Why is it that . . .

[dhasdell]

. . . there are lots of ships, especially carriers, available in CFS2, and so few in FS9? In CFS2 I can use the Illustrious class, Eagle, Hermes, not to mention all of the USN and IJN cariers in their various versions, all moving, yet in FS9 while there are masses of Nimitzes I can only find a couple of Ark Royals, the Lexingtons and Yorktowns, all stationary, and even then I have to edit files to make them usable.

How hard is it to convert - or are they simply incompatible?

[Dirtman]

Maybe because there are no bullets in FS9?

Landing on a stationary carrier completely unrealistic & in my opinion is just a waste of time.

Landing on a moving carrier takes skill..........

Landing a plane that's been "shot to hell" takes even more skill, but adds much more excitement!!!

Boils down to the same old equation: no bullets = no fun

Don't get me wrong here; I've had FS9 installed for a couple of weeks. :eek::eek::eek:
It's great for "sight-seeing" & "dead-reckoning" navigation. I also see the allure to those civil & commercial pilot wanna-be's.

I find little else of value in it for me personally. I guess time will tell.........

Perhaps this partially answers your question?
.
.

[dhasdell]

Yes, and I tend to agree with you. I like both FS9 and CFS2, and don't really go in much for warbirds in the former. I just feel that with such good scenery available - Golden Hawaii, for instance - it's a shame not to have more working carriers.

[crashaz]

We built a ton for CFS2 obviously. Only built Hornet for FS9.

One reason it is so difficult for FS9. The platform for the flight deck. FS9 when it came out.... had no thought of carrier operations. So the ships can now have platforms for the flight deck via the AttachTool in the SDK.... but the ships cannot move.

FSX... thanks to efforts of Paul Lange w/ Aces ....gave us back carrier ops with the Acceleration expansion pack. Moving carriers, multiple platforms catapults,carrier traps and ability to simulate moving elevators.

So we have CFS2 and FSX which simulate carriers so well. All 3 sims use different SDKs.... you can see why people build for CFS2 and FSX.... the ships can do much more.

:wavey:

[Captain Tenneal]

Landing on a stationary carrier completely unrealistic & in my opinion is just a waste of time.

Landing on a moving carrier takes skill..........



:costumes:

HAA HAA that is not so well this according to a supposed "naval aviator" (I think he was a fake riding on someones coatails) that blasted Razbam and I a few years ago :costumes:

either witchway I'm in your court DirtMan although I can't speek for FSX as of now never used it, but maybe soon!!!

[dhasdell]

Thank you for the explanation - presumably that is why some downloads specifically refer to a "hardened deck", and why try as I will I just fall through the deck of, for example, the "Hancock" task force in the English Channel.

Only built Hornet for FS9.
Is it available somewhere, please?

[Captain Tenneal]

Is it available somewhere, please?



here ya go!!
http://www.combatfs.com/index.php?loc=downloads&page=info&FileUploadName=The%20Virtual%20Navy&FileID=1886

[dhasdell]

Thank you - downloading now.
:jump:

[PRB]

Have you checked out the Midway and Coral Sea fleet of ships by Yanco? They are the most detailed carriers out there for FS9. They’re very nice and all can be landed on.

You can find them at the MAAM site here:

http://www.maam.org/flightsim/enhance/scenery_enhance.htm#BATTLE%20OF%20MIDWAY%20AND%20B ATTLE%20OF%20THE%20CORAL%20SEA%20SCENERY (http://www.maam.org/flightsim/enhance/scenery_enhance.htm#BATTLE%20OF%20MIDWAY%20AND%20B ATTLE%20OF%20THE%20CORAL%20SEA%20SCENERY)

As for ease of landing, as far as these sims go, if they are moving, they’re just moving in a straight line anyway, and all that does is provide a slower closing rate, i.e., making it a bit easier to land on than a stationary one. This closing rate reduction is easily simulated in FS9 by adding some wind over the deck. Now it’s moving, as far as we sim pilots can tell! Now if it was pitching and rolling, that would add fun! :d

[Good_2_Be]

Pitching and Rolling, another benefit of cfs2 :ernae:

[dhasdell]

Thank you Paul - those look very useful, and I'll certainly try them.

As for CFS2, I agree - I still get pleasantly surprised by new discoveries every time I go back to it.
:wiggle:

[dhasdell]

Those MAAM carriers are great. Even the recoil springs on the a/a and the non-slip textures on the metal decks are there. I'd never seen formations of bombers, skies full of flak and splashes in the water before. You can fly around and watch the battle going on below. Well worth a look! Thank you.