franze

OT: Shturms? HAH! Shturms are outdated missiles compared to the Ataka and Vikhr! Civilian stats for Shturm gives it a 600-700mm penetration, Ataka 900mm, and Vikhr the same as that. Civilian stats estimate a range of 8 to 10 klicks for Ataka/Vikhr series - you get that kind of range when you don't have to arc over your target. The penetration estimates for the HELLFIRE series, especially the K and L models, are pretty hard to find but initial estimates give 1100mm to 1200mm. True about the cannon, Russia always made some pretty nice guns. Anyone remember the Vya 23mm? Or the NS-37s? Lastly, the Mi-28 can't keep the rockets and the Atakas, and keep a few defensive AAMs availible at the same time. (Lets keep this going - maybe we can make the tank drivers blow a fuse! ) And lets not forget, the HELLFIRE is one sexy missile! Compared to Vikhr...

Those are Atakas you doppleganger. And Atakas don't have anywhere near the penetration, range or top attack capability that the AGM-114 packs. They hold still real good though. Plus, tanks can't mount auxiliary tanks and feed from them at the same time! Let's see you hit it first. 8 klicks is a lot of distance to cover. You cheated.

Let's see how well you feel after getting hit by 16 AGM-114L.

I'm suprised you tank drivers haven't bowed to the real ultimate master yet.

You can do it with PaaTool, Texview or O2. .paa files are conversions of tga files (bet you already knew that.)

How are you going to handle the massive size of this thing? Geometry & handling are gonna give you fits - although it does look like you'll pull it off. OT: Gedis, the C-5B can carry 130 metrics tons, or 145 imperial tons. That's two Abrams. The C-17 has 76 metric tons, or 85 imperial tons. Considering the Abrams weighs 60-70 tons each, that's not bad. But it's a lot easier to just ship those by sea and carry the lighter stuff (such as 13 Kiowas ) by air.

Can we have a bowl of chili for the next addon? You could induce heart burn and perform 'crop dusting' after eating it.

Tank? APC? They all seem to make nice big yellow & orange puffs when hit by my M230.

You can get shadows in O2 by going to Window>Named Properties, then right click in the properties box and write in "lodnoshadow" with a value of 1 for every resolution LOD that isn't the shadow LOD. You need to have a resolution LOD of relatively low face count to be the shadow LOD (in this LOD, you just leave the named properties blank). The second question escapes me, I'm not sure how to do that.

FAS and Jane's are a little flawed here because the AH-56 got axed shortly before the AAH program was started. I'd have to look it up but since it was during the "Mac the Knife" era, military budgeting was pretty harsh. Personally, the idea behind the AH-56 was a very flawed way of thinking - if it has to go fast, you might as well just use a fixed wing aircraft.

The story goes that the AH-56 was a big-budget Army program, something like what the Comanche was in the recent years, that was promising a lot without delivering it. Basically, they were trying to squeeze a high speed aircraft out of a whirlybird. Now, some other guys needed attack helicopters in Vietnam, and they needed them desperately; at the time, Bell already had the AH-1 ready to go for service. The brass didn't want to give up the AH-56 but the commanders were desperate, so a proponent of each program met with a general of higher rank and listened to their arguments. The end result was they bought the Cobra and scrapped the AH-56 - in other words, a great deal.

OT: Thanks eestaikas, I couldn't find the source where they used the actual cyrillic lettering for the designation. Much obliged.

Then you'd better start looking for tutorials and downloading Oxygen, because it sounds like you want things done in a specific way.

Let me clear up a couple things: - The Havoc you see in my sig is *not* a new, full blown addon. It consists of 1183 faces and serves as a simple low detail adversarial aircraft or for AI use. - DKMM's Mi-28 remains one of the best addons availible in OFP to this day, but keep in mind that it was designed to work alongside BIS vehicles. It gets annoying having to blow 3-4 ATGMs on a single tank. I've already dragged this off topic, so if you have any questions regarding this, you can PM me or contact us on our forums. F-18: What about the F-18 that was part of a mod released a few months ago? It was based on Hudson and Pennywise F-18 but it looked pretty polished.

Yeah we do but he's been pretty busy lately. We've all been slacking off on way too many projects.

A very, very, very low quality one. But, it does pack some good characteristics!

We've had a F-18 in progress for a while now, but it's largely untextured. I haven't got any screenshots on hand right now, but if you drop me a line I could link you up with it.

I think the East finally got themselves a real official retirement of the old BIS Mi-17. Way to go, Our Weapons!

Great tanks! They run very smooth despite how detailed they are - definately a good combination. The anti-missile defense system gets a little confusing, though. If a weapon is guided via laser to the tank, the system doesn't function. They worked fine for me using AT weapons against it and with AI firing weapons at me.

That ZSU is gonna be awesome when it gets released - great work, Spetsnaz team!

You aren't going to be able to see infantry from 5 klicks out, no matter your zoom factor, if your aircraft is consistently moving around. Some people can't even see infantry at 100m away.

I'd say that 50x50km is the minimum size required for helicopter operations on a map. Longbow 2 featured a 50x50km combat zone. With around a 4-5 klick detection radius, no matter what the sensors are set for, and the small view distance (even if customizable), it makes no sense to add more zoom than required.

Four, actually. Along with two damaged. The action occurred on September 24th, 1958. The group was the 11th TFG, and the destroyed targets were MiG-15Bis. Damaged aircraft were MiG-17. (They killed 4 other aircraft in this action with 50 cal.) And I don't challenge that point, for the reasons you've stated. But again, my point is that there is nothing to keep them from using the weapons if the situation is dire enough. It's risky, but sometimes it's a risk they've got to take.

The CNAF recieved a handful of AIM-9Bs in the mid-50s, without aircraft that could use them. At the time, the CNAF primarly had F-86F fighters, none of which were qualified to use AIM-9s. US Navy personel agreed to make a few launch rails and systems for their AIM-9s by using rocket rails and parts for which the aircraft was compatible with, and proved remarkably successful. The CNAF used these quite successfully until they were able to upgrade to better aircraft. I don't know if the R-73 is at all similar to the AIM-9, but since it is a IR guided weapon like the AIM-9, I assume using a similar method (or in this case, a software upgrade), someone could mount the missile on the helicopter. And since we've already said its in testing phase, and given the R-73 is a newer missile availible, it'd be silly not to have it availible, now or later, for use on the helicopter. But I think those guys would probably just use gunpods instead. (Try this sometime in LOMAC - use a MiG-29 and R-73, switch to HMD mode, and move the circle onto an enemy aircraft within range (preferrably tail-on) - the missile will lock on without you needing to bracket the target.) Agreed. However, there is absolutely nothing that says a pilot can't go out in combat at night using the platform. Let's not forget that 60 years ago, they didn't even have NVGs. Yes, yes, yes, I know its risky business, with a chance of hitting friendly units, but there is still absolutely nothing that prohibits the aircraft from operating at night. A UH-60A doesn't have any special nighttime equipment (outside of NVGs), yet they still operate them at night if necessary. The flight dynamics alone would be worth it, but elsewhere I think LOMAC comes short for helicopter operations. Despite what I say, I don't think I'd be crazy enough to try it either.

No, I think you're missing the point. Have you seen the OH-58D's mounting a Russian 57mm rocket pod? It isn't even qualified to use these M261 19 shot pods. Please don't mistake my point of view with "will use at all times" or "always qualified"; but you know as well as everyone else, war has no rules. If necessary, somebody will fly a Ka-50/52 at night even if it has no such systems for night flying (outside of NVGs). Also, to clarify, the Ka-52 has a few different sensor system over the regular Ka-50, or so they claim anyways. See this photo for more details. I'm looking forward to that one, but not the massive upgrades required to run it. Â Given Eagle Dynamics' lust for realism, I don't doubt they'll probably have one of the best Ka-50 simulators on the market, but unfortunately I don't think they'll get a whole lot of attention outside of Russia. All R-27 missiles require constant guidance from the firing aircraft until the terminal phase. The last one, R-27AE, has not been accepted into service. It seems pretty durable, but I think thats probably a good thing; it's likely to attract a lot of attention from numerous western aircraft. Dibs on the Ka-50. Â There was Hawk's modified BIS V-80 that came in winter I think. I tried both the Ka-50 and the Ka-52 but the landing gear and cockpit are difficult to make.