Changes to air units!!

[dkraver 1]

Havent seen any thread about this subject so i thought that i might aswell start one :) There are a couple of things that i can see and hope BIS will make available in Arma 3.

1. More Weapon classes.

There is a need for more weapon classes to make a more realistic arsenal of air weapons. I could personlly se something like this being added.

-Radar class weapons.

To be used to attack enemy radar installations or vehicels that locks on to the plane. This will of course also mean that there would have to be added some kind af radiation profile to those units.

-GPS class weapons.

To be used with jdam class weapons. I know there a player made system in use i arma 2. But would good to have a BIS made standard as well.

With that it would also be nice if the map grids could be change to a more military grid system maybe even adopt the Military Grid Reference System

That way people would have to enter grids for the bomb instead of just mark a point on the map.

-Dumb Bomb class weapons

Reason im writing this one is that the current BIS dumb bomb can be locked to a target. There need to be a real dumb bomb that not lockable to a target.

2. Custom Air Loadouts

Both to plane and helicopters there should be a way to customize the load out ingame so one can change the loadout vs what is needed instead of having to change to another plane just to have another weapon.

3. Damage system for planes.

There need to be a better damage system for planes. I have never been in a situation with planes where i needed to eject from the plane. Either i get damage and fly back to a airport with no problem or the plane is blown up.

There should be some kind of critical damage to planes to make it more realistic. Something like power loss or a spin out of control or a constant roll to one side. Maybe combined with a better damage profile to the plane like wings, tail and engine.

The helicopters already have this with the power loss og tail rotor malfunction. But planes got nothing.

4. Target pod

A last thing i would like to see is the possibility to use target pods. The system almost is there already with the uav view and its hellfire missiles. It just need to be intergrated with planes and the make it possible to lock to anything and not just vehicles.

[dysta 10]

I think vehicles can be also have dynamic loadouts without setting other variants of units. However, I agree with the electronic parts for airplanes. Especially with AWACS, the radar and commanding plane to sending order/signals to all the air units. Advanced air warfare must have electrical and digital support for the most dominant roles.

[Archosaurusrev 12]

And also much more realistic flight model is always welcome.

[Daniel 0]

Agreed with all of the above! Some have been added in Arma 2 through mods, some are general bugs are gameplay issues. It could be arguable that complex SEAD is outside the scope of the game, especially if it means introducing radar signatures for only one type of weapon.

It would be nice to see most of them fixed or added for Arma 3.

Edited May 22, 2011 by Daniel

[AlanAkbar 10]

talking about targetting pods, render to texture looks extremely promising when it comes to targetting systems, cant wait.

[columdrum 11]

Totally agree with the Custom Air Loadouts , it shouldn't be to dificult to do and would be better than having 10 models that are the same but with diferent weapons. And also agree about the targeting system.

The rest... obiusly everything could be improved and the damage models for the planes and the flight model... well obiusly improvements there will be welcome, but shouldn't be a priority on a infantery simulator. Just with transport helis well modeled should be enought to start with.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Fully modelled & implemented cup holders in all cockpits. I won't buy the game unless I can still drink my virtual soda while flying.

More seriously, some improvements in fixed wing aircraft would be neat, but not absolutely necessary (ArmA not being a flight sim).

[da12thMonkey 1943]

I'd like to see a working CCIP system for that dumb bomb class you mention.

[esfumato 75]

Someone knows how to disable the free look while flying choppers and be allowed to use the mouse to aim the dumb rockets?

Choppers are quite useless in arma 3. BIS have improve the controls to fly but have make the controls impossible to aim.

[chortles 263]

Default keybind for toggling free-look is double-tapping Left Alt.

[merlin 17]

very good suggestions, I think a system for delivering precision guided munitions, either by self designating or GPS is long overdue (A CCIP system doubly so). A weapon config for anti-radiation missiles would add some very interesting mechanics as well, although i think it would be better left to modders as vanilla arma does not have a great deal of vehicles that would serve as targets. I'd like to think these type of improvements would be fertile ground for an expansion, just as OA overhauled optics and backpacks.

[roshnak 41]

Anti-radiation weapons: Why? They are typically employed against SAM sites with ranges in the tens of kilometers. The kind of SAM sites it would be reasonable to engage with anti-radiation missiles could shoot you from far outside reasonable view distances.

GPS guided munitions: This is just my personal opinion, but they are tremendously boring. Like, they are by far the least interesting way to attack targets from an airplane. They require virtually no action from the player. Fly over target, hit button, bombs kill target. I feel like GPS munitions would be a step away from making flying jets more engaging. I just don't understand how people think smart munitions will make the game more fun, I guess.

You also probably wouldn't be entering map grids, but rather GPS coordinates to drop GPS guided bombs.

Dumb bombs: Sure, but we could use a way of telling where they are going to land to go along with them (CCIP). I also want CCIP for guns and rockets.

Damage system: Yeah, the default system is dumb. I'm not sure why bullets make airplanes explode, but they do! I'm pretty sure airplanes damage model is still working with the hitpoints system. There should at least be damage induced rolls and engine flameouts.

Targeting pod: This is the kind of thing that seems like a good idea, but how would you control it? Targeting pods are typically controlled by a miniature joystick attached to the throttle. I don't think everyone playing arma wants to buy special flight sim level equipment to fully utilize airplanes. The other thing is that view distances are typically too low to properly utilize a targeting pod. Consider that the view distance cutoff is a sphere, so if you are flying at 3000m you can only see everything properly if it is directly below you with a 3000m view distance.

As much as I would love to play a flight sim and coordinate with other players on the ground in mulitplayer, Arma is definitely not the right platform for it.

Edit: But I will say that one thing that would make flying airplanes much more pleasant was that if the HUD was bright enough to read in daylight.

[esfumato 75]

Default keybind for toggling free-look is double-tapping Left Alt.

Yes I know, but no matter you double-tap left alt key free look stills enabled by deafult. the more you can do is just press left tab or num pad number 5 to center the view. :butbut:

[Harzach 2517]

Yes I know, but no matter you double-tap left alt key free look stills enabled by deafult. the more you can do is just press left tab or num pad number 5 to center the view. :butbut:

Edited March 3, 2014 by Harzach

[krycek 349]

I would like to see a simple hover command implemented(not the one we can use as players) for AI attack choppers when they're...attacking.If ground vehicles can engage targets while holding position I don't understand why choppers can't do the same.This didn't got any attention since OFP era.

Now I understand this could brake the choppers(especially the transport ones) if they start hovering on their own when they detect an enemy,but how about add this to the behaviours list,for example if setting them to stealth??

The main threat to AI attack choppers should be AA weapon systems,right now the nr.1 cause for loosing air support is because the braindead AI attack choppers are flying straight into enemy positions when they detect and engage hostile units.:annoy:

[JestersDead 2]

I agree that anti-radiation really doesn't have much of a place in arma. Fast movers should be able to break range of AA threats pretty easily, and helos should be able to use terrain masking to defeat any AA threats. Arma doesn't have any AA with enough range to justify it.

GPS weapons could be interesting if some kind of TGP was implemented. Check out DCS-A10. It's not just a matter of plugging in a map position and dropping. You have to find the target, lock that position, fly the release point and pickle the weapon. It's a lot more involved than the Arma "TAB, turn, fire" method. That being said, I doubt we'll see anything that complex in arma. I'd love to see DCS level simulation in Arma, but I know that's fantasy. Aviation nerds like me can hope though :)

I would absolutely love to see HUD improvements like CCIP, CCRP... and you know... adjusting the view a bit so you can actually read the hud :P

[the_demongod 31]

In my honest opinion, I'd rather not have GPS guided munitions in the game. They're cool and all, but in a game like Arma 3, they're really not very interesting. I am fully in support of CCIP and CCRP, and at least GBU-12s require someone to lase for you. I play DCS-10 and I like them in that game, but that is a much more involved process, using your TGP to set a SPI on the target, etc etc. That's okay, but to be able to click a spot on a map, drop your bomb, and have a 2000 lb GBU-31 bomb fall within 33 feet of a target... it's just not fun. I'd rather just add a TGP so you could self designate LGBs.

Also, there needs to be more separation between the engine power, wheels, and physical drag. Currently, we have a button (or analogue control) to go faster, and one to go slower. In reality, you have wheel brakes, air brakes, and decreasing power on the throttle. It may seem unimportant, but it is used in more situations than you might think. For example, during takeoff in a plane you always put on the wheel brakes, then run up the engine to ~85% power, and only after that do you release wheelbrakes, put the power to full, and begin your roll. It is especially important for taking off of shorter runways, when those meters you roll while your engine spools up to full are meters of runway lost.

Similarly, when landing (again, I am basing this off of DCS A-10, because so far, CAS jets are the only ones currently available in Arma III), wheelbrakes are useful when a short runway requires a more abrupt stop. Currently, it seems that we are just lowering engine power until friction causes the plane to grind to a halt. Many of the airfields on altis are useless because they are simply too short to take off of using the current jet configuration.

Also when landing, your main means of slowing the plane to a safe landing speed is the airbrakes. Because jet engines can take as long as 10 seconds to fully respond to a change with the throttle, it is not safe to lower the throttle significantly until you are very close to the runway. In case of an emergency or any other need to abort the landing (came in too fast, bad angle of attack), the airbrakes can be closed and speed can be quickly gained to make another approach.

The same principle applies during strafing runs, when speed must be lost so you have more time to aim and fire your weapons. If you lower your throttle, you are making yourself vulnerable to enemy fire. If a truck with an HMG opens up on you, you will not be able to effectively turn away without losing a dangerous amount of speed. You also don't have the power to recover if you are heading on a collision path with the ground. Using the airbrake allows you to safely lower your speed without exposing yourself to fire, or the ground.

I know that was a lot more than 2 cents, but thanks anyways.

the_Demongod

[GReeves 10]

We really need a complex damage system for fixed wing aircraft, something like choppers. Just having the Call of Duty-style "health bar" is lame and leads to some weird situations where light bumps cause you to blow up if you're in the red zone of the damage levels.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

I agree and dis agree to the Fixed Wing Damage change. Why, is because as of now, i ca't really see the use of it seeing as the Flight Model at its current is very basic. Much like the helicopter, but not really. I don't think we can expect to see anything like the War Thunder style wings and tails with holes, on fire spinning out and holding on for dear life kind of system, but for now, as its not a Simulator, and based on the fact that Fixed wing are a basic asset for ground forces, its ok for now. Maybe BIS could make Take On Aircraft, and focus on these aspects of game play for that.

[roshnak 41]

I agree and dis agree to the Fixed Wing Damage change. Why, is because as of now, i ca't really see the use of it seeing as the Flight Model at its current is very basic. Much like the helicopter, but not really. I don't think we can expect to see anything like the War Thunder style wings and tails with holes, on fire spinning out and holding on for dear life kind of system, but for now, as its not a Simulator, and based on the fact that Fixed wing are a basic asset for ground forces, its ok for now. Maybe BIS could make Take On Aircraft, and focus on these aspects of game play for that.

We don't need a complex damage system. We just need a damage system that is overly simplified. As it is now, planes either work or they explode.

We don't need wings and tails to be shot off, but it would be okay if damage to a wing induced a roll, the severity of which was based on damage. Can planes get fuel leaks in Arma 3? It would be cool to allow the engine to be damaged to the point of shutting off without the plane exploding.

These aren't simulation level changes to the damage model, just a few changes to bring the fixed wing damage model in line with the damage model of rotary wing and ground vehicles.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

We don't need a complex damage system. We just need a damage system that is overly simplified. As it is now, planes either work or they explode.

We don't need wings and tails to be shot off, but it would be okay if damage to a wing induced a roll, the severity of which was based on damage. Can planes get fuel leaks in Arma 3? It would be cool to allow the engine to be damaged to the point of shutting off without the plane exploding.

These aren't simulation level changes to the damage model, just a few changes to bring the fixed wing damage model in line with the damage model of rotary wing and ground vehicles.

Now, I've thought of this as well before. That could be interesting. Depending on the aircraft, could have two engine, left and right. If ones taken out, your thrust capabilities cut in two, just like in real life with the F-18, you can fly with one engine. Just limited.