RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

[da12thMonkey 1943]

On 7/22/2021 at 4:23 PM, spooky lynx said:

Nope. I'm talking about the Soviet 280th helicopter regt. Soviet airforce used their Hinds-A in Afghanistan too.

All the visualisations I have seen of the Hind-As flown by 280 ОВП show the aircraft in Afghan colours. And my understanding of their initial deployment to the country is that even thought they were a Soviet regt. they were conducting missions at the behest of the Afghan government in aircraft destined for the Afghan Air Force. Then were later flying missions supporting the larger Soviet force using the Soviet Union's own, more modern Hind variants

Things like this book illustration

and the plates of the Zvezda Mi-24A kit depict the Hind-As flown in Afghanistan by 280th pilots this way, and I can't discern a Soviet Air Force star in the photo you showed.

Whether those are accurate depictions or not is of course debatable, but they're from Russian publishers/manufacturers so I am inclined to trust how they present the aircraft flown by the 280th at that time.

 

In any case, what I was talking about was whether it was believable that a region like Chernarus within the Soviet Union would have still had Hind-As around as late as the 1990s when the USSR was dissolved, and keep them operable until the 2009 conflict and beyond - i.e. whether a Hind-A would be something high on our wishlist for RHSGREF

 

[spooky lynx 73]

7 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

In any case, what I was talking about was whether it was believable that a region like Chernarus within the Soviet Union would have still had Hind-As around as late as the 1990s when the USSR was dissolved, and keep them operable until the 2009 conflict and beyond - i.e. whether a Hind-A would be something high on our wishlist for RHSGREF

Why not? There were a lot of cases when newly formed post-Soviet countries used the old hardware from various storage bases and former Soviet army training centers.

[GordonWeedman 39]

8 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

In any case, what I was talking about was whether it was believable that a region like Chernarus within the Soviet Union would have still had Hind-As around as late as the 1990s when the USSR was dissolved, and keep them operable until the 2009 conflict and beyond - i.e. whether a Hind-A would be something high on our wishlist for RHSGREF

 

RHS GREF isn't just for the CDF, it's for everything that could be GreenFor, so I'd say a Hind-A would be appropriate for RHS GREF

[bars91 956]

9 hours ago, spooky lynx said:

Why not? There were a lot of cases when newly formed post-Soviet countries used the old hardware from various storage bases and former Soviet army training centers.

 

The wider adopted extremely mass produced and simple to maintain examples (T-55, BTR-152 etc) yes.

 

Very briefly produced low-rate initial samples, most of which have been given away as foreign aid, and having unique not easily aquired parts - not really.

 

By the late 80s all 24A's would be worn out, scrapped or given away as milsurp and later models would be easier to maintain and source parts for (hence why they fly even today).

[PuFu 4600]

12 hours ago, GordonWeedman said:

 

RHS GREF isn't just for the CDF, it's for everything that could be GreenFor, so I'd say a Hind-A would be appropriate for RHS GREF

do you honestly think monkey, one of our RHS developers needs being explained what GREF is for?

 

4 hours ago, bars91 said:

The wider adopted extremely mass produced and simple to maintain examples (T-55, BTR-152 etc) yes.

 

Very briefly produced low-rate initial samples, most of which have been given away as foreign aid, and having unique not easily aquired parts - not really.

 

By the late 80s all 24A's would be worn out, scrapped or given away as milsurp and later models would be easier to maintain and source parts for (hence why they fly even today).

this. 

 

On 7/24/2021 at 8:06 PM, sanderske said:

Hi, what happened to the SOC-R that was posted a while ago? It would be a great thing to have in arma.

as explained in the PM you sent, the original author has had other priorities besides creating free mods for a while now. no ETA as with everything modding related

[zukov 490]

On 7/25/2021 at 1:38 PM, da12thMonkey said:

In any case, what I was talking about was whether it was believable that a region like Chernarus within the Soviet Union would have still had Hind-As around as late as the 1990s when the USSR was dissolved, and keep them operable until the 2009 conflict and beyond - i.e. whether a Hind-A would be something high on our wishlist for RHSGREF

Pathetic Berserker is still around? 

[spooky lynx 73]

On 7/26/2021 at 8:48 AM, bars91 said:

Very briefly produced low-rate initial samples, most of which have been given away as foreign aid, and having unique not easily aquired parts - not really.

Vietnam used Mi-24A's until mid 2000's. The engines, APU, transmission, rotors, chassis, most part of the electrical systems of Hind-A do not differ much with the later models. Or even the same. So... If there is a choice between having an old assault helicopter from the storage base or having nothing... For example, Armenians used several Mi-24K's (observation and artillery directing variant that became useless in smaller post-USSR armies) as a regular assault helicopters. During Donbass war Ukrainian army used RKhM "Kashalot" NBC recon vehicles as an improvised APCs. Even in the Afghan war some Soviet army detachments used such exotic vehicle as escorting vehicle for Strategic missile TELs based on BTR-70 as regular APC (look at the turret on the photo). So it's a kind of the tradition...

[Sierra-G339 'Digger' 19]

This is all so facsinating! I ask about one small idea and people are still talking about it. lol.

 

Really do hope the Hind-A gets added in some faction or form.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Honestly I think you'll likely end up hating it and wish we did an Mi-35M instead 😄

Have you tried using the MCLOS missiles on the "early" Mi-24D we have in the mod? It's nightmarish before you even consider that Hind-A would have those paired with an even less effective gun turret
 

[kibyde 64]

3 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

Honestly I think you'll likely end up hating it and wish we did an Mi-35M instead 😄

Have you tried using the MCLOS missiles on the "early" Mi-24D we have in the mod? It's a nightmarish before you even consider that Hind-A would have those paired with an even less effective gun turret
 

speaking of the turret gun. The RHS YakB has a HUGE spread and it's hard to hit anything with it. The turret gun of the Mi-8MTV-3 is far more accurate.

Would be nice to have a Hind with one or two door guns like the Mi8-8MTV-3 🤩

[bars91 956]

On 7/27/2021 at 8:01 PM, spooky lynx said:

*text and a pic

 

Well, one-offs and exceptions to rules happen. You are correct on all of it. But, so am I (he he):

 

Vietnam was given the 24A's + spare kits. They also are known to mod the shit out of their old stock (see their recent BTR-152 refurbs).

Soviet states would've had one or two left as training vics but not in running condition (i've seen several such vics).

 

It's similar to the AK's = most Soviet 7.62 ones seen today are AKMs as og milled (actually semi-stamped / form-bent) AKs were given away / disposed of with adoption of AKM and later AK74.

Still, you'll find one or two milled AKs and even some slab side early mags (you can use it as blunt weapon if need be).

 

So yea, shit happens when you do "necessity is the mother of mad-max vics" stuff (like waging a civil war or some such) 🙂

[Sierra-G339 'Digger' 19]

16 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

Honestly I think you'll likely end up hating it and wish we did an Mi-35M instead 😄

Have you tried using the MCLOS missiles on the "early" Mi-24D we have in the mod? It's a nightmarish before you even consider that Hind-A would have those paired with an even less effective gun turret
 

Eh *shrugs* Just be greedy and ask for both! lol

[intermaus 10]

There IS a Mi-24A for ArmA3...

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1440194894

[Sierra-G339 'Digger' 19]

4 hours ago, intermaus said:

There IS a Mi-24A for ArmA3...

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1440194894

Already knew about it, but to save megabytes I was not keen on adding all of CUP to my mod pack...

 

[cry me a river kids 7]

The RPK only has the PKM magazines and PKM reload animation available. I don't know if the RPK was recently added and this is just a placeholder but thought I'd let you guys know just in case.

[simkas 25]

14 minutes ago, cry me a river kids said:

The RPK only has the PKM magazines and PKM reload animation available. I don't know if the RPK was recently added and this is just a placeholder but thought I'd let you guys know just in case.

Are you using JSRS? This is an issue with JSRS for RHS AFRF, it's using old classes and breaks the RPK, it needs to be updated.

[cry me a river kids 7]

Just now, simkas said:

Are you using JSRS? This is an issue with JSRS for RHS AFRF, it's using old classes and breaks the RPK, it needs to be updated.

I'm not using the JSRS mod. I'm running the RHS mods, ACE, USAF MOD, CBA3, and some client-side gore and visual effect mods.

[reyhard 2082]

18 minutes ago, cry me a river kids said:

I'm not using the JSRS mod. I'm running the RHS mods, ACE, USAF MOD, CBA3, and some client-side gore and visual effect mods.

Always report issues without any 3rd part mods. In this particulary case, I would say it's ACE compats error - https://github.com/acemod/ACE3/issues

[munger 25]

Hi. For some reason the lase target function is not working for me when in the gunner position in tanks, but it works in the commander position in a tank with a commander rangefinder such as the M1A2 SEP. I've tried it in various versions of the M1 and T72. In all cases when in the commander position the four range digits remain at 0000 no matter how many times I press the lase target key (in my case Tab) or when pointing the reticle at various different ranges.

 

I disabled all other addons as I assumed it might be a conflict, for example with ACE3. The only addons I had enabled were CBA and all RHS addons. Still the same issue.

 

When using vanilla assets the lase target function works fine. Also when I go into RHS options on the menu screen it shows lase target as the Tab key.

 

I'm really scratching my head. Any ideas would be appreciated.

 

BTW whilst I'm at it... thank you for the continued support for such a great mod.

 

 

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Commander's positions with RWS etc. use the vanilla FCS (because they just have a rangefinder or simple MG), while gunner positions have a scripted FCS that's far more realistic in terms of laying the main gun. So they operate differently in general and that's why you have a disparity between gunner position on RHS tanks and things like BI's tanks.

 

Is this an issue for you using the RHSDEV mods, or current 0.5.6 stable release?

 

At this moment in time, the RHSDEV mods requires Arma 3 dev branch because the mod's keybinds are being transitioned to a new feature that BI are adding to Arma 3 where mod keybinds can be set in Arma 3's controls menu, independently from standard game controls or fully scripted keybinding systems. The binds through "RHS - Game Options" menu are being phased out and FCS scripts rewritten; so you need to have Arma 3 Dev Branch and set your binds through Options>>Controls>>Show: RHS - FCS keybindings dropdown.

The default lase key is [T] under the new keybinding system. Not inherited from A3's "lase range" action.

^^Eventually this will be the case with stable releases, so it's worth everybody noticing^^

Infantry weapon laser/light attachment, stock folding, safety-catch etc. script binds are likewise getting this treatment. You can bind things to mouse button actions now too.

 

If you're using RHS's stable release then I can only guess that something is blocking the FCS scripts from running. Like an addon/mission conflict or corrupted rhs(usf)_optics.pbo or rhs(usf)_main.pbo

[nillievanloo 11]

Thanks for pointing this out, i was unaware of it.

[Jackal326 1182]

17 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

[...] the RHSDEV mods requires Arma 3 dev branch because the mod's keybinds are being transitioned to a new feature that BI are adding to Arma 3 where mod keybinds can be set in Arma 3's controls menu, independently from standard game controls or fully scripted keybinding systems. [...]

Slightly off-topic I know, but that is a great feature I'm glad BIS are adding. Though its addition is not without added work-load for you guys I imagine, what with having to re-do what you've already done. I hope its "proper" implementation will (hopefully) make things easier in the long run though.

[munger 25]

21 hours ago, da12thMonkey said:

Commander's positions with RWS etc. use the vanilla FCS (because they just have a rangefinder or simple MG), while gunner positions have a scripted FCS that's far more realistic in terms of laying the main gun. So they operate differently in general and that's why you have a disparity between gunner position on RHS tanks and things like BI's tanks.

 

Is this an issue for you using the RHSDEV mods, or current 0.5.6 stable release?

 

At this moment in time, the RHSDEV mods requires Arma 3 dev branch because the mod's keybinds are being transitioned to a new feature that BI are adding to Arma 3 where mod keybinds can be set in Arma 3's controls menu, independently from standard game controls or fully scripted keybinding systems. The binds through "RHS - Game Options" menu are being phased out and FCS scripts rewritten; so you need to have Arma 3 Dev Branch and set your binds through Options>>Controls>>Show: RHS - FCS keybindings dropdown.

The default lase key is [T] under the new keybinding system. Not inherited from A3's "lase range" action.

^^Eventually this will be the case with stable releases, so it's worth everybody noticing^^

Infantry weapon laser/light attachment, stock folding, safety-catch etc. script binds are likewise getting this treatment. You can bind things to mouse button actions now too.

 

If you're using RHS's stable release then I can only guess that something is blocking the FCS scripts from running. Like an addon/mission conflict or corrupted rhs(usf)_optics.pbo or rhs(usf)_main.pbo

 

Thanks for the detailed response.

 

I can confirm that I am using 0.5.6 stable and the latest stable Arma 3 version. No dev versions.

 

In the end I unsubscribed from all four RHS packs and then resubscribed on Steam. Upon trying again with only those mods and CBA loaded the rangefinding still didn't work, but after messing about with the RHS options I finally managed to fix the issue by changing the lase control by scrolling the list down to one of the 'user defined action' options, exiting options, reopening options and reverting the lase control back to Tab. This fixed it. I can only assume that the config wasn't recognising the key and it needed to be 'prompted'. Seems odd but there you go.

 

I have not tried the dev version as I tend to stick to stable releases but the new version that you describe sounds promising and more user friendly. Looking forward to it.

 

Thanks again for the support.  

[da12thMonkey 1943]

4 hours ago, Jackal326 said:

Though its addition is not without added work-load for you guys I imagine, what with having to re-do what you've already done

Not entirely.

reyhard's was already in the process of MASSIVELY overhauling the FCS and optics on Russian tanks, so it seems to be quite fortunate timing in some ways. As an observer it appears to have streamlined expanding the feature set a little  - like being able to add actions to dump range or go to a battlesight zero on appropriate FCS, and not having to worry about how players should interact with it, where it fits in with the existing Arma 3 control scheme, or how it's tucked away in a menu somewhere. Everything can be there in one organised RHS - FCS Keybindings subset of controls specifically for interacting with the FCS.

 

It's also motivated refinements to the weapon/attachment interaction scripts. For a start they work equally on secondary and pistol slot weapons as well as primaries now. reyhard doing that has in turn allowed me to config the picatinny rail slots on the SMAW, MAAWS and M72A7 to be open to more attachments (in fact can use the same universal joint-rails type slots we have on rifles), instead of having a limited "whitelist" of optics and lasers masking things that were obviously not functioning the same as they could on a rifle.

Simplified additional binds offered room for expansion of the system to have both previous and next states in attachment cycling. So it's a bit smoother to cycle directly between states on attachments that have more than two modes: Like the AN/PEQ-16 or AN/PEQ-15+M952V combo now that they have an additional IR illuminator setting on top of the existing IR laser and white light (that's another thing BI have added on the A3 dev branch in recent months: IR flashlight/spotlights).

Again, all this is in its own little RHS - Weapon Keybindings nest in the keybinds menu, so folks hopefully have a better idea of where to look to tweak it to their liking.

[GordonWeedman 39]

Is there by any chance a hiddenSelection for the camo fabric on the SVDM (Camo)? Looking in the config I can't find one, and I would like to reskin it.