WISHLIST: Allow the F-4E Phantom II to take off from aircraft carriers

[gnomechild]

I think it would be really cool and fun if we had the option to plop the F-4E onto an aircraft carrier and the catapult could work, even with no animations. Probably wouldn't work with the super carrier but who cares.

Before people come in here with "it's not realistic" etc, don't bother I don't care.

Facts:

• The Navy variant of the Heatblur Phantom is YEARS away
• Naval aviation is the coolest and most badass form of aviation
• The F-4E Phantom II for DCS World by Heatblur is amazing and I want to fly it off the Forrestal.
• This would not diminish from the realism or depth of the simulation in any way because mission makers could just not put it onto an aircraft carrier and nobody would even know.

Thanks for coming to my thread. Heatblur, please consider this. I know it sounds like a joke but it really isn't

Edited June 10, 2024 by gnomechild

[ryu1940]

There are some amazing Naval liveries out there in the User Files section and I would absolutely love being able to take off and land on the HB Forrestal or ED Super Carrier. I definitely agree with you about the realism aspect. While it isn't realistic it would hold me over for the Naval Phantom which is likely many years away and it could be up to mission makers to decide.

I don't need to see any fancy animations either I'm happy to just be able to launch off the carrier and spawn on one without CTD.

 

Great idea!

 

[Tom Kazansky]

HB has confirmed that they will do a Naval Phantom as a separate module.

It would surprise me, if they did a fictional carrier F-4E (before/ever).

[gnomechild]

We've got DMAS, Early A/95GR, Eurotrucker, and A-6 at least before we see our beloved Navy Phantom. I am not patient enough for this. Getting the F-4 onto a boat is one line of lua, so whatever is needed to tell DCS it can ride a catapult surely can't be too difficult.

[ryu1940]

Launching this off a carrier would be so nice in a Marianas map mission.

[Kalasnkova74]

21 minutes ago, Tom Kazansky said:

HB has confirmed that they will do a Naval Phantom as a separate module.

It would surprise me, if they did a fictional carrier F-4E (before/ever).

In principle, I 100% agree with enabling carrier launch of the F-4E. However, I’m sure HB’s got their hands full fixing minor bugs with the Block 45 we have, publishing weapons and changes for the F-4E like integrating the refueling probe for the Kurnass , ANd rolling out the next block with DMAS and associated upgrades. Following this they’re working on a dedicated Naval variant, so IMO their team should be focused on knocking these out before catering to fun but fringe scenarios. 

[Christophe D]

Hoping it will be a Naval variant which was used at war and not some very late model.

[gnomechild]

43 minutes ago, Christophe D said:

Hoping it will be a Naval variant which was used at war and not some very late model.

Yes. I'm really hoping for an F-4B + J combo pack but if we only get one I'd like a B 

[Castor Troy]

Does the E variant have the landing gear to even do carrier landings? Or are they all the same.

[gnomechild]

7 minutes ago, Castor Troy said:

Does the E variant have the landing gear to even do carrier landings? Or are they all the same.

My understanding is they're all the same except the USAF nose gear doesn't extend and they have slightly larger tires 

[Zabuzard]

Does the E variant have the landing gear to even do carrier landings? Or are they all the same.

Parts of the gear system, including but not limited to the tires, are not cleared for carrier operations.

If you carrier-land regardless, you will put a lot of stress on the system and unless you are really good at it, it will likely even collapse.

The hook is identical though.

[Ramstein]

58 minutes ago, gnomechild said:

My understanding is they're all the same except the USAF nose gear doesn't extend and they have slightly larger tires 

the USAF F-4 while doesn't break on landings, did have a very small and light nose gear and wheel... they had both a 10 bolt and 12 bolt wheels (interchangeable). I spent so much time around them I picked up info about servicing many of the aircraft I was around...

Edited June 10, 2024 by Ramstein

[_BringTheReign_]

45 minutes ago, Zabuzard said:

Parts of the gear system, including but not limited to the tires, are not cleared for carrier operations.

If you carrier-land regardless, you will put a lot of stress on the system and unless you are really good at it, it will likely even collapse.

The hook is identical though.

Zabu I thought of you while I was doing this  

 

[Zabuzard]

I find the topic really amusing. I remember we had a meeting once where we discussed if we should model the tailhook feature for EA. Given that its not a carrier rated plane and even thinking about using the hook for anything other than airfield emergency landings is a sin.
We concluded that its top priority because it will be the very first thing DCS players will want to try out, lol. I could feel the SMEs shaking their heads slowly

Thanks for the suggestions in this thread. We will talk about it and see if there is something we can and want to do about it.
Its right though that our schedule is very packed.

[gnomechild]

7 minutes ago, Zabuzard said:

thinking about using the hook for anything other than airfield emergency landings is a sin

I will not repent!

7 minutes ago, Zabuzard said:

Thanks for the suggestions in this thread. We will talk about it and see if there is something we can and want to do about it.
Its right though that our schedule is very packed

Thank you! Y'all really are amazing. I understand it's a packed schedule and a silly request but even considering it means a lot. 

[ustio]

Does the E still retain the bridle hook?

[Biggus]

No bridle hooks on the USAF birds.

[Ramstein]

Nets were used very often in the USAF for aircraft with brake issues. This was when I was in TAC. Hooks not nearly as often on land.

Edited June 11, 2024 by Ramstein

[Dangerzone]

FWIW, my personal decision for a while now has been not to buy any more modules unless they can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, so no F4 for me. 

Thankfully all helo's fall into that category, and so can the C130. 

I don't know. There's something about carrier ops that have me hooked. Even though I have other non-carrier aircraft, I just tend not to fly them. What can I say? I guess I've fallen for the motto... 

Fly Navy

[gnomechild]

4 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

There's something about carrier ops that have me hooked.

null

[aaronwhite]

16 hours ago, Zabuzard said:

Parts of the gear system, including but not limited to the tires, are not cleared for carrier operations.

If you carrier-land regardless, you will put a lot of stress on the system and unless you are really good at it, it will likely even collapse.

The hook is identical though.

Can confirm the landing gear collapse. Just did a quick "I'll just try landing at Kutaisi without knowing what I'm doing" and managed to slam it down and only slightly bent the gear. Felt pretty carrier appropriate. 

[ryu1940]

more naval F-4 propaganda o7

[Victory205]

This would ruin my immersion.

[Oldcrow Jr. 62]

15 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

FWIW, my personal decision for a while now has been not to buy any more modules unless they can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, so no F4 for me. 

Thankfully all helo's fall into that category, and so can the C130. 

I don't know. There's something about carrier ops that have me hooked. Even though I have other non-carrier aircraft, I just tend not to fly them. What can I say? I guess I've fallen for the motto... 

Fly Navy

Yes the Navy and Air Force tested the C-130's on and off carries for about 20 times. But never developed further. This was for many reasons. So of which was that the Flight deck had to basically be empty, they landed and took off with minimal gross weights thus no capable for heavy loads. Plus, it would have been hard to train pilots to be carrier capable. But it's DCS, and people do wonky things all the time. For me personally, I'd stick to landing on land. Even with carrier capable A/C, my carrier skills leave a lot to desire...Dangerzone...falls for the Motto...named Dangerzone, I would have never guessed..Love Carrier ops, but growing up Air Force, I guess I'm basically land bound then....Have a good one DZ...

[r4y30n]

I can wait for the real navy bird and it’s a waste of time for HB to hack it into this one.