SuperCarrier extended Or ?

[toni]

Hey guys, just starting a new post.Direct question to ED with your opinnions attachet. When the Supercarrier series is completed, would be feasible adding the last two, CVN 76, CVN 77 with all its differences ?

Or by the other way, would have more sense a new Carrier from scratch? The CVN 78 would be brilliant I think.

Also CVs from other navies are a good option, the old Kiev class for the red side, Moskva, french Clemenceau,.......

[Inventor]

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/newsletters/newsletter03042020-usiwi30b0zn3nf5l357fhm5dehrm6rv7.html

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4261478&postcount=1

[Swordsman422]

If they were going to extend the class in any direction, rather they did the first three; Nimitz, Eisenhower, and Vinson. Reagan and Bush won't look right without a Superhornet to fly off of them.

[Marky146]

Agreed. With F14s and F/A18C/d you really need vintage surroundings.

[Seaeagle]

Hey guys, just starting a new post.Direct question to ED with your opinnions attachet. When the Supercarrier series is completed, would be feasible adding the last two, CVN 76, CVN 77 with all its differences ?

 

Whether its feasible is largely a question of effort vs. gain. Aside from multiple differences on the 3D model - especially for CVN-77(the hull, superstructure, mast etc), there is also the issue of the Reagan(CVN-76) and Bush(CVN-77) having a three-wire arrestor system, which would require modification to the systems' code.

 

Since the module will provide(eventually) five different Nimitz class carriers, the question is why you would need more and if the required effort is worth the bother for two more.

 

Or by the other way, would have more sense a new Carrier from scratch? The CVN 78 would be brilliant I think.

 

Why exactly? - the flyable carrier aircraft(F/A-18C and F-14) we have in DCS have both been retired by now, while AFAIK the CVN-78 has yet to reach full operational status and the aircraft(F/A-18E/F/G and F-35C) slated to operate from it don't exist in DCS World even as AI entries.

 

So if anything, I think your suggestion for CVs of other nations would be a better bet(and more interesting) although...

 

Also CVs from other navies are a good option, the old Kiev class for the red side, Moskva, french Clemenceau,.......

 

...those have the same issue as with the Ford class - namely that we don't have any suitable aircraft for them in DCS world.

 

In my opinion, it would be a much better idea to look at additional surface/subsurface combatants and support ships than just saturating the sim with more CV/CVNs.

[Mad_Max2]

While we're on the topic of big labor intensive projects to throw on ED's plate how about we get some WWII carriers in the mix! No planes...I know. No maps (kinda)... I know. But hey.

[Greekbull]

I think we are getting plenty of Nimitz Class Carriers in this module. I would selfishly love to see a Payware addon of the Enterprise. But I think we will have plenty to play with in the Carrier module as is...

[WOPR]

The Ford is very different from the Nimitz class. It’s not reasonable to expect that ship or class with this module. It would nice to be to be able to at least put the hull numbers for the entire Nimitz class on the ships even if they are only user skins for the carrier and deck crew and maybe even allow end users to set up different names in the mission editor for the ATC menu.

[JayBird]

Or by the other way, would have more sense a new Carrier from scratch? The CVN 78 would be brilliant I think.

 

ED launches a capable Ford class before the US Navy does

[Raisuli]

ED launches a capable Ford class before the US Navy does

 

 

I don't get why everyone gets to twisted around the axle. The Navy launches carriers into early access, then adds features (weapon elevators, the ability to launch aircraft) as development proceeds. EA charges tens of dollars for their EA, the Navy charges tens of billions for theirs.

 

 

Seems to be ED wins by orders of magnitude.

[fmedges]

I don't get why everyone gets to twisted around the axle. The Navy launches carriers into early access, then adds features (weapon elevators, the ability to launch aircraft) as development proceeds. EA charges tens of dollars for their EA, the Navy charges tens of billions for theirs.

 

 

Seems to be ED wins by orders of magnitude.

 

I’ve got nothing for that logic.

[TheGuardian]

I’ve got nothing for that logic.[/Quote]

 

:doh:I now have a twitch from reading his/her comment

[Thump]

I don't get why everyone gets to twisted around the axle. The Navy launches carriers into early access, then adds features (weapon elevators, the ability to launch aircraft) as development proceeds. EA charges tens of dollars for their EA, the Navy charges tens of billions for theirs.

 

 

Seems to be ED wins by orders of magnitude.

 

 

This rates up there with the "Sim fighter pilots are better than real fighter pilots" statement someone made a bit ago. I'm going to go lay down now.

[G B]

This rates up there with the "Sim fighter pilots are better than real fighter pilots" statement someone made a bit ago. I'm going to go lay down now.

 

Ha. Somebody said that?

[Thump]

Ha. Somebody said that?

 

Yeah, but it would take me more time then I care to spend trying to dig that jem back up.

[Raisuli]

Ha. Somebody said that?

 

 

Well, let's be clear. It's completely true. Some examples:

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Passes out at sustained 9Gs

Sim Fighter Pilot: Drinks beer at sustained 9Gs

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Evades the moment a surface to air missile or ten get fired at her

Sim Fighter Pilot: Gets those last two ARMs off, then evades while drinking a beer

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Never flies without at least one other aircraft on his wing

Sim Fighter Pilot: Fearlessly takes to the sky with only a six-pack for company

 

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Calls for backup when outnumbered eight to one

Sim fighter pilot: I've got ten AMRAAMs, let's do this!

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Will fly in (almost) any weather condition

Sim Fighter Pilot: Has the power to control weather

 

 

 

Real fighter pilot: Spends months at a time away from home defending their family

 

Sim fighter pilot: Escapes their family for a few hours at a time to play a game

[thermalguy]

Something people forget

 

Real Fighter Pilot - No toilet

Sim Fighter Pilot - No TP

[G B]

Well, let's be clear. It's completely true. Some examples:

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Passes out at sustained 9Gs

Sim Fighter Pilot: Drinks beer at sustained 9Gs

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Evades the moment a surface to air missile or ten get fired at her

Sim Fighter Pilot: Gets those last two ARMs off, then evades while drinking a beer

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Never flies without at least one other aircraft on his wing

Sim Fighter Pilot: Fearlessly takes to the sky with only a six-pack for company

 

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Calls for backup when outnumbered eight to one

Sim fighter pilot: I've got ten AMRAAMs, let's do this!

 

 

Real Fighter Pilot: Will fly in (almost) any weather condition

Sim Fighter Pilot: Has the power to control weather

 

 

 

Real fighter pilot: Spends months at a time away from home defending their family

 

Sim fighter pilot: Escapes their family for a few hours at a time to play a game

 

I have never stood so corrected.

[Raisuli]

I have never stood so corrected.

 

 

You, sir, and those like you, are my heroes. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time at the bloody end of the spear, willing to put yourselves in harms way for the rest of us.

[G B]

You, sir, and those like you, are my heroes. Thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time at the bloody end of the spear, willing to put yourselves in harms way for the rest of us.

 

Thank you. That’s very kind and appreciated. However, this forum is not about me. I just like to chime in once in a while just like everybody else.

[rayrayblues]

While we're on the topic of big labor intensive projects to throw on ED's plate how about we get some WWII carriers in the mix! No planes...I know. No maps (kinda)... I know. But hey.

 

I am so down with that.

Of course we would need appropriate WWll aircraft to go with it.

I was thinking.....

F4F Wildcat, F6F Hellcat, F8F Bearcat, F4U Corsair for starters.

Then maybe a Japanese tree with Zeke's, Franks and Oscars. :pilotfly:

 

Hey, I can dream can't I? :music_whistling:

[Cypher1o1]

I am so down with that.

Of course we would need appropriate WWll aircraft to go with it.

I was thinking.....

F4F Wildcat, F6F Hellcat, F8F Bearcat, F4U Corsair for starters.

Then maybe a Japanese tree with Zeke's, Franks and Oscars. :pilotfly:

 

Hey, I can dream can't I? :music_whistling:

 

Well, one of the 3rd party devs are working on a F4U Corsair, which would be a good aircraft to start with, as it was a mainly land based carrier aircraft.

[jskibo]

If only they had my old boat, CV-63 USS Kitty Hawk

[SkateZilla]

The Ford is very different from the Nimitz class. It’s not reasonable to expect that ship or class with this module. It would nice to be to be able to at least put the hull numbers for the entire Nimitz class on the ships even if they are only user skins for the carrier and deck crew and maybe even allow end users to set up different names in the mission editor for the ATC menu.

 

The FORD class is still Classified, and as of Right now, Broken in Real Life. It has so many bugs to work out with just the Catapults and Arresting gear it's not funny. Not to even mention the Elevators

[G B]

The Ford has overcome many of those issues lately. A number of CQ events have taken place aboard the Ford recently. It's not perfect, but it's not the old stories of doom and gloom anymore either.