Jets DLC Official Feedback

[dragon01 902]

Now that dynamic loadouts are default, could we get rid of "(CAS)" suffix on CAS aircraft? It'd look much tidier.

 

Also, the Shikra's gun ROF was increased, but it now fires to the left and below the gun cross, making it kind of useless.

[Hvymtal 1251]

Bug related to instant takeoff speed still occurs. Able to confirm it works on same catapults now

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124563

 

Also, this one will require more digging from you guys, the gun is not off the pilot/cockpit orientation is off

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T124569

 

Unfortunately I don't have any wide view cockpit shots of the previous build shikra to share, but even from this example you should be able to tell that it... feels off.

 

Edit, I played with the head movement function, its definitely set low and to the left. Notice the FPI and gun cross location for an idea of how off it is. My adjustments aren't an exact boresight (a tad high) but it's close

Spoiler

My corrected view

 

 

And this is the "default" view. Notice the gun splash

BTW, nice job on the get in/out anims for the shikra :)

[dragon01 902]

I found a small glitch with the Sentinel. When equipped with 2x Macer, the missile fins protrude through the weapons bay doors. Also, the weapon bays don't close when the contents are expanded, only when the other bay is opened.

 

Another thing I found in a Sentinel is that its flaps don't make sense. Generally, aircraft with elevons don't have flaps, for the simple reason that the only place to put them is so far behind the COM that they'd put the plane into a nosedive. Flaps have to be installed at the COM of the aircraft, which is impossible for flying wings like the Sentinel. It doesn't seem to have a visible rudder (split control surfaces or differential airbrakes), either. I'm fine with using differential throttling as rudder, but it should be relfected in performance (that is, no rudder when throttled down).

[ataribaby 54]

One humble request for Jets DLC creators. Please consider include open ocean terrain set in middle of Atlantic or Pacific (or both). Just all water. For obvious reason to get carrier real use. Please.

[iratus 71]

During my tests of the new damage model (in other words: getting shot down repeatedly) I noticed that AI planes like to shoot at parachutes with their guns. I'm pretty sure this is against the geneva conventions :)

 

[bl4dekk 9]

The jets of superiority have no superiority at all if we use their cannons, if they run out of missile and depend on the cannon, 1 mistake against a CAS and you die.

And the last update generated a bug in the cannon sights of shikra, buzzard and gryphon

 

 

 

 

errrrr,Could not make a f18 gif so it goes in the video :/

 

 

[peegee 118]

35 minutes ago, bl4dekk said:

The jets of superiority have no superiority at all if we use their cannons, if they run out of missile and depend on the cannon, 1 mistake against a CAS and you die.

And the last update generated a bug in the cannon sights of shikra, buzzard and gryphon

Heh, like I already mentioned somewhere, Neophron's cannon doesn't even need a full burst to completely destroy other jets.

I found it more bothering how easy it was to out turn DLC jets with Wipeout and just shoot them with the cannon.
Neophron I can understand as it has some multi-role capability. I actually liked the fact that it's a valid threat to counter fast movers. Wipeout not so much.

[dragon01 902]

Gun combat is an emergency measure in modern aircraft. The DLC jets should be superior to CAS ones in terms of air combat, but remember that this mostly comes from their air to air missile loadout, powerful radar and greater speeds that they can achieve. In gun combat, however, CAS aircraft have the advantage of tight turning circles due to their low speed and straight, lightly loaded wings. They also have powerful guns meant primarily for air to ground role.

 

In a real situation, a plane like Black Wasp would never engage something like Neopheron in gun combat. It'd lock onto it with radar at over 10km and shoot it down with a BVR missile. I think that if forced into a low-speed dogfight with a CAS airplane, the best course of action for a fighter would be to bug out (easily done thanks to afterburner and superior engines), turn around and either use the missiles or, if the reason you're in a dogfight in first place is that you ran out of missiles, outclimb it and try to dive onto it at an angle it would not be able to sustain (especially useful as the top tends to be less armored). Your "superiority" comes from speed and acceleration, not from turning rate or radius. Getting into a turning fight way below your corner velocity is about the worst thing you could do. TVC could give you superior low speed maneuverability, but the current flight model doesn't simulate it and it probably wouldn't be the best idea here, anyway.

[snoops_213 75]

13 hours ago, iratus said:

During my tests of the new damage model (in other words: getting shot down repeatedly) I noticed that AI planes like to shoot at parachutes with their guns. I'm pretty sure this is against the geneva conventions :)

 

Everything targets parachutes! Lol Get shot down by AAA and eject.... damn thing shoots the ejected pilots 

[Flax 397]

8 minutes ago, snoops_213 said:

Everything targets parachutes! Lol Get shot down by AAA and eject.... damn thing shoots the ejected pilots 

 

Yea that is annoying, maybe setCaptive could be used until you are on the ground.

[Strike_NOR 898]

@dragon01

 

To add more to your already correct statement, the CAS aircraft tend to have more lethal guns (30mm very high ROF), and better armor/damage resistance.

 

52 minutes ago, Flax said:

Yea that is annoying, maybe setCaptive could be used until you are on the ground.

 

Or rather have AA vehicles, Static AA guns and Self-Propelled AA guns and aerial vehicles ignore parachutes. They are more likely to be targeted by infantry (which have shorter detection ranges and poor accuracy - which work in the favor of the pilot).

 

[OlegAckbar 47]

Gryphon is very maneuvers. It easily can turn at Black Wasp and Shikra's back, which makes it best dogfight plane of DLC planes. The main issue is that he didn't losing speed while doing horizontal circles, like other jets do.

[bl4dekk 9]

8 hours ago, dragon01 said:

Gun combat is an emergency measure in modern aircraft. The DLC jets should be superior to CAS ones in terms of air combat, but remember that this mostly comes from their air to air missile loadout, powerful radar and greater speeds that they can achieve. In gun combat, however, CAS aircraft have the advantage of tight turning circles due to their low speed and straight, lightly loaded wings. They also have powerful guns meant primarily for air to ground role.

 

In a real situation, a plane like Black Wasp would never engage something like Neopheron in gun combat. It'd lock onto it with radar at over 10km and shoot it down with a BVR missile. I think that if forced into a low-speed dogfight with a CAS airplane, the best course of action for a fighter would be to bug out (easily done thanks to afterburner and superior engines), turn around and either use the missiles or, if the reason you're in a dogfight in first place is that you ran out of missiles, outclimb it and try to dive onto it at an angle it would not be able to sustain (especially useful as the top tends to be less armored). Your "superiority" comes from speed and acceleration, not from turning rate or radius. Getting into a turning fight way below your corner velocity is about the worst thing you could do. TVC could give you superior low speed maneuverability, but the current flight model doesn't simulate it and it probably wouldn't be the best idea here, anyway.

 

Yes, I agree with what you say, what's bad is that it takes a very big effort to knock something down with the cannons.

[bl4dekk 9]

2 hours ago, OlegAckbar said:

Gryphon is very maneuvers. It easily can turn at Black Wasp and Shikra's back, which makes it best dogfight plane of DLC planes. The main issue is that he didn't losing speed while doing horizontal circles, like other jets do.

Yes he does many maneuvers, but the tail rudder is heavy.

Did you notice that his tail rudder is heavy?

[Hvymtal 1251]

I just tried the Buzzard and Grpyhon. As far as I can tell, their gun bug is related to CCIP (which has never been 100% reliable), the Shikra's is related to pilot head position. Perhaps the gryphon and buzzard's head position is a tad high but it is centered and almost level. If I were QA, the Shikra would deserve more attention

 

Few more bug tickets today: The attach position for Cat 4 appears to have migrated to Cat 3.

(Feedback.bistudio is shooting me a 500, will post pics here instead for now)

Spoiler

 

Launch position for cat 4 is fine, though, but Cat 3 is still crooked and aft

Spoiler

 

After you detatch from a cat without launching, when you attach to a new one it will TP you to launch position but it will also instantaneously detatch you

Spoiler

Step 1

 

Step 2

 

Step Sadface

 

Also, I'm still getting UI scaling errors with the loadout menu preventing me from accessing the "bottom" pylons for most aircraft, see the loadout feedback thread

[OlegAckbar 47]

12 minutes ago, bl4dekk said:

Yes he does many maneuvers, but the tail rudder is heavy.

Did you notice that his tail rudder is heavy?

I noticed that, but it don't making this plane less OP in dogfight.

[suiside 95]

i noticed that you can take off the freedom with the griphon

(it can land on it too :P )

and for people who want to know, the black wasp can land perfectly on the freedom without arresting hook and leave space to roll to the next catapult launch

this brings me to how i found out, is there a keybind (option) for the arrestor hook ?

 

in the picture below you see the grey identifier of the carrier, i don't know if it should be there but to me it is kinda pointless but maybe i am wrong...

Spoiler

 

in the picture below the last light of the landing strip of the carrier is out of line with the other centerline lights and i don't know if that yellow one next to it should be there ...

Spoiler

 

i forgot to take a screenshot but in the mfd of the griphon  you have height and speed indicators next to the artificial horizon but the right side has (height ?) a bigger (too big) font while the right side might be a little bigger

[Hvymtal 1251]

Well with the Wasp and Shikra's speed they can easily outrun it, and in stealth mode they can already match the gryphon for payload, while in regular they handily outclass it. Its energy retention is an advantage it needs, it'll force NATO and CSAT pilots to either fight long range where they can out-spam their enemy or learn how to deal with a plane that has superior energy retention at close range (tip, let it get close and then kill velocity to force an overshoot)

 

[GBee2 68]

41 minutes ago, bl4dekk said:

 

Yes, I agree with what you say, what's bad is that it takes a very big effort to knock something down with the cannons.

 

That seems realistic to me.

 

A CAS aircraft, especially something like the Wipeout (A-10) are more heavily armoured as they are flown closer to the ground (relatively) and need to withstand small arms fire. Their cannons are very powerful because they need to damage armoured vehicles, all the way up to tanks.

 

Air superiority aircraft on the other hand are very lightly armoured, they are flown far above the range of small arms and trade heavy armour for speed and agility. Their cannons are generally weaker than CAS aircraft because, as others have noted, it is a weapon of last resort for an aircraft that will usually be engaging well outside cannon range and again because of weight restrictions.

 

The F-35, on which the Black Wasp II is based uses a 25mm GAU-22/A - with only 182 rounds - enough for just two bursts at a fire rate of 3,300 rpm.

The A-10, on which the Wipeout is based uses a 30mm GAU-8/A - with 1,174 rounds and a fire rate of 3,900 rpm.

 

You simply cannot expect to compare the two canons, or expect a CAS aircraft to be as easy to shoot down as an air superiority aircraft. The difference you've described in-game seems to accurately reflect the real world differences in these two types of aircraft.

 

The two aircraft are in different classes, an analogy would be that the Black Wasp is an IFV - it uses it's weapons at range and has light armour to give it speed and agility, in close combat it's extremely vulnerable. The Wipeout is a tank - it has very powerful weapon and heavy armour but it's much slower. You wouldn't expect the main gun on an IFV to be as powerful as a tank's cannon, or for it to withstand as many hits as a tank.

[bl4dekk 9]

8 minutes ago, GBee2 said:

 

That seems realistic to me.

 

A CAS aircraft, especially something like the Wipeout (A-10) are more heavily armoured as they are flown closer to the ground (relatively) and need to withstand small arms fire. Their cannons are very powerful because they need to damage armoured vehicles, all the way up to tanks.

 

Air superiority aircraft on the other hand are very lightly armoured, they are flown far above the range of small arms and trade heavy armour for speed and agility. Their cannons are generally weaker than CAS aircraft because, as others have noted, it is a weapon of last resort for an aircraft that will usually be engaging well outside cannon range and again because of weight restrictions.

 

The F-35, on which the Black Wasp II is based uses a 25mm GAU-22/A - with only 182 rounds - enough for just two bursts at a fire rate of 3,300 rpm.

The A-10, on which the Wipeout is based uses a 30mm GAU-8/A - with 1,174 rounds and a fire rate of 3,900 rpm.

 

You simply cannot expect to compare the two canons, or expect a CAS aircraft to be as easy to shoot down as an air superiority aircraft. The difference you've described in-game seems to accurately reflect the real world differences in these two types of aircraft.

 

The two aircraft are in different classes, an analogy would be that the Black Wasp is an IFV - it uses it's weapons at range and has light armour to give it speed and agility, in close combat it's extremely vulnerable. The Wipeout is a tank - it has very powerful weapon and heavy armour but it's much slower. You wouldn't expect the main gun on an IFV to be as powerful as a tank's cannon, or for it to withstand as many hits as a tank.

 

Yes, but the black wasp II is based on F18 and F22 and these two use a M61A2 Vulcan 20mm cannon at 6000 rpm.

[Blackbomber200 11]

Don't have much to Report. I was planning on commenting earlier when Carriers were released on the Dev Branch. The USS Freedom is beautiful but I find quite lacking even if it is Free Content. Several parts of the Carrier airstrip don't register as solid ground and you can not put Aircraft or turrets on them, I'm not asking for much but I was extremely disappointed that at the very least you could have not let us get on the bridge of the Aircraft Carrier since you can walk up the stairs and you see signs leading you up to the bridge then you go up to the door and its like JK you can't go to the bridge. I also wish there would have been a hanger for extra jets or to put Tanks, APCs, and JLTV's with an elevator to the flight deck, but that seems like asking for that is too much. I'm disappointed in this even if it is free. When I saw the Carrier I was very excited and couldn't wait to use it, but I'm disappointed by its lack lust of content. Several of the turrets you place on the Carrier in the red circles designated for them will explode randomly when you load up the scenario. I'm also still begging on my hands and knees that out of fairness and respect for CSAT fans that they receive their own Carrier, A Chinese Carrier for Tanoa to counter the USS Freedom, and an Iranian Carrier for the invasion of Altis and Stratis. They have one now in 2017 and if they don't they certainly would in 2035. At the very least give a reskin for the USS Freedom for the Chinese and Iranians with a Chinese and Iranian name, so CSAT fans can use it and create cool scenarios with it. Below you can see the Chinese Super Carrier.

 

 

Outside of that I have not used the Aircraft since the Carrier release in the Dev Branch or the New Drone for that matter, and I still need to. Although I have seen people arguing about the Cannon, While I'm aware that the FA-18 has a 20mm Vulcan cannon in real life I wouldn't mind maybe a 25mm cannon for the F/A-18 cannon in Arma III or perhaps a 30mm cannon. The current cannon is very underpowered and I swear I will get several direct hits on an aircraft and it will still keep chugging along. Someone mentioned that Air Superiority jets have lighter armor than CAS Jets which I agree with so why the blanky blanky can I not Take down an enemy aircraft with a 20mm cannon with several direct hits. If I manage to hit them with a missile which is a BIG IF, they will go down immediately. I also still believe that the F/A-18 loses way too much speed on turns and I will stall repeatedly. That is a real pain for F/A-18 and the CSAT Aircraft.

 

Also on a parting note I would like to say that I am probably one of the first one who has landed the A-164 Wipeout onto the Aircraft Carrier proving that it is possible and I even asked a friend of mine who was in the Navy if its possible and they said it would be possible if the A-10 was modified for it. So I still beg of you to make a USS Freedom camo/skin for all NATO Aircraft including the A-164 Wipeout. If you could I would be Thankful, thanks for reading and have a nice day.

[Strike_NOR 898]

9 hours ago, Blackbomber200 said:

Also on a parting note I would like to say that I am probably one of the first one who has landed the A-164 Wipeout onto the Aircraft Carrier proving that it is possible and I even asked a friend of mine who was in the Navy if its possible and they said it would be possible if the A-10 was modified for it. So I still beg of you to make a USS Freedom camo/skin for all NATO Aircraft including the A-164 Wipeout. If you could I would be Thankful, thanks for reading and have a nice day.

 

Wow! Well that's a humble post.

 

First of all - The devs have already said that the content of the Jet DLC has been settled, which means we not getting any more jets or carriers. The 2017 Scanning the Horizon video already reveals what is part of Jets DLC, and the bonus is an absolutely free carrier that comes with static AA defenses.

 

Secondly, regarding the A-10. Just like in real life, you can't have your cake and the topping too. There's always a tradeoff. Last time I remember someone converting non-carrier aircraft to carrier craft was probably in the 60's there was an attempt with the C-130. The problem you see, is that modifying an A-10 to work on a carrier is something you would have to do pre-production, meaning re-designing the entire aircraft. The reason for this being that the landing gear would need to be bigger and heavier, there would need to be a tailhook, probably foldable wings to save that precious space.. and with all of this comes strengthened structural elements. The area where the landing gear attach would need to be beefed up, as well as the attachment point for the arresting hook.

 

So on a closing note, is it possible to modify an A-10 (A-164) to work from carriers? Yes! Would the cost and reduced effectiveness of the aircraft ever pay off? Would the Navy/Marines ever consider buying such an aircraft? 100% guaranteed NOPE!

 

Still not convinced?

 

Watch boeing drop an F-18 from 20ft (~6m).

 

There's no way an A-10 could withstand that..

 

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

Scalpels and ASRAAMs for Hellcat (and maybe Pawnee, I didnt test that) are nice but pretty useless since the pilot is not able to lock them onto any target. They are basically just rocket pods with enhanced damage but limited availability...

Also the 20mm gun pod is pretty loud compared to even bigger caliber guns...

[Komachi 10]

13 minutes ago, the_one_and_only_Venator said:

Scalpels and ASRAAMs for Hellcat (and maybe Pawnee, I didnt test that) are nice but pretty useless since the pilot is not able to lock them onto any target. They are basically just rocket pods with enhanced damage but limited availability...

Also the 20mm gun pod is pretty loud compared to even bigger caliber guns...

Last time I've checked, you can lock them on by looking at your target and pressing T (Same way you do with PCML for example)

[Blackbomber200 11]

47 minutes ago, Strike_NOR said:

 

Wow! Well that's a humble post.

 

First of all - The devs have already said that the content of the Jet DLC has been settled, which means we not getting any more jets or carriers. The 2017 Scanning the Horizon video already reveals what is part of Jets DLC, and the bonus is an absolutely free carrier that comes with static AA defenses.

 

Secondly, regarding the A-10. Just like in real life, you can't have your cake and the topping too. There's always a tradeoff. Last time I remember someone converting non-carrier aircraft to carrier craft was probably in the 60's there was an attempt with the C-130. The problem you see, is that modifying an A-10 to work on a carrier is something you would have to do pre-production, meaning re-designing the entire aircraft. The reason for this being that the landing gear would need to be bigger and heavier, there would need to be a tailhook, probably foldable wings to save that precious space.. and with all of this comes strengthened structural elements. The area where the landing gear attach would need to be beefed up, as well as the attachment point for the arresting hook.

 

So on a closing note, is it possible to modify an A-10 (A-164) to work from carriers? Yes! Would the cost and reduced effectiveness of the aircraft ever pay off? Would the Navy/Marines ever consider buying such an aircraft? 100% guaranteed NOPE!

 

Still not convinced?

 

Watch boeing drop an F-18 from 20ft (~6m).

 

There's no way an A-10 could withstand that..

 

Do I think the Navy and the Marines would buy more A-10s if given a choice? YES! I DO! Because they have been incapable of replacing the A-10 because the A-10 is one of the best CAS Aircraft out there today and is loved by the Marines and Airforce. This is also a video game and the A-164 is an fictional aircraft based on an existing one. Since the A-164 is a more sleeker and stealthier aircraft than the A-10, despite what I said about the Marines and Airforce loving it do you believe that the A-10 or A-164 would realistically still be in service in 2035? Or that they would pay billions or millions of dollars to REDISGN it with a stealthier design when they've been pumping all their money into the F35 and a new project to replace the A-10? Now despite what I just asked, Do I think Congress and the Navy would spend money convert this if given the option? Absol-f**king-lutely! The US Defense Department is already getting a 70 Billion dollar bump in their budget, and we've spent our money on some pretty stupid shit before. You also asked all these questions on would we spend money or do you think we honestly would do this? Well do you think we realistically think we would keep the F-18 in service in 2035 for an air superiority jet when we have the F-22 Raptor which has never been used in combat once? Just thought I'd point out nothing is ever 100% guaranteed. I landed the A-164 without the line or conversion so I don't really care about changing or converting it. All I asked was if we could get a camo/skin for the A-164 which doesn't sound like an unreasonable request, actually it isn't considering I'm paying 10 dollars for this DLC. Which you would have saw that was all I asked for, which I don't think you really read anything I said because if you did you would have also seen that I talked about the cannon, stalling, services that were not solid and exploding turrets (All useful feedback I think so at least) and the small part I added about the A-164 was just a joke and I thought it was humorous and I really didn't need you to be rude. Also considering your just a random person on the internet with probably no engineering or airforce experience and my friend was in the Navy I'm going to believe my friend over a random person on the internet. And Also This is a video game, even if this is one of the most realistic Military simulators in the World, its still a video game that's set in the future so I don't see why reasonable upgrades and modifications are unforeseeable in the future in a fictional game in a fictional world in a fictional conflict with fictional aircraft with fictional organizations like CSAT and governments with unlimited budgets. So I really did not need you to be so rude and snap for no reason because all I asked for was a Camo identifying the A-164 with the USS Freedom Carrier group which would give it a sense of identity and belonging because I love the A-164 and have used it for 3 years and done so many missions with it. I want to see the Older Aircraft get tender loving care.