Real Aircraft take off feature

'how the aircraft attacks like the YAK plane (shoots a stream of bullets in a strait line)'

already doable.

Ok, but what about the aircraft take-off logic?

Black Temple Gaurdian, such funny workarounds aren't really solutions, are they?

'Black Temple Gaurdian, such funny workarounds aren't really solutions, are they?'
???
Just give the weapon burst=

what about giving the airplane an minimun velocity? and giving an idle order to the airplane, that it just go in cirles, with a customizable radius

Voted to "Do it but without priority". This because this is a classic CNC feature being in Red Alert 1 and somewhat with the TD airstrip landings, and improves the appearance and realism nicely, in my opinion quite comparable as to how voxel units tilt on slopes. Airstrip like structures and such can finally not look ridiculous when the aircraft are all VTOL instead of using a runway.

But on the flip side compared to stuff like the Aircraft PATROL feature, this is just a nice graphical enhancement, while the latter is a serious time saver and gameplay improver. So I vote that this to be done but not with strong priority as some major gameplay improvements.

This is something I would really like to see in Ares. Countless mods add back Soviet MiGs, or standard take-off aircraft, like F-22s, B-2s and (eww) Fortress Bombers- they all stand to benefit from such a feature.

In addition, being able to force this logic on Aircraft Carriers would be _amazing_.

Perhaps it could be controlled with a set of tags, along the lines of:
[AirUnit]
Takeoff.NonVTOL = ;[yes/no], do we take off like a real jet?
Takeoff.RunwayLength = ;[leptons], how far until we leave the ground?

Carrier spawned planes could perhaps use the Carrier's FLH as the spawn location/runway height.

However, I also understand that this is just an "eye-candy" feature, and as such would deserve a lower priority compared to other features, like (what MT said) the Air Patrol feature.

If the aircraft are not at their flight level once they leave the foundation, they are more likely to fly directly through adjacent buildings or cliffs...

Which way should they take off? The way the Carrier is facing? The way the aircraft is facing when it's docked?

I would like to see this feature happen, but I don't think I can do it just yet without digging in the code for quite some time.

Yes, that is the problem with it. This would result in ugly clipping (if that is, the game would allow the plane to clip the cliffs/buildings).

My idea was that Takeoff.RunwayLength would be used by the aircraft with the default airstrip it would use in consideration, as to avoid this possibility, IE the plane would have already been in the air before the strip ended. (which now that I think about it, would mean that you'd need pretty uniform airstrips for all sides...:/)

I guess the Aircraft Carrier take-off would be oriented to the facing of the unit.

The game has no problem with the aircraft flying into and through a building (uh oh), but the aircraft will explode if it kisses a cliff face.

I see nothing wrong with it exploding when it hits a cliff face; and you should add the same logic you use for missiles colliding with buildings to aircraft (shouldn't be too hard?). Let the player learn from their mistakes of placing a tall building at the end of a run way; We don't do this in real life for good reason ;)

And as for the AI, which doesn't have this awareness?

Pray? The best option is to allow it to be placed roughly 3x further than other buildings (similar to naval yards) and have WantsExtraSpace=yes, without addition code.

Though the feature that would make this really useful for AIs as well would be to have building-speciifc AIBaseSpacing that overrides the default in [AI], and ExtraSpace0=5,0 for wanting additional space in direction 0 (north?), settling for the second option if the first can't be found, and eventually setting for the AIBaseSpacing that is specific to that building, if not the default; another format would be ExtraSpace=5,0,0,0 for directions 0,1,2,3. This is useful even not considering aircraft without VTOL

And CliffMinDistance0=5 for the minimum distance to a cliff - this one will be harder to code if westwood didn't have something similar already set up, same suggestion for a different format as above if this one is undesirable