Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
1in1class

Fighter Pilots

Recommended Posts

Iv seen chopper pilots but what about the fighter pilots? In ArmA iv seen PKW fighter pilots wich were also an replacement pack and are vary nice. Could we see them come over to ArmA 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All ArmA2 vanilla pilots for US air vehicles are identical "pilot" types with crew style helmets, OD overalls, MOLLE vests, and MP5s. This includes A-10s, UH-60s, and AV-8Bs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fighter pilots are useless without a analogue throttle :D

You can have that to a degree when you attach a joystick. Only bit iffy bit is that the throttles center position is Idle, the most rearward is slow down (or down in helicopters) and the full throtle is just that (or up in helicopters). The planes and choppers are a lot nicer to fly with a throttle :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can have that to a degree when you attach a joystick. Only bit iffy bit is that the throttles center position is Idle, the most rearward is slow down (or down in helicopters) and the full throtle is just that (or up in helicopters). The planes and choppers are a lot nicer to fly with a throttle :)

ArmA2 doesn't support analogue throttle in planes (been like this since ArmA1)

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?t=69872

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish people would quit referring to the difference between the Speed Control and the Throttle type of thrust management as Analog and Digital. It's not at all a correct distinction and causes confusion.

All joystick control in PC gaming is digital (discrete values). There are many values in your typical joystick axis's range, but any semblance of analog information has long since been converted to digital when it comes in the USB port.

The fact that ArmA2's jet aircraft "go faster-go slower" axis is based on speed and not thrust has nothing to do with (and does not change) whether or not you're using a joystick or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the term doesn't fit, but the intention is obvious. You could call it "multi-value" and "binary"/"few values" but then people would give you a :confused2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many-value and few-value are also incorrect. Categorizing the two methods of throttle by the continuous or nature of the controller itself shows a lack of fundamental understanding about the subject.

The controllers in both situations operate identically apart from the metric that they control. Currently in ArmA2 we have a speed-based control when we should have a thrust-based control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would it be possible to get a conversion over to thrust based throttle instead of velocity based?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many-value and few-value are also incorrect. Categorizing the two methods of throttle by the continuous or nature of the controller itself shows a lack of fundamental understanding about the subject.

The controllers in both situations operate identically apart from the metric that they control. Currently in ArmA2 we have a speed-based control when we should have a thrust-based control.

That doesn't mean asking for "analog" inputs is wrong, it just means it's not enough and we also need more realistically behaving vehicles :(

Current controls are extremely weird in every sense of the word.

When I tried steering my hummvee with my joystick, it seemed like it was the same as with the keyboard - can't do a "weak" steer, only "steer left" or "don't steer left". Makes controller input useless for driving. At least it works for flying (pitch/roll).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would it be possible to get a conversion over to thrust based throttle instead of velocity based?

I think so. It's been asked for since OFP which was a decade ago so who knows if it'll ever come.

That doesn't mean asking for "analog" inputs is wrong

It's not very bright to ask for "analog" ("analog" and analog being two separate concepts apparently) inputs for aircraft throttle when it already has it, is it? By the way, the best term to use is "axis." You want car_accelerate, car_brake, car_left, and car_right axes for control, we all do.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×