[WIP] USAF Air Asset MOD

[zio sam 77]

Radar data are top secret so i'm not so confindent about what SU35 and SU37 can really do radar wise.

One thing that's known is that F22 regularly win simulated bvr fight at Red Flag vs EF F18 F15 thx to his stealth tecnology.When dogfighting WWR EF proved to be a good counter to the raptor.

[John Kozak 14]

Radar data are top secret so i'm not so confindent about what SU35 and SU37 can really do radar wise.

One thing that's known is that F22 regularly win simulated bvr fight at Red Flag vs EF F18 F15 thx to his stealth tecnology.When dogfighting WWR EF proved to be a good counter to the raptor.

Well, first, F-22's RCS is also classified, but is said to be at the level of 0.0001m^2 (-40dBsm). Irbis (the most modern Russian radar) has detection range of 400km for 3 m^2 RCS target. This, using The Radar Equation, puts detection range for a target with RCS of an F-22 at around 30km. Even a more conservative estimation of 0.001m^2 puts the detection range at 53km, well within AIM-120C-7 kill zone.

Second, there's the record of Northern Edge 2006 where the F-22 win/loss ratio was 108:0 in sum of BVR and WVR.

And third, BVR is F-22 primary doctrine. EF may be a match in a dogfight, but then EF has orders higher of RCS, so it clearly lacks BVR capability to counter the threat in realistic scenario.

But of course, facts are not an obstacle for armchair analysts and there are plenty of people who say a MiG-23 can easily defeat an F-22 :)

P.S.I'm not looking to insult anyone, just want to emphasise that taking some opinionated blogs for truth is a very bad way to get information. There's plenty of sources around to cross-check almost everything.

P.P.S. Are there any sources, actually, on EF participating in exercises against F-22? I couldn't find any trustworthy ones.

Edited April 1, 2014 by DarkWanderer

[Raid 18]

I love reading these huge debates about how good this is but no no no this is better. It's quite a laugh but anyway if we are on the F-22 stealth capabilities subject looks like china's going to be coming in or above the F-22's standard. Chengdu J-20 <--- Good little read if you can find some good sources.

-Raid

[chortles 263]

P.P.S. Are there any sources, actually, on EF participating in exercises against F-22? I couldn't find any trustworthy ones.

Turns out that Alaska has its own RED FLAG, and some of the argument/discussion on Eurofighter Typhoon vs. F-22 Raptor comes from the 2012 RED FLAG-Alaska (the participating Typhoons were from the German Luftwaffe).

[John Kozak 14]

I love reading these huge debates about how good this is but no no no this is better. It's quite a laugh but anyway if we are on the F-22 stealth capabilities subject looks like china's going to be coming in or above the F-22's standard. Chengdu J-20 <--- Good little read if you can find some good sources.

-Raid

Well, as you can see, it always starts with some dubious claims which aren't based on anything.

To give an analogy, whether beer or wine is better is a matter of taste and subject to holywar, but if someone claims sewage water is better for drinking - well, there's definitely something wrong.

Turns out that Alaska has its own RED FLAG, and some of the argument/discussion on Eurofighter Typhoon vs. F-22 Raptor comes from the 2012 RED FLAG-Alaska (the participating Typhoons were from the German Luftwaffe).

Thanks, by your hint I found the following link:

http://theaviationist.com/2012/07/23/f-22-raptor-kill-markings/

What it doesn't say, however, is how many EF's were "shot down"

[warlord554 2065]

Love the video. Planes look amazing. The amount of detail in the small things is going to show when these awesome planes are released. Extremely excited and thank you for your hard work. Good luck with the transition, luckily companies respect the value of vets a lot more now. Good luck, cheers brother.

[chortles 263]

Thanks, by your hint I found the following link:

http://theaviationist.com/2012/07/23/f-22-raptor-kill-markings/

What it doesn't say, however, is how many EF's were "shot down"

And for obvious reasons, details will not be forthcoming on either side... though really I'd take The Aviationist's disclaimer on RoE -- which presumably won't also be publicly available, but without which said disclaimer also applies (that arguing over how representative the results were is kind of guesstimating and dependent on which pilots are believed).

That, and all of the above has little bearing on the Arma 3 versions unless the reputed/alleged real-world differences are simulated...

Edited April 2, 2014 by Chortles

[John Kozak 14]

And for obvious reasons, details will not be forthcoming on either side... though really I'd take The Aviationist's disclaimer on RoE -- which presumably won't also be publicly available, but without which said disclaimer also applies (that arguing over how representative the results were is kind of guesstimating and dependent on which pilots are believed).

That, and all of the above has little bearing on the Arma 3 versions unless the reputed/alleged real-world differences are simulated...

True, and that's why the mere fact that there were some A2A "kills" shouldn't be used out of context to make any loud claims... And yes, I agree that this is big OT which I hope gets moved to another topic.

[SGT Fuller 856]

Hey guys stay on topic please. Also still looking for that texture artist please hit me up soon

[SGT Fuller 856]

Here we finally have the revamped KC-135. It has new lights and collision lights also new modified refueling script made by John Spartan. In order for your Aircraft to work it has to be entered into the refueling script. Very beautiful as you will see in the video. Right now the KC-135 can support the B-1 and the F18 but will be able to refuel all aircraft that are apart of this mod. Upon release if you want your aircraft to be able to be refueled via the KC-135 you will have to let me know. Anyways here the vid

[BadHabitz 235]

Exceeding expectations!

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Looking great :D

[eymerich 11]

Very Very nice!

Can't wait!! :bounce3:

[ice_age0815 37]

damn that is nice need to have it know lol nice work

[SGT Fuller 856]

Hey everyone just wanted to show you a little something upcoming.. It will not be in the alpha. It's the RQ-4A Global Hawk it doesn't really serve a purpose at the moment by can be controlled via the Uav terminal. I want to point out the one and only major delay that's keeping us from alpha and that is textures. Myself not peral are good with textures and we need someone to put the last bit of polish for release. We want to bring you great aircraft and visuals are apart of that so if your a texture or know someone who is hit me up in a pm or reply to this thread.

[TheRovaskian 10]

Here we finally have the revamped KC-135. It has new lights and collision lights also new modified refueling script made by John Spartan. In order for your Aircraft to work it has to be entered into the refueling script. Very beautiful as you will see in the video. Right now the KC-135 can support the B-1 and the F18 but will be able to refuel all aircraft that are apart of this mod. Upon release if you want your aircraft to be able to be refueled via the KC-135 you will have to let me know.

As a boom operator in the USAF this makes me cringe. Surely, it's pretty awesome to see it working but it's missing a lot of things. Mainly a lot of lights are missing from the KC-135 that are necessary for Night AAR. Strobe light's would've been turned off before contact. And of course the boom would never be that still nor would the receiver. Maybe for realism you could make it so the receiver plane and the boom can wobble a bit in the AR Envelope. Would be very interesting if you could create a compartment for the boom operator so we can actually connect the boom to the receiver manually instead of relying on a script!

[CyclonicTuna 87]

As a boom operator in the USAF this makes me cringe. Surely, it's pretty awesome to see it working but it's missing a lot of things. Mainly a lot of lights are missing from the KC-135 that are necessary for Night AAR. Strobe light's would've been turned off before contact. And of course the boom would never be that still nor would the receiver. Maybe for realism you could make it so the receiver plane and the boom can wobble a bit in the AR Envelope. Would be very interesting if you could create a compartment for the boom operator so we can actually connect the boom to the receiver manually instead of relying on a script!

I was afraid someone might post something like that, but I see you're new to the forums and therefore also the game. So I'll explain.

You should understand that Arma isn't a flightsim, and for this wobble and motion of the boom to look realistic, you would ideally need a vector based physics engine, which Arma doesn't have. In fact, Arma lacks any real simulation of physics, it only has a scripted physics eninge but no dynamic input. Let alone the fact that you need simulation of airspeed/direction.

I know it looks a bit static, but honestly, most people playing this game aren't in it for the flight simulation, its just a great addition that we can have aircraft as accurate as Peral and Fullerpj are making them, but don't expect everything you would find in for instance DCS or BMS. So even if you could accomplish something like that, which would take a lot more time than actually making all of the aircraft themselves, most people would only be annoyed by it.

I agree that it would be nice to be able to approach the boom yourself, and not having to "click" the aircraft into place behind the KC-135, and maybe that is something Fullerpj and Peral will look into but for now, this works, so this i what you're gonna get.

I notice a lot of new members have this posture towards addon makers, which as much as it annoys me, I also kind of understand it. You feel like when you have knowledge of a certain subject you have the responsibility to make a remark about it.

But please realize that addon makers aren't a bunch of magicians of the RV engine that can make anything happen. For a lot of these people its just as complicated as you might think it is. They do this stuff not only the make content but also to learn, and that takes real time and engergy out of real lives of real people.

Also, know that on a forum no one can hear you voice or see your face, so when you say "it makes me cringe", eventhough you might not have intended to come across as hostile, you might sound like that to other people reading your comment. And this leads more often than not to flamewars, and no one has any benefit from a from a flamewar.

So next time maybe start you're comment by saying: "I'm a boom operator in real life and noticed (such and such), do you think you can/would it be possible to/how difficult would it be to improve (this and that)."

Or even better, if you already have a possible solution to a problem you see, post it!

Alright, welcome to the forums :)

Edited April 5, 2014 by CyclonicTuna

[raptor 6 actual 13]

So, who's making the models of the aircraft, such as the Global Hawk? If neither of you are texture artist, how did the model get the texture it has?

[TheRovaskian 10]

You should understand that Arma isn't a flightsim, and for this wobble and motion of the boom to look realistic, you would ideally need a vector based physics engine, which Arma doesn't have. In fact, Arma lacks any real simulation of physics, it only has a scripted physics engine but no dynamic input. Let alone the fact that you need simulation of airspeed/direction.

And I understand that. I was thinking more along the lines of just simulating the movement of the planes moving around in the AR Envelope. If the script functions the way I believe it does, it should be rather simple to have the receiver plane move left, right, forward, back, up or down a few degrees here and there just to simulate it. It's a minor thing for me because I do understand Arma has little to no real physics.

The main thing for me was the lack of lighting(at least during the night portion). There are Nacelle Lights, Underbody and Underwing lights, boom nozzle light, boom nozzle markers, tail mounted floodlight and the pilot director lights. On all receivers there should be a receptacle light with some receivers having more lighting around the receptacle. C-17 for example has perimeter lights, perimeter lead-in lights, etc.

[SGT Fuller 856]

So, who's making the models of the aircraft, such as the Global Hawk? If neither of you are texture artist, how did the model get the texture it has?

There are textures that are on the models we just want to polish them up give them more of a Arma 3 lighting if you can understand what I'm getting at

---------- Post added at 16:12 ---------- Previous post was at 16:08 ----------

And I understand that. I was thinking more along the lines of just simulating the movement of the planes moving around in the AR Envelope. If the script functions the way I believe it does, it should be rather simple to have the receiver plane move left, right, forward, back, up or down a few degrees here and there just to simulate it. It's a minor thing for me because I do understand Arma has little to no real physics.

The main thing for me was the lack of lighting(at least during the night portion). There are Nacelle Lights, Underbody and Underwing lights, boom nozzle light, boom nozzle markers, tail mounted floodlight and the pilot director lights. On all receivers there should be a receptacle light with some receivers having more lighting around the receptacle. C-17 for example has perimeter lights, perimeter lead-in lights, etc.

I understand where your coming from but tuna is correct. Also there is a limit on lights that you can put in a plane trust me I figured that out the hard way. Now referring to the aerial refueling.. It's not just gonna let you fly behind it and bam your connected..you do have to get in line with correct position of the probe just like in real life. I was in the Air Force recently as of yesterday separated due to the budget and force shaping so I know also. We're trying to simulate as close to RL as possible but as tuna said you have to understand that this is a game and a game has it's limitations which limits are imaginations also. Now as far as the view of the boom for a player that might be feasible but he wouldn't be able to move the boom around it's more of a luxury look for videos to be honest.

[p0laris 14]

Hey everyone just wanted to show you a little something upcoming.. It will not be in the alpha. It's the RQ-4A Global Hawk it doesn't really serve a purpose at the moment by can be controlled via the Uav terminal. I want to point out the one and only major delay that's keeping us from alpha and that is textures. Myself not peral are good with textures and we need someone to put the last bit of polish for release. We want to bring you great aircraft and visuals are apart of that so if your a texture or know someone who is hit me up in a pm or reply to this thread.

http://i1022.photobucket.com/albums/af344/Fullerpj/2014-04-04_00001.jpg

Please let me know if you need any reference pics of the Global Hawk. As I am currently stationed on the base in which we have them at and where the mission for them is. :P (Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota). I can see if I can get some pics for ya. Please remember that the wingspan is freaking huge so please try to accurately get that in game :P

[peral 267]

So, who's making the models of the aircraft, such as the Global Hawk? If neither of you are texture artist, how did the model get the texture it has?

We can and have textured some of the planes. We are looking for someone how has a little more experience with texturing to help us because of the work load.

[TheRovaskian 10]

Fair enough on the limit to lights, sad to hear however. Sorry to hear about the separation from force shaping. And I understand it's just a game. Just wanted to point out some things that were mixing and I tried to offer a solution. And that'd be pretty awesome for just laying back there. If you ever need any information regarding the inside of the KC135, the boom pod, etc. Lemme know and I can get the information for you.

[SGT Fuller 856]

Please let me know if you need any reference pics of the Global Hawk. As I am currently stationed on the base in which we have them at and where the mission for them is. :P (Grand Forks Air Force Base in North Dakota). I can see if I can get some pics for ya. Please remember that the wingspan is freaking huge so please try to accurately get that in game :P

I'm looking for a reference as far as lights and collision lights if you can get those for me I'd appreciate it also I didn't take a picture from the top. It's wing span mirrors real life trust me lol

[raptor 6 actual 13]

We can and have textured some of the planes. We are looking for someone how has a little more experience with texturing to help us because of the work load.

Fair enough on the reply Peral. I guess what I was saying, without making it sound as an accusation, was that the look of the aircraft appeared fine, as-is. I would've taken it as finished after looking at the pic that was posted of it.

Edited April 5, 2014 by Raptor 6 Actual