Jump to content

F1GHTS-ON

Members
  • Posts

    107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About F1GHTS-ON

  • Birthday 11/25/1966

Recent Profile Visitors

1231 profile views
  1. is it too soon to suggest that RAZBAM just focus on the Pompey based ships and not bother with the Guzz based ships? ( awaiting incoming! )
  2. had same issue today (Oct 2023) cleared it by holding lefty & right mouse click on button for approx 5 secs ( which is how I think I caused issue in first place )
  3. F1GHTS-ON

    Hangar bay

    way, way back (when presumably Noah was still just thinking of going to sea and flight safety was still in it's infancy!) didn't the A-4s on the "special" alert occasionally get the "shape" fitted whilst in the hangers and then (with pilot strapped in) ride the elevator to the flight deck? Wiki Broken Arrow incident Link is to a 1965 incident where sadly a A-4 + pilot (never recovered) went over the side whilst be pushed onto the elevator (presumably with the intention of riding it up to the flight deck?). So clearly it used to happen, but at some point in last quarter of a century, removed from the list of "accepted practices" (as @Jackjack171 suggests). I think that the UK Invincible Carriers deliberately had the bomb lifts pass (with an option to stop) at the Sick Bay, yet for health & safety reasons (can't fight a war without a good Health & Safety enforced policy, otherwise, god forbid, someone might get hurt), was never used - something to do with removal of any unsecured limbs on lift travel. Good discussion, and regardless of realism (that statement likely to get me shot on these forums ) to create that "immersive" experience, I would welcome option of riding the lift in game. Of course, a radio menu option for "push back" MUST be the the most desired Super Carrier request.........
  4. +1 to @draconus said. Try setting up an approach using auto throttle AND ACLS initially. (Even getting the aircraft into the"right peice of airspace" for the ACLS to stand a fighting chance of taking control is challenge enough!). Now sit back(!) and watch the instruments and get a feel for what the aircraft thinks is the correct speed etc. Half the battle for getting into a good ACLS start position is getting the trim, auto throttle AND geometry (heading) right. Like you, I thrive in the mental stimulus of just getting the initial parts right, the actual landing is just the icing on the cake.
  5. great post @Bremspropeller. using data from your F-8 link, I see that for the F-8E, it's empty weight was 19,200lbs, yet it's max trap weight was 22,000lbs. Whilst any drop tanks would be empty before landing, (300 gallons + 2500lbs! each), even an empty tank is weight thus eating into margins. I am obviously NOT an F-8 driver, but I have known some brits who served on the French carriers back in the 90's (not flying F-8s). I am told that the French F-8s needed to dump down to such a level that they literally had enough fuel for 2 looks at the deck before having to hit the tanker. They also stated that on a 3 degree approach, in anything more than a sea state 4, the pitch of the deck could easily put the vertical distance between 1 & 4 wires outside a the "catch" of the hook, even if flown perfectly. Essex class carriers are bigger, so perhaps ship vertical pitch is less of an issue, but flying to such tight margins is really sorting the men from the boys stuff. (Whilst dumb bomb ordnance is clearly relatively cheaper, this trap weight limitation must explain the lack of any photos of F-8s returning to deck with any wing hardpoint bombs underneath? - Perhaps some ship's engineer might clarify, but even though steam powered, if you inject oil direct into the furness's, you can get a marginal boost of speed - does this explain the thick black smoke from the Essex's at flying stations??)
  6. You've answered the blackout issue (only on extreme loadouts for me) - Thanks I'm still getting the "damage to CVxx" at launch come up in MP - again, minor issue. But absolutely loving the suspension spending far too much time taxing in external view to appreciate it more - Thank you Heatblur
  7. Same with drifting long over the 4 wire. It seems to be a recent glitch, but most likely cause is as suggested above (optimised for legacy Hornet). I`'ve even played with setting the switch to"warm weather" on a actual "cold day" in a foolish attempt to get "less power" out of my engines! I prefer to fly the A model with speed brakes out and if you command a full "down" on the DLC just as you cross the ramp, you occasionally snag a 3 or 4 wire. I think I saw in a previous post a comment that the ACLS was never meant to control the aircraft down to the wires, but just close enough to allow the pilot take control in the last few seconds. All this F14 technology decades before UAVS operating from decks was even considered. Finally google "magic carpet" to see where the future of reducing pilot workload in landing on a CV is going. I.e. the aircraft's computers will adjust the flaps continually rather than the pilots inputs to power to maintain glidepath
  8. Really showing my ignorance here.....does an F-4E need a starter cart, or can it start from cartridges? As a Phantom is based on a Naval design, I assume DCS will make us "request ground power/Air" etc to start a Navy F-4, but I think I have seen a German AF F-4F using a cartridge to start (there's certainly a YouTube vid to support this). It would be "nice" therefore to have DCS change the comms menu script to reflect the fact that it isn't always a Chief Petty Officer ("Chief request....") in game for our navalised F-4s. @Uxi when I was lucky enough to serve on the Enterprise (2010) I was told that the bridle catchers had been deliberately retained as a piece of showmanship so as to claim any record on Longest CV at sea. Agree that she would make an excellent addition to the growing fleet of CVs in DCS
  9. If the developer were clever, could they not release the skin basic ahead of schedule, so that those really gifted artists could do the work for them. Allowing the developer to remain focused on the flight model etc. The Forum then becomes a discussion pointy on which in-game provided skins we get as I am sure I'm gonna need a whole new drive (!) just to store the multitude of home made skins that6 are bound to accompany this release.
  10. Warning Star Callsigns: I was about to reply that I read somewhere that it was "Disco" - but (Wiki is my friend!) G.J.S. is right, it was "Ethan" for Rolling Thunder, with "Disco" introduced for the Linebacker campaign. I think they also had airborne C-130's acting as the ABCCC (airborne Command & Control) and many of the other stuff that we see today in complex Air Campaigns first introduced in the Vietnam War. A lot of the Navy's CROWN doctrine started as a solution to countering the kamikaze attacks at the end of WWII, and has been refined ever since. Flying the DCS F-15/16 & 18 with IFF nearly always correct (well in some multiplayer games I would question some players ability to read that correctly!), where as back in the 1960s the "game"(?) was much harder and proved to be a real challenge. It'll be interesting to see how IFF is modelled in DCS with the F-4. Either a lot of "declare" calls to the AI E-2/3 AWACs or a "jester" that is vaguely competent.......
  11. great debate and valid points raised. For clarification, I am NOT suggesting dumbing down, but rather working within the constraints that DCS modelling already provides. In "my opinion" (and that's why I love these informed discussions on these forums), if the A-6 is going to see the light of day AND be delivered within a reasonable timescale/business model by Heatblur, then there will need to be some compromise. I acknowledge the negativity of the "computer games" mindset, but DCS is not a military grade, Taxpayer funded ($ millions!!) simulator. But it is the most immersive PC game that the majority of us will get to use (I nearly said "play"). That many former military Aircrew give DCS a thumbs up, speaks volumes for how good the game is. But already in DCS many of the components that are so important to real life flight ops are dumbed down (e.g. jamming - just a simple noise jammer modelled, yet I'd argue this doesn't detract from the enjoyment?). Bottom line: I think that a 90+% realistic A-6 (and yes, even 2 human players) is achievable without having to compromise NATOPs or more sensitive info. More importantly, my estimate would be that this 90% A-6 would receive a 90% positive response from the wider DCS community.
  12. Replying as a non US citizen (but have worked with A-6 pilots on exchange, more than a quarter of a century ago!) Why the absolute need for access to NATOPs and other documentation? As is regularly posted on these forums, the absolute "purists" will insist on 100% accuracy, yet I doubt have flown an A-6 as a pilot or B/N themselves. Whilst I genuinely take nothing from their laudable ambitions, lets look at what the A-6 weapon systems actually did, and how DCS can meet 99% of that whilst remaining at Open Source. Remember DCS models AIM-120s, without knowing the true range or Probability of Kill (PK), detection capabilities against various target sizes and aspects etc, etc - yet doesn't detract from the enjoyability of game? In very simple terms, the A-6 required 2 crew to operate a complex pre-GPS targeting system to achieve all weather hits using dumb bombs. To generate an accurate INS position to release those bombs, the B/N was constantly using the radar to update the aircraft nav system. (I would suggest that that feature has already been implemented in DCS (F-14). That most games we chose to set either zero wind or zero nav drift is our dealers choice. The latest A-2-G mapping in some aircraft looks pretty good to me and with the F-15E, I suspect that 21st century A-2-G mapping & targeting is pretty well playable without compromising military knowledge. Sorry to say, but before GPS, this was the high workload on a B/N and therefore for a computer game, that "accuracy" by a Jester type AI, should be fairly straight forward. (sorry to genuine B/Ns reading this, but GPS, assuming that the opposition doesn't take it down, was your replacement). Flight Model - I would assume that Open Source should be able to provide the various speed, drag, turn performances for a 1960's plane allowing for various weight and configuration variants good enough for the majority of DCS players. Use of 1990's precision weapons - modelling for these already in game, and even if the exact switchology for spooling up HARM/Harpoon/Maverick/LGBs isn't known, I would speculate that the MFD(s?) that were introduced on the very late SWIP A-6s were probably identical to mid block F/A-18Cs. The Nose mounted Targeting POD was probably less clever than LANTRIN, but why does Heatblur not just use their LANTRIN model (with Jester integration already developed, on their A-6. Take a wild guess where many of the original F-14 RIOs came from when the F-14 assumed the role of Bombcat - and I would argue that their previous A-6 Targeting Pod/designator knowledge was huge in the development of LANTRIN. Would the US Defence Department really have developed something totally new for the A-6 when MFDs were already in use on legacy Hornets? And more importantly, would 99% of DCS players know? anyway, my two pennies (or should that be cents?) worth
  13. Doesn't need to be declassified. Simple solution would be an AI F-4G only, i.e some 3D modelling, but allow the AI be either programable in Mission Planning or reactive to threat radars as a default setting. Whilst these forums seem to attract a significant number of "purists" who would call foul, the reality is none of them have flown an F-4G, their knowledge of Radar Suppression is from what they've read in open source etc. F-4Gs represented top end technology 40 years ago - their replacement in USAF was the F-16 (which is modelled pretty well in DCS already - as a SINGLE seat. I can't even begin to imagine how complicated creating a JESTER to operate the back seat would be for a "G"). IMHO. majority of DCS players are content with current "noise" only Jammers and relatively simple ARM missiles that the developers have provided. AI, or even a MOD that allows a "cheat" of allowing an F-16/18 type MFD for the back seat for HARMs might meet your requirements..... .
  14. If not already seen, here are a few more A-6E Youtube (from cockpit) vids to keep the DCS dream alive. Video at 0:49 gives you a few seconds view of the VDI where you can see the waypoint steer that the B/N has put in. Video description states that this is a VA-145 machine flying from Ranger (with other clips from creators time flying in A-6). At very end of video, as the jet taxis out of the wires you briefly see a parked A-6 which to me looks like a SWIP wing Fold. If so then I am making a huge leap and guessing that the cockpit seen thru most of video is also SWIP - not sure other than HUD what difference that makes... US Navy Museum walk around briefed by ex B/N. minute 20:25 for description & illustration of VDI I/m guessing a V-165 in cockpit video - I think a SWIP again guessing at a view of the ECM(?) aerials on trailing edge of wings........ EDIT - I should add that SWIP was the Systems/Weapons Improvement Programme. Whilst later SWIP aircraft had the "Plastic wings", first airframes upgraded only had the internal stuff done - giving HARM, MAVERICK capability.......guess which version I hope we get!
  15. Same advice a s Jayhawk - I'd been unable for 12+ months to AAR in the F14. Reduced my curves to zero, and finally can achieve that precision (avoiding the dreaded vertical induced bouncing) flying that allows me plug in (albeit with some effort). Strangely I had put the dead zones in because I couldn't get the auto pilot to engage on ACLS - but I seem to have lost those random "spikes" in input around the centre that I used to have. I have had a CH Flightstick (the bottom of range) as I really am on a budget, so will never be able to afford the fancy stuff. Only additional advice I can suggest: Not sure how often you get to play DCS - but ALWAYS set aside a 10 min AAR practice (own mission?) at end of play so as to retain the riding-1-bike skill
×
×
  • Create New...