Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, goldtoaster said:

Love the fact they finally added sonic booms for jets. It sounds awesome. I don't suppose it wouldn't be too much trouble to add a vapor cone around the plane too?

 

the vapor cone has not much to do with super sonic flight. it is just an effect that occurs, when the pressure of the air drops so much that the air humidity starts condesing, because the dew point drops below the current air temperature. this is more likely to happen whith a very high humidity (eg. above water surfaces or around clouds) but it can also happen at very high speeds (supersonic) with high humidity but going supersonic is no necessity for this to happen.

so to have this effect coverd in a realistc way (or else other people will complain) you would need to have so many parameters coverd (air pressure, air humidity, speed, geomety of the aircraft, angle of attack, etc.) that it's propably better that it's not in the game.

 

 

29 minutes ago, MK84 said:

The virtual runway guide on the ILS doesn't align with Freedom's deck (testing the Showcase mission). Has anyone reported this on the feedback tracker before? Searched through it but didn't see any mention of it.

LwuOCW5.png

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124498

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I have feeling that ship ILS approach is too shallow. In RL is more like "controlled crash" than landing :) ILS should be bit more steep IMHO

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ataribaby said:

Also I have feeling that ship ILS approach is too shallow. In RL is more like "controlled crash" than landing :) ILS should be bit more steep IMHO

 

Normal approaches are 3 degrees.  Not measured what we actually have in Arma3.

 

You've obviously watched my deck landings for the controlled crash !

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Also I have feeling that ship ILS approach is too shallow. In RL is more like "controlled crash" than landing :) ILS should be bit more steep IMHO

I put this one up in the bugtracker as well:

 

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124536

 

55 minutes ago, kremator said:

 

Normal approaches are 3 degrees.  Not measured what we actually have in Arma3.

 

You've obviously watched my deck landings for the controlled crash !

Yeah, Atm it's more <1 degree...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

Will this even work?

  ...

_velInitial will always be the same, most likely [0,0,0] when the variable has been defined.

 

The _velInitial variable is updated in the while loop so it doesn't need to be determined twice every iteration.

I've copied BIS's function and improved it slightly, so all the variables are the same as theirs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol pretty sure the devs are no longer monitoring this, but hey, maybe they are silently stalking it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2017 at 5:05 PM, tuskin38 said:


Don't all AI units shoot at Parachuting pilots? Which is also against the Geneva convention IIRC.
It is a universal problem with Arma's AI.

Yes. Hence the request for a fix. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@flight1700 Given the way they are fixing things they are most definitely monitoring this thread. Have faith

 
 
Nice anims on the Wasp, looking good :)
 

Shikra head position bug fixed, woohoo!!

UAVs now have a throttle indicator where appropriate

Launch position on cat 4, 2, 1 too far forwards, Cat 3 off a bit to the left and too far back (On 1, 2, 4, it seems the aircraft itself is centering on the catapult truck, rather than the front landing gear)

Takeoff speed still shouldn't be instant (thanks again to dennenboom for being smarter than me: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124618)

F/A-181 Flaps indicator still buggers off, fuel still reads left-right instead of up-down

Still can't launch the sentinel in manual controls (note, it is possible to launch it unassisted, which while functional is kinda immersion-breaking)

Carrier deck guide still a bit too counter-clockwise, forward, and off to the right (here's a good top-down view)

Spoiler

C7B4E604441471BF81209B12919AA8FD0BD27503

Wasp stealth can't fold wings in virtual garage (doing a regular wasp and switching it to wasp stealth will work but that is WAY too convoluted)

HUD pitch ladder on gryphon is still inaccurate https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124435

Wasp tailhook HMD indicator remains active after arrested landing

Spoiler

01D748ACC69430F5C533C8AC4C8FB77F4E097455

 

Thanks again for listening to us, it shows in your work :)

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes we are monitoring these threads... always.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Improved get out and get in animations for the F-181 have been added. Not mentioned in the changelog.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ataribaby said:

Also I have feeling that ship ILS approach is too shallow. In RL is more like "controlled crash" than landing :) ILS should be bit more steep IMHO

I agree!

Share this post


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

Yes we are monitoring these threads... always.

Suddenly I find myself playing DCS World's F-15C and notice it's fire rate to be about 30 ish rounds per second. So basically, disregard my suggestion. I suppose I really have no idea how it actually works. Thanks for the jets devs :)

Edited by flight1700
Unsure of da facts(TM)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see a lot of things improved and fixed,

Roll indicator for both CSAT airplanes has been fixed! :don11:

Keep it up. Your work is appreciated.

 

8 hours ago, ataribaby said:

ILS approach is too shallow.

Yes it does feel too shallow. In reality landing is "sinking" in to the landing area, not flying onto it...

 

Having that said, I feel that some other things have a higher priority over ILS.

But ILS approach definitely needs some more work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across this issues atm.

 

Dev Version: 1.71,141530:

 

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124646 (Throttle not recognized correctly in Black WASP)

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124689 (HUD is not updating "Tailhook" after landing)

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124670 (Blast deflector 1 and 2 are not working on USS Freedom)

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124691 (F-181 Black WASP head stuck on "getIn" animation when HEAD BOB isEqualTo "zero")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 30. 4. 2017 at 11:55 PM, FRENZYMAX said:

2.Since we got airbrake release separated from throttle controls is it possible to separate landing gear brakes too and combine them with airbrake release ?

Actually the new Speedbrake action = speedbrake + landing gear brake. I recommend unbinding Speedbrake (analogue) and using the new one (even with anlg. input)
 

On 2. 5. 2017 at 5:05 PM, tuskin38 said:

Don't all AI units shoot at Parachuting pilots? Which is also against the Geneva convention IIRC.

Depends whether it's a distress (e.g. pilot bailing out from an airplane on fire) or combat deployment via parachute. Only in the first situation is the parachuting person considered hors de combat and protected by laws.
Anyway, not sure our AI could evaluate that so it seems better we restrict that. (It might have been caused by an experiment with parachutes detectable by sensors)

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

re parachutes, unless there is some new parachute for distress ejections I think it is best to leave as is. It would be a bit weird to jump from chute and land near AI with them only shooting once you hit the ground. They should fire unless its clearly a distress ejection (new parachute class for these ejections maybe). Even then they have no ability to capture or force surrender. I think its best to just disregard this Geneva protocol for now ;)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one more problem. Fixing of the camera of a tourist's fir-tree always happens to mixture from the purpose, or shift in any point of fixing of the camera.
The problem has appeared only on the UCAV UAV.

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124470

The UCAV Sentinel's laser designator always points forwards instead of where the UAV gunner (TGP) is pointing at.
https://youtu.be/9PEwhvBfvI0
But what occurs in practice, the bomb defines a laser point there where watches a tourist's fir-tree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the way the new jets are balanced! The AAF one has the best turning radius, the shikra has the best speed and the f18 is somewhere inbetween. I would like it if the shikra had the best turning circle but the f-18 the best speed. Would be more realistic, but whatever.


About CAS: I think that air-to-ground has been simulated very well. The only thing i found strange was that you can activate a camera by pressing ctrl+rmb, but you cannot focus it on a position, making it very hard to aim at a target with the lasermarker. That fact makes it kind of useless when theres no other plane that could lock on to your laser, because it is alot easier+safer to just drop the bomb via the HUD. That camera has been in the game for quite a while and i always hated it. My suggestion would be to either remove it or make it be able to focus on a position, like Weapon System Officers FLIR pod in the F-18F by JSS

 

What i noticed when trying to engage aerial targets at long range, was that 1: The missiles range is too low, 2: It is way too easy to shake off (1 flare burst and it misses), 3: Jets fly towards eachother so fast that you often dont even get to use the AMRAAM/AMRAAMski missiles (similar to point 1) and 4: The AI still acts as immature as before, which is now worse because they see you across the entire map.

I would like the long range missiles to somehow be simulated, so that they run out of energy at high distances and cant simply be evaded by only countermeasuring. The F-18/Su-35 Mods by JSS added Aim120/R-77 missiles which were pretty hard to dodge, you actually needed to drop alot of countermeasures and go defensive.

 

Also, by what i have seen (correct me if im wrong) you cant remove the white square that appears around an aircraft if you lock on to it. I would love it if there was an option to remove it via the difficulty settings or so. It seems redundant to me.

 

I play alot of DCS, so i might be expecting too much. Those are just my thoughts on what i have tested so far.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

... you can activate a camera by pressing ctrl+rmb, but you cannot focus it on a position ...

Look for action "Stabilize turret", cateogory Weapons. By default Ctrl+T.
We've also added a new Targeting Camera hint which you can find in the Field Manual.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some minor things on the engine and fuel displays in the Black Wasp/Shikra:

 

I think the fuel display in the Black Wasp ticks down in the incorrect direction, assuming this "Bingo" line is supposed to be a vertical marker.

Spoiler

OOe9BxB.png

The nozzle position display is neat, but I'm surprised the numerical readout at the bottom doesn't match the throttle readout in the UI.

Spoiler

O4gQKhW.png

zeae18X.png

In the Shikra, both engines are labeled as "ENG 1" on the display.  (The fuel readout also doesn't change as you use fuel, though you do get a helpful "LOW FUEL" warning light.)

Spoiler

PdUZkiR.png

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fn_Quiksilver said:

re parachutes, unless there is some new parachute for distress ejections I think it is best to leave as is. It would be a bit weird to jump from chute and land near AI with them only shooting once you hit the ground. They should fire unless its clearly a distress ejection (new parachute class for these ejections maybe). Even then they have no ability to capture or force surrender. I think its best to just disregard this Geneva protocol for now ;)

 

Well I mainly have a problem with planes trying to hit parachutes with their guns (and probably AA vehicles too - have not tested that). I would be okay with infantry attacking parachutes, so maybe there is a way to tell the AI "it's not worth firing 30mm rounds at a single infantryman"?

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

×