Jet DLC?

[andersson 285]

I hope for direct input from my controllers. Now you are telling the plane/ai what you want to do and it fly the plane in that fashion. The throttle for example is a request for a certain speed, not thrust. So you can hear the engine do whatever even if you give full throttle.

So advanced flight model for planes please :)

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Put it this way, aircraft in Arma 3 are going to change dramatically. As they say, new radar stuff, threat acquisition, target identification... I'm sure they have a few more things hidden away. Hopefully proper HUDs and hopefully Advanced Flight Model for fixed wing (how ever they will go about that). I'm super hyped for this 

[kremator 1065]

Would like some proper Nape-of-the-Earth flying capabilities for humans and AI alike.

[haleks 8212]

I must be the only one thinking air superiority jets without a system of energy states and how each aircraft approaches them is pointless.

 

Standard ACM maneuvers cannot be executed and mean anything as you cant even control airbrakes , throttle and afterburner separately. 

 

Energy fighting, Boom and Zooming, Turn fighting are mostly the same for every aircraft 

 

Acceleration is mostly the same for every aircraft.

 

I mean war thunder has theese thing more fleshed out that arma , thats kinda sad.

 

Warthunder is focussed on vehicle warfare, jets/planes and tanks; Arma is a different playground, you can't have the same expectations.

[R0adki11 3949]

Warthunder is focussed on vehicle warfare, jets and tanks; Arma is a different playground, you can't have the same expectations.

Exactly it would be liking trying to compare and apple to a banana. They are both different. 

[razor6014 35]

When the DLC i have to pay for is focused on jets , YES i bloody CAN.

 

Do i expect the same detail , no , but i do expect concepts that are present in EVERY sim that has jets. You cant even do a High Yo-Yo now to bleed off speed. That i could do in sims from 1990s. 

Heck you can do that in helicopters in arma, but not in jets. 

 

Warthunder is focussed on vehicle warfare, jets/planes and tanks; Arma is a different playground, you can't have the same expectations.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

That reminds me. Hopefully they bloody Fix PIP. So fixed wing and helis alike don't have to be in TGT Camera/Gun Camera view 24/7 to see whats going on. That may come with the 64bit stuff though I'm not sure. I'm surprised they just done have 'Full True PIP' option in the drop down in the actual graphics options? If people have the PC to handle it then why not? 

[kerozen 187]

I must be the only one thinking air superiority jets without a system of energy states and how each aircraft approaches them is pointless.

 

Standard ACM maneuvers cannot be executed and mean anything as you cant even control airbrakes , throttle and afterburner separately. 

 

Energy fighting, Boom and Zooming, Turn fighting are mostly the same for every aircraft 

 

Acceleration is mostly the same for every aircraft.

 

I mean war thunder has theese thing more fleshed out that arma , thats kinda sad.

 

How is that sad? You do realize you are comparing and HARD CORE Flight Simulator to an Arcadish Military Simulator don't you? All of those things can change like stuff did with APEX... it was impossible to load vehicles into other vehicles and guess what? They coded that in

[silentghoust 132]

Gentlemen, gentlemen....We are forgetting the most interesting possible outcome out of this whole DLC. Even though they mentioned air superiority fighters directly, who says we might get a set of LARGE TRANSPORT PLANES!

[Guest]

Gentlemen, gentlemen....We are forgetting the most interesting possible outcome out of this whole DLC. Even though they mentioned air superiority fighters directly, who says we might get a set of LARGE TRANSPORT PLANES!

"jets" :-/ I would love a military transport aircraft, but I don't know if it would fit in such a DLC.

[Wiki 1558]

"jets" :-/ I would love a military transport aircraft, but I don't know if it would fit in such a DLC.

+1

Moreover, we already have the new VTOL for this

[heavygunner 179]

I'm more excited for an actual radar system etc.

No more Tab-spam fighting. :)

[Wiki 1558]

I'm more excited for an actual radar system etc.

No more Tab-spam fighting. :)

+1

[john111 76]

That is really neded in this game,no more to easy/ arcade game parts to it .A+1 from me,and a great Auto pilot feature and a radar altimeter to make the wierd pull up a lot of meters before landing.

 

Some way to make Ai fly better by the use of the Auto Land feature,but making it adjust the altitude on the fly and fly the entire map at 10 m and a few such things will be sought after

 

features a lot of people like to see.

 

More solid systems,less gadget just put in there if they are easy to make .

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

To be honest, i think it's going to flesh out the way air combat is coducted in Arma's Battlespace. I'm excited and worried at the same time, as i'm very accustomed to tab-lock gameplay, while it's cheaty, and dry, it gets the job done for both sides. I remember flying an SU-25 Vs. a Tunguska, always above 9K out of visibility, come into the range and start popping flares every few seconds to prevent a solid lock from AA, then attempt to tab lock around my target location provided by friends on the ground, and it would be a game of who can find each other first. Remembered doing this for about 7 hours on Takistan life back in the day. But in the light of new possibilities, here's what i hope for.

 

-Finally a new Flight Model that supports Arma's Fixed Wing Aircraft

-Better controls for flying aircraft (Option for Mouse as Joystick with the persistent Box/Area method)

-More variety of existing aircraft, Buzzard with rockets, Two Seaters

-Fighters. We currently only have Attack jets, and i know, Arma 2 had an F-35, but that's technically still a dedicated Attack jet

-Actual working HUD in relation to Radar. Arma 2's HUD for jets actually kinda (Kind of) worked. There was still an overlay.

-And finally, Real Sounds for jets. After hearing some of the work these guys do, i can't understand why we can't have jets that actually sound like jets. =P

[x3kj 1247]

I would actually put an improved damage system on the top priority list. Airplanes have only one hitpoint, thats it. What i would wish for:

• Engine (loss of thrust)
• Instruments (stuff in cockpit, Interface)
• Electronic Weapons (Fire controll, radar, laser designation)
• Wings (loss of lift/ rotation due to asymmetric lift)
• Controll surfaces (reducing of "steering" power)

I proposed a different approach to the usual "hardcoded way" that would be very beneficial to have, not just for planes  https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83575

 

followed by

1. Better Flightmodel... pretty please.  I tried to analyse the errors and possible countermeasures in the current FM here (nr 1 nr2 nr3) . A template for a force based new FM from-scratch is described here (is lacking pitch and yaw rotational drag description)
2. Radarimprovements: Differentiation between Radar Warning system and Active Radars. Active radars can seek passive targets. RWR can only see active targets (with enabled radar). Implementation of Radar cones, instead of always 360°. Implementation of terrain occlusion ("Flying below radar"). Including simple implementation of passive stealth ( Modifier in Vehicle config for "stealthiness"), which makes stuff show up on radar at reduced distance, and is identified in more detail at even greater reduced range. Ability to enable/disable radar (for stealth).
3. Some way to access the Sensor informations (Radar, RWR, etc) via scripts. Would allow custom extended functionality, without having to build a custom radar from scratch next to already existing functionality.
4. Fix of thrust animation source, so the thrust controll in cockpits can finally be animated. Also important for engine nozzle animation. It is broken for PlaneX Simulation (but works for old A2 Plane simulation). There are other such broken sources (e.g. steeringwheel for tanks). All this could be solved in one swoop and made significantly more powerfull with this method https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83574
5. Mixed Ammo in Magazines for better simulation of Aircraft/Helicopter Autocannons https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82246
6. New missile lock functionality, that requires retaining active lock for the missile to hit, otherwise it wanders off. We only have Fire&Forget Seekers and a bad implementation of manual guidance in the game thus far.
7. MFD source for CCIP crosshair
8. Eventhandlers for Weapon and Missile locking https://feedback.bistudio.com/T79227

[xxgetbuck123 945]

 

I would actually put an improved damage system on the top priority list. Airplanes have only one hitpoint, thats it. What i would wish for:

• Engine (loss of thrust)
• Instruments (stuff in cockpit)
• Electronic Weapons (Fire controll, radar, laser designation)
• Wings (loss of lift/ rotation due to asymmetric lift)
• Controll surfaces (reducing of "steering" power)

I proposed a different approach to the usual "hardcoded way" that would be very beneficial to have, not just for planes  https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83575

 

followed by

1. Better Flightmodel... pretty please.
2. Radarimprovements: Differentiation between Radar Warning system and Active Radars. Active radars can seek passive targets. RWR can only see active targets (with enabled radar). Implementation of Radar cones, instead of always 360°. Implementation of terrain occlusion ("Flying below radar"). Including simple implementation of passive stealth ( Modifier in Vehicle config for "stealthiness"), which makes stuff show up on radar at reduced distance, and is identified in more detail at even greater reduced range. Ability to enable/disable radar (for stealth).
3. Fix of thrust animation source, so the thrust controll in cockpits can finally be animated. Also important for engine nozzle animation. It is broken for PlaneX Simulation (but works for old A2 Plane simulation). There are other such broken sources (e.g. steeringwheel for tanks). All this could be solved in one swoop and made significantly more powerfull with this method https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83574
4. Mixed Ammo in Magazines for better simulation of Aircraft/Helicopter Autocannons https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82246
5. Eventhandlers for Weapon and Missile locking https://feedback.bistudio.com/T79227

 

 

Yes! How has the Advanced Damage for fixed wing not been mentioned until now! I completely forgot about such thing! +1 +1 

 

I +1 all those propositions. 

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

 

I would actually put an improved damage system on the top priority list. Airplanes have only one hitpoint, thats it. What i would wish for:

• Engine (loss of thrust)
• Instruments (stuff in cockpit, Interface)
• Electronic Weapons (Fire controll, radar, laser designation)
• Wings (loss of lift/ rotation due to asymmetric lift)
• Controll surfaces (reducing of "steering" power)

I proposed a different approach to the usual "hardcoded way" that would be very beneficial to have, not just for planes  https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83575

 

followed by

1. Better Flightmodel... pretty please.
2. Radarimprovements: Differentiation between Radar Warning system and Active Radars. Active radars can seek passive targets. RWR can only see active targets (with enabled radar). Implementation of Radar cones, instead of always 360°. Implementation of terrain occlusion ("Flying below radar"). Including simple implementation of passive stealth ( Modifier in Vehicle config for "stealthiness"), which makes stuff show up on radar at reduced distance, and is identified in more detail at even greater reduced range. Ability to enable/disable radar (for stealth).
3. Some way to access the Sensor informations (Radar, RWR, etc) via scripts. Would allow custom extended functionality, without having to build a custom radar from scratch next to already existing functionality.
4. Fix of thrust animation source, so the thrust controll in cockpits can finally be animated. Also important for engine nozzle animation. It is broken for PlaneX Simulation (but works for old A2 Plane simulation). There are other such broken sources (e.g. steeringwheel for tanks). All this could be solved in one swoop and made significantly more powerfull with this method https://feedback.bistudio.com/T83574
5. Mixed Ammo in Magazines for better simulation of Aircraft/Helicopter Autocannons https://feedback.bistudio.com/T82246
6. MFD source for CCIP crosshair
7. Eventhandlers for Weapon and Missile locking https://feedback.bistudio.com/T79227

 

If i remember correctly, Arma 2 had some form of Engine Thrust loss, though, i don't think it carried over into Arma 3. It may or may not have. I remember taking a hit on multiple occasions and finding it hard to maintain efficiency afterwards, forcing me to land and repair, or rarely cost my life in a combat situation. Kinda wish they would bring it back. Kinda sucks damaging aircraft on the receiving end and the pilot has no problems continuing to be a massive problem for allied ground forces.

[x3kj 1247]

Engine thrust is lost when you are damaged over 90% currently. Doesnt matter where the hit was, doesnt matter what hit it. Its pitiful (compared to Helicopters where every little bit has a component).

For really fast jets it might not be so jaring. They are more vulnerable. For slower flying planes (esp. VTOL) and especially for larger planes it is extremely bad  to have no differentiation. They can get hit by alot weaker weapons and there it matters where the stuff hits a lot more.

 

Another feature:

New Lock functionality, that requires retaining active lock for the missile to hit, otherwise it wanders off. We only have Fire&Forget in Arma.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

Shit, while I'm here might as well add the following.

 

- Being able to land aircraft wheels up without the aircraft blowing up instantly!!

- Letting helicopters roll over without blowing up instantly at like 45* to the vertical!! 

 

And I cannot say enough the support for

 

- Advanced Flight Model and Advanced damage for fixed wing. 

[razor6014 35]

And for the love of god, separate throttle , and airbrakes,

 

Seriously whoever thought that was a good idea? 

[Beagle 684]

And for the love of god, separate throttle , and airbrakes,

 

Seriously whoever thought that was a good idea? 

You can  already separate that by assigning thrust and brake to different axis

[xxgetbuck123 945]

And for the love of god, separate throttle , and airbrakes,

 

Seriously whoever thought that was a good idea? 

 

They're already separate. As old mate said above me, just bind brakes to a separate button and bam you're done. 

[sberla101 50]

I think the basis of a good DLC is to implement these "technologies":

 

1) the increased viewing distance

 

2) the sub-pixels

 

[sjaba 19]

Very thrilled to hear this news and will be first in line to pay for such a DLC.

However,  there are imo not that much that have to change for Fixed wing becoming more fun to use ( in an Arma setting).

 

+5 for Advanced Flight Model or atleast a "upgraded" flight model. IMO no point asking or hoping for a "simlike" approach, but atleast somewhat closer to what they did with Heli DLC.

+4 Heading/ altitude autopilot option ( ie one can actually set up a "wheel" and work the cameras/maps/radios etc without fearing a instant crash due to loss of control input).

+3 Ground stabilsed TGP ( quite sure we see that one soon)

+2 For having primary instrument panels, clear and working and a ASL attitude gauge/ counter

+1 A better armament option and missile systems (In the lines of Firewills F16 or the likes) . Ie Pilots, JTACs etc can choose what armament they will need for each induvidual operation..MM can set limitations if wanted.

 

Sjaba...