DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion

[renhanxue]

In reality the Viggen only ever had one offensive bomb option, the 120 kg sprängbomb m/71. It was carried on a mount which took four bombs per pylon; max four mounts for a total of 16 bombs. It's a HE-frag bomb which can be fuzed for either contact or proximity detonation. Retarding parachute optional, minimum arming time around 4 seconds after drop.

 

The same bomb mount could also be used for lysbomb m/71, a parachuted illumination bomb.

[OziRekt]

Is the sprängbomb of any use against APCs/MBTs?

[mattebubben]

Is the sprängbomb of any use against APCs/MBTs?

 

Well it should be comparable with the russian 100kg bomb (slightly more powerfull but its the closest comparision)

 

So APCs should be doable but MBTs would be more unreliable.

 

But then again its hard to kill MBTs in dcs Reliably with unguided dumb bombs smaller then 1000lbs.

 

But MK82 does not reliably kill MBTs either.

 

So a bomb wont be your main AT weapon.

 

Thats what you have the AGM-65s (RB75) for.

[WinterH]

Slightly unrelated, but now that the bombs are mentioned, want to share an experience of mine.

 

I made simple mission to see F-5 attacking ground targets about a week ago, before the stable got updated. Two f-5s armed with Mk82, M117 and CBU52 as well as me in a saber with bombs & rockets fooling around. Targets for AI F-5s are 4 static IL-76s parked on an airbase.

 

Before the update any of the mentioned bombs by F-5s would obliterate the target IL-76 including Mk82. Since update, neither Mk82, nor M117 seem to destroy them. Ilyushin gets damaged and it takes AI many bombs to destroy them.

 

Sooo, it seems with each DCS version, our bombs get weaker and weaker :D. Therefore I wonder how will 120 kgs perform when Viggen comes.

 

It seems even larger bombs pretty much require direct hits or verymuch close misses to kill even a BMP1 now. And dumb bombs aren't exactly meant for sniping things with.

[fixen]

We should get the Rb-04E since it is specially designed to fit the viggen. The E can also do sea skimming.

[Aginor]

Well it should be comparable with the russian 100kg bomb (slightly more powerfull but its the closest comparision)

 

So APCs should be doable but MBTs would be more unreliable.

 

But then again its hard to kill MBTs in dcs Reliably with unguided dumb bombs smaller then 1000lbs.

 

But MK82 does not reliably kill MBTs either.

 

Do you have any real world numbers on that?

 

Because I am quite sure that a direct hit or a very close one (below 5m distance in an open field) with an ordinary Mk-82 bomb will put any tank out of service.

[fixen]

Do you have any real world numbers on that?

 

Because I am quite sure that a direct hit or a very close one (below 5m distance in an open field) with an ordinary Mk-82 bomb will put any tank out of service.

 

He was taking about dcs I believe.

[mattebubben]

Do you have any real world numbers on that?

 

Because I am quite sure that a direct hit or a very close one (below 5m distance in an open field) with an ordinary Mk-82 bomb will put any tank out of service.

 

As fixen said im talking about DCS not real life.

 

Since in DCS bombs are very weak when it comes to splash radious.

 

a direct hit might take out the vehicle but even very close hits are not enough to take out even older tanks (Reliably).

 

Iv had instanced with the MK82 where i hit withing 10 meters of a unarmored truck without it being destroyed.

 

And its a well recorded facts that unguided bombs are less effective in DCS then they should be.

[Skjold]

The 120 kg bombs should be relativly harmless to anything but the lighest vehicles without direct hits but that isnt anything to do with Leatherneck but rather the weapon modelling of DCS as a whole. I don't know much about actual swedish doctrine but as a guess <- i would assume that the high number of low yield bombs are designed for anti-infantry operations or targeting lightly armoured convoys.

 

We should get the Rb-04E since it is specially designed to fit the viggen. The E can also do sea skimming.

 

Yes the RB 04E is the logical one and is confirmed, and the RBS 15 is confirmed aswell. If u didn't know, RBS 15 is the modern variant designed out of the RB 04, very advanced missile.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Skjold

[Aginor]

As fixen said im talking about DCS not real life.

 

Since in DCS bombs are very weak when it comes to splash radious.

 

a direct hit might take out the vehicle but even very close hits are not enough to take out even older tanks (Reliably).

 

Iv had instanced with the MK82 where i hit withing 10 meters of a unarmored truck without it being destroyed.

 

And its a well recorded facts that unguided bombs are less effective in DCS then they should be.

 

Ah, ok. I fully agree then. :)

[mattebubben]

One thing that is important thing to remember when it comes To the

AJ/AJS 37 viggen and its weapons is that Swedish Doctrine was purely defensive.

 

The Viggen was only ever to be used over Swedish (Friendly) Territory.

 

So No cluster munitions were allowed (until later when a safe type of "cluster munitions" entered service)

 

Since the risk for duds that could later be harmfull for the civilian population was seen to be to large (as seen from other international conflicts)

 

There was also no need for Runway Cratering weapons as Swedish Viggens would never operate over Hostile territory.

 

And if it came to the point where Soviet/Russian aircraft where operating from Runways in Sweden then then the war was already lost.

 

There was also not as large need for Heavy bombs since there was never a need for weapon to destroy bunkers or to take out factories or other large or reinforced structures.

 

So the 120kg bombs where seen to be optimal for the role of destroying smaller lighter targets such as truck convoys, infantry, supply depots,Radar stations or non reinforced buildings etc.

 

Since bombs were never seen as a main weapon against Tanks/Armor(that would be the job for RB 75s RB 05 and for the 135mm rockets)

 

So the 120Kg bomb allowed for more to be carried (Allowing for a wider spread of bombs thus covering more ground) and it was seen to be powerful enough for the job it was intended to do.

 

And Luckily that point never had to be tested.

 

One always needs to remember that the attack Viggen was only ever intended to be a defensive aircraft.

 

And as such it might seem to have odd armament or design choices compared to other strike aircraft of the same time period.

 

Since if you look at most other Strike aircraft of the same time period they use both Cluster munitions and their armaments include larger bombs in the 500+lb range.

 

Where as the Viggen uses neither for the same role and as such lacks some capatilities of other strikers.

But thats not a fault of the aircraft but rather due to the Doctrine of the only airforce that used it (since if it was exported those nations would likely have used different bombs aswell as cluster munitions).

Edited April 13, 2016 by mattebubben

[Farks]

The 120 kg bombs should be relativly harmless to anything but the lighest vehicles without direct hits but that isnt anything to do with Leatherneck but rather the weapon modelling of DCS as a whole. I don't know much about actual swedish doctrine but as a guess <- i would assume that the high number of low yield bombs are designed for anti-infantry operations or targeting lightly armoured convoys.

 

E1's mission was to hit targets of high strategic importance, so infantry and light armor was out of the question. It's more likely that the 120 kg bombs was to be used on supply lines, artillery batteries, radar stations, command posts, etc. All relatively unprotected targets that don't require heavier bombs to destroy or damage. And I suppose that's why the 250, 500 and 600 kg bombs were retired with the Lansen.

[BravoYankee4]

It would have been nice with the 500kg Brandbomb m/58 (napalm) :music_whistling:

[Skjold]

E1's mission was to hit targets of high strategic importance, so infantry and light armor was out of the question. It's more likely that the 120 kg bombs was to be used on supply lines, artillery batteries, radar stations, command posts, etc. All relatively unprotected targets that don't require heavier bombs to destroy or damage. And I suppose that's why the 250, 500 and 600 kg bombs were retired with the Lansen.

 

Wouldnt artillery batteries, supply lines & command posts be anti-infantry and targetting lightly armoured convoys? :P

 

I never said what type of priority any target had, i never suggested it was low priority targets :) The statement was generic though, so fair enough.

Edited April 13, 2016 by Skjold

[Farks]

Wouldnt artillery batteries, supply lines & command posts be anti-infantry and targetting lightly armoured convoys? :P

 

I never said what type of priority any target had, i never suggested it was low priority targets :) The statement was generic though, so fair enough.

Just explaining the swedish doctrine, since you mentioned it.

[outbaxx]

When I did my military service I had the opportunity to see a 4-group 37s drop 16 bombs each:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/freddan321/Viggenbomb2.jpg

[mattebubben]

When I did my military service I had the opportunity to see a 4-group 37s drop 16 bombs each:

http://i908.photobucket.com/albums/ac287/freddan321/Viggenbomb2.jpg

 

If only DCS made bomb impacts (and the smoke / dust cloud it generates) look this amazing.

 

And i assume it was a Awesome and terrifying sight to behold.

[outbaxx]

Just the split second before I snapped the picture everything was a big fire ball, too bad this was back in -97 and I only had a old camera were you forwarded the film for the next picture manually :)

I think the distance was about 1.5km. But as you can see on the top part, I did capture the bombs in the air from 3 of them :)

[Skjold]

Just the split second before I snapped the picture everything was a big fire ball, too bad this was back in -97 and I only had a old camera were you forwarded the film for the next picture manually :)

I think the distance was about 1.5km. But as you can see on the top part, I did capture the bombs in the air from 3 of them :)

 

Thanks for the pictures, cool stuff!

 

Just explaining the swedish doctrine, since you mentioned it.

 

Yeah thanks for the clarification :)

[mattebubben]

Just the split second before I snapped the picture everything was a big fire ball, too bad this was back in -97 and I only had a old camera were you forwarded the film for the next picture manually :)

I think the distance was about 1.5km. But as you can see on the top part, I did capture the bombs in the air from 3 of them :)

 

Where was this?

 

And the Pictures are good for the time period.

 

We are just a bit spoiled by the cameras we have today.

 

And especially by the quality of camera that exists on most phones.

 

But a Picture taken with a old camera is still 10 times better then no picture at all.

 

And those pictures are actually very good since you can see all the important things including the Falling bombs.

 

I mean you can see the bombs very clearly to the point where you can single out most of them and one can "Almost" count them.

Edited April 13, 2016 by mattebubben

[outbaxx]

Where was this?

 

Somewhere around Kalix I think

[Dahlbeck]

Looks like the Kalixfors/Lomben firing range.

[outbaxx]

Looks like the Kalixfors/Lomben firing range.

 

 

 

Not Kalixfors that's just outside Kiruna, but it could well have been Lomben.

[Dahlbeck]

I recall having seen a map on which the two (huge) ranges connect. But I agree it's probably Lomben as I have a very similar photo from my service, only the explosion is caused by 800 kg of TNT dug into a purpose built road bank (combat engineering exercise).

[mattebubben]

Does anyone know what kind of Salvo options the AJ/AJS 37 had when it comes to the Bombs.

 

Was it capable of dropping Singles or pairs or is it only capable of dropping all bombs at once (maby with a ripple time function?)