Jump to content

norman99

Members
  • Posts

    240
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by norman99

  1. Up until now, I've had absolutely no interest in the much talked about AirBoss feature. As primarily a single player, it just never seems all that useful to me, but you've just come up with a brilliant idea. Allow the AirBoss the have access to a "launch que", with the ability to change both the order of launches, and the desired catapult.
  2. With the glacial speed of SupperCarrier bug fixes and feature development, enabling the ability to reload the USS_Nimitz_RunwaysAndRoutes.lua mid game is even more beneficial. Lots of issues currently experienced by users, such as spawning damage, taxi gridlock, etc could be improved by users whilst we all wait for permanent fixes from ED. Furthermore, this would present mission builders with a host of new possibilities based on different deck configurations.
  3. @Jackjack171 Yeah, I assume the 24 hour CAP would only be for a combat, high threat scenario, rather than a "normal", non combat deployment.
  4. Hi Miguel, attached is my simple fuel check script. Just a word of warning, I'm pretty raw at coding, so it may not be the most elegant solution, nor have I haven't carried out any real bug testing. None the less, it works well for me in single player, especially when using VIACOM and adding a "Fuel Check" voice command. One day I may get around to adding an audio response in addition to the text output currently used. Cheers. EDIT: In addition to the above, I just remembered it's only calibrated to the Hornet, as I don't fly other aircraft. As DCS reports fuel as a % of max, I've simply converted this to a quantity value based on the Hornet's tank capacity. Fuel Check.lua
  5. Does the centreline tank have to be empty? 3 full tanks, takeoff, full burner climb to 30k, and I hear it passing 20k too. Happens on the way back down as well.
  6. I've a small question. I have a small script which adds a fuel check radio call to the F10 menu, to which any aircraft in the players group respond with their fuel state (currently via text output only). It's great to keep an eye on the AI, and send them to the tanker or RTB early enough that they don't just bingo and eject. I usually add this to any mission I play. If I add my script to the base .miz file in a campaigns inuit folder, will this then be included in all the subsequently generated missions? If this won't work, I assume I can add a line to one of the scripts to add it to generated missions, I'm just not sure which one.
  7. Just curious if anyone has managed to get this campaign working with 2.7? I'm aware of CEF's great campaigns, and his DCE manager, but I've always enjoyed this campaign too, and would love to try it again if possible.
  8. This is absolutely fantastic! A much needed feature, I can't wait to try it.
  9. I've noticed this too. I get aircraft type in the HMD all the time, yet nothing on the SA page.
  10. Hi all, not sure if this is the best place to ask it, but as it has to do with cyclic ops, hopefully someone here can help. I'm curious how CAP flights would be scheduled in a hypothetical scenario where constant coverage is required, and how that integrates with the cyclic ops of the carrier. Given an example CAP flight of F-14s 100nm from the carrier, average 450kts TAS for transiting aircraft, gives a 12-14min transit time. When swapping flights at the completion of the desired station time, this means 24-28min from the launch of the replacement flight, to the arrival at the carrier of the airborne CAP flight, if constant coverage is desired. Assuming an 'average' carrier cycle event is 10-15min for launching aircraft and similar for landing, is it as simple as launching the relief CAP flight first, with the returning CAP flight arriving at the carrier just as recovery is finishing, being the last aircraft to land? I ask this because most references make mention of arriving aircraft ensuring they are already in the marshall stack at recovery time (ideally 10min early), and that late arrivals should be avoided. Alternatively, would CAP aircraft be launched early, prior to the cyclic event actually starting, in a similar fashion to E2s and tankers? This would allow the returning CAP flight to arrive back at the carrier earlier, though most likely still after recoveries have commenced. They'd therefore again have to join the top of the stack and would be last to land. Lastly, am I just overthinking things completely? Do all flights just stick to the scheduled event times, and small gaps in CAP coverage whilst flights are inbound/outbound are accepted to ensure the rest of the system runs to plan? Any details would be greatly appreciated. Cheers.
  11. Re-raising this bug. If you shut down the left engine, then lower the flaps to full, which is the correct procedure from NATOPS, the left LEF becomes stuck at 12 upon startup. Nothing will fix it. Could this please be moved to the bug section so it doesn’t get lost. Edit: After double checking, flaps should be selected to full BEFORE engine shut.
  12. Oh ok, thanks for the background. I understand the logic behind it being somewhat realistic, but it can’t be to the extent that is currently experienced. Aircraft basically facing 90° from me, 100nm away causing a launch warning in my aircraft that is parked on the carrier deck just doesn’t seem right. If attempting to operate realistically, and therefore treat launch warnings as real (even when you kinda know it’s not), it just constantly ruins missions as you have to react accordingly. The other option is to view enemy aircraft on the F10 map an check it’s a false warning. Such an immersion killer. Seems like it’s a challenge to fix, but I’m really surprised there isn’t more noise made about this issue. Anyway, seems enough was said in the previous thread, so I’ll leave it be for now. Maybe if we come back in another 3 years things may have improved….
  13. Absolutely love this mod! One question though, has anyone used it to create some templates of SAM sites? Personally I’m interested in the older Soviet systems (SA-2/3/5/6/8/9/11/13 etc..) rather than newer S-300/400 variants. Whilst I’ve tried making a few with the help of “Aussie Air Power” http://www.ausairpower.net/sams-iads.html, I just don’t seem to have the knack of creating realistic looking sites like others do. So please, anyone who has created a few templates, I’d love to grab a copy. Cheers
  14. The simple answer is no, there is no push to ‘lock’ the wings in the folded position. For everything you could ever want to know about the wing fold handle here’s the relevant NATOPS manual page.
  15. Will we ever get proper azimuth centering in RWS? As far as I’m aware, when using other than 140°azimuth, pressing the TDC on a blank area of the B-scope should center the scan on that location, similar to TWS. Currently this is not possible. This makes RWS a difficult mode to use when you have bandits > 30° off the nose. You either use a larger azimuth scan with it’s associated disadvantages, come nose on, or change to TWS. Non of these solutions are ideal, and scan centering in RWS would be the preferred solution.
  16. Probably all depends on the tactical objective. If you’re actually going somewhere, I’d assume CSS will provide the most fuel efficient climb profile per nm traveled. Best rate of climb obviously gets you up as fast as possible, but probably does so at the expense of fuel burn/nm. Important if you need to get to alt fast for BVR engagement. 350 into constant Mach is actually what I tend to fly, just because it’s the simplest. My question is, should the FPAS climb speed profile adjust for the actual aircraft drag index? It would seem silly not to, otherwise why even include what is effectively an always incorrect figure?
  17. We hear something soon, this issue is so frustrating when attempting to engage multiple bandits.
  18. Don’t confuse naval ground power units and their intended functions with civil aircraft ground power. Civil aircraft are designed to use ground power as part of there every day operations. Loading and unload cargo/catering/cleaning pax all require power, so aircraft use ground power to minimise apu usage. To facilitate this, the electrical systems onboard modern aircraft have no break power transfer systems. My understanding of navy ground power units are they are primarily use by maintenance crew, and are not used in an operational sense. Because of this, there is simply no need to include no break power transfer as a feature in the aircraft.
  19. Wow, just found out this bug is over 3 years old! Surely no one actually thinks that this is acceptable? ED’s disregard for things that are just ‘too hard’, no matter how important, never ceases to astound me.
  20. This issue is extremely frustrating, as it basically breaks TWS multi-launch functionality. As soon as the first missile is launched, the radar instantly creates a track file for the outgoing missile , and re sorts the tracks. Using the NWS/undesignate button to step to the next target selects the missile instead. Launching on more than one target therefore becomes almost impossible, as the TDC cursor has to be used, extremely difficult in a time critical situation. It should not work this way, it’s literally what track file priorities and the NWS/undesignate button are designed for. Whilst I’m no expert, I’m extremely sceptical about the ability to track (or at least display) outbound missiles. Why have the missile fly out cue and associated symbology, if that is the case?
  21. Hopefully..... eventually..... Sounds promising. Haha.
  22. On multiplayer servers, I always receive RWR lock & launch warnings from AI aircraft 70nm-100+nm away, as they engage other aircraft, so long as they are pointing roughly in my direction (+/- 45 degrees). Whilst I understand getting false warnings if I'm very close to the aircraft actually targeted, what currently happens seems very unrealistic. Below is an example of receiving a lock RWR warning sitting on a carrier deck, whilst the source SU27 engages an F-14 70nm away. On a multiplayer server so I don't have a track. I don't seem to get this in single player. Not sure if it's a Hornet RWR problem, or a general DCS radar/AI issue.
  23. Drastically improved AI is actually a prerequisite of dynamic campaign development. There's absolutely no point in having persistent force levels and units, if AI aircraft all 'bingo & eject" every second flight. Within a day there wouldn't be any aircraft left to task....
  24. Any additional update on this bug? It’s extremely frustrating to get the lost cue, and loose the time to active, during every launch.
  25. I’d imagine STD HDG isn’t used for carrier ops. As already mentioned, aircraft are almost continuously re spotted (moved around on deck), especially during cyclic ops, so it doesn’t make sense to use this function.
×
×
  • Create New...