Jump to content

CBU-87 and CBU-103 Performance Explanation


NineLine

Recommended Posts

Am 26.9.2021 um 05:41 schrieb NineLine:

Even people in know know that fly and have dropped these say the same things, they are not doing much more than light damage to tanks. Don't expect the 87/103 to be magic wunder weapons now, they will still need to be used to their strengths, and understand, on a spread out target, and only dropping one, you could miss if not dropped well. 

 

With the 87, you will probably want to drop 2, with the 103, you might get away with 1 as the wind wont be as much of an issue.

 

I have a mission I tested with some BMPs, a couple T-55s, troops and transports in a outpost like layout in about 200 square feet, dropping with the right settings, and getting a good drop wipes out almost everything but the T-55s, but they sustain some damage.

I need to test these against infantry again. The bomblets have a secondary fragmentation effect, that should be pretty devastating against infantry. Hitting a camp site or a group of APC/IFV with dismounted rifleman should wreak havoc... It is important to model the effects in terms of incapacitation. You do not need to kill(!) everything and everyone. Most of the time it's actually about taking assets out of the fight for a sufficient time to reach your objective. A shrapnel wound, explosive burns to the face, a ruptured lung, etc. even a 7.62 hitting a leg will take the soldier out of the fight for now. He will need medical assistance and binds additional assets. In terms of DCS, a hit or close hit to unarmored vehicles, soldiers or aircraft should result in enough damage dealt to take it out.

The modeling of damage to mobility, weapons or sensors that is already present(!) is a great way of simulating the effects. What bugs me is the extraordinary "resilience" specifically of infantry in DCS to virtually all area effect weapons, most notably rockets and Cluster munition.

  • Like 2

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NineLine said:

This is the little outpost I set up for a number of different testing reasons, this is a before and after dropping 2 CBUs 900 HOF and 1000 RPM from the A-10C.

 

Since you mention it, any chance to get this to other birds soon? The way it's handled in the A-10C isn't realistic anyway AFAIK, those things have to be set on the ground since it's done on the CBUs themselves (-> kneeboard when on ground and able to communicate), but have to be set in the aircraft for the CCIP/CCRP calculation. RPM should only be programmable though the A/C with Wickmids.

  • Like 1

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
3 hours ago, Frederf said:

What are the healths of the watchtower and T-55s? Two by 900' HOF CBUs is a moderate quantity at quite high density. Soft targets like trucks and infantry should be tested at low submunition densities.

2 T-55 were about 50%, and 2 were about 75%ish, the watch towers were I think 25% and one was 80-90%, but it was quite a tight drop so not that surprised, you can see now as well, we have small craters for missed sub-munitions which I am happy about.

  • Like 2

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For now, I use triggers. Unit health below % and action is whatever I need. Its time consuming but in the end makes missions less irritating when in miss a unit by a foot or two. Its actually fun to decide what happens to them once they reach certain health bar. At least it is there as an option while in wait for everything else in DCS

Intel i7-13700KF :: ROG STRIX Z790-A GAMING WIFI D4 :: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB ::  MSI RTX 4080  Gaming X Trio  :: VKB Gunfighter MK.III MCG Ultimate :: VPC MongoosT-50 CM3 :: non-VR :: single player :: open beta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 19 Stunden schrieb bmbpdk:

They also said that simple barbed wire (NATO wire in Danish service) can tear of the track, which makes the tank dead as a cockroach under a boot.

True, though it does not tear the tracks off, but wraps around track elements and the powered gear, dampeners and definitely immobilize the tank. An immobilized MBT is an easy target, even for RPG, Satchel charges or "HandFlamm-Patrone" (a hand fired phosphorus incendiary load that burns into the engine compartment and/or crew compartment if not sealed).

On the positive side we already have the immobilization and sensor/weapon segregation modeled! ED introduced this silently and most people will only notice the "mobility" effects as there is not much indication of a weapon damage or crew hit, other than the tank NOT firing at you.

The problem is to better model the hits, to trigger the effects of immobilization, wounded or disoriented crew, damaged sensors and weapons.

 


Edited by shagrat

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Gierasimov:

For now, I use triggers. Unit health below % and action is whatever I need. Its time consuming but in the end makes missions less irritating when in miss a unit by a foot or two. Its actually fun to decide what happens to them once they reach certain health bar. At least it is there as an option while in wait for everything else in DCS

It's already in the simulation, immobilization/engine damage, crew disorientation etc. I noticed the first engine damage speed reduced, years ago, on the then pretty new Nevada map. The thing is the immobilization is not bound to a 100% chance each time the "health" degrades below X percent. Like in real life the effects are by chance of dealing the right damage to the right parts of the tank/vehicle.

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 5 Stunden schrieb NineLine:

2 T-55 were about 50%, and 2 were about 75%ish, the watch towers were I think 25% and one was 80-90%, but it was quite a tight drop so not that surprised, you can see now as well, we have small craters for missed sub-munitions which I am happy about.

Yep, nice visuals and the effects on infantry look good now.

Is this currently limited to the CBU-87/103 or is it modeled to the CBE munitions and works the same with the Mk-20/CBU-99, as well?

  • Like 1

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, shagrat said:

True, though it does not tear the tracks off, but wraps around track elements and the powered gear, dampeners and definitely immobilize the tank. An immobilized MBT is an easy target, even for RPG, Satchel charges or "HandFlamm-Patrone" (a hand fired phosphorus incendiary load that burns into the engine compartment and/or crew compartment if not sealed).

On the positive side we already have the immobilization and sensor/weapon segregation modeled! ED introduced this silently and most people will only notice the "mobility" effects as there is not much indication of a weapon damage or crew hit, other than the tank NOT firing at you.

The problem is to better model the hits, to trigger the effects of immobilization, wounded or disoriented crew, damaged sensors and weapons.

 

 

It did tear the track off, although not every time, but off went the track.
Also our APC drivers was explicitly told to NOT run over NATO wire, only in extreme cases of emergency or a like where they allowed to do it.
In combat though you do whatever is needed to get back home, and no one will blame you for it.

May i ask you what experience/reference do you have to say that it does not tear the track off?

  • Like 1

Inno3d RTX 2070 Twin X2, ASUS STRIX Z270E Gaming, Intel i7 7700K, 32GB Corsair vengeance, Kingston Hyper X FPS Alloy Cherry MX Red, Logitech G102 Prodigy, Track Ir 5, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Saitek Combat Rudder pedals, Beyer Dynamic DT770, Acer CB280HK 4K monitor, Win 10 Pro 64bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@NineLine

 

Thank you and your colleagues for working in this direction. The effectiveness of these ammunition has always caused a lot of debate for many years...

Let me ask you a few question:

 

1) We have already realized that until there is a more realistic model of damage to ground vehicles, we will not get the correct bomb efficiency... So when the ED company plans to start developing new damage patterns ? If this investigations is already underway, what year do you plan to finish ?

 

2) Are there plans to improve the performance of the CBU-97/105 bomb ?

How realistic its effectiveness today, in your opinion? Perhaps her effectiveness in the game is higher than in life ?

 

3) You gave an example of the destruction of the accumulation of forces at the checkpoint, it is obvious that the player, even after your upgrade of the CBU-87/103 bombs, will choose the bomb CBU-97/105...

So in what cases, after your update of CBU-87/103, will its choice be more preferable than CBU-97/105 ?

Or everything will remain as before, people will use CBU-97/105 and forget about CBU-87/103...

 

Kind regards, I would be grateful for a structured answer.


Edited by Mr. Wilson
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb bmbpdk:

It did tear the track off, although not every time, but off went the track.
Also our APC drivers was explicitly told to NOT run over NATO wire, only in extreme cases of emergency or a like where they allowed to do it.
In combat though you do whatever is needed to get back home, and no one will blame you for it.

May i ask you what experience/reference do you have to say that it does not tear the track off?

German Army, training excerciss with Leopard 2A4 and feedback from our PzBtl drivers and tank commanders.

From that feedback the common problem is the "NATO-S-draht" wraps around the powered gear and elements of the track. It can throw the whole track, if you try to force through or worse damage the drive train, but the most common issue I've heard was blocking the powered gear and wrapping around axles... In the end the result is pretty much an immobilized Leo 2 MBT, but lucky me only once had to help get the NATO-S-draht of the gears and track.

The thing is what you said about tanks being very vulnerable on the battlefield, absolutely true. There are so many obstacles, dangers and hinderanves for a tank that can cause it to be a sitting duck or worse... 👍🏻

P S. ...and APC or IFV with the smaller/lighter tracks are definitely a much easier to throw. I remember some stories of that poor M113 driver. That 1000 Liter Fridge was, let's say delicate to drive, according to the stories. 


Edited by shagrat
  • Thanks 1

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Mr. Wilson:

@NineLine

 

Thank you and your colleagues for working in this direction. The effectiveness of these ammunition has always caused a lot of debate for many years...

Let me ask you a few question:

 

1) We have already realized that until there is a more realistic model of damage to ground vehicles, we will not get the correct bomb efficiency... So when the ED company plans to start developing new damage patterns ? If this investigations is already underway, what year do you plan to finish ?

 

2) Are there plans to improve the performance of the CBU-97/105 bomb ?

How realistic its effectiveness today, in your opinion? Perhaps her effectiveness in the game is higher than in life ?

 

3) You gave an example of the destruction of the accumulation of forces at the checkpoint, it is obvious that the player, even after your upgrade of the CBU-87/103 bombs, will choose the bomb CBU-97/105...

So in what cases, after your update of CBU-87/103, will its choice be more preferable than CBU-97/105 ?

Or everything will remain as before, people will use CBU-97/105 and forget about CBU-87/103...

 

Kind regards, I would be grateful for a structured answer.

 

When you don't have CBU-97. When logistics is modeled and supplies limited. When you want area effects on infantry on a larger area.

Shagrat

 

- Flying Sims since 1984 -:pilotfly:

Win 10 | i5 10600K@4.1GHz | 64GB | GeForce RTX 3090 - Asus VG34VQL1B  | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | VIRPIL CM 50 Stick & Throttle | VPC Rotor TCS Plus/Apache64 Grip | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | WW Top Gun MIP | a hand made AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2021 at 1:58 AM, NineLine said:

Probably why they are not used anymore, the 52 and 58 I am told have more of a donut pattern, meaning not much falls in the middle of it. Not ideal when you want good coverage in a certain area. So we can look at the 52, but I can't say that it will or should get better at this time.

 

A look at the CBU-52 (BLU-61) would be very appreciated. Would give the F-5 a little more purporse against soft and light armor like artillery (which was what they were primarely used at, during the Gulf War) or SAM sites. Is not easy to plink a unit with a Mk82 from a F-5.


Edited by Knock-Knock
  • Like 1

- Jack of many DCS modules, master of none.

- Personal wishlist: F-15A, F-4S Phantom II, JAS 39A Gripen, SAAB 35 Draken, F-104 Starfighter, Panavia Tornado IDS.

 

| Windows 11 | i5-12400 | 64Gb DDR4 | RTX 3080 | 2x M.2 | 27" 1440p | Rift CV1 | Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS | MFG Crosswind pedals |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2021 at 3:50 PM, Spectre VCAW-1 said:

I have never had luck with the AMG-154A(from an F/A-18), dropped 4 in multiplayer on an SA-6 site, they were not targeted on the same spot. I watched the submunitions blanket the area, yet not a single unit on the ground was even damaged. The other cluster munitions for the F/A-18C are just as bad. 

Gotta admit I'm the same.  They really are poor!

I use the C. 

At least I know it's one shot one kill (as long as I have the slant angle sorted and I'm not against sa15s and the like)! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darn... suckered in again.  It's like "click bait".  I support the request to move or close this thread.

  • Like 3

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

i7 10700K OC 5.1GHZ / 500GB SSD & 1TB M:2 & 4TB HDD / MSI Gaming MB / GTX 1080 / 32GB RAM / Win 10 / TrackIR 4 Pro / CH Pedals / TM Warthog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...