TeTeT

dragon01, please take a look at: http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/nimitz/experimental/missions/%5bsp%5dAICatLaunch.Stratis.pbo Is the "Nimitz" variable name assigned to the carrier in your mission? Same for "wingplane". The error comes from an undefined variable and either of the before could be the root cause.

You're activating the trigger before the Nimitz is loaded, I believe. If you add a 'time > 0' to the condition it should work better. I've prepared a small sample mission for you, using spawn and sleep in the init line of the plane: http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/nimitz/experimental/missions/%5bsp%5dAICatLaunch.Tanoa.pbo TeTeT

There's some documentation on the modules in http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/nimitz/html/, it's probably not complete any longer. I didn't see much interest in it, so didn't really maintain it. The complete launch to landing cycle can be seen in the traffic mission: http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/nimitz/missions/%5bSP%5dNimitzTraffic.Stratis.7z For launching a plane take a look at ttt_nimitzfunctions\fn_ambiance\fn_planeStart.sqf (ttt_fnc_planeStart): _plane = [Nimitz, _plane, _catapultNumber] call ttt_fnc_planeStart; The function should return the plane once it's launched. A more ambiance oriented function is in ttt_nimitzfunctions\fn_ambiance\fn_flightOps.sqf (ttt_fnc_fligtOps). It needs three addons: JS_JC_FA18 lesh_towing Peral_Airfield_Logistics You can stop the flight operations by setting 'doFlightOps' to false in the carrier object. On the CUP LHD crew, I believe I had added them at some time, but forgot to add this to the repository. For now you have to use either Flightdeck Crew or the already mentioned Futarm Maritime Units. TeTeT

odie0351, found the bug and fixed it. Strangely it was the same as in the FA-18, but it didn't manifest for me at start. sargken, sounds like quite an undertaking to remodel the GPS map into the cockpit. Not sure we're going down that path, sorry. TeTeT

We've isolated the issue with the GBU-32 and GBU-38 to the setting 'autoSeekTarget =1'. On larger maps like Altis and Tanoa this causes the massive slow down, while on Stratis and VR it basically works. Testing the removal of this setting is on the way. Bamse, I like the idea, but it basically means making an incompatible change with the released aircraft, so if it's been done for sure in another major release. YanYatCheng and odie0351, for now please use the GPS system for the GBU-32 and GBU-38. YanYatCheng, you mention a server crash, we could not reproduce that so far. Can you outline the steps to reproduce? odie0351, the CCIP mode is being worked upon :) What error do you get for the SU-35, I do not see any so far. TeTeT

Thanks for the bug report, we're investigating on the issue with the bombs.

With great pleasure Leshrack, Moon_chilD and I provide you with this bug fix release. We decided to call it the legacy release, as we haven't changed much. Only those annoying popup errors have been overcome by Leshracks config and scripting magic. The only little tidbit that is new is the ability to fold wings via an Eden attribute in the 3d editor. We left intentionally all credits and author and version information as is - it's a legacy release, there to honour the great authors John_Spartan and Saul and all their helpers! However, we will not stay idle and have our own goals. While the HMD is currently not on our TODO list, we do want to provide a nice integration with eden, updating the SQF in the scripts and in general provide a good experience for players. Of course there will still be bugs in this release and we will do our best to fix them in upcoming maintenance and bug fix releases. However, don't expect a rapid release cycle, please. Currently the distribution channels are being filled. Unfortunately I could not publish to John's workshop on steam, so I had to create new pages. I will update this post: Su-35 http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=24024 http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=743108251 http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/planes/JS_JC_SU35_v1.4.1.torrent http://withsix.com/p/Arma-3/mods/plgNZFxx4xGCkgAVF72WTA/su-35s-flanker-e F/A-18E/F http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=22594 http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=743099837 http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/planes/JS_JC_FA18_v1.9.1.torrent http://withsix.com/p/Arma-3/mods/inYY6HIf4xGhSwAVF72WTA/f-a-18-super-hornet [Edit: Added steam and torrent links] [Edit2: Added PWS links]

Requirements: CBA - http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=18767 Unsung 3.0 Charlie release - http://www.armanam.eu/downloads.html Mission Download: Chickenhawk (@) on Armaholic or: http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/chickenhawk/%5bSP%5dChickenhawkUnsungCharlie.DaKrong.pbo Welcome to the 'Nam, pilot! Conduct five transport missions in a UH-1D in your shift on Da Krong in Quang Tri province. Fly NOE over the Ben Hai river, or pass through the hills to the three canyons, pay a visit to Radio Relay Vandergrift or Camp Sarge. Don't forget to check your fuel level and probably pay the service point close to Camp Sarge a visit once per tour. The mission follows BTK/sxp2high's Workhorse tradition (http://www.armaholic.com/page.php?id=14027) and adds some variety by selecting places randomly from a pool for each mission. In general the environment is rather peaceful for a warzone, but don't be surprised if a stray bullet hits the chopper or you! There is no repair facility on map, so be careful with your landings. A development version was previewed on mudspike: http://www.mudspike.com/arma-3-chickenhawk/ A video of an even earlier development version: Enjoy! TeTeT [edit: add armaholic download, change unsung download link] [edit2: update for Unsugn charlie]

It's a great honour to maintain these great jets in the future! I thank John_Spartan and Saul for their trust and confidence and of course providing us with these excellent planes! First goal is to reduce the impact of the recent arma3 patches (apex et al) on the planes and eliminate any pop up errors. Please bear with us while we setup our environment for collaboration on the planes. Once testing has been completed a bug fix release will be made. In due time we will then see what the future for the jets hold ... TeTeT

I'm not so sure about changing the default, is it somehow preventive to use the checkbox in the Eden attributes list? I always thought that is sufficient for people wanting a carrier without the antennas. It will even work in the upcoming 0.95 final release - it's broken right now. I'm as baffled about this problem with the fake engine sound vehicle as you, and I never figured out what's the actual problem with it. In 0.95 final I have today deprecated the sound vehicle and added the engine sound to the jdg carrier spawner (e.g. Nimitz carrier). You can then use 'this engineOn true;' in the init line and the engine runs. Also a problem with wires 3 and 4 was fixed, the mem points for the wire animations were somehow missing. TeTeT

The mission is now updated for Unsung Charlie and also published on steam: http://tetet.de/arma/arma3/chickenhawk/%5bSP%5dChickenhawkUnsungCharlie.DaKrong.pbo http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=739326718 Somehow in steam the multiplayer tag sneaked in and I cannot delete it any longer, bummer. It's definitely a single player mission though.

Now I know whom I forgot in the credits, sorry hcpookie! Good idea to make a restricted sparrow launcher via config. The 360 degree launcher can stay public, and the other ones can be private.

A video showing the work in progress on 0.95 final: Feedback already received is that the Phalanx is not too scale right now. Also the chair and locker were wildly bouncing and disappeared overboard or were suspended in mid air in the mission for the video. So I disabled simulation on the chair. Prior testing didn't show this behaviour at all, we're still investigating what happened.

Hi, I'd recommend a slow approach to get the ships into game. Start with a single p3d and use a tool set like Mikero's to navigate the shallow waters of Arma model.cfg and config.cpp ;) As a first step you should create a simple config.cpp and refer your p3d in it: Once you've got the single ship part into the game, hone your scripting skills to assemble the ship in Eden and in game. For that purpose I recommend using multiple init scripts. The Nimitz for example has thanks to Leshracks work two init scripts, one for Eden, one for in game. This is the init script that calls either one: The edenInit looks like this: The eden events are for changing position and removing the Nimitz. The init for in game looks similar, but adds a dozen or so compatibility variables, which may be more confusing than helpful to you right now. Good luck!

A quick update on progress with version 0.95 final. We now have a handful of objects to at least statically appear on the Nimitz for the update. They will be added to the carrier in certain spots, but don't expect a full set of furniture yet - this is the start. The objects will also be available in Eden in the 'Nimitz objects' category. Good progress has been made on the upgraded Mk 29 sea sparrow launcher: TheSn4k3 delivered a very nice detailed model, and Pookie and I rigged it as static air defense unit. We also have a Phalanx and RIM-116 model, but it's not clear yet if they make it fully rigged as air defense asset into the next release - there's quite some work to be done. For the interior, we already have now models for a locker, medical station, briefing room, and some pipes. For the flightdeck, we have a new fuel station. All of this is currently being brought into the game. Unfortunately the new script solution for catapult, arresting wires, elevators and so forth has to be pushed back. Our timeline for the 0.95 release is end of August.

This post is also available on nimitz-arma3.blogspot.de and copied here for your convenience. Future plans for the Nimitz for arma3 In a recent query on a Nimitz for arma3 youtube video the valid question was raised what the long term plans for the Nimitz are. In this blog post I try to answer this. First, the development is driven by two distinct forces: one is the known issues (bug) list, the other is the interest and area of expertise of the involved developers. Ideally both would overlap and issues are resolved on the fly. In reality this is of course not always the case. For example there is a number of texture problems and also needed model improvements on our known issues laundry list, but there is no active developer taking care of it. This of course limits the known issues we actually fix per release. On the other hand we have areas which match the interest of a developer. For example Leshrack is on his way to improve the many scripts for aircraft and carrier operations in regards to multiple users and multiple carriers on map. I myself added some rooms to the weapons room level, as I was interested in exploring this part of modding. Then there are areas like testing which benefit from dedicated people like Moony, who basically gets to the see the changes first. Besides the basically dedicated staff of the Nimitz, there are one-off contributors from the larger arma community who improve the carrier from time to time. For example in the beginning of the Nimitz for arma3 project, we had several submissions of texture sets for the hull and flightdeck. In addition to the community effort, we're currently exploring the use of paid for models via a website named cgtrader. This is kind of a last resort move, as our calls for texture and modelling help could not be answered by the larger arma community. However, it's too early to tell if this approach will be successful. Given this background it's hopefully clear that speaking of the plans for the Nimitz and the long term path for the carrier is necessarily a wishlist topic rather than a set in stone goal path. Having said that, our goal is to provide a carrier that is operable in single and multi player arma3. It should support a simple and complex mode of operation, with the simple mode being intuitive enough for a new player to merely follow a tutorial mission and being able to utilize the carrier capabilities. The complex mode of operation tailors toward players not minding reading documentation and going the extra mile for a more realistic carrier experience. The current mode of operation is clearly a mix of the two - most functions are easy to use, but some like fueling an aircraft are not that easy to discover without reading the documentation. Another huge topic for many player is seeing the carrier move through the water. If it ever will largely depends on the future development of the arma engine. We've seen with vehicle in vehicle transport capabilities that there's hope on the horizon. Support for the Man class (e.g. people) sticking to a moving and rocking surface is needed though. Speaking of personal preferences, I certainly would like to see an integrated air defense system aboard the Nimitz. Currently an improved model for the sea sparrow is in the making and we might be able to source a phalanx or sea ram from cgtrader. In a first step these systems might be rigged as default arma3 anti aircraft systems. But in the future a working radar which controls these assets and is able to track missiles as well as aircraft would allow a player to play air defense coordinator aboard the Nimitz. In multiplayer this could be augmented by pilots on CAP as well as OPFOR pilots. Of course a Hawkeye to expand the radar capability of the carrier would be useful as well :) Changing the focus from air operations to the carrier interior, we're currently working on providing a whole new deck on the level of the current weapons room. This work is driven by two motivators: one is the request for more empty space aboard the carrier for milsim units to use it as a base, the other is the relative unease of operation of the weapons elevator. So in February 2016 we started to explore the addition of new rooms roughly 2 meter above water level. This has resulted by now in a whole new deck under construction that reaches from the fore to the aft section of the carrier. Currently we're looking into the availability of floor plans to make these new rooms as carrier characteristic as possible. Staying with the interior, there's a spot that's been under construction for a long time now: the island. While the stairwells from the arma2 LHD now give the island a refreshed look, the bridge and connecting parts are empty. Goal is here to use the sourced models from cgtrader to provide a nautical bridge and an airboss room. But as written above, we need to first see if this approach yields any success. Coming back to future plans, above we've seen what are some immediate, mid and long term goals of the Nimitz for arma3 project. These should be sufficient for the next year. Beyond that, currently there'll be dragons. A lot depends on the future development of the engine and its capabilities in the air/sea area. But not everything: a long term goal is to make the carrier walkable from the heights of the island to the water level deck, another is the above mentioned integrated air defense capability, yet another is the creating of a simple and a complex mode of operation. But as it is with dragons, there's room for uncertainty - maybe some brave soul from the community steps up with her own ideas and those will alter the above set course!

On ItemInfo, check out https://forums.bistudio.com/topic/192259-config-errors-displaying/?hl=iteminfo#entry3056311 I'd guess the other errors are inheritance related as well. Best to de-pbo the vanilla weapons after the patch and model your stuff like wise.

Thanks. Are you sure this only happens in the new rooms? From what I remember these items fall right through the flight deck as well. You can disable their simulation and hope they stick to the height you placed them, as a work around.

I've updated the Nimitz yesterday night and somehow the version numbers got mangled (most likely my mistake, user error). I uploaded the correct version this morning (0.95-beta) and noticed that the pws support page is down: http://withsix.com/errors/404?resource=http:%2F%2Fwithsix.com%2Fp%2Fsupport

With the Apex expansion backward compatibility for the Nimitz was broken (see https://feedback.bistudio.com/T118956for details). The new 0.95 beta build fixes this and can be considered a true work in progress. Expect the work to be ongoing, not finished. The new build 0.95 beta build has new rooms on the weapons room level, connecting the weapons room with the aft and fore section of the carrier. The fore section has two new entries to the carrier. Further the road way lod (e.g. the place your soldier stands upon) has been restructured on the hangar level, making it less likely to glitch through the hangar floor. Also the geo lod for the fence on elevator 3 and the missing texture at elevator 3 hangar level have been fixed. Support for the new Eden editor preview view has been added, albeit it's an interim image on display. Thanks for this release go to Leshrack for isolating the p3d model causing the crash to desktop with Apex, Kim "Megadeth" Norman for opening the holes at the fore and Moonchild for testing. Please stay tuned for update information through the different channels (armaholic, pws, steam, google drive).

sanjuaro, try to alter the start position of the helicopter. It seems that when they take off from the actual runway spots they work, while when taking off from the north-west positions close to the hangars they tend to get stuck in air.

Thanks to Leshracks debugging help the problem with the crash on Apex was identified: A p3d needs to have a res 0 LOD now it seems. The nimlights and nimspots p3d didn't have that, so the game would crash. We're currently busy assembling a build to be released later this weekend, hopefully before Apex is released. It will be quite rough around the edges, don't expect miracles.

I suggest to add some default Journal, err, diary, entries for these troops types. Otherwise they might have a hard time recovering after a crash. ;)

FYI currently the Nimitz crashes the 3d editor and arma on the Apex build. This is being tracked in https://feedback.bistudio.com/T118956. If you have additional insight on what's happening there please let us know.

Sorry, we've not been able to reproduce this. For example this week I got a report that the braking capability of wire 4 is not strong enough, so a plane caught the wire and still ended up halfway overboard. But as you mention waves, maybe your mission is at a certain sea level that influences the working of the wires?