The A-10

[=JoKeR= 0]

Stop the political arguments. They are so utterly useless and they serve no purpose in this thread whatsoever.

The A-10 is brilliant. I was, at first, however, shocked when I shot the Avenger cannon. It looked about as powerful as a Blackhawk minigun. when I got it on a target my nightmares were done away with, though.

However, I feel for the next patch a noticeable smoke trail should be included, as well as a better sound (more of a *BVVVT* when you fire) and some bigger and longer lasting smoke puffs on the ground. Also, a typical CAS loadout would be preferred over what we have now, a typical CAS loadout being (from right wing to left wing):

2 Sidewinders (on single two-mount rack)

1 Hydra 70 launcher

3 Mavericks (on single three-mount rack)

4 Retarded/Cluster/Smart bombs (inner-underwing and middle fuselage mounts)

3 Mavericks (on single three-mount rack)

1 Hydra 70 launcher

1 ECM jammer unit

This loadout could be ok only for evaluation purpose with blank/exercise ammunition,you don't know how many drag can cause a triple Maverick launcher,Hydra 70 are not used at all on planes,they use the 4 or 7 shots tubes,and the CAS loadout would be very different

BTW is the 3d model nice to see?Or is just crappy as the Harrier?Total inaccurate like the Su-34 or low-rider look-like the Abrams?

Why BiS reproduced an accurate replica vehicles only for the enemy army?

Yep,I don't have ArmA too crappy for me,rewrite the game guys and make better 3d models

This loadout could be ok only for evaluation purpose with blank/exercise ammunition,you don't know how many drag can cause a triple Maverick launcher,Hydra 70 are not used at all on planes,they use the 4 or 7 shots tubes,and the CAS loadout would be very different

BTW is the 3d model nice to see?Or is just crappy as the Harrier?Total inaccurate like the Su-34 or low-rider look-like the Abrams?

Why BiS reproduced an accurate replica vehicles only for the enemy army?

Yep,I don't have ArmA too crappy for me,rewrite the game guys and make better 3d models

[RedStorm 0]

Stop the political arguments. They are so utterly useless and they serve no purpose in this thread whatsoever.

The A-10 is brilliant. I was, at first, however, shocked when I shot the Avenger cannon. It looked about as powerful as a Blackhawk minigun. when I got it on a target my nightmares were done away with, though.

However, I feel for the next patch a noticeable smoke trail should be included, as well as a better sound (more of a *BVVVT* when you fire) and some bigger and longer lasting smoke puffs on the ground. Also, a typical CAS loadout would be preferred over what we have now, a typical CAS loadout being (from right wing to left wing):

2 Sidewinders (on single two-mount rack)

1 Hydra 70 launcher

3 Mavericks (on single three-mount rack)

4 Retarded/Cluster/Smart bombs (inner-underwing and middle fuselage mounts)

3 Mavericks (on single three-mount rack)

1 Hydra 70 launcher

1 ECM jammer unit

This loadout could be ok only for evaluation purpose with blank/exercise ammunition,you don't know how many drag can cause a triple Maverick launcher,Hydra 70 are not used at all on planes,they use the 4 or 7 shots tubes,and the CAS loadout would be very different

BTW is the 3d model nice to see?Or is just crappy as the Harrier?Total inaccurate like the Su-34 or low-rider look-like the Abrams?

Why BiS reproduced an accurate replica vehicles only for the enemy army?

Yep,I don't have ArmA too crappy for me,rewrite the game guys and make better 3d models

This loadout could be ok only for evaluation purpose with blank/exercise ammunition,you don't know how many drag can cause a triple Maverick launcher,Hydra 70 are not used at all on planes,they use the 4 or 7 shots tubes,and the CAS loadout would be very different

BTW is the 3d model nice to see?Or is just crappy as the Harrier?Total inaccurate like the Su-34 or low-rider look-like the Abrams?

Why BiS reproduced an accurate replica vehicles only for the enemy army?

Yep,I don't have ArmA too crappy for me,rewrite the game guys and make better 3d models

With Hydra 70 I obviously meant the LAU-68 Hydra 70mm rocket pods. Also, the loadout mentioned above is the general mulri-purpose loadout A-10s take to the skies with most often. Drag is usually not an issue with planes like the A-10 becuause of, well, look at its design. It wasn't exactly meant to go fast or to be drag-efficient.

[BlackScorpion 0]

Errr... I still prefer gameplay to graphics. Sure, neat graphics are nice, but...

And Hydra 70's are used on A-10s. It's just the launcher that varies, Wiki states the use of LAU-68 (instead of LAU-61 found in LOMAC, IIRC) 7-tube launcher.

[4 IN 1 0]

i is a nonsence to talk about drag on an A10, i mean......with the cannon which acturally stops the plane......

[=JoKeR= 0]

Ok then,check some reference books regarding OEF-OIF operation and take a look at the A-10 loadout,they never used in real warfare operations the triple Maverick Launcher,they loaded on each wing a single Maverick on a LAU-117 rail,the rest of the loadout was a combination of CBU,dumb and guided bombs.

The drag is an issue,the A-10 is not the fastest plane in the world adn having drag while dodging aa fire at low level flights is a big issue

[d3dsh33p 0]

Thepredator is working on fixing the sound in his Modern Warfare sound mod just so you guys know, he posted some videos in his thread

[RedStorm 0]

Ok then,check some reference books regarding OEF-OIF operation and take a look at the A-10 loadout,they never used in real warfare operations the triple Maverick Launcher,they loaded on each wing a single Maverick on a LAU-117 rail,the rest of the loadout was a combination of CBU,dumb and guided bombs.

The drag is an issue,the A-10 is not the fastest plane in the world adn having drag while dodging  aa fire at low level flights is a big issue

A-10s do take to the skies with both double and triple AGM-65 launchers. And as I stated, if drag really had been a major issue on a plane like the A-10, they wouldnt've used massive rivet plates on its leading edges and main airframe.

[MehMan 0]

I don't think drag is a problem on the A-10 at all. The plane isn't meant to go really really fast, it's meant to go slower and be a flying tank. And it's doing one heck of a job at it. IIRC the marines were/are eyeballing with the A-10 because it's superior CAS capabilites than the AV-8B or F-18.

[=JoKeR= 0]

Double Maverick launcher?lol?

There are only two types of launcher for the Maverick

The LAU-117 is the singular launcher used on every plane capable to use the Maverick

The LAU-88 triple launcher was used only for test purposes in training or test schools like Edwards AFB on F-16,A-7D,early F-4G Phantoms,A-10,and late F-4E Phantoms.Maybe they were used in war with F-16 and F-4E of IDF air force.

The double launcher is the triple launcher with only two Mavericks one on the starboard side and one on the bottom

Reference

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/lau-88.htm

During the Desert Storm A-10 maybe used the LAU-88 for a short time period,and here you can see their loadout

http://www.dstorm.eu/pages/loadout/a-10.html

So they can fly with full loaded triple launchers,but is not a reliable loadout during wartime operations.

Rivet plates are external armor protection placed in the weak points of the aircraft.

Do not use Lock-on for reference is a game,and game sometimes have errors inside,like the double Sidewinder launcher mounted on Falcons

[ricoadf 0]

I don't think drag is a problem on the A-10 at all. The plane isn't meant to go really really fast, it's meant to go slower and be a flying tank. And it's doing one heck of a job at it. IIRC the marines were/are eyeballing with the A-10 because it's superior CAS capabilites than the AV-8B or F-18.

They were, but it was canceled because the A-10 couldn't be converted for carrier ops

[RedStorm 0]

Double Maverick launcher?lol?

There are only two types of launcher for the Maverick

The LAU-117 is the singular launcher used on every plane capable to use the Maverick

The LAU-88 triple launcher was used only for test purposes in training or test schools like Edwards AFB on F-16,A-7D,early F-4G Phantoms,A-10,and late F-4E Phantoms.Maybe they were used in war with F-16 and F-4E of IDF air force.

The double launcher is the triple launcher with only two Mavericks one on the starboard side and one on the bottom

Reference

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/lau-88.htm

During the Desert Storm A-10 maybe used the LAU-88 for a short time period,and here you can see their loadout

http://www.dstorm.eu/pages/loadout/a-10.html

So they can fly with full loaded triple launchers,but is not a reliable loadout during wartime operations.

Rivet plates are external armor protection placed in the weak points of the aircraft.

Do not use Lock-on for reference is a game,and game sometimes have errors inside,like the double Sidewinder launcher mounted on Falcons

*Sigh*

Yes, they field several dual and triple AGM-65 launchers.

And I do use Lock-On as a reference, as for the A-10, they've got it pretty much spot on.

[Mr.Whitlow 0]

Even though the effects are not the best, I'm just pleased they did the cannon damage right (Or about right)

Problems:

No shaking in the cockpit when firing main cannon

No smoke comes off the gun when firing. (Watch some videos if you don't understand. It doesn't matter how fast the A10 is traveling, you WILL see smoke coming out of the barrels at the front of the plane) Not even a really weak effect. I mean, come on, we already have that kind of thing in game with other guns.

The cannon barrels do not spin whilst firing. There is practically NO animation related to the GAU-8 firing.

The GAU-8 sound is... Quite poor. It's not as bad as the harrier's GAU-12, but it's no way near as 'beastly' as the real GAU-8 sounds. I'll be sure to check out the new sounds mentioned a few posts before me.

Erm, I'm not quite sure on this one but I'll mention it anyways. The numbers on the HUD are a bit weird, they do not go along with the numbers at the top left. Now I'm not sure if this is actually a feature (American units being used rather than knots or whatever is used at the top left !?) or a problem.

And finally, the impact explosions of the 12-inch long depleted uranium 'bullets' are so, so weak. Ooh, a medium-sized puff of smoke. Woo. That gun must be powerful. I think some minor explosions would do the trick, or bigger smoke, which lasts longer. (Not too sure on how they should look. In some videos I see the bullets exploding, in some I see a lot of smoke/dirt coming up (In desert areas) but I'm not sure if not seeing any explosions was just down to poor camera quality or distance from impact. This might also be down to different bullet types)

Oh, and one thing. As someone else mentioned, the GAU-8 firing does not decrease the A-10's speed at all. The plane uses some anti-thrust-force-power... Thingamajig... Or whatever... As the gun fires, and so the myth is a load of crap. It really is.

[Daniel 0]

The plane looks ok, but other than that it doesn't have any soul. Mainly because of the lack of effects and poor sounds. BIS need to take a look at the OFP A10 addon, which was in my opinion one of the best well rounded OFP addons ever created.

The maingun needs to look, feel and sound like its spitting out hundreds of rounds, and chewing up dirt and metal into the air. The rockets need to feel like they've just been launched from their pylons in to the distance.

So as others have pointed out, it needs a low rumbling/whiny sound for the GAU 8, it needs tonnes of smoke billowing out of the GAU 8, the depleted uranium rounds need to kick a crap load of dirt into the air, and maybe BIS could take a look at what made the OFP addon A10 so cool.

[JeRK 0]

I can rip a T72 to shreds with a 1 second GAU burst... IMO it's almost overpowered.

[whisper 0]

About LAU-88

They HAVE been used, but very limited.

ODS has shown the missile could burn other equipements onboard, this has been corrected so the triple-Mav has been (very seldom) used, AFAIK, during OIF.

From a real OIF A10 pilot : this configuration has been used in combat but has been used more during transport phases of the planes (from 1 base to another).

Main reason for not using them : the drag is heavy.

[wipman 1]

Hi, i haven't installed the 1.07 Beta patch, so the only images that

i've seen of the A-10, are screenshots and some user made videos;

but for what i've seen... i'll say that the cockpit textures, don't look

so good. I remember the INQ-A10 or the DSL A-10 1.1 for the OFP

and damn, that was a cockpit that made you feel as in a flight sim

more than in a land based combat sim. Also... if it's true that the

BIS A-10, leaks of that big smoke cloud that the GAU-8 Avenger

lefts behind and arround the plane, that's really sad. And i can

perfectly belive that the sound be too low in the BIS A-10, for some

reason, all the sounds in the game leaks of power and don't sound

as loud or just aren't the real sounds of the weapons that produce

'em; so i think that with the A-10 must be the same. I hope that

some addon maker adds a config made A-10 that uses smoke

scripts, maybe some more damaged smoke trails from various points

of the plane like the tail, each engine & the wings. Plus ovbiously

add the smoke cloud that the 10.000rpm of the GAU-8 Avenger

left begind, so when the alpha & not beta patch be ready... we

could enjoy a more scary/impresive A-10 than how it currently is.

Let's C ya

[=JoKeR= 0]

Ok Mr RedStorm if for you the things displayed on Lock-On are real have fun and bug off

[Gecko1969 0]

If damage was done differently then you could conceivably take out a tank with ONE DU round IF it hit the ammo. DU is like a knife through butter, so landing 10 rounds on a tank should end it if they are direct hits. There are a fair more than 10 rounds in a one second burst so feeling that A10 is out of balance for doing so is a bit off base.

The whole point of the A10 is that it's a tank killer and yes it will unbalance a game if you insist on using it in every game.

Again it seems people are getting too attached to the equipment side of what is supposed to be an infantry "sim". I'd love to see the armor and air and water craft all done to "sim" level of detail, but that is not what BIS is selling. The next best thing they can do is leave things open enough so that people who have the time/skill can add more detail as they feel is needed. Which from what I have seen is the general direction they are going.

So the BIS A10 flies, kills tanks (saw that there might be an issue with AI, not confirmed, but nothing that can't be fixed) and fills the role. Seems good enough. "Mission accomplished".

[=JoKeR= 0]

so here we are again

http://img114.imageshack.us/img114/1508/a102mp9.jpg

Redstorm,if this picture is the newly Bis A-10(I wish is not)the Maverick in the middle belly pilon is accurate or not?

That pilon is not cleared to carry Mavericks is not wired for that purpose.

[EvEnLeaSe44 0]

that is the new bis a10 for you, and that missile being there is not accurate one bit, usaly a bomb would be there, that missile being there jabbed my mind.

BTW, I hate BF2, if you really think i'm compairing it to the most unrealistic game on the planet then you need some help, some major help.

And also BTW, There is NO SMOKE OR TRACERS on or coming out of that gun on the a10, the smoke should be anuff to blind the pilot for 2 secs, watch the video in the first post, you'll see what i mean.

[RedStorm 0]

I'm not sure, but I don't think most types of bombs can even be mounted there. As far as I'm aware, that hardpoint is mainly used for mounting drop tanks.

Also, you were right about the AGM-65 two-mount, =JoKeR= I don't think it exists. I asked around here in the Dutch Air Force and none of us seem to have ever witnessed it.

I still stand by the triple mount and the Hydra 70mms, though.

And also: yes, that is the ArmA A-10C. The weapon mounts leave much to be desired, but the rest of the model is top notch. Excellent attention to detail and I usually just fly around in it with no weapons mounted, just for the heck of it.

All we need now is a proper fighter pilot model.

<span style='color:red'>EDIT:</span>

Found a picture of middle hardpoint usage:

[EvEnLeaSe44 0]

^^^^^ Once again wrong, they can also put bombs there, not just drop tanks....

but, back on topic, this is not about the fricken bombs, its about the crapy 30mm that bis/atari totaly screwed up.

[4 IN 1 0]

how/what did they screw up really?

-it didnt rock the plane

-it wont smoke

-you only have brust instead of full auto which squid out 3900 rounds per minute and emety your drum just over 1 min

and whats more? i can take out a T72 with a few brust, and thats enought

(the recoil is a only a myth BTW but i love to joke around it)

WIKI is your (not so accrate but works) friend

[EvEnLeaSe44 0]

you forget to add...

-No tracers on rounds (whoa, now thats a screw up... like, every fricken gun if not all of them have tracers, and the a10 dont... eh, weird...)

No smoke, and no tracers really make that plane feel like a peice of crap... its somthing that some one needs to fix, i would, if i knew how to mod...

[4 IN 1 0]

you forget to add...

-No tracers on rounds (whoa, now thats a screw up... like, every fricken gun if not all of them have tracers, and the a10 dont... eh, weird...)

No smoke, and no tracers really make that plane feel like a peice of crap... its somthing that some one needs to fix, i would, if i knew how to mod...

it seems they did something on the tracers thing, at night they look less laser like, but they still needs a lots of improvement, i think they turn it off so that no one will start bitch that the Avenger shooting out lazer instead of rounds

BTW

Quote[/b] ]In practice, the cannon is limited to one and two-second bursts to avoid overheating and conserve ammunition