CBU-52 Bomblet Pattern

[MBot]

The CBU-52 bomblet patters seems too small.

 

This is the drop profile used:

 

 

Notice fuze function time 4.0 sec (which corresponds with what we have in DCS), fuze function altitude 1800 ft and impact patter diameter 692 ft.

 

 

 

This is the drop with ok parameters.

 

 

 

Impact pattern about one runway width.

 

 

 

Runway width is 200 ft. Bomb pattern diameter should have been 700 ft.

[MBot]

Arg, I just saw I did a little mix-up with the numbers, but it doesn't greatly change results. Just tried again with a 15° dive KIAS 540/KTAS 560 drop at 2900 ft (100 ft low). Bomb opened after 4 sec. at 1900 ft, 100 ft above planned height of burst (expected it to open 100 low at 1700 ft). Pattern diameter was again about 200 ft.

[diditopgun]

It's well what I have thought... And you prove it. Good job ! :thumbup:

Edited August 2, 2016 by diditopgun

[Azazel]

Well done, about 1/3 of what it should be.

[OutOnTheOP]

This problem is also affecting the Mk20 on the Mirage2K; it might well be an ED weapons coding issue rather than a Belsimtek module coding issue. Either way, it is incredibly frustrating on both modules.

 

I would be interested to see how altitude of release actually affects the in-game impact pattern; on M2K it doesn't seem to have any effect at all: release from 3000ft AGL or 20,000 ft AGL seems to have exactly the same pattern size. It's as if the submunitions just stop spreading out after a certain point.

[Sarge55]

Doesn't matter what altitude you drop the bomb at, it is the "burst" altitude setting which dictates the bomblet pattern/size.

 

Unless of course you release below the burst altitude.

[OutOnTheOP]

Doesn't matter what altitude you drop the bomb at, it is the "burst" altitude setting which dictates the bomblet pattern/size.

 

Unless of course you release below the burst altitude.

 

If you're using a radar-fuzed CBU like CBU87, CBU97, 103, or 105, sure.

 

But Mk20 and CBU52 don't have a radar proximity fuze. Instead, they have a time delay fuze. They dispense at a pre-determined time after separation from the aircraft, NOT based on height above terrain. Therefore, the higher the altitude of release, the higher the altitude of CBU opening for Mk20 and CBU52. The Mk20 was retrofitted with an FMU-140/B radar proximity fuze at some point, though. I'm pretty sure CBU-52 never was. Either way, the variants modeled in DCS at the moment are time-fuzed.

 

That *should* mean that higher releases result in wider dispersion of bomblets. But right now, it does not. So, something is broken in the weapon modeling.

Edited August 13, 2016 by OutOnTheOP

[Svend_Dellepude]

... So, something is broken in the weapon modeling.

 

Not implemented is my guess.

[OutOnTheOP]

Not implemented is my guess.

 

"It isn't done yet" and "it's done wrong" both result in broken modeling. What it seems like to me is that the bomblet dispersion is done as a single "entity", where each bomblet disperses out on a scripted path, and the whole formation then moves as a unit, rather than having each bomblet individually tracked along their trajectory the way cannon shells are. Once the bomblets reach the maximum scripted dispersion, they just fall in formation. Unfortunately, that means they never get very far apart.

[Holbeach]

The bomblets form a shallow, rather tight disc and not spun off sideways as the real ones are, so you end up with a shotgun, or torch pattern hit.

 

The only way to spread them, is lengthwise, using a low flat approach.

 

You can just make them out in this sequence from a video.

[cofcorpse]

Thank you for feedback! We'll look into this issue and will correct

[MBot]

Any news on this? CBU-52 are still almost useless, while it should be one of the primary A-G weapons of the aircraft.

[Pipe]

Yes please...any news on this would be great

Thx

[Vlerkies]

CBU's work just dandy on a A10C, box of matches dropped into a pond with the F5E, hopefully an oversight and a quick fix.

[Pipe]

Thank you for feedback! We'll look into this issue and will correct

 

Still waiting for this correction!.....thx

[Dino Might]

Question:

 

Should a CBU-52 with pattern coverage on a Shilka be able to kill it?

[MBot]

We would appreciate some developer feedback on this.

[ST0RM]

Bump. CBUs are still unusable.

[ST0RM]

Bump. Or will working CBU-52s be a payware addon?

[ST0RM]

Bump. Seems this is being ignored.

[Nooch]

I see his baro altitude is 3000 ft but the airfield could be above sea level. So it might have a noticeable impact on the results here. I don't know, just suggesting.

[MBot]

I see his baro altitude is 3000 ft but the airfield could be above sea level. So it might have a noticeable impact on the results here. I don't know, just suggesting.

 

Target elevation was just 60 ft, so neglecting.

[cicimicikiller]

Still not fixed, first time reported 31.7.2017

[MBot]

Still not fixed, first time reported 31.7.2017

 

2016 ;)

[johnv2pt0]

For anyone interested in this thread, Belsimtek has responded:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=195293

 

Basically, all bugs that they know about are not going to be addressed until they are done with their part of the F-18C module. Don't expect anything soon...