Firewill Standalone Series Release Thread

[BonSie 4]

I have similar issues with ATGMs vs RHS MBT (well anything non-RHS AT vs RHS heavy armor)

GBU's do murder them to bits.

I do know RHS changed how their armor and weapons worked but I know nothing of a config thing.

[kationarma3 1]

Hello Sir Firewill,

I love to use your mods, the amount of detail and dedication you spent making them is stunning, brilliant work. I hope you keep enjoying modmaking :)

I have a question regarding the integration of the i-tgt system. Do the same steps listed in your manual work for multiplayer too? Do I have to put the config stuff inside all clients configs connecting to my server? Or only serverside?

 

Thanks in advance,

Kat

[firewill 3879]

11 hours ago, kationarma3 said:

Hello Sir Firewill,

I love to use your mods, the amount of detail and dedication you spent making them is stunning, brilliant work. I hope you keep enjoying modmaking :)

I have a question regarding the integration of the i-tgt system. Do the same steps listed in your manual work for multiplayer too? Do I have to put the config stuff inside all clients configs connecting to my server? Or only serverside?

 

Thanks in advance,

Kat

you need to make config for integration of I-TGT and client also need to have it.

 

AWS updated

v2.84
- AGM-84E SLAM added (for Project Rhino and F/A-18E/F mod)
- AGM-84K SLAM-ER added
- AGM-84H SLAM-ER repainted
- Command Guidance/CG-T(Terminal) mode added in I-TGT
- CG mode Supported weapon : AGM-84E/H/K. more weapons will be add.
- warhead config added for AGM-65 Maverick series
- maintenance

 

[Poentis.K 125]

On 2/14/2019 at 12:51 AM, firewill said:

AWS updated

v2.84.
- warhead config added for AGM-65 Maverick series

:O? in what way?

 

[TitansWeasel 6]

Hello

Thank you for the new AGM 84s.

Can you tell me the maximum standoff range of them?

 

greets Mike

[firewill 3879]

7 hours ago, TitansWeasel said:

Hello

Thank you for the new AGM 84s.

Can you tell me the maximum standoff range of them?

 

greets Mike

didn't check exact range actually.

[wraithwyvern 10]

@firewill

While you're adding APKWS and Hydra 70 variants to vanilla and modded choppers and your cluster bombs to vanilla aircraft, could you also add the AGM-122 Sidearm to both fixed-wing planes and rotary-wing helicopters? It's just an anti-radiation version of the AIM-9 Sidewinder, so it shouldn't require any new modelling work to the existing Sidewinder models. Essentially it would just be a shorter ranged- and less destructive AGM-88, which you already have, but with the ability to be deployed on attack helicopters and lighter jets like the AV-8B.

 

Side note: After looking up information on the AH-64 program, the upgraded AH-64E originally lost its ability to use Stinger missiles, but I found it interesting that South Korea had Boeing re-add that ability even though the US Army doesn't say it needs that capability (even though in my opinion the US Army has very little for ground-based air defense capability right now)

[BonSie 4]

How come the AGM-84s sometimes fly at mach 5 and another time at sub mach 1 for only a few kilometers? 

[octop01 30]

@firewill 

 

Do you plan on using the FC-37 cockpit from Saippua? It is a very well made cockpit and fitting to the F35B. He released his assets  under the by-nc-sa license so you are free to use it as long there is credit given.

[Hud Dorph 22]

I know the su-25 is a tough plane just like the a-10 - but this survives 4-5 hits by aa.  Maybe its a little too tough 🙂

[firewill 3879]

On 2/16/2019 at 7:27 PM, wraithwyvern said:

@firewill

While you're adding APKWS and Hydra 70 variants to vanilla and modded choppers and your cluster bombs to vanilla aircraft, could you also add the AGM-122 Sidearm to both fixed-wing planes and rotary-wing helicopters? It's just an anti-radiation version of the AIM-9 Sidewinder, so it shouldn't require any new modelling work to the existing Sidewinder models. Essentially it would just be a shorter ranged- and less destructive AGM-88, which you already have, but with the ability to be deployed on attack helicopters and lighter jets like the AV-8B.

 

Side note: After looking up information on the AH-64 program, the upgraded AH-64E originally lost its ability to use Stinger missiles, but I found it interesting that South Korea had Boeing re-add that ability even though the US Army doesn't say it needs that capability (even though in my opinion the US Army has very little for ground-based air defense capability right now)

AGM-122 is will be available when some another AV-8B variant update. and yeah, ROKA AH-64E is currently using stinger launcher(not for all birds however) on wingtip.

 

12 hours ago, BonSie said:

How come the AGM-84s sometimes fly at mach 5 and another time at sub mach 1 for only a few kilometers? 

still need to adjust for speed and thrust time.

12 hours ago, octop01 said:

@firewill 

 

Do you plan on using the FC-37 cockpit from Saippua? It is a very well made cockpit and fitting to the F35B. He released his assets  under the by-nc-sa license so you are free to use it as long there is credit given.

yes, will be adapt it eventually.

 

9 hours ago, Hud Dorph said:

I know the su-25 is a tough plane just like the a-10 - but this survives 4-5 hits by aa.  Maybe its a little too tough 🙂

will be adjust when apply aircraft hitpoints. A-10 too.

[reconteam 19]

17 minutes ago, firewill said:

AGM-122 is will be available when some another AV-8B variant update. and yeah, ROKA AH-64E is currently using stinger launcher(not for all birds however) on wingtip.

On the AH-64E and late AH-64D Block II you have the CMWS on the wingtips covering the rear arc, any idea where those are relocated if there are Stinger launchers or some other systems placed there? I should probably go ask this in the AH-64 addon thread.

[firewill 3879]

9 minutes ago, reconteam said:

On the AH-64E and late AH-64D Block II you have the CMWS on the wingtips covering the rear arc, any idea where those are relocated if there are Stinger launchers or some other systems placed there? I should probably go ask this in the AH-64 addon thread.

here is video about introduce the ROKA AH-64E apache guardian, maybe you can check what you looking for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojCoufuOAB4

[firewill 3879]

when upcoming AWS update, air force and navy aircrafts will use same bomb, but different look.

both F-16 and F/A-18F equipped GBU-31 and GBU-38 JDAM, but you can see different color and nose plug.

 

 

 

[Devastator_cm 434]

So that visual change happens automatically or they are different bombs to pick in pylon setup?

[firewill 3879]

2 hours ago, Devastator_cm said:

So that visual change happens automatically or they are different bombs to pick in pylon setup?

different to pick. for example, mk8x navy version is not be available for F-16 and other air force aircraft.

[firewill 3879]

AWS updated

v2.85
- GBU-16, Mk83 GPB, CBU-78 GATOR(500lbs class mine cluster) added
- DSU-33 radar proximity sensor for Mk8x bomb(air burst, only available for Mk82 now)
- reskin & remodel work
  GBU-10
  mk82
  mk84
  GBU-31/32/38
- some bombs not be available for F-14 due to historical reason
- maintenance

[reconteam 19]

Any chance you will return to the F/A-181 mod at some point to add variants with internal loadouts only? Even when unloaded the outer weapons pylons are still attached. A vanilla-type "blank" skin might be nice to have too.

[firewill 3879]

3 hours ago, reconteam said:

Any chance you will return to the F/A-181 mod at some point to add variants with internal loadouts only? Even when unloaded the outer weapons pylons are still attached. A vanilla-type "blank" skin might be nice to have too.

maybe will add internal loadout later.

 

and you can make hide external pylon like this

 

[reconteam 19]

Thanks for the heads up. I'm not certain what I was doing wrong then.

[ShadowSix 24]

Cheeky question for you, @firewill.

 

I saw obviously that you made a YF-23 Grey Ghost, and was wondering if you were willing to make an ASF-14?

 

With the ever-growing threat to aircraft carriers such as hypersonic missiles and en-masse Cold War-style air raids increasing, there are talks of the Super Hornet, albeit is a capable fighter platform, it wasn't specifically built for Fleet Defense or long-range interception.

 

This would be a good fit for the 2035 time-frame of Arma 3.

 

[reconteam 19]

I'm not certain what that first aircraft drawing is but I don't think it is the ASF-14. As far as I know there are no official drawings or plans of the ASF-14 that are part of the public record. Grumman themselves wasn't entirely enthusiastic about the concept as it was significantly more costly than the ST-21 and for the amount of money even they figured starting with a clean sheet of paper might be a better choice.

 

The ST-21 was a much more concrete proposal and existing F-14Ds could be upgraded to this standard.

 

There was also a "Tomcat II" proposal at some point which like ASF-14 was also a significant departure from the existing F-14 yet I haven't been able to determine where on the timeline that idea occurred.

 

The bottom picture looks to be an artists conception of what the Lockheed Martin NATF would have looked like in squadron service. This aircraft would have shared as many components and systems with the ATF (F-22) as was viable. The most obvious change is the variable sweep wing but there is no relation to the F-14. Some of the basic features of Lockheed's NATF carried over to their A/X and A/F-X proposals. A/X was the successor program to the A-12 Avenger II after that mess of a program had been cancelled, it was later changed to A/F-X after additional air-to-air requirements were added when NATF was cancelled. A/F-X itself was soon cancelled and instead the USN got a place at the table in the JAST and JSF programs ultimately culminating in the F-35C. Of course this isn't exactly the aircraft they were looking as the goal of JSF was a smaller shorter-ranged aircraft aft than the USN's earlier programs.

[ShadowSix 24]

7 hours ago, reconteam said:

I'm not certain what that first aircraft drawing is but I don't think it is the ASF-14. As far as I know there are no official drawings or plans of the ASF-14 that are part of the public record. Grumman themselves wasn't entirely enthusiastic about the concept as it was significantly more costly than the ST-21 and for the amount of money even they figured starting with a clean sheet of paper might be a better choice.

 

The ST-21 was a much more concrete proposal and existing F-14Ds could be upgraded to this standard.

 

There was also a "Tomcat II" proposal at some point which like ASF-14 was also a significant departure from the existing F-14 yet I haven't been able to determine where on the timeline that idea occurred.

 

The bottom picture looks to be an artists conception of what the Lockheed Martin NATF would have looked like in squadron service. This aircraft would have shared as many components and systems with the ATF (F-22) as was viable. The most obvious change is the variable sweep wing but there is no relation to the F-14. Some of the basic features of Lockheed's NATF carried over to their A/X and A/F-X proposals. A/X was the successor program to the A-12 Avenger II after that mess of a program had been cancelled, it was later changed to A/F-X after additional air-to-air requirements were added when NATF was cancelled. A/F-X itself was soon cancelled and instead the USN got a place at the table in the JAST and JSF programs ultimately culminating in the F-35C. Of course this isn't exactly the aircraft they were looking as the goal of JSF was a smaller shorter-ranged aircraft aft than the USN's earlier programs.

 

Yes, I'm well aware of this... however, I'm thinking why not use some creative license and "build" the next generation Fleet Defense Aircraft?

 

You've gotta admit, the top pick looks Tomcat-esque, but with fift-generation thrown right in! 😛

[firewill 3879]

actually, i don't like some kind of "futuristic" F-14 concept. maybe modify the canopy frame design(especially front) or adding more weapon capability and cockpit upgrade is would be okay for me. but mixing with other jet or stealthy design? no thanks.

[reconteam 19]

13 hours ago, ShadowSix said:

 

Yes, I'm well aware of this... however, I'm thinking why not use some creative license and "build" the next generation Fleet Defense Aircraft?

 

You've gotta admit, the top pick looks Tomcat-esque, but with fift-generation thrown right in! 😛

 

I see what you mean. Personally I have no problems with people working off existing concepts and designs to build something that's "semi-fictional" as long as it's not too crazy or unbelievable. I think BIS did a decent job with their F/A-181 of mixing elements of various US fighters for example. I must admit that side view you posted is cool looking.

 

If Firewill was looking to do anything more with the F-14 I'd again have to suggest doing a fictional "F-14E" using elements of the ST-21 design first. The only significant changes to the external airframe profile that I'm aware of was the reshaping of the wing root area (where the glove vanes were on the F-14A/B) to carry additional fuel, and a new canopy that provided better frontal visibility. There would be some basic treatment to reduce radar cross section similar to what has been done for the F-16 and other fighters but nothing extensive like what was envisioned for the ASF-14 or NATF. Engines were to be F110-GE-129s which offered a significant increase in thrust over the earlier variant used on the F-14B/D. Besides for that it would be a matter of simulating the improved avionics, new cockpit with multicolor MFDs, HMDs, etc, and new weapon systems. The AIM-152 which was intended for the F-14D should be one of them but they hadn't down-selected to one contractor team before it was cancelled. Personally I favor the somewhat more conventional Hughes design.

 

Firewill don't view this as me asking for anything I'm mostly just using this as an opportunity to ramble on about the Tomcat and what could have been. The mess of 1990s NAVAIR procurement is a somewhat interesting subject.