Just stumbled upon this today.

Here is a video:

http://youtu.be/H7CVwRN8c7g

I have had this like 3 times, but not related to switching to the launcher, I have had it when switching to primary as well since I hardly play with AT and still get it, unfortunately I cannot give exact repro steps as it usually happens on a time when I do not pay too much attention the combinations I press, and it's during stressful situations. trying to reproduce on my own leisure, I have not had success yet, but this problem does exist and is a pain. much like the stuck running anim, pressing v resolves it at that point of time.

Thanks for the video, SwiftN7. Very good.

Anyone (modder especially) who wants this game improved I guess ... probably not you.

May I ask something: who the hell cares how their weapons look when dropped on the ground?

yep, can't complete it too. My AI was near the extract heli and mission just failed. Sometimes even if AI in heli it fails

I have tried on normal and easy difficulty settings, and still the same situation occurs every time. When clearing the LZ and loading into the chopper, the soldiers on my team who are still alive either wander around aimlessly, or at one point the squad leader got in the chopper and I was able to also, but the other soldiers continued wandering around aimlessly until the chopper said it couldn't wait any longer and I failed the mission.

Still here in dev 1.03.111052

OPFOR are apparently getting a new marksman rifle, so BLUFOR might get the EBR. Upvoted, anyway.

Still here in dev 1.03.110747

I have nothing more to add to this discussion: "*facepalm*"
k thx bai

I think it's easy to fix come on

You can try to be clever in a different place, but I do not advise you to try to be clever in another place that the impact of hitting a bullet to the object has less of an impact than a hammer (hammer blow enough to detonator exploded, there is evidence above), you'll look silly. You can continue to try to prove that the evidence is not enough, but it's your opinion that has nothing to do with reality....

Instability of a chemical compound != zomg they must explodez when u shoot 'em

120 mm HE rounds have absolutely nothing to do with this ticket.

In which country do people live who are not able to understand that the instability of the chemical compound explosives = explosive when exposed to heat, shock, friction?
Stability / Sensitivity explosives (for you) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_(explosives)
If the bullet hit the object, that object will be exposed to strong impact. Do you need proof of this?
I think you have no awareness of this issue. Does it make sense to me to try to explain to you anything else? I think not....

Copypaste me saying bullets don't cause heat or shock when it hits something. I'm questioning your claim that it's enough to detonate explosives! QUESTIONING! That doesn't mean I make a counter-claim. I'm demanding you provide satisfactory evidence to back up your claim.

"If the bullet hit the object, that object will be exposed to strong impact. Do you need proof of this? "
We need proof that the impact is strong enough for the explosive to detonate! How many times do I have to repeat myself?!

You Have Absolutely No Idea How Burden Of Proof Works! There's a saying "put up or shut up". I know which one should be used in this case.

I'm more concerned about the following: if the players are young age playing ARMA 3 (simulator) will see that shooting in the explosive is safe enough, it can lead to disastrous consequences. As here: http://www.exponent.com/lead-azide-detonation-at-detonator-manufacturing-facility/

I believe that I should not have to prove to you that irrefutable evidence submitted by me above is actually an irrefutable proof. In addition, not everyone in ARMA 3 is realistic, but it does not mean that everything has to be changed. If the players do not bother to search for information, but require this of me (voting down), it means that they do not want it to be implemented. If you believe that the evidence is not sufficient, then subsequent attempts to reason with you is not my burden.

Yet another quote mining. That article has absolutely nothing to do with bullets...

Trust me, I'm not.

It's pretty clear now that you're either unable or unwilling to provide us satisfactory evidence to support your claims. You're intellectually dishonest if you still keep claiming such things you can't proof.

This conversation is pointless and will not lead anywhere. 86,96% disagrees with you. The situation would be completely different if you can prove you're right and 86,96% are wrong.

What you have written does not matter. This article is about the instability of explosives used in detonators, C-4 and Claymore. It is directly related to the C-4 and Claymore who are immortal in the game, and even withstand a direct spillage of 120 mm HE projectile. If you are unable to understand this, it is your problem.

I don't have to prove anything because I didn't claim it makes it safe (I only called your quote mining), the burden of proof is still on you. You're the one who is flooding here by not presenting evidence to support your claim. If you can provide concrete evidence that you can explode explosives with bullets (and don't just say "you can because the fuses are unstable", because thats not your claim), or even better; an article or video (with enough details so we can verify what really happens) where this method is used in real-life situation (say, an EOD team makes detonates an explosive by firing at it) then I'd be happy to change my pose (from "I don't know if it's possible" to "you can detonate explosives with bullets").

In this situation absence of evidence is evidence of absence, at least to me. If it would be possible to detonate them by just firing at them then why haven't I read about it? *As far as I know* this method wasn't used, ever. If it wasn't used then maybe it belongs to Hollywood?

You may not realize that the detonators are very unstable?

You are a troll ...

You have an interesting logic. The article in which it will be written that "the shot in the explosives will explode" may be irrefutable proof? Moving substance "PETN" from one type to another detonator make the substance safe? Can you prove it? Even the careless use can cause explosion of the detonator, unfortunately Events such happened a lot. You can buy a detonator, and try to warm him or hit, it will be conclusive evidence for you. I think you need to stop wasting your time trying to flood here.

Seriously... Wouldn't it be easier to just find an article about exploding explosives with bullets instead of roaming around the net desperately trying to find a chain of quotes that would validate your claim somehow..? Or maybe there isn't one, and that's why you post quotes like "Detonating cord is insensitive to friction and ordinary shock, but may be exploded by rifle fire" (nice quotemining, btw. This is the original quote. It's about detonating cord, not fuses...)?

Tracer rounds are nothing special, they are not setting off explosives period.

As in the other explosives related ticket about HE grenades setting off C4: if you can provide us with the blast velocities generated by an HE grenade and the required shockwave to set off a C4 charge, you have valid arguments. Just doubting something is not enough.

Yes, C4 is stable for through regular contact with the bullet. But you tend to think that C4 can be stable in contact with 30 mm HE projectile? Is this a joke? How about this: http://youtu.be/_Cwz9_P5cYM. In your C4 can be stable in contact with 120mm HE projectile, and then continue to function? This is ridiculous. I also doubt that C4 is stable to the tracer bullet.

Impact and fire are separately not enough to detonate C-4, but the combination of the two can create the necessary circumstances for detonation. http://lostpedia.wikia.com/wiki/C-4

Many detonators' primary explosive is a material called ASA compound. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detonator

C4 is easily and reliably initiated by L1A2, or L2A2 detonators, detonating cord L5A1 or Detonating Cord Boosters (DCB). http://www.militarysystems-tech.com/files/militarysystems/supplier_docs/CEUK-C4-Mouldable-Plastic-Explosive.pdf

The L2A2 comprises an aluminium tube with an output charge of PETN initiated with a primary charge of Aluminium / Lead Styphnate / Lead Azide. http://www.mondial-defence.com/images/PDF_Data_Sheets/L2A2%20Detonator%20Electric.pdf

PETN is the least stable of the common military explosives. Under certain conditions a deflagration to detonation transition can occur. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PETN

PETN may be exploded by rifle fire. It also detonates sympathetically with the detonation of an adjacent high explosive. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/explosives-nitrate-petn.htm

Lead Azide explodes after a fall of around 150 mm. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_azide

Lead Azide explodes at 350°C. May explode from shock, heat, flame or friction when dry. http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/11731

Lead Styphnate is particularly sensitive to fire. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_azide

Lead Styphnate detonation Temperature 260°C. Very sensitive to friction, heat, and impact. http://design.caltech.edu/micropropulsion/styphnate.html

I'm not sure if I followed your line of reasoning correctly...
you can use B to do something to A
B has a certain characteristic
Conclusion: A has the same charasteristic B does

Did I get it right?

@tyler2, you keep on showing videos of the game /not doing what you want/ instead of providing links that /reality is not present in the game/. I agree after some huge explosives nearby the C4 should be "deleted" (aka not working anymore), but it should not trigger "just like this" just because *you want*.

Downvoted, because.

Shooting C4 (also inside claymores) is like shooting at a lump of clay. The only way you can disable it with bullets/explosives is by completely wrecking the electronics or vaporizing it. And most military grade explosives don't get destroyed too easily.

Ask the Mythbusters: Busted.

Downvoted becauce I don't believe everything that's in Hollywood films...

с4 is very stable. Only with special detonator it can be exploded. Not sure about claimore

What is the schockwave velocity of a hand grenade?

As some use RDX and TNT (Composite B if I am not mistaken?) the blast velocity is over 8000m/s.

How much is required for C4? Anyone got info about the blasting cap shockwave velocity?

correct me if i am wrong, but the explosives used in a claymore is usually c4, so both should not explode when hit by a bullet.

i am not sure about claymore but i am pretty sure that c4 will not explode by normal bullet.

I know very well that hand grenades go bang. I have throwed some real ones too. You're using strawman arguments all the time.

I'd like to ask one last time: I don't really care what you think will happen when hand grenade explodes near explosives if you're not willing or able to back your claims with evidence. Link a youtube video where a hand grenade detonates explosives, and that it's possible to identify the device is actually a hand grenade. Anything, not just your common sense (once common sense said that the Earth is flat or that the Sun revolves around the Earth).

If you're unable to provide evidence when asked, you must step off and reassess your claims.

Which is it?

Do you think that the explosion pressure rises, flying debris, the temperature rises, and the fact that the grenade consists of a metal is fiction? Why did you decide that I have to prove to you that this is not fiction?

I'm not claiming that the pressure don't rise. I'm not claiming that there are no flying debris. I'm not claiming that the temperature don't rise. I'm not claiming that the grenade is not ferromagnetic.

On the other hand, you are claiming that the pressure can detonate pressure triggers. You are claiming that there are enough flying debris that can detonate some explosives. You are claiming that the temperature will activate temperature triggers. You are claiming that the grenade will have big enough magnetic field that it will activate magnetic detonators.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

It is important to understand that the hand grenade is not a New Year's fireworks. In the hand grenade contains enough explosive solid matter, which could have a devastating impact on the explosives are a few centimeters from a hand grenade. If you are interested in the details of the explosion occurring processes, you can study them yourself in more detail. The same is not required to spread links not relevant to the subject.

No. You listed 4 claims that didn't explain anything but your opinions how they should be. If you can provide concrete evidence (not just your opinions) that this is actually true then I would be more than happy to admit I was wrong.

Don't bring any deities into this discussion, especially if you don't understand how burden of proof works, and because it would have absolutely nothing to do with blowing explosives with grenades...

I think that if you can not provide evidence that this is not possible, it is also a proof that this is possible, is not it :) (according to your logic).

1. Mines (pressure) from the grenade will explode, as garnet in the center of the explosion generates a pressure of about 100 kilograms per square centimeter (maybe more).
2. Mines (wire stretching) from the grenade will explode, as grenade creates a blast wave and fragmentation effect that will have an impact on a wire stretching.
3. Mines (heat sensor) from the grenade will explode, as the explosion of a grenade is an increase in temperature.
4. Mines (magnetic sensor) from the grenade will explode if you throw it close enough, as it is made of metal.

You can deny it?...

Are you seriously going to shift the burden of proof over to me?! It's like saying that "prove to me there isn't a celestial teapot orbiting between Mars and Earth. You can't, therefore there is"! The burden of proof is on the one making the claim. You're making a claim, I'm demanding satisfactory evidence. This is how it goes in real world.

You made 4 claims. Now provide _evidence_ to back those up. Give me an article or an actual test )with more than just a topic "antitank grenade") that demonstrates you can detonate mines by throwing grenades at them.

Neutralization of anti-tank mines:
http://www.sonicbomb.com/iv1.php?vid=grenade_at&id=269&w=400&h=300&ttitle=Antitank%20grenade

@tyler2
"If a mine is triggered by falling bullets and explosives..."
Yes. "IF"! You're making an _assumption_ that this is the case. If you're unable to back your claims with evidence, then there's no real reason to claim it is so...

@tyler2
Name of the video: antitank grenade.
No mention what exactly happens in the video. No mention what was thrown, nothing.

You could copy the movie and change the topic to "exploding chicken eggs".

I think that the people involved in ACE knows more about it than we are. If they did, this was a good reason. I showed you 4 points that explains why this is possible, in principle, but that is not enough. As proof of this is not possible of arguments, there are suggestions are based on the assumption that in real life, you can destroy a mine with a device "Anti-Personnel Obstacle Breaching System", which undermines the mines by shrapnel charges (like grenades). There is also a video (unfortunately I can not find) which demonstrate how the M1A2 tank gunner undermines the anti-tank mine with a machine gun 7.62 mm. There is no evidence that God exists, but that does not mean that it is not.

You may be of the same mind and the next, I'm not going to convince you. If a mine is triggered by falling bullets and explosives, it also explodes by a grenade here do not need proof, as it obvious. Anti-personnel mine (pressure sensor) also explode if it drops a stone weighing a few pounds. On it you will also need proof?...

@tyler2
You can't use your example with pressure/detonator type explosives... Surely your common sense says that?

@tyler2

Give me evidence that supports your claim and I'm willing to stand corrected. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim (you).

Gekkibi: Hand grenade explosion generates a pressure of about 80 kilograms per square centimeter at a distance of 5 meters, which is enough to trigger the mines with pressure fuse.

Here is an example: You set a land mine with a tight wire (if you touch the taut wire, the mine will explode.) Then you throw a grenade next to mine, the explosion of the grenade hitting hurt taut wire, then the mine explodes. This is common sense. It is clear to all things, I suppose.

CKykis: I remind you once again that it is about the interaction of grenades with explosives, not just C4. What is relevant here are created by me earlier ticket? You should be more polite I think.

Gekkibi: If the mine is being undermined by the interaction with a bullet or bomb, why it should not interact with a grenade, call the cause?

CHykis: Here is a question not only of C4, please do not be nervous.

At the moment, anti-tank mines and anti-personnel mines only interact with explosives (C4, explosive satchel), and provided that the mine has got some bullets, it does not cause problems. But there is no interaction with a grenade.

"But the anti-tank mines and anti-personnel mine definitely needs to interact with a grenade, as the explosion of a grenade creates all the necessary conditions for the destruction of mines, such as pressure, temperature and shrapnel damage. "

Got a source?

if mines have c4 as an explosive component so it can't be exploded too mate. if something not so stable - yes, it can be.

I'm nervous because you create ticket for detonate c4 with ways it can't be.

"Common sense" -argument, eh? Sorry, I don't believe your common sense unless you can provide us with credible evidence to support your claim.

Before you can provide it, I have no reason to believe you can detonate explosives with grenades and bullets in real life.

no, c4 can't be exploded with grenade. go read something about before you report!

#12482(c4) and #6096(explosives and mines) are related to this issue

I'm not sure what to detonate the C4. But the anti-tank mines and anti-personnel mine definitely needs to interact with a grenade, as the explosion of a grenade creates all the necessary conditions for the destruction of mines, such as pressure, temperature and shrapnel damage.

We are talking about the interaction of explosives with a grenade, which is absent.

Agreed, I removed the mention of duplicate. You might still want to mark them as related tough.

Also resets firing mode after exiting vehicle.

Also optics mode is reset.

What is your dynamic light setting? Putting it to ultra should hotfix the issue.

What exactly is the bug? Could you provide a screenshot or a video?

Sure, http://youtu.be/4dDJz8Lhn3A

I was have low dynamic light settings, will try ultra, but it's still bug, and i am hope developers fix this bug =)

Man, try read about suppressor somewhere. Type suppressor at wikipedia, and some read. Suppressor Device must hide some shot sound, and Visible muzzle flash. But at third arma is no reason with or without suppressor shooting, it blinked without difference

Suppressors do not hide light. This game is not Colladooty. If you are firing at AI from medium range (at least 400m) and they instantly spot you, that is an AI issue.

Seems a realistic request, if only for pistols : http://www.waltherforums.com/forum/free-range-time/25297-will-suppressor-hide-muzzle-flash.html