United States Air Force( 2015)

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Looking great! Good to see progress is still going strong. One suggestion I would like to give is to tone down the dirtyness of the A-10 a bit. The textures look great, but I feel like the darkened lines and smudges are just a tad to much, most notably on the sides of the hull.

 

Other than that amazing work. Keep it up people! Looking forward to the release. 

[skuijs 17]

Wow great that its back on cant wait :) 

 

Loved the ac130 in your pack used it alot solo :) 

 

Any chance that will be standalone someday ?

[raynor_d 339]

On 9/20/2018 at 9:29 AM, CyclonicTuna said:

One suggestion I would like to give is to tone down the dirtyness of the A-10 a bit. The textures look great, but I feel like the darkened lines and smudges are just a tad to much, most notably on the sides of the hull.

 

Appreciate the feedback. I definitely got carried away with the contrast on the spec map. The original diffuse texture had a ton of dirt baked in as well which I tried to reduce. Also baked the AS map today and took off the pave penny. Much happier with the look now. 

 

For people who prefer the dirty look, I'll make it a combat-worn livery down the road. These will be 50 year old fuselages by 2035 after all. 

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Just now, raynor_d said:

 

Appreciate the feedback. I definitely got carried away with the contrast on the spec map. The original diffuse texture had a ton of dirt baked in as well which I tried to reduce. Also baked the AS map today. Much happier with the look now. 

 

For people who prefer the dirty look, I'll make it a combat-worn livery down the road. These will be 50 year old fuselages by 2035 after all. 

 

Yeah, that looks better in my opinion. Also if you're going to make a combat worn look, perhaps it'll be cool to include some flaked paint in the specular/metallic map. A lot of on duty A10's have paint flaked away and scratches around the refuel cap on the nose and stuff. 

[derzto 0]

Will you guys be upgrading the explosion size for the GBU-57? It currently has the explosive yield of a 500 or 1000 pound bomb rather than one of a 30,000 pound behemoth 

[cry me a river 36]

On ‎2018‎-‎09‎-‎16 at 7:12 PM, Lala14 said:

iirc there are modules that need to be placed and sync'd (I believe 1 with the person who is calling it)

do you have any ideas which ones? I played around with the support modules but none of them work. It almost seems that he uses a script to add an action to the scroll wheel menu. 

 

[Lala14 135]

8 hours ago, cry me a river said:

do you have any ideas which ones? I played around with the support modules but none of them work. It almost seems that he uses a script to add an action to the scroll wheel menu. 

 

yes u sync it and it will add the addaction to the jtac to call in the plane

[cry me a river 36]

On ‎2018‎-‎09‎-‎28 at 7:35 AM, Lala14 said:

yes u sync it and it will add the addaction to the jtac to call in the plane

I'm sorry I'm a little slow, sync what to what exactly? Right now I have the plane synced to the "CAS Bombing Run" module which is synced to a "Support Requester" module which is synced to the JTAC. It's how it normally works but when I press "0," then "8" to pull up support options the AC130 appears greyed out. 

[raynor_d 339]

Progress over the past week included visual work on the aging GBU-12 and 24 models, and minor improvements to several others.

 

The 24 received a specular map, while the 12 was given a model overhaul then re-textured from scratch. Seekers were added to both models.

 

GBU-12

Spoiler

USAF variant

 

Maritime variant with white thermal paint on warhead for USN/USMC, to resist cook-off in case of fire on a carrier (no functional differences)

 

Complete family of variants, including all green variant (middle right) and inert training variant (far right).

 

GBU-24

Spoiler

 

 

 

The SDBs (GBU-53 and GBU-39) along with their BRU-61 rack had their materials improved and vendor logos removed. Also the LAU-131 was made from the 68 for the longer APKWS hydras.

Spoiler

 

[SuicideCommando 333]

Wow, those look awesome. 

[TheSenDest 38]

Are we still getting that video that was talked about back in August or September?

[raynor_d 339]

Put together a teaser trailer for the first pack that will be released, the fighters: 

 

[CyclonicTuna 87]

Oh wow, I wasn't aware that you guys were going to release it in packs. So its become that expansive huh? Well, those are some mighty fine looking aircraft, can't wait!

[SuicideCommando 333]

Cool teaser video. Those aircraft look great. 

[sammael 366]

Very good idea to make it in packs.  Really looking forward to this amazing mod

[ferpo_the_great 6]

Forgive me if this is something the mod cannot control, but is there any way to get the B1 and B2 AI to behave more like strategic bombers rather than CAS? My guess is that its an ARMA thing but it would be nice if the AI would fly bombers at higher altitudes rather than behave like an F-35 or A-10

[CyclonicTuna 87]

4 minutes ago, ferpo_the_great said:

Forgive me if this is something the mod cannot control, but is there any way to get the B1 and B2 AI to behave more like strategic bombers rather than CAS? My guess is that its an ARMA thing but it would be nice if the AI would fly bombers at higher altitudes rather than behave like an F-35 or A-10

 

Pretty sure there's a set min/max altitude command for AI flying planes. 

[raynor_d 339]

14 hours ago, ferpo_the_great said:

Forgive me if this is something the mod cannot control, but is there any way to get the B1 and B2 AI to behave more like strategic bombers rather than CAS? My guess is that its an ARMA thing but it would be nice if the AI would fly bombers at higher altitudes rather than behave like an F-35 or A-10

 

Yeah that's out of our hands afaik. On your end one of these should do the trick.

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/flyInHeight

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/flyInHeightASL

[TeTeT 1523]

22 minutes ago, raynor_d said:

 

Yeah that's out of our hands afaik. On your end one of these should do the trick.

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/flyInHeight

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/flyInHeightASL

 

From what I've seen you need both: First a flyInHeight with a low number, like 50 to 100 meter. And then the flyInHeightASL with higher altitude, 1000+. The logic seems to be that the plane uses ASL height flying unless it's lower than flyInHeight ATL, then it will do the terrain following with flyInHeight.

[john111 76]

This will need some real useful ECM scripts to make this ATL-flying work .I would make a C-119 or other turboprop maybe a C-7 Porter or similar as a dedicated ECM-plane .With such a potent Sam-system currently in Arma 3,this may be a must.

[Foxone 1044]

12 minutes ago, john1 said:

This will need some real useful ECM scripts to make this ATL-flying work .I would make a C-119 or other turboprop maybe a C-7 Porter or similar as a dedicated ECM-plane .With such a potent Sam-system currently in Arma 3,this may be a must.

It doesn't need those planes, they are not in service anymore, hell neither of them was a plane that was used for ECM back then. As that didn't exist back in those days..... Most planes come with an ECM pod or have it built in.

[sammael 366]

Do you devs plan to change on Stinger lock on noise?

 

[Ex3B 266]

Where will the pack be released? I know its not an "Air Force" plane, but I wasn't there some work on an F-35B model, will this be release din the pack (or did I get confused with another WIP F-35)?

[R77 Adder 2]

18 minutes ago, Ex3B said:

Where will the pack be released? I know its not an "Air Force" plane, but I wasn't there some work on an F-35B model, will this be release din the pack (or did I get confused with another WIP F-35)?

I believe SGTFuller was working on a F-35B and F-35C and was going to be placed within the USAF mod, But I havnt heard anything about the two aircraft in over a year.

[Ex3B 266]

The question was where, not when.

I gather it won't be on steam, will it be on Armaholic?

Mediafire? dropbox? I'm just curious