SalakauHeadman Posted Thursday at 02:01 PM Posted Thursday at 02:01 PM recently have been flying some bombing missions and i noticed that the mk83s and 82s explosion radius seems a little... too big? i always replay the same missions for practise and this time when i drop bombs i notice that it kills vehicles way outside of the visual explosion radius and my plane gets "hit" by the blast because it will play the damage hit audio. for example the default f4e "hit hard hit fastest" caucasus mission usually i would fly it the exact same way and back then id hit maybe 2 out of 4 of the hangars and a few trucks but now it kills almost every vehicle in the base and sets it on fire. and if i drop bombs in continuous interval the first bomb will hit but then it destroys all the other bombs that havent landed mid air and make it explode early. i have not downloaded any splash damage mods at all let alone install anything on my pc the past few days. does anyone else have this same issue? the only thing i did was update the game 2
buur Posted Thursday at 07:10 PM Posted Thursday at 07:10 PM Problem with the bombs in DCS is that they have only splash damage and no fragmentation damage. If they have now updated the damage radius to the real world ones, than this are good news. 5 1
71st_Mastiff Posted Thursday at 07:20 PM Posted Thursday at 07:20 PM I noticed it also, splash damaging vehicles 150ft to 250ft, away and its smoking. Ill make a track from the AV8B for comparison. 2 "any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back", W Forbes. "Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts", "He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," Winston Churchill. MSI z690 MPG DDR4 || i9-14900k|| ddr4-128gb PC3200 |zotac RTX 5080|Game max 1300w|Win11| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2||MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || G10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/MouseLogitech || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Asus||
71st_Mastiff Posted Friday at 01:59 AM Posted Friday at 01:59 AM (edited) yea might be a little OP to start a fire, should only get like maybe 25% damage not 70%? The Mk 82 bomb is a 500-pound class general-purpose bomb. Key Specs: Weight: ~500 lbs (actual weight varies slightly depending on configuration) Type: General-purpose, unguided (but often used with guidance kits like JDAM or Paveway to make it precision-guided) Length: About 87 inches (2.21 meters) Diameter: 10.75 inches (273 mm) Filler (explosive content): ~192 lbs of Tritonal (standard fill) Edited Friday at 02:20 AM by 71st_Mastiff 2 "any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back", W Forbes. "Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts", "He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," Winston Churchill. MSI z690 MPG DDR4 || i9-14900k|| ddr4-128gb PC3200 |zotac RTX 5080|Game max 1300w|Win11| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2||MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || G10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/MouseLogitech || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Asus||
SalakauHeadman Posted Friday at 06:31 AM Author Posted Friday at 06:31 AM 4 hours ago, 71st_Mastiff said: yea might be a little OP to start a fire, should only get like maybe 25% damage not 70%? The Mk 82 bomb is a 500-pound class general-purpose bomb. Key Specs: Weight: ~500 lbs (actual weight varies slightly depending on configuration) Type: General-purpose, unguided (but often used with guidance kits like JDAM or Paveway to make it precision-guided) Length: About 87 inches (2.21 meters) Diameter: 10.75 inches (273 mm) Filler (explosive content): ~192 lbs of Tritonal (standard fill) hmmm.. on my end the effect is way larger... ill try to film a track and post results. very puzzling because i never installed any splash damage scripts.. 1
PawlaczGMD Posted Friday at 06:41 AM Posted Friday at 06:41 AM No solid data, but I also noticed this. I hit myself even with a safe drop. For a moment I was hoping they've added frag. 2
SalakauHeadman Posted Friday at 07:10 AM Author Posted Friday at 07:10 AM ive made a video showing the behavior i mentioned. by the way i also would like to add that i tested every bomb for the f4e and it seems all of them have an extended radius of effect 1
Moezilla Posted Friday at 10:05 AM Posted Friday at 10:05 AM If you check out Quaggles' datamine, the commit for 2.9.17.11733 shows significant increases in mass, expl_mass, and piercing_mass for the Mk81-84 bombs. How exactly these numbers are used by DCS to calculate explosions is not generally known, but it would be a reasonably logical assumption to make that bigger number = bigger boom. Here's an example for the Mk83: [2.9.16.10973] _G["warheads"]["Mk_83"] = { caliber = 356, concrete_factors = { 1, 1, 1 }, concrete_obj_factor = 0, cumulative_factor = 0, cumulative_thickness = 0, default_fuze_delay = 0, expl_mass = 160, mass = 160, obj_factors = { 1, 1 }, other_factors = { 1, 1, 1 }, piercing_mass = 32 } [2.9.17.11733] _G["warheads"]["Mk_83"] = { caliber = 356, concrete_factors = { 1.35, 1.35, 0.135 }, concrete_obj_factor = 1.35, cumulative_factor = 0, cumulative_thickness = 0, expl_mass = 201.9, length = 1.956, mass = 446.8, obj_factors = { 1.35, 1.35 }, other_factors = { 1.35, 1.35, 1.35 }, piercing_mass = 89.36 } The new numbers for 2.9.17.11733 match the stated specs on the wiki page for the Mk83 of 447Kg mass and 202Kg of filling. Sources: https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_83_bomb 3
SalakauHeadman Posted Friday at 01:48 PM Author Posted Friday at 01:48 PM 3 hours ago, Moezilla said: If you check out Quaggles' datamine, the commit for 2.9.17.11733 shows significant increases in mass, expl_mass, and piercing_mass for the Mk81-84 bombs. How exactly these numbers are used by DCS to calculate explosions is not generally known, but it would be a reasonably logical assumption to make that bigger number = bigger boom. Here's an example for the Mk83: [2.9.16.10973] _G["warheads"]["Mk_83"] = { caliber = 356, concrete_factors = { 1, 1, 1 }, concrete_obj_factor = 0, cumulative_factor = 0, cumulative_thickness = 0, default_fuze_delay = 0, expl_mass = 160, mass = 160, obj_factors = { 1, 1 }, other_factors = { 1, 1, 1 }, piercing_mass = 32 } [2.9.17.11733] _G["warheads"]["Mk_83"] = { caliber = 356, concrete_factors = { 1.35, 1.35, 0.135 }, concrete_obj_factor = 1.35, cumulative_factor = 0, cumulative_thickness = 0, expl_mass = 201.9, length = 1.956, mass = 446.8, obj_factors = { 1.35, 1.35 }, other_factors = { 1.35, 1.35, 1.35 }, piercing_mass = 89.36 } The new numbers for 2.9.17.11733 match the stated specs on the wiki page for the Mk83 of 447Kg mass and 202Kg of filling. Sources: https://github.com/Quaggles/dcs-lua-datamine/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_83_bomb hmm.. interesting... but is it really that damaging in real life? in the video i posted 1 pair of mk83s could destroy trucks that are almost 500ft away
PawlaczGMD Posted Friday at 04:47 PM Posted Friday at 04:47 PM 2 hours ago, SalakauHeadman said: hmm.. interesting... but is it really that damaging in real life? in the video i posted 1 pair of mk83s could destroy trucks that are almost 500ft away yeah, the nominal values of explosive mass might be correct, but the damage model with these values is probably not. 1
PawlaczGMD Posted Friday at 10:39 PM Posted Friday at 10:39 PM @BIGNEWY what did you guys cook here? Is it just an increase in the explosive parameters, or was the explosion modelling worked on? 1
AndyJWest Posted Friday at 10:57 PM Posted Friday at 10:57 PM Seems to apply to GBU 54s too, on the Harrier at least. I've not tried the remaining GBUs.
Bigity Posted Friday at 11:07 PM Posted Friday at 11:07 PM I've noticed this on many bombs, I was hoping it was intended because they need to be larger than they were. 1
Esac_mirmidon Posted Friday at 11:09 PM Posted Friday at 11:09 PM Then we need some information or values to calculate safe bombing radius to not be damaged by the blast 1 " You must think in russian.." [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´ Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4
Czar66 Posted yesterday at 12:42 AM Posted yesterday at 12:42 AM I noticed my 500lbs being a bit beefier too. GBU-38 (Mk-82 JDAM).
Why485 Posted yesterday at 05:36 PM Posted yesterday at 05:36 PM (edited) Full list of weapons affected. IMO this is a very positive change and I'm shocked ED didn't announce this in the patch notes or newsletter. This is something the community has been asking for, for many years, and would have been appreciated by a great many players. AN_M30A1 AN_M57 AN_M64 AN_M65 AN_M66 M_117 Mk_81 Mk_82 MK_82AIR MK_82SNAKEYE Mk_83 Mk_84 GBU_8_B GBU_10 GBU_12 HB_F4E_GBU15V1 GBU_15_V_1_B GBU_16 GBU_31 GBU_31_V2 GBU-38 GBU-54_V_1B Edited yesterday at 05:53 PM by Why485 7
Recommended Posts