Cbu 103/105 ,not WCMD in 4.33?
-
This has become a very interesting discussion now.
-
While I agree that 4.32 JSOW were WAY overmodeled in damage effects, my understanding is that the 4.33 version of JSOWs is more realistic. Any BMS devs care to weigh in on this?
-
Assuming that JSOWs are now more realistic in 4.33, the argument that a weapon doesn’t give enough challenge is very naive. When I go into a fight, I do not care about ‘fairness’, ‘challenge’, or ‘balance’. Real life isn’t a rule-regulated sport. I want to utterly, immediately, and devastatingly overwhelm my opponent. If someone approaches me with a baseball bat, my response is to run them over with a Ford 150 pickup truck. F**k ‘challenge’. This philosophy goes far to explain my long ‘real life’ years thus far.
2@ maybe my English makes me hard to understand but i try to say that even if weapon is modelled 100% to RL , rest of simulation wont be. Terrain offers zero cover to red (no real jungle etc…) and AI won’t move and relocate units enough.
And this is not real life Btw …
You like to beat enemy (korea) without any danger , well thats fine for you.
I like to even loose my virtual war sometimes.
-
-
I for one would love to see this - folks needing accurate system altitude to be able to get decent bombing solutions in CCRP, implementation of A-CAL, possible long/short bomb errors due to incorrect system altitude, solution lag for CCIP over broken terrain… Id like to see steerpoint elevation no longer be the intended altitude of flyover. How awesome would it be to get the CCIP pipper displayed in a plane parallel to the ground, but above or below it due to incorrect system altitude?
Im not sure you can get a radar altimeter ranging solution. something to look into I guess.
Cool, I have an ally - we need to start lobbying for stuff like this. It would add so much to the pure bombing mechanics side of the sim. It is kinda ‘point and shoot’ without it.
Sure you can have a RAD ALT ranging sensor. It performs height above target calculations for the bombing trigonometry just like BARO ALT, in the absence of either the Radar or Laser.
-
Cool, I have an ally - we need to start lobbying for stuff like this. It would add so much to the pure bombing mechanics side of the sim. It is kinda ‘point and shoot’ without it.
Sure you can have a RAD ALT ranging sensor. It performs height above target calculations for the bombing trigonometry just like BARO ALT, in the absence of either the Radar or Laser.
I will be with you guys too!
-
This has become a very interesting discussion now.
-
While I agree that 4.32 JSOW were WAY overmodeled in damage effects, my understanding is that the 4.33 version of JSOWs is more realistic. Any BMS devs care to weigh in on this?
-
Assuming that JSOWs are now more realistic in 4.33, the argument that a weapon doesn’t give enough challenge is very naive. When I go into a fight, I do not care about ‘fairness’, ‘challenge’, or ‘balance’. Real life isn’t a rule-regulated sport. I want to utterly, immediately, and devastatingly overwhelm my opponent. If someone approaches me with a baseball bat, my response is to run them over with a Ford 150 pickup truck. F**k ‘challenge’. This philosophy goes far to explain my long ‘real life’ years thus far.
This has become interesting, and it raises what to me has been the question. Which is, knowing the relative payloads of cbu-87,for example, and JSOW, how /why is/was JSOW a “mini nuke” ? Was it “artificially enhanced” in 4.32? Is it still?
Don’t get me wrong, I love BMS and am not complaining. I also get the “greater challenge” concept. Even I don’t load up with HARMs, for example. My favorite kills are still Mav kills, though I am liking -103’s more and more. However, IMHO, I would like As Real As It Gets. If RL has x,y,z, I would like to see them. too. And, I will use them, given the tactical situation. For example, at the start of a campaign when I know I’ll be knee deep in bandits without escort and lucky to get within 20 miles of the target, I want standoff.
And btw, sign me up for what Blue and Adam are talking about. -
-
The JSOW-A produced kills of truck-like targets separated by 1,540’ (300m). The footprint from videos appears to be about 1/3 or 1/4 of the burst height. Since the highest possible dispense for the JSOW-A is 2,500’ the maximum footprint is expected no greater than 830’ (270m). This CBU-87/103 with HOF 3000’ (low spin setting) producing a 400x200m footprint at the largest. EGEA of 500’ should produce a significantly tighter ground footprint (~30m wide, probably a bit longer than wide).
The JSOW against soft targets remains overpowered strictly in terms of footprint size. A 500m wide swath of assured destruction especially at moderate EGEAs is too much. Strictly by submunition density calculation it’s hard to believe. Giving a lethal radius of 202 BLU-97 at 7m, an acceptable area ratio of 2:1; the maximum area is a circle 140m in radius. To kill trucks 300m apart each of the 145 munitions must be responsible for a 12.4m kill radius at minimum with no overlap.
In BMS I’ve found that HOF or EGEA has absolutely no change of terminal effect for JSOW-A or CBU-103 or CBU-87. No wait, -87 does at least. I can even set HOF to 6000’ or 1’ or maybe even more A 300’ HOF CBU-87 will be scalpel precise (50m away truck unharmed).
-
CBU 105’s work great in VIS mode, make sure you have smart scaling enabled though or its like looking for a needle in a haystack, the new weapon systems are good they just need learning, great fun.:D