SDBs- what are they and how would you use them?

[Aussie_Mantis]

Since they clearly don't stand for Sugma Dick Boiiii, what is the Small Diameter Bomb exactly and how would they be employed? Are they literally just small GPS-guided bombs that the F-15E happens to be able to carry 20-28 of? What kind of change does this make to the Eagle's lethality? According to half the people I've asked, the SDB is the second coming of Precision Jesus Himself.

Edited March 15, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[Cunning_Raven]

They are almost exactly like JSOWs, just smaller. They are GPS/INS, (The SDB II is also radar and maybe laser) guided gliding bombs. They are stand-off weapons just strong enough to kill a tank, but not cause any collateral damage.

[Spurts]

They are 250lb class GPS guided glide bombs carried four at a time on a special rack.  They have a small warhead for minimized collateral damage and have decent penetration abilities.

[Aussie_Mantis]

7 minutes ago, Spurts said:

They are 250lb class GPS guided glide bombs carried four at a time on a special rack.  They have a small warhead for minimized collateral damage and have decent penetration abilities.

 

7 minutes ago, Cunning_Raven said:

They are almost exactly like JSOWs, just smaller. They are GPS/INS, (The SDB II is also radar and maybe laser) guided gliding bombs. They are stand-off weapons just strong enough to kill a tank, but not cause any collateral damage.

 

Kill a tank/penetrate... how? With kinetic force, or a shaped charge like a Maverick?

Edited March 15, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[WinterH]

I personally don't have huge hype people seem to have for them, but they do have a few things going for them:

- You can carry a lot of those

- They can glide pretty damn far

- They are rather small, so some air defense systems may not be able to detect/engage them.

On the flipside,

- They are, indeed, small, so are their warheads (though, that is actually by design afaik, to avoid collateral damage). Don't expect a lot of area of effect from a single weapon impact

- This earliest version of SDB is a GPS only weapon. So it is useful vs things that don't change position after you release the weapon.

- Subjectively, as with most fire and forget GPS bombs, they are boring

[Ignition]

39 minutes ago, WinterH said:

- This earliest version of SDB is a GPS only weapon. So it is useful vs things that don't change position after you release the weapon.

They also have INS

[Spurts]

1 hour ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

 

 

Kill a tank/penetrate... how? With kinetic force, or a shaped charge like a Maverick?

 

Kinetic.  The bomb is 250lb, 7in diameter, impacting near mach 1.  Most the weight is casing.  Google "Small Diameter Bomb Penetration" and look at the images, you will see images of it penetrating a shelter and exploding on the inside.  SDBII is better suited to tanks as it has moving target capabilities and a larger, shaped charge, warhead.

[Aussie_Mantis]

15 minutes ago, Spurts said:

Kinetic.  The bomb is 250lb, 7in diameter, impacting near mach 1.  Most the weight is casing.  Google "Small Diameter Bomb Penetration" and look at the images, you will see images of it penetrating a shelter and exploding on the inside.  SDBII is better suited to tanks as it has moving target capabilities and a larger, shaped charge, warhead.

> Near mach 1

Excuse me? I thought it was a glide bomb...

[Deano87]

15 minutes ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

> Near mach 1

Excuse me? I thought it was a glide bomb...

Depending on how you have them set up they can pitch over to impact the target from vertically above, they pick up quite a bit of speed before impact.
 

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by Deano87

[Spurts]

^ That

[McGraw]

In another sim I use them to kill sam sites with the F16.

Easy to use, great standoff and you get to carry 8 instead of 2 HARMs.

Pretty much all I use against static ground targets.

 

[HalfBlindOracle]

On 3/15/2023 at 5:13 AM, Aussie_Mantis said:

 

 

Kill a tank/penetrate... how? With kinetic force, or a shaped charge like a Maverick?

 

To answer: 250 lbs HE is plenty to absolutely ruin an MBT on a direct hit, or even a very near miss. For comparison, the total charge of a 155 HE shell (also enough to break the crap out of a tank, and mission-kill/actually kill a tank on a direct hit, is only 14.6 lbs of HE filler. an SDB has 50 lbs of filler. That's equivalent HE to about three 155mms... or about the same explosive payload of a 12"  (304mm) US WWI era battleship HE shell give or take a few lbs.  For an idea of how very dead an MBT or any AFV will be being hit by about 50 lbs of HE filler... see below:

Notice the largest crater is for a mere 152 Russian field gun with an HE charge of about 8 kg or 18 lbs of HE filler... less than half of the payload of the SDB. Meaning you can expect the tank to be quite shattered by a direct, or even near miss of an SDB.

For indirect comparison on the -smaller- side... attached you will find an M1 Abrams MBT after a direct hit on the front right side of the tank by a slightly more modern 152mm HE artillery shell round. You will notice the tank is... not in working order. This is again, LESS THAN HALF THE HE PAYLOAD of an SDB. There is a 0% chance of a tank surviving an SDB hit anywhere on the tank itself, nor is it likely to survive a near miss.

The CEP of an SDB 1 is between 3 and 8 meters.  The length/width of an MBT is about  8x3m. Conveniently, assuming a static tank target... the SDB is effectively guaranteed to land close enough to either directly hit, or land within a few feet of a given part of the tank. The result will be catastrophic for the tank and crew regardless of if it is on the front, side, or rear. You will have the turret likely removed, turret ring shattered, tracks and suspension broken, power pack busted, fuel tanks and lines ruptured, and possibly ammunition cooked off. The crew, if buttoned up, have a very small chance of survival if the tank is struck by a frontal near miss.

The SDB also has a hardened penetrator tip... enough to get through 5-8 feet of reinforced concrete. This is perhaps unlikely to penetrate the Tank itself on major armored faces, however, a top strike certainly will... and even if it detonated on contact, would buckle the tank top, hatches, and spall the crew inside to death easily.

The reason 250 lbs bombs were unpopular in the past was that it required essentially a direct hit, or near miss to kill a tank, and 250 lbs bombs were a bit wimpy in area of effect for armored targets if you miss by a few dozen meters.  Hence 500 lbs bombs (Mk82) series is the most popular dumb bomb type in NATO inventory. Good balance of payload numbers and effect against most anything you want to bomb. As a 500 lbs bomb can shatter an MBT from even a 20-30m distance, where a 250 lbs bomb cannot.

But as was found in gulf War 1 and later, 500 lbs bombs with laser guidance and a CEP under 10m was massive overkill for a tank target. Hence the reduction in bomb size with the SDB series: Less weight and drag was beneficial when 50 lbs of HE filler puts your weapon on the order of power of small Battleship cannons.

No tank is surviving any kind of hit from a naval-grade shell. Nor will it survive an SDB hit or near miss. No penetration necessary.

Keep in mind DCS ground units that aren't infantry/trucks are EXTREMELY resistant to HE blast effects, much more so than real life vehicles/crews are. While many vehicles in DCS can survive near/moderate misses in real life, the "survive" means the crew isn't instantly killed/dead. The tracks come off, sensors/optics shatter, and mounted equipment is broken/ruined by such near misses... while in DCS, HP bars either move a bit or they don't, and more often than not, they don't move when they should and the damage model of Combined Arms ground forces is so simplistic that they suffer none of the major impacts near misses put on vehicles. I'd LOVE to see ED take a pass at improving blast-damage modeling for all ground vehicles in DCS, but especially armored vehicles of the IFV/Tank variety. I get asking for realistic fragmentation simulation would melt a big scale sim like DCS in multiplayer, but the blast radius could be improved/made realistic enough to apply things like mobility/firepower kills.

Edited March 17, 2023 by HalfBlindOracle

[CoyoteEffect]

On 3/15/2023 at 3:05 AM, Cunning_Raven said:

They are almost exactly like JSOWs, just smaller. They are GPS/INS, (The SDB II is also radar and maybe laser) guided gliding bombs. They are stand-off weapons just strong enough to kill a tank, but not cause any collateral damage.

FINALLY I'm an air force simp but I've always wanted something like JSOWs for USAF jets

[Coole28]

On 3/16/2023 at 11:56 PM, CoyoteEffect said:

FINALLY I'm an air force simp but I've always wanted something like JSOWs for USAF jets

“Finally”?  We are getting close to the 2-decade anniversary of when the SDB entered service.  It’s probably older than some of the folk playing this game.

[Eviscerador]

On 3/17/2023 at 5:56 AM, CoyoteEffect said:

FINALLY I'm an air force simp but I've always wanted something like JSOWs for USAF jets

Dude, we'd had the JSOW in the Viper for a long time now.

[Omega417]

On 3/15/2023 at 5:13 AM, Aussie_Mantis said:

Kill a tank/penetrate... how? With kinetic force, or a shaped charge like a Maverick?

Extremely accurate GPS system, which is why bombs are getting smaller. The probability of impact error is getting so small you dont need the 2K lbs bomb to make up for lost accuracy.

[Daerchanar]

TBH, I don't see the interest in these tiny bangs. I'm more looking forward to GBU-28 sorts of weapons.

 

[Coole28]

17 minutes ago, Daerchanar said:

TBH, I don't see the interest in these tiny bangs. I'm more looking forward to GBU-28 sorts of weapons.

 

There’s nothing in DCS you need a GBU-28 for that a GBU-10 or -24 can’t handle.  The GBU-28 has the same (possibly less) explosive filling as a Mk-84.  The extra 3,000 lbs is just casing to increase penetration.  Unless something gets added or reworked such that a GBU-10 can’t penetrate it, I don’t foresee the GBU-28 adding any utility to the plane (won’t deny the cool factor though).

SDB on the other hand would be very useful for the E model.  You’d take the max GPS weapon payload from 9 to 22.  GPS weapons are incredibly useful in DCS; being able to carry this many would be a game changer.

[Daerchanar]

16 hours ago, Coole28 said:

There’s nothing in DCS you need a GBU-28 for that a GBU-10 or -24 can’t handle.  The GBU-28 has the same (possibly less) explosive filling as a Mk-84.  The extra 3,000 lbs is just casing to increase penetration.  Unless something gets added or reworked such that a GBU-10 can’t penetrate it, I don’t foresee the GBU-28 adding any utility to the plane (won’t deny the cool factor though).

SDB on the other hand would be very useful for the E model.  You’d take the max GPS weapon payload from 9 to 22.  GPS weapons are incredibly useful in DCS; being able to carry this many would be a game changer.

You're right in saying that DCS doesn't properly model damage. But with a proper penetration bomb, that'd be their best opportunity to sort out this flaw. A ultra realistic game like DCS simply can't skimp on damage modelling. 

[Eviscerador]

21 hours ago, Coole28 said:

There’s nothing in DCS you need a GBU-28 for that a GBU-10 or -24 can’t handle.  The GBU-28 has the same (possibly less) explosive filling as a Mk-84.  The extra 3,000 lbs is just casing to increase penetration.  Unless something gets added or reworked such that a GBU-10 can’t penetrate it, I don’t foresee the GBU-28 adding any utility to the plane (won’t deny the cool factor though).

SDB on the other hand would be very useful for the E model.  You’d take the max GPS weapon payload from 9 to 22.  GPS weapons are incredibly useful in DCS; being able to carry this many would be a game changer.

That's our main problem in DCS, since the game was initially designed as a CAS heavy environment (Ka50, A10C), the damage model and the mission edition is very CAS oriented. Hence multiple small smart weapons are most "sortie efficient" in DCS. APKWS made the Harrier and the A10C the default "FEBA cleaners" in liberation servers. With Vipers and hornets there is a limit on how much GBU 12 you can carry and use for tank plinking.

Once we have SDB in the eagle, it will be the de Facto airfield and site cleaner after vipers do their SEAD magic. Specially with a human WSO marking objectives and ripple launching SDB from 20 NM.

I agree that the GBU 28 is pure cool factor, but that's more for campaign editors than for air quakers. I expect our friendly neighbour Baltic Dragon to make it count.

[Ignition]

1 hour ago, Eviscerador said:

I agree that the GBU 28 is pure cool factor, but that's more for campaign editors than for air quakers. I expect our friendly neighbour Baltic Dragon to make it count.

DCS needs more static buildings, we have many 3d models from the 90's but ED seem to not agree on this. The strike missions are VERY limited. ED will realise of this issue when the dynamic campaign releases.

[Eviscerador]

2 hours ago, Ignition said:

DCS needs more static buildings, we have many 3d models from the 90's but ED seem to not agree on this. The strike missions are VERY limited. ED will realise of this issue when the dynamic campaign releases.

The Syria map is the way. Funny though, the Persian gulf has a LOT of real strategic sites but they were deleted from the map, I guess to avoid problems. There is a template in user files which fills the Persian gulf with a lot of strategic places, power stations, foundrys, static SAM sites... all the stuff you actually have modelled in Syria but for some reason they didn't at the Persian Gulf map.

Of course we need more strike targets, Viggen pilots have been crying for them since the plane was released. Problem is, it is very difficult to implement those kind of missions without heavy scripting. We will see what they do with the dynamic campaign in 2030 or so 

[Ignition]

If ED just add 1 static building every 2 months you can substantially increase the ammount of missions.

Buildings on maps aren't the best option since you can't repeat the mission as if they were static objects.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Ignition

[gzj3401]

Why we are talking about SDB here, are they coming with RAZBAM's F-15E?

[Ramsay]

1 hour ago, gzj3401 said:

Why we are talking about SDB here, are they coming with RAZBAM's F-15E?

GBU-39 is on a "wish list" and may be added with the planned CTU II (2015) update that adds the HMCS, AIM-9X, etc. sometime after early access

AFAIK Razbam hope to accurately model Suite 4+ avionics and weapons fairly tightly.

Beyond this they wish to include legacy weapons i.e. for 1990 Desert Storm scenarios, and newer weapons/systems that are out of scope of Suite 4. How well this is done depends on the information available from SMEs, etc. for obvious reasons.

Adding the GBU-38 to the base game will require cooperation with ED and it's inclusion is subject to change, etc.

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/99350-weaponry/?do=findComment&comment=5136643

 

Edited March 24, 2023 by Ramsay