We need FCLPS...

As a RL Navy Pilot I have to say we really need an IFLOLS and a carrier box on land. I know that none of the DCS terrains IRL have this but it is needed. I had hundreds of FCLPS before my first carrier landing and hundreds more if not at this point a thousand plus FCLPS in my career. Is it possible to make an object that is an IFLOLS with a carrier box to the right that could be overlay on a runway? If this is possible a mission maker could simply place it on any airfield on any map.

With the popularity of the Hornet and the soon to be Tomcat this would be a boon and really plus up the realism.

As a RL Navy Pilot I have to say we really need an IFLOLS and a carrier box on land. I know that none of the DCS terrains IRL have this but it is needed. I had hundreds of FCLPS before my first carrier landing and hundreds more if not at this point a thousand plus FCLPS in my career. Is it possible to make an object that is an IFLOLS with a carrier box to the right that could be overlay on a runway? If this is possible a mission maker could simply place it on any airfield on any map.

 

With the popularity of the Hornet and the soon to be Tomcat this would be a boon and really plus up the realism.

So many of us and so many post being made in the wish section for this hoping fr it, but, last news we had, it wouldn'T come. Hopefuly one day it'll change, with the Tomcat coming as a third Naval aicraft (not counting the SU-33)

Jane's F/A-18 had a popup meatball inside the cockpit you could turn on and off. You can see it in this video:

Jane's F/A-18 had a popup meatball inside the cockpit you could turn on and off. You can see it in this video:

at around the 2:36 mark. I think something like this would work well. Matt Wagner worked on Jane's F/A-18 so he certainly knows about this feature.

I think OP meant a real FCLP system not just a pop-up window, having a pop-up meatball window for me would be a total turn-off and take me off the immersion, like a physical FCLP IFLOS unit system on the side of the airfield (somoene made the modle already as mod, is only we could attribut a working IFLOS to it from Mission editor) and the carrier box on the landing strip (though i think this is available from a mod to be as static boet, but not sure). I would still rather use Dubai's International Airport's PAPI'S light instead of a meatball window pop-up. But, thats my own opinion.

Not sure why this is needed in the sim. It's not real life. You don't need to practice hundreds of times before risking lives and equipment by attempting on the ship. Just practice using the Stennis and if you crash, load it up and try again.

Joker, some of us want to realistically simulate the experience. I agree with all requests for a box and meatball object that can be placed. If you prefer to head out and ramp strike on your 1st look - fill your boots.

You might prefer Ace Combat 7, just sayin'

Not sure why this is needed in the sim. It's not real life. You don't need to practice hundreds of times before risking lives and equipment by attempting on the ship. Just practice using the Stennis and if you crash, load it up and try again.

You realise OP was or still is a real pilot and totaly knows this is a sim and not real life and the difference between real and virtual? Second, on my side, since i started flying carrier ops back then in FSX early 2007-2008 with the Hornet and Super Hornet, then DCS with the Hornet, if i haven't done over 3000-4000 landings on the carriers i did none, when i left FSX i earend the badge for 2000 landings which i was mostly practicing patterns on the carrier, so i am pretty well ease on the Carrier, but sometimes, it's fun to have alternatives to change the eue sight and do different stuff and sometimes i love landing on airfields, but having the possibility to create a FCLS scene would be great even though PAPI's are back in DCS after a whole not being working and which glideslpe is a bit different. ;)

You realise OP was or still is a real pilot and totaly knows this is a sim and not real life and the difference between real and virtual? Second, on my side, since i started flying carrier ops back then in FSX early 2007-2008 with the Hornet and Super Hornet, then DCS with the Hornet, if i haven't done over 3000-4000 landings on the carriers i did none, when i left FSX i earend the badge for 2000 landings which i was mostly practicing patterns on the carrier, so i am pretty well ease on the Carrier, but sometimes, it's fun to have alternatives to change the eue sight and do different stuff and sometimes i love landing on airfields, but having the possibility to create a FCLS scene would be great even though PAPI's are back in DCS after a whole not being working and which glideslpe is a bit different. ;)

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

... some of us want to realistically simulate the experience.

That is exactly it.

I know that this wish is an old, ignored one, but keep wishing and you just might get it.

btw: how many problems in implementing should that be? We have all we need, just put it on a runway. Hm, ok, maybe we don't have a realistic runway where it is installed in RL?

If I may add a wish:

With a FCLPS give us a radio operator that tells us which wire we would have caught. That would be cool.

That would be a real advantage over training with a carrier. You could do 100 touch-and-gos with getting your results much quicker than grabbing the wire of a carrier, reposition and take off again. Am I wrong?

This would be a nice future option, including an an additional segment for training missions. I think one part is that there is no NAS or MCAS modeled in any of the maps, but an overlay or placing at least placing IFLOLS might be something. Some fields may not have a carrier box but have IFLOLS on certain approach ends. Ancient history, but when I was stationed at El Toro - endless hours of the night of FCLPS for F-4 squadrons. (F-18 was just arriving to squadrons).

To find which wire you caught, as soon as the plane stops hit F2 for an external view and use your mouse to look rearward. I am not always quick enough but maybe 80% of the time I can see the wire moving before it is full retracted.

To find which wire you caught, as soon as the plane stops hit F2 for an external view and use your mouse to look rearward. I am not always quick enough but maybe 80% of the time I can see the wire moving before it is full retracted.

That's not the point. With an FCLPS and radio operator u don't have to touch down with hook extended. You just do one touch and go after the other and get your result immediately. Just like in RL. Afaik there exists a training site where no wires exist at all. Don't know if this is a part of a FCLPS. But it is very usefull to get the feeling or to optimize your skills.

FCLP clips at YouTube show no wires. Makes sense to me.

I disagree.

Even if you really wanted to load a new training on every run, 3 miles off the landing deck, every time with the same initial altitude, speed, fuel load (...) just to quit and load again after touch down, I believe it is much better to just touch and go, without the hook, go around and try again. But only if you are told if and which wire you would have caught.

This might me done with a radio call of the carrier's LSO after a touch and go aswell, but a FCLPS would simulate the real way of advancing from a Hornet driver to a member of a carrier crew. Aren't we here to simulate the real thing? And would it really cost too much time to implement?

And picture the fun it would be on a VFS's multiplayer server, where you can't quit and reload. You could help and get help from others. I would love to see this in DCS.

I think you're missing the whole point of FCLPS here. The reason you had to do those is because you were flying a real jet. It was a form of simulation of carrier landing. DCS is a flight simulator, which defeats the whole purpose of doing those, since you can just train on the real thing from the start and if you crash, you can just reload the mission.

 

I get it that you want immersion, but there are practical limits to it. Sure, this could be done but there are more pressing issues. Not all essential systems are even implemented yet. They will surely do this eventually but I'd rather they focused on actual avionics for now.

I think the whole point of a flight simulator is to be able to simulate the real experience of flying. So, there is the real experience and the video gamer's idea of what the real experience should be.

How we each want DCS improved is an individual preference. Some of us are more serious than others, some just have different priorities. I personally want night lighting fixed. I want comms fixed. We all want different things. I think RL pilots tend to treat the simulator like being in a real plane and not a video game with an infinite number of do overs. Sure, crashing a sim is not the same as crashing a real aircraft, but perhaps real pilots act in the sim more like in RL... and they want to know they are proficient before taking it to the boat.

For me in sim, I will certainly try some what ifs, but crashing simply because I am unprepared leaves me with a foul taste.

As a wish list item; nothing wrong with it, how high on the list it is varies from player to player,its kind of like the CAP-9M in that regard(we are in a simulation so we don't really need it, but, the simulation of simulated combat is still valid). I dont know how many fields in the Nevada or Gulf areas actually have FCLS (I'm guessing none in Normandy or Caucasus), and therefore if it would be reasonable to place them at existing airfields or if it would require a major MOD to the map to include areas off board today (which I have understood in the case of Nevada will not happen?)…

I think the whole point of a flight simulator is to be able to simulate the real experience of flying. So, there is the real experience and the video gamer's idea of what the real experience should be.

How we each want DCS improved is an individual preference. Some of us are more serious than others, some just have different priorities. I personally want night lighting fixed. I want comms fixed. We all want different things. I think RL pilots tend to treat the simulator like being in a real plane and not a video game with an infinite number of do overs. Sure, crashing a sim is not the same as crashing a real aircraft, but perhaps real pilots act in the sim more like in RL... and they want to know they are proficient before taking it to the boat.

 

For me in sim, I will certainly try some what ifs, but crashing simply because I am unprepared leaves me with a foul taste.

Ha, as a real pilot I’m the opposite. I spend my work days doing cold starts and systems checks, maintenance test flights, etc. Even our tactical trips involve a lot of “work” and planning even though we have fun ripping along at 90kts and 15ft AGL.

I jump in DCS to do the fun stuff I wish I could do more of in real life. I skip the start checks and the detailed planning and jump right into the combat flying, because the boring stuff just feels like being back at work.

I guess to make this relevant to the thread, I would be an advocate of just going to the boat and doing circuits. I train at the boat and just do hook-up bolter patterns, you can usually tell by the ball position and your sight picture on touchdown whether it was a good approach or not.