Stennis Carrier ME Limited to Only 4 Aircraft

[Preacher316]

I used to be able to put a quantity of 4 F18 on the ramp and 4 more F18, taking off from parking hot - all on the Stennis. ( 8 units total)

 

Now it limits me to only 4 aircraft.

 

Anyone else having this issue, or am I doing something wrong?

Edited February 27, 2019 by Preacher316

[BB.]

Same problem.

If groupID and unitID of carrier are the same number, only 4 aircraft can be put.

Therefore, by creating a group including multiple units before creating the carrier, I was able to avoid it.

Edited March 2, 2019 by BB.

[Preacher316]

Strange, but it works, Created the aircrafts first, then added the carrier and put 4 on ramp and four from parking hot. All eight are on the carrier. Quirky, guess the first time I got lucky one way and tried putting them after the carrier was created when I tried the second time, and it didn't work. Thanks for the tip.

[Adrian858]

I'm unfortunately plagued by the same issues and trying to find a work-around.

 

I went to update a lot of missions (30+) yesterday to include the F-14B and it appears that any missions previously made prior to February with a Carrier already placed suffer from this issue. It's frustrating as a large majority of my missions have a template that I built before this issue with various statics already on the Stennis, and an escort of ships (including the Tarawa with the Harrier / Huey's, etc). The only temporary work around was to move 4 F/A-18's from Ramp to Runway, create 4 F-14B's to Air start beside the Carrier, then move those 4 to the Ramp. The thing that I hate about this most, is that because the F/A-18's are on the Runway (Cats), they're hot started, which is not exactly ideal for the missions I have.

 

Now, any missions that I built from scratch last month by building a new template, it worked as it did months back, where you can put 8+ in the Ramp positions. One mission in the Persian Gulf has 4 F/A-18's, 2 Huey's, and 4 F-14B's in the Ramp positions without any issues.

 

I've been banging my head against the wall trying to figure out how to make it work again with 'older' missions with the Stennis already placed...

 

I've tried the following:

-Create 4 F-14B's separately OR in the same group starting in the air, when moving any of them to the Stennis, they get placed at the nearest airport / base if 4 F/A-18's are on the Ramp. Even with a temporary Waypoint placed down as suggested in another post.

-Change F/A-18's to F-14's, moved all static objects (set to offset fixation and linked to Stennis) to the middle of the boat. Still couldn't put any other Client aircraft on the Ramp.

-Remove 2 F/A-18's from the Group in the Ramp or Runway, place 1 F-14B in the air, then move to Ramp, fine, then when attempting to increase the F-14B group, I get an error stating "no parking for this aircraft."

-Move the 4 F/A-18's to Runway, create a group of 4 F-14B's and place them to Ramp. This works, but now I'm stuck with F/A-18's Hot starting on the Runway / Cats which I'm really hoping to avoid, especially when a couple of my missions have AI aircraft taking off from the Stennis at mission start.

-Create new Aircraft Carrier, move or create F/A-18's and place them on the Ramp, no issues, move or create F-14's and place them on the Ramp with the F/A-18's no issues. Even went to put 4 AV-8B's on the Ramp without any problems, 12 aircraft in total on the Ramp (highest I've checked).

-Also attempted changing the Stennis in the group to another ship type, then back, but the issue is the same (was hoping it would be like the E-2 when the SA update came out).

 

 

 

I'd rather not spend a full day re-creating the Battlegroup in each of my missions in the hopes that this bug will be resolved, or unless someone has found a more feasible way of making a previously placed Stennis work as a newly created one that allows for more than 4 aircraft on the Ramp.

 

 

ED, please make the Stennis great again!

Edited March 14, 2019 by Adrian858

[AG-51_Razor]

+1 for this!! I would like to see if ED could create parking slots on the flight deck within the landing area and let the mission builders deal with it. It is such a waste of space to have only 4 or 5 parking spots on the ramp. Let the mission builders decide where the a/c will spawn from by assigning the slots to the individual a/c. Make each one big enough for a Tomcat and we should never spawn bumping into one another.

[Bruce_D]

I’ve managed to solve this problem. I’ve opened the mission file (.miz) and changed the information inside “mission” so the aircraft can start on the carrier. I put 11 planes to start on the deck and worked

[AG-51_Razor]

I believe that the issue is, regardless of how many planes the ME allowed you to place on the carrier, only a maximum of 7 (breathers) will spawn. 4 on the cats and 2 on the #2 elevator, 2 on the #4 elevator and 1 on the #3 elevator. Anyone else trying to come in will be told that their flight has been delayed until the catapult(s) have been vacated and at least one of the "ramp starts have moved off of their spots.

 

My wish is to see ED place numbered parking spots on the flight deck, just like they have on an airfield, to allow the mission builder to decide where each plane will spawn. If they are able to allow placement of an a/c on a catapult, I just can't see why it could be any more difficult to allow us to place the spawn point on a specific parking spot on the flight deck, regardless of where it is. :thumbup:

[ScopeDope]

My wish is to see ED place numbered parking spots on the flight deck, just like they have on an airfield, to allow the mission builder to decide where each plane will spawn. If they are able to allow placement of an a/c on a catapult, I just can't see why it could be any more difficult to allow us to place the spawn point on a specific parking spot on the flight deck, regardless of where it is. :thumbup:

 

Yes! I can only hope that some day when they make animated deck crew, they don't just slap that feature on and polish a turd. I hope they really put some thought into allowing a working, launch - recovery deck sequence. As is, putting multiple AI on the deck is a recipe for disaster, taxiing explosions etc.

[VFA41_Lion]

You can spawn at least 10 aircraft cold start on the carrier, but for some reason this only works in missions originally created before mid-February. Mission attached to demonstrate

12 plane spawn demo.miz

[ScopeDope]

You can spawn at least 10 aircraft cold start on the carrier, but for some reason this only works in missions originally created before mid-February. Mission attached to demonstrate

 

When I load your miz, I don't see any aircraft units at all...

[Dutch Baron]

Yes please fix this ED.

There have been so many groups starting Naval OPS now and for us in the CVW-88 we need 6 carriers to spawn 24 clients.

Would be so nice if ED would acknowledge the issue at let us know they are working on a solution.

[dudeman17]

We should be able to place client aircraft on the carrier just as we can with the static aircraft. it would allow for tons of spawns and choice of parking locations depending on the flight.

[Dino Might]

When will this be fixed?

 

Extremely frustrating for mission designers wanting to incorporate naval ops.

 

This should be a #1 priority, as it is core gameplay breaking.

 

I don't care that my Hornet gets ATFLIR or JSOW sooner if I can't fly it off the boat.

[Tomsk]

Had the "no parking for this aircraft" problem, found a workaround:

 

- Drag the aircraft group off the carrier, onto a nearby airfield.

- Change the size of the group

- Drag it back onto the carrier.

- Profit.

Edited June 9, 2019 by Tomsk

[lharv71]

Work Arounds

 

We should not have to be finding work arounds for an issue that has been ongoing for such a long duration. As an avid Mission designer, it is a real pain for developing realistic missions. Reality is I should be able to have both AI and client players flying off the carrier for missions.

 

Further to this issue I am continually getting a collisions from AI aircraft placed in parking spots, esppecially F-14B. I am attaching a diagram of actual parking spots on an US Aircraft Carrier which does not match what ME has available?

 

 

I do respect the fact that you are swamped and your work is truly amazing, but reading back through this thread I noticed one person found a simple work around by changing the mission fil, however many mission creators do not know or understand how to do that......

 

 

Thanks Guys

 

Ozzy

 

 

 

[Mars Exulte]

Problem is the Stennis is a 3d model update only, they didn't really change anything about the woefully outdated mechanics. Remember we only recently got unit icons and numbered parking for airfields! We know they're working on carriers and ATC right now, so hold tight!

[lharv71]

Work Arounds

 

Thanks for the update it is very much appreciated!

 

Oz

[Shotsx74]

If you make each "Group" only one aircraft, you can get as many planes on there as you want. The issue is making the group and flight of 3 or 4 or 2, is that it actually counts those as taking up space even though no one may be in them.

 

Just do single flight groups

[Grimes]

If you make each "Group" only one aircraft, you can get as many planes on there as you want. The issue is making the group and flight of 3 or 4 or 2, is that it actually counts those as taking up space even though no one may be in them.

 

Just do single flight groups

 

Getting the error with placing more than 4 aircraft on the ship or as a group was fixed.

[Utildai]

I'm having a problem today in the ME placing 18's on the Stennis. I've tried both the group and the single plane option. However, the ME wants to place the 18's off of the carrier when I want them to start on the ''ramp''.

 

It literally places them roughly 50 yards off the carrier.

 

Any idea?

[Baco]

ES should give us e the possibility to place client aircraft in a manner similar to Start on round, but Start on Ship, and let the Mission Editor deal with logistics and how the deck flow will go. I understand that it is imposible with AI, but at least Clients