Jets - HUD improvements

[Jnr4817 215]

I like the helmet idea.

 

If they don't add an HMD to AH-9, then a grease pencil mark or something would be awesome.

[Strike_NOR 898]

20 hours ago, Jnr4817 said:

I like the helmet idea.

 

If they don't add an HMD to AH-9, then a grease pencil mark or something would be awesome.

 

The debate on the previous page isn't really about what the devs decide to fit the AH-9 with, but more to keep some form of gameplay/balance in the game. But to round off the AH-9, yes. I think it should get a tape-cross or grease dot or whatever as a crude sight. Mostly because DAR's are a valuable resource :) The miniguns don't require much guessing :P

 

Now, to the actual topic on reward/penalties for player loadouts:

 

Just imagine sitting in an F/A-181 with a booniehat and no helmet. I can tell you a few immersion breakers right now:

1. No helmet should = No HMD. In the F/A-181 that means no HUD at all. Just an excellent panoramic view of the world!
2. No helmet = No oxygen mask = Only fly at lower altitudes and, realistically speaking, less G-tolerance (but we're not simulating G's in Vanilla arma).
3. No Oxygen mask/headset = no communications (microphone is integrated in mask).

Also, something else to consider is getting into the cockpit without a flightsuit + harness:

1. No flightsuit = actually doesn't really matter for flying purposes.
2. No harness = no connection to ejection seat straps
3. No connection to ejection seat straps = any negative G maneuver or rapid deceleration will throw you around inside the cockpit like a pinball.
4. Lastly, during ejection you would not be attached to the seat nor parachute, which means getting flung out of the aircraft like a ragdoll.

My major gripe without having such restrictions is that you can grab a ghilliesuit, plate carrier vest, backpack with ammo, Titan AT, sniper rifle and everything and basically "throw your jet away" and continue like a rambo-soldier. This stuff dates back to Battlefield 1942 where an assault class soldier could bail out over the flag and parachute down with guns blazing and take the spawn. It's almost rude to compare arma to battlefield, but you get the idea.

 

I'd like to see such restrictions enforced onto players because a jet is a multimillion dollar piece of equipment. A jet pilot does not gear up for infantry combat when entering the cockpit. He has a flight suit, G-pants, a harness to strap him into the jet, a helmet and some sturdy boots in case he is forced to bail out. If ArmA players knew that getting into a jet means sacrificing their infantry role, maybe they would take better care of their jet! 

 

Also, you have to try to picture what happens if a player has to bail out with such a "limited" loadout. It becomes a whole different game style. Suddenly you find yourself behind enemy lines, with only a pistol and some flares, no armor at all and poor camouflage. You have to adapt to survive. Play an evasive game and try to get home. If you are super-lucky you can ambush some tiny infantry teams and steal their gear. But you would be facing several riflemen with only a 9mm and a few mags.

 

 

To me it adds a whole different layer of gameplay to ArmA. Search and rescue now becomes a dynamic thing. Friendly forces and enemy forces race against each other to rescue/capture the pilot (who normally is considered a high value target due to information etc).

 

I hope you all understand that I'm not asking for oxygen systems to be simulated, losing radio comms or being thrown around inside the cockpit if you don't equip a pilots vest/harness. Not at all. But what CAN be done, is the following:

 

1. Disable HMD display from showing for any player NOT equipped with a HMD-type helmet.
2. Disable parachute for any player NOT wearing a pilots harness/vest/kit
3. Move player backpack into aircraft inventory upon entry (some jets actually allow some stowage of personal items behind the seat during flight).

 

These three points would prevent players from wearing a straw hat and 'magically' seeing HMD info, force "sniper, rambo, AT, kit pilots" to actually LAND and get out if they want to safely get out and fight and lastly, strip pilots from bringing loads of supplies with them upon ejection.

 

I really can't see anything negative about it other than those that feel "robbed" of the possibility to fly with the "one man army" kit and dominate the skies AND ground. "Combined Arms" in persona :P

 

What do you think?

[suiside 95]

@strike nor

 

i really like what you say, but then i would love to have that applied to all vehicles.

i think you can ride in an IFV or 4WD in any capacity or uniform, but i think it would be nice to prior getting in the vehicle to store the stuff in the vehicle inventory and upon exiting retrieving it from the vehicle inventory, not from commander, driver or gunner seat.

 

on the ejection seat, i think the resque/survival kit could add immersion, as a little bag or something that you actually have to perform as an action to make use of or open.

 

edit

 

*sorry for off topic reaction*

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Loving the new VTOL position indicators in the Xi'an and the Blackfish!

Also massive kudos and thank you to the improved and updated MFDs and HMD for the Blackfoot.  It always irked me that it was just a ripped off AH-64 MFD set up that did nothing, now it's so wonderful!

Brilliant work.

[snoops_213 74]

Would it be possible to project glide slope onto the hmds for landings? Being 2035 and landing a multimillion dollar plane and trained pilot are a huge factor in all aerial operations,  this type of technology would feasibly be in operation by then especially so on carriers. 

[kimi_uy 134]

OMG I'm just reading through the updated https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/A3_MFD_config_reference 

 

This alone is one of the best features ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

• user0 : (up to user10): custom condition which can be changed by scripting command SetUserMFDvalue

Does it mean we'll be able to map MFD stuff to custom controls?

 

[MK84 42]

On ‎4‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 9:32 PM, dragon01 said:

It makes no sense for an MD-500 jury-rigged with weapons to support HMD technology. The real one doesn't, and AH-9 seems to be nothing more than a civilian MD-500 with guns added and an ammo crate chucked in place of the back seat (a really trim variant of MD-500 Defender, at best). The real AH-6 has a very different cockpit.

 

On ‎4‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 10:54 PM, Strike_NOR said:

 

You are absolutely right. Because the MD-500 is a real helicopter.

 

The point is, ArmA as a game benefits from letting the player decide certain things.

 

If you make the AH-9 support HMD tech, but only make it active when the pilot is wearing a HMD helmet, then you can have both versions. The hardcore realism guy can fly with the standard heli pilot helmet and have no HMD. The arcade or future-guy can have HMD if he wants. At least both options are available. This would also work well for obvious gameplay reasons. Ghilliesuit sniper with Titan AT launcher and Parachute + shemag has to prioritize wearing a HMD helmet to use its potential. (LOL).

 

 

While the A/MH-6, MD-500 and up to MD-530F doesn't have HMD, the MD-530G is fitted with Thales Scorpion HMD.

 

[dragon01 902]

True, but it also has a glass cockpit and a differently shaped nose. In fact, the "clock" cockpit of ArmA3's MD-500 variants establishes them as modifications of a particularly outdated MD-500 model. The cockpit is closer to 'Nam era OH-6 than to advanced models that are produced today. I have no idea why NATO would adopt the absolutely cheapest off the shelf MD-500 variant available (presumably because BI already had it made for TOH :)), but it appears that they really had to cut their spending...

[reyhard 2082]

Finally I have some time to write some documentation that I previously promised ;) After completing (more or less - there is still room for improvement) vanilla content, since last week I started to upgrade & improve HUDs & HMDs for Jets DLC plane with plenty of features that @Jakub BXBX Horyna implemented into the game recently.

 

I will begin here with some sample code (which is actually excerpt from Blackfoot config), which should be really useful for anyone willing to learn new features.

 

General Macros (WIP) - contains macros that are used in most of the HMD/MFD/HUD configs

HUD config - main "class MFD" componenet

excerpt from cfgMagazines - contains mfdElements class

 

In above example you can observe how new mfdElements class is working inside of magazine. Basically, that it's a MFD inside MFD (MFDception!) which is merged into main MFD if specific magazine is present on the pylon. In that special class, you can create groups, text, polygons, bones & whatever you need - just link in regular MFD. You can have multiple MFD inside single magazine config if it's mounted on different vehicles, with different MFDs. In this case you just need to create new class inside of mfdElements.
 

class mfdElements
{
    mfd_plane_1 {...};
    mfd_plane_2 {...};
};

 

Then its matter of simply changing name in pylonIcon group to desired entry.

Example Dynamic Loadout MFD

 

 

It's worth to mention that usage of __EVAL preprocesor speeds up evaluation of whole MFD rendering so it's more that recommended to use that when you write some math inside. I also recommend for anyone willing to struggle with HUDs to use macros that I've included in this post - those can literally save thousands of hours! They are especially useful when dealing with parallax effect since you can edit two defines (SizeX10deg & SizeY10deg) in one place to control them all. They are also useful for making circular shapes & I can't imagine now, how I was able to spend whole nights before just to make perfect circle before when power of math was in the reach of hand ;)

 

For making more complex shapes (like outlines of planes on VTOLs, or missiles on Shikra MFD) I'm using Adobe Illustrator & plugin which exports your current scene to array of points, which after some regex magic are ready to use in Arma.

 

As a random tip I also recommend to anyone dealing with HUDs to make sure that "weapon" vector is aligned with non-diagetic cursor & position then head of pilot proper place first. Otherwise there is serious risk of pulling your hairs out - don't forget I warned you ;)

 

For those seeking for even more information please head to below link - I spent some time recently to update it with latest features yet still, for some of them, there is missing description.

https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/A3_MFD_config_reference

 

On 25.04.2017 at 6:44 PM, dragon01 said:

5. Blackfoot lacks speed and altitude ladders, and the symbology is poorly annotated. It also lacks a torque indicator, which is an important tool for flying the helicopter safely

HMD was based on the AH64 one and those elements are not existing there too. Personally I would avoid adding all the available elements to all available planes just for sake of "consistency" since it reduce authenticity & unique feeling. Sure, you can say that by the 2035 unification of electronics systems would be much higher (vide how i.e. Ka-52/Mi-28 HMD symbology looks like) than now days, yet I still can safely assume that differences would be still present.

 

On 25.04.2017 at 6:44 PM, dragon01 said:

8. Kajman lacks a speed ladder, and the pitch indicator is so strange that I almost took it for a second VSI. Also, no hover or CM indicator. Another thing that I noticed is that the HMD seems less "sharp" than the others.

Mi-48 HMD is based on Ka-52/Mi-28 HMD, with some futurized additions. Tried to keep it quite close to it to give it that authentic feeling. I also made that choice due to available space I had on HMD - adding more elements would dangerously get it closer to being cluttered. ps, cm counter should be introduced soon

 

On 27.04.2017 at 4:03 AM, kimi_uy said:

And apparently the clock sources don't work off the box, are they linked to the clock in the model?

 

weird, when I tested it (before introduction of "time" source) it was working out of the box - they had some issues (rounding of time...) yet it was working after all.

 

On 2.05.2017 at 2:26 AM, kimi_uy said:

OMG I'm just reading through the updated https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/A3_MFD_config_reference 

 

This alone is one of the best features ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

• user0 : (up to user10): custom condition which can be changed by scripting command SetUserMFDvalue

Does it mean we'll be able to map MFD stuff to custom controls?

 

Yes, it is possible to use custom controls inside MFD right now - see for more informations https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/setUserMFDvalue

With this scripting command & minor edit to MFD config itself (like i.e. simple replacing condition = "on"; with condition = "on - user0";) it should be possible to write some simple script which would control availability of HMD depending on current helmet on the head. Unfortunately, I don't think such feature will be available for vanila Arma anytime soon yet I can at least cheer you up that such idea is somewhere on our wishlist.

[dragon01 902]

41 minutes ago, reyhard said:

HMD was based on the AH64 one and those elements are not existing there too. Personally I would avoid adding all the available elements to all available planes just for sake of "consistency" since it reduce authenticity & unique feeling. Sure, you can say that by the 2035 unification of electronics systems would be much higher (vide how i.e. Ka-52/Mi-28 HMD symbology looks like) than now days, yet I still can safely assume that differences would be still present.

Fair enough, but remember that HMDs aren't purely a matter of visuals. It's not that I don't want differences between HUDs and HMD, but rather that I find those elements I listed as missing useful. In particular, a torque indicator on Blackfoot would be handy, even if AH-64 doesn't have it. One good thing about dealing with fictional helos is that you have some freedom in design, so you can add things that real helicopters, for one reason or another, don't have. For example, more annotation for the HMD symbology or a torque indicator.

 

Most of those problems I listed are of this kind, quality of life. For example, a VSI in a plane is more of a convenience, while airspeed is an essential information. Thus, it makes more sense to give, for example, the Shikra (and other planes, as well) an airspeed ladder, while VSI may either have a smaller one, or a numerical readout. The current arrangement on both Shikra and Gryphon exposes unimportant information (vertical speed), while underexposing important one (airspeed). The opposite is true in helicopters, where airspeed is of somewhat secondary importance (though still vital), but vertical speed is crucial to avoiding vortex ring state and other perils that can befall you on landing and takeoff (appropriately, VSIs are present on every helo, while speed ladders are not). 

 

Kajman HMD, aside from the sharpness thing, is one of the best ones in there, actually. Any comment on the others? In particular, pitch ladder on Wipeout and status indicators on Buzzard. I'd also love to see the radar altitude ladders on Kajman, Xian and Orca become more permanent and show both AGL and ASL.

 

On a related note, I found that roll indicator is inverted on Orca, the same way Neopheron's used to be before a the recent fix. Blackfoot's turn and slip ball on HMD also doesn't seem to work right (it seems to just indicate roll, even in a coordinated turn).

[reyhard 2082]

27 minutes ago, dragon01 said:

Most of those problems I listed are of this kind, quality of life. For example, a VSI in a plane is more of a convenience, while airspeed is an essential information. Thus, it makes more sense to give, for example, the Shikra (and other planes, as well) an airspeed ladder, while VSI may either have a smaller one, or a numerical readout. The current arrangement on both Shikra and Gryphon exposes unimportant information (vertical speed), while underexposing important one (airspeed). The opposite is true in helicopters, where airspeed is of somewhat secondary importance (though still vital), but vertical speed is crucial to avoiding vortex ring state and other perils that can befall you on landing and takeoff (appropriately, VSIs are present on every helo, while speed ladders are not). 

Well, if it would be such big quality of life then military wouldn't use it that way, right? Yet I know some designs where vertical speed is just a number so imo it's quite subjective.

 

As for pitch ladder for it is somewhere on my "to do" list & probably I will make it after Jets DLC release due to data lock

[dragon01 902]

Keep in mind, nobody said that everything that military uses is well designed. I don't know which helo you are referring to in particular (vertical speed being a number on a plane HUD would not be surprising), but I don't think this design decision is popular with its pilots. :) Granted, you're free to use poorly designed HUDs as well, but why? BTW, as far as helicopters and VTOLs go, the current HMDs are more or less fine. Besides additions such as speed ladder (which is not really necessary, to think of it) and a torque indicator, what I proposed for them is more in the category of tweaks. It's the jets that have the most QOL issues, some of which got fixed already.

 

Great to hear about pitch ladders. It's a big immersion breaker for Wipeout, I've never seen a fixed wing aircraft HUD that wouldn't have one, except the most basic "gunsight" HUDs of old. I hope that other issues will get ironed out as well, if not now then in the first post-Jets patches.

[Jnr4817 215]

VSI is definitely important for helo flight and safe operations. I use it all the time in every game I play. Probably the gauge I look at the most on the AH-9.  As for real life, our pilots,  use it but also rely on other indicators of ascent and descent. Plus autopilot makes things a lot easier from the co-pilot perspective.

 

Any chance the grease pencil marker for AH-9 will be adopted?

[nodunit 397]

To address a few misunderstanding on the symbology.. All of the information is there, the airspeed and altitude, you just need to know where to look.

Being that the blackfoot is designed of the IHADSS symbology, it would use more direct numbers in most cases than ladders. 
For example the engine torgue is the number % located left and below the heading tape, the airspeed is just below that and the altitude is shown with a mix of ticks on the far right which represent 5 meters each, or you can follow the radar altitude (AGL) number to its left.  You will notice a tape moving up and down on the 'ladder', it dissapears once you reach 100 meters AGL aka above NOE, ASL will eventually pop up above that, and lastly the arrow that moves up and down is your climb rate.

So yeah its spot on terrific job!  I found myself quite at home.

For the Kajiman the vertical speed is on the bottom right hand under the torque indicator, and again helicopter's don't use climb ladders for airspeed they use direct numbers, why add unnecessary clutter and moving distraction when you're going to be  which in this case is located to the left just under the heading tape.

PS: If pitch ladders are added please only have them activate in cruise mode...it would just be clutter in transition for engagement.

 

[xon2 102]

if only we could full access to the gunner's turret from the pilots seat to make it a viable solo option and bring it on par with the enhanced fixed wing tgp experience. Your AH-64 mod leads the way there. Especially the AH-99 has enough mfds to make it reasonable that both i

pilot and copilot could have full access to the turret.

[dragon01 902]

What was improved in today's build with Shikra and Gryphon HUDs? Symbology doesn't seem to have changed, Shikra's HUD is now aligned properly (Gryphon's still isn't), but I believe that was the result of head position being fixed.

 

Also, the selected weapon indicator on Gryphon's HUD is too low and thus invisible in normal flight (it can only be seen under negative Gs).

7 hours ago, nodunit said:

Being that the blackfoot is designed of the IHADSS symbology, it would use more direct numbers in most cases than ladders. 
For example the engine torgue is the number % located left and below the heading tape, the airspeed is just below that and the altitude is shown with a mix of ticks on the far right which represent 5 meters each, or you can follow the radar altitude (AGL) number to its left.  You will notice a tape moving up and down on the 'ladder', it dissapears once you reach 100 meters AGL aka above NOE, ASL will eventually pop up above that, and lastly the arrow that moves up and down is your climb rate.

I don't mind realistic HMDs, but if so, we need a manual explaining the symbology. :) Other aircraft in ArmA3 have annotations (SPD, AGL, ASL, you know that), Blackfoot doesn't. I can see this being potentially confusing to players unfamiliar with the helicopters.

 

BTW, the actual torque indicator on Blackfoot is missing, the percentage under the heading tape seems to indicate collective position.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Issue with the AHI on the A-149 Gryphon.

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124741

 

[MK84 42]

The Blackfish and Xian really could use the Vertical Speed Indicator tape on the HMD, more so on the Blackfish.

[panduhh 40]

On 5/3/2017 at 11:54 AM, reyhard said:

Finally I have some time to write some documentation that I previously promised ;) After completing (more or less - there is still room for improvement) vanilla content, since last week I started to upgrade & improve HUDs & HMDs for Jets DLC plane with plenty of features that @Jakub BXBX Horyna implemented into the game recently.

One bit of documentation that has been sorely lacking since launch is a guide to what all the symbology means on the various HMDs/HUDs used in aircraft. There are a number of us in the community (/r/arma) willing to take on this task, I just need to know where to put it for maximum visibility. Here is what I have done so far.

[R3vo 2652]

42 minutes ago, panduhh said:

One bit of documentation that has been sorely lacking since launch is a guide to what all the symbology means on the various HMDs/HUDs used in aircraft. There are a number of us in the community (/r/arma) willing to take on this task, I just need to know where to put it for maximum visibility. Here is what I have done so far.

 

This is splendid and should be part of the field manual. Don't know how they could forget about that.

[sammael 366]

I hardly see very transparent data on the HUD. Is there a chance in the future to make it a brighter

 

[panduhh 40]

2 hours ago, R3vo said:

 

This is splendid and should be part of the field manual. Don't know how they could forget about that.

 

I don't believe it's a matter of forgetting. BI is real busy and documentation is the most difficult, most time-consuming and lowest priority task.

[a_killer_wombat 120]

When cross-hairs are disabled, which is my personal default setting as well as the forced setting for the game-servers I play on, it's near impossible to aim rockets accurately with the AH-9 Pawnee. I can understand not adding a HMD to the chopper, but at the very least have a collimator/holographic sight (had this technology in WW2) or even a simple "pencil mark" reference on the windshield.

 

Here is a real-life representation:

 

 

[jerminhu 25]

10 hours ago, a_killer_wombat said:

When cross-hairs are disabled, which is my personal default setting as well as the forced setting for the game-servers I play on, it's near impossible to aim rockets accurately with the AH-9 Pawnee. I can understand not adding a HMD to the chopper, but at the very least have a collimator/holographic sight (had this technology in WW2) or even a simple "pencil mark" reference on the windshield.

 

Here is a real-life representation:

 

 

I concur.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

Would be nice but for the time being just use a few tracer rounds from your mini-guns to line up a rocket run.