cry me a river

sorry im new, I dont go on the forums much unless something really weirds me out

I can't get the gunners in the Humvee and M113 to actually man the machine guns or Mk19s, they just sit there and use their own rifles for some reason.

will one or two seconds and some changed sound effects really affect game balance? Besides the vanilla F181 already has near instantaneous lock on speeds.

What's the Shrieker? I can see it in the head down displays in the F35 in the images you posted. Also, has the dev team ever considered adjusting the lock on mechanism? I'm speaking specifically of the lock on time and audible tones. For example the AIM120 AMRAAMs do not have any tone what so ever since it is just a case of selecting a target on the radar. The AIM9 sidewinder has a growling tone which becomes louder and higher pitched once it has found a target. The lock on times for both of these missiles should be nearly zero as a missile seeker does not need to stare at a target for 2 seconds before deciding it can lock on. DCS world does a pretty good job of modelling this. Go to 5:00 for the first video and 5:50 for the second video.

I poked around in the functions viewer and found the functions that allow pilots to eject: BIS_fnc_PlaneEject & BIS_fnc_PlaneAiEject. The first works fine in that players can eject but the second does not seem to be working with this mod as I have seen on a few instances A10s that take critical damage and the pilots go down with their stricken planes.

Quick note about the M2 Bradley for the devs. Its M242 25mm cannon has a dual feed system, meaning it can instantly switch between APFSDS-T and HE-T. Right now, there is a considerable wait time when switching ammunition types, as if the crew have to swap ammo boxes.

I'm terribly sorry for this taking so long. All of my classes threw a metric @$$ ton of tests, evaluations, and projects so I have been swamped for the past week; it didn't help that I also had to perform at a concert last Wednesday... But i finally got around to testing the IFV penetration. I used cargo houses as the targets. They are a nice go between for intermediate caliber weapons. I tested the M2 Bradley, the BTR80, the BMP2K and the BMD2. Note that the Russian IFVs/APCs that use the large 75mm cannons fire HEAT projectiles so they won't be shown. For the uninitiated HEAT rounds use an explosive charge to mold a copper cone into a stream of superplastic metal that bores its way through armor; I've heard of it even being described as being able to part the molecules of the impacted surface. This jet disperses very quickly; the intent is to have it hit enemy armor while it is still a concentrated jet and dispersing after going through, creating a shotgun effect in the vehicle. Spaced armor works by detonating the warhead prior to it reaching the optimal detonation point; to put it simply, HEAT can only penetrate the first thing it hits, can kill soft targets behind that first layer, but cannot penetrate a second obstacle behind the first; hence why the game does not calculate a trajectory for HEAT rounds after impacting the first obstacle it hits. M2 The round is stopped by the opposite wall of the 2nd cargo house; anyone in the second cargo house is dead :) BTR80A Almost the same deal as the M2, the APDS rounds have lower KE after penetrating the front wall of the second cargo house. BMP2K BMD2

does anybody know how to force a fighter pilot to eject? I tried unit action ["eject",plane] which works for non USAF mod jets but when I try it on the F16 from this mod it just does not work.

I apologize for the delay in the penetration test using APCs/IFVs. The problem I am having is that these "small" cannon rounds will go through a massive number of the light targets used for rifle testing but none of the heavy barricades used when testing tanks. I'm currently trying to find a good target to shoot at. I'll try and have it by Sunday at the latest.

Empirically speaking your tanks are very biased with that penetration gap jkjk. To be fair though the AP round for the AK74M far exceeds the M855A1 in penetration.

Massive thanks to all the work the dev team have put in. Because of this amazing mod, I was able to make my first ever user created mission I've published on steam. http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1313363758

I found several sources that the M855A1 actually has better penetration performance than the M80 against hard targets like steel. I also found a video of M855A1 fired from a 16" barrel penetrating armor rated to stop an M80 round travelling 2780fps. The same guy using a 22" barrel got the M855A1 to 3259fps and penetrated a level 3+ plus that had a V50 against M80 at 3093fps and M193 5.56mm at 3347fps. https://web.archive.org/web/20130922062140/http://www.aschq.army.mil/ac/aais/ioc/LCAAP/Industry_Day/634272332137343750.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20130922062140/http://www.aschq.army.mil/ac/aais/ioc/LCAAP/Industry_Day/634272332137343750.pdf

thanks for the clarification. From what I understand, the M855A1 has a steel penetrator cone and a copper slug, the MK318 has an open tipped lead core with a brass penetrator slug behind it, and the MK262 is a heavy lead OTM round which fragments violently. From what I have read on the topic, IRL: the Mk318 is the most accurate with a MOA of just 1.7 at 300 yrds, the M855A1 with its steel penetrator offers slightly higher penetration over the Mk318, and the MK262 inflicts the most damage to soft targets. Wonder if this works in the mod as well. This afternoon I'll try to get it posted. I'll compare the Bradley with its Russian counterparts. I'll throw in the ZSU23-4 for the hell of it, although it might fire HEI only in which case I wont show it. If I have time I'll also include helicopter mounted guns as well.

Just another quick comparison. The first demonstrates the vanilla 7.62mm and 5.56mm performance. The next shows the vanilla .50cal, the US M2 AA turret, and the KORD 6U gun. The A10 and Su25 for all practical purposes have the same penetration. I used concrete walls and a stupid number of shoot house panels as the targets. I gave up trying to find how many panels will finally stop either one. The abrams seems to have better penetration than the T90A (obr 2006g) firing APFSDS shells. The abrams will consistently penetrate 8 concrete walls while the T90A will at most penetrate 7 and usually only penetrates half of that.

I’m gonna run some more tests tonight but I have a theory that while the infantry weapons are specifically modelled from the ground up the vehicle weapons rely at least partially on stats from the vanilla game, the M2 machine gun in particular. As I already stated the vanilla game’s weapons have higher penetration than their modded counterparts. I’ll have an illustration up soon.

the huge dish antenna for SA11 SAM site is indestructible for me. I have tried everything from tank rounds to lightning bolts using zeus.

I ran a penetration test using the AK104, AK74M, M4A1, M2010, M40A5, M107, and T5000 in that order from left to right. The first one uses regular FMJ ammunition (57-N-231, 7N10, M855A1, .300 Winchester, M118, M33, and .338 lapua) and the second uses AP ammunition where applicable (57-N_231(86), 7N22, Mk318 [not designed as an AP cartridge but has the best penetration performance, IRL the M995 is the military's 5.56mm AP cartridge], M993, M211, the rest unchanged). The targets were 9 shoot house panels. Just for those of you who are curious/the devs if they want to see if the ammunition is performing as it is meant to. For normal rounds the AK105 only penetrates 3 layers, the AK74M & the M4A1 & the M107 penetrate 6 layers, the M40A5 penetrates 3 layers, the M2010 penetrates 7 layers, and the T5000 penetrates all 9. For armor piercing ammunition, the AK105 & M4A1 penetrate 6 layers, the AK74M & M107 penetrate all 9, and the M40A5 penetrates 7 layers. Note that in some cases it appears that a round penetrates but the trajectory cuts short immediately after going through without touching anything including the ground; these are likely the result of lack of precision when the game calculates terminal ballistics and I have not counted them. These characteristics are shared by all weapons that are chambered in the same cartridge and are crewed in a similar way (i.e. vehicle or infantry weapons). Vehicle mounted weapons with the same cartridge share penetration characteristics among themselves both not with infantry counterparts as both the vehicle mounted M240 and M2 (same cartridge as the M107) machine guns can penetrate all 9 layers. M240G infantry version firing M61, M62, and M80A1 from top to bottom Tank mounted counterpart. Top: M240 Bottom: Commander's M2 I forget to get a screenshot of the GAU19 (Gatling gun firing .50BMG, same cartridge as M2 HMG) doing the same thing, but it can also penetrate 9 layers; for practical purposes, this is what taking cover in a house will do And in case you were wondering, the A10 just wrecks everything. I’d be happy to test the penetration of anything else if anyone is curious about something in particular. *note that the penetration is not a straight up indicator of the damage it can inflict as shotgun shells do massive damage but have abysmal penetration. I will do some testing on [body damage] in the future as well and will share the results. **across the board the infantry weapons from RHS seem to have worse penetration than their vanilla counterparts chambered in the same cartridge.

I’m not concrete on the forum rules so if this violates them please let me know: I’d just like to ask if those external pods can carry the AIM9X sidewinder. My biggest pet peeve with the Raptor is that it can only carry 2 heatseekers, which work very well in close quarters since you guys model the high-off-bore-sight capability pretty well.

My eyes suck so forgive me if I’m wrong but are those 12 SBDs in the weapons bay? I believe the maximum capacity is 8 plus 2 AMRAAMs in the main weapons bays as only the middle four AMRAAMs can be replaced with bomb racks. They also look like the CUDA and MSDS currently in early development, if not don’t consider this a request but rather food for thought. the first is a highly maneuverable missile, that’s much smaller than an AIM120 but with almost the same range and the latter is a self defense munition that shoots down incoming missiles, both use hit-to-kill technology without an explosive warhead; what appears to be a highly maneuverable terminal kill vehicle with a booster stage is being developed as the LREW, the replacement for the AMRAAM. https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/new-long-range-missile-project-emerges-in-us-budget-442816/ I’m just bringing this up because you already seem to be able to stuff a bunch of miniturized munitions into the F22 so maybe in the future when these weapons are integrated IRL they will be on the drawing board. Seriously good work guys.

How are the AGM88s suppose to be used? They don’t seem to lock on to anything. So far I’ve tested them against the new vanilla CIWS and some of POOK’s SAMs. Am I doing something wrong? I’m dreaming of an F22 with the Scorpion HMCS. Don’t need to respond to this bit, although it would be hilarious if the mod team integrates it before the actual USAF does (trying to for past 5 years but sequestion budget cuts and all).

Just placed an SA3 site and flew my F16 towards it. You can see the missile trail of the SA3 to the right and in front of the plane.http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1282439862 Missile hit a few seconds later, never once triggered the audible or visible warning (i.e. the flashing red indicator on the radar). I did get a warning (orange) when the AAA fires at me, probably from a FCR, but as of yet never from the SA3 FCR. It works just fine for the SA20 and SA21 sites, just not the SA3

Thanks for the response. I didn’t know the F22 has that feature, learn something new everyday. As for the missile launch warning, I’ll play around with it more tomorrow. While on that note, when I swapped the SA3s and their radars with SA10s and SA20s it worked fine. It might have been a random event today so I’ll try and come back to you with more information.

I was using the F22 and F16 from the USAF mod and the OPFOR consisted of SA3s (both mobile and static) from this mod. I noticed that the radar warning receiver/ missile launch detector never gave the audible warning of a missile locked onto my aircraft so I had the hilarious (not being sarcastic) situation of getting a glimpse of the missile a second before it hit. Is this due to the SA3 having some sort of passive homing feature? Also worth noting, sometimes the missiles would miss but in a weird fashion; in the F22, I used the third person camera and noticed on several occasions right before an SA3 hit it did a split 60 degree turn and veered away. I'll try and get a screenshot/video of that. I love your mod and this has been the only real hiccup for me. I know content creators already spend hundreds of hours to make these mods for us so I don't need a quick response. Keep up the good work :)

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=307683842 my disk is a little full so I do not know if this is a version of the mod on steam or just some missions for the mod but the description is a little suspicious

I run all of the RHS factions mods and the Gau 8 mod and I am not experiencing this issue. I do not think it has anything to do with the recent RHS update, maybe it's another mod that is causing the issue like ACE?