grim_reaper68

My bad, it was on the Charles de Gaulle. You're talking about an Breguet Alizée, that would be in fact a great add. I asked you aboout the Super Frelon that i saw on on eof the latest screens you made. Is it avaible?

I tried to make an E-2C to land on the clem, after a patrol of 4 SEM has landed on it. Unfortunately, the Hawkeye brokes his right wing because of the SEM that were parked near the landing zone. . That's the matter with our tiny little carriers .

I have a question about reloading Exocet on the SEM, Étendard IV and Rafale. The ground crew refuse to reload. I think it has to do with the weapons in DCS more than a bug with the carriers. Am I right? Or did I miss something?

Well, nice job on the R98 and R99. I just have a problem with the crusader. Can only find one french livery. And I have some issues on the IA crusader.

Just in test now, how about the super frelon? Is it aviable somewhere? Maybe we could dream of an alouette III as pedro.

OK for the F8, I thought there was another one. Strangely the french liveries seems ugly in my case. I noticed on a self made mission that there where 3 "catapults on the clemenceau, as i had 3 F8 on the deck, on on each catapult, and one behind the tower, floating over the elevator. What a surprise to see it starting at the same time that the F8 at the catapult 1. Then the other on cat 2 started after a few time.

Hi just checked the A400M, works fine for me.

Nice work! Where did you get the F-8? I see in the last picture R99, isn't that the FOCH? Also the SA321 seems to be new, or I maybe missed some mods...

Hi, nice job and thanks for those great french mods. I just noticed that the speed of the AM-39 Exocet is a bit too high. In fact, IRL it's a subsonic missile, but in game it flies at 2500 kts. I didn't know that France had hypersonic antiship missiles . The MM-40 has a more accurate speed as it's an high subsonic missile.

If you want more countermeasures, my Corail pods are available in the user file section.

What do you mean? In external view?

In the weapons.lua, the barax has a weight of 85 kg and the phimat 105kg, so theoritically the phimat is heavier than the barax, and the F1 should turn on the phimat side. I've made several tests, the wing where the phimat is attached is going down slowly every time.I tested the phimat on both side, with different loadout, with the same result every time. So in my mind the weight of each pod seems to be correct and taken in account in the balance of the F1. Keep in mind that there is 20 kg difference between both pods. The position of the pods on the external wing attach point play also a role in the unbalance. The F1 is an old school aircraft with no fly by wire or any stabilisation system like the M2000. Just take a look when you drop a 250 kg bomb from one of the wing pylon, you have a violent roll on the opposite side, that you need to compensate.

Just tested the P-3C with Harpoons, works fine. Shot 6 missiles at the Kuznetsov in one time. Share your mission, i will test it to see where the matter is.

I my mind, there is no need to have damage from the drogue or boom, only a more realistic interaction between the drogue and the aircraft, like the droggue bouncing on the fuselage if you touch it, and not going through the whole aircraft.

Hi same for me! Both works fine. latest OB, and probably latest mod version

As far as I tried to refuel the A-10C II, the boom seems to have a better physical interaction with the aircraft. My refuelling skills didn't allow me to make a correct refuelling with the F-16 (I need to work on it to maintain correct speed and attitude ), so I can't talk about it, and it's hard to look over the shoulder to see if the boom is going through the aircrafts body.

The KC135 MPRS, with the Mirage F1, the F18, the F14 and the M2000

Hi Would it be possible that once the refuelling is completed, as the tanker operator tells 'transfer completed" the drogue stays "physically", instead of having it going through the aircraft. It would add some realism to the AAR operation. I don't know if it's the same for the boom AAR as the probe and drogue. Another possible improvement, related to the first one, would be that the drogue stops going through the aircraft. I mean the only contact possible yet is between probe and drogue. It could be nice to have the drogue bouncing when you missed it, or touch it with the fuselage.

OK. Thanks for your advices, I will try ASAP.

External tanks wouldn't make any noticeable difference on the attitude, as they're close to the CG. I know I'm crazy as newbie on AAR to try "heavy loaded" aircrafts, but in my mind if I'm able to make it with clean or heavy loaded aircraft, it would be easy to understand how they react with or without load. I even made an AAR on the IL78, single and then with an SU33 (I would like to make a joint flight with the SU27, like the pilots from the Normandie-Niemen, but as they aren't AAR capable...) , in the mind to practice AAR on the right side of the tanker. I was surprised to see that the lights of the IL78 are very visible compared to the KC135, and almost indicates if you're flying too fast or too slow. Strange thing too, hearing my "french" pilot speaking russian. As I'm gaining experience on AAR, I'm challenging myself . I even made a try on the IL78 with 2 SU33 refuelling, he tells me to wait... Why having 3 drogues if you can't use them For making AAR with the KC130, good luck, as far as if you're flying too slow you would have both inverter failing (tested on KC 135 flying at 260 kts)

Hi Isn't it possible to have tacan on the IL78m?

OK, I will try that. I was just wondering why the Cat is the only affected by wake turbulence even if they are deactivated. The tanker speed is at 350kts 15000ft.

Hi, yes I have curves. As said I'm a newbie on AAR, but now with training, I managed to predict the pitch up, and can almost make a complete fuel transfer in one time. I will try to make a AAr with more than the minimum fuel to see if the pitch up appears. As mentionned with all tank lights on, the first who where be filled are the rear aft tanks (5 on the tank panel), so the center of gravity of the F1 goes back. I'm surprised to see the realism level of the F1, which take in account that sort of parameter in the flight model. Did you try an AAR with 20% of fuel? I would be glad to see if it's only my impression or if it's really the FM of the F1.

Sorry for digging up that post, but I tried to AAR with the cat, but it seems to be affected by wake turbulences but in my mission they are deactivated. Other modules works fine, but the Cat moves a lot even if I'm 0.5Nm away from the tanker .