Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by SonicJohnBH

  1. Hello all! I'm trying to learn the code behind some of the fantastic mods that include complex displays and huds. Chief amongst them is @pierremgi and his MGI tactical pack. 


    I'm looking to get a display on the custom scope we're making that includes a compass, wind indicator and rangefinder. The last of those I've gotten somewhat figured out, but it disables the text on the base hud that indicates your current zeroing.


    EVENTUALLY I'd like to get a autozeroing system working for the scope, akin to this:



    I'm beginning to understand the basics of the rsc stuff, but it's still very confusing and I have little experience with scripting. Much more comfortable with configs.


    Any help would be GREATLY appreciated.


  2. One whole year of flying the Omaha. Dozens of ops, hundreds of take-offs and landings, troops deployed/extracted, targets destroyed and hostages rescued and I'm still just as in love as I was back when I first flew it. This is hands down my favorite aircraft to fly in the game, no contest. I'm so excited to see more aircraft and more updates to the Omaha, no matter how long it takes it'll be worth it.


    Seriously guys, keep it up!

  3. Howdy again boys. So I've recently done some testing and something in some of my modpacks appears to cause the Aircraft from the mod to be...I can only really call it fatter? As though the drag and weight for the pylons was multiplied a lot? The weird thing is, it ONLY happens on multiplayer, single-player the aircraft fly as normal and take-off in a normal amount of runway with the exact same payload. I'm GUESSING this is being caused by another mod, and I recognize that's not your problem, I was just wondering if you had any ideas on what kinda mod would cause this? I've tested AWESome, but it's not that. In some cases as well it only seems to affect ME, not the other players on a server.


    But yeah, if any of you, whether developer or not, have any idea what might be causing this issue please let me know.


    Thanks for all your hard work y'all! Keep it up!

  4. So I followed this mod for a long while, talked some with you guys. I've flown the Omaha on about a dozen proper ops now, and I gotta say that I've just entirely fallen in love with it. Our whole unit has really. 

    Couple of notes for you guys after having EXTENSIVELY flown and tested all variants.


    1. Reinserts are much faster, and it spins-up/takes off SUPER fast. My infantry guys LOVE this for reinserts especially.
    2. It can land in surprisingly tight spaces, it's strong Yaw authority helps with this.
    3. It is an ISR BEAST, I've gotten into the habit of slewing my targeting pod to the area where I'm landing to check for threats (and landing smoke) and I've had multiple occasions where the Infantry have asked for me to do an recon pass using the thermals and 360 degree Infrared and it has spotted many an enemy vehicle/squad, this is an especially unique skill for an insert helo to have.
    4. It is so agile that (in the right hands) it can stand a chance against enemy fast-movers. With careful vectoring you can turn as-tight or tighter than some jets (when controlled by AI mind you) and I've managed quite a few takedowns (including two cannon kills) in the MAV-85.
    5. It can do a very flat deceleration/landing approach, I had one op with enemy Tigris AA and I was able to go full speed the entire flight-path but still stay low-enough (even when bleeding speed) to have hill-cover from the radar. If you're an Omaha pilot PLEASE try some low-level flying, it is worth it.
    Some bugs/critique.

    1. Sometimes when touched down on the ground it will fluctuate between 0 and 100 thrust all on it's own, leading to a "bouncing" effect. I think I've seen this on other VTOL's in ArmA so it might just be an inherent problem.
    2. As others have mentioned this bird needs some flares/chaff as an option, the DIRCM is GODLY against infrareds but it doesn't have much defense against radar-guided stuff it seems like. 
    3. The MAV-85 seems to have a problem where the pilot's seat cannot target ANYTHING randomly. I've fixed this by, of all things, going into the co-pilots seat, taking control, locking onto something, and heading back into the pilot's seat, and then it works fine. This doesn't always work, and doesn't seem to occur on the AV-85 so I don't know what's goin on there.
    4. When the auto-flaps change position it sets the vector back 15 degrees, not sure if this is intentional or not.
    5. The turret camera/stability is...less than ideal. I acknowledge that this is a common issue with gunner's seats in ArmA but I figured it was worth pointing out.
    6. Either fixed gunpods options or the option to have the turret slewed dead forward/controlled by the pilot would be amazing.
    7. As previously mentioned people get stuck in the doorgun seats.
    8. Some of the weapons pylons from other mods clip really badly but I guess there isn't much you can do about this apart from maybe making the AV-85's trapeze arms "swing" further out.


    Overall it is just...amazing that something like this has been done so amazingly by such a small team, almost entirely from scratch. My troops love it, I adore it, and I can't wait to see whatever you guys pump out next, don't worry about it taking a while because the Ohama has proven that your work is definitely worth the wait.


    Best Wishes from the 434th!



    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  5. As we approach the unveiling of the much anticipated AC-130, I find myself curious of whether the wing mounted weapons and 'gunslinger' weapons will be available? My unit already has a crew prepped for Manning a Ghostrider, we've been practicing on the Blackfish, but I find myself rather bored/disengaged just flying in a circle. As challenging as a perfect pylon turn can be I'd like to be a bit more involved in the battle as the pilot, hoping that the SDB, Griffin, Viper and the like would give me some options to do so. To say nothing of having a reliable option taking out moving vehicles.


    Regardless, looking forward to hearing into anything you guys turn out as usual. Keep up the great work!


    Also I apologise profusely if this has already been answered.

  6. Surprised no-one has said this yet but: WOOOOOOOOOOOT! We finally get to fly this beautiful beast! I can't wait to see how the side-launching weapon racks work, how the view from the EOTS is, how maneuverable it is in plane-mode, how a "running start" takeoff looks.
    We get to find out what kinda weapons it can equip, whether it has a laser designator on the EOTS, whether the pilot or the co-pilot controls the EOTS, how stealthy it is, what it's low speed maneuvering is like.

    I can't wait to show this thing to the infantry in my unit, they won't be able to make head nor tails of it.

  7. I'm loving the new A-10U, I like the small touch that the cockpit space has been used for a small radar, very clever. I was curious do you model stuff like that yourself or are you editing models that you found/bought?

    It made me think of these renders for the F-23: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/24911/this-is-what-a-northrop-f-23a-wouldve-looked-like-if-lockheed-lost-the-atf-competition

    I originally wondered if you had used these renders as reference for the mod but it appears they were posted AFTER you first posted the F-23A mod, so credit to you for accurate predictions and good research.


    These models are based off of the final plans for the production F-23A, there's a great graph comparing the differences between the production model and the prototype YF-23, including the larger weapons bay which you featured in the mod. I figured you'd find these interesting/helpful if you ever decide to take another look at the Gray Ghost. 

    The same artist also did the failed X-32 (competitor to the F-35), which is especially interesting as it's VERY different to the prototype: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20971/this-is-what-a-boeing-f-32-wouldve-looked-like-if-lockheed-lost-the-jsf-competition


    Regardless, I appreciate that you give less popular and "forgotten" aircraft like the YF-23 a chance to shine.

  8. Is there currently a way to set it so that the SDB's use their own sensors (infrared, ultraviolet) for terminal guidance after GPS guiding to the general area of the target? In a similar vein the SFW (Which is the coolest and most amazingly detailed thing in this mod IMHO) does the "kill area" get bigger at higher burst altitudes like in real life? As in, can you tune how saturated or spread out the "pucks" are with the burst height? 

    Also I just gotta agree with @octop01 that the F-35A is an absolute DREAM to fly, it might be the smoothest jet I've flown in ArmA and those peddle turns at low speed are something I encourage everyone to try. Pulling off a little slipping over peddle turn in the F-35 is one of the coolest things I've done in ArmA and it's legitimately helpful for quick strafing runs. 


    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  9. On 1/6/2020 at 10:22 PM, SGT Fuller said:

    when it’s ready 🙄

    I think we can all agree that "when it's ready" is the best way to go after the recent ACE release everyone loves SO much. Keep up the work Fuller and the rest of ya, we'll wait patiently!

    On 1/11/2020 at 1:30 PM, Vojtechsonik said:

    Where can I find some missions for this wonderful mod?

    I just use RobJ's "fly FC-37" or "fly A-164" missions and fly with the gorgeous F-35 here instead, with a bit of zeus spawning of course.


  10. I can't seem to get mods to work, I've got them all on the list as it's supposed to be but they don't show up once the server is up. On my client I can spawn in the stuff from the mods but only through arsenal or garage not through Zeus, Zeus (so I assume the server) doesn't recognize it as existing.


    Using btw, is there any way to import the modlist from the launcher so I can make sure they're all downloaded and ready?

  11. Come to think of it I'm sure there are more than a few people in this thread that'd be more than willing to test an early (even slightly broken/janky) private build and report errors, myself included. It could help spot some time-consuming bugs earlier on. 

    Regardless, I was curious if you guys had implemented the reverse vector that the V-22 and V-280 possess. The V-22's in game right now, both Poly and CUP,  unfortunately don't have this awesome and useful feature to put the nacelles at 97.5 degrees, slightly rearward from the "helicopter" position. Testing video for the V-280 APPEARS to show this ability, and it'd be rather silly for them to not have it given that they're focusing on low-speed agility. On that same note, both the current V-22's also lack a properly strong Yaw authority in low speed, seems like the devs and modders assume the V-22 gets it's yaw entirely from control surfaces and forget about the swashplates on the rotors being able to operate as a cyclic, either that or they didn't want to model it in the physics engine. Based on what I've seen so far though it seems like you guys know your stuff, so I'm hopin this sorta thing has been taken under consideration. Keep up the great work and hope you had a happy holidays!

    • Like 1

  12. On 11/27/2019 at 8:42 PM, firewill said:

    It's a local marker via createmarkerlocal command, so only can see marker who created for now. i was think about use the global marker, but it might be messed up the map screen with lot of TGT marker everywhere.

    Ah, that's an understandable concern.

    Would it at all be feasible to have an option in the AMS or I-TGT that toggle's BETWEEN local or global for specific situations?

    This could also let people on the ground act as Forward Air Controllers/JTAC's for people flying your planes, similar to how your KGB tablet works now.

    Also, are you planning on having Datalink support with the Fleet Defender systems? It'd be great to be able to coordinate targeting data from a jet to intercept anti-ship missiles with a Seasparrow like the F-35 is designed to do with US Navy ships in real life.


  13. I cannot stress enough how amazing the ability to have useable and gameplay relevant Cargo aircraft is. I've done several fantastic paradrop insertions of my group in Antistasi now, far behind the front lines where they least expect it and they've never had more of a blast. Being able to not just FLY the C-130 in a mode like that but BE HELPFUL and in a have a unique capability, it's something I never thought i'd see outside of an op specifically designed for it. Thanks for all the great work!


    I've been practicing my low-altitude cargo drops and I found some videos of what looks like the older versions of the USAF mod where the C-130 and C-17 had a LAPES option. I attempted this in-game, with both aircraft, but every time I get to a certain distance from the ground the "drop cargo USAF" option goes away. Is there something I'm doing wrong or is this just something that hasn't been added back in yet? Also, will the C-17 be getting the awesome countermeasures options that the C-130 has? Maybe even some LAIRCM?

    Regardless, this is seriously some jaw-dropping awesome work guys, can't wait to see the rest of what you've got cooking and test it out. Good luck!

  14. I gotta say these updates for Fleet Defender look really exciting! I wish there was a way to integrate it with the wonderful Arleigh Burke ships from the HAFM mod, but I imagine the amount of work that'd take would be too much, and that you'd need the cooperation of it's own creator to implement a system to load different missile types.

    Still, as an upgrade to the vanilla ship-weapons these looks FANTASTIC and long overdue. The CIWS system sounds clever, and a lot less complicated/heavy than the ones i've seen before. Would the AI be accurate enough to be used as a land-based C-RAM system such as the Centurion? I imagine if it's having trouble with harpoon missiles that Mortars would be even harder, although perhaps the slower speed would make interception easier  🤔 

    You could also use some of the code for the Harpoon, use it on the JASSM model you added in the last update and use it all to make an AGM-158C LRASM, but I'm guessing you've already thought of that.

    Keep up the great work!

  15. On 10/18/2019 at 4:47 PM, SGT Fuller said:

    - Aerial Refueling
    - Nuclear Assets
    - Service Menus
    - Multiple Weapons
    - New and Improved AC-130
    - GPS/INS Systems for applicable Aircraft
    - Improved Flight Models
    - UAV Systems for Recon

    It occurred to me that it's possible the reason we keep getting a ton of people asking where the AC-130 is because it's actually listed on the original post, not in the "to be added" sections.

    • Like 3

  16. I've been trying to train one of my buddies who's been interested in learning to fly, we've been using the two-seater F-15E Strike Eagle so he can sit in the WSO seat and learn the systems without having to be responsible for the flying. The only issue we've run into is that the I-TGT markers don't share between us, so I just have to take his word that he's marked the correct target or selected the right slot. I'm assuming this is because the I-TGT markers are client-side and can't be shared at all? Is it at all possible to have them be linked to an aircraft instead of a player or is that just not possible to code?

    Appreciate all the hard work!

  17. On 11/4/2019 at 11:24 AM, octop01 said:

    Please also look into adding HE effect for the F35 gun. It overpenetrates frequently when shooting planes/helicopters thus doing only little damage and already makes explosion sounds when hitting something.

    I've had this problem a bit too, made some friendlies very upset thinking I was doing some blue-on-blue when I tried to down a helicopter.

    Technically if we're talking specifically about the F-35's gun though it would be a FRAG effect if i'm not mistaken.
    The specially developed APEX 25mm shell that the F-35 uses has a "penetrate then detonate" fuze. It's got a Tungsten-Carbide penetrator for armor-piercing that activates the fuze once it makes contact. The penetrator is propelled forward by the blast, and the rest of the body is fragmented, with an extra incendiary effect from a bit of zirconium behind the main explosive. It's similar to a SAPHEI round, but with the penetrator at the front.

    Granted that would all probably be pretty hard to model accurately in the ArmA engine, but hey the USAF team have managed more impressive things than that. It DOES mean though that for the F-35's gun to be "realistic", it shouldn't' overpenetrate anything but the thinnest of targets.

    • Like 2

  18. On 11/5/2019 at 5:42 AM, firewill said:

    i thought MQ-99 is based on EADS Barracuda.

    It seems to be an original design that takes from both the Barracuda and the Valkyrie. It's wings and control surfaces are original in shape, in the configuration of the Barracuda, the shaping of the body and seems closer to the Valkyrie. What I mainly meant was that the MQ-99's unique ability to be launched via shipping containers equipped with catapults, and it's general low-cost/high quantity design is unique to the Valkyrie, and would be a really cool/unique thing to see in ArmA.

    I purchased a couple of licenses for the model for my own projects, so if you're interested in one of them you're welcome to have it.

    Regardless, keep up the great work!

  19. Recently found an interesting model: https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/aircraft/military/xq-58-valkyrie

    Knowing your love of Ace Combat, this'd be the closest real-world equivalent to the MQ-99 container-launched drones from AC7. I know very little about models, but if this one is suitable It'd make for a fascinating mod, especially with catapult launch and parachute recovery like the real-world Valkyrie employs.

  20. I'm guessing this has already been pointed out but in-case it hasn't, the DAS Spherical coverage function doesn't seem to work on the F-35A. It can be enabled, and the text says as such, but then a prompt comes up saying "AIM-120 missiles depleted", followed by "DAS Spherical coverage off". I've tried repeating this with and without AIM-120's, even a full load, an empty load, in both the heavy and stealth versions. Regardless of all this I do seem to start with 360 degree IR coverage according to the sensor panel. Is it only meant to provide IR sensor coverage vis-a-vis normal Arma sensors or does it have fancy functions like the EOTS seems to have?


    Unrelated, any consideration to (eventually) adding in the ALE-70 internal towed decoy to the F-35A? I'm not aware of any mods that have tackled towed decoys, although but I HAVE seen radar spoofing and the like done here and there. I figure if anyone could figure it out it'd be you guys.

    Keep up the great work!