the Rangefinder is same Binoculars and exists in the unit you mentioned sorry votedown

The Quadtiltrotor does not sound too plausible and seems to not be that efficient.
(In my opinion)

But personally I think a updated V280 Valor would be very interesting to see and is indeed very fast and agile. Also it has some pretty sexy shapes.
-But prop engines are certainly more efficient than jet engines for such an aircraft, because jet engines cannot autorotate in a hover (duh) and it consumes a hell of a lot of fuel.

There is also a new type of aircraft that is being tested, the "Raider" from Sikorsky, which is a mix of coxial-rotor helicopter and prop aircraft. It can fly around 400km/h in flight and can of course hover like any normal helicopter.
-just as information http://aviationweek.com/site-files/aviationweek.com/files/imagecache/large_img/uploads/2014/10/aw100620143559l.jpg

But the Valor is in my opinion a reliable and fast troop transport aircraft.
-The Raider would be great though too, even with it's odd look.

Transport planes for the win :)

Upvoted.

I did some concepts for the V-25 (Stalth V-22) , V-45 (Stealth V-44) and V-280 (Stealth V-280) and other CSAT possibilities:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?166008-WIP-VTOL-Tiltrotor-Aircrafts

How cool would these look ingame!

Just notice guys that we are in 2013 and the game is featured somehow 2035 and in terms of aircraft desing and innovations the aircraft manufactures are actually working on it.
Im still working like aircraft engineer in helicopters developed on early sixties and the variants are still used today with improved desing and avionics.

EDIT: With that I mean that we are not going to expect so innovative changes in fuselage design more than those made by composite materials and the way the wars are right now dont deserve to spend more money in those proyects, maybe more in all kind of electronic and armour protection for ground forces.

@Fri13 ka-56 and mi-48 are totally different designs: turret, cockpit, stealth... The only similar thing that they share is that dual blade rotor engine. Looks more like a new generation Mil-mi 28 for me. Despite that I agree with the request of that ticket about yaws.

Non existing vehicles today will probably exist by 2035, for exampla pak fa t50, v280 or v44. Of course if they add non existin vehicles (concepts/protypes) they should try to make them realistic but taking into consideration this is the year 2035. V280 third generation tiltrotor is dated for 2016 aproximately. So what we will have in 2035? Exoskeleton suits?

Voted this because Vtol is the future.By 2035 Vtol solutions would be pretty mature,transport,gunship etc.

even china is trying to créate (Or copy) their own quadtiltrotor called blue whale:
http://images.china.cn/attachement/jpg/site1007/20130905/001fd04cf34a13923eff21.jpg

so yes, no doubt that the future is Stealth and VTOl/tiltrotors/stol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1O3Onyas984

It would be pretty sweet if there was a VTOL jet transport
think V-22 Osprey, but with jet engines on the ends of the wings instead of props :)

The KA-56 looks kind of like a Comanche.

"Sukhoi Su-25KM Scorpion (counterpart of the A-10c for opfor, or the devs could ''make'' a new one like they did with the Mi-48 Kajman, which is a total succes)"

I wouldn't say Mi-48 is total success. It does look "fancy" but its flight modeling is just so terrible what it should be. There are own tickets like http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=12722 what takes it.

If the OPFOR is going to get non-existing vehicles, at least they should be some how realistically behaving or having reason to exist.
Like if Mi-48 would have wanted to make correctly, it would look more like Russian current helicopter plans for future like KA-56 http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_En-sxfOkXP8/S-wcaUWOAAI/AAAAAAAAFoo/51yIXvUVfCc/s400/ka58_flying.jpg

That would be what Mi-48 should have been and called it directly as KA-48 instead KA-58, so it would have been a "first step" for it. A counter part for AH-99 but with much bigger punch, speed and agility.

Armata is the Russian universal Platform plan. A one platform what is used with MBT, SPAAG, SAM, Artillery etc. And now suddenly NATO got those.

When showing the ARMA 3 for players who knows military stuff well in reality buyt but nothing about ARMA, they don't like at all that NATO side has same turrets and designs in ARMA 3. But they do like that many vehicles are realistic and exiting ones even (like AMV-7).

So if they add new fighters etc. They should do them for more realistic counter parts as just changing a single feature takes about 10 years to get it fielded. So if today is something taken in service, it will be next 40-50 years in service with a few upgrades like F-22 and Sukhoi PAK FA.
The fuselag design can be kept "classic" but the armament and gear is the thing what would make them interesting. Like add a Vikhr missiles to ground attack aircraft like Su-25 (multiple benefits for them).

Larger aircraft's like C-130 feels little "dumb" but can bring interesting missions.

Yes, more air vehicles are coming, but Arma needs more than 3 planes, and a couple of helicopter. I think at least 2 attack jets per faction, and one transport plane.

downvoted...

2 new planes are coming...

and let's first see what those are... then they better fix all major bugs first etc...

there's tons of stuff to play with already (and soon ARMA2 content will be released for modders etc...)

@the_Demongod
The Mi-48 is based off Mil-mi 28 (turret, cockpit), Mi 24 (can transport infantry) and Kamov Ka-50 as you said. It's an helicopter based off existant helicopters, but it does not exist itself, that's why I said ''Created by BI''.

@AD2001
If thats true you made my day :D but for some reason I can't find the source, where did you find that information? forums? BI main page? Arma 3?

But It's a shame that if they are only working in CAS planes, that means that they are not working on VTOLS/Heavy transport planes. Hopefully they will add that later.

EDIT: added this to a forum discussion:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?161576-A-Large-Fixed-Wing-transport-aircraft-for-Arma-3&p=2513639#post2513639

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bix4ptq3Who

There is a huge cargo plane at least to be deliver in the campaing/patch episodes that is like the C130 but with other name. You can find the wreck actually in the game right know under the wreck category.
Anyways you can spect the Osprey also.

Here http://dev.arma3.com/sitrep-00026 under "Operations".

@ DrDeathO5
Basically youre saying that with those 2 CAS aircrafts arma doesn't need any other vehicle... Tell me, what vehicle are you going to use to parachute a vehicle? How are you going to transport infantry in a plane? Having said this I prove that there aren't enough vehicles yet. But im not saying they should have high priority, these could be added at some point since i agree that bug fixes are main priority, and if you have read the main post you'll see that I said this.

Of course when tools are released, moders will be able to create their own stuff, but something basic such a cargo plane or heavy helicopter should be oficial, more when there is no type of this vehicle for blufor and opfor.

I also suggested a MLRS for opfor, and a hovercraft as a posibility. Downvoting this, means that you do not want any other vehicles than the ones that are ingame, so think about what are you downvoting, because i don't think that is reason to downvote this.

If people still uses this pretext for downvoting this i'll create another ticket specifically for cargo plane/vtol and v-22 with defensive system since these were the main points of the post and I added the other vehicles along the way to request everything at the same time.

EDITED:
I'm not saying that the only ones that should be added are from this list, these are just posibilities and suggestions, I'm pretty sure BI will make others that are not mentioned above too. But i thought this could be a good influence.

@AD2001 Thank you :)

''The two CAS airplanes are mostly finished in terms of their most detailed artwork Level Of Detail (LOD). They are now undergoing texturing and LODing, before handing them off to the encoding, audio and animation departments. And there are yet more ''brand-new vehicles'' being sculpted by the artists''

I wonder what are those Brand new vehicles, hopefully the ones I mentioned above and many more.

@Peter

I only noticed the wrecks from Arma 2, I'll check that later thanks. and if they add the osprey I hope it will have a defensive weapon system:
http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/ORD_RWS_RGS_on_MV-22_Slide_lg.jpg

EDITED:
The wreck vehicle is a C-192, which looks exactly like a C-130. i hope they will not use the C-130 when they will probably be decommissioned by that time.

I found the post:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?161576-A-Large-Fixed-Wing-transport-aircraft-for-Arma-3
I think these 2 planes are the buzzard, which are already ingame for independant faction. I said that in the post though.
Even in the case that was true, we still have the issue for a large transport aircraft for Arma 3 or multiple transport aircraft which is why I made this post too. Only 2 planes is not enough(Arma 2 had over 8, and the islands were smaller).

Why did you downvoted? Whats the reason? We as a community can decide what would be the most realistic and fun fixed wing transport aircraft for Arma 3. If you downvote give reasons please. And if you have a better suggestion or disagree about something feel free to post it.

Thank you.

@nightovizard

No, BIS is currently working on two CAS planes for NATO and CSAT.

uhh the kajman was not created by bohemia interactive
it is modeled off of the Kamov Ka-50
Its twin tail is fucking badass though, so thank you b.i.

Cool stuff..

They are working on two planes right now.
/downvoted

Change description to: "Laser targeting devices do not lock on vehicles. The lasers target behind vehicles."

Change Steps to Reproduce to: "Create a mission with a tank on top of a hill, and laser target the tank."

Change Additional Information to: "Lazing the tank from 3km from tank, but laser targeting device show tank at 2400km?" (I think this is what you meant to say.)

UPDATE: I just used the laser designator this evening, and did not notice the laser going through targets at all. I did notice the pilot had issue picking up the lazed target, but he finally acquired the target after listening that he had to approach from the side of the targetted item without hills in the way. Also, Internet lag may also be an issue. I did notice the pilot was warping across the map at times.

How about you go make your own feature request.

How about changing the topic to:
"Lasers do not lock-on, and go through vehicles"

If the laser does go through the vehicle, then the pilot (or remote gunner) should then see the lazed ground as a target! So more specifically what is happening, sometimes lasers are not locking-on to a target (whether vehicle or ground item) or the lazed target is not being transmitted to the remote gun item or aircraft targeting system.

If your bug as stated is true, then this may be why I and some others are not able to lase targets, and the pilots subsequently cannot see any lazed target!

I had trouble for the past week lasing some targets for pilots, as they could not see the lazed target on their HUD. I then noticed a person lazing targets very well last night while I was flying, and everything he lazed showed on my HUD without flaws. (*Note: He was in the same group as I was, so this may also be an issue.)

And then tonight, somebody tried lasing multiple targets, and none of his targets showed on my HUD. (This person was not within my group.)

I'd like to create a mission with an AI partner lasing targets, while I fly bomb runs.

Sure, also how about adding the following weapons:
-HS Produkt 2000
-H&K MP5
-H&K MP7
-H&K UMP
-HS Produkt VHS
-H&K G36
-Colt M4
-Sako TRG
-MACS M3
-RT-20
-Remington M40
-Barret M82
-RGB-6
-H&K AG36 (for G36 rifles)
-FN M249
-FN MAG
-Ultimax 100
-9K38 Igla
-RL90 M95
-AT4

And the following vehicles:
-M-84D
-M-95 Degman
-BVP M-80A
-BOV VP
-M1151 Up-Armored Capable HMMWV
-Iveco LMV
-International MaxxPro
-M-84AI
-PTS-M
-PMS (mounted on Tatra T813 8x8 trucks)
-Strijela - 10CROA1
-MV-4
-Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21
-Pilatus PC-9
-Zlin 242
-Air Tractor AT-802
-Canadair CL-415
-Bombardier Challenger 600
-Elbit Skylark
-Elbit Hermes 450
-Mil Mi-17
-Mil Mi-8
-Bell 206
-Iveco 5 tone transport truck
-Iveco medium and heavy trucks
-Mercedes-Benz Actros 6x6, 8x8
-MAN Tank Transporter Truck
-Astra Truck
-Daf Truck
-Toyota Landcruiser
-Mercedes G 4WD
-Nissan Navara 4WD
-Land Rover Wolf 4WD

And the following artillery guns:
-M56
-D-30 RH M94
-CITER 155mm L33 Gun

These are all currently in use by NATO and will be in use for at least the next 10 years (maybe one or two wont, I'm not completely sure).

Thank you for reading.

Very good suggestion. Agreed.

Ok. Thank you!

It's improved considerably. There is a still an issue with regards to path finding to the Inn gardens/gazebo on both Altis and Stratis.

AI do eventually find their way to the stairs leading into the Inn gardens/gazebo.

So I personally don't think it's worth spending time on - please close if you agree. Thanks for checking this issue out in any event.

EnableSentences isn't a very effective solution as it silences everything & not just the robotic move orders.

Thank you for the report!

Could you please check if this is still valid?

Damn, the second one is beautiful.
/upvoted

Sounds have been overhauled, this is no longer relevant.

+1 for the helis

I too think the original reporter was talking about Bug #584 "Bad positional audio makes it nearly impossible to estimate distance and direction by sound", as I reread he makes mention of anything greater than 5 meters.

That's pretty rude JohnnieConcrete. Like I said, suggest closing this bug.

Shrugs, I clearly tried to help. Think this bug needs to be closed, unless the reporter can be a little more informative, and little less argumentative or assumptive.

I also have headphones around here and believe I used them at one time with no issues. On the contrar, I also have a super duper ASUS XONAR STX sound card with a good preamplifier, which amplifies both headphones and microphone.

Well that is true . Sounds and falloff aren't balanced enough but that's another matter.

OP means that the falloff range of sounds is to high. I do agree with that (to certain extent), a jet that flies by you can't hear anymore if he is 300 meters away same for choppers, yet a rescureboat on the water with a tiny motor you can hear a kilometer away. In arma2 you could hear jets over a longer disatance.

@Dark . Its not an old internet meme its an old film called This is Spinal Tap
Oh and just to let you know I'm still ignoring that pompous twat Roger. Roger means to be fucked up the ass where I come from

I think its quite clear that the overall sound, for me ,is too low. I use headphones. No problem in others games with them, some I have to turn down. I don't think its a bug, I just think the AMP needs to go to 11.

Rogerx what is not clear about it. State this state ,You are a troll and I will ignore you from this moment forward.

Overall sound is definitely not to low...

He (JohnnieConcrete) is just a fat troll :)
"AMP needs to go to 11" is an old internet meme: http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/these-go-to-11-spinal-tap
He should be banned.

The reporter doesn't clarify. Sounds as if he's trying to state the overall volume from the game is low, especially since he states he has increased a volume setting to 10 within a main game configuration file within a text editor?

The majority has reported hearing game sounds, such as somebody reloading a magazine for their weapon, from further than a mile away.

Shrugs. We need clarification in order to be able to help.

My sound card is not the problem or my volume levels. Its the in game volume level. Overall volume.

everyone calm down we are all friends because we play arma 3 and we are here to improve it! but rogerx I think arma 3 have some issue about sound volums, for example sound of an unsilenced weapon is too loud but with that volume, the sound of a car's engine is so low
thanks and sorry for my english

I didn't call you an idiot. (You're perception is skewed.)

The computer outputs digital sound, and does not amplify sound as amplification occurs during sound rendering or digitization. Your sound card has the amplifier for amplifying sound if you require it.

Or if using S/PDIF, my setup uses S/PDIF Toslink connected to a 100 watt per channel 7.1 Yamaha RX-V375 receiver. So I'm passing the game's software rendered five channel audio (ie. AC3/Dolby stream) through Toslink for the receiver to amplify. It's commonly known five channel audio is sometimes softer in amplification when compared to mono or stereo streams.

If you're setup is for stereo speakers, I think the Windows' mixer down-mixes the five channel audio into two channel audio. The sound may sound not as loud as other natively rendered mono or stereo sounds, similar to comparing AC3/Dolby streams on over-the-air TV broadcasts and playing back on Mono or Stereo speakers. (Also, something called matrixing or compression is used, but it's another name for down-mixing AC3/Dolby to Mono/Stereo. I really dislike this matrixing as it seems to cut the higher frequencies from the streams, making the audio sound muffled.)

As already mentioned concerning matrixing, manufacturer's sound card drivers and or manufacturer's software may also further down-mix streams, albeit even unknowingly of the user as the software and drivers are usually proprietary within Windows.

Sorry if your feelings are hurt. I'm a guy at heart and not much of a fan of hugging other guys. :-/

If anybody can confirm the game outputs native five channel audio, please do so.

Rogerx. Its not a bug. I don't need to disclose my setup. You think everyone is an idiot except yourself. What I am saying is the sound is low overall. If setting 10 could be made twice as loud OVERALL then I could put it to 5 to get the same volume or to 10 to make it twice as loud. Maybe you have a billion watt speaker set-up, most don't.

I've never heard of such a bug with ARMA 3.

There are many different output methods for sound from the computer motherboard. You likely need to disclose your setup, including your sound chip or sound card maker and model number. Also state how your speakers are connected.

Please state your sound/audio hardware chip or card, including version of drivers being used.

State also if you use the Windows' taskbar volume control to adjust volumes, or if you use your audio/sound card manufacturer's software for adjusting mixing controls.

Fixed
28-01-2014
EXE rev. 114714

"Set up proper initSpeed parameters for various infantry weapons according to their RL counterparts or through careful approximation. Also performed slight round up adjustment of airFriction for small arms bullets to create greater distinctions between them."

good one. aswell as a weapon has its advantage, so it should have its disadvantages. thumb up.
http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=6147

Closing as duplicate.

Duplicate of #8938 :)

Ahh, well my version is more frustrated lol, you feel the connection to my pain? :P But i made an account here specifically to write this. I guess there's no harm in more emphasis on such a crucial issue for multiplayer ;)

Can you close the ticket then?

Closing as No bug.

Awww ok I found it, just have to press CTRL to switch modes as if it has a collimator.