Jackjack171

I mean, yeah if you are 3-5 years old and can't hold yourself up on your bike! But this ain't that bro.

Perhaps the OP should lobby for more training missions IRT AAR instead of "training wheels"! IJS

Thank you! Been saying this for a while! Oh well!

Yeah, I've been quietly following that radar bird stuff. The Harrier has been in my hangar for a while. I pulled it back out a month ago after a lot of A-10CII shenanigans. The AV-8B is a unique bird. It deserves all that is possible IMO. For some reason, and this is no negative jibe at anything but trapping in the Hornet is way too easy. Maybe it's the trap physics. Hovering however is a trip! We just need the LSO comms to tell us "Clear to Cross and Clear to land", and of course, the lens working again! Thank you my friend, looks better!

The USS Tarawa needs a major overhaul IMHO. It is dated to say the least. I hope it is brought up to SC standards or better. Not just operationally but cosmetically as well. The padeyes are funny looking. FYI, IRL she sits in Hawaii close to Ford Island and looks the same as in DCS: bland and dead. Perhaps it is time for a new LHD model. I love the free mod Juan Carlos. Vertical landings are addictive. The Harrier has so much more left in her. Along with all of the fixes that @Fri13 was mentioning, it would be beautiful! Off topic: I'd pay double for a TAV-8B (I know, I know, what's the point right?) and AV-8B II+! Razbam could go to the moon with this, IJS!

How is it not? It's probably the easiest thing to do. Download it and go, problem solved!

I've seen this a few times. It usually happens when they transfer squadrons. The PR shop didn't get to swap out the reflective tape yet. This is often seen in the FRS during CQ as well. Most of the instructors still had their previous units reflective tape.

I'm there with you on the Stennis. I just never said anything because, at the time I thought, why rock the boat? But since the SC module (which needs work but has, can and will kick ass) and seeing what can be done, my thoughts are, do it right or don't. As I think about it, what's important maybe, is the time frames and modifications that that ships class went through. If they could get that situated, then there could be a baseline ship that could father the others. I served FDNF so the Independence is the one I was looking forward to the most. I'll support HB in whatever they do. I don't mean to be so pedantic at all. It's just have a keen eye for this kind of stuff. Either way, we are all going to have a lot of fun!

I see your point as well. Also, I've never served aboard her; way before my time. But I am a student of history and warfare as are many others. The differences are as clear as the day is bright! Since DCS is the place to "get it right" instead of making Frankenstein modules, my stance is still the same. Yes, it is up to Heatblur on which direction they go. It looks like it's the right one from what I see, but that's my thing. And I'm sure some hard charging livery maker will go crazy if they only produce the Forrestal. And then you will have exactly what you were asking for. So it looks like a win-win. Only time will tell!

Honestly brother, I'd rather it look right than not at all. There are little more than mast and antenna when you reference these ships. I'm a Flight Deck guy. And most ship guys can tell the difference. The deck configurations are slightly different. In DCS, CVN 71-75 work because those ships are VERY similar. CVN 68-69 are very similar to each other but sort of different from the rest. But you can't take CVN-68 and swap out the numbers and make her -75. I mean, you could but it wouldn't look right. And now you have a Franken ship! I don't expect everyone to get it or care. But for those of us that know, it would probably be an eyesore. And then you would have people calling it out and bashing the Devs for not getting it right! I don't bash, but that's just me. I'm ok with just the Forrestal! Do it right or don't do it at all!

Those reasons are very obvious to a lot of people. I wanted all four as well but I'm glad that we won't get the painted over Honda Accord effect. To just swap the numbers and paint like a livery would be cheap and blasphemous TBH!

Can we get the Hull number on the Tarawa turned off at night in some update?

Thank you my friend. That did the trick! I'd buy you a beer if I could!

How do I use this fine ship? I see it is installed and I have the tab for it. The paints for the Harrier work, but I see no L61 in the Mission Editor or anywhere else to allow me to use it. Also, is there a manual somewhere? If I missed something that is right in front of my face, my apologies. Thank you in advance! JJ

Thank you so much! I now have to adapt my Navy brain around that. Man, that all sounds so complicated. I'm thinking it is all chaotic but I'm sure, somehow you guys make it all work (obviously)! It closely sounds like a MEF and how they come together. It makes the movie "Black Hawk Down" make sense, as far as who answers to who! It just seemed like one big conglomerate of leaders. I'm tracking now! Appreciate you brother! Thanks brother! Now I have homework Lol. Thanks bro!

Hello all, I'm looking for references on how Army Aviation is structured. I'm a former Navy guy so I'm used to squadrons, Carrier Air wings and such. Looks like the have Regiments and Battalions! I've never really paid much attention to the Army (no offense) but with the Apache coming, it has my full attention. Nothing sensitive or classified (obviously), I'd just like to do some homework. Also, I'm curious about how different Helicopter traffic patterns and airfield operations are compared to Navy/USAF/USMC. The Apache will be a breath of fresh air for me personally! While I love my pointed nose aircraft, I'm looking forward to something different and a new challenge. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!

The reason being is the bubble on CAT4. Certain ordnance on that station will impact the bubble. There's what is called a "go-no-go" list with us as Flight deck directors. Every Flight Deck Director had to be familiar and carry the list on them. I think CAT3 had restrictions as well. It's been a while! I hope that answers your question!

Yep, replacement radome! Seen a lot of that on Rhino's just like that. For what it is worth, what you have there looks really good. Gives it character!

Good one bro! Nice!!!

Give it time if you want to go down the road to never-never land! And then we will have an F-16C with "freaking laser beams" on the centerline tank! I guess after all the discussion, you still don't understand the term "Authenticity"! And as for Line B: You still don't get it it! It's not about telling others how to play. You already have an established baseline sandbox to do as you please. But that has been your stance since this forum started. So this may not make sense to you. If I give you a 2021 BMW and you take it and add rims and all kind of aftermarket bull crap to it, is it the same or did the value just depreciate faster than a Thanos snap? The authentic BMW, no matter how old it is still has value as long as it hasn't been turned into some god awful street racer! I know bro, I used to be a car guy! Convenience and instant gratification, in so many words is engrained in this conversation. I've heard it all along. I've never seen so many who only want to give 50% of the effort in anything and expect 100% results! You don't become a new homeowner in a nice neighborhood and then ask the Homeowners association to start changing things to suit you! It's that simple, sports fans! This has been a great discussion btw!

That's a matter of personal opinion. I worked with the Viper for 3 years and the Hornet for 20. Both great aircraft, although none of them came in pink! Lol

It didn't crash anywhere bro! And again, it is a Milsim! The name itself is self-explanatory! DCS is already where it is without having to scale back anything. More training and less cheats would be great! Your opinion about 100% realism became null and void the moment you admitted that you do not fly that way, with a pink Hornet! Really bro? Are we being punked here? Being honest, that Hornet is missing a lot of testosterone but hey, if it makes you happy, I'm all for it! You either downloaded that or made it yourself. That's all great but the rest of us that appreciate DCS for what it is shouldn't have to. The original OP was about bore sighting the Mav. It is not difficult to learn! It takes no time to be efficient at it either. Do it or don't, but don't complain about it! Why would you get on a platform that sells itself for it authenticity and complex systems and then ask for it to change just because you are too inept or too lazy to even do it properly? And since you pointed out that "100% realism" is out of the barn, then why not either learn it and fail or learn it and succeed? You can die, respawn and die again. That's the beauty of the sim dude! Some people are full of excuses!

This IS a Military sim bro! It is ingrained in the name itself! Are you pulling my leg here? Lol

I have never really been into Army aviation, but this looks amazing! I will pre-order when the time is right!

Now where talking! I'll take it!. With all due respect, I'm not sure how long you've been here but ED is never in any shortage of new players. The forums reflect that! I have almost every module so I read a lot of the threads and discussions to help me when I hit a snag. It's interesting what you find when you are not looking! So, please don't use the weak argument about sales.