M1117 Guardian ASV light armored vehicle

[cleggy 297]

Jelskipro maybe use a AAF  roundel or low visibility flag instead of a high visibility flag but other then that amazing texture 

 

Great idea. I will look into it soon.

Nice work Jelskipro - keep at it!

 

I have to say, that AAF faction, they'll buy any old rubbish - no brand loyalty whatsoever.

 

Heck,they can't even decide whose side they're on ...

[KillPact 0]

Hey cleggy, love what you have done here, can definately say that my guys are really enjoying what you made, its something super unique that no one really offers anything that comes close.

 

I am having this issue though, wanted to share with you to see if its something that is conflicting, or a simple bug report. Every-time we try to load a scenario with one of the M1117's as an asset we get this error.

 

"Cannot open object blx_ridgback\weapons\zasleh_proxy.p3d"

 

It stops the mission load in, and then if we try to reload a second time it continues like normal.

 

 

 

Thanks!

[Chairborne 2594]

The ridgeback is a different vehicle though.

[KillPact 0]

The ridgeback is a different vehicle though.

 

 

Yep, thats where this is kind of funny. We dont use the BLX Ridgeback in the mods, just the M1117 ASV. I went back and did some basic "debugging" and created a simple scenario on the VR with a NATO rifleman and the M1117 Woodland on the map. Went ahead and tried the scenario and same deal, "Cannot open object blx_ridgback\weapons\zasleh_proxy.p3d".

 

Then I went back to my original scenario and removed the M1117's and no issue arose on load in. So I'm not sure what to say, I'm all up for trying things/answering questions to get the bottom of it.

[cleggy 297]

 Every-time we try to load a scenario with one of the M1117's as an asset we get this error.

"Cannot open object blx_ridgback\weapons\zasleh_proxy.p3d"

Yes, my bad - I forgot to change the path to the M1117 after a bit of copy/paste.

Mr Sanchez (better known as Eagle Eyes) pointed it out shortly after release.

 

The reason I haven't rushed to correct it is because no-one complained loud enough!

 

Maybe I should get off my butt and sort that out ....

 

The ridgeback is a different vehicle though.

That, Mr Chairborne, is the problem in a nutshell :P

[handicap 19]

I once watched one of these roll over a double stack of 155's in Iraq. The only injury was to the gunner, who jumped off of the roof while it was still rolling and broke his ankle.

 

Then they left their weapons and ammo (literally all weapons and ammo, to include personal) in the vehicle to burn so I got to sit there for 14 hours providing security on the wreck until EOD and CLB finished fighting and came out to drag it off the side of the road and back to the DRMO lot.

[cleggy 297]

Greetings

 

The first post has been updated with a link to version 1.1 of the M1117.

 

Nothing very exciting, just a few bug fixes - better late than not at all though :)

 

I'm getting a script error in Eden, it doesn't seem to like the fact that my vehicle commander is a 'turret'

but doesn't have a weapon - however, that's a problem for another day ....

[kecharles28 197]

Updated mod v1.1 available at withSIX. Download now by clicking:

[takelmeifter 10]

Hi cleggy,

I'm not sure if this is intended or not, but the guardian seems to explode on any direct hit to the front, despite being able to take hits to the side relatively ok. It's like there's no protection to the front of the vehicle?

EDIT: talking about rpg hits here

[ivan keska 45]

Could we get this uploaded to the steam workshop, because that would make it easier for people to find and use if a server adds it as well as people finding out about it. Other than that I was waiting for this vehicle also for a FAV I think someone posted months ago, because i really do like light vehicles and armored cars. They just very better than a lot of the medium and heavy armored vehicles we see.

 

   Also tested it out just now against various small arms, and it feels too lightly armored. Because in testing 5.56 and 6.5 could penetrate the frontal armor on the flat strip, 6.5 could penetrate all parts but impacts to unarmored crew did little damage but good shot placement would drop them fast. Well 7.65 and above could easily pierce all other parts of the vehicles from close to medium range, but at ranges 600 meter a 7.62 rifle could penetrate with reduced damage if not hitting hard angles thus at about 45 degrees (which proved to deflect shot or if they penetrate sent them off at wild angles inside). Well a mora's 7.62 machine gun was more effective out to 1000 meters thanks to it's greater amount of fire and steadier platform. Now at sharper angles rounds like .338, 9.3, and even normal 12.7 had trouble piercing areas like the frontal slope right below the windows. But could not repeat this on other parts of the vehicle. Also tests with the 20mm and 40mm grenade launchers showed the vehicle to protect crew unless hit in windows, but showed it to be very easily to disable with these weapons. Well 12.7 machine guns proved effective in all areas against this vehicle. Mortars proved highly effective at disabling the vehicle but crew would survive unless blast hit window or vehicle is hit directly or close enough a few times, resulting in its destruction.

   These tests on the armor don't match up with it's real world counter part, which can receive small arms fire which according to a report states 7.62 ball to all parts of the vehicle and able to withstand 12.7 armor piercing to the crew compartments. Also able to take 60mm mortar fragments from 10 meters over head and 155mm airburst from 15 meters over head. But testing against grenade launchers and mortars seems to show it effective at protecting the crew but structurally weak to such devices. Also didn't test it against AP mines which it is suppose to withstand and not be disabled unless a serious hit occurs, nor did i test it against AT mines and IEDs which it is meant to protect it's crew from though vehicle will be disabled.

   Now not saying you have to make it realistic but the current protection rating is pretty bad, because a single machine gunner (but 6.5 will make it difficult) can slaughter the entire crew. I'd suggest giving it the armor values of the hunter, strider, or ifrit, since in testing those took all small arms under 12.7 to the plating without penetration (but worth knocking ifrit's sharp window angle proved as effective at protecting crew as it's plating). Also just for extra use, would be great if you add the ability to sit ontop of the vehicle. Because a single passenger seat causes issues if you need to move people around, due to vehicle loss or if you have to evac people. Also might be best to mark it as a car and have it crewed by rifleman, which no armor on crew leaves them very vulnerable.

 

Might test it out more later but i'm tired and it's almost 2 am.

[Guest]

Release frontpaged on the Armaholic homepage.

M1117 Guardian ASV light armored vehicle v1.1

[cleggy 297]

Thanks to Kecharles and Foxhound, cheers guys for the quick update.

 

EDIT: talking about rpg hits here

 

 tested it out just now against various small arms

Appreciate the input. That's quite a wall of text from Ivan but I'll try and answer the salient points:

 

steam workshop

no, sorry, I'm not comfortable with SW

 

CUP may include the M1117 in their mod, in which case

it will appear on Steam as part of their vehicles pack I assume.

 

too lightly armored/explodes on direct hit to the front

Let's just say I thought my FireGeometry would come back to bite me.

I'm still learning ... and it's complex ... I will look at it again

 

armor values of the hunter, strider, or ifrit

It's not just a case of copying config values though, the model itself

has to have the right bits in the right place, and we

don't have access to those models.

 

ability to sit ontop of the vehicle

I don't think so, not on this vehicle, but you might

be interested to know I am working on the APC vesion

which has 8 cargo positions and maybe some sneaky 'external' FFV slots.

 

mark it as a car and have it crewed by rifleman

I don't really want to lose the WheeledAPC class, however, I think there is now

a config entry which let's you specify the type of crew (not sure - have to check).

 

I think that's about it for now ....

[takelmeifter 10]

 

mark it as a car and have it crewed by rifleman

I don't really want to lose the WheeledAPC class, however, I think there is now

a config entry which let's you specify the type of crew (not sure - have to check).

 

yup, you've currently got it marked as "crew = "B_Crew_F";" under your blufor version classes so you can just switch that to B_Soldier_F/B_Soldier_lite_F or whatever and it should work proper fine like. Same with the UN ones. just obviously switch B for I

[cleggy 297]

 "crew = "

Doh! sometimes I'm not the 'sharpest tool in the box' - especially on a Sunday.

 

However, changing the crew does beg the question whether the game actually takes into account

body armour when a bod is inside a vehicle ....

[x3kj 1247]

 

too lightly armored/explodes on direct hit to the front

Let's just say I thought my FireGeometry would come back to bite me.

I'm still learning ... and it's complex ... I will look at it again

 

You can use the plate material rvmats - that way you dont have to remodel it, only change the material to a different one and it has the thickness you chose.

Suggested lecture:  https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/LOD#Fire_Geometryand https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/Arma_3_Damage_Description

[cleggy 297]

Thanks for the info, MrX.

 

I am actually using 12mm_plate at the moment but that was just a guess.

 

I'll study your links more carefully when I get some time and hopefully find a better solution

[cleggy 297]

Greetings

 

I've been working on some turn out animations for my M1117 and I've managed to get the turret to move

out the way to minimize clipping issues with the commander's head.

 

However, because the available config entries don't get on with MRAP type vehicles, I've had to make some changes ...

 

Basically the problem is this: When the crew are turned in they are invisible in the external view.

This means that shooting out the windows and opening the doors becomes pointless - so I've disabled those features.

 

To summarise:

 

Good things:

Increased situational awareness when turned out.

Crew are invunerable to small arms fire when turned in.(they're invisible!)

I think turning out looks cool.

 

Bad things:

No eye candy like openable doors

I thought opening the doors looked cool.

 

So, does anyone have an opinion either way? To turn out or not to turn out, that is the question.

 

TL;DR   Here's a picture:

 

[-TFP- Bridge.J 18]

I think turning out is worth it.

 

Also not sure if you're planning it but it'd be nice to have an interior view for the gunner. :) Oh and sling load support would be nice (from what I can tell big helicopters like the CH-53E can lift it)

[Chairborne 2594]

You have little to no interaction with the interiors anyway, having the ability to turn out is preferable in my opinion.

Have you considered making a proxy for the interiors though?

[cleggy 297]

Thanks for the replies!

I think turning out is worth it.

Also not sure if you're planning it but it'd be nice to have an interior view for the gunner. :) Oh and sling load support would be nice (from what I can tell big helicopters like the CH-53E can lift it)

Sling loading is the easy one, tho' I wouldn't be able to test it because my flying skillz are not the best.

I did have a (poor) attempt at a gunner's interior, but I couldn't get everything to fit in - so settled for a more practical solution. :P

 

You have little to no interaction with the interiors anyway, having the ability to turn out is preferable in my opinion.

Have you considered making a proxy for the interiors though?

Do you mean what I think you mean-  ie: dummy crew members to fill the missing crew seats?

It is the sort of idea that crosses my mind when I hit a brick wall trying to config

However, I do see some problems with that ...

 

What I really would like is if BIS could give us CanHideDriver and ViewDriverInExternal instead

of that spawn of the Devil HideProxyInCombat :) 

[Chairborne 2594]

I assumed the problem was with poly count, so moving some stuff to proxy would be a way to run around this and have both interiors and exteriors.

[cleggy 297]

I probably didn't explain my dilemma very well.

 

The interior is already a proxy, the problem I have is purely config based.

There doesn't seem to be a way of writing a config for an MRAP type vehicle without having to compromise in some way.

 

The available config parameters seem to assume that all turned in crew can't be seen because there are no windows

- as is the case with the LAV / Pandur etc.

 

This is not the case with MRAPs, they have windows so you should be able to see the turned in crew from the outside.

 

A bit of an oversight really - and rather frustrating - especially as MRAPs are all I seem to want to do. :P

[Rich_R 1087]

Nice mod, even saw the Iraqi's using them going into Mosul.

 

Getting this error

 

[cleggy 297]

Thanks for the reply. I must admit I haven't updated it for Apex.

 

As the model is included in the RHS US faction now i just assumed everyone would be using that version

('cause they've done a better job of it than I did!). :P

[Rich_R 1087]

Hmmmm, haven't been using RHS. I'll give it another look.