Jump to content
Spartan0536

ArmA III Ballistics Overhaul WIP

Would you use this ballistic code in your mod?  

158 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you use this ballistic code in your mod?

    • Yes
    • Not Sure, perhaps you could site your findings more in depth
    • No


Recommended Posts

For the sake of not getting jailed, go with the option A

For the sake of realism & authenticity, go with the option B

honestly i'd really love to see you pull off that research :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I got a hold of some UNCLASSIFIED UNLIMITED DISTRIBUTION documents, and it had information on the M80A1 Ball ammo, it gave me the grain, velocity with variance and with that I was able to extrapolate an accurate calculated G1 ballistics coefficient using JBM Ballistics calculator. All I need now is the penetration rating and we are good to go for the M80A1 ball ammo.

Addendum: Since I now have the data for the M80A1 EPR, with a fairly accurate penetration rating thanks to unclassified documents provided to me by Google and some of my contacts, and rest assured ALL documents are UNCLASSIFIED UNLIMITED DISTRIBUTION provided by DTIC.MIL, I have scrubbed the inclusion of the old M993 Armor Piercing round. The M993 was never designed to be shot out of short barrels, it was designed back in the early 1990's for use in mounted M240B's and M60E3 machine guns with 24 inch barrels. The M80A1 EPR is designed to be much more efficient in shorter barrels and uses a mild steel penetrator over the M993's Tungsten Carbide penetrator. Remember that Mild Steel has a bullet factor of 6 and Tungsten Carbide is 9, this means that the M993 AP would be doing SIGNIFICANTLY LESS damage than the M80A1. Given the M993 AP from a 24 inch barrel is capable of penetrating 16mm RHA at 550m, all that penetration is wasted when you shoot into a soft target like a body, you end up with a clean pass through.

So the final 3 round to be implemented in my 7.62x51mm NATO pack are....

M80A1 EPR - (covering all 4 barrel lengths of 24, 20, 16, & 13 inches)

Mk 316 Mod 0 Special Ball Long Range - (Covering 2 long barrels of 24, & 20 inches)

Mk 318 Mod 0 Ball Barrier Blind - (Covering 2 short barrels of 16, & 13 inches)

Please note that the Mk 318 mod 0 is SPECIFICALLY designed for short barrel performance, however it is NOT a boat tailed round, this round is NOT designed for long range use, mainly up to 400-500m.

Before anyone asks, I WILL NOT share the documentation on the M80A1 EPR regarding penetration and range tests, these documents were provided to me by personnel in active military standing using their AKO clearance. ALL of the documents are UNCLASSIFIED UNLIMITED DISTRIBUTION, however since those documents were not found actively through search engines on the web I will NOT be the one to put them out there. I do not want any security "breaches" as I do not want to suffer any reprisal. I must also advise you that the M80A1 EPR is NOT within my 3-5% threshold, its most likely in a 10-15%, its close, damn close, but I did have to calculate certain things based off of data and parameters, I did however use the best ballistics software available to calculate the rounds performance.

Edited by Spartan0536

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spartan,

I've been keeping track of your progress on this project for awhile now. Your efforts and enthusiasm to make this what we all know what it can be, are respected and appreciated.

Keep up the good work! And don't get yourself in jail ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep getting this nagging/painful feeling every time I test another weapon mod out and cant use ammo/magazines across multiple weapon systems from different mods that should be complete compatible. I love the calculations and in combination with Advanced ballistics by Ruthburg. It makes long range shooting with Iron sights very predictable and accurate like I'm used too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're quickly getting to a point where having a JAM ver 4 set of magazines would be helpful. The nice thing in Arma 3 is that if JAM was to be reborn, everyone could still use their own preferred sound mod, unlike in OFP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PROJECT UPDATE! (1/10/2015)

Hello and happy belated New Year to everyone! Last weekend I had my Sunday Gunday automatic weapons shoot and I got some nice video for you guys. The first video is me shooting a custom built BCM/NOVSKE/Spikes/Magpul AR with an AAC 762-SND-6 suppressor, and the next is an IMI Full Size Uzi with an IMI Suppressor. I have also been helping my clan get our ArmA III Insurgency server up and running by building our FOB and also playing some of the games I got from the evil Steam Sale. I just got a chance to test out HLC's FAL and G3 pack and I am IMPRESSED, the G3's however when using the "battle sights" at 100m are not correct, the "V" cut should perfectly align with the front ring creating a full sight picture similar to an AR. I am pretty much done with 7.62x51mm NATO and everything is ready for a release before the end of this week (24 hours). But for now enjoy the following videos and if you are making a weapon chambered .300 Blackout please for the sake of realism make it sound right, especially with a suppressor. As you will see even with SUPERSONIC ammo the AAC 762-SDN-6 Suppressor is super quiet!

.300 Blackout Rifle

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10205784729600620&l=4550012349296069322

IMI Uzi

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10205784717520318&l=2777849485803702388

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMPORTANT PROJECT UPDATE! (1/11/2015)

I am currently uploading my 7.62x51mm NATO ballistics code with a few extra bonus rounds! This includes .45 ACP FMJ Ball and JHP +P (Based off of Federal Tactical HST's), and 1 new 7.62x51mm NATO round that encompasses all 4 barrel lengths, the Lapua 200 Grain Full Metal Jacket SUBSONIC round. Please keep in mind that my calculated ballistics are set to standard barometric pressure at 1.762m (5ft 9 1/2 inches) ABOVE sea level, changes in elevation and pressure can make these into SUPERSONIC rounds as they really push the threshold of the Subsonic/Supersonic barrier. That being said, any barrel length 20 inches and under should be subsonic, anything over will be Supersonic for a short portion of the flight and you MAY get some ballistic instability at range. The maximum rated effective range of this new round from a 16 inch barrel is stated to be 200m. All of my data on this bullet came DIRECTLY from LAPUA including ballistics charts to which I professionally calculated the G1 coefficient to a .500.

My ballistics code should be completely uploaded within the next 4 hours of this post, enjoy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I got the M80A1 EPR & all of the .45 ACP ballistics finished and uploaded, need to get to sleep for work in the morning, I will finish the ballistics upload once I am finished with work on 1/12/2015! Sorry for the slight extra delay :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

uuuummm this is ballistics, not ballistic helmets, I do not work on clothing/armor, only bullets and weapon systems.

---------- Post added at 05:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:20 PM ----------

Also minor update, I am off work now, and I am finishing my projects, they WILL be finished in the next few hours!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMPORTANT UPDATE! (1/12/2015)

While writing the ballistics code for the Mk319 Mod 0 SOST (7.62x51mm version of the 5.56x45mm SOST) I was running into penetration issues where the 7.62x51mm NATO was either barely outperforming or were under-performing their 5.56x45mm "cousins", this threw red flags at me. I went back, looked at the code for the 5.56x45mm NATO rounds, adjusted some airfriction rates that were not properly updated (my fault, there were typos), and PROPERLY adjusted penetration. Apparently I was using the OLD conversion rate of 20 gauge mild steel to RHA which I was told was a 1.3 differential ratio, this turned out to be incorrect as many steel works websites list 20 Gauge steel to RHA as a 1.2 ratio. I know that does not sound like much of a difference at all but when you are talking about penetration at distance it makes quite a big difference. As it turns out the M855A1 EPR was UNDER PENETRATING and the MK318 Mod 0 SOST was SLIGHTLY OVER PENETRATING. The SOST was set to 3/8 mild steel at 200m when it should have been exactly on par with the old M855 at 3/8 Mild Steel @ 160m. The airfriction differences only affected the M855A1 and the Mk318 Mod 0, and they are MINOR corrections, usually in the last 2 of the numbers.

This has only caused a VERY MINOR delay in my final release of the 7.62x51mm NATO rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MAJOR UPDATE! (1/13/2015)

My 7.62x51mm NATO rounds including Subsonic rounds have been added as well as .45 ACP for pistols and SMG's (they share the same barrel length as a full size .45 handgun), please be sure to check my "completed" thread for more information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MAJOR UPDATE! (1/13/2015)

My 7.62x51mm NATO rounds including Subsonic rounds have been added as well as .45 ACP for pistols and SMG's (they share the same barrel length as a full size .45 handgun), please be sure to check my "completed" thread for more information.

Mate, that stuff is Top notch. Running a test build of My M14s with the EPR and Mk 316 , REALLY digging the performance of the rounds across the board, bloody nice job as usual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the Marksman DLC pack out and not really solving any issues with ballistics from a modding standpoint (it slightly improves on the current system), I am debating on which direction to go.

Plan A: Continue work as before and update values based on current changes

Plan B: Get in with the ACE team and ensure 3rd party compatibility with the mod working 100% in tandem with Ruthberg (this means a total combination of our databases and efforts)

Plan C: Give up completely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say b might be the best option. ACE is clearly going to be widely used, so your work will likely be used by more people if it's added into that and no doubt you want your work to be widely used, as all modders do. You'll have to find out what compromises, if any, that will require though and decide whether they're acceptable or if you'd rather keep your mod as you want it, even if less people are likely to use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A and B

I still use your values and so far no real change in ballistic performance so as long as it isn't C do what you gotta do man.

Matter of fact one guy on my Steam friends list made your Mk316 ammo his girlfriend so... I think it's fair to say your work is appreciated even with the Marksman DLC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ACE3 does not include pre-configured 3rd party ammo- or weapon classes.

And it requires proper configurations from any 3rd party content pack, including weapon packs.

So I would recommend you go with plan A.

Plan A: Continue work as before and update values based on current changes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so after looking at the ballistics code of the ACE 3 team, I will be taking Ruthbergs advice and I will continue to support the 3rd party devs, however with that I will also be making sure they are ACE3 compatible code wise. ACE 3 ballistics code is VERY VERY similar to Ruthbergs advanced ballistics mod and my current work is inter-operable with his. This will allow me to use the same setup as I have been using, and I will be able to focus my efforts on securing the best ballistics data instead of learning to write code in a new fashion. With that out of the way, there are a few things I would like to clear up....

1. My current work is fairly accurate, within 5% for sure, 3% in some cases, and rarely within 1%, and I am pretty happy with this, but I will try to get this dialed in a bit more, see below for more details.

2. There will never be any TRUE simulation in ArmA even with Ruthbergs and ACE's work, the problem lies with densities of objects and how projectiles react with them. Imagine trying to accurately model ever fence, door, house, building, window pane, ect..., its almost impossible, and not really worth the dev time. In addendum there is also an issue with how body armor works in the game, unless someone has gotten the right dev tools to edit this (I am not currently aware of anyone who has), this is a "broken" element to ballistics.

3. I am still awaiting the finished product from my friend Bakerman on his new ArmA III ballistics calculator which I use exclusively to help me import real ballistics data into values that ArmA's engine uses. If you have ever wondered why my numbers are so detailed (example. hit = 10.039582042) its because of the calculations that are run to generate that number based off of the variables I have set (see my original post on the first page of this thread for more information). Bakermans new calculator will allow me to dial in the numbers a bit more as his work is completely revised and enhanced.

Now in the mean time I need some new projects to work on, this is a public shout to 3rd party modders, what are your current projects that need new ballistics, the most commonly asked for ones will go first. Also for anyone interested the .408 Sniper rifle seems to have a new bolt action animation that looks and sounds pretty darn good, for anyone making bolt action sniper weapon systems look into this, I am all finished with my .338 Lapua research, just waiting for the rifles to test them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay if you're doing .338 Lapua then my L115s could use some tweaking that's for sure. I was going to get around to it but since you got the better goods so far I still can but... :)

Edited by EricJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Spartan, I absolutely love what you're doing here. Thanks for the hard work, man.

Do you have any estimation on how much this will affect performance on a 15-20 player server?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if using ACE 3 you might want to ask the rest of the team, mainly Ruthberg as that is primarily his code, if just using "default" ArmA III with HLC/EricJ/RH ect... weapons 0% performance hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I"ve never seen a performance hit with his ammo over a year or so, so it's good stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok so after looking at the ballistics code of the ACE 3 team, I will be taking Ruthbergs advice and I will continue to support the 3rd party devs, however with that I will also be making sure they are ACE3 compatible code wise. ACE 3 ballistics code is VERY VERY similar to Ruthbergs advanced ballistics mod and my current work is inter-operable with his. This will allow me to use the same setup as I have been using, and I will be able to focus my efforts on securing the best ballistics data instead of learning to write code in a new fashion. With that out of the way, there are a few things I would like to clear up....

1. My current work is fairly accurate, within 5% for sure, 3% in some cases, and rarely within 1%, and I am pretty happy with this, but I will try to get this dialed in a bit more, see below for more details.

2. There will never be any TRUE simulation in ArmA even with Ruthbergs and ACE's work, the problem lies with densities of objects and how projectiles react with them. Imagine trying to accurately model ever fence, door, house, building, window pane, ect..., its almost impossible, and not really worth the dev time. In addendum there is also an issue with how body armor works in the game, unless someone has gotten the right dev tools to edit this (I am not currently aware of anyone who has), this is a "broken" element to ballistics.

3. I am still awaiting the finished product from my friend Bakerman on his new ArmA III ballistics calculator which I use exclusively to help me import real ballistics data into values that ArmA's engine uses. If you have ever wondered why my numbers are so detailed (example. hit = 10.039582042) its because of the calculations that are run to generate that number based off of the variables I have set (see my original post on the first page of this thread for more information). Bakermans new calculator will allow me to dial in the numbers a bit more as his work is completely revised and enhanced.

Now in the mean time I need some new projects to work on, this is a public shout to 3rd party modders, what are your current projects that need new ballistics, the most commonly asked for ones will go first. Also for anyone interested the .408 Sniper rifle seems to have a new bolt action animation that looks and sounds pretty darn good, for anyone making bolt action sniper weapon systems look into this, I am all finished with my .338 Lapua research, just waiting for the rifles to test them.

im with the eu sof mod are we are making a few weapons over the course of time. and with that said we are going to be incorporating warsaw pact ammo such as 7.62x54r 7.62x39 5 45 9x18 so seeing some russian round ballistics would be great also maybe some of the older rounds like 8mm mauser and 7.62x55 swiss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×