Comments on the New Crew for the Supercarrier Module

[Bonz]

I'm a former Naval Aviator... I flew from the USS Kitty Hawk on my first tour (A-7s) as a J.O. and I was a TAO (Tactical Action Officer) working in CDC (Combat Direction Center) during a later cruise aboard USS Nimitz. My point is that I have some experience with flight deck operations. I'm sure there are many others who fly in DCS with as much or more experience than I have. First, I'm very happy with DCS and the Supercarrier as currently put together, but a little confused by this latest addition... the new flight director crew members! I suspect that this is the first of many iterations in EDs development of the Supercarrier module. Generally speaking, launch operations seemed fairly well thought out with the avoidance of some static objects a notable exception. I found it intuitive and did not require the use of HELP ICONs or HELP TEXT once I understood how it worked. Recoveries on the other hand seem completely nonsensical. I assume ED understands cyclic operations. It makes no sense to wrap arriving aircraft back around and through the landing area, fouling the deck, to park aft of the island. It would seem to make much more sense to direct aircraft forward onto the bow to park first on CAT 2. Additionally, you could direct them across the six-pack area then back around to the right to park along the foul line or, with a pushback, on elevator 2 and the corral area. Elevator one should remain open so that armed aircraft exiting the landing area could point in a safe direction while they disarmed... or not. You could also direct aircraft directly to CAT 1 for a Trap-Cat-Trap scenario. In order of priority... I would have fill  CAT 2 first, followed by CAT 1, then the area along the foul line (Six pack and street areas) and finally Elevators 2 and 1. 

[CaliJoshua]

Thank you for your experienced based insight and I hope you are well sir.  

[Nazgûl]

Many thanks Sir. Even if ED doesn't implement this soon, you've already helped a lot.

[theIRIEone]

Honestly i feel like they're existing just so an item could be checked off the "missing features" list before the clock strikes 5 years of age..

Besides the bugs ("awaiting ATC Status", anyone?) i feel cyclic ops aren't represented properly:
2 Hornets, nothing else around, both get assigned CAT 1... Why?

Also while i never seen an aircraft carrier irl, leave alone being deployed on one, i feel the deck crew has some sort of psychic ability:
There is 0 reaction time at all, as soon as the "point at next handler animation" hits, the next handler's animation starts rolling already, making it all look very mechanic and not really human...

To further decrease our immersion (that's all we have and why a lot of us sim in the first place), we get bright yellow text in the center of our screen that cannot be disabled or at least moved to somewhere less intrusive, like the corner of the screen.. No it has to be right in our faces with no means of being disabled.

And then, after everything is done and we returned to the boat, the abrupt 180 auto-turn / respawn thing kills it all off one last time....

Where's the passion?
There is no passion, it's business.. and the deck crew demonstrates that to me more than everything before.

Edited December 23, 2024 by theIRIEone
EDIT: fixed typos

[draconus]

6 hours ago, theIRIEone said:

we get bright yellow text in the center of our screen that cannot be disabled

DCS options > special > Supercarrier

[MicroShket]

12 часов назад, theIRIEone сказал:

the abrupt 180 auto-turn / respawn

And what about Esc-menu with options like exit to desctop? It's just a PC-game, simulator, but still a game. Some assumptions must be done. 

Developers said that they could find another solution for turning the aircraft. But I can't imagine the degree of AIs frustration which tow-tractor must pass through in that case. 

[draconus]

3 hours ago, MicroShket said:

And what about Esc-menu with options like exit to desctop? It's just a PC-game, simulator, but still a game

Any unwanted message or unrealistic feature brings down immersion for those that seek it in simulation. Current design does not take that into consideration.

[MicroShket]

27 минут назад, draconus сказал:

unrealistic feature

I don't that auto-turn is unrealistic feature. This is a game assumption. Unrealistic feature is a taxiing in the hangar, for example. 

[draconus]

13 hours ago, MicroShket said:

I don't that auto-turn is unrealistic feature. This is a game assumption. Unrealistic feature is a taxiing in the hangar, for example. 

The other way around. It's impossible to teleport IRL but no physics prevents you from running engines in hangar, see what I mean? And yes, I agree no pilot should do that, nor should AI.

[MicroShket]

9 часов назад, draconus сказал:

from running engines in hangar

Is it allowed to run engines even at IDLE in hangar bay? I'm not sure. 

9 часов назад, draconus сказал:

see what I mean?

You said about unrealistic feature and not about realistic physics. Esc-menu or mission restart is very unrealistic. 

[Vampyre]

29 minutes ago, MicroShket said:

Is it allowed to run engines even at IDLE in hangar bay? I'm not sure. 

Yes, but only for low power maintenance turns. The hangar bay divisional doors are closed and personnel access is limited. The jet is chained down, roped off and intake turn screens are installed. A fire crew and safety personnel are standing by the aircraft. The aircraft is positioned so the exhaust blows out of the opened hangar doors on the side of the ship. Only low power turns are authorized so the aircraft will not throttle up above 80%. The turn is performed by a engine turn qualified maintenance technician. If a turn qual tech is not available a pilot can be used to turn in the hangar bay but I saw that happen only once in my 20 years. Never seen a jet taxi in the hangar bay... ever.

[MicroShket]

5 минут назад, Vampyre сказал:

The aircraft is positioned so the exhaust blows out of the opened hangar doors on the side of the ship.

That's what I mean exactly.

I understand that there is a place for removed engine testing at MAX power, etc. But no merry hangar taxiing with running engines, what players are delighted about.

And I don't care, I understand that it's a necessary evil. Like auto 180-degree turn. 

[draconus]

3 hours ago, MicroShket said:

You said about unrealistic feature and not about realistic physics. Esc-menu or mission restart is very unrealistic. 

No. There is the game and of course there are menus and conrols but when the simulation starts I want uninterrupted, real time immersion, no physics breaking. Player decides when and where the simulation starts and when it ends. What you do has to be realistic in the physically possible means, not limited by what would normal pilot do - that's rather for AI programming. Examples of unrealistic features are teleports, 180 instant rotation, super fast rearming, cosmic fast repairs in the place of request... Some of that I can  choose not to use but I'm forced to some when parking on the deck.

Edited December 25, 2024 by draconus

[MicroShket]

I wish I had only yours "unrealistic" problems.

[Vampyre]

The plane handlers feature is less than optimal at the moment. A real carrier deck is a highly dynamic place, but it does run in patterns because everything is pre-planned, deviations are prepared for and delt with on the fly.

The AI not being able to see and avoid static objects is unfortunate because, with only one pathing to use, it keeps the mission maker from placing objects in realistic locations according to the carrier's current mission. As set up currently the taxi pathing is really only useful for clear deck CQ... just without cat/trap/cat ability. During all other times there is always something parked by the island be it H-60's or the Hummer. I think there should be multiple sets of taxi templates for the deck pathing depending on the mission the carrier is doing. I imagine a template for clear deck CQ, another for full deck CQ, another for cyclic ops and one more for wartime ops. The template should be selectable by the mission editor and possibly by the AirBoss position even though it's not really his job to un-F the deck because we lack a Handler. Giving the AirBoss the ability to make deck adjustments and unclog the deck by picking parking spots for jets to go in would be nice.

In real life the jets can be hot refueled, but the jets have to be shut down to get rearmed... It was something about the Navy in the 60's and 70's not liking things blowing up on the decks of their carriers. As for the instant 180 and teleporting thing, I would be happy with the deck crew chocking and chaining the jet where it stops and kicking the pilot back to the slot selection screen more than that. Hot rearm is a gamification I can live with; teleporting and instant flipping is not.

As for the Elevators, the only time we ran them during flight ops was to move large amounts of cargo from the Flight deck to the Hangar deck and back when a C-2 arrived. The C-2's usually arrived right before a break during cyclic ops, usually right after the first go while the next go was being set up. If they delivered only passengers and some mail bags the elevator wouldn't run at all. Running the elevator takes personnel stationed on the flight deck and hangar deck and is dangerous. There is also the possibility it will fail. It disrupts the smooth operation of the deck during flight ops. The Elevators were usually only used for moving aircraft after flight operation were ended at night and before the first go's in the morning.

Here's a short video depicting standard cyclic ops in the Stennis. Pay attention to where things are parked and how the deck flows.

ED has their work cut out for them to get this right and I do hope they get it as right as is possible.

[NIGHTHAWK1]

great video

 

[Amarok_73]

On 12/23/2024 at 4:23 PM, theIRIEone said:

To further decrease our immersion (that's all we have and why a lot of us sim in the first place), we get bright yellow text in the center of our screen that cannot be disabled or at least moved to somewhere less intrusive, like the corner of the screen.. No it has to be right in our faces with no means of being disabled.

...and excerpt from the SC manual:
null