MBot

I wouldn't be surprised if our version of the F-4E wasn't wired for AIM-9L/M at all. In which case the AIM-9P is the most everybody gets.

Same here. The servers that historically reflect wars like Vietnam and the Middle East wars of the 60s and 70s would have weapon restrictions, but the Phantom (or at least some version of it) will be right at home in more modern environments using all-aspect heaters, countermeasures and PGM's. There's so much potential for this module. Even in the 1980s, frontline USAF F-4E were only using rear-aspect AIM-9P and AIM-7E.

Very interesting. Would you say then that the primary method of bombing was still manually with the depressible pipper? I assume with ARN-101, CCIP became the primary mode?

Thank you @Tengu, excellent overview. This should be the reference post for the subject.

Here are some birds of the 57th Fighter Weapons Wing at Nellis AFB, Nevada, which we have the right map for in DCS. Operated F-4E for training, testing and evaluations 1969-1985. DMAS aircraft in SEA camo, 1980. Pre-DMAS aircraft in SEA camo, 1981. Pre-DMAS aircraft in Europe One camo, 1984.

And here are some notable Cold War units with late DMAS aircraft: 3rd Tactical Fighter Wing, Clark Air Base, Philippines. Final combat deployment with 6 F-4E to Desert Storm. 52th Tactical Fighter Wing, Spangdahlem Air Base, Germany. From 1983 on the dedicated European air defense suppression wing with a F-4E/G hunter-killer mix until 1987. 4th Tactical Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson Air Base, North Carolina. 1980-1991 this wing was committed to the Rapid Deployment Force for the deployment of two squadrons within 48 hours to anywhere in the world. So this unit would fit any DCS map.

So many skins important skins for the Phantom... Ok, here are some notable/interesting pre-ARN-101 Cold War frontline liveries: 57th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Keflavik, Iceland. Defending Iceland from Soviet bombers 1978-1985. Southeast Asia camo. 57th Fighter Interceptor Squadron, Keflavik, Iceland. Air Defense Command camo. 11th Tactical Fighter Wing, Elmendorf AFB, Alaska, 1977-1981. Southeast Asia camo. 526th Tactical Fighter Squadron, Ramstein Air Base, Germany, 1973-1986. Wraparound SAE camo.

Do you have details on the Pave Spike stabilization? I was under the impression that was is only gyro stabilized, so would need to be held on a fixed point by hand (like the sight in the Hind).

Incredible news, this makes me so happy! For me this is the most significant DCS module development in years. I think this is really the best possible outcome for the Phantom. Not only is it made by Heatblur, which in my oppionion are the leading module developer in DCS and are clearly ahead of everyone else in AI multicrew. This will also settle the endless variants discussions with not one but two -E variants and the naval version down the line. I could not be happier.

If content creators would want to use this in paid DLC, I would be ok as long as I would be credited appropriately. Of course everybody can use the script for free missions. I doubt that ED would incorporate this into the core game. There is a ton of workarounds for basic game limitations in the code, which would be better fixed on the game side instead. I hope (and expect) that ED at some point will properly add these capabilities on their own. We definitely need the minimum distances for dive bombing gone. The AI needs to be able to dive on the target right from rolling out of the apex of the pop-up maneuver.

The purpose of this script is to enable the AI to perform efficient air-ground attacks using level, dive, pop-up and offset pop-up tactics. The general idea is that the AI flights must be able to ingress and egress smoothly, when needed adjust altitude quickly, attack multiple targets simultaneously and not do any unnecessary maneuvering in the target area. Get in, strike and get out quickly, especially in a high threat environment. Many elements of this script are not new and as various Custom Attack scripts have been part of my Dynamic Campaign Engine for a long time. Some weeks ago, I realized that it is possible to script advanced offset pop-up attacks tactics. The general idea is that by using Aerobatics tasks it is possible to maneuver the AI from low level through the pop-up and put it into a position from where it can perform the native DCS AI dive attack. While this new offset pop-up attack tactic is the main attraction, I decided that it would be worthwhile to clean up my older attack scrips, condense everything into a single multi-purpose script and release it to the public. (all scenes show a single AI-flight) Features: Realistic offset pop-up attacks from low level which have not previously been possible using default DCS AI behavior. This allows AI aircraft to approach targets at low level in cover from high/medium range SAMs, then pop-up to attack from above the AAA threat, thus greatly increasing AI survivability in high-threat environments. Ability to set-up various traditional level and dive attack profiles. Depending on ingress-egress geometry, aircraft in a flight can perform offset pop-up attacks from one or two sides. Each aircraft is able to attack its own sub-target element independently, allowing simultaneous attacks of all aircraft in a flight against multiple vehicles, ships, static objects or scenery objects. With default DCS AI behavior this has not been possible for static or scenery objects. After weapons release, all aircraft in a flight will perform a hard turn towards the egress direction and proceed towards the egress point individually, where the flight will form up again. This eliminates standard DCS AI behavior where flights will try to reform directly after weapon release, leading to unnecessary maneuvering in the target area. This also means that all aircraft are free to immediately climb/descend back to safe altitude after weapon release (default DCS AI behavior means that the flight leader is unable to change altitude until all wingmen have rejoined, leading to lingering at weapon release altitude over the target area). Works for full AI flights and for AI wingmen of human players. Mission Editor Instructions: Include the “AirGroundAttackScript.lua” with a "Do Script File" trigger in your mission. At the waypoint where you want your flight start the attack, under Advanced Waypoint Actions, add a Run Script action. Insert the following code to this action: AirGroundAttackTask(FlightName, Target, WeaponType, ExpendQty, Dive, OffsetAngle, ClimbAngle, PopAlt, AttackDist, Reattack) Function argument description: FlightName "Aerial-1" Group name of flight that is tasked to attack Target -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 -Option 4 "Ground-1" {"StaticName-1", StaticName-2", StaticName-N"} {{x = 123, y = 123}, {x = 456, y = 456}} {x = 123, y = 123} Four types of ground targets can be attacked (vehicles/ships, static objects, scenery objects, parked aircraft/helicopters) Vehicles/Ships: Group name of vehicle or ship group Static Objects: Object name of static object, listed in {} (a single static objects also needs {} ). Scenery Objects: x-/y-coordinate of scenery object in {}, listed in {} (a single scenery objects needs double {{}} ). Parked aircraft or helicopters: x-/y-coordinate in {}. Stationary aircraft or helicopters within 5000 m of this coordinate will be attacked. WeaponType -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 -Option 4 -Option 5 -Option 6 -Option 7 "Auto" "Cannon" "Rockets" "Bombs" "Guided bombs" "ASM" number Weapon type for the attack Automatic weapon type selection (note: might lead to gun strafing) Attack with gun Attack with unguided rockets Attack with unguided bombs Attack with guided bombs Attack with guided missiles Alternatively, the internal DCS code for certain weapon types or combinations of weapon types may be entered as a number ExpendQty -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 -Option 4 -Option 5 -Option 6 -Option 7 "Auto" "One" "Two" "Four" "Quarter" "Half" "All" Number of weapons to be expended per attack run Automatic selection of number of weapons to be expended Expend one weapon Expend two weapons Expend four weapons Expend 1/4 of weapons carried per type Expend 1/2 of weapons carried per type Expend all weapons carried per type Dive -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 true false nil Whether a dive attack is performed Perform a dive attack (when possible) Perform a level attack (when possible) Perform a level attack (when possible) OffsetAngle -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 number 0 nil Offset turn to side prior to pop-up maneuver Angle in degrees of offset turn (enter positive number only, offset side is determined by egress geometry) Do not perform an offset turn Do not perform an offset turn ClimbAngle number The climb angle in degrees for any pop-up climb (climb angles smaller than 15 are not possible) PopAlt -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 number 0 nil Pop-up maneuver prior to attack Height in meters above target to which a pop-up shall be performed Do not perform a pop-up maneuver Do not perform a pop-up maneuver AttackDist -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 number nil nil Distance from target where a pop-up maneuver shall be completed (if no pop-up maneuver is performed, this is ignored and attacks will be initiated immediately) Distance in meters (useful to set a specific distance for weapons with stand-off range such as missiles and heavy rockets) When attacking with bombs, the distance will be calculated automatically in order to keep to pop-up as short as possible When attacking with rockets, a generic distance is selected automatically that works with the most common rocket types Reattack -Option 1 -Option 2 -Option 3 true false nil Whether aircraft egress after the first attack or return for subsequent attacks Repeat attacks as long as weapons and targets remain Egress after first attack Egress after first attack Several demo missions are attached for your convenience, where you can see how the script is used in practice. Notes and known issues: The offset pop-up attacks have been scripted to be as realistic and smooth as possible. You will note that when attacking with bombs, after climbing and rolling into the target, AI aircraft will fly level for 10+ seconds before starting to dive. This unfortunately is due to the way the DCS AI is set up and is unavoidable, as the AI needs a certain distance from the target to attack it. This level flight part has carefully been scripted to be as short as possible for any given speed and altitude (if it is made too short, the AI will turn around and return from a longer distance). You will notice that when attacking with rockets, the AI is able to dive on the target instantly. Offset side for a pop-up attack is automatically selected based on egress direction. If the egress waypoint is in the right quarter of the target, aircraft will offset left and attack towards the right (and vice versa). If the egress direction is either in the quarter ahead or behind of the target (from where the flight came from), the flight will split and make a pincer attack from left and right simultaneously. The next waypoint after the attack waypoint (where the attack is tasked) is automatically selected as the egress waypoint. Alternatively, if any waypoint is named “Egress”, it will be selected as egress waypoint instead (this way you can have the attack waypoint ahead of the target, a waypoint at the target itself and the next waypoint named “Egress” away from the target). Aircraft in a flight will slightly modulate offset angle, climb angle and pop-up altitude in order to create timing separation over the target. The script also works for AI wingman of a human player. Set up the task for the player flight in the Mission Editor exactly the same as for an AI flight. During the mission, before reaching the attack waypoint, order “Attack Mission Target and Rejoin” via the radio. Your AI wingmen will perform their attacks as set-up, proceed to the egress point and then form up with you again without any further commands required. I made a very big effort to accurately calculate the maneuver geometry for pop-up attacks. As the execution of this maneuvers by the AI is highly depending on many factors (such as aircraft type, speed, altitude, weight, AOA, available Gs, turn radius as well as some DCS bugs), there might be cases where the AI will not be in the anticipated position when rolling out on the target and not initiate an attack. Hopefully it will be rare, but better first verify that any combination of aircraft type, weapons, offset angle, climb angle, pop-up altitude etc. works correctly. Offset pop-up attacks over uneven terrain might be problematic. There seems to be a DCS bug that minimum attack distance is depending on aircraft height above terrain below the aircraft, instead of aircraft height above the target. This means that pop-up maneuvers may fail to lead to the AI initiating an attack if they are over higher terrain than the target elevation at that moment. Higher targets (such as on a hilltop) with pop-ups over lower ground are not affected by this problem. The attack geometry is actually always calculated correctly and takes target elevation into account. I hope this script will help you to make the AI in your mission behave a little more realistic during air-ground attacks and be more survivable in high-threat environments. AirGroundAttackScript.lua AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_OffsetPop_Static_Rockets.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_Dive_Scenery_Bombs.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_Pop_Scenery_Bombs.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_Pop_Ship_ASM.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_OffsetPop_Vehicle_Rockets.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_OffsetPop_Airbase_Rockets.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_OffsetPop_Vehicle_Bombs.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_OffsetPop_Vehicle_ASM.miz AirGroundAttackScript_Demo_Level_Scenery_GuidedBombs_Repeat.miz

We recently found this server and are enjoing this very much. Thank you! A small tibit you might want to consider. I assume the Viggen is intended to represent a Cold War era AJ 37 (the AJS 37 modification is from the 90s). In this case, Rb24/Rb24J Sidewinders should be restricted to the two fuselage pylons. The AJ 37 was not wired to carry Sidewinders on the 4 wing pylons.

Setup of attached test mission: -Flight consisting of Aerial-1-1 and Aerial-1-2 -Final waypoint at carrier -Night 1 second into the mission, Aerial-1-2 is tasked with an orbit task with a stop condition after 10 seconds. After task completion, Aerial-1-2 will return to the carrier instead of forming up with the leader again as would be correct behaviour. Please do the following mutations: -Set time to day -> Wingman will return to leader (correct) -Set time to day and add fog -> Wingman will return to carrier (incorrect) -Change flight final waypoint from carrier to airbase (day or night) -> Wingman will return to leader (correct) Conclusion: CASE III conditions and carrier as homebase will cause an individual aircraft tasked with a task with stop condition to RTB after the task is finished instead of returning to group leader. StopConditionTask.miz

For the last two years I am working on major updates to the Dynamic Campaign Engine, as well as a big Tomcat campaign that will make full use of them. As always, things are often hampered by issues and bugs with the DCS AI, which is essentual for any dynamic campaign to work well. But there have been some important bug fixes to DCS for me over the past few months. Others are still outstanding and may or may not ever get fixed. Once the new campaign is finished and working I may revist Battle Group Delta and update it to the new standard. But it probably makes sense that this will include the AI A-6E.

Thread can be marked as resolved, thank you very much.

Can be marked as resolved. Thank you.

Thank you Heatblur for the wonderful Forrestal!

Yesterday evening we spent about 3 hours doing just rounds around the boat. Unfortunately I have to say that I have severe problems with lineup. I simply cannot see any deck markings until in-close. For most of the groove, the carrier just is a black hole. ICLS can be used as crutch, but it cannot replace seeing the orientation of the landing area for rolling out in the groove precisely. I understand that the deck weathering is realistic and it certainly looks awesome. But I suspect that this is a hardware problem, as VR displays do not yet have the clarity and brightness to emulate true human vision. As such I wonder if it is possible to make a technical compromise. Perhaps the lower LODs could be adjusted to make deck markings more visible from a distance, while preserving the great weathered look up close.

In DCS these are just spawn positions not tied to specific aircraft types. Still...

Fantastic update, huge thanks to Heatblur for the additional content.

First, a huge thanks to HB. This is a fantastic and very generous addition to DCS. The carrier looks beautiful. What I have found is that in VR, the datum lights and the ball are severely over-blooming. They even spill over when viewed from the bow: May I also make some suggestions in regards to the spawn positions? It seems that the Forrestal has taken the same approach as the Stennis and the SCs with the first flight at mission start spawning at the center of the deck (these spawn points only work at mission time 0 and wont be available into the mission): This setup often causes issues for me, as this blocks access to the catapults. Especially with AI this often leads to problems and stuck aircraft. May I suggest to move this spawn positions in front of the island as so? As you can see, there should be sufficient space available for that setup and it frees all aircraft to taxi. Personally, I would also re-arrange the numbering to give priority to the deck edge parkings, but that is just my preference. May I also suggest that you define additional "overflow" spawn positions at the stern of the ship? I know this will block the landing area, but don't think this is a problem. If numbered positions 13-20, they would only be used if the first 12 spawn positions are occupied. In single player the mission designer can coordinate landing aircraft if he wants to use these "overflow" positions. In public multiplayer I think it is extremely rare that more than 12 people will spawn simultaneously on a carrier. Organized multiplayer groups that might want to spawn with more than 12 players simultaneously will be able to coordinate launch and recovery operations.

That is actually the first time I have ever heard about the Phoenix only loadout. From what I have read so far, the standard loadouts were: 2x AIM-54A, 2x AIM-7E, 2x AIM-9P for the leader and 6x AIM-7E, 2x AIM-9P for the wingman. Phoenix stocks were limited so missiles were reserved for "important" shots. Sidewinders and Sparrows were part of the IIAF Tomcat's arsenal from the very beginning.

But that is the point, isn't it? Ships are the SAM systems in the naval environment. And DCS currently makes a rather spartan job at represeting different ships with different air defense capabilities. For DCS I am interested in ships primary in how they interact with the player flying an aircraft, either serving as target or by the air defense they put up. I agree that ASuW and ASW have no role in DCS and are much better served in other games. But I very much care about ships that affect my expierience in the cockpit. As a naval buff I would of course enjoy to see all possible classes of ships but that clearly is not realistic to expect from DCS. What I would like to see though is a smart selection of key ship classes that support our flyable aircraft in a meaningfull manner. This includes a high-low mix of capabilies for more diverse gameplay. For example for the Viggen I thought it would have been nice to have the second-line ships of the Soviet Baltic fleet which the Viggen would historcially have faced as targets and/or escorts. For the Tomcat I am interested in the CVBG escorts because they form the backbone of the carrier's defense (and also soak up a certain amount of inbound fire). Their performance has a direct overall impact on my primary mission in the aircraft's cockpit (defending the carrier). As I already mentioned, I primary look at pre-AEGIS scenarios (because AEGIS is so powerful that it makes fleet defense uninteresting from the cockpit's point of view), so the Tico and the Burke are unfortunately a no-go. Luckily, an all Perry escort screen is an ok-ish compromise in terms of air defense for the Cold War (e.g. overall amount of Standard SAM missile guidance channels available to the CVBG), so I can live with it. Still for the fidelity of the simulation it would be nice to see the differences in AAW capabilities that exist in the CVBG, such as the ASW ships that only have Sea Sparrow and/or Phalanx (Knox, Spruance) or the dedicated AAW cruisers with multiple missile guidance channels and Standard-ER SAMs. If I could pick just one ship to go with a Cold War carrier I would select a Leahy-class guided missile cruiser (among the most numerous AAW carrier escorts). If I had a second pick, I would select the Spruance-class DD for the low-end in air defense (most numerous ASW carrier escorts). Once we will get the A-6E, of course the focus will be on the major units of the Soviet surface fleet and their escorts, which were primary mission targets for the Intruder. If it is up to HB to create those ships or someone else I cannot say. I feel that we must be grateful that HB is offering the Forrestal at all. Perhaps a way to improve the situation would be to tone back on the very high level of detail of ground units/ships in general, which I think is just overkill. I know that some will not agree with this, but I would much rather have multiple ship classes which I can actually put to good use in missions than one extremely detailed ship to take nice up-close screenshots (carriers have some more leeway due to the up close nature we see from the cockpit).

From a gameplay point of view, the Ticonderogas don't make very interesting escorts. AEGIS type escorts basically make the battle group immune to anti-ship missile attacks (in DCS and probably also IRL for the most part). This in turn largely takes away any fleet defense responsibilities from the Tomcat. For the F-14 player, the pre-AEGIS era is much more interesting, as it puts fleet defense into the player's hand. Unfortunately this means we are left with only the Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates as carrier escorts. That is why I don't quite understand why all the members of the Forrestal class need to be modelled individually and won't be copy-pasted. E.g. we only get Forrestal initialy and might not get Saratoga, Ranger and Independence because they have slight differences. If the naval environment is so lacking that I have to suround my carriers with only OHP frigates, differences between members of the same class are the least of my problems...

Additional information: Single ship flights make a much more (too) aggressive orbit compared to multi-ship flights, all other things being equal. Orbit_Single_vs_Two.trk