Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Community Reputation

15 Good

About S3blapin

  • Rank
    Private First Class

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not really... The F111 used 2 Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-100 The F14 was iniially eqquipped with 2 Pratt & Whitney TF30-P-100 too, but it was changed in favor of General Electric F110-GE-400 The A-7 used a Allison TF41-A-2 non-afterburning turbofan engine. SO yes, no turbo fan, but not the same as the F111. :) Hi. I totally understand that. :) At least the Sensor is something more important than the Dynamic loadout. :) 1. It's totally up to you. :) It could just be really intersting, especially for those who use HOTAS. 2&5. Erf... I would like to help but I have litterally no knowledge in mdodding... 3. Yes, It didn't have any afertburner... I thought You add a WEP because you found somewhere that he can used one... If there's no AFterburner/WEP, completely remove it. it's simpler. 4. Oh, I see. :) Can't wait for Echo then. Thanks for the answers. :)
  2. Hello, I use to pilot a lot in Arma 3 (I don't think @Barden notice me but I was the CAS pilot in the bugged mission last sunday) and I have some suggestion for your plane. I don't know if you already answer to some of them but anyway - add radar support from DLC jet - add dynamic inventory for plané Well... hm... basically try to implement all the things bring by jet DLC. It will reduce the quantity of model you need and the player will be able to create any combination of plane and loadout he need. You can even create ARH missile for wild weasel/SEAD loadout (like AGM-45 Shrike, etc). I don't know if it's a huge work on your side though. - allow players to bind key to some action (like afterburner on and off, tailhook down, etc) via the "configure addon" when you change your keybind. - remove/tone down reflection on the canopy. In certain case it's impossible to see due to the sun reflection - Tone down the WEP on A7 corsair!!!! This thing is just too effective! Try to turn it into an afterburner (that you can toggle On and Off) with something like 1.5 time the standard power and that you can't use below a certain speed... right now I can take off with only 20m and WEP... - I wasn't able to enter inside a bunch of plane, many from the US Navy. Even the A7 corsair is tricky to enter. It looks like the model and the interaction model are not at the same place. It's pretty visible when you use ACE that use the "interaction model". - make a pass on the some texture... sometimes it's really weird (for example look at the side panel from th A-7...) I will continue to test your plane as I find you r mod interesting and if I have other suggestion, I will let you know. :)
  3. Hi @Karloff SInce your around here, did you have time to answer some small questions? :) Is it possible for a jet to select and lock a target that is send via the datalink? So far, all my attempt were a fail. Is it possible to add the turret stabilization from the TGP/drone turret to chopper turret? At least the AREA mode. It would really usefull and I don't know how to do it with script. :/ Do you know what are the difference between all the Next Target Bind? We have like 4 of them without any explanation...
  4. > Would be nice if they updated the jets to have a view of the targeting cam in the cockpit instead of the BS "radar sweep Unless they removed it with the Malden patch, you can have your TGP in one of your Display. > the BS radar sweep What do you mean? I've never had a radar sweep, just static icon that shown area covered by radar. Could you please put a picture of what you have? > And get rid of the stupid 2k view distance. Again, explain a bit more. If you talk about the radar, you can have a 16km display. If you talk about the view distance, you can change it in your option unless the server limit it. > Afterburning engines Already in game. Badly implemented, of course but already in game. > Helmet mounted displays (why don't opfor or indfor jets have those? Those would definitely have them) Because it's something quite hard to do and not every nation can create that. IIRC, there's only 2 or 3 nation that have them today. > Would be nice if the Griphon could carry 4 LGB's in place of 2 LGB's and 2 Mavs. I don't see why that isn't an option. Indeed, the Gripen can actually carry 4 bomb. It was already suggested many times and devs said they will look and maybe try to add it. > I don't see why the targeting pod's range of movement is often so limited. Because Griphon as an old version of the TGP and those one have gimbal limit which are represented in game. > I don't see why the radar range is so limited It depends the vehicle you use. On jet for the DLC you have a radar with 16 km range that look directly in front of you. On chopper, you have a shorter radar but directed downward, to look at the ground. And for SAM site, you have a 360° long range radar. I don't see why you said they are limited since they suit perfectly to their intended role. > I don't see why you can't fire AMRAAMs at datalink radar targets. Never tried that, did you post a ticket on the feedback tracker? > The new OPFOR jet still has Flaps T/O when you fully extend them. > There is no tailhook key. The landing runway on the HUD is still off too when you approach the Freedom. Same, post ticket on the feedback tracker. > The planes are also very twitchy on landing. Might be on your end, I literally have no trouble at landing speed. Everything is smooth. > Would be about a 5 minute fix in a lot of instances. Nothing is only a 5 minute fix. You always have to take account of dozens of other things, like model, hitbox, network impact, performance impact. Everything you change might impact a completely unrelated part of the program. You really can't say it would takes only 5 minutes.
  5. S3blapin

    Tanks - Fire-control system

    Oh I know that there's a big difference between manufacturer data and army dat a. The thing is this test was performed by the army. It was one of the requirements for the army. I understand your PoV, and I agree with many things you said (like the fact you can only know what a tank is really capable of in combat situation, with logistic involved etc) But here i'm just showing that extremely long range engagement on moving target is possible in correct condition, so shooting a target at 2000m isn't really a problem here, even for late 80's tank. The main advantage of the Leclerc is not its ability to engage target at stupid long range but to engage many of them while he is moving at high speed on bad terrain (thanks to the autoloader) I've seen with my own eyes some really impressive stuff done by the Leclerc (at least impressive for my grun eyes), like shooting out two designated target we just called right after jumping out of cover in less time it took me to change my mag...
  6. S3blapin

    Tanks - Fire-control system

    It was made from test during the evaluation phase. Remember that the Leclerc see real combat only (with the UAE). I know it's totally useless against a tank. I just wanted to show that long range shot are possible even for a late 80's tank. And from what I remember, yeah the tank and the tager was moving parallèle but in opposition direction (at those distance the turret can follow it pretty easily). I don't know about the terrain. Just point out that engaging moving target at +2500m while you also move is possible. Of course, the Leclerc is the best in that category, was specifically build to engage moving target (even chopper), and even other armies agrees that even today it's a vastly superior tank when it comes to engage target quickly and precisely. But being good (one of the best) at shooting doesn't necessarily means being the best tank.
  7. S3blapin

    Tanks - Fire-control system

    Huh? Really. I always thought that leo2 had at leat on part performance with the AMX Leclerc (minus the firing on the move). Just to remember, the Leclerc is able to hit a 2x2m target at 3.5-4km while moving at 45-50kph and with the target also moving. And the hit chance was above 95%. I know it's completely useless against tank at that range (you explain pretty clearly why) but I would thought that the Leo2 could at least shot at pretty long range.
  8. S3blapin

    Tanks - Fire-control system

    I was thinking about all the improvement added by the jet DLC and how we can use it for other vanilla feature. I know that some of them are not just tank related but they can be used by tank so I decide to post my ideas here: - Turret stabilization switch for tank Use the same system than the TGP or the drone turret to activate the Stabilizer. It would only lock an area and wouldn't go in "point" mode. When you press the center view, instead of going to the selected target it will just point at the same target than the commander view. This would emu late correctly hunter-killer ability. - Commander turret stabilized Same system than the tank turret but allow "Point" mode for this one. It wI'll commander to continusouly check the surrounding but also keep a target in sight. - Commander incoming data display Add to the commander a new display that show a list of all target identified by him or other vehicle (depending if data receiving/sharing is activated). This display would allow him to go through the target list with Previous/Next Target key. He would then be able to go directly to the selected target by pressing "center view" key (like TGP) And you can expand some of those ideas to other vehicle: The commander stabilized view could be really usefull on vehicle like Ifrit etc, while the Turret Stabilization Switch would be extremely usefull for chopper turret (being able to activate this would make the turret more reliable and effective!)
  9. S3blapin

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    @Zygzak191... I've never heard about that!! Like never!! I'll try this tonight but you might sovereign my problem (if it works of course). If it works like oukej said, it could be interesting for them to put this tips somewhere.
  10. S3blapin

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    Not yet. Didn't have time yesterday. I'll try to do one today
  11. S3blapin

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    @R0adki11 I hope you will be able to help me. Because it's extremely annoying.
  12. S3blapin

    Jets DLC Official Feedback

    @R3vo yeah with keyboard iys quite easy. They should really try woth an hotas. With all the axis problem, it's pretty ridiculous. :) And I don't talk about the bugs like the one I'm currently having...
  13. So, I don't know if it's only from my side or if the game that change but I have a problem... It's seems the axis for throttle was reduced/changed for chopper and jet after the DLC patch... I tried to rebind all my key, but nothing change... It looks like the current axis use only the half of the full range available... I will pass on the fact that only half the throttle axis is usefull on the jet, but for the chopper it's totally insane... So, i decide to do some screenshot. and here is what I hyave: - Maximum Cyclic when you use my Throttle. The Instantaneous Vertical Speed is around 7.5 - Maximum Cyclic power when you use keyboard (DIgital input): And more interesting look at what the game use from my throttle axis!! here i'm at 0% power for chopper and jet: here i'm at 50%: I first thought that the game doesn't fully recognize my axis, but no... When you use the In game tool, the game fully recognize it. From -100% to +100% I'm completely lost... Someone can help me? I made all the test without any mods, I remove every single useless keybind to not have any interaction. My Hotas is a Thrustmaster Warthog... HELP!!! :O
  14. I understan. So maybe you could remove it from the list but still allow people that bind a key for ejection to still use it. This would solve both problem no? Zero-zero ejection seat are seat that can be used from a grounded stationary position (zero-zero stand for zero altitude and zero airspeed) Since we can't eject from a stationary vehicle, they're not zero-zero seat. :) Also @oukej, do you know if there's some change for the front wheel rotation? Could we get rid of the +/-15° of rotation and go with a +/-90° instead? It would help a lot in cranked space (like on a carrier... for example) and would be more realistic.