investigating mk82, 83 bombs explosion radius too large after update?

[gmangnall]

On 8/21/2025 at 6:34 PM, shagrat said:

Yep, blast range is ok now, but the damage dealt over distance is A) a bit too excessive (my subjective opinion) and B) as it is a stand in for fragmentation too fast, as the fragments slow down faster.

Keep in mind, if you dropped more than one bomb the damage is cumulative (also in real life), as the blast waves overlap (and IRL would interact). Also IRL an airburst Mk-82 would spray the  whole site and damage most if not everything not armored.

The thing here is damage modeling, though it has improved, isn't able to visualize things like crew incapacitated, a track of a tank damaged (mobility), though some effects are modeled. For example damaged units can't drive full speed any more, simulation of engine/mobility damage. 

So, yes, the current change is not perfect, but it is a big step in the right direction.

For a long time, you could more or less throw a Mk-82 between a couple T-80 some 10m apart and if you were very lucky one got noticable damage. IRL the crews would have been heavily disoriented, or even injured, likely the tracks on the side of the explosion damaged and some of the optics and external weapons (DshK) damaged.

The problem is that CAS missions are no longer possible. You cannot drop a bomb anywhere near friendly troops they have to be well outside of their firing range. It's ridiculous.

[shagrat]

Am 28.8.2025 um 01:27 schrieb gmangnall:

The problem is that CAS missions are no longer possible. You cannot drop a bomb anywhere near friendly troops they have to be well outside of their firing range. It's ridiculous.

It's how a 500 lbs bomb works in real life.

That's the reason why those special low yield weapons for CAS employment were developed in the War on Terror with the aim to minimize collateral damage.

They even used training bombs (casings filled with concrete) to minimize damage to civilian infrastructure and innocent bystanders.

Keep in mind the damage radius is ok, the time for fragmentation to reach the full distance will be slower than the current blast damage, but it will still incapacitate a couple people if fragmentation simulation is implemented later.

Unfortunately blast is "hitting" every unit in the RED currently.

So now we need to make the same tough decisions for CAS and choose appropriate weapons in danger close scenarios, as finally the "danger" in danger close is real... not ridiculous.

[shagrat]

Maybe this visualization helps to better grasp what 425 m of "danger close" to friendly forces actually means.

First picture represents a Mk-84 (2.000 lbs) bomb and shows the difference between the direct effects and the fragmentation radius "in the open".

The second shows a comparison between the Risk Estimate Distances area. Note the 100m RED of the AGM-65 Maverick in the center, in comparison to the Mk 80 series bombs.

Source is this article, PDF direct link:

https://article36.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/PAX-A36-Areas-of-Harm.pdf

[gmangnall]

On 8/29/2025 at 7:00 PM, shagrat said:

It's how a 500 lbs bomb works in real life.

That's the reason why those special low yield weapons for CAS employment were developed in the War on Terror with the aim to minimize collateral damage.

They even used training bombs (casings filled with concrete) to minimize damage to civilian infrastructure and innocent bystanders.

Keep in mind the damage radius is ok, the time for fragmentation to reach the full distance will be slower than the current blast damage, but it will still incapacitate a couple people if fragmentation simulation is implemented later.

Unfortunately blast is "hitting" every unit in the RED currently.

So now we need to make the same tough decisions for CAS and choose appropriate weapons in danger close scenarios, as finally the "danger" in danger close is real... not ridiculous.

500lb bombs dont kill everyone within 300m. End of argument

[Nealius]

The main problem here is how we continuously get "realism" upgrades without any fundamental game upgrades to deal with the increased realism, further contributing to the "Digital Cockpit Simulator" problem that the customers have been complaining about for the better part of a decade. How is this damage modeling going to work with the dynamic campaign where unscripted CAS scenarios are going to be involved? Currently the only way to simulate CAS is to have everything so scripted where the friendly units are set to immortal, enemy units are set to invisible, and the friendly units are set to "fire at point" somewhere in the general vicinity of the enemy to create a fake CAS atmosphere. In short, we've got more realistic bombs operating in an arcade system.

[shagrat]

vor 14 Stunden schrieb gmangnall:

500lb bombs dont kill everyone within 300m. End of argument

Correct, but they "can" incapacitate someone within 425m, through fragmentation.

The current issue is that blast does damage to all objects inside the blast distance, instead of only a certain percentage.

The biggest issue I see currently is, that bombs trigger other bombs in the air  through blast damage. This definitely needs adjustment.

But the correct approach is to adjust the damage dealt and set distance thresholds for bombs being triggered. Not reverting back to the old damage model where a bomb designed to level a couple buildings barely scratched some vehicles 50m from the impact...

As for the concept of Risk Estimate Distances, we need to learn that RED with a PI 10 of 250 meters means you do NOT drop a live Mk-82 bomb closer than 250m to friendly forces and expect no blue on blue casualties, at least in real life.

You may drop danger close (inside PI 0.1), if the ground commander takes the responsibility and accepts potential harm to his soldiers or civilians, but that's still a certain risk many NATO countries wouldn't accept...