Clusterbombs are broken
-
I honestly think he just missed. BA900 SFW is not a very large footprint. Judging by AOA it was <300 knots release against the general area of a moving battalion. Miss any vehicle by 400’ or so and you come up empty.
-
Highest object density.
-
Test#2. CBU 103s and CBU 105s both at 3,000 BA and AD of 1.0
2 hits. Video uploading now. Thanks for the help in testing, I really appreciate it. -
This post is deleted! -
2nd test. CBU 103s and CBU 105s both at 3,000 BA and AD of 1.0
AI Wingman had the same loadout as me. As before, AI wingman hit nothing. I hit only 2 targets.
You guys are the experts on the lethality of these munitions; I totally accept that. I am just really surprised that the AI can’t hit anything with them.
-
2nd test. CBU 103s and CBU 105s both at 3,000 BA and AD of 1.0
AI Wingman had the same loadout as me. As before, AI wingman hit nothing. I hit only 2 targets.
You guys are the experts on the lethality of these munitions; I totally accept that. I am just really surprised that the AI can’t hit anything with them.
With those parameters and drops you should at least get some more kills
Have you tested other Cluster munition? CBU55 /58 MK20?
-
Right now I’m focusing on CBU 87s, 97s, 105s and 103s. I find it weird that GBU-12s are looking to be more effective than clusters against armor.
-
I think AI have no concept of leading moving targets, especially WCMD. Weapon effects and weapon accuracy are two different ideas so let’s treat them separately.
CEM should require dense pattern to be effective against MBT armor since it is hit-to-kill. Fragments of CEM is only good for I think ~11mm of penetration. Low density CEM against soft targets should be investigated. Ideally low density will harm soft targets but not hard targets. CEM against T-series tank probably has a burst which only covers 2-3 tanks in size when configured for that target type. It’s not so much an area weapon as a kind of unitary warhead. What I don’t know what is a reasonable density for soft target engagement. I think probably a 200x300’ pattern with a ~1200 HOF is about right for being “hell on Earth” but not super concentrated for tank killing. You can probably get 5-10 soft targets inside this footprint at normal BN spacing.
SFW is a balancing act. Since real SFW must pair skeet to target 1:1 (at best, often multiple skeet target same object) this naturally limits damage potential to even groups of targets packed tightly. But Falcon does not model this fact since it is just CBU generic with different numbers. It has to be coded such that it isn’t so powerful you drop on 1000 tanks and kill all 1000 just because they happened to be in the “super CBU” radius. Soft target damage should be similar between CEM and SFW.
-
I’ve not had any problems with 87s at 2000 BA on stationary targets in 4.34. If anything it seems the footprint of the 87 is a bit bigger in 4.34 versus 4.33. CBUs aren’t the best choice against movers. That is a hard solution to make for getting hits since the aircraft isn’t going to give you a leading the target solution. If I know it is going against a mover or potential mover I pick mavs or LJDAMs.
-
I have also the same feeling that something is wrong: the damage range of this weapon seems to be too low as if only one submunition had been dropped… instead of 10 submunitions with 4 skeet type warheads in a single dispenser, providing 40 weapons total which can cover an area of about 500 feet by 1,200 feet…it seems be far from this case in BMS.
Now as Textron Systems has decided to stop cluster bombs production in 2016 …so it is maybe a good occasion not to use them in 2019 with BMS
-
CBUs have been illegal since 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition#Convention_on_Cluster_Munitions
But of course some countries find them too useful and haven’t signed the convention. Hideous devices and I’m ex Military!!!
-
CBUs have been illegal since 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_munition#Convention_on_Cluster_Munitions
But of course some countries find them too useful and haven’t signed the convention. Hideous devices and I’m ex Military!!!
Yep looks like 99% of the nations who own 0.1% of the cluster bombs agreed to the ban
-
Yep looks like 99% of the nations who own 0.1% of the cluster bombs agreed to the ban
…and you are smiling why? CBUs are hideous weapons
-
Because it doesn’t matter that they’re hideous weapons, what matter they’re just so bloody effective that the only nations calling for the ban were the ones who didn’t use them in first place, and anybody who did didn’t give a hoot about the ban. All that talk about morality is just smokescreen for plain old realpolitik. It’s cheaper to ban a weapon than to develop countermeasures. Nobody bans weapons which are genuinely useful to them, no matter how awful they might be.
I’ve tried using rockets in BMS, and needless to say, CBUs it is. Rockets have potential to be effective against unarmored movers, but in practice, the ones mounted on Vipers are just not lethal enough. Visual delivery is the only option with those, making things worse. Rockets are good for helos, because using bombs on them is perilous thing at best. The only more futile thing I’ve done was trying to strafe a truck with the cannon (it probably would’ve worked better if it was preplanned, but it’s not exactly something you expect to be doing…). My technique probably wasn’t best (we need a rockets/gun training TE), so I can’t say for sure they aren’t good for anything, but CBUs are rather easier to use.
Though to be entirely honest, when I’m doing BAI or SCAR, I just bring Mavs. Movers, non-movers, tanks, SHORAD, you name it, Mavs work against it, and from further away than you can loft a CBU from.
-
…and you are smiling why? CBUs are hideous weapons
Sarcastic smile.
About my point on the topic, if the top military powers (USA,Russia,China) didn’t sign, then it becomes kind of pointless that the respective allies sign or not.
-
This post is deleted! -
I am cancelling my membership of this forum because there are far too many people who do not have a bloody clue about war. I wish you all well but people like @Viper37 are scum of the earth!
Bye
Likewise and thanks for the smile
-
This post is deleted! -
Well, what else could be expected out of a bunch of flyboys? From up there, the worst part of war is just a pretty light show. TGPs don’t zoom as much as to give you a good view at all the disembodied corpses and bloody carnage doesn’t show up well on thermal (or B/W video for that matter). We’re the guys who see the big red-guarded “NUCLEAR CONSENT” switch in the 'pit and wish it’ll get implemented someday (sadly, it’s probably too classified for that to happen)…
-
Well, what else could be expected out of a bunch of flyboys? From up there, the worst part of war is just a pretty light show. TGPs don’t zoom as much as to give you a good view at all the disembodied corpses and bloody carnage doesn’t show up well on thermal (or B/W video for that matter). We’re the guys who see the big red-guarded “NUCLEAR CONSENT” switch in the 'pit and wish it’ll get implemented someday (sadly, it’s probably too classified for that to happen)…
We dont give a shit dude.
WE ARE HERE TO KILL ALL NON COOPERATIVE PARTIES and they will pay the ****ing price!