Naval Air Station Fallon PLEASE

The satellite imagery of Fallon is in the sim, but theres no buildings, runways, hangars etc there, just blurry satellite photos, but thats because its right at the edge of the map.

So open the ME, park a couple FARPs on it, a dozen fuel trucks, a few HUMVEES, and a roach coach and hey presto a functioning NAS Fallon in a mission template.

Tip: only fly southeast after takeoff.

If they can refuel Viggens on the roadside...:pilotfly:

Not trying to be facetious, just thinking of options. Hadn’t heard of any mods to take advantage of this.

Agreed +1 NTTR Needs NAS Fallon. or DCS needs Map tools for us to create it ourselves.

It is a shame that ED cant make it happen.. But 3rd Party.. Maybe community Mod team ??? if given the tools to do so...

Dear all,

 

As has been mentioned before, adding Fallon NAS and its range (and buffer area) to the NTTR map will not happen for several reasons:

 

1- While Fallon NAS is barely in the current NTTR map, the entire range and buffer area is certainly not.

 

2- The NTTR map is already as max size that can support current RAM min-specs (8 GB).

 

3- To add such a huge amount of work would also result in a higher price; many users would have a fit.

 

4- The NTTR map is centered on the NTTR, not all of Nevada. Way out of scope.

 

5- Based on customer feedback, we have heard overwhelming that most customers want new combat theater maps, not training maps.

 

6- A Fallon NAS map would be a great opportunity for a 3rd party.

 

7- All our map resources are tied up with new map projects for the next several years.

 

While I understand the desire, I’m afraid it’s not feasible for all the above reasons. Perhaps a qualified 3rd party though may wish to take it on.

 

Thanks!

Thank you for the detailed response. Very sad, but understandable.

It's unfortunate that NAS Fallon was overlooked when originally designing the NTTR map. I feel there is a lot enough useless area of the map to the southeast where the map area could have been shifted more northwest to include Fallon. Maybe the Hornet and Tomcat were unknowns back then and that is why we see a complete focus on USAF operations. If you look at DCS as a whole, it was not originally designed to support US Naval aviation.

Giving up quality control to wannabes? Not can't, more like won't, and for good reason. I wouldn't let that happen either.

 

A map isn't the same as an aircraft module. There is too much of the core of the sim that depends on the map to allow random modders and hack 3rd party wannabes to muck around in the works. Too much opportunity for quality control failures and exploitation when too much happens outside the auspices of the lead developer.

 

There's enough problems with people mucking about in files and then blaming ED when things go wrong.

 

As frustrating as the pace of development may be, I'd rather that than leaving the gate open like the quoted post suggest, if not directly, then by not considering the consequences.

 

Edit: Before anyone brings it up, no. BMS is not a good counter argument. This is not an abandoned project rescued by the community.

I agree...I don't even know how a third party would be able to successfully integrate a NAS Fallon map into the current NTTR.

All third parties seem very busy for the foreseeable future as well with aicraft and other maps so I don't see this happening at all.

Thank you ED for taking the time and patience to respond to my request on getting NAS fallon PLEASE into NTTR . I know now that it will be impossible to have it in place for us to train. Maybe in the future ED can create a training mission that would allow us to train our FCLP'S , and I also want to thank everyone that supported this idea on bringing NAS Fallon to ED's attention . Merry Christmas and have a Happy New Year

+1. agreeded all dino's.

Also because Nevada theater without NAS Fallon... just can't figure it out, sorry.

With best regards to all.

Perhaps a qualified 3rd party though may wish to take it on.

Just out of curiosity, would ED allow qualified 3rd parties to augment the existing NTTR map or would they have to develop their own Fallon-centric terrain module?

Just out of curiosity, would ED allow qualified 3rd parties to augment the existing NTTR map or would they have to develop their own Fallon-centric terrain module?

"2- The NTTR map is already as max size that can support current RAM min-specs (8 GB)."

Their own, by the looks of it.

Just on a lark, I tried landing the A-4E on the “image” of the longer Fallon runway...very gentle touchdown, just realized “ok I’m on the gr....BOO-oo-OOOM!” and I made a spectacular crash and burn site.

Has anyone successfully landed on the image?

Has anyone successfully landed on the image?

Yepp. AV8B ;)

btw I understand there is no chance for this wish to be granted. So I'm over and out here.

Disturbing and a huge oversight indeed. I seriously cannot wrap my mind around their decision not to include NAS Fallon. They put so much effort into adding civilian airports and yet we are missing one of the most important US bases and what would be a very much needed and only NAS in DCS. NTTR is supposed to serve as a realistic training area before "deploying" to other maps such as the Persian Gulf and Caucasus. While we only had the A-10C as the main full fidelity module, NTTR and Nellis AFB was perfectly fine, however; DCS is becoming much more naval aviation oriented with the Hornet and Tomcat and NAS Fallon is very much needed.

 

The location of NAS Fallon is already within the boundaries of the NTTR map but it is just outside of the detailed area of the map. It is approximately 68 nm to the northwest of Minas airport. The detailed portion would have to expanded only one grid square to the northwest to include NAS Fallon.

 

I really hope they reconsider and surprise us all with the very much needed NAS Fallon.

Hell I bet most of us would be ok with a slight deviation in location to keep it inside the detailed map area. but yes 10000% yes we need a Naval Air Station and Fallon is perfect as the majority of the area is already modeled. We need an FCLP field as well. Fallon could fill both roles.

Fallon is fallen

Go support this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=197436

DCS: F/A-18C Hornet » Wish List » Field Carrier Landing Practice

Tomcat is coming! Hopefully with FCLP somewhere/anywhere.

Yepp. AV8B ;)

 

 

btw I understand there is no chance for this wish to be granted. So I'm over and out here.

Yup, but I suggested making a FARPish base, just because it is there. Part of the process would be to see if one could land on just the image (the image itself shouldn’t have rocks and bumps unless placed there as part of a programmed global config, so a smooth landing could happen)...

Except it didn’t with a conventional aircraft, so...I played around a bit with Mission Editor buildings, FLaK 37’s and 38’s, until I got bored.

On to bigger and better things! (BTW, you can’t put a carrier on land. :^\ )

I'm absolutely with you VZ. And Fallon would have been a good reason to buy NTTR or to like/use it more.

Why I'm not "over and out" is because of this thread:

Go support this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=197436

DCS: F/A-18C Hornet » Wish List » Field Carrier Landing Practice

 

Tomcat is coming! Hopefully with FCLP somewhere/anywhere.

It would be really cool if there was a NAS to practise carrier landings the real way, with a ball and marks on a runway of the size of a carrier's runway.

Maybe with an operator that calls your results by radio. Just like the real thing.

Fallon would have been great for that, but if it is not possible, we should have a FCLP site somewhere else.

Thanks Wags. Appreciate the update. Love all your hard work. Great products are certainly hard to come by, but you guys do produce some great products. I would say that it appears (from public info) that you guys are in need of a few more qualified developers to join your team?! There's ample amount of source materials to choose from but seems like all the devs are currently tapped out at maximum output, no? There's an entire field of developers in the P3D/Xplane world that could easily enhance and innovate in the DCS arena. Have you ever considered adding maybe another one? Milviz, VRS, and A2A come to mind. Each has produced astounding works in other sims. thanks again for the update. Looking forward to another great year in 2019, wishing you all the best!