Doolittle Raid - Task Force 16 2026-08-16

[kdriver]

kdriver submitted a new resource:

Doolittle Raid - Task Force 16 - VN Task Force 16

Doolittle Raid TF16

This release contains scenery that depicts the ships of Task Force 16 that delivered the Doolittle Raiders to their launch point on April 18th 1942.

Carriers:
USS Hornet CV-8
USS Enterprise CV-6

Heavy Cruisers:
USS Salt Lake City CA-25
USS Northampton CA-26
USS Vincennes CA-44

Light Cruiser:
USS Nashville CL-43

by: The Virtual Navy (Bruce Baker & James Smith)

View attachment 195664

Read more about this resource...

 

[kdriver]

Another old one missing from the Virtual Navy collection sent to me by Wolfebee - thank you!

I hope all the textures are there this time!

 

[caputanto]

ottimo repaint

 

[Sbob]

The last two times I d/l'ed this scenery, I got the carrier surrounded by airport gates.
Maybe the third time is the charm?

 

[Mick]

The last two times I d/l'ed this scenery, I got the carrier surrounded by airport gates.
Maybe the third time is the charm?

Same here. The flip side was when someone (Panther?) got heavy cruisers in the desert at some airport in Israel.

The reason comes from how scenery software assigns an enormously long alphanumeric identifier code created by a random character generator. The idea is that the odds are that any of those character strings randomly happening twice is about once in the anticipated life of the physical universe. Trouble is, random isn't orderly - it's the opposite of orderly. Something might only happen once in the life of the universe but that doesn't mean it will take that long before it happens. That one time could happen this afternoon.

It happened when the VN made those cruisers and someone else made those airport gates - jetways,to be exact. I put the task force into Golden Wings, where I could just delete all the jetway files, since there weren't any jetways in the Golden Age, and I got my cruisers.

I have a dim recollection of that happening elsewhere in the FS world with elsewhat but I can't recall any details.

 

[Mick]

One might work around the problem in a less era-specific FS9 installation by putting the task force higher in the scenery stack (or would that be lower? I don't remember.) Then you'd get cruisers at some airports but you could inactivate the taskforce when you wanted to fly from one of those airports.

 

[wolfebee89]

in my test/bare-bones setup aboard the CV-8



...uncertain what the issue is??

cheers!

 

[Mick]

in my test/bare-bones setup aboard the CV-8

View attachment 195744

...uncertain what the issue is??

cheers!

You must not have the airport(s) that include that jetways scenery object.

 

[leuen]

I don't see any issue.

It looks different due to my SweetFx settings.

Bernard

 

[Sbob]

One might work around the problem in a less era-specific FS9 installation by putting the task force higher in the scenery stack (or would that be lower? I don't remember.) Then you'd get cruisers at some airports but you could inactivate the taskforce when you wanted to fly from one of those airports.

That's why I avoid using the terms "higher" and "lower". They tend to get flipped if you're setting up layers within FS9 or editing the .cfg file separately. Its also why I don't share scenery that I made using EZ Scenery. Everyone's scenery.cfg file is different which throws off the layering.

 

[wolfebee89]

That's why I avoid using the terms "higher" and "lower". They tend to get flipped if you're setting up layers within FS9 or editing the .cfg file separately. Its also why I don't share scenery that I made using EZ Scenery. Everyone's scenery.cfg file is different which throws off the layering.

and not to forget about the internal terrain vector data layering - embedded within a scenery bgl, and which is generally independent of the scenery library layering priority - as mentioned in the Terrain SDK

@Mick would be worth a try to prioritize the carrier VN TF-16 scenery to near the top of your scenery library, above all airports and 3rd party scenery object libraries; thereby making sure the said scenery takes precedence

 

[Sbob]

One other thing I should mention, if you have the KBT Battle Of Midway/Coral Sea scenery installed- one of those carriers uses the same AFCAD airport ID.
I tried to load the Doolittle Raid carrier and wound up in the wrong battle.

 

[Mick]

and not to forget about the internal terrain vector data layering - embedded within a scenery bgl, and which is generally independent of the scenery library layering priority - as mentioned in the Terrain SDK

@Mick would be worth a try to prioritize the carrier VN TF-16 scenery to near the top of your scenery library, above all airports and 3rd party scenery object libraries; thereby making sure the said scenery takes precedence

I didn't recall which way to phrase it when writing about it. In practice I always remember that when adding scenery to the cfg file manually the highest level is the bottom of the list, and If my recollection is correct it's the opposite on the drop-down list if you add scenery the "normal" way.

I've done it manually for decades, after I found that using the regular FS method sometimes scrambled the cfg file. That was so long ago that it might have been FS8 rather than FS9. But either way, yes, the scenery with the higher priority will take precedence over the lower.

But for Golden Wings or a classic era installation like my "FS1954 - A Half Century of Flight" when there weren't any jetliners or jetways it's a simple matter to just search for "jetway" and delete them all. I had to do that in FS54. It's been so long that I don't remember if it was necessary in GW or if they were already deleted in GW right out of the box.

I know that in GW I have Task Force 16 with cruisers instead of jetways in the water, and the same in FS54 where I've moved the ships to the North Atlantic.

If someone has everything in one FS installation they could just inactivate whatever scenery or sceneries contain the conflicting jetways file, but if they have a lot of add-on airports it could be a seriously tedious process to identify them.

 

[wolfebee89]

@Mick glad you found a workable solution and much thanks for the potentially helpful tips

cheers!

 

[kdriver]

It turns out this package was already in the library. I deleted the old download.