Duplicate of #0013990.

Checked ingame again and I still have no clue wether that's 600 or 800 meters. Checking the map, it's apparently 600~.

Doesn't anybody at BI test these details after implementing them? :(

But they should.Even irons like on SOS,but they should be.Almost all advanced(Not 80th years tech) sights have backup sights.This is for realism sake.
As I said - Nightstalker have backup iron.NVS doesn't.But this is almost same models.About TWS,well imagene like that.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/FELIN-openphotonet_PICT6047.jpg

Confirmed, but I think it has to do something with the way the units are being spawned.

When placing an OPFOR soldier, and making him the group leader of a blufor rifle squad while setting his presence to 0 it's working just fine.

^ Indeed, they are long range engagement optics, a CQB sight is not intended for them.

And you didn't even consider it being intended?

Added video.

I have problem with that also, how long must be the distance betwen waypoints? Isnt this little odd? Behavior of heli varies if its type, so i need to put some specific behavior? For example on modded MI-24 (assault chopper) what behavior i need to put? I dont remember this in arma 2.....

Same problem with vehicle "O_Heli_Attack_02_F" spawned with BIS_fnc_spawnVehicle on Altis.

I spawn the helicopter out in the ocean so players don't see it spawn.
Way points are set on every town on the map in a random order.
setWaypointBehaviour SAFE
setWaypointType MOVE
setWaypointSpeed NORMAL
Heli flies to the first way point and keeps circling around it forever.
This seems to be happening when way points are more than 3000 meters apart but it's very inconsistent.

This bug report is already 2 years old, is there any word of when this will be fixed?

God... just saw that "2 year old" and i lost hope it will be fixed. BTW heli is reacting very strange for enemy infantry, its almost impossible if you are infantry to get attention of enemy heli, 2 mags is barely enough. About waypoints - heli is circling around first waypoint (as Fluit sayed) and most often crashing on trees (chernarus)..... What a joy from gameplay, wow! I almost shit myself ......

Hey! Thanks for the report. I was able to reproduce the issue.

The helicopter correctly reaches the first waypoint but refuses to proceed to another. Note - the waypoints need to be far enough from each other and the behavior varies by the type of helicopter

have you tried setting altitude when placing the object in the editor?

Unable to reproduce. They move just fine.

Keep in mind that units won't move until their reach their flyInHeight altitude.

I think you should take it to the forums: http://forums.bistudio.com - this seems to be a support issue, not a game defect.

Fixed, should appear on dev branch soon.

Mass-closing resolved issues not updated in 10 days.

Also, I have noticed that only the host can use the Ammo crates in mp missions, and they don't work at all in dedicated servers.

You also can not rearm a vehicle that spawns in completely empty (which i find strange).

+1 for 1 full resupply per truck, ability to see its empty, and AT LEAST make the vehicles crates rearm the trucks!

The fuel trucks are good, they Refuel 1 and a half Slammers.

The Repair Trucks have TOO much inertia! (HMETT version) It acts like an air vehicle when it hits 15kph, tugging left or right while driving.

This has been already fixed. Thank you for helping us make the game better!

The issue is still valid. I tried this yesterday when I wanted to place snipers up there, but they just glitched out near the ladder on the 2nd floor (after climbing 1 ladder).

Grumpy, I think not my question is the key now, but the one of oukej.

I tried to get a squadmember to climb up the tower before posting my previous comment. It never showed the building positions, so I guess it's still valid. ;)
Uploaded a few pictures, as you can see there's no position indicator showing up, not even when I try to get a better line of sight to the tower.
See that the position indicator is showing up just fine on the last pic using a different building.

Uploaded a picture.
It's pretty obvious.
It's a tower, and it has "SOLAR" written all over it.
What other building could possibly fit the description "Solar Tower"?

related: http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=17526

Is this still valid? I was able to make the AI climb up and take the position on the top of the tower.

Can we please get a coordinate and optional a screenshot of the tower?

Solar tower?

Got my vote on that one.
The MLRS should have a wider variety of rockets to choose from.

IMO they should at least have a DPICM/Cluster-munition version of the rockets since the majority of munitions developed for the real-world MLRS were DPICM munitions (M26, M30(GMLRS), most warheads for the MGM-140 ATACMS and IIRC SAGE 227 were all DPICM).

In the past, the UK, France and Germany used to have AT2 rockets to deploy AT mines, but stopped using them due to various landmine and cluster munition conventions (which I know Arma 3 doesn't adhere to, hence we have 155mm DPICM and mine munitions), so they are also a realistic option for the Sandstorm.

Unitary munitions (single warhead HE) like the one used on the Sandstorm are actually a fairly recent addition to MLRS' arsenal; only becoming a mainstay with the introduction of the M31 GPS guided rocket. Nowadays this is the only munition used by the UK's MLRS (and I think Germany too) because of the previously mentioned conventions on cluster munitions.

The US had an XM29 SADARM munition as well.

It is zoomed to 5x by default but when holding breath it zooms to 25x as well. You can still zoom in by + and -.

Just use a seperate keybinding for zoom temporary (view)/hold breath (weapons).
This is not the scopes fault.
Downvoted.

Is the Nightstalker a zoomed scope or a non-zoomed sight?

Just checked it, it's really annoying.
/upvoted

Flaps Speed Behaviour

Zero 190 kmh On the ground still.
One 207 kmh Feeling a little light but still on the ground
Two 235 kmh Flying.

You can't use those speeds. Stage zero at 235 km/H you will also be flying ...

@Thx1164 : Thank for your tests. If you need to perform further test i've everything to pilot, so i could help you if you want.

Eh...?

IMO they need to implement a generalized flight physics system that applies to all aircraft. That system would calculate aircraft behaviour based on the aircraft's physical model in-game, and other inputs like wind speed and direction.

I think X-Plane does it like that.

What they need to do is look up the physics of all the aircraft they implement in the game, and go off of that. Structuring flight models from their real life counterparts, is something that BI SERIOUSLY needs to look into. This way, it creates the balanced and polished feel of what the game needs. You get my vote on this one. +1.

That´s friction coefficient you are talking about. But no, the effect is the same up in the air as well.

Now that I've tried it, i think the whole flight model is flawed in Arma 3...ignoring the fact that a drone can fly at mach one... :/

No problem, we are only human ;)

The great thing about this is that it should be an easy fix i think.

maybe the gear touching the road, make more drag, and more lift, make the gears touch less making less drag... maybe? I don't know in reality how it work

"Also it shouldnt be possible to lower flaps at more than, say 300kph." At some speed it should probably rip the flaps/wing off but none of that damage modelling or weight changes (weapons firing) is modeled in ARMA it seems which to me is not surprising. Infantry game...

I decided to look into it more so I talked less in generalities.

Stall speeds from the Albatross data sheet though there may be variants...
Clean: 195 kmh
1 Stage: 176 kmh
2 Stage: 165 kmh

These should be at max takeoff weight.

Doing a test flight I get these numbers:
Clean: 155 kmh
1 Stage: 155 kmh
2 Stage: 162 kmh

I'm using a mouse so it was a bit hard to get completely accurate numbers but I pretty confident that there is something amiss.

I did like how squirly it was near stall. A lot like my plane. I would like a good snap roll on stall but not even flight sims manage that well :-(

As for should it able to take off on full flaps. Depends on whether the engine can overcome the high induced drag AND ground friction long enough to get airborne. I can't find anything that says anything about it.

As to automatic flap reduction. Some modern jets have them but this isn't a modern jet. It is a cheap ancient thing used by underfunded factions!

As to "higher angles should reduce ground/air speeds not increase them". Absolutely true in flight. Bit of a warning sign that one :-)

Actually L-39 Albatros has automatic flaps retraction :D

Is this realistic of the real life version of this aircraft?

@RushHour yes i think you're right, sorry :)

Though, i remember playing a flight sim (F/A-18 Korea) where i could takeoff with max flap angle as well...though i went through the game's training videos and manual, i think max flap angle is indeed used only for landing, as it's not mentioned anywhere else.

But other points here are undoubtedly valid, higher angles should reduce ground/air speeds not increase them.

To add to what prykpryk's said in the end, usually aircraft automatically retract flaps and gear beyond a certain speed.

It´s fundamental physics this so it´s not so much about the aircraft itself.

"That's absolutely incorrect. You need flaps for both takeoff and landing. Lift and drag are proportional to the angle of the flaps, and as i mentioned before, higher flap "angle of attack" allows greater lift at lower airspeeds, allowing you to takeoff sooner."

No you are miss-understanding the point.
The most extreme flap angle is only used for landing, not for take off.

It´s there for landing, not taking off. Medium flap angle is for taking off.

You are absolutely right that it´s proportional, but you are completely disregarding that drag will overpower the lift because the drag will inhibit the plane to reach enough velocity to take off.
IT´s the same with F1 cars where eventually the downforce becomes so much that drag will disallow the car to hit it´s top speed it´s geared for.

Imagine a graph, vertical is lift, horizontal is speed.
The line can´t split itself so you need to choose what you want, with maximum flaps you go up the graph, with lowest you go horizontal.
Middle is a perfect ratio of taking off while maintaining enough speed to actually lift off the ground.

Yea that´s another thing, when in flight, changing flap settings has no effect on drag at all.
In fact i think i registered some increase in speed with the most extreme setting.

Should be easy to just switch it around and maybe make the most extreme setting more powerful so it actually starts to slow the plane down while in flight.

Speed is solely controlled through X and Z right now.

Confirmed, flaps physics need a lot of work. Stall speed should be significantly lower for high flaps settings. Also there should be more drag when using flaps but not so much.
0 flaps - normal stall speed, normal drag
1 flaps - lower (maybe 20-30kmh) stall speed, higher drag
2 flaps - landing stall speed (maybe 150-180kmh), most drag allowing to slow down plane quickly.
Also it shouldnt be possible to lower flaps at more than, say 300kph.

Um if i'm not wrong, during takeoff, both lift and drag are pretty significant, but only when the flaps are deployed.

However, i believe that with flags deployed, you should be able to takeoff at a lower airspeed than without them, as they generate more lift at lower airspeeds.

I just read your ticket again,
"Then in regards to lift i don´t think the plane should take off at all with highest flap angle because drag will overpower the lift being generated."

That's absolutely incorrect. You need flaps for both takeoff and landing. Lift and drag are proportional to the angle of the flaps, and as i mentioned before, higher flap "angle of attack" allows greater lift at lower airspeeds, allowing you to takeoff sooner.

Just the plane in general, the way it feels and handles in the air seems exactly the same as it was in.ArmA 2. I would dare to say that the physics engine isn't affecting the plane's performance im the slightest, same with helicopters.

1. Police vehicles are in (scripted variant of civ vehicles).
2. There is no such thing as an MH-9000.
3. The forum is for asking questions. The tracker is not.

From my testing.

Try just accelerating down the runway and note speed at end of runway.

Flaps Speed Behaviour

Zero 190 kmh On the ground still.
One 207 kmh Feeling a little light but still on the ground
Two 235 kmh Flying.

That actually looks ok to me.
With zero flaps it should stay on the ground due to the symmetric airfoil
With one flap it it light due to a mslla amount of lift. Being in ground effect and the wheels not dragging as much we could expect a bit more airspeed.
With two flaps. Assuming the jet has the thrust to counter the induced drag it would take off.

So. Could it not be that at full flap the aircraft getting "light" due to lift then into ground effect helps it accelerate to where it takes off? The flaps don't seem particularly large to induce massive drag.

I will say I expect that kind of behavior from one stage of flaps and stage two would probably be too draggy for takeoff and used for approach only but that is based on my own plane. I don't own one of these jets!

I can't say I see any effect on stall speed in flight though.

There aren't going to be any police vehicles.

What the hell is an MH-9000?

It seems to be replacing the Team Switch function too. Before Camp Maxwell showed up, I could switch to another playable unit if I died, now I can't seem to do that. After some experimenting I discovered that the "Camp Maxwell" option is overlapping the "Team Switch" option. If you run the editor with two or more playable units, and then you die, you can hit tab to select the "Team Switch" option hidden behind the "Camp Maxwell" option. I guess BIS needs to add an extra "\br" to the menu code.

It's known issue.

Fixed in release version.

Same thing here.

camp maxwell is the showcase camp where the first E3 took place.

i have no fucking idea why is that a buttom in the editor..... it makes no sense at all, unless they want to make it an easy-to-find preset mission that you load up to watch all the showcases

Still there after the last Dev Update (9 SEP)

In my case its not only in editor but also on singleplayer.

It also ends the mission however each time you click it, leading you to the debrief.

Also, I believe you can find Statistics on your map under the Statistics button.