LanceCriminal86

I have a book showing it as well and Yae is pretty good at freehanding/tracing decals. If not him there are a couple of dudes that could probably do it as a commission if needed even.

Lebanon 1982/83 VF-14 has a simple tactical scheme and subdued Tophat on the tails. CO/CAG bird I believe only had the same but the tophat's ring was filled in white. Swordsmen may have still had color tails and the late hi-vis scheme, overall gull gray with glare stripe and tan nose, color markings. For this one, going to have to call in a specialist like @_YaeSakura_ to draw the tails. I have them in a book here, it's the Tomcat leaning on a yellow sword with a red pirate bandana on his head. Photos from the cruise book also showed them with the simple color sword on the tail. Some jets even had a grat tactical scheme radome. https://www.navysite.de/cruisebooks/cv62-84/352.htm For Lebanon '84, BeDevilers and Sluggers on Saratoga: Having a tougher time finding VF-74 pics from the cruise, but they basically should be lo-vis tac scheme but with color versions of their tails. No idea if either squadron had CO jets in light gull gray but the cruise book photos of the whole air wing seemed to show a pair of Tomcats in light gull gray. Looks like they were 103s: https://www.navysite.de/cruisebooks/cv60-84/554.htm This pic is from '85 but basically this: VF-103 is pretty simple, mostly tactical scheme except maybe two stragglers in well worn LGG. Tails have the arrow in gray, but it looks like some or all had a yellow innerline. Can't find any postable photos but similar to the arrow on the B model skin. Between some of my books, a few sites I frequent, Facebook, and some other resources I think it'll be easy to accomplish. Some of the hi-vis schemes are already done by others, they would just need some adjustment to fit the specific cruises. One would need some custom tailwork for VF-32, but the rest I don't see being a problem at all. There are some usable references for the A-6E and A-7E squadrons but not much of a point starting there quite yet, with no modules to even think about painting. But the Tomcats can be done for sure. The CAG/CO jets aren't even that fancy here so really it should be easy to make a dynamic MODEX compatible blank skin.

Red Rippers and Tomcatters in 1988, plenty of references there as well. Red rippers were same as the decal sheet from my last reply minus the E and S on the tails. Tomcatters you get the nice hi-vis tails with Felix, black noses, and glare stripe. Both photos here 1988 on Forrestal:

I'm already finding what I need, cruise book for 1987 + Bert Kinzey book on Pacific Tomcat squadrons is already telling me what I needed to know. VF-1, 1987 cruise book shows late Hi-Vis with color tails and snazzy CAG jet, same with 1988 photos. VF-2, cruise book has a bunch of Bio's photos in there that match the photos I'm seeing in Kinzey's book for 1988, so there may be some changeups in there or it even looks like they had some jets in tactical scheme, some jets in the overall light gull gray with color markings. Tails looked like the 1987 style with the bounty hunter skull and tricolor band on the tail. Mid 1988 though apparently they switched back to the flashy overall gull gray, fuselage band under the cockpit for the CO/CAG jets, blue rudders with two stars, and yellow fin caps. So either they had Bio grab some pics from the shoebox from later on to do the cruise book or they changed their paint mid cruise or something. Cruise books show she set sail in July '87 and returned in Dec '87 after being in the Persian Gulf supporting Kuwaiti tankers. Now, some of the photos from Kinzey's book are showing from June 1987, the month before the cruise. So it's possible between then and the cruise that at least the CO and CAG jets may have gotten or retained the old style scheme, and after the cruise the other jets had it reapplied. During the cruise VF-2 had the "E" award. Actually, one of the "Straggler" pages of the '87 cruise book shows Bullet 200 on the CAT ready to launch, no color bands on the fuselage under the canopy. The full color scheme may have come back later or they dug old pics out from Bio for their cover page. I probably can't post stuff from the Kinzey book but this decal sheet matches what I'm seeing in the cruise book and his photos for VF-2. I think best bet is to go with the below for VF-2 for that cruise period, with a mix of tactical scheme jets and semi color jets like below: I can get the BuNOs from gonavy.jp and another book I have, from there I can search for photos. Plenty of FB groups where guys like Bio post their photos, bound to be some from that cruise in there.

If I know Heatblur, they probably already intended to have skins that matched their campaigns. Help me help you. Start digging up the references and I'll take a peek at them, or try to get them in front of some other guys who are working Tomcat skins. I'll try to get some stuff in front of the HB skin guy if I can after the holiday and maybe verify if he's had any guidance to have skins that match the campaigns and Forrestal boats or not.

It's not just that, it's the fact that fixes to the visual models WILL require redoing multiple textures. That's what I've tried to say about the small number of skins at release, and why we aren't seeing floods of them coming from HB. There are model corrections apparently in the pipe and they do affect both A AND B model skins. I've detailed this in the skinner's thread with screenshots of what needs to be changed, but one of them I have no idea what the fix will look like. If the model fixes aren't already in their skinner's hands, what's the point of doing work you will certainly have to re-do in the near future? But those points seem to fall differently on the ears of folks that have never done this at even an amateur level like mine. The best I've ever been able to draw is terrible stick figures, I'm not an artist. I've just taken a little time to learn Photoshop's tools like the pen tool and ask a LOT of questions, and make the rest up by sheer ADHD power and not being phased by monotonous workflows of saving, copying, pasting, reloading textures, and continuing that loop until the skin looks how I want it. And then throwing the whole thing in the trash because I'm not happy with it and doing it all over again from scratch after I realize I have to make new stencils because this squadron uses a font or color or size not used by any other squadrons I had for references. To those desiring these skins: Help gather resources. Start trolling places like Gonavy.jp, find the cruises, the BuNO and MODEX of the jets, and then start searching for photos of those jets on those cruises. Start gathering the materials and you might find why this often is no small undertaking. Take special note of stencils, CVW logos, any names and callsigns if you can actually see them, how much corrosion control paint there was, were they using later hi-vis or TPS, etc.

I disagree none with the intent of this effort. Having skins that match the maps and ships we have is a very relevant desire. I disagree with the vehicle by which some want it delivered, and when they want it delivered. Seriously, this kind of stuff should wait to see how dynamic MODEX pans out, because then it becomes a moot point for the most part.

Then maybe restructure your comments. Less "this is a load of crap" and disorganised mess comments and perhaps ask nicely and dudes might actually put their efforts towards a common goal. I've already tagged one or two guys in this thread who actively are either filling out full packs of jets with MODEX and BuNOs all lined up for particular eras and cruises, one of whom is creating a full pack for the whole Millenium cruise on the Stennis. The skins will come. The packs will come. They might even get integrated into the module if they're good enough and fit what HB would like to present or given enough palpable demand. Or, we could just tee everyone off who are doing this for fun and they'll just keep painting whatever the hell they want. Surely none of them have actually spent money purchasing digital books and hours digging around trying to find photos to reference and get the skins right. At this point it sounds like between this thread and the other one about skins needing to match the ships and maps we have, y'all just should wait for the dynamic MODEX thing to get solved, because between now and then what you seek probably isn't going to happen.

It's buried somewhere in either the "What should go in the FAQ" stickied post, the Enter the -A thread, or an older Forrestal question post. It was asked if we were still getting the Forrestal class and the response was something similar to "we may have bit off more that we can chew", or it may simply be that Forrestal will show up and it will be a long while before the other two appear. But I recall the point being brought up about the unanticipated workload of doing even just Forrestal especially in light of the new Supercarrier adding expectations for animated crew etc. and that the added work of having to make all the small changes to superstructure etc. being involved to do the whole class vs just the one ship. But the takeaway is that the other two boats are no longer 100% certain and they almost surely will not be there when Forrestal drops. As to everything else: "to get the historical experiences that were marketed to me when I bought the maps?" I don't recall specific historical experiences being marketed to me when I bought any maps OR the Tomcat, or any Heatblur insinuation that we'd be getting some complete experience around a particular flashpoint or conflict. Only that we'd be getting a 90s B model Tomcat and an A model that was contemporary to our B, the Forrestal (and originally described as -Class but now who knows), and AI A-6E and KA-6. They also promised campaigns, I think one for each variant. The B campaign is releasing maybe today, and the A at some point later. The Iranian Tomcat was originally just going to be the A with some systems disabled but it seems they've caved to the calls to have the external model done correctly and it will have the no-TCS ALQ-100 setup and the internal systems/weapons of the Iranian cats. They ALSO added an early A in with the old ALR-45 and likely locked to the older weapons, plus no LANTIRN. I didn't miss your point, I'm not trying to push them to add carriers into the game (as much as they IMO should be here). But I am saying that they are probably not going to suddenly halt the other skins just because we don't have the ships that match their deployments. I also don't get your line about "why do I have to rely on modders". This isn't like Bethesda "relying on modders" to fix their game and make up for its faults. This is simply an issue of massive amounts of work and demand on a very small number of people doing the skinning. Yet instead of saying "hell yeah let's start a community skin pack", you're saying you'd rather have HB do it. Which basically says middle finger to the skinners because our work isn't good enough. Or maybe you're saying because you want to have it be a default skin, in which case I must again remind you: what makes you think the HB skin you are expecting to happen will come from the HB guy and not from a community skinner? What if that's the winning skin from the competition? What if one of us submits it behind closed doors and just happens to get accepted because they like the idea of a couple historic skins to go with the boat? Do you complain that ED has been integrating community skins in the F-16 and the F/A-18? Do you believe that compromises the quality of the product?

So, do something about it. This is the skinning thread after all and there's a competition on.

Screw IC, tons of folks looking for mods don't play online anyways. Make it work/look good. I will say the preview vid for the catapult steam, I think the ED steam looked a lot better after the jet launched as it dispersed though blown by the jet.

I use a printed detent as well but want to use it so I can be certain I'm at MIL and not going to AB when right on the stops. I was curious as well whether it was a "push while advancing throttles past MIL" button, or whether it's an on/off toggle where you need to disable it when you want to drop back to MIL, or does it autodisable after going below AB?

I'm sure they will, but we also don't have the Nimitz which kind of sucks. Same problem for the Enterprise, Eisenhower, a new Vinson, and all the other conventional carriers we aren't getting. But the other problem is are we doing 1-2 skins for each squadron for each version of the jet? If we're talking official skins thats 2x of each for the old block Tomcat AND another for the 135 block Tomcat, multiply by how many squadrons operated in both eras and we're looking at a lot of skins, aka a lot of hard drive space. I have a feeling with the drive space concern HB is going to have to be strategic about how many official skins they include. The good thing though is we have a very active pile of solid folks making skins and quite detailed ones at that, so I don't think anyone is getting left out in the cold. Once some of us are done with the ones we personally want to do, naturally we'll probably start picking up on the ones that get requested here and elsewhere. And ultimately ones to go with the ships available in DCS for campaign usage.

Why do they have to be official skins? Heatblur isn't going to give you a 100% every MODEX every BuNO skin pack for one boat for one year (X6 if we are expecting each carrier and each of the 2 Tomcat wings to have full packages), I do not see that happening at all based on 1) how much disk space that will take up, and 2) the broad base of customers that would like to see the other squadrons that operated A and B models up through the late 90s. Maybe when dynamic MODEX comes online a generic line jet skin would happen sure but not to the rivets level of detail for each individual jet. Now, you almost certainly WILL see something like that from the community, because guys like me and Swordsman and Shmoo42 and others are planning exactly that. You also MIGHT see HB willing to have their campaigns optionally use those kinds of skin packs, but I have to refer back to point #1 about the size those skin packs will add to the drive size and that's not a solution all of their customer base will want. They're already stating that they are having to keep an eye on that and full MODEX/BuNO are not very likely due to size. But perhaps they'd provide alternative versions of some of their "official" campaigns for users to download that would take advantage of a community livery pack. That's also again dependant on what ships we get, because it's now sounding like there is uncertainty about whether Ranger and Independence are happening. I think we should have had the JFK instead if we were only getting one boat, but again that comes back to things like opinions and preferences, which everyone has. JFK was there for Sidra incident in '89, and for the Lebanon strikes after the Beruit bombings. Maybe JFK would be an option to go with the A-6E if they decide to do one boat, who knows. Even if we do get the whole Forrestal class we're still left with a swath of missing carriers, which is an issue in DCS not easily or quickly solved, just like the Flanker era assets that still make up a large portion of the non player assets and the FC3 quality REDFOR aircraft, and the lack of accurate contemporary adversaries for 1983 and 1987 era Tomcats like MiG-23s and Su-22s. Oh, and no Libya or proper Iraq map either, nor do we even have a Pacific map for the South China Seas or anywhere that the Pacific squadrons would fit in. And the ubiquitous VF-84 Jolly Rogers don't have the Nimitz, nor for the VF-41 Black Aces from the 1981 Sidra Incident. There's a ton of missing stuff and it's unlikely to happen this decade or at all. TLDR: This should just be a community skin pack because it can be done now without slowing down HB at all in their development, which means their skin and model guys can focus on fixing the existing issues with the A model and B model, updating the templates, skinning the Intruder and Forrestal. There's plenty of folks who'd totally do it even if we don't get the Ranger or Independance. And we can probably collectively do it faster than HB's guy can because again, single/limited resource who may not even be doing this full-time. The VF-154 skin may not have even been made by Heatblur...

Why does Santa Cat matter so much to be included as an official skins than filling out other historical squadrons who only have a single skin each? Was it even in the time period the Heatblur B model represents, aka before 1999? Honestly, stop pushing it. It's your prerogative to do so but there are a ton more deserving and missing skins that should be made official than yet ANOTHER Jolly Rogers skin where the B already has a few. There are a ton of A model skin possibilities, Viggens, and other actual B models that could be done to fill in some gaps. VF-24, VF-74, VF-211 don't even have a color jet of any kind, nor do we have a Sluggers CO/CAG jet.

Like I said, pick one of those skins and try to make it to the accuracy expected from Heatblur, and then remember that there's one, maaaybbe two guys making their skins. Track how many hours it takes you and then let some of us pick it apart for errors. Then multiply it by how many skins everyone is demanding be made available for the A and B. THEN go back and make all the changes every time a model correction is done where you spend hours re-exporting textures because a UVW map changed. I'm trying to put perspective on some of the tones in these thread because people do NOT understand how many hours and research go into making just one skin that meets Heatblur's requirements for inclusion. Yes, I agree it makes sense that some of our skins should match the Forrestal class boats. The people that REALLY care about it though are the kind that download skin packs and track BuNO and MODEX, like me. Everyone else just seems to want HiVis and CAG one of Christmas schemes who honestly don't care about it. It makes more sense to me that we wait and see what ships we ACTUALLY get, and then see what skins need to come along for them. There are a bunch of talented skinners working behind the scenes putting together entire cruise packs for the whole boat. But we are also missing half the aircraft that belong in the eras you are discussing, so shouldn't we focus on more recent packs until the A-6 and A-7 actually happen? And we are still missing an EA-6B, the S-3 is still a junk model, and so is the SH-60. I'm making VF-201 and 202 because most folks don't even know or care about the reserve squadrons and they were local to me. And I'm making them to the quality that I'd hope they could eventually be included. It takes a LOT of work to even get one jet right because photos have different color shifts coming from film, sometimes all you get is a far away shot, and almost never do you get a canopy rail with names and callsigns and the MODEX and know exactly what year it was. I had one jet that I thought maybe I could do and immediately had to tear down half of it and start over once HBs guy took a quick peek at some WIP shots. The skins will come. Let's see what jets and boats we ACTUALLY get first.

Sounds like more folks need to download the paint kit and buy a Photoshop CC subscription. There are a lot of demands and expectations for what HB and the skinning community are expected to do on their free time without understanding what goes into it.

You use the existing paint kit and make alterations for the A model, just like with the new A-10C II.

I'd rather have Jester work like a real human RIO than have glove vanes, cosmetic or not. I'd rather have TCS housings be swappable as an animation argument in the model than have glove vanes, for the A and B. I'd rather have a D model TCS housing added in for AI D model usage than have glove vanes. I'd rather have the USS Kennedy added than have Glove vanes. I'd rather the UVW mapping and model inacuracies be done instead of glove vanes. I could go on and on about things that would improve the Tomcat experience more from a functional perspective than adding non functional glove vanes. The late A model we have right now is supposed to be a contemporary to the 90s B models, at which point the vanes were permashut.

If we had the Kennedy we'd have great options since she was always on Med cruises, and for a long time with VF-14 and VF-32. VF-103's final cruise in B models was on her, and the reserve squadrons I'm working did carrier quals off of her. For Syria and Caucuses I'd really expect to see Atlantic squadrons only, especially ones that did Med cruises. PG would probably be East and West depending on choice of scenario. The Guam map will be where the Sundowners, Black Knights, etc. should really fit in. VF-51 as well I think. The skins are going to come, don't worry. Between the few that will come with the jet and the guys that are already furiously painting, you're going to see plenty of time specific packs as best as possible. The problem though is getting good enough reference photos for the time periods in question, because there are subtle stencil differences here and there which can be very tough to get right. Forrestal herself though had VF-11 and VF-31 flying A models in 1991 for a Med cruise, and all the way back through the 70s. In fact the 2 reserve squadrons has carquals off her along with the rest of the whole reserve wing in '87. So, historical 80s to 90s VF-11 and VF-31 are the pick for Forrestal. If we get the rest of the Forrestal class there's good options, but lacking the Constellation class, Kennedy, Enterprise Nimitz, Ike, and Vinson we're going to have most of our A model and even B model squadrons missing their rides.

The template technically can work with Gimp, the files are huge with a ton of layers and I know some folks have had to cut out portions of it to get it working. The DCS Livery Group Discord has plenty of Gimp users who could help.

@Shmoo42 is super far down the road on that exact timeframe jets from the Millenium cruise, nearly done in fact.

Expect to see them all within the coming month. The HB competition has folks in the Discord hopping on any squadron they can find right now. Hell at this point I just need to settle down and pick something and finish it. I'm trying to do Bio's VF-211 jet from 1996, all of VF-201 and VF-202, plus a few "fun" schemes that are all on pause. Whenever he's done and happy with it @_YaeSakura_ 's hi-vis template is going to be an awesome resource for the community. I'm working on some more stencil stuff based on some photos of the last 4 As delivered, who went to VF-201 and VF-202 straight from the Grumman factory. After I get all the stencils done I just need the model corrections to be made, the ALR-67 blisters to be added, and the bullet fairing for the TCS as all 4 appeared to be delivered that way.

So did anyone read the "Enter the -A thread" or any of the recent sticky discussion threads? Seems like the answer is no, because a lot of this was already answered.

It seems like the pitch and volume are too low. Looking at the SDEFs the pitch for the intake close sounds was down at like .47? The sound samples themselves were pretty good but it seems like the pitch is being made too low and they are too quiet. My ears should be bleeding in external view right in front of the jet!