch/50 mounts, removed the four twin 5" mounts from the flight deck, shortened the island, redesigned the boiler uptakes and replaced the mast with a single larger one, replacing the "short bow" so that all the ships had the similar, longer clipper bow. And there were other internal upgrades, including moving pilots' ready rooms to below the armored hangar deck and providing an escalator to bring them up to the flight deck more quickly. In the movie "Bridges at Toko-Ri", you see Oriskany and Kearsarge in about 1954, in their SCB-27A configuration launching F9F-2 and -5P Panther jets with their H-8 catapults, and Mk-5 arresting gear, as well as operations of HO3S-1 helicopters and AD-4 Skyraiders, which were operational squadrons aboard at the time.
These upgrades were applied to 8 ships after Oriskany from 1951 to 1953. These were the SCB-27A's. They all still had straight flight decks, though. In 1954, three further ships were upgraded with the SCB-27C, which replaced hydraulic catapults with new, more powerful, steam C-11 catapults, plus jet blast deflectors and starboard deck edge elevators that were moved farther aft (for some reason), and nuclear stores handling and a few other upgrades. These 3 (Intrepid, Ticonderoga and Hancock) still had straight flight decks, though. In 1955, the last 3, Lexington, Shangri-La and Bon Homme Richard received their SCB-27C along with SCB-125 (the years indicated being when work was completed).
SCB-125, first applied to Lexington, Shangri-La and Bon Homme Richard and then to the SCB-27A and 3 previous -27C ships was as follows:
Angled flight deck, enclosed hurricane bow, mirror landing system, Mk-7 arresting gear, Primary Flight Control moved to aft end of island, air conditioning, No.1 (forward) elevator lengthened (on -27C ships only), and No.3 (aft) elevator moved from centerline to starboard deck edge (except for the first three -27C's which already had the more aft deck-edge elevators in place). At some point, bridle catcher extensions were added to the -27C ships (and Oriskany). The -125s were completed on all -27A ships, except Lake Champlain, by 1955-57, and the other three -27C ships by 1957. Oriskany was last to receive the angled flight deck -125 with some further upgrades. Aluminum flight deck cladding, Mk-7-1 arresting gear, and C11-1 steam catapults, as well as the lengthened No.1 elevator; completed in 1959.
There were still 9 Essex class ships that did not receive -27/-125 upgrades. 2 of them were the Bunker Hill and Franklin, which were both heavily damaged in WWII. While they were both repaired, they never saw additional service. As a kid, I cruised past Bunker Hill a few times in the early 70's on the San Diego Harbor Excursion tour boats. Boxer, Princeton and Valley Forge were CVS's and then became LPH's for helicopters in '59 & '61 and used through the late 60's. Antietam received the first angled flight deck in 1952 but became a CVS in '53. It became the training carrier in the late 50's until being replaced in that role by Lexington in about '62, I think. Tarawa, Leyte & Philippine Sea were used as straight-deck CVS's until decommissioning around '58-'59. Most of these last 6 were Korean War veterans.
Lexington, Yorktown, Intrepid and Hornet are preserved as museums. I just saw Lexington at Corpus Christi, Texas, earlier this year. Oriskany is an underwater reef off Pensacola, FL. All the others have been scrapped.
-
1
-
-
Thanks for the angled-deck Essex carriers. I don't know if you're aware... Intrepid, Ticonderoga and Hancock had a slightly different flight deck design. The starboard elevators of these three were farther aft than the others, with a little bit extra flight deck area forward of those elevators. Somewhat like this graphic I made up from modified screenshots.
Also...
Intrepid (11), Ticonderoga (14), Lexington (16), Hancock (19), Bon Homme Richard (31), Oriskany (34) and Shangri-La (38) all had the longer C-11 steam catapults and jet-blast deflectors. They were designated CVA's to operate faster, heavier modern jet aircraft.
Essex (9), Yorktown (10), Hornet (12), Randolph (15), Wasp (18), Bennington (20), and Kearsarge (33) all had the shorter H-8 hydraulic catapults. They were designated CVS's to operate propeller-driven anti-submarine aircraft and helicopters. And I think these were all without the bridle catchers...the deck extensions in front of each catapult.
Lake Champlain (39) was also a CVS but never got the angled flight deck and hurricane bow. It had the SCB-27A with H-8 catapults and the updated island and no twin 5-inch turrets, but no SCB-125 with the angled flight deck and hurricane bow.
Blue model (below) on the left = Intrepid CVA-11, Ticonderoga CVA-14 and Hancock CVA-19
Yellow model on the right = Lexington CVA-16, Bon Homme Richard CVA-31, Oriskany CVA-34 & Shangri-La CVA-38. Also, if you shorten the catapults to 198 ft of shuttle travel (150 ft power stroke) and remove the bridle catchers from the front edge of the flight deck, plus shorten the forward elevator, the model should be good for: Essex CVS-9, Yorktown CVS-10, Hornet CVS-12, Randolph CVS-15, Wasp CVS-18, Bennington CVS-20 and Kearsarge CVS-33.
H-8 hydraulic catapults could launch 15,500 lbs dead weight to 105 knots in 150 feet, in 1.69 seconds resulting in about 3.25 G's acceleration.
C-11 steam catapults have a 225 ft long track and could launch 39,000 pounds at 156 mph (136 knots) or 70,000 pounds at 124 mph (107.5 knots) in 211 feet.
-
Detrola was a radio manufacturing company based in Detroit, Michigan, USA from 1931 to 1948. They made some radios for the US military during WWII. That explains the "Detrola" box in the P-47D and P-51D in DCS. It is a Low Frequency Radio Range navigation system receiver of lightweight, compact, vacuum-tube design.
For the explanation of the Low Frequency Radio Range navigation system, I refer you to this Wikipedia page. I think it explains it very well.
Low-frequency radio range - Wikipedia
It's actually pretty cool. But not a navigation method we'd like to use in DCS...I'm pretty sure of that.
There are sample audio recordings of one such navigational aid on the Wikipedia page. I'm pretty sure you will understand why NDB, VOR, TACAN and ILS took its place.
That said, maybe someone could make a mod to replicate these stations on the Nevada map (or where we could place stations on any map in ME). As we can currently place transmitters on ground vehicles in DCS, using the Perform Command (Set Frequency and Transmit Message) in Mission Editor, setting frequency, power and assigning an audio file to be played; there might be a way for modders to incorporate the Low Frequency Radio navigation system into that. I think it would be just for vintage aviation fun. Probably any radio receiver in any aircraft could be used, but the Detrola in the P-47 and P-51 was specifically for that. So, as far as I can tell, the Detrola has no practical purpose in DCS. I thought it might be useable as a voice broadcast receiver, but it doesn't seem to receive voice transmissions of transmitters set up in Mission Editor (doesn't play the audio file). Only some Morse code station identifier signals of some radio transmitters around the 208-212 kHz range that don't seem to correlate to the 200-400 kHz band.
DCS REQUEST
A request of DCS would be to make the Detrola radio able to receive radio stations from 200 to 400 kHz and play their audio. This way we could at least use it as an audio file message/music receiver. And someone might be able to create a mod to make it function as a Low Frequency Radio Range navigation receiver.
-
On 4/19/2024 at 9:57 AM, Eight Ball said:
Getting closer
Dang! Probably ruined a good poker game there.
-
2
-
-
Is there any possibility of ED making a CH-47C, analog cockpit version... far down the road when a Vietnam Map might come out? I realize it would have much less powerful engines and less load capacity, as well as lacking other refinements of the F model.
-
8
-
-
On 4/16/2024 at 10:57 PM, Rudel_chw said:
it is not clickable, like an F-15C of flamming cliffs 3
only the F-4B/C has a clickable cockpit
how about trying out what VSN has already provided … before asking for more?Thanks for answering my questions, Rudel!
I guess the answers to the future mods VSN might make would be "Maybe...maybe not." If they made the F-104 and the F-106, I suppose they've considered the ones I mentioned. I just get excited. LOL. You're right. I need to try out the F-106...A & B!! That's enough right there for a while. I guess I was just hoping for an answer like, "Yes, we're thinking about them. But it will be some time yet...if we can even do them." I suppose I just answered my own question.
F9F-5 Panther. I wish it had an authentic 3D cockpit and not the 'placeholder' A-10A cockpit. But I understand. It's a lot of work! It sure is COOL seeing the F9F's flying around as AI aircraft, though!!
-
1
-
-
Is the cockpit not clickable on the F-106? I haven't tried any of your VSN aircraft before. Do any of them have clickable cockpits?
Any plans for making mods for the F-101B Voodoo and the F-102A Delta Dagger? How about going beyond Century Series with mods for the F-89J Scorpion and F-86D (or L) Sabre Dog? How about the F-6A (F4D-1) Skyray? And the F-86H Sabre?
-
On 1/14/2024 at 4:21 AM, rkk01 said:
Try flying close to the Chase as an opfor….
(I tried to use it as a merchant type stand in for a Victory ship - did I get an unpleasant surprise
)
Have you tried placing three Samuel Chase's in a line about 4000' apart, in-trail, going about 12 knots, on the Marianas map, and then have about 6 flights of 4 Fw190's with "Zero" skins attack from high-level with 250kg bombs? They make diving attacks. Maybe a Fletcher-class mod destroyer (or 2) a mile to port, on a parallel course. And then man the 5" gun on the center ship and try to shoot some of them down? It creates quite a show. Unfortunately, when you man a gun on the Chase (the only ship on which you can man a gun), AI does not operate any of the other guns on that ship. That's why you need the other ships nearby. And in the middle of that, add a few Ju-88's with "Betty Bomber" skins to make low-level torpedo attacks. You'll have a Pacific theater airshow. There's a mod ship of the USS Pensacola heavy cruiser. If you add that, it helps a bit with anti-aircraft fire...or an Iowa battleship. But not all guns fire on those.
We need Fletcher-class and Sumner-class destroyers and Cleveland-class and Oakland-class light cruisers in DCS. Where we can man one of the Mk37 directors to aim the ship's battery of 5-inch guns or Mk51 directors to aim one or more 40mm twin or quad mounts...and yet have the AI continue to operate the guns we don't control.
-
4
-
-
Here's a training film on all the steps involved in firing the main battery (8-inch/55 guns) on a Baltimore class heavy cruiser. Would probably be a similar procedure on all ships, including light cruisers and destroyers. If implemented in DCS, the procedure would probably be much simplified in terms of communications. The names of the stations involved are stated here.
-
1
-
-
DCS: Task Force
WWII Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO) Support Module - much like a WWII Naval
operations version of a combination of Supercarrier, Combined Arms and WWII Assets all rolled into one with complete VR support. Primarily focused on circa 1944 systems. These would include search radars, surface warfare and anti-aircraft gun mounts and their gunfire directors, as mounted on US Navy major warships of WWII in the Pacific: carriers, battleships, cruisers, and destroyers.I've been working on this request for a while. Seeing the announcement of the USS Enterprise CV-6 and the Hellcat, I figured it's time to post it as best I can. It's an extensive and complex request. I realize it wouldn't come to fruition for at least a couple years...at least! But I just couldn't stand seeing the DCS picture of the fast carrier Enterprise CV-6 being escorted by a slow Samuel Chase and LST. Enterprise and Intrepid (Essex-class) will need proper escorts with functioning sets of radars, gun directors and properly functioning guns. And why not let players man the radars, guns and directors in a far better way than currently implemented in DCS for the Samuel Chase? ...and with VR support.
Features:
- WWII straight-deck carrier operations (also applicable to Korean War era).
- Detailed models of Yorktown, Essex, Independence and Midway classes of fleet
carriers; and Sangamon, Casablanca and Commencement Bay classes of escort
carriers of the US Navy. As well as several classes of Imperial Japanese Navy
carriers.
- Carrier operations phases
- aircraft launch operations - aircraft spotted aft on the flight deck
and launched from catapult(s) and when deck space permits, the forward
half of the flight deck.
- aircraft recovery operations - aircraft spotted forward on the flight
deck and in the hangar deck to allow aircraft to land on the aft half
of the flight deck with the arresting gear.
- underway replenishment or at port - aircraft fill the flight deck to
allow room for initial storage of supplies on the hangar deck. (if desired)
- animated deck personnel to move aircraft back and forth on the flight
deck, hangar deck and elevators. (if feasible)
- animated launch and recovery personnel on the flight deck and in the
ship's pri-fly (or equivalent) control stations on the island. (if feasible)
- animated ordnance men and refueling men to service the aircraft.- WWII Fleet Operations
- Detailed models of Battleships, Cruisers, Destroyers and submarines; as well
as oilers, cargo and transport ships.
- CIC (Combat Information Center) on carriers, battleships, cruisers and
destroyers [intended for operation by 1 or 2 DCS Players]
- a search radar scope, PPI display, with combined airborne and
surface targets, and landmasses.
- plot board (similar in function to F10 map view) to keep track
of assets and targets.
- As flagship: Player (or AI) can command speed and direction of
ships in task force, as well as formations and other commands to ships.- Ship's Gun Fire-Control System (GFCS)
- Gun Mount Director Control Stations
- radar (A-scan display?) to determine range and bearing to
surface targets for gunnery solutions, fed into ballistic
computers to determine firing azimuth and elevation.
- also for directing 5-inch AA guns against airborne targets.
- Optical range finders as alternative to radar.
- 40mm gunmount remote director, Mk-51. Used to aim one or more 40mm
twin or quad mounts. Lead computing optical sight.
- 20mm guns with gunsight on individual gunmounts.
- DCS players can each operate one of the gun directors, 20mm gunmounts
or CIC. Directors, guns and CIC not occupied will be run by AI.
- Also applies to aircraft carrier CIC and GFCS.Although I would like all the classes of ships of the Pacific Theater in DCS, the main ones would be the fleet carriers mentioned above and the South Dakota and Iowa classes of fast battleships. As escorts for the carriers and battleships; the Baltimore class of heavy cruiser, the Cleveland and Oakland classes of light cruisers and Fletcher and Sumner classes of destroyers. This would be an essential starting point for US Navy ships. There would also need to be a like set of Imperial Japanese Navy ships, perhaps all run by AI, initially.
But here's my compiled list of US Navy ships (not including carriers) that I believe operated in the Pacific Theater in the 1944-1945 timeframe as escorts to fleet carrier (fast carrier) battlegroups and Task Forces. I've included the "old slow" battleships, although they would be their own task forces or part of the escort and shore bombardment ships for amphibious task groups, including the slow escort carriers. I do not expect this whole list to be included; although, many of the ships in a class are nearly identical...only name and number, and sometimes camouflage being different.
(Ships to be modeled in DCS as they appeared in 1944, or 45 as indicated)
- USN Battleship classes:
Old "Slow" battleships - 20-21 knots
- Wyoming class (12")
- Arkansas BB-33 1945
- New York class (14")
- New York BB-34
- Texas BB-35
- Nevada class (14")
- Nevada BB-36
- Pennsylvania class (14")
- Pennsylvania BB-38
- New Mexico class (14")
- New Mexico BB-40
- Mississippi BB-41
- Idaho BB-42
- Tennessee class (14")
- Tennessee BB-43
- California BB-44
- Colorado class (16")
- Colorado BB-45
- Maryland BB-46
- West Virginia BB-48"Fast" battleships - 27-33 knots
- North Carolina class (16" - 28kts)
- North Carolina BB-55
- Washington BB-56
- South Dakota class (16" - 27.5 kts)
- South Dakota BB-57
- Indian BB-58
- Massachusetts BB-59
- Alabama BB-60
- Iowa class (16" - 33 kts)
- Iowa BB-61
- New Jersey BB-62
- Missouri BB-63
- Wisconsin BB-64
- USN Heavy Cruiser classes:
(These were the only USN Heavy Cruisers in the Pacific in 1944-45)
- Pensacola class
- Pensacola CA-24
- Salt Lake City CA-25
- Northampton class
- Chester CA-27
- Louisville CA-28
- Portland class
- Portland CA-33
- Indianapolis CA-35
- New Orleans class
- New Orleans CA-32
- Minneapolis CA-36
- Tuscaloosa CA-37
- San Francisco CA-38
- Wichita class
- Wichita CA-45
- Baltimore class
- Baltimore CA-68
- Boston CA-69
- Canberra CA-70
- Quincy CA-71
- Pittsburgh CA-72
- Saint Paul CA-73 1945- USN Light Cruiser classes:
- Brooklyn class
- Nashville CL-43
- Phoenix CL-46
- Boise CL-47 1945
- Honolulu CL-48 1945 (4 twin 5"/38 turrets)
- St. Louis CL-49
- Atlanta class
- San Diego CL-53
- San Juan CL-54
- Cleveland class
- Cleveland CL-55
- Columbia CL-56
- Montpelier CL-57
- Denver CL-58
- Santa Fe CL-60
- Birmingham CL-62
- Mobile CL-63
- Vincennes CL-64
- Pasadena CL-65
- Springfield CL-66
- Topeka CL-67 1945
- Biloxi CL-80
- Houston CL-81
- Vicksburg CL-86
- Duluth CL-87
- Miami CL-89
- Astoria CL-90
- Oklahoma City CL-91 1945
- Amsterdam CL-101 1945
- Wiles-Barre CL-103
- Atlanta CL-104
- Dayton CL-105 1945
- Oakland Class
- Oakland CL-95
- Reno CL-96
- Flint CL-97
- Tucson CL-98 1945- USN Destroyer classes:
- Gleaves class - 66 ships - those in 1944 configuration
- Fletcher class - 175 ships - those in 1944 config
- Allen M Sumner class - about 47 ships - 1944There were many more older classes of destroyers, in smaller numbers. Just too many to be modeled, I think. I believe the above were the most significant ones.
-
2
-
-
On 3/31/2024 at 2:32 AM, Horns said:
Sorry I couldn’t offer anything more effective, would have been good to get you up and running before the long weekend ends. Fingers crossed the DCS update gets pushed on Wednesday and it’s the solution to your problem. FTR yes, pancake means flat screen
Thank you! I wasn't completely without DCS for the weekend, as I have a 2nd PC (no joysticks hooked up to it yet, though) that I use to give friends and relatives rides in multi-crew modules, like the Huey, C-101EB and Mirage F1-BE. Just hadn't gotten around to the F-15E yet. Has its own DCS account and its own set of paid scenery and (multi-crew) modules...because that's my understanding of what's required to do multi-crew. Expensive and rather tedious to set up with people who are not knowledgeable about VR goggles, DCS and aircraft ...but cool when it works! No one can say I don't do enough to support DCS and 3rd Party Developers.
 Interestingly, DCS works fine on this PC with Windows 10 Home (22H2), Quest2 and the same version of DCS Open Beta. I'm not sure if it has the same Meta/Oculus update. I turned off Auto-update as soon as I could. It said an update began downloading on March 25th. Didn't say it completed or installed. Although, it looks like a lot of those same files in the Oculus folder have the 3-25-2024 timestamp, so I think it updated. Maybe the difference is Win10 vs Win11? My 2 PC's don't have the same hardware, though, either. One's an i5-11600K with a Geforce RTX 2060 card. The one where DCS now doesn't work is the Win11 PC with i7-13700F with a Geforce 4060Ti card.
So, I was making warbird airshows with the AI piloted A-20s and P-51s in Nevada. Pretty cool when you put two flights of 4 aircraft in a racetrack pattern at about 500' AGL right over the airport and sit in an open-top Jeep and watch it all from the ramp!
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Horns said:
The only other suggestion I have is to ensure you don't have Public Test Channel enabled in Settings on the Beta tab. If you find it was enabled, when you first disable it it will download an update. Let it do its thing. Bad news is that, if it doesn't work after that, you should probably copy the files you downloaded in the fix back into the relevant folders (oculus-client, oculus-diagnostics and oculus-runtime).
I have no doubt this situation is frustrating, and before I found the fix for the issue I had most recently I was furious (I may have vowed to kick Zuckerberg hard enough to make an outie an innie). However, the silver lining would be that the problem that prevents users loading the game based on the make of headset they have is one that we have a fix for. As ruprecht says, this seems to be a different problem that isn't being experienced broadly, so once you find a fix, hopefully this problem will stay fixed on your system.
Public Test Channel was not and is not enabled.
What is "pancake"? I mean, I made some for breakfast, but is the usage here referring to normal 2D video mode? If so, it is true. I cannot get DCS Open beta 2.9.3.51704 to get past the "15 year" splash screen even with the Oculus Runtime Service stopped. Last good run of this current DCS version was on March 20th with my Rift S headset...it ran fine, then. I didn't try it again until March 30th, where it is now, crashing at the 15 year screen. (And I was already having DCS withdrawal symptoms going 10 days without flying. Now it's unbearable! Ha ha.) I think there was also a Windows update between the 20th and the 30th. I'm running Windows 11 Home 23H2. I tried running DCS Repair...didn't help.
Well, I hope the DCS fix will solve my problem. Just a few days to wait, I hope. Thanks for the help, you guys!
-
On 3/29/2024 at 4:31 PM, WinOrLose said:
Yes and you need to ensure you have no occulus functions running by closing them down in task manager before copying the files across.
I did all that. I went into Oculus and disabled automatic updates. I stopped the Oculus VR Runtime Service. I copied the downloaded files to the C:\Program Files\Oculus\Support\ path. And then I rebooted. It still doesn't work.
Is this the end of DCS working on Meta/Oculus hardware?
-
2 hours ago, Andrew8604 said:
I can't seem to start the engine in the BE. It works okay in SP, but in MP the engine just false-starts and shuts down at about 1100 RPM by front seat instrument. The engine RPM passes so quickly from 300 through 600 RPM, I can't get the throttle out of cut-off fast enough. And if there's a discrepancy between pilot and instructor RPM, which one is the true RPM indication? Is it really this demanding in the real aircraft that the throttle must be moved to idle within the 1 second that the RPM is between 300 and 600? Or is it, perhaps, longer than 1 second from 300-600 RPM during startup in the real aircraft?
My second pilot is a novice. I'll try to sit in the instructor seat and try it. Also, it seems I only get one attempt at starting the engine. If that fails, the engine won't even crank anymore. I have to restart the server to try again.
Don't seem to have enough switches in the back seat to start the engine from there. But I did get the engine started on a subsequent try from the front seat. Seem to have to move the throttle to idle before 300 RPM. Seem to have to hold the starter button until the RPM needle comes alive...then let it go. Then it was a nice flight with dual crew, giving a person a jet ride, in VR!
-
I can't seem to start the engine in the BE. It works okay in SP, but in MP the engine just false-starts and shuts down at about 1100 RPM by front seat instrument. The engine RPM passes so quickly from 300 through 600 RPM, I can't get the throttle out of cut-off fast enough. And if there's a discrepancy between pilot and instructor RPM, which one is the true RPM indication? Is it really this demanding in the real aircraft that the throttle must be moved to idle within the 1 second that the RPM is between 300 and 600? Or is it, perhaps, longer than 1 second from 300-600 RPM during startup in the real aircraft?
My second pilot is a novice. I'll try to sit in the instructor seat and try it. Also, it seems I only get one attempt at starting the engine. If that fails, the engine won't even crank anymore. I have to restart the server to try again.
-
From the GIB pictures, it's basically just a big-ass, gas-guzzling, faster, F-5E (or F) with a proportional ordnance increase, AIM-7s, and a radar that has a few more modes and longer range...I hope a longer range.
....GET OUTTA MY WAY!! I want it!! 
(Now don't take me seriously and rant about all its features that I neglected to point out.
)
It'll be out April Fool's Day. But since that's just a joke, sometime later in April. ...and of course, that's just my GUESS.
But seriously... I see a lot of instruments in back like we see in the F-5E. But that's the way it was. She's from that same era.
Don't worry! I mean, I'm not even going to fly her. I'm just going to sit in that back seat, in VR, on the ramp with the canopies open and just grin and know that it is COOL!
And sit back and take a nap in the sunny breeze, laced with JP-4 fumes. Relax, people...it won't be long now. (...where's my F4U? I think I can hear the Blacksheep Squadron theme song!)
-
2
-
-
Thank you, guys!! I ended up moving videos from the SSD of the "stable release" PC, clearing enough room for a parallel install of Open Beta, and it offered to import the modules and maps...which duplicates them on the SSD. I can delete the Stable version later. Then it worked. And it worked quite well! Both players using VR! All except for voice (intercom/VOIP) between the two players. Each has a USB headset. Both microphones test good in Windows. PC2 player can hear their own voice through the mic. PC1 player cannot hear self. Neither can hear each other but all other sounds in game are heard just fine...including a radio transmitter on a vehicle playing a 30-min-long, repeating ".ogg" music file to give a homing signal for the Huey's ADF. Both players can hear the music, located on the "acting server" PC 1.
I'll work on getting some screen shots of the steps it takes to make this "Multiplayer-in-same-house" work and post it here later for anyone else that wonders how to do it...including that the versions of all DCS installations on participating PCs on the LAN must be identical, as well as same module to be flown and same map...and any other mods involved in the mission to be used.
-
1
-
-
Thank you! I will try that. But I figured out perhaps the likely problem, I have two different versions installed. Latest Beta on one PC and Latest Stable on the other. I bet that will not work, right? If so, one or the other must notice the version mismatch and just says something like 'Failed to connect'. Maybe it should say "Failed to connect to server -- program version mismatch." That would be very helpful.
Apparently, I should upgrade the latest stable to the latest beta. But there's another problem. Rather than offer to convert the installation to either Beta or Stable, it only seems to offer to create a parallel installation...but at around 300+ GB, I can't fit two installations on a 1 TB SSD with the OS and a few other large programs! On the other PC is the Beta version. With the full set of Terrains and 90% of the Modules, plus 25 GB of skins and mods, it's a 550 GB installation of DCS!! No way that can fit twice on a 1 TB SSD, even without the OS. They're going to have to allow the option of placing Terrains on a 2nd HD, since they are the biggest and can't be used simultaneously anyway. I'd imagine the Kola map will be around 70 GB and a proper Vietnam map probably another 70+ GB.
I saw a recent post by one of the Forum moderators that the plan is to go to an all-stable release system and (I think) a closed beta. Open beta was meant for some users to be able to participate in the testing, but apparently a great many of the servers all went to the beta updates path, leaving few servers for the stable users.
DCS F-4E Phantom II Release Date Announcement- May 21st 2024
in DCS: F-4E Phantom
Posted
Chuck Yeager:
Hey, Ridley, you got any Beeman's?
Jack Ridley:
Yeah, I think I got me a stick.
Chuck Yeager:
Loan me some, will you? I'll pay you back later.
Jack Ridley:
Fair enough.
Yeager: I think I see an F-5 o'er here with my name on it.
Ridley: Now yer talkin'.
Think I'll take 'er out for a spin. ...until the techs get the F-4 ready.