Fixed Wing Flight Model (dev branch)

[enex 11]

Why would you fly backwards in first place and be snarky?

[papanowel 120]

I just tried and I'm not able to reproduce it.

[Gutsnav 13]

So BIS, can new planes fly still backwards? :D This is just ridiculous, you should really improve the flight model a bit. At least fix this ridiculous backward flying.

Um, planes can fly backwards. It's a dangerous manouver though and rarely used.

---------- Post added at 14:24 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Used in air shows, not a combat maneuver.

[evromalarkey 150]

Yeah but not the way it's done in the game.

@Papanowel I tried it and it's not easy to reproduce, but it can by done when you fly fast up and when you start fall down you will change to - speed and you can fly backwards the same way as normal and thats just not right, but it's funny :D

[paecmaker 23]

Um, planes can fly backwards. It's a dangerous manouver though and rarely used.

---------- Post added at 14:24 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Used in air shows, not a combat maneuver.

Actually, I would love to see a combat manouver that works so that the airplane must go into reverse. :p

[izaiak 1]

Before combat manouver, just a real lift on each wing ? a real throttle control ? a real air speed indicator ( and not a ground a speed ), because if you have 200 km/h of front wind and if you hare flying at 200 km/h of IAS (indicated air speed), the game will show you 0 km/h of speed ... so you fall....

Just had few basic stuff to the flight model and it will change the air part of arma.

[McKeewa 7]

Nevermind, saying shit, good work BIS

Edited March 14, 2014 by Keewa

[xendance 3]

I'm just going to copy my thoughts about the current state of airplane handling here, I feel they'll just drown in the general dev branch discussion.

The A-164 handling is very poor. The plane seems to be nose heavy, and the controls around pitch axis are very rubberbandy so to speak. Every time I pull up the plane's nose gets yanked back down a bit. Also the plane's nose goes down constantly no matter what the speed, meaning you'll go down unless you compensate with your controls constantly.

Edit: Same goes for the CSAT jet.

[oukej 2911]

I can confirm the "reverse" flying is possible (although a bit tricky) and was wrong the same also in Operation Arrowhead :/ I can only put a "no promises" disclaimer here.

Oh, and yes, I guess this is the right place to post any feedback regarding the birds - thanks in advance as well as for the one already posted

[maddogx 13]

The new jets are awesome, but - as others have pointed out - the flight model can really kill the mood when flying them. Any improvements in that area would be welcome.

[Wiki 1558]

As said, I TOTALLY agree about the A-164 bad flight model.

Can't you use the ArmA 2 flight model of the A-10? It was good.

[carlostex 38]

The jets look cool, but it seems the 30mm cannons are generic. It seems like a futuristic GAU-8 replacement will be much less efective.

[Redphoenix 1540]

The new jets are awesome, but - as others have pointed out - the flight model can really kill the mood when flying them. Any improvements in that area would be welcome.

Even though I am not actively playing anymore: When time comes and a proper airplaneX class is created, I might just download A3 again to check it out how the jets feel.

[Wiki 1558]

the 30mm isn't very powerful, I couldn't destroy a T-100 with the A-164...

[maddogx 13]

the 30mm isn't very powerful, I couldn't destroy a T-100 with the A-164...

According to a quick Google search, this seems to be authentic. The A-10's GAU-8 would apparently have trouble taking out a modern MBT.

[Mr. Charles 22]

According to a quick Google search, this seems to be authentic. The A-10's GAU-8 would apparently have trouble taking out a modern MBT.

It depends where you hit the tank. The old P-47 Thunderbolts 8xM2 could penetrate german tanks back in WW2 with a bit of ingenuity:

[carlostex 38]

According to a quick Google search, this seems to be authentic. The A-10's GAU-8 would apparently have trouble taking out a modern MBT.

That depends. If A-10 pilot attacks from a good flight profile that will allow him to put several bullets on a softer part of the target the crew inside is gonna have a really bad day.

Problem with the A-164 is that i tried a small dogfight vs the To-199 Neophron and it takes a lot of hits to shoot it down. Now i know the To-199 is supposed to be CAS and to be more heavily armored than a normal fighter jet, but there is no plane in the world that could deflect a 30mm DU round, specially if its fired as close as i did, like 150m or so. A single bullet would rip through a fuselage and cause catasthrophic damage. It seemed like i was shooting .50 cal bullets.

I'd say the gun should be pretty deadly unless against a MBT which would require shots in the right place. But this problem tells us more about the current hitpoint system which is in desperate need of improvement. In my opinion and it's my opinion, i feel the gun (in this case the rounds) should be 50% more powerful. Or, improve the whole hitpoint system (which is much much more complicated).

As far as the flight model, it definitely needs an improvement as well. And i need a good joystick as well...

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

It depends where you hit the tank. The old P-47 Thunderbolts 8xM2 could penetrate german tanks back in WW2 with a bit of ingenuity:

Love it how is response to a Modern tank is a WWII video. Ok, let here is what i have to say. Very impressed with the Opfor CAS, its great. The only problem i see with that, is the engines sound weak. Not enough "Jet" sound. Ok, now, as for the Flight model, the A-164's Flight model is... Well, i can't explain it. It feels like very poor thrust vectoring. This means when i press the down button, it goes into a bit of a post stall feel. This allows the A-164, especially at high speeds to maneuver WAY too un realistically. I turn that thing on a dime going 800 k/mph after a dive. It needs work. Thrust on the Opfor CAS (sorry, i don't remember the name, at work), is excellent. It fly's like the real thing.

OVER ALL - I can tell that BI has about got wind resistance down in the Dev flight model. I dived, and turned hard in the Buzzard, and instead of turning quick, it was gradual, and less arcade like. Same with the Opfor jet, after diving and pulling hard, unless you know what your doing, your dead. Blufor CAS needs work on its maneuvering. Lets see some more improvements, slowly but surly, things are getting better.

OH, ONE LAST THING. Developers, please. For the Opfor CAS Tu-199, please.

I CANT fly without this. Just cant.

Edited March 14, 2014 by DarkSideSixOfficial

[carlostex 38]

Ok just made a small test. The 30mm DU rounds should have extra penetrating capability. But in the tests it doesn't really feel anything special compared against other types of 30mm rounds.

Against a building:

Against plywood plaques or some sort:

Against Metal Containers:

Now it seems to me that 30mm DU penetrating capability isn't very realistic. Either 30mm needs to penetrate more or objects in the Arma 3 have way too much armor. Maybe it's a little of both... :confused:

[Mr. Charles 22]

Love it how is response to a Modern tank is a WWII video.

That's just to show that simply shooting at the frontal armour of a tank is silly. One has the advantage to choose where to engage from in a jet and Penetrating the top or behind of a T-100 shouldn't be too hard. I doubt that the engine deck on top can withstand that many rounds.

[carlostex 38]

I was curious... So it seems that the 12.7mm APDS round penetrates deeper than the A-164 30mm Round.

---------- Post added at 07:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 PM ----------

Just took a look into configfile >> "CfgAmmo" >> "Gatling_30mm_HE_Plane_CAS_01_F"

and values are:

caliber: 1.4

hit: 32

indirecthit: 12

indirecthitrange: 3

This is basically the same as: configfile >> "CfgAmmo" >> "B_30mm_HE".

So BIS might change settings. I would be cool to see two types of ammo available for the A-164.

To attack hard targets a 30mm_DU round:

caliber: 8

hit: 150

indirecthit: 8

indirecthitrange: 1

To attack soft targets (cars, personnel) a somewhat improved 30mm_HE round:

caliber: 1.5

hit: 40

indirecthit: 15

indirecthitrange: 3

If supposedly the A-164 Wipeout is the A-10 Warthog successor, make it a worthy successor. As it seems right now the Wipeout in Arma 3 performs worse than the venerable Warthog in Arma 2.

One cool feature would be that the Wipeout had an internal system that would allow to reload between HE and AP rounds.

---------- Post added at 07:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:49 PM ----------

I'm getting out of thread topic so i will create a thread to continue the issue i'm presenting.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

That's just to show that simply shooting at the frontal armour of a tank is silly. One has the advantage to choose where to engage from in a jet and Penetrating the top or behind of a T-100 shouldn't be too hard. I doubt that the engine deck on top can withstand that many rounds.

Good point. Though, this would then require the pilot to either have damned good sight, or, the more dangerous and risky approach of flying in low to see which way said tank is facing. Making things a bit more interesting.

---------- Post added at 21:18 ---------- Previous post was at 20:58 ----------

I was curious... So it seems that the 12.7mm APDS round penetrates deeper than the A-164 30mm Round.

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a620/carlostex/2014-03-14_00006_zpsf4113b0b.jpg?t=1394825042

http://i1286.photobucket.com/albums/a620/carlostex/2014-03-14_00003_zps1c8e2a8e.jpg?t=1394819969

---------- Post added at 07:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:27 PM ----------

Just took a look into configfile >> "CfgAmmo" >> "Gatling_30mm_HE_Plane_CAS_01_F"

and values are:

caliber: 1.4

hit: 32

indirecthit: 12

indirecthitrange: 3

This is basically the same as: configfile >> "CfgAmmo" >> "B_30mm_HE".

So BIS might change settings. I would be cool to see two types of ammo available for the A-164.

To attack hard targets a 30mm_DU round:

caliber: 8

hit: 150

indirecthit: 8

indirecthitrange: 1

To attack soft targets (cars, personnel) a somewhat improved 30mm_HE round:

caliber: 1.5

hit: 40

indirecthit: 15

indirecthitrange: 3

If supposedly the A-164 Wipeout is the A-10 Warthog successor, make it a worthy successor. As it seems right now the Wipeout in Arma 3 performs worse than the venerable Warthog in Arma 2.

One cool feature would be that the Wipeout had an internal system that would allow to reload between HE and AP rounds.

---------- Post added at 07:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:49 PM ----------

I'm getting out of thread topic so i will create a thread to continue the issue i'm presenting.

Umm, bro, you are aware this Is the "flight model" section, not ballistics. Though your point is understandable, but post on the Feedback tracker

[carlostex 38]

Umm, bro, you are aware this Is the "flight model" section, not ballistics. Though your point is understandable, but post on the Feedback tracker

Yep that's why i created a proper thread.

[turin turambar 0]

According to a quick Google search, this seems to be authentic. The A-10's GAU-8 would apparently have trouble taking out a modern MBT.

A-10 isn't in the game. The A-164 is. Which is the successor of the A-10, according to the official lore of the game. We can imagine it has improved ammo, it won't use the 50 years old (in the time of Arma 3) GAU-8 and its ammo, but a more modern one with more power to take out modern MBTs.

Why would anyone make the successor of a combat plane and then use the same armaments of the old one, even more when the old one have 50 years. Do the Abrams use a Sherman cannon? etc

[maddogx 13]

A-10 isn't in the game. The A-164 is. Which is the successor of the A-10, according to the official lore of the game. We can imagine it has improved ammo, it won't use the 50 years old (in the time of Arma 3) GAU-8 and its ammo, but a more modern one with more power to take out modern MBTs.

Why would anyone make the successor of a combat plane and then use the same armaments of the old one, even more when the old one have 50 years. Do the Abrams use a Sherman cannon? etc

Same may as well be true for tank armor. You're assuming that the 30mm cannon has advanced but armor technology has not.