RaiderOne

I know for sure, but apparently ... in the small world of Radio Communications they call those radio : "Half-Duplex Radio" ... :music_whistling: An old habit may be .... I don't know ...

Not completely in DCS, you're right, but enough anyway for the SRS external Radio System to simulate those 2 Full Duplex new digital radios that become available in the F/A-18C ! So if you use SRS, then you will have 4 radios available in your fighter : 2 classical radios Half-Duplex and 2 Crypted Full Duplex "MIDS" digital Radios ! Then ... Plenty enough to have 1 channel for your flight, 1 tactical channel for the Package, 1 for the AWACS and 1 on the Guard channel ... for instance ! :thumbup:

I do completely agree ! It's gonna be a real mess on the only radio channel when in multiplayer more than 6 planes will come back together for recovery !!! :(:cry::doh: It's really a pity to hear that change !! Please, consider a way to make it back to a more realistic status with different channels ... even if it's not done at the first release ... The realistic MultiPlayer ATC of the SuperCarrier for Case I, II & III Recoveries is THE MOST important feature for us to be able to live nice MP Naval Ops missions with ours squads !!! Good new 3D model, moving Deck Crews in the Catapult process, etc... are nice good looking features (no problem, it's cool) ... but they are not essential for the ability to fly good MP Naval Ops Missions with a whole squad of team mates ! .

Yes but come on ... that obviously should be included as a normal functionnality ! It's a BASIC of Naval Ops from an Aircraft Carrier ... the Boat should have an easy way to put the "Angled Landing Runway" right into the wind for recovery operations !!! :helpsmilie::cry::helpsmilie: I am really very disappointed to hear that in this fantastic brand new module, where lots of time & efforts have been put into research of maximum realism, a so basic and useful functionnality has not been considered as important to as it should !!! What a pity ... :(:cry::(

+1000 ! :noexpression:

Thanks a lot !

So now ... do we have any news about the "Deck Crew visibility during Night Operations" on the Catapults ? Will they use Light Sticks with special arm signs as IRL ? Or is it a requested feature to put on the WhishList for the SuperCarrier ? ??

Yes for sure ! ... I've read that the use of NVGs for departure & recovery operations on a CVN is even forbidden !

That has been annonced a few weeks ago ... but not sure it'll be ready for the initial release ...:unsure:

+1 for sure !!!

I hope they will !!! Otherwise, during non-MultiPlayer sessions, the module would be much less interesting than expected !?! :(

I do totally agree with your point of view !!

You are right for sure ! But seriously, I think they should better spend their dev&test time to produce a very usable radio system, with as intelligent as possible artificial "Marshall, Airboss, Tower and LSOs" ! The accuracy of those radio comms with the Carrier is the main subject for the usability and the realism of that module !

I must say that you are probably right ! Because it is or should be very nice to see, so they wouldn't have resist to show us some nice shots at night in the trailer ... I'm afraid ! I hope that they plan to at least include that part later in the EA process ... !?!

And the Hands Signals at night with those light sticks are rather different of course than those at day time ! It doubles the work for DeckCrew animations ... I am not sure it is already modelised for the first EA release ... !?§

Any info about the "night subject" on the SuperCarrier Module ? Are we going to see things like that on our new SuperCarrier CVNs : Or that : Or is the Deck Crew behaviors&appearance at night are planed later in the EA process ... or never ?

I think I have read somewhere a few weeks ago, that ED initialy wanted to had 2 more CVN in the list of SuperCarrier "skins", which are : CVN-74 and CVN-75 ! I don't know if it is still in the plans ...

The best thing would be for the deck crew to walk away and try to avoid the path of a plane that do not follow the orders of the guys in yellow shirt ! But those deck crew behaviors could be very difficult to modelise correctly ... the number of the different possible situations is quickly really HUGE even with a rather small number of objects on the deck ! And seriously, in real life, a Navy Pilot who is not following the movement orders on a Carrier Flight Deck ... it's not realist either ! This pilot risks to be grounded in no time ! So why ED would spend a lot of time and efforts to try to modelise those non realistics situations and behaviors ?? I do prefer a lot they use their limited man ressources to debbug the Radio Comms for the Case I, II & III Recovery operations ... if needed at release time ! That's much more important for the real "usability" of this module than trying to satisfy a few simmers that only want to put a big mess on the flight deck just for fun ...! I have the weakness to think that it's obvious to everyone here !??

What is planned for the SuperCarrier Module about Naval Ops at night ? Do the Deck Crew Members use luminar light stick for their Hand Signals during Night time as in real life ?

It's not exactly about me in fact. Except for those tests, I am always IN or very near the required values for the basics flight parameters on the Groove, In Close and At the Ramps ... and doing that way I can count more than 600 traps with the DCS F/A-18C since the last 12 months. No but ... on many MP servers, and like many of my team mates, a lot of DCS pilots don't care how they land their F/A-18C on the Stennis because without really monitoring their speed or slope angle, it works, they get a Trap with no damage ... !?! Recovery on the CVN is then close to be an easy part of their flight ! But IRL, it is known that coming back to "Mother" (the CVN) for Recovery after a complicated & long real War Mission is definetely not a "piece of cake" and it requires particular skills & training ! Especially if the weather and sea conditions are hard and if you come back with a non used dissymetrical payload configuration, and so on ... So to see so often all those guys "take advantage" of this so exagerated tolerance of the FA18C DCS module and/or the Stennis modelization, partly break the interest of naval ops in DCS and by the end make me sad since one year... :cry: But I am glad to hear that this almost inexistant damage model will be considered as a bug and soon adressed !!! :thumbup:

I can show the track file (and/or the tacview file) of that last try if needed ...?!

OK I understand your arguments but I don't agree with all of them ... some flight datas (IAS, slope angle, ...) admitted by DCS (only for the moment we all hope) for F/A-18C Deck Landings on the Stennis, without damage to the plane, are way too high !! For instance, I have just succeed in landing my quite light DCS F/A-18C on the Stennis's Deck at the speed of 243 Kts (IAS) !?!?! It's almost twice the correct speed ... that's completely insane ! ... and I still catch this "Ultra-Solid" 3rd Wire which stops my plane and don't break itself, nor the hook, nor the plane !! Come on, it's obvious ... you should agree ! Please, test it yourself ...

And - I forgot this one - the TACAN station can be mobile ... The Carrier (Stennis) for instance. So in this case, it is useless to create a waypoint with the GPS coordinate of the TACAN station. And anyway, in the case of the Carrier, you don't have to aim directly to the Carrier itself (for your descent) but you have to manage your descent to be compliant, at the end, with the Recovery Procedure declared (CASE I, II or III).

Without any damage to the Plane (nor the Landing Gear), and without breaking the wire caught, ... it is still possible to land the F/A-18C on the Deck of the Stennis with those data at the "impact" : IAS : 200 Kts (instead of 125~135 Kts, the delta is 54%) Glide Slope : -7.5° (instead of -3°, the delta is 150%) Descent Rate : -2000 ft/min (instead of -700 ft/min, the delta is 185%) :cry: The worse is that a very lot of DCS F/A-18C Pilots down here, have got the habit to do bad deck landings without damages ... It will hurt a lot when this bug will be adressed !? :huh:

The only difference is that the TACAN point is not showing itself on the HUD like the Waypoint does. So you cannot put your FPM on it to adjust your descent rate ...