jmarso

If the radar is in standby then it's not radiating and NO modes will work. Think of STBY as the equivalent of the radar being turned off.

Some of the 'problems' people are having with Jester aren't problems with Jester- it's that they don't understand the AWG-9 system and how it is designed to work. I suspect many don't understand the difference between active and semi-active radar homing missiles. You don't need to 'lock up' a target for a Phoenix shot. Have him put the radar in TWS mode with the proper scan range selected, and he'll designate the target hostile as necessary, and prioritize the target automatically. Select Phoenix, and when the hot trigger light comes on, you may fire when ready. As others have stated to my own edification, hold the trigger down for three seconds when firing, as this allows some sort of information transfer between radar and missile. The Phoenix is NOT designed to be launched in STT like a Sparrow, with the target 'locked up.' If you want to use the Phoenix close-in (inside of ten miles or so), put the missile in boresight mode, lock the target in PLM (not really necessary but I find it helps), align the boresight symbol with the target, and fire it. It will be active off the rail, and then behaves sort of like a 1000 lb AMRAAM. It's a friggin' beast in pitbull mode like this. Many times there is nothing left of the target after it hits.

Ideally, as planes return to the boat ( and assuming USS Boat is on BRC and green deck), the marshal controller will take aircraft into the stack from low-to-high as they arrive, and start them commencing with no delay unless there's already traffic. IRL there might be some tweaks to that accounting for a/c type and fuel states, or an aircraft with an emergency (critically lo fuel or combat damage), but that might be too much for the AI at this point. But what I don't need is to be given a push time in 20 or 30 minutes when there's nobody else in the stack and there's no conflicting traffic. Although realism is nice, this is still a game and ain't nobody got time for that. (Same reason I don't do 'cold starts' where I have to sit around for 8 minutes waiting for an INS to align.)

A bolter should be its own grade.

Safe to say you wouldn't get an OK underlined for snagging the 4-wire IRL. AFAIK, an LSO might hand that grade out 2 or 3 times in a career, and mostly to an admiral making his final trap or something- if it was a stellar pass.

Fuel density changes with temperature. Ballpark for jet fuel / JP is about 6.7 lb/gal on a standard day (15 deg C), give or take. So, on a hot summer day you are going to fill the tanks but show slightly less than a full bag on the gauges. On a cold winter day, you can fill the tanks and actually over-fuel the jet slightly in terms of weight, although you haven't magically made the tanks bigger- the fuel itself is just denser, is all.

Just a suggestion: try switching over to easy comms, do a little communicating, and then switching back .

I don't know how hard terrains are to do, but a map that included Iceland and part of the West Coast of Norway would be mostly geographic features, and very light on towns / cities and so on. The vast majority of said map would be open ocean.

Yass! For that we would need the upcoming Syria map, as well as a map of Norcape or the GIUK gap/Vestfjord , to fire up those "Hunt for Red October / Red Storm Rising" Cold-War-Gone-Hot scenarios!

Quit overloading the poor RIO! Throw the man a bone! ;)

TWS doesn't 'lock' targets, as if you are in STT. See the below thread, starting at about post #15, and this is explained there. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=275266&page=2

Man, just think of it: F-14A, F-8, A-6, A-7, and Forrestal. You've got a late Vietnam-era carrier and air wing, right there. All we need is a Vietnam map to go along with the MiG's that are already out there, and we could totally fire up Yankee Station. A working F-4 would just be icing on the cake.

Hmm. Cool. Well, I'll have to give that a whirl and see if I can't knock my kill-count with the Phoenix up a bit. :thumbup:

I really need the detent button in the hornet, but in the F-14 there is a solid audible 'click' when you come in or out of burner, and those nice analog fuel flow gauges are right there as well as a dead gieveaway. It would still be a nice to have, though, for those situations where you'd just like to make sure you were getting every last erg out of mil power without worrying about lighting the cans.

Interesting, I didn't know about that part. What's the reason for the 3-sec hold on the trigger? Does it have to do with letting the computer cycle over to the next target?

Bad idea in just about any jet, military or civilian.

I might be totally wrong on how this works, but you don't have to 'lock targets' (like in STT) for a Phoenix launch. You need to have Jester put the radar in TWS mode, and then select the Phoenix. Watch the targets on the scope: the radar automatically prioritizes and assigns them numbers, and when it's done you get the 'hot trigger' light on the ACM panel. Then you just pick your range for a better hit probability, and start shooting when you're ready. I usually don't let a Phoenix go at more than 60 NM, especially against a smaller target. Any of you RIO wizards types out there can correct me here, but this is how I do it and it works, although I don't seem to score a great many hits with the Phoenix.

Well that would explain it! Curse those lowest-bid aerospace companies!! :D That does leave me a bit confused though; the P in APU stands for 'power'. So what does the hornet APU do anyway? Just act as an air supply for engine start?

I'm finding this to be true as well, although to be honest I fly the 'Cat a helluva lot more than the hornet. I think the biggest issues with the Hornet when it comes to the pattern are the low aspect ratio wing (compared to a 'Cat with 20 degrees of sweep), and the slow power response on the engine. Angle of bank changes in the pattern in the Hornet seem to have more effect on lift, and then the slow power response when you adjust with power turns it into a game of chasing throttles settings around. I also notice when I make a power change in the Tomcat, when I set an RPM value it stays there. In the Hornet, I set an RPM value, and when I cross-check it a few seconds later it seems to have gained or lost a couple percent, which is not insignificant in that jet. To me, the engine response is the biggest problem in the hornet- it just seems godawful slow to spool up. Getting low in close in the Hornet is a damn death sentence- you're gonna hit the ramp.

Why wouldn't you use your APU if you wanted to shut down, since the Hornet is equipped with one?

Little trick: You can use OVGME as a mod manager, and build a mod with your walkman tracks. When an update comes out, disable all the mods via OVGME, do the update, and then re-enable them.

Ditto. I suspect a lot of guys who've gotten used to the B model and are doing good at carrier landings are going to have whole litters of brick kittens when they start ramp-striking that A-mod. ;)

Who's doing the A-7?

I'm probably an outlier here, but I'd love to see the A-7E and/or the F-8. That said, I'd like to see all modules already released fixed / finished before moving on to new stuff.

Weird; I've used it twice on a night approaches to the Stennis in my own missions and it worked fine. Haven't tried it to the SC yet. I want 'em to get the IFLOLS sorted out for the Big Cat!