Best posts made by SyntaxErol
-
The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of)
As a huge weapons/systems nerd always like to test stuff on simulators. However, when it comes to CBU SFW systems, the performance seems lackluster.
First I looked up the values in the editor, they seemed reasonable(even higher) from what I saw on the wiki and other sites citing coverage of SFW series.
However, I found that out in-game performance in terms of coverage is much less than the values stated above (both editor and web sources).
The attack parameters are as follows AC is at 15k Feet. BA of bombs is set at 3000f at all tests. TGP was on point track on the destroyed tank. flying co-axis and directly above the enemy column of 4 tanks, CCRP release of a single 105 with 0 wind set on TE. Only the vehicle that was directly hit by the cbu body got destroyed. You can see that other tanks are well within the effective Killzone of 105 stated in the above resources using the tgp meterstick set in meters.
After this I tried to alter lots of parameters from the falcon bms editor. Pulling random levers around to achieve a noticeable difference. In the end, I managed to get 2 kills in the same 4 tank groups consistently but with severe alterations of the values:
Things that proved effective were changing the ammunition type to HE from AP and setting a higher blast radius which is copied over from CBU 5x series of bombs. Messing with damage and hit chance seems to do nothing (maybe hit chance is for 2D logic and damage was already high enough)
The frag circle is set at 430 meters (the closest value of reported SFW longitudinal cover area of 460) And while I can get 2 kills consistently when aimpoint is in middle of the group or leading element. The actual Killzone is still a lot smaller than reported coverage area.
(smoking vehicles were shot separately previously this image is to illustrate the frag circle of 430 meters on target)As an end user who doesn’t have access to the code itself, I’m guessing that I’m out of tools/ideas to improve the performance of this munition. I would like to hear about other players and devs/modders opinions/ideas.
-
RE: Santa's wishlist for BMS
Airbases having actual targets that matter beside runways.
Shooting:-Ammo storages : reducing amount/variety of stores on fragged flights.
-Bunkers : reducing actual number of aviable airframes
-Squadron buildings:reducing number of pilots thats aviable in a squadron
-Fuel depots: reducing max fuel aviable before takeoff for flights
-
Poor Mans HOTAS (HOGAS ?)
Hi everyone. Been flying Falcon with an old and trusty Logitech Extreme 3d pro for quite some time.
But flying in a HOTAS aircraft with such limited hardware is a chore.Thus I present you the HOGAS ! The poor man’s HOTAS.
With the help of Joystick Gremlin,Vjoy And HID-HIDE and a gamepad laying around you can experience the real basement pilot life.
-You need to setup 2 Vjoy devices, 1st one with 96 buttons and 1 HAT and 2nd one with 32 Buttons with no HAT (if you want to use my Gremlin profile. I randomly created the button numbers. Its a bit messy.)
-Right analog stick is setup as “Relative” in JG to make it act like an actual rotary axis. (radar elevation and man range doesn’t actually return to the center when let go. )
-Gamepad D-Pad acts as a modifier for TMS/CMS/DMS/Trim Hats. So you press the desired modifier and use the HAT on the stick to go up/down/left/right.
-You better hide your actual gamepad and joystick from the falcon using HID-Hide. it makes setting up much easier. (Otherwise, Launcher picks up actual buttons, not Vjoy device ones.)
Mapped button pictures and Joystick Gremlin profile in the link:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1kBQQCoPVHCJCbbIKTeo1GKqeBAOU18jY?usp=sharing -
RE: F-15C Cockpit Improvement
Great work @buraktunahan… would love to see your work on vipers as well !!
-
RE: The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of)
@jayb -34 manual page 226 have some insights on this. I dont think its MSl i tested in both near shore and kotan range which is pretty high and observed no change over the covarage.
-
RE: all types of f-16's cockpit and sounds files mod
I tried sound setitngs in your folder but the engine sounds are too overwhelming. is there a way to solve or change this. cant hear anything over the engine itself.
And also bitching betty coming from the left audio channel only -
RE: The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of)
Yes. As i said in my previous message. Im not expecting everything in killzone to be killed but expect the actual killzone would be larger. Thats my whole point.
Next thing i will try is flying lower and a bit faster to make canisters still have longitudinal speed when deployed at BA. Setting burst height to a lower setting would decrease the killzone so im not sure about changing BA
-
RE: Weird compression/alliasing on kneeboards.
@Dee-Jay Huge difference! Its not that i can read that from this wide of a fov but its not distracting and immersion breaking as before with artifacts. I think my default fov is 80 and max is 90. this two shot should be at 90.
-
RE: BMS - Other cockpits
@qawa @buraktunahan real nice work, love to see mudhen getting a facelift. Currently trying to “fix” current 4.37 F15E would love to use your work if its still relevant
-
RE: The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of)
@Snake122 said in The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of):
@white_fang do you doubt that the T-90 has suffered losses or that they were due to top attacks of SFW skeets level munitions?
Just saying the Oryx blog has documentated over 40 T-90s lost. Most of these probably due to top attack missiles like the Javelin, which admittedly are a different class than CBU-97 skeets.Also even if it can’t get through turret top armor, skeet probably can reach the engine compartment of most tanks from the top fairly easily, resulting in the worst kind of M kill. To be fair though, I’m not familiar with the T-90’s top armor levels.
Top armor on tanks are still low. The engine compartment of a t90 has hatches for maintenence which is a even lower armor value. However this is not the discussion here. Sfws fire at random heat/infrared signatures that resembles a vehicle while spinning in the air efp they fire can hit anywhere in a vehicle. Its not a guaranteed one shot kill miracle skeet (insert rambo shooting a helicopter with explosive tipped arrow)
However. The covarage of in game 97/105 is much less than reported figures. Thats obvious and you can see yourselves using tgp referances such as meterstick and frag circle.
I would be happy if the covarage would equal to reported values but some skeets miss/fail to destroy a target in killzone. This hitchance of skeets can be increased by dropping in pairs to same location. But thats not the case, while sfw destroy prettymuch everything in their smaller then reported killzone, they lack the covarage.
Im not after creating the wonder weapon, but these weapons have created to deal with extensive armored/vehicle quantity of redfor in staging phase of units but fail to do so imho.However @Kavelenko achieved success with 97. I will try to finetune bombdata with his procedures. Maybe 97s and 105s have a difference that i can not see. Or maybe lower altitude droppings of bombs with canisters still move at planes/columns axis in considerable speed yield to better longitudinal dispersion.
-
RE: 4.37.4 Update Semi-Public beta-testing
Was a tester for U3 and i would be happy to be included in this one also ! Thanks @tiag
-
RE: all types of f-16's cockpit and sounds files mod
@sheref well i used the settings from the file, but the “buzz” soundfile really drowns out everything else and everything is really too loud…
-
RE: The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of)
@Seifer Would love to hear about your friends employement of jsows. nailing the attack azimuth seems impossible to me, always reverting back to aligning jet with the column somehow
-
RE: all types of f-16's cockpit and sounds files mod
@sheref
ı put the engine sound to low to quiet it down but it didn’t do anything -
RE: The CBU 97/105 Effectiveness (lack there of)
@CriticalMass well, syatem altitude/range shouldnt effect cbu burst height. Burst height or “altitude” must be a simple radar altimeter onboard the munition, independent of launching aircrafts altitude. The target elevation error may result in bomb falling short or long because of ccrp solution would be wrong but bomb burst is independent of that solution.
Also observed in all shots cbu body landed at exactly where my tgp cross is.
-
RE: BMS Other Fighters Mafia (BMSOFM) Journal
@drtbkj rolling the drums…