jmarso

This is going to sound really lazy, but the way I figure it, the radios are the RIO's job. So I just use easy comms, and in my head that's just Jester "doin' his thang." :music_whistling:

The biggest problem for people new to precision instrument approaches is the tendency to get into PIO (pilot induced oscillations), aka 'see-sawing back and forth or up and down' because they chase the needles a little too hard. Make small corrections to avoid that. If you practice a bit in visual conditions and keep the boat in sight behind the needles, you''ll develop a sense of how much correction you need to get back on course/glideslope. Remember also that the closer you get to the station (meaning the ship in this case), the more sensitive the needles become and even smaller corrections are needed. The proper correction you make at ten miles out will be a gross over-correction at half a mile. Have fun with it! Couple of other pointers for orientation if you are new to instrument flying: You can use your HSI as a map when using the TACAN. The station is always at the center. You are always on the 'tail' end of the needle, and the bearing where the tail is, is the TACAN radial you are on. When flying/ maneuvering, the head of the TACAN needle will ALWAYS fall, and the tail will ALWAYS rise unless you are headed directly to or away from the station, in which case the needle will be vertical. So if the boat wants you on the 180 radial for marshal, fly a course that will allow the tail of the needle (where you are) to 'rise' to that 180 mark. When the tail of the needle is on 180, you are on the 180 radial. Then you need to check distance. As you become more skilled, you'll be able to work the distance problem simultaneously with the radials. Remember also that TACAN radials are like the spokes of a wheel- they are farther apart the farther away from the station you are.

Here's another related question: If the IFLOLS overlay is incorrect for the Tomcat, does the actual meatball on the deck still provide a proper look, or is that off as well?

When you want to use the ILS system, use this list of checks: 1. Dial in the proper ILS channel. (Right side console) 2. Set link mode to tactical. (Jester) 3. Set link host to your mothership (i.e. Stennis) (Jester) 4. Set your VDI to ILS (Right vertical console) 5. Set your steering command to AWL/PCD (Right vertical console) 6. Set your display mode to LDG (Right vertical console) Usually, after a mission when you've been linking to AWACS, step 3 is the one that's easiest to forget. If you set everything else up right and are looking at a centered cross when it shouldn't be centered up yet, remember to switch your link host back over to the carrier. If you aren't seeing that ILS 'cross' at all, make sure you've selected the LDG display mode for your HUD. (Step 6) One of the cool things is that when you accomplish Step 5, you can still see all relevant TACAN data on the HSI for reference, provided you have the TACAN tuned up to the boat. That should get you set up to use the ILS, even as a backup on a Case-1. Remember that typically, ILS indications aren't to be trusted more than 30-40 degrees off of the final approach course, but in game I've noticed that the GS seems reliable pretty much 360 degrees around. As for setting your HSI, that's more of a reference than anything else unless you are shooting a TACAN approach to the ship. I usually just put whatever they say the BRC is in there as a reference. By the time you are established in the pattern, your cues should be visual and not instrument based. Happy landings!

Fair enough. I sort of mentally compared the marshal stack to a holding pattern in civilian life. In the real world, when you're issued holding instructions by ATC they include an 'expected further clearance time,' which is for use in the event you go NORDO. Otherwise, you don't leave the hold until ATC issues a clearance. So that first time, I was expecting to hear a clearance to commence from the boat. I was a P-3 guy in the Navy IRL about twenty years ago, so I don't have any experience flying around the boat IRL. I always imagined the boat would issue the clearance to commence, since they can see everyone on radar and know if the intervals are good.

Sorry to be answering this a year late: Yes, it is possible to do that in the ME. In the README are the permissions for anyone to modify the files as they wish. The only caveat is that it remains freeware. I don't play MP, so I won't be doing said adjustments myself, but anyone who wants to has my okay. SIDE NOTE: I posted it in another thread, but I'll mention it here as well. After a long absence from the game, I've recently fired it back up and was pleased to find this mission pack still working as advertised. In the past, DCS updates have had an unfortunate tendency to break mods.

I'm only guessing, but the marshal pattern for Case-1 originates right on top of the carrier and extends out to the port side. My suggestion would be to try passing right over the top of the deck at about 2000' or so, and see what happens. If you get the Charlie call then you can do one descending lap to port and overfly again at 800' for the break. I haven't really experimented with it, but offsetting from the ship too far to starboard may cause you to miss a trigger in-game. Again, I'm only guessing here. Although I will say, it works fine for me at either marshal altitude or just coming in for the break after the 10 mile call. I get the charlie signal as I go over the top of the boat either way, no problems. Try going right over the top of the deck if you haven't already, and see what happens. Hope you get it working for you. My biggest gripe about DCS is that everything seems to be an 'early release', a 'beta', or what not, and buggy as hell. I think the whole game would benefit if the devs put the brakes on 'new stuff' for a while and concentrated on finishing / polishing what's already out, but that's neither here nor there.

Update: Just returned to DCS after a lengthy absence, and fired up the mission pack. I was half-expecting it to be 'broken' in light of the numerous updates over the past year, but I was pleasantly surprised to find all the missions still loading and working as they should. My original plan to convert the mission files over to the Teddy Roosevelt SC have been scrapped. What I've found is that with the exception of the deck crew, the SC stuff works for the Stennis as well, and since there is only one carrier-based mission where you don't start on the catapult to begin with, the deck crew becomes superfluous to a degree anyhow. So, the bottom line is that I'm going to leave the package alone, for now. In the near future here I may look at making some more missions, perhaps some standalone ones, using the SC module. When the LANTIRN mod for Jester is out and fully functional, I may tweak a couple of missions in this pack. A couple of them practically beg for that LANTIRN pod and some smart bombs. The mission pack is still downloadable from the DCS website, right where I left it. Ciao!

"Talk to me, Goose!"

Yeah, the AI for wingmen needs a lot of work. Especially the part where they jettison all their stores the first time they get shot at, inbound to the target.

I only waited once in the stack for my expect time. After it came and went with no call to commence, I just commenced on my own and figured the game was set to let me head in when I want. Since then, I call established, do a procedure turn of some sort to get lined up on BRC, then make the commence call and have at it. Works like a champ in SP. I suppose in MP you'd need some coordination so everyone isn't coming down the rails on top of each other.

I'm not having this issue. Are you flying over the top of the ship after your 10 mile call? I think that's the trigger for the charlie call. I've noticed also that it can be a little time late if I overfly the ship 'hot', say at about 500 knots or so heading into the tuck-under.

That is correct as far as I've seen. Replaying some of my old missions after buying the SC module, trying to decide if I wanted to convert the carrier from Stennis to the SC. Turns out the only thing missing from the Stennis is the deck crew, as far as I can tell, so I've decided to just leave them as-is.

Good thinkin'

Or just post it in this thread. :thumbup:

Deliberately ignore the LSO, and not only will you not be flying around the Boat any longer, you won't be flying in the navy any longer. A FNAEB would really be just a formality at that point- getting the paperwork done. CAG would have your wings in his desk drawer about 10 minutes after you un-assed the jet, and you'd be on your way to your new non-flying billet. It's not like the movies where you get a mulligan and a hi-five for buzzing the tower and making the air boss spill coffee on himself.

There was a good Burke mod but it was broken by an update a few months ago.

Just curious, and not a criticism of any sort. Are you guys RL pilots or pure sim pilots?

+1

Did the latest update and fired up the most third-party-mod-heavy of the missions in the mission pack. Nothing broken this update! :thumbup:

Yeah, there are lots of mods in lots of games that need much better README files. I think sometimes modders get so familiar with a game and its file structure that they forget that other people (especially newcomers) may have no idea about how that stuff is set up. Hell, even if I've been away from a particular game for a while and come back to it, especially with new mod content, I have to go back and relearn all that stuff, especially the quirks.

Back at home now. Planning to go into the ME and remove all third party mods from this mission pack in order to preserve it before I do any further DCS updates. One thing I've noticed is that when an update borks a mod, you can't even load the file in the ME after that. That way, when the carrier module is released and so forth, I can do the 2.0 update I'm planning using the current missions as templates. I might even take a swing at turning them into a campaign. In the meantime, I'm curious if anyone posting issues with the third party mods loading up ever resolved their issues. As a gamer, I know the default thing when you solve an issue is to press on and play, and post no more. So did anyone having issues fix the issues, or just give up? Feedback will help me with future versions going forward, especially when it comes to writing README files and installation instructions.

+1, And some functionality to be able to program a defined course and speed between waypoints, and having the ME present back to us information such as how long the travel time will be between waypoints at the chosen speed. If I want to put a group on a 270 course, there should be a place I can type in 2-7-0 and not have to move the damn waypoint around on the map just hunting for it.

Interesting.

I think Jester is a movie fan, not 'in the world', so to speak. Echoing what others have said, what you guys have done with the Jester AI is totally revolutionary. As we go forward, we know he's going to get better and better.