Jump to content

da12thMonkey

Member
  • Content Count

    4077
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

  • Medals

Everything posted by da12thMonkey

  1. da12thMonkey

    Adding requiredAddons to a mod

    Yeah. Most simply you can use requiredAddons[] = {"A3_Data_F_Enoch_Loadorder"}; Which is the latest cfgPatches class for Arma 3, to ensure your data loads after all the BI data that you are referencing or modifying
  2. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Combat Range != Combat Radius AH-64A's mission radius is quoted as 150km by most sources - that is to fly there with ordnance, perform the mission (unknown duration) and return. Total range for the mission duration was 400km. AH-64D has a marginal increase in total range with similar ordnance ~470km without external fuel tanks. But yes vehicles in the mod generally have a shorter maximum range, partially for gameplay reasons to encourage logistical support, but also because Arma doesn't simulate a number of factors that affect fuel consumption (like tankbuster mentions), and most players don't operate the vehicles at anything less than max speed (which would be bad for fuel efficiency IRL).
  3. They could be carried by many aircraft in British service but the RAF and RN almost exclusively used the UK's own 1000lb and 540lb general purpose bombs made by Portsmouth Aviation etc. There were a couple of different tail kits and fuses used for both types (diagram showing the general shape of the airframe, here with the Hunting designed retarding tail cone. Dimensions of the 1000lb bomb) UK versions of the Paveway II and Enhanced Paveway II (CPU-123/B?) were guidance kits for the domestic 1000lb bomb rather than for the the Mk80 series used by just about every other NATO member. (Enhanced) Paveway III carried by Tornado was with a BLU-109 type warhead. I don't know that the RAF have ever employed the Mk84 version of Paveway III. The other major freefall bomb employed by the UK was the BL755/IBL755/RBL755 cluster munition. American CBU-87 cluster munitions were used during the 1991 Gulf War by RAF Jaguars and possibly Tornado too. Rockets were largely SNEB 68mm with Matra Type 155 (18 round reusable) and Type 116M (19 round disposable) pods in that 1980s/1990s period. Type 155 seemed to be the predominant pod because it was reusable. Though I understand the CRV-7 was first used in the Gulf War on Jaguar, and eventually came to supersede the SNEB on Harrier by the late 1990s or early 2000s, with LAU-5002 (6 round) and LAU-5003 (19 round) pods. LAU-5003 being the predominant one. The Royal Navy were still using the 1960s-era 36 round No.7 rocket pod for 2-inch (50mm) "Microcell" rockets, as late as the 1980s and apparently these are what RAF Harriers also used for the duration of the Falklands War. Dumb bombs and rocket pods could be carried on triple racks only on the Phantom and Buccaneer (a UK copy of the US TER-9 more or less). Harrier, Jaguar and Tornado used dual racks, though it was somewhat rare. Neither are still in use. AIM-120 was also being introduced by the mid-1990s, on Sea Harrier FA.2
  4. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    There's not much point critiquing it since the OCP uniform is not accurate almost by design. It's entirely the wrong cut of ACU uniform for that camo As stated before we don't entirely intend to put it in a stable release.
  5. da12thMonkey

    Model between legs

    Your model.cfg is wrong. Arma 3 uses OFP2_ManSkeleton. Take the model.cfg from the Arma 3 samples Test_Character_01 folder. Not the TemplateRTM folder (this one in TemplateRTM has the wrong skeleton - AFAIK it's to provide an example of creating new skeletons for creatures that wont fit the base Arma 3 male character skeleton and move set). Then change this part at the end of the model.cfg class A3_headgear_example: ArmaMan{}; class A3_headgear_NVGslot: ArmaMan{}; class A3_character_example: ArmaMan{}; class A3_vest_example: ArmaMan{}; to simply class ghilie_top_short: ArmaMan{}; and if you additional models beside ghilie_top_short.p3d, add extra classes in that format inheriting from ArmaMan
  6. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    It was discussed within RHS right at the start when Jester introduced the project to the mod and we decided no, because there appears to be little actual movement towards the US using A-29 as part of their own operational capabilities in the near future. Most US testing and purchasing of A-29s have been on the behalf of the Afghan Air Force, and more recently a handful for prolonged testing of the Light Attack/Armed Reconnaissance concept. The LAAR program to date, seems to be just kicking the A-29B and AT-6B around in the grass to develop requirements for another competition that may or may not materialise at some indefinite time in the future. The US hasn't fully established if they want a manned or unmanned aircraft for such a role yet.
  7. da12thMonkey

    Night Vision Google - LUCIE

    LUCIE was used by vehicles drivers in the UK's armed forces. Here, LUCIE was not cleared to be used for dismounted combat, but I think the later, smaller MINIE version has been.
  8. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    It's not really a compromise, since there will be a whole other set of people who don't like the front sight being up when they are trying to use optics for regular shooting of the rifle (i.e. the way they are using the rifle 90% of the time), and would nag us to change it back to how it works currently. We're largely impartial about which way would have been better. The current way was probably just the simplest to do in terms of implementation since it's already there and done for the non-M203 M4B2s and both are for the most part sharing a common model.cfg animation programming and model setup. We can only pick one way to do it, and which ever way we choose is going to run contrary to the preferences of some people. So it's probably not worth our while deviating from what was the most simple implementation.
  9. da12thMonkey

    Russian Helmets Project

    I thought the post was saying you were updating the old Flora pattern (VSR-98) with a new Flora pattern, and the new image was of the new Flora/VSR-98 version. But I see you meant you were replacing VSR-98 with VSR-93.
  10. da12thMonkey

    Russian Helmets Project

    Isn't that pattern VSR, rather than Flora?
  11. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Pattern trialled briefly by some units of 82nd Abn [1][2] and 4th ID [1][2] in Afghanistan in 2009, in an attempt to make UCP less useless in terms of camouflage. The Army saw sense and just adopted a multicam variant (OEF-CP) in the end.
  12. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Even the planned UCP/OEF-CP/UCP-D ACU texture sets might get another total overhaul again in future. We've just been experimenting with a few different methods with substance, photoshop etc. etc. and figuring out suitable colour adjustments, resolutions etc. We might decide to do it all again, some other way. The ones on dev branch have already been updated a bit more since Tuesday, to add a little more dirt and some pattern splits where the uniform is cut and sewn.
  13. UH-60M has different "wide chord" main rotor blades to the UH-60L in your image But yeah the tips seem like they might bend differently UH-60M: https://www.planephotos.net/photos/17730_Sikorsky-UH-60M-Black-Hawk_7642.jpg https://defence-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/1000w_q95-33.jpg
  14. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    RPG warheads will penetrate it all day long, but the odds of you hitting the ammunition feed are not very high because it's a small chute in the middle of the turret-ring. And even if you do, it's only a 25mm gun: the vehicle's not going to explode in a huge fireball from a 25mm round detonating.
  15. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    It's a decision made by whoever made the model. Not a team decision. So motivations vary on a case by case basis. The team merely respects decisions made by our artists, and we expect our users to give it equal respect.
  16. da12thMonkey

    Problem with Textures in Ship Config

    In your original config you are using the wrong selection names. "camo1" doesn't exist in the RHIB, they are "camo_1" and "camo_2". I haven't checked what they are for the Assault Boat/Lifeboat but it's probably not "camo". If you put the wrong selection names in it, it will break the ability to retexture that vehicle because the selections no longer correspond with what sections are available in the model. You should not need to include the hiddenSelections[] = {...}; array at all in a vehicle retexture config, since it's already defined in the base class. It's only needed for people making new models.
  17. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    Those classes are in the old obsolete rhs_c_cti.pbo which was in AFRF with the first few RHS releases. All the classes from that addon were put in private scope and replaced by GREF more than three years ago...
  18. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    NAPA/Nationalists never had any armoured vehicles apart from the BTR-70s in GREF. Only INS/CHDkZ and CDF had BMPs, BMDs etc.
  19. da12thMonkey

    DHI Battle Dress Uniforms

    Same reason we were "allowed" to use his HMMWVs and other things since the very beginning RHS for Arma 3. He's a member of the team and like everybody else, contributes what he wants to, in the way he wants to. That's what I said in the first reply, isn't it?
  20. da12thMonkey

    DHI Battle Dress Uniforms

    We have not been "allowed" to reskin it in general terms. We asked to use the model, currently for the purpose of equipping the HIDF with one ERDL camo BDU, and that texture is applied directly to a copy of the model binarised within the RHS pbo. The original lowland ERDL uniform texture was made by DH (was featured in an earlier version of this mod IIRC, before being replaced with highland ERDL) and only small colour adjustments were done for RHS, to match Tanoa's mud etc. The model within RHS lacks any hiddenSelections to retexture it.
  21. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    We're using Delta Hawk's BDU model for HIDF. If you want it in other Woodland or other US camos, we advise you to use the original addon
  22. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    CH-53's didn't seem to have window-mounted GAU-21s, they were usually GAU-16s or now possibly GAU-18s in the images I was looking at. And if they've been refitted with GAU-21s recently it will be a situation like the UH-1Y where it requires a new mount to be modelled to add GAU-21s correctly. So no plans to do it any time soon. It's only on the CH-53 because someone donated a complete model suitable for the ramp. Like virtually all our AFVs, they have more than one optics mode. Try zooming Num+/- to switch between modes.
  23. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    There were some bugfixes done between the last dev Branch update and the release of 0.4.9 stable. So strictly speaking stable is a more recent build than the public dev build at this moment in time But by tomorrow morning's automated dev update, that branch will include all the additional last-minute changes that were done to 0.4.9, and the first bunch of post-release changes that were made today (which will eventually be rolled in to 0.5.0 stable when ever that happens in the future).
  24. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    @Richards.D has produced a showcase video of 0.4.9's new content, for your viewing pleasure A list of 0.4.9's highlights below
  25. da12thMonkey

    RHS Escalation (AFRF and USAF)

    That's 0.4.8, which was the previous version and didn't add anything new to USAF. 0.4.9 changelogs weren't published until after you posted
×