ArmA 2 C-130J and MV-22 Redux

[progamer 14]

Exactly.

Better to have the capability and remove it if you want to in missions, because it can't be done the other way around. If you don't want to allow the use of all 34 available cargo spots, move ten game logics into the cargo and you're set. Want to carry 34 troops, but the addon is limited to 24? You're stuck.

The MV-22 is for smaller groups of 24 fully loaded soldiers. If you need more soldiers in MV-22's then bring more than one. Why would you need to carry more than 24 soldiers at weight levels that should be worse than BI's generic levels?

You have to remember have to remember we have the C-130 for if you want to carry more than 24 players. If only one guy comes to pick people up in an MV-22 on something mission specific like domination, then there's an issue with the amount of pilots. You guys are acting like the MV-22 is the only large transit to the battlefield and that the C-130 doesn't exist and wanting it to do what it is not designed for.

Edited December 22, 2013 by ProGamer

[Make Love Not War 10]

Shouldn't the addon attempt to simulate the true capabilities and specifications of the real aircraft though? At a certain point it just becomes a fantasy aircraft and we might as well call it the MV-23 Bald Eagle (or some other fishing raptor name). I doubt the real MV-22 can even carry 24 fully equiped soldiers in most conditions - it's probably less a question of cargo space and more a weight limitation issue. And even if you can get off the ground with x number of troops on board, doesn't mean you're going to have much if any flight envelope left for manueverability. So, your practical operational limits are probably going to be even lower. Kind of how the A-10 can theoretically carry 6 (or is it 8?) AGM-65s, but during real operations they almost always only load two.

The ideal way to do this would be to allow the aricraft certain max cargo seating and volume capacities (so that you could fit in 32 unarmed passengers without backpacks or gear, for instance), but the amount of weight you carry has a significant impact on perfromance. You'd probably have to define multiple proxy models within the config and switch them in and out dynamically on the fly every time the aircraft is loaded and unloaded, but the effect would be super-cool.

Ed: And for those who absolutely, positively need higher operational capacity, we're also going to be getting a C-130.

[eduzumaki 12]

Great addon i can't wait for the c 130 making night ops .I completely agree with 32 seats more units more fun but how Make Love not War said a weight system,would be great if you have just a MX and a parachute and your friend a backpack a mx and AT launcher the plane can't carry much more units .

[b00ce 160]

The V-22 can pick up over 20,000 lbs of stuff. Lets say a man with all his gear is 400 lbs (A very generous estimate including armor, weapons, tough boxes and duffel bags full of all of the miscellaneous crap he'll need in the field), with 32 people its only 12,800 lbs, the aircraft could easily sling load a humvee as well. Weight isn't the limiting factor, space is. That being said, I agree that it should be limited to how many seats there are, but that's just the crewchief in me talking.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

I don't see why everyone is finding it so hard to fathom that you can just NOT fill it to max, the fact that the option is there doesn't mean you absolutely have to do it. If you're moving that many guys to the battlefield bringing more than one aircraft is probably a better idea regardless of their cargo capacity as if one of them gets shot down you only lose half of your force instead of all of it, but having the ability to load it up like that means that in a pinch you can carry that many guys. This is a good thing

Do you honestly think during an extraction the crew chief is going to go 'Sorry guys we have room but that would be against regulations you'll have to wait until we come back.'

[progamer 14]

Do you honestly think during an extraction the crew chief is going to go 'Sorry guys we have room but that would be against regulations you'll have to wait until we come back.'

They would have additional aircraft in that situation. If that second aircaft failed, they would have other plans or call of the mission. If you fill it to the max, you could endanger everyone aboard it.

In Arma I have never seen players be left behind and forgotten about and 99% of the time there are too many transport aircraft for the number of players. (I prefer to fly people around while playing). If everyone doesn't get picked up, no one just leaves them there, the first thing pilots normally do is go back and pick the rest of the people up in the rare case that situations comes up.

Edited December 22, 2013 by ProGamer

[Make Love Not War 10]

Please have a look at page 23 of Boeing's own marketing handbook. That looks like 24 troop seats OR 12 litters. To me the diagram suggests that you can combo litter stations with seat banks, but you can't combine all at the same time. Are we sure that original 24+12 number is even correct?

[sakura_chan 9]

Its a tough call...24 would be the "official" capacity, due to the use of safety equipment. It's maybe along the lines of 'it's safe to carry 24, any more will be at your own risk'. The other soldiers would be sitting down on the floor, their safety in a defensive maneuver would be severely reduced and would also be likely to injure the seated soldiers. An example is the infamous recovery of a fallen soldier by the marines, who rode in on the wings of an Apache. I guarantee that scenario wasn't in any flight manuals or references. ArmA doesn't simulate anything even close to simple crew safety/danger so you can fly around upside-down all day without any penalty. In that scenario, increased crew capacity is more plausible.

[zodd 14]

Sitting people on the floor (for lack of a better term) exists - is called operational combat loading. Significantly adds to the carrying capacity (eg. Blackhawk seating 8 v OCL of over twice that amount) It does have drawbacks - it is bloody uncomfortable and you are stuffed if it crashes... but it exists.

[Make Love Not War 10]

@Sakura_Chan: Pretty much my thoughts as well. It can certainly be done if an emergency situation calls for it, but, like you said, it pretty much means that you're going to have guys sitting on the floor hanging onto tie-down eyelets or whatnot. Although, if Arma doesn't simulate anything along the lines of crew safety, wouldn't that make an increased official cargo capacity less plausible? Something semi-realistic could probably be scripted for such situations. In fact, I'd be willing to give it a go after I get the basics of the attachToWithMovement script hammered out (my animations issue from earlier this week is getting slowly sorted out and I'm hoping to move onto aircraft in the next few days).

[serjames 357]

I say max it - We run ops all the time where our transport is limited or we lose a chopper or two and the ability to pull all units from the field in one VTOL aircraft is great.

From a realism pov as long as the "official" seating gets filled first then in those emergency combat scenarios, the floor ceiling, hanging on to the wheels etc spots gets filled AFTER the seats, then I think it's the right thing to do.

SJ

[Kristian 47]

I say max it - We run ops all the time where our transport is limited or we lose a chopper or two and the ability to pull all units from the field in one VTOL aircraft is great.

From a realism pov as long as the "official" seating gets filled first then in those emergency combat scenarios, the floor ceiling, hanging on to the wheels etc spots gets filled AFTER the seats, then I think it's the right thing to do.

SJ

I agree with this. It'd be quite epic in my opinnion :)

As long as we remember its Sakura's addon, he does what he wants with it :P

[wipman 1]

"Oh no! We can carry too many players in our aircraft!", said no one ever. Everyone needs to remember that there must be a focus on useability when making an addon. Restricting cargo loads only sounds good on paper, in actual usage it is much better to have it carry as many as can graphically fit in there. The benifit is that servers/mission makers can CHOOSE whether to use the full capacity or restrict it by filling the extra seats through scripting.

Fine for me; it was just an idea, your addon... our joy!. That's all what i have to say about it

[progamer 14]

The whole 34 number just doesn't exist. You can have people sitting on the floor after 24 but it's not going to be close to 34. The 34 number was someone's mistake as some of the military data is confusing.

There also needs to be things in place like flight model or other stuff that make it very unpractical to fly loaded to the absolute max.

[mankyle 410]

Has anyone tried the setmass scripting command so the vehicle gains mass as soon as the cargo spaces get occupied?

it could be worth trying

[sakura_chan 9]

I tried it. It is actually pretty awesome because you can change the flight characteristics easily. If you were carrying a humvee you could change how it feels and also change the center of gravity accordingly. I dont know if its a bug or what, but on the osprey increasing the weight actually improved the handling and reducing it made it worse. It might be a special case with the osprey's flight model being mostly hardcoded. Regardless of the weight its vertical performance was unchanged.

Just another little update, i managed to get some awesome lighting effects working without any scripting. It now has positional and collision lights with realistic blinking frequencies. It was impossible to use the default lighting because you can't animate the position of lights, and each nacelle has a positional light and a formation strip. I found out that there is an animation source for when you turn on your collision lights, so i was able to make 3D light flares and formation stripes and have them come on at the right time. Its sweet because you have realistic lighting effects without scripting that are also visible in the daylight and the AI use them too. So far the only scripting i've used has been a custom action to extend or retract the fuel boom. So far you have to be outside in order to move it, as that is something the ground crew would do.

[armyinf 33]

Does the MV-22/ C-130 allow use of the Co-Pilot take control and fly?

[LykosMactire 298]

I tried it. It is actually pretty awesome because you can change the flight characteristics easily. If you were carrying a humvee you could change how it feels and also change the center of gravity accordingly. I dont know if its a bug or what, but on the osprey increasing the weight actually improved the handling and reducing it made it worse. It might be a special case with the osprey's flight model being mostly hardcoded. Regardless of the weight its vertical performance was unchanged.

Just another little update, i managed to get some awesome lighting effects working without any scripting. It now has positional and collision lights with realistic blinking frequencies. It was impossible to use the default lighting because you can't animate the position of lights, and each nacelle has a positional light and a formation strip. I found out that there is an animation source for when you turn on your collision lights, so i was able to make 3D light flares and formation stripes and have them come on at the right time. Its sweet because you have realistic lighting effects without scripting that are also visible in the daylight and the AI use them too. So far the only scripting i've used has been a custom action to extend or retract the fuel boom. So far you have to be outside in order to move it, as that is something the ground crew would do.

does this mean what i asked will happen with the Rotor lights? and if so can you screen it?

[sakura_chan 9]

I assume it will be possible. Haven't looked into the code for that yet. I know i will have to set up the copilot as a "turret" to be compatible with A3

[mr. bravo 17]

Lovely work you're doing here man :D These vehicles are a must have for bigger operations. Keep it up!

[mankyle 410]

I assume it will be possible. Haven't looked into the code for that yet. I know i will have to set up the copilot as a "turret" to be compatible with A3

There is an unused screen in the cockpit. You could try to animate the "chin" FLIR turret and add a PIP screen there so the copilot can use optics and move the FLIR camera

[progamer 14]

There is an unused screen in the cockpit. You could try to animate the "chin" FLIR turret and add a PIP screen there so the copilot can use optics and move the FLIR camera

I don't think the Osprey uses a FLIR camera, or does it?

Why would you need to make a turret though? Surely you could copy the method BI used for Co-pilot seats.

Edit:

The US Air Force and US Navy variants are equipped with a Raytheon AN/APQ-186 terrain-following, multimode radar. The helicopter night-vision system is the Raytheon AN/AAQ-16 (V-22) FLIR, which is mounted on the nose. This system contains a 3-5 micron indium antimonide staring focal plane

Hope this is a credible source without a chance for those Wikipedia mistakes: http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/osprey/ And this is the company that makes the FLIR and more information on the FLIR: http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/aaq27/

---------- Post added at 06:42 ---------- Previous post was at 06:38 ----------

@Sakura_Chan

I am very glad you have take the time to port these vehicles from Arma 2 but if you really must have your unrealistic 34 seat version, could you please at least have a copy of each variant with the correct 24 seats? I love how you have tried your best to make it realistic, but why stop at the seating?

Edited December 23, 2013 by ProGamer

[mankyle 410]

I don't think the Osprey uses a FLIR camera, or does it?

Why would you need to make a turret though? Surely you could copy the method BI used for Co-pilot seats.

What¡s that round thing under the refuelling probe? It certainly looks like a FLIR turret to me.

And doing the same BIS did for copilot seats....

Theoretically looking at the Independent Heavy Helicopter, there is a gunner proxy in the chopper and it is linked to a turret

class Turrets : Turrets {
		class CopilotTurret : CopilotTurret {
			gunnerAction = "ChopperHeavy_L_static_H";
			gunnerInAction = "ChopperHeavy_L_static_H";
			memoryPointsGetInGunnerPrecise = "GetIn_Turret";
			gunnerGetInAction = "GetInLow";
			gunnerGetOutAction = "GetOutLow";
			preciseGetInOut = 0;
			GunnerDoor = "door_back_L";
		};
	};

[progamer 14]

Also, someone correct me if I am wrong but I think the Arma 2 C-130 is the C-130J super Hercules variant for which information can be found here from the manufacture: http://www.lockheedmartin.ca/us/products/c130/c-130j-variants/c-130j-super-hercules.html

If that is the wrong variant then there is a list of them here: http://www.lockheedmartin.ca/us/products/c130/c-130j-variants.html

The links include information about the aircraft and I am pretty sure are 100% credible.

---------- Post added at 07:02 ---------- Previous post was at 06:59 ----------

http://www.air-and-space.com/20070926%20Edwards/DSC_1533%20CV-22B%20165839%20right%20front%20cockpit%20l.jpg

What¡s that round thing under the refuelling probe? It certainly looks like a FLIR turret to me.

And doing the same BIS did for copilot seats....

Theoretically looking at the Independent Heavy Helicopter, there is a gunner proxy in the chopper and it is linked to a turret

class Turrets : Turrets {
		class CopilotTurret : CopilotTurret {
			gunnerAction = "ChopperHeavy_L_static_H";
			gunnerInAction = "ChopperHeavy_L_static_H";
			memoryPointsGetInGunnerPrecise = "GetIn_Turret";
			gunnerGetInAction = "GetInLow";
			gunnerGetOutAction = "GetOutLow";
			preciseGetInOut = 0;
			GunnerDoor = "door_back_L";
		};
	};

lol, I thought BI would have done more than just that...

And I also did correct myself along with links with information about the the FLIR camera for Sakura_Chan to use.

[roshnak 41]

@Sakura_Chan

I am very glad you have take the time to port these vehicles from Arma 2 but if you really must have your unrealistic 34 seat version, could you please at least have a copy of each variant with the correct 24 seats? I love how you have tried your best to make it realistic, but why stop at the seating?

Wait, what's unrealistic about it? You already said that the Osprey can be loaded to 34 for transit between bases, with the caveat that it would be too heavy for combat loads. Someone else said that weight isn't an issue. So then what is? A rulebook?

From what I can tell, it's fully possible to load a V-22 to 34 fully equipped troops, even if it isn't the safest. If it's possible, then how is it unrealistic? Should we not have the option to load the aircraft to its FULL capacity, not just its official one?