Plane handler implementation questions

[Vampyre]

• In the video, the final parking area for the Hornet was in the Helo hole which is only used during CQ during workups to deployment and training RAG students. It would only be used during these periods due to there being far fewer aircraft on deck than normal. For cyclic and combat operations, that area would be filled with helicopters, an E-2 just forward of them and possibly some overflow from the junkyard. Will the AI be able to compensate for the area being occupied and will it know about the difference in setup?
• Similar to the previous question, I set up my decks with real life placement of static objects to enhance the immersion when operating on the ship. Will the plane directors be able to see and avoid static objects placed on the deck?
• Will mission builders have the option to disable catapults due to having static objects parked on them?
• Upon landing, a yellow shirt should have been standing next to the foul line to assist the pilot in the untangling of the wire from the hook if needed and direct the aircraft out of the LA to be de-armed. 
• In cyclic and combat operations, once out of the LA the aircraft would be directed to point its nose at EL1 (which was kept clear of parked aircraft specifically for this purpose) to be safed up and de-armed before proceeding to its parking area.  Additionally, in the same vein, there should be an arming step on the Cat. Will arming and de-arming be included at any point?
• In the video I couldn't help but notice that a lot of time was spent in the LA and when the jet finally got to its parking spot in the Helo hole its nose was sticking across the foul line into the LA. Anything crossing the foul line would cause a foul deck wave off of the next jet. Will this be issue refined further?
• The teleporting mechanic is a bit immersion breaking. Is that just a placeholder until a more realistic pushback mechanic can be implemented?

[draconus]

You'll find some answers in the pinned comment from Wags under his video:

 

[Tomcatter87]

Following this with great interest. On all pictures and videos I know, the area in front of the island is crowded with stuff. If I read Wags reply and the updated Supercarrier manual correctly, we wont be able to put static objects there, which would really be a pity. But it seems every plane thats headed to the back of the ship is supposed to taxi through there. Wish there was a way to avoid it.

[Vampyre]

Pinned comment from the video:

Answers to some common questions:

1- Link to updated Supercarrier Guide: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/228670-dcs-supercarrier-mini-updates/#findComment-5554122

2- We continue to tune how fast the deck crew taxies the aircraft out of the landing area. The video was WIP.

3- Once this aspect of SC is wrapped up, we'll certainly investigate using aspects of this technology for airbases.

4- A push back would involve gathering deck crew from the general area around the jet, all lined up on different parts of the jet with correct collision and physics, pushing animations in unison, and not interfering with other animations and functions. Regarding the automatic rotation, this is a needed gameplay concession, for now, based on avoiding collisions with nearby aircraft and minimizing time in the landing area when parking in the stern. We are investigating a more elegant solution.

5- Static objects can block the legs of a taxi route. So, be very mindful when placing static objects not to place them in the path of aircraft routes on the deck and the active deck crew.

6- Regarding the F-14, we are working with Heatblur to make this happen. It’s cutting it very close to be in the initial release of this feature, but if not, it will be soon after.

 

As to point number 4, we would normally only pushback the Legacy Hornets and occasionally an S-3B by hand. The other way to get an aircraft pushed into position is with a tow tractor. The E-2/C-2 had reverse pitch on their props and could push themselves back although, occasionally they would need a tractor assist depending on conditions. Every other aircraft on deck would be pushed into a parking position by tractor. We don't really need animation of a bunch of flight deck crew doing a pushback if we can accomplish the same thing with a single tow tractor and have that feature available for any future carrier-based module.

Point number 5 does not clarify whether static objects can be seen and avoided by the AI plane handler logic. looking further into the pathing in the manual, it seems the pathing is only set up for a clear deck Carrier Qualification deck setup. If I understand it correctly, putting static objects next to the island will cause problems the AI cannot compensate for. For cyclic/combat operations and even full deck CQ ops the area next to the island will have at least one E-2 and two to three helo's parked there. From what I have seen, that is standard practice for most modern Supercarriers from Kitty Hawk to the Bush with the exception being the Enterprise. Certainly, all the Nimitz class along with its Roosevelt and Reagan subclasses operated their decks this way.

Bush just after a cyclic recovery.

Lincoln for RIMPAC photo op

 

TR between cycles.

TR deck setup for UNREP/VERTREP.

 

Of note, in the photos, there is always something parked next to the island.

[Tomcatter87]

That's why I fear for our crowded (but realistic) flightdecks. Best thing would be if ED decided to move the taxi route to the landing area - in this video of Growler Jams you can see they do it this way, from min 4:50 on. 

 

Currently, AI flights taxi just through statics. So this would be a cosmetic issue, as long as player's planes are not directed into the statics. If statics in front of the island however block the taxi route and the new directors choose different parking spots, it might be useful to use a script (function "destroy") to clear elevators 1 and 2, the corral and the area right of Cat 1 of any static objects i order to get some parking space.  

Edited November 19, 2024 by Tomcatter87

[draconus]

5 hours ago, Vampyre said:

Point number 5 does not clarify whether static objects can be seen and avoided by the AI plane handler logic.

From another Wags comment:

Quote

They [directors] are aware of statics and will direct aircraft around them to get to a catapult. However, statics should never be placed along taxi leg routes or along catapult tracks.

Confusing, I know - interpret it as you wish. I guess it's still WIP and we'll have to see for ourselves first.

[MAXsenna]

Pinned comment from the video:
Answers to some common questions:
1- Link to updated Supercarrier Guide: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/228670-dcs-supercarrier-mini-updates/#findComment-5554122
2- We continue to tune how fast the deck crew taxies the aircraft out of the landing area. The video was WIP.
3- Once this aspect of SC is wrapped up, we'll certainly investigate using aspects of this technology for airbases.
4- A push back would involve gathering deck crew from the general area around the jet, all lined up on different parts of the jet with correct collision and physics, pushing animations in unison, and not interfering with other animations and functions. Regarding the automatic rotation, this is a needed gameplay concession, for now, based on avoiding collisions with nearby aircraft and minimizing time in the landing area when parking in the stern. We are investigating a more elegant solution.
5- Static objects can block the legs of a taxi route. So, be very mindful when placing static objects not to place them in the path of aircraft routes on the deck and the active deck crew.
6- Regarding the F-14, we are working with Heatblur to make this happen. It’s cutting it very close to be in the initial release of this feature, but if not, it will be soon after.
 
As to point number 4, we would normally only pushback the Legacy Hornets and occasionally an S-3B by hand. The other way to get an aircraft pushed into position is with a tow tractor. The E-2/C-2 had reverse pitch on their props and could push themselves back although, occasionally they would need a tractor assist depending on conditions. Every other aircraft on deck would be pushed into a parking position by tractor. We don't really need animation of a bunch of flight deck crew doing a pushback if we can accomplish the same thing with a single tow tractor and have that feature available for any future carrier-based module.
Point number 5 does not clarify whether static objects can be seen and avoided by the AI plane handler logic. looking further into the pathing in the manual, it seems the pathing is only set up for a clear deck Carrier Qualification deck setup. If I understand it correctly, putting static objects next to the island will cause problems the AI cannot compensate for. For cyclic/combat operations and even full deck CQ ops the area next to the island will have at least one E-2 and two to three helo's parked there. From what I have seen, that is standard practice for most modern Supercarriers from Kitty Hawk to the Bush with the exception being the Enterprise. Certainly, all the Nimitz class along with its Roosevelt and Reagan subclasses operated their decks this way.
Bush just after a cyclic recovery.

Lincoln for RIMPAC photo op

 
TR between cycles.

TR deck setup for UNREP/VERTREP.

 
Of note, in the photos, there is always something parked next to the island.

Why don't we have wake like that in the game?

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk