TeTeT's Vietnam War Vessels

[TeTeT]

21 minutes ago, SickSidewinder9 said:

Might wanna update the link in the OP.  Maybe just link to the releases section?  Last time I checked it, it was 2 versions old.  So maybe I just downloaded the same old version.  Haven't played with the new one yet.

Great idea, I changed the download URL to the releases.

[TeTeT]

Trying different planes than the A-4 on Bon Homme Richard. Fixed the cat position forward in latest dev build to accomodate player driven F-14 and F-4. Still hitting a block trying to launch the Panther... [EDIT]: water injection was missing, then the Panther launched upon full throttle as well!

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by TeTeT
add resolution to Panther launch

[SickSidewinder9]

You are unstoppable!

[TeTeT]

Currently facing two distinct problems that needs to be addressed:

1. The hit/bda between plane and carrier happens upon landing and launch of player controlled aircraft
2. Not all planes can hook-up to the cat when starting from ramp/parking hot. Notably the A-4 and F/A-18 seem to work, but neither F-4 nor F-14 work

Not sure when and if those problems can be overcome, stay tuned.

Cheers,
TeTeT

[TeTeT]

And another update is out: https://github.com/tspindler-cms/tetet-vwv/releases Version 0.2.4.

Changelog

2023-12-15
  Bon Homme Richard
    - New collision shell, 50cm thick
    - Adjust DM to new collision shell
    - Move cat position forward for large aircraft (F-14, F-4)
    - Add sensor.height setting 

The thicker collision shell does allow the F-4B to land and launch (at least from Runway).

Unfortunately neither the F-14 nor the F-4 hook-up reliably to the cat. We're still investigating. Also the hit/bda spam in the mission debrief is still present.

Enjoy,
TeTeT

[seabat]

Was setting up various things in Mission Editor and the Bonnie Dick and wanted to see how night ops looked.   Deck was kinda dark so I took some lights from Massun's mod and placed them on the island.  Light was harsh but did add to the effect and gave me some better visibility.  Got the idea from Admirals boat topic posts.

seabat

Edited December 18, 2023 by seabat

[Woogey]

Good Morning Tetet,

Just my two cents, but I wouldn't worry too much about trying to make aircraft that never operated from these ships compatible with your beautiful mod.  Loving the texture updates! 

-Preston

[SickSidewinder9]

1 hour ago, Woogey said:

Good Morning Tetet,

Just my two cents, but I wouldn't worry too much about trying to make aircraft that never operated from these ships compatible with your beautiful mod.  Loving the texture updates! 

-Preston

Some may feel differently since it's only a game, but I totally agree.  No reason to waste time on Teen Series planes.  An Essex class could barely even handle an F-4 (and I guess didn't normally?).

[Tengah]

Desperately in need of the F-8.  Nuff said.

[Hawkeye60]

There is a F-8 in progress.

A Virtavia Vought F-8 Crusader

with the authors permission to port to DCS.

Once ready, @TeTeT

will get a copy to test!

With thanks to @Spino for getting the permissions.

and converting the textures to DDS format.

[TeTeT]

That's great news, Hawkeye60, a F-8 will fit the Bon Homme Richard very well. For Arma 3 NightIntruder and I had ported the F-8 from FSX from https://royalefrenchnavy.restauravia.fr/ . It's a great plane and I had lots of fun with it back in the day in Wings over Vietnam.

On the use of F-4 and F-14s on the CVA-31 flight deck, I don't see a proper reason why it doesn't work. But it doesn't. This annoys me more than anything else currently, so I'm looking for a solution, no matter that either type was flown regularly from Essex carriers.

Cheers,
TeTeT

[Scotty Rotten]

Pretty great we've snatched one of ArmA's biggest modders  

[Spino]

1 hour ago, TeTeT said:

On the use of F-4 and F-14s on the CVA-31 flight deck, I don't see a proper reason why it doesn't work. But it doesn't. This annoys me more than anything else currently, so I'm looking for a solution, no matter that either type was flown regularly from Essex carriers.

Well in the case of the F-4, your mileage may vary.  Not sure what to say about the F-14, it's an official module so I would think it would work if anything would.  Odd issue to have that they don't hook to the cat.

[SickSidewinder9]

What actually is the problem, they don't line up with the JBD's?  Maybe they didn't IRL.  And the cat hookup is different, as we discussed.

[toan]

Hi, I'm using the CV-31 and USS Maddox, and think they are really great assets. I am testing VSN F-4 and community A-4E-C Mods, as AI only planes. Both launch correctly from both cats, if they are in a single unit group. However, none can trap on the carrier. They systematically get a WONSUX grade from the LSO ("Wave Off Non Set Up in the groove"). I've no idea why this is, because they all have the correct landing configuration (speed, and landing gear, flaps, hook all extended) when approaching the carrier. Any help much appreciated. Very nice work, indeed ! 

[seabat]

1 hour ago, toan said:

Hi, I'm using the CV-31 and USS Maddox, and think they are really great assets. I am testing VSN F-4 and community A-4E-C Mods, as AI only planes. Both launch correctly from both cats, if they are in a single unit group. However, none can trap on the carrier. They systematically get a WONSUX grade from the LSO ("Wave Off Non Set Up in the groove"). I've no idea why this is, because they all have the correct landing configuration (speed, and landing gear, flaps, hook all extended) when approaching the carrier. Any help much appreciated. Very nice work, indeed ! 

Out of curiousity since you did not list it in the landing configuration, what is the weight of the aircraft set at when you set them up for landing on the carrier?

I am checking some things for TeTeT and I noticed on some planes that aircraft weight causes the jet to stop at different distances.   For example the F4 Phantom would stop over the end of the deck at 100% fuel with tanks and would stop before the end of the deck at lower fuel weights.  I am curious if there is other parameters in DCS regarding carrier ops.

I tested various AI aircraft before the recent DCS update and all landed.   A-4E, F-4B, F-14, F-35, Harrier, E-2, C-2, F9F, Entenards, Rafael, A-6, EA-6, T-45 all landed as single AI.  Sometimes they would get a wave off but the next pass they would land. All set a around 20 to 25% fuel weight. Multi-aircraft groups would cause random results depending on the type.  The only one I tested that would not land was the OV-10 Bronco but I could not set up a carrier landing in the ME as it would always default to a land base.  It would take off from the runway with no problem which was kinda of cool.

Again this was BEFORE the last DCS update which I have not uploaded yet.  I plan to do that this weekend and then go through the tests again.

seabat

Edited December 21, 2023 by seabat

[TeTeT]

I just did a quick test, two out of eight A-4 landed for me without problem, the 3rd and 4th plane of the first flight however racked up failed landings.

Here is the trapping of 4-1:

[Hawkeye60]

There have been many reports of carrier ops issues  with the last few patches/up-dates.

Look around the forums.

The A-4 and SU-30 and a few others are causing issues.

If I had known that they would be this persistent,

I would have stayed with 2.8

Two patches after the main patch later....Still broken.

I am sure ED will get it all sorted.

My advise is to NOT up date yet.

Wait till they fix the carrier bugs.

Newy Knows.

I made a bug report.

See the DCS section of the forums.

 

 

[toan]

9 hours ago, TeTeT said:

I just did a quick test, two out of eight A-4 landed for me without problem, the 3rd and 4th plane of the first flight however racked up failed landings.

Here is the trapping of 4-1:

Hi, I forgot to mention that I use DCS OpenBeta 2.8.8.43704, because I didn't want to update to 2.9, considering the many bug reports   Well, my F-4 with 25% fuel and 4 AIM did trap now ! Thanks !  I'm currently tweaking the EssexRunwaysandRoutes.lua file, because the F-4 parks partly over the deck after landing (see snapshot below) and the routes to the parking slots sometimes go outside the deck, WIP.  Also, would it be possible to make the 2 small navigation radars on the mast to rotate ? That's a very realistic detail  Very nice Mods anyway ! Many thanks for your work ! 

Edited December 22, 2023 by toan

[Herk]

Any update on the meatball? Been using the mod and really enjoy it. Thanks for the hard work.

[toan]

Hi, USS Maddox escorting CV-31  I'm fiddling with routes on the deck to have landed aircraft in their parking slot, still WIP and only tested with the A-4  yet to test with the F-4  I also noticed that when the aircraft misses the wires and there is a bolter, it sinks into the deck and goes around for another circuit (see scree below) 

Edited December 22, 2023 by toan

[TeTeT]

18 hours ago, toan said:

Hi, I forgot to mention that I use DCS OpenBeta 2.8.8.43704, because I didn't want to update to 2.9, considering the many bug reports

...

 Also, would it be possible to make the 2 small navigation radars on the mast to rotate ? That's a very realistic detail  Very nice Mods anyway ! Many thanks for your work ! 

I have only developed and tested in 2.9.x so far and I feel failing forward is the way to go with DCS modding. E.g. stay on the latest and greatest open beta and make the best out of it.

I started to work on animated radars, but got side tracked by observing and attempting to fix the landing problems. Albeit no fix was found so far.

 

 

13 hours ago, Herk said:

Any update on the meatball? Been using the mod and really enjoy it. Thanks for the hard work.

Not really, as mentioned above the problems with landing were on the forefront of mind. I hope to get to the meatball next year.

 

4 hours ago, toan said:

Hi, USS Maddox escorting CV-31  I'm fiddling with routes on the deck to have landed aircraft in their parking slot, still WIP and only tested with the A-4  yet to test with the F-4  I also noticed that when the aircraft misses the wires and there is a bolter, it sinks into the deck and goes around for another circuit (see scree below) 

The F-4 never was stationed on Essex class carriers, so my focus was on the A-4 as well. Not that I didn't try to get the Phantom going ...

I've seen the sinking in the deck countless times, and wonder what setting controls it. Somehow the AI planes seem to rely on lua config and are not fully affected by the collision shells. Any advice welcome there!

I was pretty low on time this week, so no new update currently. But development will continue!

[toan]

15 hours ago, TeTeT said:

I have only developed and tested in 2.9.x so far and I feel failing forward is the way to go with DCS modding. E.g. stay on the latest and greatest open beta and make the best out of it.

I started to work on animated radars, but got side tracked by observing and attempting to fix the landing problems. Albeit no fix was found so far.

 

 

Not really, as mentioned above the problems with landing were on the forefront of mind. I hope to get to the meatball next year.

 

The F-4 never was stationed on Essex class carriers, so my focus was on the A-4 as well. Not that I didn't try to get the Phantom going ...

I've seen the sinking in the deck countless times, and wonder what setting controls it. Somehow the AI planes seem to rely on lua config and are not fully affected by the collision shells. Any advice welcome there!

I was pretty low on time this week, so no new update currently. But development will continue!

Ok, thanks !  Below is what I get when parking 6 aircraft that landed correctly on the carrier. still WIP Keep the good work on your very nice Mods ! 

Edited December 23, 2023 by toan

[TeTeT]

@toan I can clearly relate there. I must have watched hundreds of AI landings by now and the taxiing is sometimes ok, sometimes they go wide and overboard, sometimes they park just in impossible spots. I have not much of an idea what to do about it, unfortunately. Good luck, hope you find a way out of the landing+parking maze!

[toan]

10 minutes ago, TeTeT said:

@toan I can clearly relate there. I must have watched hundreds of AI landings by now and the taxiing is sometimes ok, sometimes they go wide and overboard, sometimes they park just in impossible spots. I have not much of an idea what to do about it, unfortunately. Good luck, hope you find a way out of the landing+parking maze!

Yes, I agree, I think the path followed by the aircraft after landing on the deck depends on : 1- the wire they catched, 2 - the routes defined in the LUA file, 3- the next free slot position  I watched a big difference in the way they reach the parking slot depending on the wire they catched. All this is definedion the various routes points. I know Joey45 is an expert at this. He has made some good job with various carriers, including the Hermes. I think he works with the Model Viewer. But my approach is really a time consuming trial and error process modifying the points coordinates in the Routes LUA file...