Why use a CBU-87?

[AvgWhiteGuy]

I watched a video recently on YouTube that showed CBU-87's employed against a column of T-50 tanks in a low level, low dispersion CCIP run where the HOF and spin were set to 500. Killed all but 1 target rippling off 6 CBUs.

....it's about 5 years old.

 

Tried same thing on 6 T-50's and 3 AAA emplacements clustered in a 80 meter circle using 4 CBU-87s and it didn't do a thing. I can almost believe that the T-50s would survive but I can't imagine that the 3 AAA would ever survive with no overhead armor and all that live ammo around. The CBUs activated right above the the AAA (as illustrated by the smoke and dust) but not 1 target was destroyed.

I followed that with a single CBU-97 and that made a mess of everything, no survivors.

 

I then dropped an '87 low level-low dispersion on a group of insurgents with an AAA emplacement. Didn't do a thing.

 

FYI, this is with latest update

 

So why, when, where should I even employ the '87?

Edited December 24, 2017 by AvgWhiteGuy
clarity

[ex81]

I had the same results when I tried to kill a group of infantry. Most of them where still standing after the blast.

So I stopped to use CBU 87.

It`s a waste of time and munition.

[Mad_Max2]

May have something to do with the current damage modelling not being able to accurately represent the 87's damage to soft targets. At this point however, your right, 87's are a waste to bring along.

 

97's on the other hand are damn near a cheat code... though they do help when there's more targets than you have munitions for. :smilewink:

[Vitormouraa]

CBU-87s shouldn't be used against armored vehicles. It's an anti-personnel bomb. You should use it against trucks (Such as GAZ-66) or infantries. :)

[toutenglisse]

There is mainly a problem not with cbu87 but with A10c employing this bomb.

With the A10a the cbu87 is very effective against light armoured vehicules because it deploys frags at a given altitude so whatever the release altitude is the result is well concentrated.

With the A10c if you want cbu87 to be as effective you have to drop it so low that 1 more second diving and you crash, and so low that the ccip reticule has disappeared long time ago.... If you release it at a normal altitude the cbu87 impacts are super sparse and everywhere but on the target.

[feefifofum]

You can set the HOF on the CBU-87 in the DSMS inventory page for that station.

 

That said, I've still found them ineffective compared to a couple of well placed Mk82s or a pile of rockets when dealing with infantry.

[Nooch]

CBU-87s shouldn't be used against armored vehicles. You should use it against trucks (Such as GAZ-66) or infantries.

 

+1

[AvgWhiteGuy]

I never plan to use them against armored targets, I was just trying to duplicate results I saw on the video.

As I said at the start, I set the HOF and Spin at minimums so the blast radius would have been right on top of the targets....4 of them created a lot of smoke and dust, that's all. If it can't kill troops then it's useless.

Mad Max2 is most probably correct in the modeling because it didn't seem to be this way in previous versions.

Maybe I try again with the 103's and see if they are as useless as dropping a stale muffin.

[Kang]

I remember seeing someone drop two or three CBU-87s onto a target online not so long ago and neutralising plenty of infantry units due to the large spread. I guess that's one valid use as those guys are close to impossible to see and pinpoint usually.

[toutenglisse]

Thanks feefifofum - reducing HOF to 300 gives the same clusters pattern as a cbu87 dropped by A10a module.

But there is something wrong with the cbu87 and the A10c.

With A10a FC3 module these cbu87 are deadly against light armored vehicules, and with A10c module they are inefficient, just firecrackers. I tried all HOF and spin RPM combination. The best score against 15 light armored vehicules is 1 kill (but rare, that with full cbu87 load). With A10a FC3 module all the 15 vehicules are destroyed and I keep some cbu's to go home.