Moving Ships - what's the big deal

[fsafranek]

A sudden interest in carrier landing has me wondering a few of things.

1) How important are moving ships? And in particular aircraft carriers?

2) If they are moving how can you navigate to them and find them in the fog? Aren't the navaids at a fixed location?

3) Since FSX Acceleration includes the ability to launch and trap (I think) are the third party programs that make this possible necessary?

There are many things that are possible in FSX that seem to be "expected" these days. Is moving ships one of those "must haves" or is/was this just a passing fad?

Just curious.
:ernae:

[michael davies]

A sudden interest in carrier landing has me wondering a few of things.

1) How important are moving ships? And in particular aircraft carriers?

2) If they are moving how can you navigate to them and find them in the fog? Aren't the navaids at a fixed location?

3) Since FSX Acceleration includes the ability to launch and trap (I think) are the third party programs that make this possible necessary?

There are many things that are possible in FSX that seem to be "expected" these days. Is moving ships one of those "must haves" or is/was this just a passing fad?

Just curious.
:ernae:

1. How important is icing to a cake? :)

2. Not sure, I think you can hard code some nav aids to a vessel, but, vessels do not roam freely, they follow a given track and time scale, once you know that all you need do is follow said track and arrive at said location at said time.

3. Technically no, Acceleration is all you need to replicate carrier operations, and a corresponding coded aircraft, launch bar being a requirement, if carrier and aircraft are not compiled to Acceleration SDK then 3rd party programs will/may be required.

Best

Michael

[TARPSBird]

Two weeks ago I started a thread here where I asked about getting started in FSX carrier ops. Got a lot of suggestions and help (all of which was much appreciated), but the FSX Acceleration carrier features still remain a mystery to me. They may even be a mystery to Microsoft. The FSX SDK makes no mention of how it works, in fact the aircraft.cfg info section doesn't even list details of the [tailhook] or [launch_assistance] line entries. I've yet to even attempt to set up AI carrier traffic .bgl files. I know that subject is covered in the SDK but the procedures are pretty involved. Somebody came up with a clever program to set up FSX boat traffic but now it's not available for download. The moving carriers are a nice feature, but I would have still been happy with FSX if it had kept the FS9 limitation of static carriers requiring the use of the RCBCO gauges, or Rich Hogen's Arrestor Cables program to launch and recover.

[Astoroth]

You can still use Rich Hogan's Arrestor Cables 2.6 with Acceleration, I use it all the time for aircraft that don't have a tailhook or launch bar section in the aircraft.cfg.

Even works with the moving carriers too.

[AndyG43]

1. How important is icing to a cake? :)


Depends how good the cake is to start with - MY cakes need no icing!! :icon_lol:

[sparouty]

Hi!

I'll try to add some elements to what Michael said.

1) Why moving boats are important? Because trying to land on a fixed platform is something, but on a moving one is something completely different... I'm speaking about planes and helicopters too!! To my own opinion, FS naval operations takes its whole meaning with moving ships...

2) That's a good point: FS nav aids are thought only with fixed geo-coords. But Jivko Rusev came and switch the light on with his great gauges. So far, the FSX/Acc F18 and Dino's T45C are equiped with a Tacan-like system that allows you to navigate forward some moving Carriers. Jivko allowed me (thanks again!!) to integrate his code into our RFN's productions, so Etendard and Zephyr have moving carrier Tacan feature too!

But be aware that it is not a feature added to ships, it is a AI traffic functionalities added to the navy plane...

3) Michael has fully answered, any plane with defined launchbar and tailhook (defined in the aircraft.cfg or hardcoded into its mdl file) can use Acceleration feature for catapult launch or trap...


Last, AI Boat Traffic Compille, is THE tool that allows you to make bgl files for moving ships is available here: http://lc0277.gratisim.fr/boat/

I hope it will help you ,
Regards,
S.

[expat]

I strongly recommend using the RCBCO 3.0 for FSX gauges. They work well for both fixed and moving carriers. You need not set any coordinates for the cat/trap zones anymore which were needed in FS9. For the relatively few carrier aircraft you use you just make some simple changes to the panel.cfg once and you are done.

[jeansy]

Frank, I owe a few favs, send me a google earth kml of a location where you want a carrier and the carrier of your choice, and i will knock something up for you '

so you can have a play


i love them, ships or carriers , its just gives you something more to play with, being rotor head trying to land on the back of a moving ship adds a bit more of a challenge than landing on a H at an airfield

[LouP]

You want cake??? Go here http://deltasimstudio.com/bourbon_orca.htm or here http://deltasimstudio.com/smit_rotterdam.htm and set them up in AI carriers. Then get in your helicopter and land on them while underway. It took me a while and I still have crashes but what a blast. Haven't done it in a while as I am playing with a new aircraft cockpit I just built but what a blast :jump:

LouP :salute:

[Roadburner440]

I will answer the question of why having moving ships is so important (especially for carriers!). Cause in real life you would almost never see a static recovery unless you are talking about helicopters maybe. The ship is constantly moving and turning to the wind, and trying to keep at least 20-25kts of wind flowing over the deck to help the jets get enough lift for takeoff. Also to give them a little extra speed for landing as well. Without the carriers ability to move you would have to increase the cat shot speed, and somehow decrease their landing speed in order to use the equipment within its designed limits. Now in FSX none of that really matters, but it certaintly helps with the experience of feeling like you accomplished something. Plus landing on a moving one is harder than you know what.

[kilo delta]

Let's hope that MS Flight will also have carrier operations available as an option. :)

[falcon409]

It's my opinion that for the average joe, Carrier Ops is somewhat a mystery. Just read the posts above and see that it isn't a "one-size-fits-all" operation. There is a myriad of addon gauges, addon vessels and so on to help get you on the carrier deck but unless you are really "into" Carrier Ops, they aren't just sitting there waiting for you to do a circuit and perform a trap. You have to either ask for assistance in here (best option) or start looking through the major download sites and figure out on your own what you need and what you don't need.

As far as moving Carriers is concerned, I can see where that would be pretty interesting once you've mastered the basics and I emphasize "mastered". Nothing more frustrating than missing a trap doing a go-round and by the time you figure out where the Carrier should have been, it's gone, especially in weather. I'm not just blown away by moving carriers because I might get into Carrier Ops about 2 or three times a year for about a week stretch and then it get's boring and I go on to something else.

On Fixed navaids. . . .in FS9 wasn't it possible to "see" the carriers on GPS or radar as AI or at least view the ILS Approach cone? I have yet to be able to spot a Carrier that way in FSX. They are invisible (via GPS or Radar) until you "visually" acquire them (if that made any sense). I can see where moving Carriers would make that impossible, but for static, seems like it would be the same as any other airport that's visible on a map.

[GypsyBaron]

Hi!

-SNIP-

Last, AI Boat Traffic Compille, is THE tool that allows you to make bgl files for moving ships is available here: http://lc0277.gratisim.fr/boat/

I hope it will help you ,
Regards,
S.

Thanks for the new link! The old one I had bookmarked for that utility no longer works.

And I highly reccomend that anyone interested in using moving carriers download
and get familiar with this utility. It is, by far, the easiest way to insert moving ship
traffic ( not just carriers ) into your environment and have them there all the time,
sailing routes that you lay down using Google Earth and following sailing schedules
that you produce. A big THANKS! to Lamont Clark who created this utility and is also
the author of the aicarriers2 program.

When using these carriers you can create saved flights that start on the deck of
those ships.

Trying to use the FSX SDK AI utility to create ship traffic is, at best, a huge exercise
in frustration. It is NOT "user friendly"!!!

Paul

[mmann]

Trying to use the FSX SDK AI utility to create ship traffic is, at best, a huge exercise in frustration. It is NOT "user friendly"!!!

At least it doesn't require having Java installed on your system!

Regards, Mike Mann

[SkippyBing]

On Fixed navaids. . . .in FS9 wasn't it possible to "see" the carriers on GPS or radar as AI or at least view the ILS Approach cone? I have yet to be able to spot a Carrier that way in FSX. They are invisible (via GPS or Radar) until you "visually" acquire them (if that made any sense). I can see where moving Carriers would make that impossible, but for static, seems like it would be the same as any other airport that's visible on a map. Technically no, what you were seeing was the facility information for a small airfield that happened to be co-located with a model of a ship. You can do the same in FSX for a static carrier if you want but I don't think many (any?) one is making static carriers for FSX.As mentioned there are ways to emulate carrier nav aids but it’s on an individual aircraft basis.To be honest if you’re not massively into carrier ops the easiest thing to do is get Acceleration which provides an out of the box experience rather than faffing around with multiple add-ons. Personally I like the challenge of landing on a moving ship, plus with AI Carriers you can put them anywhere rather than being limited to where the static model happens to be.

[falcon409]

. . . . . .To be honest if you’re not massively into carrier ops the easiest thing to do is get Acceleration which provides an out of the box experience rather than faffing around with multiple add-ons. . . . . .
Yea, I'm not into Carrier Ops as a daily routine and I do have Accel but I don't care for the F-18 all that much any more. . . .I think I got burned out on it after it being my primary ride in FS9 for a long time (I flew Dean Reimers creations exclusively). Consequently I went looking for other Carrier Aircraft, most of which were FS9 portovers and so required all the addons to function.

[Bjoern]

1) How important are moving ships? And in particular aircraft carriers?

My "ships" slider is at 15 or 20% and number of my carrier traps in FSX are zero, so go figure.


2) If they are moving how can you navigate to them and find them in the fog? Aren't the navaids at a fixed location?

I *think* one can add NDBs or something to a carrier, but don't quote me on that.


3) Since FSX Acceleration includes the ability to launch and trap (I think) are the third party programs that make this possible necessary?

For those who don't have Acceleration, but enjoy a very occasional trap: Definately.


Is moving ships one of those "must haves" or is/was this just a passing fad?


I want moving trains.

[lazarus]

I have found that the edit to put a hook and spools on aircraft is dead easy, 2 lines in the config file to define hook and cat arm positions. FS9 ports FSX native, whatever- I ususally lift the lines from another model. I also have a page of hook and spool definitions somebody wrote up years ago to make aircraft FSX-A compatable. No adding gauges, though rcbo is an easy edit as well. I still use rcbo for catapaulting floatplanes. Moving ships- the best thing about FSX! With all the freeware ships available now, the only default boats left in my install are small boats. With multiple manual start of AI Carriers, and the FTB RADAR gauge from Brian's Nimrod-which shows AI Ships bearing, range and speed- one can recreate some fairly involved naval actions- I've fleets and formations set up for Samar Gulf- up to 8 AI carrier windows open, fleets of ships maneouvering independantly, and a fast carrier task force of 5-6 CV's and CVL's with cans, cruisers battleships, and fleet train, steaming at flank, 50-60 ships as far as the eye can see in any direction. One can also use AI formation from a carrier deck to Put up a CAP or strike, Much more limited in that the aircraft run in a fixed box or straight line, but if you run the carrier in the same box to stay under your CAP, its mighty cool to launch while the rest of the section roars overhead. Then theres the Sci-fi stuff. Gimme a Viper and call me Jolly!
So, yeah, I like the Icing!

[wilycoyote4]

Two weeks ago I started a thread here where I asked about getting started in FSX carrier ops. Got a lot of suggestions and help (all of which was much appreciated), but the FSX Acceleration carrier features still remain a mystery to me. They may even be a mystery to Microsoft. The FSX SDK makes no mention of how it works, in fact the aircraft.cfg info section doesn't even list details of the [tailhook] or [launch_assistance] line entries. ......

A couple of months after Acceleration was released (nov 2007 or thereabouts) one of the FSX developers made a brief statement ----on his own personal blog website-----that the Accel SDK did lack carrier information and that he plus one or two others would write the missing info.
As far as I know nothing was written. Three and one-half years later no info released.
Progress has been made without the info.

Today there are many aircraft, freeware and payware, for carriers. It is always being improved.

http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php/board,4.0.html
This site concerns the default Hornet. It also concerns the improvements made by the "sludge" team to the Hornet (version 1.2 is current while version 1.3 is close to release). These are basically former carrier pilots trying to improve the Hornet --- and some of this to freeware aircraft such as Dino's F-14D and T-45C. It's some deep reading and a bit of a learning curve if you will try. All free.

Offered in the hope readers will be helped. :icon29::guinness:

[sparouty]

Hi!
You're right wilycoyote4 some info has posted in parallel of the offical FSX SDK to complete it on the nvaops feature.
One of these blog was Lamont Clarke's blog whose website is know available here:
http://lc0277.gratisim.fr/Adapting_SX_aircrafts_to_acceleration_carriers.htm l

But after years, many informations has been shared by developpers on these features (about plane implementation but also on carrier modeling).
I remember some great threads here in SOH where carriers modelers were sharing some important discoveries!!
:ernae:
You'll find in the FSDevelopper Wiki a very good synthesis of all these items:
http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Catapult/Arrestor_Operations_(FSXA)

Regards,
S.

[wilycoyote4]

"Includes info missing from the published SDK. "
must study and pass along, many thanks:applause::guinness::guinness::guinness::run ning:

[Rich]

So many nice models for carrier work.

[Rich]

And some portovers

[TARPSBird]

sparouty,
Thanks for providing the live link for downloading Lamont Clarke's AI Boat Traffic Compiler. I got mine from another SOH member, didn't know it was still available. I wish Lamont would update his website or upload his programs to Flightsim or elsewhere, he's done some good programs. Also thanks to everybody else who's posted with more links, the fsdeveloper site has the carrier info that should've been in the SDK.

[Meshman]

... I wish Lamont would update his website or upload his programs to Flightsim or elsewhere, he's done some good programs.

He left the development aspect a loonnngggg time ago. He may still be out there, somewhere? His work was/is appreciated and it's a shame he decided to stop.

[LouP]

A few of my shots:

LouP

[LouP]

A few others that are also in another thread but can't find it to link to it lol:

[letourn]

Hi,Carrier landing would not be the same without moving ship. Its really a great add to FSX.With great free addon ships like the Nimitz, The Clemenceau and The Ark Royal.Lazarus sound fun what you create any chance you can release those traffic bgl files.

[BASys]

Hi Folks

re: FSDeveloper - Wiki - Catapult/Arrestor Operations (FSXA) (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Catapult/Arrestor_Operations_%28FSXA%29)
Assistance required. :wavey:

Claims were made that the article's information was incorrect.
Despite requests for details, no information was forthcoming.

Any comments/corrections/feedback would be appreciated.

Many thanks
ATB
Paul

[TARPSBird]

This tailhook stuff gets a little more fun when you can finally launch off the front end after surviving landing on the back end! No nose-overs, cart-wheels, or dunkings. :icon_lol: Paul Clawson's BT-1 launching from the Flying Stations HMS Victorious off Scapa Flow.

[Rich]

I am probably being dimmer than usual here but could you please elaborate on what you are talking about.


Hi Folks

re: FSDeveloper - Wiki - Catapult/Arrestor Operations (FSXA) (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Catapult/Arrestor_Operations_%28FSXA%29)
Assistance required. :wavey:

Claims were made that the article's information was incorrect.
Despite requests for details, no information was forthcoming.

Any comments/corrections/feedback would be appreciated.

Many thanks
ATB
Paul

[Rich]

Well done Tarps, I had a hook setup ready to pass on for that one but I see you have cracked both, personally I would have left the cat launch off as FSX launches too fast and you would probably left your wings behind.

So now you are on your own.

Rich

[BASys]

Hi Folks


I am probably being dimmer than usual here but could you please elaborate on what you are talking about.
Rich -
Sylvain's refering to the article, reminded me of the outstanding issue.

As the article's creator
I'd like to be able to correct any information
so I can finalise the article and remove the WIP Category (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Category:Wiki-Content-WIP) classifier. :kilroy:

HTH
ATB
Paul

[TARPSBird]

...personally I would have left the cat launch off as FSX launches too fast and you would probably left your wings behind.
Rich
No kidding! That poor BT-1 went off the bow like it was shot from a cannon. The pilot and gunner suffered whiplash and I just got a nasty phone call from the Flight Surgeon. :icon_lol: I did a cut-and-paste with the launch bar entries from Tim's Spad, worked like a champ. I think the Arrestor Cables program launches a bit more realistically speed wise, but since most folks prefer to deck launch the tail-draggers it's no big deal.

BTW Rich, in your Manila Bay carrier bgl's I can see Ark Royal but Victorious does not appear. I have both CV's and both bgl's installed in FSX. At 10:00 am should they both be in close proximity to each other in the bay, or is Vic out in the South China Sea somewhere?

[BASys]

Hi Folks


personally I would have left the cat launch off
as FSX launches too fast and you would probably left your wings behind.
Rich -
AIUI, Sylvain has figured out how to address this.

Not sure if its related to the CatapultForceLimiter variable.
See FSDeveloper - Wiki - Catapult/Arrestor Operations (FSXA) - Configuring (FSXA) (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Catapult/Arrestor_Operations_(FSXA)#Configuring_.28FSXA.29)

HTH
ATB
Paul

[delta_lima]

A sudden interest in carrier landing has me wondering a few of things.

1) How important are moving ships? And in particular aircraft carriers?

2) If they are moving how can you navigate to them and find them in the fog? Aren't the navaids at a fixed location?

3) Since FSX Acceleration includes the ability to launch and trap (I think) are the third party programs that make this possible necessary?

There are many things that are possible in FSX that seem to be "expected" these days. Is moving ships one of those "must haves" or is/was this just a passing fad?

Just curious.
:ernae:


Hello Frank,

Yours is a basicallyl a philosophical question - the answer to which is a function of your FS interests. As an analogy, one could ask the same of the hugely detailed airport addons - are they a must have? Well, I don't fly modern commercial airliners, so I personally wouldn't pay a dollar for such a product. Why? It's just not my thing. But there are sim pilots who want to simulate the airline flying experience - and if that's your thing, then I can totally understand why you'd get excited about an airport addon that allows you to see individual pieces of luggage get trundled out the to plane, or ultra realistic gates, fuel bowsers, etc. To simulate that experience, those components contribute heavily.

The same with naval aviation. If you have at least a strong curiousity about the subject, then there are certain key components that contribute strongly to the realism of that experience. FS9 brought us catapult and arrested landing programmes (3Wire and RCBCO) and realistic-looking wakes. They were the cat's meow at the time. But landable ships were all static. FSX Acceleration brought us moving+landable ships. I'm going to argue that's the single most important component of realism needed for that experience, second only to perhaps the arrested landing function.

Addon programmes? AI Carriers - must have, in my opinion. Once configured, you can spawn a particular carrier (or other boat) fleet anwhere, at stroke of key. Utterly amazing and power - and easy to use - utility. If you want to make existing boat tracks, then Lamont's AI Boat tool is also a must - though I haven't used it myself yet.

3rd party cat/trap programmes? I don't use them anymore - I simply use the default Accel cat/trap function, but I know Rich, Expat, and other are big fans of RCBCO 3.0. The two ways I think these are still relevant in FSX are a) static carriers, and b) I believe RCBCO allows carriers launches for slower aircraft (default FSX Accel launch is fixed for F/A-18 sized aircraft) even on moving carriers. The latter function is reasonable consideration - for planes that are neither slow and light enough to launch without a catapult, nor fast and heavy to warrant getting rocketed out at 220 kts over the bow. I wish that the default Accel catapult had adjustable force - that would make things easy.

Regardless of personal preferences, the early (Javier Nimitz), current (Clem, Ark Royal) and upcoming (Flying Stations Victorious 1944) development of FSX AI carriers is proof of their legitimate value to FSX naval aviation, and not merely a "fad". Furthermore, as Rich and other point out, there are a couple dozen or more FSX-native fantastic carrier planes now available, and around dozen or so more coming from various devs.

Apart from the naval carrier thing, moving boats allows for civilian/commercial ops: there are coast guard cutters, yachts, and a whole host of other sim possibilities that moving boat traffic makes possible.

So - the question is not whether moving boat traffic is truly needed - the question is whether or not you are interested in a realistic FSX naval/marine aviation experience. If not, then this discussion is all moot. But if you are, it truly is an exciting, challenging, and rewarding way to engage in FSX.

:ernae:

dl

[lazarus]

Hi Letourn. Sorry to say; I have no idea how to write BGL's. I use AI carrier and a 'kluge' that was in the readme file with Tim Conrads MAB AI (FS.com?) It was a hack around for AI carriers not launching- Paste a shortcut to AI Carriers to desktop. you minimise the sim to desk top with the sim running, and right click the AI Carr shortcut, run as admin ( not really sure if required) minimise the window that says' connected to FSX' you can start multiple AI Carr windows, and in the sim toolbar under add-ons you will see all the AI Carr tabs, from where you launch your fleets like usual. Its interesting- read 'high cockpit work load' to run 8-10 different formations , really so when working the littorals, much easier with more searoom, and that Nimrod radar gauge is an invaluable tool for plotting, tracking, and navigating AI formations. I can post my AI Carriers config file when I get home tonight, , which will give you the formations to use, once you get all the ships in. One of the coolest Traffic BGL's for pacific naval ops is DWSO's(? David?...) Solomon Island tracks and Mark's Solomons scenery- a stagering scenery project that is!
BTW, LouP...How in the devil did you get the Bourbon Orca's helipad to work. I put mine in AI Carr, but I sink right through the deck- no pad there.

[sparouty]

Hi,
Interesting discussion...I will try to add some details to what has been said...



Rich -
AIUI, Sylvain has figured out how to address this.

Not sure if its related to the CatapultForceLimiter variable.
See FSDeveloper - Wiki - Catapult/Arrestor Operations (FSXA) - Configuring (FSXA) (http://www.fsdeveloper.com/wiki/index.php?title=Catapult/Arrestor_Operations_(FSXA)#Configuring_.28FSXA.29)



Paul, unfortunatelly, I don' t have any explanation/clue on this feature. The solution I have been worked on is a work-around that give an acceptable result...


3rd party cat/trap programmes? I don't use them anymore - I simply use the default Accel cat/trap function, but I know Rich, Expat, and other are big fans of RCBCO 3.0. The two ways I think these are still relevant in FSX are a) static carriers, and b) I believe RCBCO allows carriers launches for slower aircraft (default FSX Accel launch is fixed for F/A-18 sized aircraft) even on moving carriers. The latter function is reasonable consideration - for planes that are neither slow and light enough to launch without a catapult, nor fast and heavy to warrant getting rocketed out at 220 kts over the bow. I wish that the default Accel catapult had adjustable force - that would make things easy.


The best way to explain what my work-around is made of is to start from DeltaLima words.
In one hand you have Acceleration feature that manage positioning and holdback fixation and blastshield animation but launch with far too much strengh for some light plane.
In other hand, you have RCBCO 3.0 that manage a adjusting launch speed but a fixed coordinates positioning.

My idea was to merge both solution taking best part from each feature:
- the positioning, launchbar and blastshield animation is done by FSX/Acc functionalities
- Launch is done by RCBCO 3.0 's dll

I made a small xml code which:
- calculates the launch speed required taking account weight, air speed on the deck, and plane properties (max gross weight and design speed)
- manage the launch process step by step including some control that FSX didn't took into consideration (throttle, flaps) and local variable to help my carrier model to animate the shooter officer.
- Fire the launch with the appropriate speed

With the courtesy of Rob Barendregt and Doug Dawson (thanks again!!) this small gauge has been packaged with the Etendard and the Zephyr, and I'm working on adapting it to Dino's T45c.

There are 2 issues with this solution:
- I don't succed in managing the catapult vapor effects...
- the launch is done by increasing speed but not acceleration so you don't have any G effect during the launch. It seems that FSUIPC and/or Simconnect doesn't overide the acceleration value...
To my own point of view these two points are minor and fully acceptable...:icon_lol:

Reagards
S.

[BASys]

Hi Folks

Sylvain -
My apologies, I'd misunderstood,
thinking you had a purely FSXA solution.



Your alternative implementation sounds a good workaround.



PS
Had you ever tried CatapultForceLimiter=0

Supposedly -
Enables the catapult systems to generate the required force for any type of aircraft.

I've never gotten round to testing it.



HTH
ATB
Paul

[letourn]

Lazarus,
I am already using Carrier Tracks 1 & 2 but never saw this package Solomon Island 1943 sound really fun. Thanks

Maybe someone can help i cant find the scenery "Solomon Island 1943 Mark Schimmer" from the download page.

Sylvain,
Can you also try your fix on the F/A-18 Acceleration. I would be nice to finally Cat at full military power instead of Idle power to have the right speed at the ramp.

let

[Rich]

Tarps, sorry my blunder I gave you the track for the WIP Victorious 1944 model which while being the same track it has the wrong ship entry, delete trafficVic44.bgl and replace with this one trafficVic.bgl both ships should then appear at and start moving at around the same time on different tracks.

Rich

[Rich]

Just to be clear on what I use to launch and catch, Before I installed Accel I did indeed use RCBCO for carrier work and very good it is too.

Since installing Accel that is all I use since you have to catch a wire to have a arrested landing, with RCBCO you just need to touch anything harder than air as far as I can tell and launch from anywhere, I may well be wrong ?????

A lot of my carrier models are tail draggers some of which are ports and I have them all landing properly.

[orionll]

Had you ever tried CatapultForceLimiter=0

Supposedly -
Enables the catapult systems to generate the required force for any type of aircraft.
wilycoyote4 at the FSDreamTeam forums tried, and it seemed to lower the cat launch speed for him in the T-45.

I haven't tried myself, though.

Here's the thread: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=4396.msg39857#msg39857 (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=4396.0)

[Rich]

Just tried this and oddly enough it works a treat on the Swordfish launches at around 65 kts which is about right so I will keep it in and try a few more, the Swordfish without this fix used to launch at over 170 kts.

Many thanks to all concerned FSX is like the first forays into CFS2 when it was first released no clues from Ms


wilycoyote4 at the FSDreamTeam forums tried, and it seemed to lower the cat launch speed for him in the T-45.

I haven't tried myself, though.

Here's the thread: http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=4396.msg39857#msg39857 (http://www.fsdreamteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=4396.0)

[Rich]

Tried the cat speed fix on the Sea Gladiator works there too down from 175 kts to 70 kts, so it seems to work ok on those 2 at least, they are my slowest flyers.

[sparouty]

Tried the cat speed fix on the Sea Gladiator works there too down from 175 kts to 70 kts, so it seems to work ok on those 2 at least, they are my slowest flyers.

Hi,
It's a very interesting point!
I used to tried it in the past, with the Zephyr, without any significant result... but FSX may use a reference speed badly defined into the aircraft.cfg that "distorted" my tests...

Last, I have to check the T45C manual, but, according to what I understood, the manual reference launch speed is given with the carrier speed included : it is the min true air speed authorized (with a margin of 10 or 15 knts), so, in the T54 case, we're expecting a speed lower than 135knts, aren't we?

Thank you for this thread!!
Regards
S.

[Rich]

Hi sparouty, It will probably need a lot more testing to get a answer but for me at the moment it works losing 100 kts unwanted speed on 2 aircraft so will try some jets and faster props to see what happens.

We left the cat launch off the Swordfish because of the stupidly high launch speeds depending how tests go it may be made available.

[TARPSBird]

Tarps, sorry my blunder I gave you the track for the WIP Victorious 1944 model which while being the same track it has the wrong ship entry, delete trafficVic44.bgl and replace with this one trafficVic.bgl both ships should then appear at and start moving at around the same time on different tracks.
Rich
Still no Victorious in Manila Bay with your attached bgl file. I have the file in Microsoft Flight Simulator X\Scenery\World\Scenery, same location as the Ark Royal bgl, Ark shows up no problem, Vic is a no-show. Also tried it in Microsoft Flight Simulator X\Addon Scenery\Scenery, again no luck. I am starting the flight at 10:00 AM per your original instructions. I hate it when I can't get stuff to work right. :banghead:

[Rich]

Tarps, re vic try this go into the Victorious folder in boats open the sim.cfg and change

title=Victorious_1940 to title=Victorious_1944 I outsmarted myself not recording changes let me know if it works

Will tidy things up tomorrow

Rich

[TARPSBird]

Rich, we're good to go now. Changing the name in the ship's .cfg file did the trick.
Thanks for the troubleshooting. :salute:

[letourn]

I tried the new config

[Realism]
CatapultForceLimiter=0 //Enables the catapult systems to generate the required force for any type of aircraft

F/A-18 Sludge / Combat v1.2
35 285 GW / 175 knots with carrier speed at 25 knots
Full military power

T-45 v2 Beta Dino
13 310 GW / 140 knots with carrier speed at 25 knots
Full military power

F-14D Dino
69 426GW / 195 knots with carrier speed at 25 knots
Full military power

[wilycoyote4]

letourn -----
looks good

[lazarus]

I tried the new config

[Realism]
CatapultForceLimiter=0 //Enables the catapult systems to generate the required force for any type of aircraft

F/A-18 Sludge / Combat v1.2
35 285 GW / 175 knots with carrier speed at 25 knots
Full military power

T-45 v2 Beta Dino
13 310 GW / 140 knots with carrier speed at 25 knots
Full military power

F-14D Dino
69 426GW / 195 knots with carrier speed at 25 knots
Full military power



Ah! Nice find. It will be nice to set the cat stroke. Some of the old salts were grummbling about swallowing their plates when the cat fired.
A excellent thread, everyone, several mysteries solved and bugs kluged.:applause:

[Rich]

From what I understand of it FSX sorts out the launch speed for all aircraft with no individual setting for each aircraft.

A very good mod pity it took over 3 years to emerge

[Rich]

Tarps, check if you can still get the 3 Victorious saved flights with the Cessna's in the Med etc.

It may be changing title=Victorious_1940 to title=Victorious_1944 may disrupt things, I have redone trafficvic.bgl as trafficVic_40.bgl.

Remove trafficvic.bgl and replace with this one and reverse the title change back to title=Victorious_1940




Rich, we're good to go now. Changing the name in the ship's .cfg file did the trick.
Thanks for the troubleshooting. :salute:

[TARPSBird]

Rich, you were right, I had lost the Vic in the Cessna flights but she reappeared when I changed the cfg name and substituted the new bgl. :salute: Got kinda confusing there for a bit.