• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Middle East Carrier Operations (MECOPS)

Dietmar

Dietmar

Members +
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Dear All,[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I have uploaded a new scenery for all US Navy/Navy Pilot friends wanted to be challenged by flying a F18 and being part of a US carrier pilots team. The scenery includes two carrier groups CVN68 and CVN69, two AI KC-135 tanker aircraft, AI F-18A aircraft approaching the carrier, Navy destroyer and a Navy Cruiser as escort ships for the carrier, a number of oil platforms and a advanced radar gauge which displays air targets and boat traffic. It include also a auto landing function for the carrier to support pilots to land on a carrier. Included in the scenery is also a prepared flight plan for the KC-135 tanker in order to perform a A2A fuel procedure. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Also part of the package is a prepared and described mission flight which challenged you to takeoff from one carrier, perform a A2A fuel procedure, fly a attack mission, and return and land on the second carrier being on a different location. Perform another takeoff from it and flying back to the home carrier with landing approach at night time !![/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]For every one who finished this mission turn successful will be a candidate for this [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]TOP GUN medal:
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif] [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
attachment.php
[/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]And here a link with a video which will give you an impression about the scenery and the flight and mission operations on this scenery.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw2WF1119gc[/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Have fun and enjoy [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Dietmar[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
 

Attachments

  • TOP GUN_Medal.jpg
    TOP GUN_Medal.jpg
    73.3 KB · Views: 3
The video's not loading for me, but reading from the file description, the use of ARRCAB suggests to me these carriers are static, right? That's the only way I can imagine AI operating off them, given current FSX limitations.

thanks,

dl
 
Hi,

it is a trivial youtube video, and not loading for you ?? Yes the two carriers are static on a fixed position.

Regards

Dietmar
 
Ooooops

In real life you DON"T want to land on an aircraft carrier that is not yours that you launched from. Here is what happens when you do:

attachment.php


:biggrin-new:
 

Attachments

  • oops-614x300.jpg
    oops-614x300.jpg
    48.7 KB · Views: 1
Take Off One Land On Two

In your description of this op' you say that the aircraft is to take off from Carrier One and perform all requirements and then come back and land on a different carrier. Never done except by mistake or in an emergency a fouled deck on Carrier One. The photo shows you what happens to the pilot that lands on another carrier different than the one he took off from. All of the flight deck crew gang up on his aircraft with spray cans of paint.

You should land and take off from your own carrier (ie. the same carrier)

CCP allows you to spawn on the carrier that is moving and come back and land on it also. Once all the bugs were eliminated, it works perfectly for me and Navy Chief in the past. The carrier does not have to be static though before CCP that was the only way to start out on it I know.
 
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Hi Richard,[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]OK, now I understand what you are saying. And yes, I agree with you that the aircraft should always take off and land on the same carrier, accept in an emergency case. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]However, the test flights for takeoff/landing and the A2A fuel are just a test and training exercise for the user of the scenery. You can do it or not. The flights are in so far not part of the scenery as such. You can use any aircraft you want for it ( F18, F14, etc.) and do your own flight plans on this scenery.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Same is true for the mission flight. It is up to the user to develop his own mission flight with the involvement of both carriers or just one, with A2A fuel or not. I included the mission flight only to include all kind of difficult situations, and in so far also the landing on the second carrier as an emergency case if you like. The scenery has been developed in order to provide a scenery platform for the carrier pilot enthusiasts to perform his own carrier operations. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I experimented also with an moving AI carrier and tested successful auto landings also. The drawback for me was the fact, that you could never find the carrier in the following case: [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Let's say you start with the aircraft in the UK to fly to your carrier being located in the Persian gulf. The carrier is moving, so you do not know the coordinates. Even with my ARS radar gauge and under the assumption you are being within the 40 nm radius where the carrier is moving, you will not see it on the radar. In this case you must do a FSX time and season reset in order to see the AI ship traffic for the region. So I decided[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]not to use the moving carrier approach. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]There is a demo route for a carrier group traveling from Norfolk across the Atlantic Ocean where you can watch the carrier leaving Norfolk. Now after an hour there is now way to find the carrier any more. You just need to know where he might be and do your FSX reset to see him. So far my findings for AI ships. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]The CCP package may have more capabilities ( I am sure ) and by using the simconnect capabilities you will have much more possibilities for a addon development. But this goes far beyond of using the standard SDK XML/bgl compiler capabilities. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I hope the one or the other will nevertheless enjoy this scenery. [/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Dietmar[/FONT]
 
The drawback for me was the fact, that you could never find the carrier in the following case:
Click to expand...

Actually, if using several AI carriers, like the Nimitz v2, or the Clemencau, the planes equipped with Jivko Rusev's HUD system CAN find the tiny thing that's a carrier out in the middle of thee big seas. Dino's F-14, and T-45, the FSX Blue Angels' F/A-18C v18.3, the VRS TacPack SuperBug, and so on all have the required HUD. It can find the carrier, moving or not, from 99 nmi or farther. Even a moving AI Carrier on a AIBTC course, just as long it's one of the required carriers.
All the information the pilot needs is the correct TCN for the particular boat being utilized. 99 NMi is a pretty large area. As long as the pilot has a vague idea about the boat's course and speed during his flight, he shouldn't have too much trouble finding the carrier. Throw vLSO into the whole mix, and it will tell the pilot a rough position, course, and speed. Those AI LSO's are just mean, though. I KNOW they hate me personally... :banghead:

Programs like AICarriers, CCP, and Living World will place a carrier quite nicely. AIBTC works very nicely as well for pre-planned routes.

The whole point is that most planes require a certain WOD to land properly aboard the boat. One way to achieve that is to have the boat moving at the necessary speed. Another is by using the sim's weather engine. Or a combination of the two. The boat's speed may be adjusted inside the carrier's sim.cfg file, but it takes a little math to get it right.

Anyway, I just thought I'd throw all this out there, in case anyone might find it useful.:encouragement:

Have fun!
Pat☺
 
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Hi Pat,[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]thank's for your comprehensive comments and explanations. I am aware/was aware[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]about the AI carrier addons and the HUD gauges being developed by Jivko Rusev.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I was in contact with him to discuss on how his HUD with the ILS capability works.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Because there is no way to add NAV aids like NDPs, VOR, or ILS functions on[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]a AI moving carrier. I was quite sure that Jivko's gauge is simulating the function on his[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]HUD gauge. Regarding my question on this Jivko agreed on my considerations and[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]confirmed my assumption. He is using the TrafficInfo macros like I do for my ARS radar [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]gauge and via the macros you are able to identify in a certain range ( like you said about 99 nm )
to find the AI carrier. Same as with my ARS radar, which has the capability also[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]to locate and display AI ship traffic. So, I would find the carrier too in that range and by
knowing speed, HDG and the distance ( via the coordinates ) it is just a matter of calculation
to define the parameters for LOC and GS to display a correct ILS approach on the HUD.
All in all this is a very good solution to do it that way.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I decided to go with the static carrier approach because I can define it as as an airport,
I can make a flight plans to/from it if required, I can select the coordinates and fly directly from
any location in the world to it, and I can define To/From AI aircraft traffic to the carrier. [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]So, this just in short why I decided to go with the static carrier approach.
May be my comments above are of interest for others too.[/FONT]



[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Best [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Dietmar

PS: A successful landing approach on a static, or on a moving carrier is always a challenge regardless of being a moving or static carrier :mixed-smiley-027:
[/FONT]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top