Moving planes?

[Harric]

Hi all, i assume it but would like to get it comewhat confirmed :)

Is this option to move manually planes from flightdeck to hangar and vice versa just not in the game yet or do i miss something?

regards

[chubeastie]

I think we will see that option in the future. However, from a software development point of view, it makes sense that they get current deck spotting and aircraft operations sorted out to their desire first. Once that is complete they can add a layer of code on top of the program that allows more player control. Doing both at the same time adds serious complexity to getting the code right as the second layer can have serious affects on the first layer of programming. Trying to code it all at once makes the problems much more difficult to locate and correct. I think they're doing it right. Software coding is like climbing stairs--if you try going up two or three steps at a time you are much more likely to trip and fall.

[Harric]

From coding point of view that might be tricky,

but from player point of view, you sure have to be able to decide which squadrons you want on deck, so you dont have to move unnecessary planes back and force when you change from starting to landing prep. Isnt that what a commander would do? giving right orders to be more effective?

[Phantom]

Being able to manage individual fighters and bombers feels like it falls out of the scope of what an Admiral would be doing. However whilst in its early demo/beta form a button that teleports a stuck aircraft to its correct position would be great.

[Harric]

Originally posted by Phantom:

Being able to manage individual fighters and bombers feels like it falls out of the scope of what an Admiral would be doing. However whilst in its early demo/beta form a button that teleports a stuck aircraft to its correct position would be great.

well, you already can move them inside hangar to storage and back.
is that what an admiral would do then?
so to me it seems from hangar to deck and back is not a task we should not be able to do, more likely not existent yet.

[chubeastie]

I would eventually like to have control of initial squadron spotting at least. As to what is historically accurate, I really don't know although I'm sure that information is available to someone less lazy than I am to look it up. I am completely on-board with idea of having more influence on initial aircraft dispersion. I think we'll see some of that going forward. At least, I hope so.

One thing I'm pretty sure about is that planes were never armed with bombs and torpedoes before being assigned a mission. Planes being parked with ordinance would be a recipe for disaster (just ask Nagumo).

[Phantom]

Originally posted by Harric:

Originally posted by Phantom:

Being able to manage individual fighters and bombers feels like it falls out of the scope of what an Admiral would be doing. However whilst in its early demo/beta form a button that teleports a stuck aircraft to its correct position would be great.

well, you already can move them inside hangar to storage and back.
is that what an admiral would do then?
so to me it seems from hangar to deck and back is not a task we should not be able to do, more likely not existent yet.

Whats with the snark? I am certain that an Admiral would not micromanage aircraft.

It doesn't matter anyway I was just providing an opinion if someone wants that sort of level of micromanagement that's fine, as I said it may help with current bugs in any case. I would want that to very much be optional and not an expectation though.

[Harric]

Originally posted by Phantom:

Originally posted by Harric:

well, you already can move them inside hangar to storage and back.
is that what an admiral would do then?
so to me it seems from hangar to deck and back is not a task we should not be able to do, more likely not existent yet.

Whats with the snark? I am certain that an Admiral would not micromanage aircraft.

It doesn't matter anyway I was just providing an opinion if someone wants that sort of level of micromanagement that's fine, as I said it may help with current bugs in any case. I would want that to very much be optional and not an expectation though.

optional wouldnt hurt at all.
it wasnt meant to be harsh on you, just saying that we have already such kind of micro management inside the hangar.

[=7CAV=SPC.Henson.K]

I thought that after recovery aircraft were moved to the hangar deck to keep the flight deck clear for OPs. Was this not standard SOP?

[Futte]

I will like a button too cancel a flights, sometime flight-deck can jam up and easy shift from 1 CV too next CV

[Hazard]

Originally posted by =7CAV=SPC.Henson.K:

I thought that after recovery aircraft were moved to the hangar deck to keep the flight deck clear for OPs. Was this not standard SOP?

Some navies, like the IJN and RN, had this as part of their doctrine but the USN, then and now, has always made use of deck parks. You will definitely understand why if you ever mess up your spotting cadence in-game and have to pull an entire squadron out of the hanger. It takes forever.

[Drydock Dreams Games]

Yes, deck park is the only true park in the USN. The hangar is for maintenance first and foremost, and by design doesn't have the space to hold the air group (which isn't the practice with pre-war Japanese & RN design & doctrine). Notably, all refueling and arming is expected to take place on the flight deck, so as to make the best use of this setup

[ironsmack]

I would like the ability to choose which aircraft are parked on the deck in between mission assignments. I can plan ahead as to which missions I will be launching from each deck and save minutes. For instance, launching a strike packaging and then leaving fighters parked on the deck in case of a scramble.

[7394teen]

I have given a lot of thought about pre-spotting. My observations from battle gen both carriers start with 25 planes on deck. I was watching Yorktown to see if all the elevators were operational. I saw only bow and midships elevators operating. The deck count never exceeded 25. I restated the game and watched Lexington . I could see it was slower because seemed that the deck was narrower at the island. I think it was slower because of the location of the mid-ship elevator. I also saw that the deck count went up to 27 for a few seconds.

So is 25 the hard number for Deck capacity? Does the fact that Lexington hit 27 mean anything?

I don't think that pre-spotting is worth the development. I think a better solution at this stage selecting the SBD squadron during search planning, It doesn't effect search, it affects your strike cohesion. You can end up with two squadrons where the last section only 1 or 2 planes.