Fn fal

[DKM Jaguar 0]

Rambozo finished his nice FN FAL rifle.

You can get it by clicking my sig banner and loknig in weapons/statics.

[Billabong81 0]

Looking good

[Andrew B 0]

It looks great!

I noticed two issues that someone might want to examine though:

1. The iron sight view is incorrect for someone aiming the rifle. (The view is looking over the rear sight instead of through the aperture; like someone is about to use the grenade sight.)

2. The accuracy is reported to be 2 MOA in the readme. It's actually set at 2.31 MOA right now. (Maybe typo? It's set at 0.000588 now, when 0.000508 would be 2 MOA almost exactly.)

Great work guys, especially with the textures. Keep it up!

[rambozo 0]

Yeah the sight view is something Im aware of. Its like that for the sake of consistancy with the FN MAG we are doing. It rubs me the wrong way to. It was added as an afterthought.

The moa issue isnt a typo. Its probably something off in the calculation somewhere. I came to .000294 for 1 moa. If Im off then I would also have to edit my moa to dispersion converter. Or it could be an inconsistancy in reguard to decimal places. What did you use for pi? I used 3.14159265. But Im not shure if it would create this kind of inconsistancy.

Care to share your figures?

[Andrew B 0]

My simple calculation was: 5.88 X 0.3937 = 2.314956 inches at 100 meters...

I think I just realized that I'm the one who made the mistake. I was assuming that 1 MOA was 1 inch at 100 meters instead of 100 yards.

Doh!

So, why exactly are they making you use that iron sight? You say someone else's FNMAG is using that as their iron sight, so you have to too?

[rambozo 0]

Whew, good to know. I did a bit of calculating to get my numbers. I found that 1.04719755 inches is 1 moa at 100 yards, and that 2.90885252903226 centimeters is 1 moa at 100 meters.

I lil while ago I wrote a small moa calculator that will output a value in inches or centimeters that would equal 1moa at the given range (yards or meters). You can check that out here. Its pretty neat.

I also created a small proggy you can download from the DKM website called discalc. Its an moa to dispersion converter.

Im fixing the optics right now. sorry bout that. DKM is doing a FN MAG. I think I might fix those optics to. I get all bent out of shape over these details.

For as long as I had this thing sitting on my harddrive, there are still things I have to fix.

The new optics will be MUCH better. Sorry again.

[rambozo 0]

Well I fixed the issues. I also made other slight changes. Stuff that you probably wont notice, But I fixed a few other things. Hopefully the fixed file will be up for download tomorrow.

Sorry for the trouble. The new Optics are FAR better.

[miles teg 1]

Was the carrying handle ever put on this FNFAL rifle addon?

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Andrew B 0]

I don't think Rambozo's FAL has a carry handle Miles. You can get them with and without.

Hey, no need to apologize Rambozo.

I know how you feel, I'm a bit of a detail person myself.

BTW, have you checked the scale of your rifle in o2? No one ever thinks to check their models for scale... (eg. BAS's Delta pack had weapons that were much too big. Their M4 was over a meter long! )  

P.S. How's the FAL shooting these days?

EDIT: Wow, those MOA calculators are nifty! Now I have some work to do with all of my weapons...

I can't believe I forgot that MOA was a measurement of degrees and not an inch measurement...

[rambozo 0]

Ah hell, I didn't put the handle on it. I remember Miles asking about it on the last one. I probably should have put it on this one.

Anyway, the fal shoots good. I havent shot it for accuracy so I dont know what its capable of. I plan on slapping a scope on it to see, But I dont expect much. I'm hoping better than the average fal, since I lapped the bore and all. I doubt I will get under 1 minute with it though. Im guessing maybe 1.75 or 2 moa. If I'm lucky. I think I would be pretty happy with that.

A friend recently picked up a Cetme at a gunshow. Its a cool gun. I think I might do that one next.

I'm still itching to get an AR180 though. They have one up at the local shop here. You still having problems with yours?

[Gen.Carnage 0]

Improoved version 3.1 made available at our site folks, grab it from our downloads page.

[bonko the sane 2]

very nice addon, love the 3D feel of the optics

[ni-mh 0]

very nice addon, love the 3D feel of the optics  

i wonder if its possible to make the optic fully 3d by making the soldier look through the iron sights of the weapon model itself. inquisitor's static m60 kinda did the trick.

nice addon!  love the model and textures.

[aj_addons 0]

i dont see why since the optic is a 3d model in its own right saying that i might be difficult to get right

[Andrew B 0]

Yeah, I actually just sent my 180B back in for evaluation and repair. This will be the third time, but I'm not too upset about it. ArmaLite has taken good care of me and has been paying the shipping both ways.

I sent it back the second time in Feb because the scope mount plate that's welded to the top of the receiver had broken loose. The bolt hold-open had also stopped working because the carrier was too soft and had worn out the little ledge that catches the hold-open latch.

I got it back in March and discovered a few weeks later that the bolt lugs had worn their rear-right corners off after only 300 rounds. After examining some casings, I found that there was also a lot of carbon residue on the outside of the cases and also some caked up in the rims.  

I don't know if it's as simple as a headspace issue or if it has to do with some improper chamber/barrel extention dimentions.

So, back it goes for the third time... It sucks too, because it was really shooting well with that last upper. I had a couple of 1.5 MOA groups I shot with a 4x russian scope.

Does your FAL have a rough or heavy trigger pull? (I just got a NM two-stage for my 180B, for when it gets back ;) ) There are some smiths that do good trigger work on FALs. I can't remember their names right off, but if you check out falfiles.com you should be able to find them.

Was that 180 at the gunshop a 180B? Either way, I say go ahead. No one else seems to be having the kinds of problems with their 180Bs that I've had with mine, heh. Just make sure you go with Thermold and USGI mags to avoid having to modify the mags. (The cheap Brit steal mags are great, but have to have the mag catch hole "raised" about 1-2mm with a Dremel and epoxy)

ArmaLite also has very good customer service. So, if something does go wrong with your rifle, you're covered. (My "One Year Warranty" expired almost a year ago, and ArmaLite is still taking care of me free of charge.)

Finally, be careful with the Cetmes. I've heard that some of the latest ones have very badly worn rollers, bolts, and locking shoulders (Out-of-battery discharge hazard. ) Make sure you read up on them so you know what to look for before you plunk down the cash. ;)

P.S. Remember that AR-180B model you improved and re-textured for me? I made a couple of refinements to your model and would like to mail it to you sometime to look over. Maybe we can finally get that thing released, eh?

[rambozo 0]

Yeah but man thats a lot of trouble to have to keep sending that thing back. Even still, its a gun that I've been interested in. The one they have up at the local shop is the new B. I seen a lot of the origional ar180s at gunshows, But they are always kinda beat up. Im more inclined to like the AR180 more than the AR15. Im not too keen on that direct impingement gas system. But Bushmaster looks to have some REALLY nice featherweight AR15 rifles. I cant afford to buy any new rifles now though.

As for the Cetme. I don't intend to buy one. A friend just got one. I was thinking about making one for ofp. He got a century build. All in all it looks nice. It wasnt shot since it was built. It didnt have any wear to indicate use, and it still had grit in the barrel. After we cleaned it out, we went out to shoot it. It functions flawlessly. He payed out around 400 for it. I think he made out ok on it.

Anyway, Back on subject. I actually tried to use the model for the optics. It didn't work right. Its almost as if ofp tries to flatten the optics model.

[Andrew B 0]

Yeah I know about the optics.

I've got a pair of "E-D" 3d glasses (very cool with OFP btw!) and I tried to put the front sight image about 20" ahead of the rear sight, and it didn't work. Both were still displayed at the same depth. It really is a shame since that could have been a really cool effect for those with 3d glasses.

For me, the thing I like about the AR-18 design is that the bolt carrier doesn't ride directly against the receiver like it does in the AR-15. IMHO, the AR-15's gas system isn't a problem. Its carrier and receiver design just don't allow enough space for foreign matter to work its way clear of the moving parts.

Sorry for taking the thread so far off-topic.

[rambozo 0]

Yeah bearing surface. But I think the bolt carriers on the ar15s have rails on em now. To reduce bearing surface. I mean I think there are shallow channels cut into the carrier. Anyway I think its a combination of things. There really isnt a lot of reciprocating mass in the ar15s. I think thats one thing.

Most of the origional problems were with ammunition and cycle rate. Even still I don't care for the idea of injecting that dirty gas into the reciever. If you ask me the m14 and garand have the best gas system.

[Cpt. FrostBite 0]

VERY, VERY nice weapon BUT

DON'T USE THOSE F**KING JPG TEXTURES!!!

PLEASE, make one with the jpg textures converted to paa/pac. Since the model are binarized I con't do it myself. (unless I use ODOLexplorer, of course. But I rather don't use it)

[Major Fubar 0]

Maybe if you ask nicely instead of swearing at them?

[rambozo 0]

VERY, VERY nice weapon BUT

DON'T USE THOSE F**KING JPG TEXTURES!!!

PLEASE, make one with the jpg textures converted to paa/pac. Since the model are binarized I con't do it myself. (unless I use ODOLexplorer, of course. But I rather don't use it)

I never liked paa or pac too much. Jpg files look better, and thats why I used em.

[raedor 8]

Quote[/b] ]It's a huge difference between loading the textures of 40 or 5 (or so) models in the video ram.

The graphic accellerators aren't be able to decompress jpg's in hardware, thats a job for the cpu ...

... also the decompressed raw data of these texture must be stored in the video ram

If a view more addons of these technic's been used the engine must reduce some details otherways for memory handling (e.g. unload Lods, other textures ...)

from orcs moskovich thread.

[Major Fubar 0]

VERY, VERY nice weapon BUT

DON'T USE THOSE F**KING JPG TEXTURES!!!

PLEASE, make one with the jpg textures converted to paa/pac. Since the model are binarized I con't do it myself. (unless I use ODOLexplorer, of course. But I rather don't use it)

I never liked paa or pac too much. Jpg files look better, and thats why I used em.

Have you checked out Inquisitor's High Res weapons pack redone with PAA textures? It looks just as good IMHO...but everyone's entitled to their own view

[rambozo 0]

Im not entirely opposed to using em. I just think they look nasty in comparison. I did package up a series of jpgs at different resolutions. And progressively use smaller skins for the higher lods. To kinda simulate mip mapping.

But if people really think its a problem, then I could change it.

[P_Machine 0]

VERY, VERY nice weapon BUT

DON'T USE THOSE F**KING JPG TEXTURES!!!

PLEASE, make one with the jpg textures converted to paa/pac. Since the model are binarized I con't do it myself. (unless I use ODOLexplorer, of course. But I rather don't use it)

Why not?

Why are people always complaining on this?

If you think it'll lag, well it wont, because its just a weapon. If you make a whole vehicle or a units with only JPG textures, you might notice a bit of a "lag" but not on just a weapon.

All it does is make the textures look better, whats wrong with that?

And awesome FAL, man. Good for the Resistance guys, I often play as FIA, but I absolutely loath the vz.58's BIS gave them, its such an ugly weapon, useless too.

By the way, that handguard thats on your FAL, is that the Brazilian one?