idk why but the VLS Tico and burke just fire 80% of SM-2 directly into the water infront of them, I have no other mods.

@nuclearstonk Triggers are not working correctly in The High North (2008). All messages and victory immediately show after briefing.

will fix

Unsure if this is a issue from Pack Lethality or NTU. But on the Tarwa Class landing ship, the AV-8B+ is missing localization for StrikePrecisionLongRange.

@Yolkyslime why would it track ships? it's a land attack missile that can only engage static targets
@beckett.wier no, the model for the ship would have to be completely different and the devs do not allow for modders to reimport whole ship models to the game (which is what i would have to do)

also, it would be a huge amount of work

For some reason the RGM-109E doesnt track ships, or anything? @Nuclearstonk

Can you add a late 80s fit for the USS Enterprise great mod thanks in advance

@itachiaurion what settings do you have your game at? maximum? i personally recommend keeping settings lower than max (i play on pretty low settings personally) but the second highest settings arent as awfully performing as max
otherwise, all i can say is that it's a big mission and you're bound to have degrading performance if you're using a lot of sonobuoys or spawning a lot of planes

Question about the mission coming with the mod. Is that normal to have atrocious FPS quite quickly into the mission? I've tried the Hormuz 1998 mission and while very enojoyable at forst it become an nightmare to finish with a framerate arond the single digit mark despite having an 9950 X3D 96GB or RAM and an 5090. I'm not sure what's causing slowing in this game but I have spammed a lot of Sonobuoy fearing submarines arond the carrier and the escort group and may have overdone it. I'm also not sure if it's normal for the iranian air base to not send more plane after the first wave is dealt with.

Regardless of this issue the models are really well made and the missions looks very enjoyable outside of this lag issue.

Thanks to Nuclearstonk for all this great work put into this mod.

but i didn't turn around, my f-14s were guiding the missiles all the way, and it happened when releasing the weapon at nearly 100 nm, but also when releasing at 60ish nm

@Anklopfgerät TOG II* it seems AIM-54 works completely fine, except in the event that you turn around and let the missile try to acquire the target by itself while near max range, and then the missile will do as you said

i recommend keeping your F-14s guiding their phoenix missiles while at long range, IRL AIM-54A would just go dumb if its connection was lost at any point in flight for any reason, and had no ability to reconnect or accept midcourse guidance after that

@nuclearstonk i want to make you aware, that with NTU, the AIM-54A is unable to lock on lower flying targets (i experienced it with MiG 25 at 3000 ft, while planes at 37k ft are no problem). The missiles go in their terminal dive, and after mere seconds they rotate again and start to climb again and refuse to engage a target (it feels like the missile couldn't find a target and then decides to disengage). I only encountered this bug since the last update.

@nuclearstonk thanks for the answer, just wondering if your gonna add the flight 3 arleigh? Your arleigh burke mods are the best ones out there!

@steveaeroplane i updated the mod a while back that also changed some OHP stuff as well, and i dont have a patreon or something atm, it's something i've considered before though but discounted due to a myriad of reasons

@Yolkyslime the SM-6 in NTU that you can use on any of *my* units is the earliest block I SM-6, which has less capable BMD integration versus later blocks like Dual I upgrade, block IA and the like, which is RIM-174B (which is not used on any ships right now)

eventually i'll make later era ships with presently used weapons, but for now you'll have to cope with early 2010s technology at best

The sm-6 doesnt have a good Ballistic missile interception rate compared to sm2-Er?

@nuclearstonk That's great to hear. Your mod is amazing. Do you know when you plan the next update to be out? Also do you have a patreon or something so I can throw some buckaroos your way?

no, this will be fixed next update (but unfortunately give you nearly unlimited ARMs like before)

I noticed that this mod seems to remove all sead loadouts from my carriers. Is this intentional?

I would like to personally thank this mod for making peak even more peak

Nice job on the Arleigh Burke update! Also enjoyed the new NTU missions you inserted in as well!

Will the F-14B receive a new model? Its current engine nozzles still look like those of the TF30 engine.

ship names and hull #'s on some 2003 sprucans are mismatched

so is this mod gonna start incorpatratign evne more completly custom models for like new ships or is it just gonna be stuff like new planes for the updated carriers

@HofVanStrudel this mod does tweak base game units, but all vanilla scenarios should have (mostly) the same balance if you have NTU and PELT enabled at the same time
so, for example, in a vanilla scenario you won't have units that shouldn't show up in them, and everything should be period accurate

Hello can i play thid mod with vanilla scenarious or does this replace the units in the game?

you'd have to blame the US navy for not putting helicopter hangars on the flights 1 and 2 arleigh burkes

There's no helicopters on the Arleigh Burkes for some reason, is there a reason for this?

Are the Mark 38 25 mm coming for the Burkes?

will fix

@nuclearstronk. the tarwa 1989 variant has only one deck space and crew. this is different then the default one so guessing it got missed in the update

@nuclearstonk Alright, thanks for warning and for the answers <3

@Paddy_Prickly_Dickly whenever there's a good enough quality seahawk to use, yes

This NTU update is amazing, only thing I'm wondering about is if in the future you will be able to add the Seahawk to the ships that should have it?

Thank You for the Legacy Hornets Nuclearstonk! I have been desperately waiting for Legacy Hornets since ive been building a 1989 Campaign Series and it felt weird for them to not be around

@Shina_Santos no, that all sounds right, except now the MiG-23AMs now have R-27s and R-73s, so you'll have to take them very seriously after the latest update

@nuclearstonk the AIM-7M have a range of 31nm and the R-24TM have a range of 20nm, the R-24 is very fast tho so when the AIM-7 reach their target the R-24 is already less than 5mn screaming at 2000+ kts of my F-14s. (just an FYI i got no other mods besides NTU and PELT). Is the AIM-7M range borked on my game?

any chance of adding the static a-7s back on the deck? their cockpit glass seems to be left over and just floating

Awesome work, thanks so much!

a note to all: there's a known file conflict between NTU and Mitchell600s burke mod, so for the time being i recommend you use NTU without the burke mod until i can resolve this

ok, thank you for your reply. btw, it's really great that the fantastic models from Mitchell600 and WTigerTw are now integrated.

undecided, but the current idea is that you can land helos on it and refuel them
since there's no deck park, the helo just vanishes, but hopefully in the future it'll work properly (and for more ships, potentially)

Why can the Burkes accommodate a helicopter in the “hangar” that does not exist on the Flight 1/2 models? Is this intentional or a bug?

@Shina_Santos that's because the MiG-23s have pretty good jammers, and AIM-7Ms are radar missiles (and R-24TMs are infrared and not affected by jamming)
theoretically without jamming your AIM-7s will perform better than the R-24TMs, but of course nothing exists in a vacuum, and your AIM-7s are facing more severe penalties due to that aircraft having a powerful DECM system

but your AIM-7s should outrange R-24TM by a factor of 2, so i fail to see the issue here

Okay did some more battles and still same thing... with even log I see that AIM-7M gets jammed a lot and even if they don't, when they say "intercepts" they still miss normally. Also realized that AA-7D1 rarely gets spoofed by chaff/flares so most of the ones that didn't kill were because of maneuvers. Out of the 7 battles I did 4 of them ended with 4 F-14A's dead and 1 Mig23AM dead | other 2 was 4 F-14A's dead and 2 Mig23AM dead | 1 with only 4 F-14A's dead and no mig dead. Battle scenario was 4vs4 at 37000 AA loadouts, skill of F-14s set to "Seasoned" and 23's set to "Trained", ROE set to Free and Radars on. If this is how it supposed to be (23 beats 14) then it is what it is, I just would like confirmation.

Alright I'll look into it.

try looking at the event log, it tells you exactly what's happening
you could just be rolling low on missile firings

mmm... cause yesterday I tested fighting 4 F-14A vs 4 Mig-23AM (both with AA loadouts) and the lost 10 fights at 50nm at 37000 back to back so I'm trying to understand is it missile, aircraft difference or i'm just not using them right. also tried putting the F14's at a higher altitude but the outcome kept the same Aim-7M just kept missing.

@Shina_Santos i dont really know what you mean, you can actually see the kill probabilities in the event log (either in your logs folder, or in the F10 -> event log menu) and currently AIM-7M has a KillProbability=0.8 while AA-7D1 (R-24TM) has a KillProbability=0.75

of course one is an infrared missile and unaffected by altitude, jammers, radar performance, and the other is a radar guided missile and is susceptible to all of the above, but the pK should be higher for AIM-7M

since everything is determined by dicerolls, there's always a chance to simply be unlucky given a finite sample size, so just be wary that your missiles will never be 100% efficient

Hey so I wanted to ask, are the AIM-7M with issues or do the R-24TM just outperform them like crazy. R-24 (PELT) PoK of 90% but the Aim-7M have around 50% or less