[REPORTED]GBU 38 fails most of the time

[bigbear]

Hi guys! I have been away from DCS for the past 4 years and am now excited to get back into it. I started off by revving up the A-10C and fly the East-East Georgia - Spring mission to re-acquaint myself with everything.

 

No problems with CCIP for the bombs in that mission, but I noticed that the GBU 38 just doesn't hit its mark on almost all attempts. I went through a bunch of tutorials, both written and on-line (specifically by Grim Reapers as one example) and I seem to be doing everything they say -- but the GBU 38 falls wide most of the time. This is weird because it is probably the easiest to setup and use. I notice this problem on both World 2.5 and World 2.5.6. Are others experiencing this? This is really too bad because you only get just enough ordinance to finish the mission (even with orders to your buddy-plane) so it makes the entire mission rather unplayable if you desire to actually finish all your objectives.

 

I have tested it by running many, many missions in which I do nothing else except use a GBU 38 to bomb the two trucks at the first steerpoint. (I would normally use just the guns for that if running the mission "for real".) In the past, if I recall correctly, I would have been able to mark a target on the ground between the two trucks and both would have been blown up. Now, it doesn't matter whether a single truck or a spot on the ground is marked as a target, the GBU 38 will fall way off the mark. In fact, it appears that the explosion calculations aren't quite right either, since I even tried a GBU 38 on the patrol at waypoint 3, and it actually fell in the middle of them all, but the explosion left a big hole in the ground right next to a couple of soldiers who seemed to be bored with the whole thing and didn't even bother running for cover.

 

The mission has you flying right from the start with all the necessary systems active. So I just do this to set up the bomb at the first steerpoint:

Select the GBU 38 in DSMS

Select A-G in TGP and make it SOI

Use ChinaHat back long to move the TGP to the steerpoint

Use DMS to zoom in to the target

Use TMS forward short to stabilize the ground

Slew to the target and use TMS forward long to create the SPI

Line up the target cue to the ASI in the HUD and keep the aircraft level

Wait until the Manual Release light comes on and press the bomb release button

 

I am aware of that stuff about how a bomb can overshoot a target if you don't take into account the angle of your plane to the target when locking in the SPI. But that just isn't happening here. Bombs are falling what appears to be hundreds of feet away to the right or left. I never had problem with the GBU 38 but I just wanted to see if any of you gurus can spot any folly in my ways and help me See the Light.

Edited March 3, 2020 by bigbear

[ac5]

Your procedure seems correct.

No such problems here.

Try to aim at the base of whatever you are trying to hit.

[bigbear]

Thanks for responding, ac5. Like I say, I am aware of the issue of the angle when trying to make the SPI, so I have even set the SPI by first flying over the target and placing the SPI when I am directly over it, and then circling around to approach the target again to release the bombs. No success. Note that if the problem was related to the wrong angle when taking the SPI, my understanding is that the bomb should have hit at some point beyond the target, not hundreds of yards to the left or the right of it.

 

I need to qualify my results today, however. When I just started the program up again today, I was forced to update the 2.6.5 to the latest subversion. With that, instead of getting hits about 1/25 times, I am able to hit the target about 1/6 of the time. Maybe ED made a slight fix, but it wasn't good enough I'm afraid.

 

I am getting pretty fed up with the A10-C. Maybe I should give this up and go to the Spitfire until they can straighten out their weapons for the A10-C.

Edited March 5, 2020 by bigbear

[ac5]

Ah I see.. you are on the beta...

I am on the release version, 2.5, no problems, as I said.

Must be a thing of the beta......

[BIGNEWY]

Hi

 

this is already reported, it is not new to 2.5.6

 

thanks

[bigbear]

Thanks, BigNewY. Yes, as I mentioned, it is a problem in 2.5 as well. I hope ED can fix it soon. I really want to be able to play the missions.

[ac5]

Strange... My gbu‘s 38 are mostly right on the money, especially with the

A-10, but also with the F-18.....

[QuiGon]

With the F/A-18 my GBU-38s almost never hit currently. They always miss by 5-10m, which usally still kills soft targets, but not tanks. In the past (half a year ago) this was not an issue and they always hit right on target.

Haven't dropped enough 38s with the A-10C lately to say anything about that.

[BIGNEWY]

Strange... My gbu‘s 38 are mostly right on the money, especially with the

A-10, but also with the F-18.....

#

 

You are correct generally they are on target, however we are looking into some issues where they will be off target, possibly an elevation issue.

 

thanks

Edited March 6, 2020 by BIGNEWY

[Bl00dWolf]

Yep, same for me. Not always, but most of a time. About 1m-5m of error.

On F\A-18C LOT 20.

TGP, TOO mode.

[bigbear]

#

 

You are correct generally they are on target, however we are looking into some issues where they will be off target, possibly an elevation issue.

 

thanks

BIGNEWY, please note that there are TWO issues here: One in which the bomb falls far, far wide of the target (meaning HUNDREDS of feet away to the LEFT or to the RIGHT) -- and that this is when you fly DIRECTLY OVER the target first to place the SPI -- meaning that it is highly unlikely to be an elevation issue, and secondly that the bomb explosion calculations are not making any sense. I mean a foot soldier can't have a 500 lb bomb explode DIRECTLY NEXT to him (and I mean the blast hole is no more than TWO STEPS from him) and not notice it! I have this feeling that there is a third issue where calculations don't account for the effect of a blast upon a soft target vs. a hard target.

 

I remember prior to World vers. 1.5 that I could have placed a single GBU 38 either between the trucks in the first waypoint and destroy them both, or in the middle of the patrol at the next waypoint and destroy the whole patrol. Version 1.5 messed that up and due to the careful restriction of the limited initial loadout of weapons, you couldn't then finish the mission. It was shown by someone in the forums that the blast calculation table had been changed and he showed how to modify the table entry for that. But at least the GBU38 was landing accurately.

 

I did some research on the blast radius of that bomb on the Internet and found that E.D.'s table entry was indeed no way near being realistic. I don't remember whether the table took into account the type of target. Now though, both blast and accuracy are messed up and I have no idea if blast radius is properly modeled for other bombs in the game(s).

 

I know that the developers have a lot to keep them busy, but I genuinely hope that weapon effectiveness is high on the list for the simple reason that if your weapons don't work right, there really is no purpose to fly the missions. For me, it is enough of a downer that I don't even want to bother with the A-10C until E.D. works this out and goes through the missions CAREFULLY to ensure that they can be completed satisfactorily based on the loadouts given.

Edited March 10, 2020 by bigbear

[ST0RM]

Pulling coords direct from the TPOD in TOO, the bombs are still off the mark by 1000s of yards. And against static vehicles. However, on my last bomb of 4, I targeted a building and it tracked.

 

Hi

 

this is already reported, it is not new to 2.5.6

 

thanks

 

So why this allowed to be passed on into 2.5.6, if its been a known issue?

Edited March 10, 2020 by ST0RM

[Tholozor]

Because if the team spent all their time fixing every issue, then patches would never get pushed.

[Vanguard]

I also find the A-10 is far more accurate when dropping GBU-31/38s. I wonder, if this issue due to the fact that the TGP is calculating the slant angle, and therefore at longer distances, is providing a coordinate behind the tank (which can be solved by lasing the target, which is not modeled in F-18 yet?)

 

In the A-10 i'm generally at 15k ft, 10nm out, F-18, much higher and further out, leading to the calculated co-ordinate being behind the target.

 

(see my amazing diagram attached...)

[Py]

I wonder, if this issue due to the fact that the TGP is calculating the slant angle, and therefore at longer distances, is providing a coordinate behind the tank (which can be solved by lasing the target, which is not modeled in F-18 yet?)

 

It's normal to target the base of the object to prevent this problem.

However this is not the issue as it happens even when you get the coordinates from directly overhead.

[ST0RM]

Because if the team spent all their time fixing every issue, then patches would never get pushed.

 

And by that logic, you're giving them a free pass to continue putting out updates that make the list of no-working items, grow. Stop being part of the problem.

[Tholozor]

That's an awfully extremist point of view, I didn't say that I accept the current situation, but saying that ED allows known bugs to make it into patches is pure ignorance if you think that they have the time/resources to fix every single reported issue every patch. Nothing more to add on this, this particular issue's been reported, good day.

Edited March 11, 2020 by Tholozor

[bigbear]

#

 

You are correct generally they are on target, however we are looking into some issues where they will be off target, possibly an elevation issue.

 

thanks

No BigNewy. I'm afraid that you are mistaken. They are NOT generally on target. They are generally OFF target about 5/6 of the time or more. If you want, you can have one of your people log into my system and I can prove it. Or maybe I can provide videos of what I am doing if that would help -- which is something I haven't done but am willing to do if it will make the game playable again. You guys put in a lot of great work into this aircraft and to have it all thrown away because of ineffective ordinance calculations isn't good at all and I will gladly assist in helping resolve the issue.

 

And doesn't the fact that the bombs are falling to the left and to the right of the target -- even when the SPI is taken DIRECTLY OVER the target followed by circling around again to perform the bombing suggest that it is NOT an elevation issue? If it was an elevation issue, wouldn't it mean that the bomb would fall BEHIND the target rather than to the left or right?

 

And please also address the fact that the bomb radius calculations are totally screwed up as well for this bomb -- and perhaps others as well. I really hope this problem isn't lost in the process of resolving the accuracy problem.

 

Again, I hope that you guys address the effectiveness of weapons soon. At the moment, I consider the provided A-10C missions unplayable and have moved on to the Spitfire which I hope won't have any of these issues due to the type of ordinance used at that time. The inability to use weapons on the A-10C just ruins the whole experience.

 

Thanks -- and again, I am willing to help if I can.

[QuiGon]

No BigNewy. I'm afraid that you are mistaken. They are NOT generally on target. They are generally OFF target about 5/6 of the time or more.

I can confirm. Missing 5 out of 6 is more or less what I experience as well when using the GBU-38, at least when dropping it from the Hornet. They always stay within ~10m of the target, but they seldom hit on point. It's fine to kill soft targets like infantry, but for tanks the GBU-38 is pretty much useless with this inaccuracy. This issue was introduced with some update within the past 6 months. They worked fine before that.

 

Haven't dropped enough JDAMs from the A-10C lately, in order to be able to say anything reliable on JDAM accuracy with the Warthog currently.

Edited March 12, 2020 by QuiGon

[bigbear]

I can confirm. Missing 5 out of 6 is more or less what I experience as well when using the GBU-38, at least when dropping it from the Hornet. They always stay within ~10m of the target, but they seldom hit on point. It's fine to kill soft targets like infantry, but for tanks the GBU-38 is pretty much useless with this inaccuracy. This issue was introduced with some update within the past 6 months. They worked fine before that.

 

Haven't dropped enough JDAMs from the A-10C lately, in order to be able to say anything reliable on JDAM accuracy with the Warthog currently.

GuiGon, as I was stating earlier, the GBU-38 is unreliable against soft targets as well. I was lucky enough to place one on the patrol in the second target, but even though it blew a hole in the ground not more than a couple of feet from a couple of soldiers, the soldiers just stood there like they were high on something. I just don't understand how some people can duplicate the problem and others cannot. I have a real problem accepting the idea that it is related to differences in hardware or quirks in system software. But I could be wrong.

 

The fact is, the bomb radius problem was pointed out to E.D. four years ago. A member was able to point out the table in which you could adjust the radius factors (or some sort of factor that pertained to blast effectiveness) for each bomb with your text editor. That was a cop-out because then we had to go and research military bomb specs on-line to attempt to make up realistic numbers. It also meant that you could just go in and cheat with all the numbers to let yourself get through all the missions if you wanted. Regardless, my concern is also that there isn't a different radius based on the type of target, but I don't recall now the table or how it was set up and used.

 

Evidently, E.D. hasn't worked on the issue ever since it began appearing back in World 1.5. I understand the need to keep revenues coming in by releasing more aircraft, but as our parents told us as children, "a job half done isn't done." It is sad because the A-10C was essentially their flagship module for years, and it still isn't right. And these modules aren't exactly cheap.

 

I love what E.D. has done as far as the modeling of the aircraft -- even to the point of purchasing modules that I really didn't expect to play, just to help the company out. I think others have done that as well, even though I expect that most of us aren't part of the wealthy donor class. And sadly we don't get a deduction for our generosity at tax time. We all want E.D. to succeed in a BIG WAY.

 

My concern is that they also have bitten on more than they can chew. I mean, just look at the entire idea of trying to effectively create a ground war campaign. If you really wanted to get any type of realism in that, you would actually need the latest Honeywell supercomputer to act as a server to handle not just the movement and battle results, but the AI as well. It is true that E.D. is seriously lacking in missions and campaigns, however, and I only hope they can find the right balance there. Learning the aircraft is fun (to some degree) and we all appreciate the beauty of it all, but ultimately, I think a whole lot of us find the real play value in the combat. I know that I sure do. I would really have appreciated a whole lot more having a campaign for the Battle of Britain than any ground war game -- using their existing aircraft modules and expanding on other aircraft that took part in that campaign. There are plenty of ground wargaming sims out there.

 

In the meantime, we have serious problems in existing products. And in the case of the GBU-38, it has been outstanding for 4 years. That just isn't right. Not at all. That one thing corrupts the product so badly that I just don't even want to play A10C anymore. And that is a heart-breaker for those of us who invested in fancy hardware for it. That TM HOTAS itself isn't cheap.

Edited March 12, 2020 by bigbear

[FalconPlot16]

Same here, regardless what plane you using JDAM is missing certain targets, i've tried another target and it hit successfully.

 

There is a track but its long.

 

 

It was dived like that. Jsow doesn't seem having the same problem.

A10C JDAM Bug .trk

[bigbear]

Nuts. I got the latest update full of fixes yesterday, but still no fix for the GBU38. Bummer.

[FoxxyTrotty]

I think this problem began around the time the harrier got the jdam.

The a10c used to be very easy to get the jdam to hit (you could be throwing it around as you pickle and the thing was still gonna hit). Lately as others, it misses. It does seem related to terrain height somehow, not sure if pressure deviations in dynamic weather factor in here.

 

That being said, I flew the harrier this evening with 6* 38s and 6* gbu12's, and the jdams in To mode hit 100% (and only twice further out did I use target acquisition w/ laser ranging).

[bigbear]

Well FoxxyTrotty, I tried their latest update, DCS World Vers: 2.5.6.45915, and the problem still hasn't been addressed. So I will continue to ignore the A10C module and focus on the WWII planes for now since the canned A10C missions are unplayable until that is fixed.

 

As I mentioned, though, there are TWO problems that need fixing: the bomb accuracy and the bomb blast radius. Unless both are fixed, I can't trust that anything else is working right and I really have better things to do than be a DCS play-tester. For me, this is a real downer because this is the second time I upgraded my machine to play the A10C, only to find that certain software problems keep me from playing.

[Tj1376]

I think these are related?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=282993

 

If devs need it, a track is on the above post showing the problem. Apologies for the double post, I really thought this was a harrier specific problem.

 

TJ