Speed up the planes a bit

[twirly 11]

The planes fly like they're going to fall out of the sky. Just isn't right...you can clearly see it. Aircraft don't behave like that.

[kylania 568]

One concern is that the maps are already too small for planes. Speeding them up will just make the islands seem even smaller and harder to maneuver in. :)

[twirly 11]

At least when the AI fly them. Just now watching an A-10 do slow passes and it just doesn't look real at all. It's just too slow....and the nose bobs. It's weird.

[Gunter Severloh 4067]

To slow?

the plane is slow to begin with, any faster and it wouldn't be realistic.

Heres a tip when flying the A-10,

gain altitude, then dive, and then slowly manouver up in altitude, and repeat,

and your speed will be up there.

F35, is fast, Harrier is fast, I dont see what the issue is.

[twirly 11]

To slow?

the plane is slow to begin with, any faster and it wouldn't be realistic.

Heres a tip when flying the A-10,

gain altitude, then dive, and then slowly manouver up in altitude, and repeat,

and your speed will be up there.

F35, is fast, Harrier is fast, I dont see what the issue is.

The issue is not with me flying. I don't fly in Arma 2. If I want to fly I use Rise Of Flight or IL-2.....real simulators!

The issue is with the AI. When they come in low...the aircraft looks like a boat on water that's struggling to get up on the plane. It simply does not look realistic. That goes for all AI piloted fixed wing aircraft.

I do no know about the "feel" for human pilots....would not have a clue!

[Gunter Severloh 4067]

If I want to fly I use Rise Of Flight or IL-2.....real simulators!

Yes a great game at that, Flying in Arma2 is fun and interesting too, try it some time,

you'd probably be good at it then if your used to simulators such as IL.

When you see the Ai flying is it in your own missions you are creating where the Ai is flying?

as you can get them to fly faster.

[polar bear 10]

One concern is that the maps are already too small for planes. Speeding them up will just make the islands seem even smaller and harder to maneuver in. :)

Yeah, I don't think the maps are big enough for air combat. Planes carrying out one-sided air strikes against ground forces maybe, but the maps aren't big enough for air combat.

They're big enough for a dog fight, but air combat on those maps lacks the things that characterize ArmA everywhere else: Hunting around not knowing from where the enemy will appear, detecting them at a distance too far to engage, considering the best way to approach, etc.

All that takes an arena much larger than what ArmA provides, when it comes to air to air combat. Maps would have to be hundreds of miles wide for air to air realism.

So I think fighter/bomber support is there to increase the realism of the ground experience, and not to provide a realistic air experience in and of itself.

Conclusion of all that -- ArmA should stick to ground attack aircraft until such time as there's maps 200 miles wide.

Edited September 22, 2010 by Polar Bear

[11aTony 0]

Jets seems fine by me considering map size but few cesna like planes that are in game are horrible to fly. I mean I see this competitions in similar planes on tv (sure they are tuned up but still) that are doing mad stunts between obstacles, going streight up and doing very sharp turns. In arma you just loose all your speed and fall down if you try to even turn a bit. It is very weird. In OPF cesna was better to fly. Not much though.

EDIT: Although, it would be really nice if BIS makes F35 supersonic with a really cool sonic boom effect as a standard so moders could have a template or if there is a big enough map some day.

Edited September 23, 2010 by 11aTony

[celery 8]

Jets seems fine by me considering map size but few cesna like planes that are in game are horrible to fly. I mean I see this competitions in similar planes on tv (sure they are tuned up but still) that are doing mad stunts between obstacles, going streight up and doing very sharp turns. In arma you just loose all your speed and fall down if you try to even turn a bit. It is very weird. In OPF cesna was better to fly. Not much though.

You mean the An-2, right? It's not exactly a stunt plane and it's one or two sizes bigger than the small Cessna, but can the planes on TV do this?

qVbKxnWJtO4

[Ulanthorn 10]

Just forget flying jets and the word realism when you talk the ArmAverse...its futile. I can survive for like 1 our airborne in Lock On FC2 at a hostile Waypoint in a Su-25 hunted by MiGs...try this in OA. You can do nothing to break a lock in OA and locking is only a tab push.

Its futile to talk about reasliam any futher regarding planes that do not even have system that can be damaged but have a health bar instead.

Aircraft are a nice addition in ArmA...but arma takes place on ground. Aircraft are so badly implemented you must consider them more a "cheat", not a well implemented part of a virtual battleefield.

Edited September 23, 2010 by Ulanthorn

[Zipper5 74]

Aircraft are a nice addition in ArmA...but arma takes place on ground. Aircraft are so badly implemented you must consider them more a "cheat", not a well implemented part of a virtual battleefield.

They raise and lower their gears and flaps, they fly, they shoot, they blow up. How are they "badly implemented"? They just aren't simulated to the fullest, as Arma 2 does not claim to be a flight simulator. :p

[Ulanthorn 10]

They raise and lower their gears and flaps, they fly, they shoot, they blow up. How are they "badly implemented"? They just aren't simulated to the fullest, as Arma 2 does not claim to be a flight simulator. :p

That's exactly the point. If you go flying the same plane in Lock On FC2 you have to work very hard for every single hit, in arma you just push tab and fire. In Lock on a single Igla will bring you down or render your plane unable to fight on...in OA you just fly and fight on till all your hitpoints are gone.

The helicopters in OA are of another breed, they have at least a refined Damage system. Planes are more like UFOs with shield technologie that can oly be detroyed when shields (hitpoints) are down without any degradation beetween health 1% or 100%.

[celery 8]

That's exactly the point. If you go flying the same plane in Lock On FC2 you have to work very hard for every single hit, in arma you just push tab and fire. In Lock on a single Igla will bring you down or render your plane unable to fight on...in OA you just fly and fight on till all your hitpoints are gone.

The helicopters in OA are of another breed, they have at least a refined Damage system. Planes are more like UFOs with shield technologie that can oly be detroyed when shields (hitpoints) are down without any degradation beetween health 1% or 100%.

And how many people would actually be able to play the pilot role if supporting roles in an infantry sim had the complexity of sims dedicated to them? I have seen people who claim to be pro at flying regularly crash and do stupid mistakes, so how do you think they would fare with 100x the complexity of that?

[polar bear 10]

The helicopters in OA are of another breed, they have at least a refined Damage system. Planes are more like UFOs with shield technologie that can oly be detroyed when shields (hitpoints) are down without any degradation beetween health 1% or 100%.

I agree. The jets in ArmA are just a prop to enhance the ground action. You can build a mission where you have one fly in and provide ground support, and then fly off, and that can add a lot to the experience on the ground. In the air they do not behave in a realistic way and the maps are not large enough for any sort of air strategy--it's barely big enough for a dog fight.

Helicopters on the other hand are plausible in ArmA, the maps are big enough and they behave a little more realistically. They could certainly be improved but then so can anything.

I wish the AI could fly helicopters better. The AI alternates between making itself a huge easy target for any MAAWS rockets being fired its way, and magically countering stingers with supernatural skill.

Edited September 23, 2010 by Polar Bear

[Ulanthorn 10]

I wish the AI could fly helicopters better. The AI alternates between making itself a huge easy target for any MAAWS rockets being fired its way, and magically countering stingers with supernatural skill.

Thats more a matter to the unatural straight, far reaching and unmolested by gravity superfast travel of the MAAWS Grenade...and just another big Showstopper in current OA. I catch myself using guided AT missiles quite often against choppers since AA wont work to bring it down in one strike. Trying to shoot down airplanes in OA is the pure nightmare...you can shoot 10 Stingers after a Su-25 with no real effect, the pilot has no reason to abort it's attack as long as the "shields are up and above 15%"...and even that wont stop them. Im talking abuot Warfare mainly where Airplanes like the generic LockOn FC2 "fighter victims" like Su-25 or A-10 are exploited as superweapons the most. Edited September 23, 2010 by Ulanthorn

[polar bear 10]

Well... I'd like to see the AI helicopter hiding behind a hill only coming out to attack with weapons pointed towards the enemy, and only long enough to fire.

Instead I stand there with a rocket, it flights straight towards me with no cover, then tries some kind of auto-hover maneuver right over top of me just to make sure I get a good shot at the slow moving belly of the chopper.

That's the poor flying I'm talking about.

[arthur666 10]

Well... I'd like to see the AI helicopter hiding behind a hill only coming out to attack with weapons pointed towards the enemy, and only long enough to fire.

Pop-up tactics. IRL chopper pilots use stand-off tactics like this, not charging into a hot zone guns blazing.

As for the A-10 being too slow, as someone mentioned, IRL the A-10 is a VERY slow jet. I used to watch them performing low altitude maneuvers over the cotton fields of the eastern Carolinas (when they were still stationed at the Myrtle Beach AFB :( ). Sometimes they looked so slow, you'ld expect them to stall and fall right out of the sky. The A-10 in Arma actually moves at a realistic speed, although they do get too close to targets before firing.

Edited September 23, 2010 by arthur666

[Ulanthorn 10]

Talking a-10 speed...I never got the A-10 above 400 knots in Lock On with a combat loadout, only in a dive and that is when overspeed warning rings. 400 knots feels very fast in the A-10 (vibrations) thats 740km/h. In normal operation and cruise you will fly it around 300 knots/ 555 km/h and that will be at 80% throttle already.

So at least regarding Speed I dont see a problem in OA...exept that the Su-25 should be able to reach 800 on level flight easily (and beginn to flutter and shake above 850km/h so violently that you hit the brakes immediately)

Thick profiled straight edge wings are not good for high speeds due to compression on the leading egde.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Anyone else find the glide ratio (engine off) of the AN-2 a tad above what you'd expect for a flying brick?

[Ulanthorn 10]

Anyone else find the glide ratio (engine off) of the AN-2 a tad above what you'd expect for a flying brick?

The An-2 is no flying brick. I had the oportunity to travel in one in the copilot seat. The plane is largely build out of plywood and fabric with a 1000HP radial engine in front. If you tap on the wings you can play bongo drums with it ;)...very good climber and extremely good glide ratio due to very low weight. The only problem might be the high drag of the biplane layout. The plywood fabric design also makes it hard to spot on radars...its the poors mans stealth plane. Low flying at 100km/h, sailplane like landing you dont need the engine for safe pinpoint landing...the thing glides and glides and glides...and settles down gently at 60Km/h. its basically a 40's design and nobody would keep it till today in service if it had not some good benefits.

No, the An-2 is o.k....except the backwards flying part ;)

Edited September 24, 2010 by Ulanthorn

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Okay, ugly as a brick then :D Yet easily the plane I love the most in Arma OA. Can we get some DC3's? That would be heaven - I don't know - something about radials I guess :D

It's still 3-5 (depending on load) times heavier than a C-172. I've never been in an AN-2 myself, but an old friend is checked out on it and pilots parachutists (not sure if they still lease that plane). But I don't know the best glide speed. I checked it out on wiki, and it claims that at about 40km/h it has the descent ratio of a parachute. But in game it stalls at about 50km/h (guess the game doesn't have the auto slats), and has practically no descent at all :p

I think my problem with it is lack of drag (or effects from it). There is nothing you can do to sink faster without gaining too much speed, like crossing controls for a slip dive. And if you place AI in the controls, they tend to accidentally take off during taxi :)

[Ulanthorn 10]

Okay, ugly as a brick then :D Yet easily the plane I love the most in Arma OA. Can we get some DC3's? That would be heaven - I don't know - something about radials I guess :D

It's still 3-5 (depending on load) times heavier than a C-172. I've never been in an AN-2 myself, but an old friend is checked out on it and pilots parachutists (not sure if they still lease that plane). But I don't know the best glide speed. I checked it out on wiki, and it claims that at about 40km/h it has the descent ratio of a parachute. But in game it stalls at about 50km/h (guess the game doesn't have the auto slats), and has practically no descent at all :p

I think my problem with it is lack of drag (or effects from it). There is nothing you can do to sink faster without gaining too much speed, like crossing controls for a slip dive. And if you place AI in the controls, they tend to accidentally take off during taxi :)

Hello again. I cant believe that best glide speed is below stall speed (50km/h), thats would make no sense. maybe you just missread knots for km/h. 60 knots or 110km/h sounds more like a good glide speed.

[arthur666 10]

Alright. I think we have enough wannabe pilots here...

Time for BIS to make an integrated flight sim for Arma. A huge map, some better flight models and avionics. We're in bussiness! :bounce3:

[celery 8]

When I first noticed how slow the An-2 can go without losing altitude, I thought it was a bug. But it seems that the plane does live up to its reputation. A masterpiece of Ukrainian design. :)

[CarlGustaffa 4]

The game uses km/h not knots (check velocity in m/s, convert, and verify).

I did a very rough measurement, and got a ratio of 27:1 (that's U2 land :)); started at default height at 000000, and stalled out and crashed at 000087 (8.7km). That includes a little terrain avoidance and even a small touchdown :p The AN-13 (aging acrobatic sailplane) is listed at 25:1.

I found best glide afterwards at 65kts, which would be 120km/h. But in the game, slower airspeeds gets you further.

I'm not saying it shouldn't have good gliding capabilities. But being able to match proper gliders of the same era (todays sailplanes are much much better naturally) or be close to the notorious U2, is a tad too much, given the not too aerodynamic shape of the plane :p

All I'm saying, is that it would be nice to actually land this aircraft instead of slamming it to the ground :D