Jump to content
Bohemia Interactive Forums

HamishUK

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    328

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Medals

Posts posted by HamishUK

  5. Posted

    In the set init line? In MP is it the same person? Are there any scripts?

    It's the same chap.

    It's weird as in Editor preview I have the javelin but have to load it before firing. In MP I have the Javelin but no extra ammunition so the loadout shows 0 confused_o.gif

    I may just can it and add the ammo as a seperate entity to the vehicle if i cannot pre-add it.

  6. Posted

    Okay added the line this addWeapon "Javelin" and also this addMagazine "Javelin"; into the ini file of a character.

    If I preview the mission in editor it is fine all I have to do is reload the weapon to get it bombed up. However in MP the weapons ammo count reads zero?

    Am I missing something?

  7. Posted

    I also find it is more hit than miss when I engage a target.  confused_o.gif

    for a modern FAF weapon you'd hope so too  biggrin_o.gif

    There's a reason why the UK's just spent a lot of money deploying it. I'd love to see its guided mode implemented properly though - it has the ability to lock onto any sources of heat, including people. The recent(ish) british ambush on insurgents laying IED's in Basra saw them used the Javelin by locking onto the insurgents laying the charges.

    top down modes would be nice too, but nothing that can't be scripted in a 3rd party addon later  smile_o.gif

    Should have said more miss than hit whistle.gif

  9. Posted

    the strykers need to be pretty much invincible to RPG's. I just read a book written by a guy who was a gunner on one in Iraq, and he said on dangerous patrols as many as 4-5 RPG's would hit his Stryker and they hardly dented it

    I would agree on improved survivability. But near invincibility is a tall order.

    Excelletn news about the mod though! thumbs-up.gif

  12. Posted

    50 caliber sniper rifles are designed to damage aircraft in enemy airports they can put holes through thin armour like on BMP, M113,  any apc  side rear and top armour if you  get a lucky hit on an apc  on its  ammo storage the apc's own ammo will blow it up . But don't think  any of this is simulated in Arma.

    50 cal rifle or MG bullets should put a hole through 1 inch of  steel at football pitch range. Most Apc's are only capable of stopping rifle bullets and stoping Nato 7.62 rounds with it's front armour.

    The British Army purchase them for mine disposal. During the first Gulf War they were highly effective at destroying certain mines and unexploded Cluster Bombs.

    The decent range the rifle offered gave the Engineers a rather nice safety margin.

  13. Posted

    Took some getting used to and a little tweaking here and there but having been a pilot and wanting the freedom of head movement that a keyboard simply does not offer I cannot praise this system enough!

    Certainly for the Pongo side it has taken some getting used to as I like having my Whisky by my PC during an evenings MP session.

    Great system!

  14. Posted

    B: The stinger is actually pretty acurate but in Arma you can lock and hit at any angle.  In real life you only have a chance of hitting if you fire in the rear ~60 degree cone (might be 180 not completely sure) as for the SA-7...its basically a step up from throwing rocks.  Its way underpowered and and is about as guided as an RPG.  In Arma it is shown as being equal to the Stinger.

    The Stinger being a heat seeker, is it possible that you can only get an active lock tone when the rear aspect is facing you as a Stinger operator? Currently you can get a lock 100% all aspect.

    The Stinger is an all aspect MANPAD since it's updates to RMP Block I.

    You do not need a rear aspect shot to ensure a hit with the Stinger. Naturally it's IR detector is not as powerful as say a Lima's but it is an all aspect system.

  15. Posted

    Anti Air Missiles 101:

    Only next generation aircraft with advanced sensors that detect the initial launch exaust plume however it can only detect the launch, it cant track or predict its target.

    That is actually incorrect. The RAF and USAF have been using Nemesis for the last 5 years now and also the RAF Fleet has been undergoing upgrade to the a lighter version of the AN/AAR-57 Common Missile Warning System (CMWS).

    Both Nemesis and the AAR-57(LW) are able to pic up the approaching infra-red flare of the MANPAD, provide a directional fix and will indicate using it's own sophisticated software whether you are the missiles intended target by calcualting the IR Signatures doppler effect.

    The Nemesis is far more sophisticated and will even go one step further and neutralise the missile using a focused laser pulse.

    I have had the fortune of having worked with a very early verson of the AAR-57(LW) and I can say clearly now it works very well with the pilots who are currently using the system.

  17. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]

    I meant that a lock warning (i.e. before the missile is launched) on the Stinger is a no-go. As far as I can tell the Strela is also 100% passive IR and should give no warning prior to launch on any RWR.

    Post missile launch detection might be possible, but no pre-launch.

    Sorry my bad I didn't digest your post clearly. I apologise.

    No there is no pre-launch warning except for radar guided missiles and of course the Shilka AAA with it's Gun Dish Ranging Radar.

  19. Posted

    Quote[/b] ]1. The ArmA MANPAD missiles are insanely maneuverable compared to their real life cousins. A "beam" shot on a passing Su-34 should be all but a waste of a missile due to the missile losing energy and unable to turn onto the target.

    I agree there. They are somewhat too agile but I don't disagree on their accuracy. At low level MANPADS are very accurate and to be respected.

    Quote[/b] ]2. Welcome back from BF2-land, ya noob. All the MANPADs in ArmA are passive heat-seeking. That means no lock warning is possible in real life. I suppose there might be some missile launch warning radars in a few aircraft in the world, but I don't know if any ArmA aircraft have them. Besides missile launch and missile lock warnings are worlds apart.

    That is partly incorrect. The majority of Helicopters and even my RAF Jaguar was equipped with a Missile Approach Warning Indicator (not to be mistaken with the old RWR). It picks up the infra-red flare from the missiles rocket motor and provides the direction of the missiles approach on your MAWI

    Quote[/b] ]3. Flares would be quite cool. Evasive measures should be more effective.

    Couldn't agree more

    Quote[/b] ]4. Stinger and Strela have ranges of 7,000m+ Getting shot down at 1500m is no excuse to cry foul. There's a reason MANPADs are a serious threat to aircraft.

    Totally agree!

  20. Posted

    webbing they use is generally '58 pattern webbing

    I'm wary of delving into this topic as anything SAS related usually turns into a battle of armchair generals...

    I'm fairly certain that the SAS do not use '58 pattern webbing. AFAIK it is issued only to members of the cadet forces, and even then most cadets have the sense (yes, we're not all gobshites) to buy the newer stuff. As a cadet myself I've used the '58 stuff and it is utter crap.

    Now there was an upgrade to the '58 pattern, the '72 pattern which is rumoured to once have been used by the SAS because it was easier to decontaminate.

    The bottom line is '58 pattern webbing is outdated and the newer PLCE stuff is of a far higher quality.

    Please note, I don't claim to know what "they" wear, I'm simply applying common sense as to what they might/might not wear.

    -back on track-

    Sorry Sled can't help you out with the texture stuff, although I would say that the beret isn't the wisest of choices for the units.

    You are correct the SAS use the latest kit and a lot of it is purchased from SASS and Arktis under an MOD procurement contract.

    I have been fortunate to have had a post mission BBQ in Sterling when we supported them on their annual 'Pirates Treasure' exercise up in Scotland.

    In a nutshell the SAS wear and use whatever they want or need permitting. They do use the SA80, they do use chest rigs and they do scavange when out in the hooloo.

    They do not wear their beret outside of Sterling Lines.

  24. Posted

    iirc a smooth bore loses its velocity quicker then a rifled gun, therefore less Penetration

    about the m1, i though the L/44 was rifled??? i guess i was wrong

    Also i don't know the weight of the M1A1 but the T-90 is about 50 tons, which is way less then the 65-70 ton beasts of Nato(leopard, Chally, M1A2),that extra weight is Armour

    The only major NATO tank with a rifled gun I can think of is the Challenger.

    And the weight isnt pure armor, I remember early T-80s had comparable armor to early M1s against SABOT rounds but the T-80 weighed far less. But the big thing with Russian tanks in ERA which can completely deflect a SABOT round and makes most HEAT rounds nearly useless.

    The current M829A3 Sabot was designed to pierce the current Kontakt-5 armour with little problem at effective range. Also Kontakt-5 only covers 60% of the T-90's front arc.

    Kaktus is Russia's 'claim' to have superseded Kontakt-5 but has only been seen mounted on the 'Black-Eagle' prototype tank and even then has not been seen since the company that manufactured the Black Eagle went bankrupt in 2002.

    T-90 is currently armed with Kontakt-5 on recent exercise photos. Not to say that Kaktus does not exist but with the current cost cutting being employed by Russia on it's military expenditure and poor maintanence pool I doubt that Kaktus will appear in any great number anytime soon.

    As for Armour the T-90 does use composite armour but lacks crew survavivility with ammunition not being stored in blow out panels. The T-90 is a modernised T-72 by all accounts and design. Her armour although an improvement is still no way near the Challengers or Abrams armour levels. The Indian army has already passed on a T-90S Bhishma to the US Army for evaluation.

    Soviet doctrine is still one of speed and manpower over technology. Something that has changed very little since WWII and served them so well in their huge country.

  25. Posted

    Rather than say the A10 is better / worse go gather some proper technical data and present it to BIS.

    Don't go by the LOMAC flight model either as that has already been discounted as innacurate by a few reliable former A10 pilots who used to post on the UBI forums.

    Your perception of how an aicraft performs means very little unfortunatley. Facts are what is needed not hearsay!

    Hmmm... That's odd, considering that the whole reason behind Black Sharks Delayed (over a year now) release is do to the fact that Eagle Dynamics was working on an A-10 Flight Simulator for the US Armed Forces.  There A-10 must have been pretty damn close to the real thing if they were hired to make a Flight Sim for the US...  icon_rolleyes.gif

    For the amount of Things this game offers, I can live with the flight model of the planes.  Besides, you know someone in this Bad Ass community is going to give us a better A-10 Addon anyways.

    The only thing I which BIS would fix soon is the the Peddle (YAW) response on the Helos.  They should still respond even when moving foward at high speed.  wink_o.gif

    What's the A10 got to do with it? Eagle Dymanics was hired just like BIS was as it had the technology to make a decent simulator. You now telling me the Cobra is accurate in ArmA for a flight model?  If you bothered to read my post in the first place I had already indicated that the A10's FM was already declared innacurate some years back by exisiting pilots! Eagle Dynamics also released the Flaming Cliffs pack also citing a much more accurate representation of an aicrafts FM that was not possible with LOMAC's stock aircraft.:rolleyes:

    Having flown in the RAF for a decade I can easily tell you that the A10's flight is no-where near to how an aircraft operates.

×