Cumali Bey 4 Posted October 1, 2017 (edited) Can't open RHS USAF archive Help me Edited October 1, 2017 by Cumali Bey help appeal Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomoki_daichi 0 Posted October 2, 2017 This update is very pleasantly surprised Do not know if you have any plans to MBAV make girdle and pockets Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ghostworrior 35 Posted October 2, 2017 Is it a bug or an feature that the agm114K/N/M (didn't test the L) only can lock targets at 4km? Also how do the Missiles for the SU25 work?(I think I'm just to stupid to get them working) The Mig-29S seem to have some minor problems with it#s flight characteristics, but all beside love the Update die new Cockpits allmost look like DCS FC3 Modells Awsome work and keep it on. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bolo861 166 Posted October 2, 2017 10 hours ago, jarrad96 said: Something I have noticed with AFRF- Could the 7.62x39 rifles allow the Apex BI AKM magazines to be used in emergencies? The USAF pack allows normal BI 5.56 to be used but the AK's cannot use the ingame Apex AK magazines. Similar thing with the RHS RPG-7, allowing the Apex RPG-7 round to be used. I know that they are not as effective performance wise, but just having the option to use BI ammo like you can with the 5.56 rifles would be useful in emergencies, or when fighting Syndikate. I ve actually should still have somewhere on the hard drive my old compat config that I ve made on Toadie2k github template for my milsim community that allows for apex AK mags to be used with RHS AK rifles. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 2, 2017 The Armaholic mirror has been updated with the new version: RHSUSAF v0.4.3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Posted October 2, 2017 The Armaholic mirror has been updated with the new version: RHSAFRF v0.4.3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bolo861 166 Posted October 2, 2017 11 hours ago, irving_mainway said: Is the new M3 MAAWS based on the one from TF47? If so is there any implementation of the TF47 airburst HE detonation? Like the Man said, no airburst but standard HE round is mighty deadly, espetially for groups of infantry in the open unobstructed by field fortifications. For bunkers use HEDP round, works well. Addition of MAAWS was a fantastic surprise. I simply love Carl Gustaf. Regards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jone_kone 158 Posted October 2, 2017 On 9/30/2017 at 9:40 PM, da12thMonkey said: Yeah, we acknowledged that that might be something that was confusing, and reyhard was going to add a hint message or something to inform players. But there was a scheduling conflict with our intended release window so we didn't get around to adding it. I'll quickly knock together a shitty labelled graphic for the A-10 TVM feature or something, to post here (along with the one I made for the MiG-29 radar HUD) 0.4.3 Airborne Targeting Systems Click images to expand or look at the gallery above A-10A's TVM: MiG-29S HUD-based radar: Awesome update!! Love it! Is the any other quick guides on eg. how the different AGM:s work together with the TVM / HUD (lockable, non lockable, range etc.). Edit: sorry my bad, was on the previous page (trying to keep up with this thread): Also about the MIG-29...Do you need to aquire any radar contact on the HUD or is there a way to see contacts in the wider beam outside the hud? Any future ideas on improving the A-10 TVM or MIG-29 radar/hud or is it even possible? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
reyhard 2082 Posted October 2, 2017 On 10/1/2017 at 0:18 AM, texkaz said: The MI-24VT's loadout isn't working. Went to go set it and it just remained empty. All the other MI-24 work fine though. Mi-24VT is a transport variant with slingload ability which cannot mount any weapons to accommodate extra takeoff mass when sligloading. On 10/1/2017 at 0:18 AM, texkaz said: Speaking of which, I went to go try out the raptor and I noticed the radar range is still set to 6 km like it was before It's 19km, you can toggle Radar scale with Left Ctrl + ] just like on Vanila aircrafts 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ljcsteam 45 Posted October 2, 2017 I have a question about the MBAV. Is eight 30rnd STANAG magazine too much for a spec ops unit? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
da12thMonkey 1943 Posted October 2, 2017 Storage capacities for the MBAV were left the same as the equivalent SPCs. So that I didn't have to dick around too much with changing all the MARSOC loadouts to fit their new vests with lower capacity, and potentially break people's missions where they've modified MARSOC loadouts Unless you mean the model. In which case there's a "Light" version and "Medic" version with fewer mag pouches. We're not going to make every pouch configuration under the sun. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ljcsteam 45 Posted October 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, da12thMonkey said: Storage capacities for the MBAV were left the same as the equivalent SPCs. So that I didn't have to dick around too much with changing all the MARSOC loadouts to fit their new vests with lower capacity, and potentially break people's missions where they've modified MARSOC loadouts Unless you mean the model. In which case there's a "Light" version and "Medic" version with fewer mag pouches. We're not going to make every pouch configuration under the sun. Yes, I mean the model. The loadout really looks weird and unreal, and it needs a pistol holster. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
da12thMonkey 1943 Posted October 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, ljcsteam said: looks weird and unreal To have one extra magazine pouch? Fucking hell... We don't have any pistol holsters. Otherwise I might have put one there instead. 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ljcsteam 45 Posted October 2, 2017 1 minute ago, da12thMonkey said: To have one extra magazine pouch? Fucking hell... I'm saying you have 8 mags and 240 rounds in total. Who needs that? Even regular infantry don't. You're not going to Vietnam or COD. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bitesrad 481 Posted October 2, 2017 15 hours ago, PuFu said: author is no longer part of RHS. if ever it will need to be made from scratch Zeealex left the RHS team? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
soul_assassin 1750 Posted October 2, 2017 44 minutes ago, ljcsteam said: I'm saying you have 8 mags and 240 rounds in total. Who needs that? Even regular infantry don't. You're not going to Vietnam or COD. Just dont take what you don't need. It will influence your fatigue also. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hamakaze 142 Posted October 2, 2017 53 minutes ago, ljcsteam said: I'm saying you have 8 mags and 240 rounds in total. Who needs that? Even regular infantry don't. You're not going to Vietnam or COD. You do realise that in many cases the amount of ammo carried is mission dependent right? Some units are given more autonomy by their commanders on how much ammo they carry and their chest rig loadouts. My friends in the US forces have carried more than 7 mags on various occasions... As much as you'd like to think people stick to the regulations thats not always the case... A number of other countries also issue troops with 8 magazines sometimes more so its not uncommon for that amount of ammo to be carried. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SSG-Levi 7 Posted October 2, 2017 1 hour ago, ljcsteam said: I'm saying you have 8 mags and 240 rounds in total. Who needs that? Even regular infantry don't. You're not going to Vietnam or COD. We've used to carry 8 mags during long or high probability fire-fights missions. On standard patrols and such we were carrying 6 in the vest + 1 in the M4, so 8 mags is not so much. At least when you know you might use some of them and resupply will take some time. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
EnvakeoLugaria 4 Posted October 2, 2017 Not sure if this is the correct place to ask, but I figured I'd give it a try... I'm trying to set up an alive/rhs "Red Dawn" style server for some friends, done everything I need to do on the server side, I had it running for awhile, but after a few months off, I come back, and I'm getting a pop up ingame and when running the server(which stops the server from running) "No entry bin\config.bin/CfgMagazines.rhs_mag_kh25l" - Which seems like a missing file, right? I've tried to update the mod through steam workshop, but steam being steam, I cant actually get it to redownload the freaking mod. If anyone's got any ideas, I'd love to hear them, thanks! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
da12thMonkey 1943 Posted October 2, 2017 10 hours ago, Ghostworrior said: Is it a bug or an feature that the agm114K/N/M (didn't test the L) only can lock targets at 4km? Kind of a feature. But it's one that can be contentious and may be redressed if we find good arguments and data for changing it. IRL (obviously), the kinematic range of Hellfire when launched from the air is 8km. But it's not necessarily the range it will be able to establish a lock. Locking is dependant on the quality of the reflected laser energy on the target. If conditions aren't perfect then the received signal might not be good and makes it difficult to acquire a lock. Reflection quality can be better with remotely designated targets, since the laser source may be closer to the target and provide more energy at the point of reflection. However, self designation suffers loss of energy under transmission to the target, upon absorption, and in reflection back to the launch platform so can be less reliable. Also, Hellfire in LOAL mode is able to be fired without a laser source to lock on to, and acquire one itself once it is in the target box; Which is another factor in increasing its nominal engagement range. Understandably there is no unclassified data on the kind of engagement ranges where Apache, Cobra and the like are self-designating LOBL Hellfires under battlefield conditions - akin to the main way the missiles will be employed in Arma. But I don't think we wanted to assume perfect conditions and have the Apaches etc. unfairly dominant on the battlefield. And we don't really have a LOAL mode. We had a similar thing with the AGM-65Bs: Most places you go, you'll see Maverick's ranges quoted in excess of 20km without differentiating seeker types and the type of target; because they are kinematically capable of this. But in this instance, researching further provided plenty of evidence that early Mav TV seekers on the A and B models couldn't differentiate a tank from the background until they were 3-3.5 km away, and maybe a large structure from 15km, even in quite good conditions. Fortunately we have lots of different seeker types for the Mav that provide people with other options in their scenario. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
road runner 4344 Posted October 2, 2017 4 hours ago, ljcsteam said: I'm saying you have 8 mags and 240 rounds in total. Who needs that? Even regular infantry don't. You're not going to Vietnam or COD. Basic Load used to be 7 magazines, that was back in 2006, when I worked for a US PMC, 7 magazines on you, and 7 in reserve, who needs it? lots of people after the initial contact, suppressing fire can eat through magazines at a rapid rate of knots.. I'm guessing you've never been on a two way range? 12 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gatordev 219 Posted October 2, 2017 1 hour ago, da12thMonkey said: Understandably there is no unclassified data on the kind of engagement ranges where Apache, Cobra and the like are self-designating LOBL Hellfires under battlefield conditions - akin to the main way the missiles will be employed in Arma. But I don't think we wanted to assume perfect conditions and have the Apaches etc. unfairly dominant on the battlefield. And we don't really have a LOAL mode. Without getting into the actual shot-card numbers, 4 KM is probably a little short, even in LOBL, and even in less than perfect conditions. As you said, a Hellfire doesn't actually lock at all, it just indicates if it's seeing the laser energy (via the egg changing its indication on the various aircraft's Attack Page). And, again, as you said, ranges change between LOBL and LOAL/Hi/Low. I can also see how 8 KM may not be the greatest for game play, so I understand trying to find some middle ground was necessary. Maybe 5 KM-ish could be a good compromise and would still fall well within a reasonable engagement range and still not be double (or more for me if we're talking 8 KM) the set view distance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
da12thMonkey 1943 Posted October 2, 2017 5km sounds perfectly reasonable. The sensor can already "see" to 5km even if it can't get a lock. So I might extend both values. There should be some autoseek parameters for missiles as well, but testing them I don't think we were ever able to get an indication of their behaviour working as autonomously as expected, without a manually confirmed lock. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ice_age0815 37 Posted October 2, 2017 thanks for the new update Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ghostworrior 35 Posted October 2, 2017 LOAL should be possible becaus the GBU-12 in Arma is LOAL capable Also ACE3 Worked on LOAL/Hi/Dir/Lo and LOBL profiles for their own AGM-114 type of missile's. Did some body figure out how the missiles of the SU25 work? Get them to recognice the target but cant lock?(TV seeker) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites