Thanks guys.
Capt:
What was wrong with the original SF Carrier 2 mission? Thought you had it working, at some point anyways.
I haven't been flying much recently, but I still use Skype if you'd like to contact me.
1. No, and no. This is somewhat stripped down compared to SF Carrier 2, due to time constraints (wanted to get it out as soon as possible), and from when I flew, I found that not many people ever went to the tanker anyways. Although, someone in the session is still free to fly their own plane, while others use J.R.'s In Flight Refueling gauge to refuel.
2. As long as the max speed (MPH) is greater than or equal to 35 MPH, and you didn't change the acceleration or deceleration constants, everything should be alright, I think. The worst that could happen is that your carrier would slowly get out of sync. For the record, in case anyone wants to know the default values, you should have this in your USS_NIMITZ sim.cfg:
[DesignSpecs]
max_speed_mph = 50
acceleration_constants = 0.07, 0.07 //Time constant (effects responsiveness), and max acceleration (Gs)
deceleration_constants = 0.05, 0.05 //Time constant (effects responsiveness), and max acceleration (Gs)
3. Nope, the PLAT camera wasn't updated, to my knowledge anyways. Well, not to the extent that was being talked about. The PLAT Camera included in the Combat Hornet, SF Carrier 2.5 (updater and PLAT Camera Utility) and San Diego NATOPS Carrier Mission installer all have a working windspeed indicator (that wasn't present in the original release).