saul

Cockpit sneak peek :D

Version 0.1 by John_Spartan and Saul Enjoy Visit our official thread for MAnW here.

Which version christian? If it is 1.6, then this is a known issue If it is 1.7 beta that issue should be fixed.

We will not release 1.7 on steam/ PlayWithSix/ or Armaholic since it is a kind of beta. The Arma 3 patches broke a lot of things and we want to make sure we have 90% of the kinks out then we will release 1.8 stable on the latter.

Page 130 of this thread.

1.7 beta release has already fixed this issue. Try it. 1.8 stable will be arriving soon.

If only we could control thrust ;)

@frag = once again amazing video. Well done.

@Corpsman - It is possible.

@Granola - First awesome name. Second turning off the hud wont make it to 1.7. However the feature that shows the "little green squares" can be turned off on our side. I will discuss with John on this matter.

@Wiki - If BI breaks our addons we will fix them as usual. No worries.

Hello all, I am pleased to announce that update 1.7 for the F/A-18s and 1.1 hotfix of the Su35 are moving smoothly and we are setting a date for the following weekend (July 26th) for their release. Some of the new features will be omitted for 1.7 (such as new sounds) do to time constraints with some of our other work however we will have an updated HUD, increased GBU range as well as many bug fixes. Unfortunately I am also announcing that John and I will be ceasing any major additions and updates to both the F/A-18s and Su35 so that he and I can work solely on our MAnW entry which will be announced later. We will still be providing small hotfix patches when needed as BI updates Arma 3. Both he and I have greatly appreciate all the feedback and love for our addon and we hope that our contest entry will get just as much support as our previous addons. Cause I am a nice guy, I will give you a little hint as to what our contest entry is, and yes it is an aircraft. Good hunting

I love all of you at red hammer... that is all.

@All - First and foremost, John and I do not endorse Neptune's modified F18. Though his intentions may be good, we the authors cannot guarantee the security or authenticity of this modification. We have asked Neptune to remove this download and he has been warned of any future attempt. Now 1.7 update continues as planned. Currently with the bootcamp update in route (and more so something modbreaking... again) we will be holding off on pushing out 1.7 until the Bootcamp update releases. We appreciate everyone's patience and dedication and we hope to get 1.7 out as quickly as possible. Here some of the tidbits being added and fixed with 1.7: - New Sounds (concept for sonic boom in the works) - fully fixed ejection system - new ORIGINAL FA18 LAYOUT HUD - GPS INS fix = 12km lock

Which respawn module are you using? As far as Zeus or MCC- Sandbox compatibility we will have to look into this.

@All - I'm going to kill this bomb discussion now before it gets out of hand (cause that is what it seems like to me). John and I can already say with almost absolute certainty that this topic of "How far bombs and missiles can go and how far are we are going to take them" has been well researched. We have realistic physics (to a point) that allows for bombs to be dropped at just about any speed at any altitude and they will hit their mark (guided or unguided). HOWEVER John and I are limited to the confines of the game itself so we are faced many a time at a crossroads of what is realistic/ authentic and what is practical and doesn't destroy gameplay. Outside of the physics of bomb release John and I are limited to the default Arma targeting system and our VERY experimental version of the GPS/ INS system. We know what the capabilities of JDAMs and LGBs are but there is the argument of what is real and what is practical. We could create a CCRP system synced with the GPS/ INS system where you could drop a JDAM from 20 +/ - km away and hit the target within 3 meters give or take. The problem there in lies a couple of different issues from a modders perspective. First is adding the feature which Arma doesn't really support by default so it could be very script heavy and with an aircraft mod already supporting over hundreds of lines of code this isn't practical (more code means more possible FPS issues). Second, Arma's default targeting system though not pretty and very lac luster essentially acts as a very simplified CCRP system (without all the HUD stuff) so John and I only have to set up the parameters of how far specific types of munitions can be dropped. Third, gameplay is something that is very important to John and myself. We have already created the first true multirole capable aircraft for Arma which can be insanely overpowering. Though it is ultimately the prerogative of the group and mission maker how the aircraft is used, a single F18 can take on multiple aircraft and take out two platoons of armored units in one mission. John and I designed the aircraft to be able to do that job but we also want to give the enemy a fighting chance (and who doesn't like a little pucker factor when they go on a bomb run). This is why we limit the range of JDAMs and LGBs. Now right now JDAM range is shorter than we desire, this is due to the experimental nature of the GPS/INS system. The upcoming update will see the range of JDAMs increased out to 12km (no more so don't ask). I ask that all be patient and no more arguing about "How far bombs and missiles can go and how far are we are going to take them". That is all ;)

@Frank - We are aware of this issue.

@Leshrack and well, everyone else = 1.7 and 1.0 will be delayed as I had a computer crash and it has be a "process" to get everything running again. John and I are working diligently to get the aircraft ready to go but understand we will not release them until we both are happy with them. We are hoping for a week, two at the most.

Not going to start an argument about carriers in our thread. But if the Navy was seeking active development of a new carrier design (which they have already done and decided on) then we would know. The only current carrier to be built around that time is CVN-80 USS Enterprise which will be commissioned in 2025 (Ford Class Aircraft Carrier). The last of the Nimitz class won't even be decommissioned until 2058. Nimitz class ships will be replaced on a one for one basis with a Ford. Current Ford class being built (and is already been put to sea) is the Gerald R. Ford CVN- 78. http://www.wallsheer.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/Gerald-R-Ford-Class-CVN-78-Aircraft-Carriers-United-States.jpg (185 kB) http://i.imgur.com/NYi9g.png (930 kB) Other then that it is a cool concept drawing. :)

So here is the latest news. John and me are hard at work with new developments in the works. Our plan is to roll out both a small update for the F18 (version 1.7) and finally version 1.0 of the Su35s. Currently John and me will be taking a small holiday but then we are back to business to get these updates out. We are expecting to have them up in a week to two weeks time if all goes well. We will also be releasing PSD sample templates for the F18 (Su35 will come later) as well as Service Menu sample for other mod crews with tutorial. For now, enjoy pretty pictures: http://i.imgur.com/knKzkaE.jpg (139 kB) http://i.imgur.com/XVcT2LH.jpg (691 kB) http://i.imgur.com/UGClNng.jpg (373 kB) http://i.imgur.com/x4yR4zz.jpg (254 kB) http://i.imgur.com/l7vPqyG.jpg (552 kB)

@Tuna - It has been discussed and is a possibility ;)

@Warlord = It could be the nimitz, John and I will look into it.

@Warlord = Try keybinding your landing gear and not using afterburner, it could be breaking the landing gear on takeoff.

@Fragzilla = Very nice video, that shall be added to the front page for it's splended amounts of awesome. @Warlord = We need all of the conditions in order to figure out the problem, it could be the Nimitz or the F18. What version are you using, what is your airspeed on takeoff, yes flaps/ no flaps, etc etc. Otherwise we cannot recreate the problem and figure out a solution.

Well did you hit the clear all button?