Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On ‎1‎/‎11‎/‎2020 at 12:46 AM, dragon01 said:

I'll note that it's actually a realistic behavior. LGBs, as a rule, hit long if they don't guide. Paveway IIs less so than Paveway IIIs, the latter need pretty much continuous lasing to get them to target, because they glide a lot. ArmA doesn't really get this right, at least on the F-16 there's only one way to drop LGBs without lasing them, and that's by using a ballistics table and the backup reticle.

 

IRL, LGBs can be dropped, self-lased, from over 4.2km (for an F-16, the limit is 14kft). I don't know when exactly does the bomb see the laser, but another aircraft's TGP should be able to see it flying at around that altitude and several miles out.


Enlightenment 🙂

 

First of all, GBU-10/12 Paveway II and GBU-24 Paveway III are pretty much ballistic without guidance. Only the III has an improved guidance system which may cause it to pitch up early to extend range a little bit, but I'm not sure that this happens without laser detection.

I have no idea where you are getting these range numbers from, but the self-lase distance depends on which TGP you are using (Lantirn, Litening, Sniper XR or similar), weather and atmospheric conditions etc. The whole Idea of dropping GBU's are to do it way above IR missile threats from manpads and other short range air defense systems, with extreme accuracy.

 

The Paveway II guidance kit is very coarse and its control system only makes "full deflection" corrections (aka bang-bang control). Hence it will often cause the bomb to oscillate if target is being painted while the bomb is at great distance from the laser spot. Not only that, but a lot of modern combat vehicles have laser threat detectors and will alert the crew once painted. The unnecessary oscillation will reduce bomb range significantly, and the early warning to enemy forces will allow them to pop smoke/hide/flee. Therefore, the aircraft attack system is generally set to activate the laser about 5-10 seconds prior to impact time, thus giving the enemy minimal reaction time as well as facilitating better bomb ballistics/accuracy.

 

Drop altitudes may be well over 20.000 ft, by using a second pod-equipped wingman, the lead attacker may drop the bomb and immediately bug out, while the wingman flies a few km behind and paints the target, thus keeping both planes outside enemy air defense range.

 

I assume ARMA is limiting at 200m AGL to either minimize chance that bomb picks up the wrong laser (vanilla arma does not use laser codes, only side-specific), or to save resources on game scanning functions. I'm not exactly sure, but realistically the bomb should be 100% ballistic until a laser appears within its visual cone, meaning it should perform 100% like normal CCIP bombs.

Vanilla arma does not do CCRP either, so level bombing is at best guesswork.

 

In my experience, vanilla arma GBU's seem to fly like small lightweight glideplanes, like an arma missile does without its rocket motor burning. It should follow a completely ballistic course when unguided, and just like in real life, may be used as a dumb bomb in a pinch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

I have no idea where you are getting these range numbers from, but the self-lase distance depends on which TGP you are using (Lantirn, Litening, Sniper XR or similar), weather and atmospheric conditions etc. The whole Idea of dropping GBU's are to do it way above IR missile threats from manpads and other short range air defense systems, with extreme accuracy.

 

As far as the info goes, this is taken from discussions with actual pilots and longtime simmers on Falcon BMS forums. 14kft (which translates to 4.2km) is for an F-16C with LANTIRN (I think, the guy didn't elaborate on the pod). This is indeed out of MANPADS range, but not out of flak ceiling, which makes for a hair-raising bombing experience. I suppose you could get above 20kft with a more modern pod (and you still won't quite be out of flak, the biggest guns can get you above 30kft, well into JDAM-land). This also depends on weather, clouds and fog will mess up your paint even if you can see through. Also note that I said "self-lased" for a reason, with buddy or JTAC lasing you could drop from halfway up to space and still hit. As for Paveway II lasing time, the advice I've heard was more like 10-12s, and Paveway III will miss more likely than not if you use the same settings, a bane of many a BMS newbie. 🙂 Lasing LGBs is not nearly as easy or sure-fire as people make it out to be. If you're good, you can send one down a chimney, but you can still screw it up. All LGBs glide, because they're released at speed, and they have control surfaces. When dropping from level flight, your plane will have an angle of attack, which means the bomb will have an angle of attack, which means lift (to say nothing of lofting them, which is doable, if tricky). For PII, The difference between "pretty much ballistic" and "very much ballistic" is enough to make for a bomb several hundred feet long if you try to drop it without guiding. PIIIs are worse than that, if they don't see the laser early on, they'll generally cruise off into the wild blue yonder and blow up some hapless civilians way long of the target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, the AH-1Z Viper is equiped with AIM-9Xs instead of AIM-9Ms. Is this intentional? I'm not sure if this platform supports this weapon system (yet).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, uzabit said:

Hi there, the AH-1Z Viper is equiped with AIM-9Xs instead of AIM-9Ms. Is this intentional? I'm not sure if this platform supports this weapon system (yet).

Hi, the AH1Z can used both systems, in German-language sources was it so saying. And in this Wiki was that here:

"Communication between the missile and the fire control computer on the platform is now being handled digitally for the first time. Newer aircraft have been in this mode for several years; For platforms where conversion is no longer worthwhile (F-14, AV-8B and AH-1 Cobra), the rocket has an analog compatibility mode in which it behaves like an AIM-9M and behaves in this way compared to the fire control computer identified."  and this makes sense.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, First Sea Lord Kiwi said:

M777? LAV 25? AAV? 

M665? RPK125? T69?

  • Like 3
  • Haha 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, john85oc said:

Hi, the AH1Z can used both systems, in German-language sources was it so saying. And in this Wiki was that here:

"Communication between the missile and the fire control computer on the platform is now being handled digitally for the first time. Newer aircraft have been in this mode for several years; For platforms where conversion is no longer worthwhile (F-14, AV-8B and AH-1 Cobra), the rocket has an analog compatibility mode in which it behaves like an AIM-9M and behaves in this way compared to the fire control computer identified."  and this makes sense.

 

Yeah, while I agree that it is plausible that the systems are compatible, has the AIM-9X officially been authorized as an loadout option for the AH-1Z?

Furthermore it'd then be nice to have both missiles as an loadout option in the pylon editor. As it is now the AIM-9Ms are shown in the loadout editor, but ingame the AIM-9X are actually loaded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really dig your HIDF units guys! Hope to see some other cold war-era stuff like an early AH-1Z or C-130 in the distant future. Keep up the good work comrades!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has some of the magazines available for some weapons changed? For example, ' rhs_200rnd_556x45_M_SAW ' sounds like it should work with SAW's, but it's not working for me at the moment. Is this a problem on my end, or is it an oversight or perhaps something to do with Magwells?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe some magazine class names were changed for consistency. The old names still exist but they are scope 1, however it does appear that they are not included in the guns mag-wells for the M249. A noticeable amount of missions on our server now have autoriflemen with "old" boxes that they cannot load into the weapon. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, -ben- said:

I believe some magazine class names were changed for consistency. The old names still exist but they are scope 1, however it does appear that they are not included in the guns mag-wells for the M249. A noticeable amount of missions on our server now have autoriflemen with "old" boxes that they cannot load into the weapon. 

Do you happen to know class name of those magazines?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one I had happen to me that I could reproduce was 

rhs_200rnd_556x45_M_SAW (displays as 200rd M249 Box M856A1 (Tracer) not working in a M249 PIP (Short/Savit) rhs_weap_m249_pip_S but because they are scope 1 I wasn't able to test other boxes. I would assume all the M856's are the same. I also had someone say that the M14 or SR25 was having the same magazine issues, but was not able to find which 7.62 magazine it didn't work with. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this map is going to be fun, all that RHSGREF needs is some PBR boats and some jeeps and we got are self Vietnam ☺️! Will the map work with alive on release or in the future?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2020 at 8:52 AM, reyhard said:

Do you happen to know class name of those magazines?

 

We wrote a compat internally to add these classes back into "CfgMagazineWells" for "class M249_556x45" and that has fixed the issue for us. 

 

"rhs_200rnd_556x45_M_SAW",
 "rhs_200rnd_556x45_T_SAW",
 "rhs_200rnd_556x45_B_SAW"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"all that RHSGREF needs is some PBR boats and some jeeps..." And a good old M16A1, the mags we allready have 🤐🤐🤐

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Vidda too will be in RHS terrain too right?

Thank to blud! His maps are the best and most realistic Arma terrain I've ever seen.

In this particular map, the fields has water in it which most map makers forgot to include. And what i loving the most is these mug puddles all around the place, added more realism there. The village composition are top-notch, definitely like you would see in S.E.Asian villages. I bet he definitely studied before making map.

 

 

I imagined his jungle map as horizon mainland:) which is biggest in the group (bigger than Tanoa in my universe). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Synchronized said:

Is it even possible to add a vehicle such as the M88 HERCULES?

 

Why it wouldnt be possible? It just require skill and time to make one, and by the look of mod it doesnt seem that logi is priority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a difference between the Map under RHS Banner and the Version already released by blud?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mogambo said:

Is there a difference between the Map under RHS Banner and the Version already released by blud?

 

Yes, there's quite a lot that's different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

are Upper Receiver Group Improved(URGI) m4 block III rifles being considered at all. They are the new thing in parts of socom, and the USMC Force Recon m4 setup would be nice too.

f45e392168b345429a5a1fd64ac9b80c.jpg

150414-M-ML847-875.JPG

  • Like 2

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

×