Why No Mk. 20 Rockeyes??

[Jetguy06]

Hey guys, I apologize if this has been asked before, and I'm sure it has given the age of DCS A-10, but why is the CBU-100 a.k.a. Mk. 20 Rockeye not implemented for the A-10?

 

IMHO, this bomb would be a fantastic supplement (or even replacement?) for the CBU-97/105.

 

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the CBU-97/105... it's a fantastic marvel of combat engineering, and highly effective against armored vehicles. Buuut...

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, PLEASE, but I've read before that the A-10 hasn't and doesn't carry these. The Mk. 20, however, is a weapon that has been used in conjunction with the A-10 almost since the Hawg was first used in combat.

 

That being said, even if the CBU-97/105 actually is used with the A-10, why not have the (legendary) Rockeye? It just seems like there's a huge gap in battlefield functionality due to the lack of the Mk. 20.

 

For example, in the Georgian Hammer campaign, I can go in with a choice of the following on the inner hardpoints (at the wingroots and under the fuselage... Please forgive me for forgetting the hardpoint numbers):

 

Mk. 82's (AIR's or conventional)

Mk. 84's

GBU's (10's, 12's, 38's, etc.)

CBU-87/103's

CBU-97/105's

 

The Mk. 82 AIR's are, IMO, far too impractical to use on anything other than APC's or soft targets, NOT MBT's, as you have to get VERY low because of the drag chute, and you break Rule Numero Uno of CAS; NEVER OVERFLY AN ARMED TARGET!!

 

AS for conventional Mk. 82's, I might as well not even load them onto the aircraft, since JTAC never allows me to use them. I had been looking forward to trying out 3/9 Consent to Release mode in the campaign using these bombs on a group of MBT's, but it seems JTAC isn't interested.

 

Mk. 84's and pretty much all the GBU's are far too big and impractical, even for MBT's.

 

CBU-87's don't even pierce the skin of MBT's, and the bomblets get so scattered that you're lucky if ONE bomblet hits one.

 

Finally the CBU-97's are great, but aside from the concerns of the A-10 actually carrying them, I find the parachutes take a little too long to descend in most scenarios, and they are, IMO, FAR too susceptible to wind and environmental conditions as they are floating down, compared to CBU-87-like free-fall bomblets.

 

I think the Mk. 20 fills the gap perfectly, with the proper size and weight, the cluster capability, the strength of the munitions (designed to take out MBT's) and the free-fall characteristics of the bomblets.

 

So that's my question... Why hasn't this fantastic weapon that has been a part of the A-10 all these many years not been implemented in the sim, and is there any plan to implement it in the future? Thanks guys!!

[DUSTY]

Hey Jetguy, here's my humble opinion on your post hope you don't take offense!

 

IMHO, this bomb would be a fantastic supplement (or even replacement?) for the CBU-97/105.

If you seriously want a weapon first fielded in the late 1960s to replace the awesome work ED has done on the latest SFWs I'd say you're mad!? :D Personally I'd rather ED prioritise about 16 million other things before implementing the mk-20. With the implementation of some Vietnam era aircraft by 3rd party devs you might still be in luck though.

 

It just seems like there's a huge gap in battlefield functionality due to the lack of the Mk. 20.

Not sure how you came to that conclusion, I don't think there is a single scenario where the mk-20 could not be outperformed by the CBU87/103,97/105. Please let me know if you can think of a scenario - I'd be genuinely interested.

 

Mk. 84's and pretty much all the GBU's are far too big and impractical, even for MBT's.

Mmmm, again I disagree. Depending very much on the scenario and the threats I love a good bit of 'tank plinking' from above the IR SAM/AAA MEZ with GBU-12s. If you put enough energy on the weapon, even if they run they are still doomed. Check out this awesome loadout below. Very recent image also!

 

Pictured is an A-10C of the 75th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron "Tiger Sharks", 23rd Fighter Group, 23rd Wing (ACC), Moody AFB, Georgia, currently combat deployed to Incirlik AB, Turkey, in support of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR).

CBU-87's don't even pierce the skin of MBT's, and the bomblets get so scattered that you're lucky if ONE bomblet hits one.

87's are not designed to be used against think skinned targets, they are an area attack weapon designed with thin skin vehicles and infantry targets in mind. Also are you familiar 'Height of Function' (HOF) feature of these weapons? If not read on.

 

Finally the CBU-97's are great, but aside from the concerns of the A-10 actually carrying them, I find the parachutes take a little too long to descend in most scenarios, and they are, IMO, FAR too susceptible to wind and environmental conditions as they are floating down, compared to CBU-87-like free-fall bomblets.

 

Have you seen this video? It's a wonderful explanation of the SFW and I recommending watching if you're not fully familiar with the weapon:

[ame]

[/ame]

 

So that's my question... Why hasn't this fantastic weapon that has been a part of the A-10 all these many years not been implemented in the sim, and is there any plan to implement it in the future? Thanks guys!!

 

Well to answer your question, probably simply because the weapon is outdated. Although there are still Mk-20s in the US arsenal (and I think the USMC have used them in training in the not too distant past) they have a horrific dud rate. Here's something you might find interesting:

 

"Under the current policy issued by the US Department of Defense in July 2008, by the end of 2018 the US will no longer use cluster munitions that result in more than 1% UXO. Until 2018, use of cluster munitions that exceed the 1% UXO rate must be approved by the Combatant Commander. Also, military departments will initiate removal of all cluster munition stocks “that exceed operational planning requirements or for which there are no operational planning requirements” from active inventories as soon as possible, but not later than 19 June 2009. These excess cluster munitions will be demilitarized as soon as practicable.

The only existing US cluster munitions that might meet the 99% reliability standard are CBU-97, CBU-105, and M898 SADARM Sensor Fuzed Weapons with self-destruct and self-deactivation mechanisms. According to Department of Defense statistics from 2004, Sensor Fuzed Weapons make up 3,099 of the 5,543,149 US cluster munitions."

- http://archives.the-monitor.org/index.php/cp/display/region_profiles/theme/313

 

Cheers

[mvsgas]

Mk-20 are real old weapon, entering service in the late 60 IIRC. One of the mayor problems with it and one of the factors leading to it retirement from the inventory is that it created a lot of unexplored ordnance (UXO). Not sure if they are in use anymore. Not that it matter in DCS.

 

The International Defense Review magazine was told, "A 30-40 percent failure rate for U.S. Rockeyes has created a major problem over large areas of Kuwait.

 

This is a direct PDF link to SCATTERABLE MUNITIONSUNEXPLODED ORDNANCE (UXO)=FRATRICIDE paper.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwikuOmHkNbLAhUO22MKHcCaBHoQFggrMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fhandle.dtic.mil%2F100.2%2FADA264233&usg=AFQjCNElG5OcUx332MnPsty3dSYl9MK4gQ&sig2=NZKS0zFzutopnE9s0pruzQ&bvm=bv.117604692,d.cGc

 

P.S.

Sniped :D

Edited March 23, 2016 by mvsgas

[Aginor]

Being used to them from FC2 I missed them in DCSW when they were removed, but actually they are pretty bad compared to the newer ones (CBU-87 and CBU-97) so I don't really mind now.

For a Vietnam era scenario we would need them though.

[Eddie]

The Rockeye was replaced by the CBU-87 CEM, and the CEM is much more effective against all target types (including armour) than the Rockeye.

 

DCS just doesn't reflect its capability vs light & medium armour (it should happily defeat anything from T-72 and down).

 

You simply need to use the right weapon, weapon configuration, and delivery profile for the target and the desired effects on target.

[kolga]

...Pictured is an A-10C of the 75th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron "Tiger Sharks", 23rd Fighter Group, 23rd Wing (ACC), Moody AFB, Georgia, currently combat deployed to Incirlik AB, Turkey, in support of Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR)...

Cheers

 

A bit OT but isn't that Snoopy's squadron?

[Deezle]

I don't think I've ever managed to kill anything with a Mk20 in DCS. It's horrid weapon as currently modeled.

[Sryan]

You can adjust the sensor fuze height for the radar altimeter in the CBU's. This way you don't have to wait for effect, or see your chutes drift.

[Snoopy]

A bit OT but isn't that Snoopy's squadron?

 

;)

[DUSTY]

Well I'll be damned, is that what I think it is on this F/A-18?

 

 

A United States Navy F-18 Hornet aircraft flies over Iraq, March 3, 2016. The United States stands with a coalition of more than 60 international partners to assist and support the Iraqi Security Forces to degrade and defeat ISIL. Coalition forces fly daily missions in support of Operation Inherent Resolve.(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Corey Hook)

[Snoopy]

Well I'll be damned, is that what I think it is on this F/A-18?

 

A United States Navy F-18 Hornet aircraft flies over Iraq, March 3, 2016. The United States stands with a coalition of more than 60 international partners to assist and support the Iraqi Security Forces to degrade and defeat ISIL. Coalition forces fly daily missions in support of Operation Inherent Resolve.(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Corey Hook)

 

Looks like a training munition to me.

 

That being said, we don't carry them on an A-10 anymore.

[Vampyre]

Well I'll be damned, is that what I think it is on this F/A-18?

 

 

A United States Navy F-18 Hornet aircraft flies over Iraq, March 3, 2016. The United States stands with a coalition of more than 60 international partners to assist and support the Iraqi Security Forces to degrade and defeat ISIL. Coalition forces fly daily missions in support of Operation Inherent Resolve.(U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Corey Hook)

 

Looks like a PDU-5/B Leaflet dispenser to me...:music_whistling:

 

The casing is a Mk7 though, which is the same as used by the CBU-99 and CBU-100's

[DUSTY]

Thanks for the info Vampyre, that would certainly make sense.

 

It's interesting how the MK-7 has a yellow AND blue stripe on it. A conflict of sorts considering yellow indicates live ord and blue means inert training round.

[Vampyre]

Thanks for the info Vampyre, that would certainly make sense.

 

It's interesting how the MK-7 has a yellow AND blue stripe on it. A conflict of sorts considering yellow indicates live ord and blue means inert training round.

 

The yellow is for the explosive bursting munition and the blue is for what the canister contains... training materials... if you will.:smilewink:

The blue X is a dead giveaway for the PDU-5/B. We dropped a number of them on Iraq and Afghanistan on deployment.

[kolga]

;)

 

;)

[Auric]

Hi! You are missing the Rockeyes and the LAU-61?

Here is the solution: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=182143