VIPER SHIVA

I have some questions regarding the loadout; I'm sure you realize that the USAF, USN, and USMC don't use the AIM-132- Are you also going to include versions armed with American standard-issue air-to-air weapons, such as the AIM-9X, and AIM-120 C/D's? Will you include the 25mm internal canon for the USAF version, and externally-podded gun system for the USN, and USMC varients? It should also be noted that the F-35B cannot internally carry any air-to-ground ordinance larger than the GBU-32. Finally, though it has not yet been officially cleared, all the varients will likely be internally/externally loaded with the GBU-39/40/42 SDB, as well as the Brimstone/Joint Air to Ground Missile ( When the US DOD finally decides what the JAGM will look like... Â ) And what of the SCALP/Storm Shadow EG? Also, what of the aircrafts' stealth features? How visible will the plane be to the OPFORs' sensors, at beyond visual range?

that will be included in V1.1 aswell as three new unit classes (AT, engineer and DMR) and various bugfixes and general improvements. The U.S. Army doesn't designate thier special forces troops as AT, DMR, etc. A standard U.S. Army Special Forces A-Team is made up of 12 men. TEAM COMMANDER (18A) TEAM WARRANT OFFICER (180A) TEAM SERGEANT (18Z) TEAM OPERATIONS & INTEL SERGEANT (18F) SENIOR & JUNIOR WEAPONS SERGEANTS (18B) SENIOR & JUNIOR ENGINEERING SERGEANTS (18C) SENIOR & JUNIOR MEDICAL SERGEANTS (18D) SENIOR & JUNIOT COMMUNICATIONS SERGEANTS (18E) that is true. However i think that is the point why i called them generic special forces so i dont have to do 12 different models for 12 different squad members of a real oda squad. Moreover i think it is difficult for people to recognize the different units such as AT or the DMR guy in such a structure. This is quite true, and I thank you for that. TBH, I prefer the official designation- I just like to know which guys in the team are carrying what.

It kind of reminds me of the Republic of China Air Force- F-5, Mirage 2000, F-16, F-CK-1, etc. It's a really diverse, unbiased sort of line up.

Well, I wasn't trying to be critical- just realistic. As to what the US is willing to sell to whom, obviously there is more to the decision than just dollar amounts. Canada, for instance, is a major strategic partner and ally of the US. This fictional island, on the other hand, would really be little more than a bananna republic client state, if this were real life. But of course, it's up to the addon makers to decide- and I could come up with several good reasons why the RACs could actually be considered strategic, trustworthy partners for the US government. Anyway, just talking out loud here... do carry on, gents.

Yes, just about everyone uses the F-16, but some of those weapons you've chosen are fairly cutting edge. I doubt you would see JSOWs and AMRAAMs hanging from any third-world nation's aircraft. I doubt you'd see the RACs loaded out with the the most modern varients of those weapons, anyway.

Now, I'm no expert- but shouldn't special ops Blackhawks have refueling booms?

My only beef so far, has to do with the slightly "watered-down" loadout and lack of variety- which will obviously be addressed with the next update, of course. At the moment, the medic unit doesn't have NVGs, and only carries an M4 with the standard carrying-handle iron sights. Of course, no one outside of the SPECOPS community knows what would be the most realistic loadout for a SFOD medic- but somehow, I'd expect a really high-speed super-tactical snake-eater to be equipped a little better than an Air Force transportation mechanic in garrison... J/K Anyway, I hope you intend to include a lot more variety in the updates. Based on what you have already, and the permission/cooperation of other addon makers- you could make an entire team of operators, with sniper/spotter weapons, LMGs/MGs, anti-armor weapons, laser designators, explosives, etc. etc. One thing that might be cool, is a MOUT/CQB set that carries a ton of flash-bangs, silenced SMGs/SBRs, CQB .45s like the Wilson, Kimber, and USPs, and maybe an increased armor level. The recently released Spanish Forces addon included units with an auto-aim capability- while I don't need this "cheat" for myself, I have found that it's a great capability for the AI to have in urban/CQB settings. I think it would be great for your AI DF units to have, for increased lethality. Anyway, I really appreciate the work you've done so far, and I look forward to your next round of addons.

I've never been that fond of the Phantom, anyway- but, am I one of the few people here that's old enough to remember the Phantom in service with the British, German, Spanish, Greek, and Turkish air forces? They all operated license-built copies of the Phantom in quite significant numbers. Or was the problem that it was originally produced by the Americans? Whiners piss me off.

Agreed, that would be great. Sniper team, AT team, MG team, medical team, as well as a standard four-man rifle team, etc. Oh, and some additional SPECOPS units added, including a medic, machine gunner, and AT4 gunner, etc.

Wow, those SCAR's look fantastic, and I can't wait to see them in game. Bravo!

LMAO - go read the article again they were the development aircraft carrying experimental equiment, not frontline production aircraft. OK, I see your point. They were carrying new equipment, but- they WERE production-series aircraft, and the equipment DID work. Naturally, the Raptor will constantly be upgraded, and refitted with new/better equipment. I'm not suggesting that the Raptor is the Be-all, End-all uber superfighter that Lockheed has sold it to be, but somehow, I'm betting that it is far from crap-tastic.

Simply because it’s not fitted to the current aircraft.  There is not a in service Raptor - and by that I mean all the aircraft serving with active units apart from the 2 test beds – that has the anything even close to promised/claimed avionics suite. Direct quote from Air Forces Monthly March 2008 Page 53 There have been a lot of media interviews given to gullible and info hungry journalists but now the aircraft are becoming more common place the truth is coming out.  A lot of what is on the web is really only sales propaganda.  The current state of the F-22 leaves it vastly inferior to the F-15 in practical military terms and according to USAF insiders and Industry sources its going to be 3-4 years before the F-22 even starts to begin living up to the promises. I’ll scan the article tomorrow if anyone is really interested. PM me if you want it. Both of the links I posted above, are recent articles. The aircraft that participated in the JFEX 08 exercise WERE in fact production Raptors.

I'm curious as to why you'd say there is no datalink, as the Inter / Intra-Flight Data Link is listed in just about every publication as a standard piece of equipment, and integrated into the aircraft's CNI avionics package? It's been tested, and works as advertised, as far as public knowledge has thus far been told. "Included in the CNI system is an Inter/Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL) that allows all F-22s in a flight to share target and system data automatically and without radio calls. One of the original objectives for the F-22 was to increase the percentage of fighter pilots who make 'kills'. With the IFDL, each pilot is free to operate more autonomously because, for example, the leader can tell at a glance what his wing man's fuel state is, his weapons remaining, and even the enemy aircraft he has targeted. This link also allows additional F-22 flights to be added to the net for multi-flight coordinated attack." http://www.defense-update.com/feature....way.htm As to the Rate of Climb... I am by no means an expert in this field, but, The Raptor's Chief Test Pilot, Paul Metz is. This was discussed in a recent interveiw with Carlo Kopp, of Air Power Australia: Kopp: In terms of aircraft handling and manoeuvre performance, how does the F-22A compare with established types such as the F-15 and F-16 in areas such as transonic acceleration, supersonic acceleration, climb rates, and supersonic sustained turn rates? How does the supersonic energy bleed in manoeuvres compare to teen series fighters, optimised for transonic energy bleed? Metz: My previous answer touched on the subject of maneuver performance. It is interesting to fly an airplane like the F-22 which is optimized to fly supersonically as a matter of course compared to current generation fighters designed for momentary or transitory excursions supersonically. An example may illustrate this. The best subsonic afterburner climb speed in the Raptor occurs at 600 knots calibrated airspeed. The fastest way to get to altitude in a Raptor is to accelerate to supersonic on the deck and climb all the way supersonically. Sorry, I can't quote the numbers but suffice is to say that we are talking high supersonic climb speeds. The F-15, on the other hand, has its best climb rate when the climb is made subsonically to 30,000-35,000 feet and the aircraft is then dived to a supersonic speed before once again pulling up into a supersonic climb. The difference in time to climb using the Raptor versus the Eagle climb technique is dramatic but, again, classified. You also asked about handling qualities, which is a different subject than raw performance. Handling qualities refers to how hard the pilot has to work to accomplish a task. An airplane can be a great performer but, if the pilot is sweating bullets just to keep it upright and under control, it isn't a particularly usable machine. We formalized the desired handling qualities of the F-22 with the engineers early in the design process by defining 'carefree abandon' flying qualities. This meant that the pilot could do anything with the stick and rudder as well as the throttles with the assurance that he would never overstress the structure and break it; that he would never lose control of the airplane, or that he would never have his engines 'backfire'. Many hundreds of simulator and engine wind tunnel tests resulted in an airplane that today meets those expectations. The importance of 'carefree abandon' flying qualities is that it makes flying second nature and frees the pilot to concentrate on being the wiley tactician that the human being is so adept at. http://www.ausairpower.net/API-Metz-Interview.html

What you mean the EA-6A Prowler?? The EA-6A is still the NAVY's ECM Aircraft, which was going to be made. The A-6E was able to carry the ECM pods, which just changed the model number. The big question on doing this is the a script that is known to work that does ECM effects? Actually, that role is to be filled by the new E/F-18 "Growler", as the new aircraft are completed.

Didn't the Six Pack have a built in addon patch utility? I thought it worked fairly well.

They do look stunning, and I'm sure I'll enjoy using them. One question/request, however- have you thought about slapping a DShK, or M2 HMG, or some other type weapon on to those pickups, so as to make some quick and easy, but still first-rate technical gun trucks?

If I'm not mistaken, and remember correctly- a Bradley's 25mm cannon was attributed with accidently disabling an M1A1 during Desert Storm. I believe it was also quite effective against Iraqi MBTs, IFVs and APCs. The 25mm Bushmaster cannon is by no means a "peashooter", particularly when combined with highly effective, state of the art APFSDS, and HEAP ammunition, and an advanced FCS.

I think these dudes look great, and I'm looking forward to using them when they're released. A quick question, Do you think you might make a version of them for the BLUFOR side? Sometimes, really "high-speed, low-drag" types of units such as the CIA, NSA, DIA, SFOD, DEVGRU, PMC's, etc, might use guys that look a little like this for operations where they have to be completely deniable, and undercover. That would mean they might also use non-US issue weapons, that could identify them as US personnel. Just a thought.... it might be kind of neat to have to do a ultra-covert mission, with guys that are kitted out, and actually look like the locals/bad guys.

They are half-way satifactory, I suppose. At the moment, SWM's probably are the best ghillies for ArmA. But IMO, the best looking ghillie snipers that I've seen in game so far, were the RAST snipers done by Maximus-Sniper, for OFP. 'Course, I had a small hand in creating those units, so I may be a bit biased. It would be great if he had updated that unit, or converted it for ArmA, but I don't think he's with us anymore.

There are several "Yank" answers to the Vikhr ATGM in development, including: The APKWS II http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/apkws-i....e-02193 The NAWC/DRS Spike http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/spike.html The Joint Air to Ground Missile http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Air_to_Ground_Missile and the Joint Dual Role Air Dominance Missile http://www.dtic.mil/ndia/2004guns/wed/selfpropelled.ppt Sorry for the OT...

Hmmm ... dont think so. If I remember correctly turrets in Aircraft types dont work in ArmA ...... unless *cross fingers* unless BIS fixed that in 1 of the recent patches Lovely work anyhow boys ..... (might have to finish the An12 to match up ) Turrets work Reply on the youtube movie from rock. "Technically yes, but the AI are too stupid to use it. They constantly try to dive bomb targets making the AC-130 utterly pointless. It would have to be flown and manned by players. Well unscripted turrets don't work on Plane class addons as Gnat says. The system demonstrated in that vid is quite heavily scripted. I don't want to get off on a rant here: But am I correct in assuming that if the guns were made to be useable by human players only, and the model was simply combined with Mandos' scripting, the AI could effectively use the AC-130 to attack ground targets? ATM, the AI can effectively use artillery and airstrikes against human players through rather genius scripting. We just need a damn model with GUNS sticking out the side! For the LUV of GAWD!!! amirite? kthnxbi!

I had one error with the new SF replacements: Saboteur 2 doesn't have a weapon. It would also be nice if the SF Sniper wasn't equipped with a .50- you just don't see guys lugging that enormous weapon around a battlefield like it was an AR. It should be replaced with a semi-auto 7.62 of modern design. There are various addons here that would be sufficient. What's more, at least one of these guys should be carrying a SAW, or MG, one should have a LAW/SMAW/AT-6/etc, one should be equipped with a LD, and finally, at least one of the units should be medic-capable.

I was bout to say the same thing. Didn't he criticise the Blackhawk's and praise the Huey's? Or was it the other way round? It has been at least 3 years since I read it so my memory is hazy. Also, wasn't there something about a blinded soldier managing to hold off the enemy? Anyway, it is a refreshing choice for a mod. Good luck with it. Thanks for the memory refresh... I was actually referring to Haney's book as well. I do remember it was the MH/UH-60's that got shredded on the ingress. I am fairly sure there were other casualties mentioned, more serious than the toothpaste explosion. In any case, it was one of the few documented SFOD missions that were written by one of the participating operators.

A lesser known fact: there was a fairly large contingent of Delta involved in the Op, operating from the Navy's Helo Carrier. They got shot up pretty bad when their Blackhawks encountered VERY heavy AAA fire whilst enroute to assault enemy positions around St. George.

I don't know if it's been suggested or not, but I'd really to see the new USMC Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle. 'course then again, I'd also appreciate a AAV7A1, and/or a LAV Gen II/III. The US developed an answer to the BMP decades ago, and apart from the Stryker, I'm still waiting to see any of them in ArmA.