bridges

[sweinhart3]

Are bridges non destructible items? I flew a mission where I tried to blow up a bridge using several vhikers in an attempt to prevent enemy forces from crossing. Needless to say it didnt work. Wasnt even smoking.

[element1108]

I think you need something heavier. Bridges blow in lockon so they should go in black shark. I haven't tried personly in black shark yet.

[StrongHarm]

I've blown one up. I found that I had to target the very center of the bridge. I wonder if the object doesn't align with the visual...?

[HiJack]

Is this what bombs are for? ;)

[159th_Viper]

To be sure, 4 Vikhrs. 3 will sometimes do, but a 2-Salvo set to 'Long' will Tank it every time.

 

[ATTACH]35865[/ATTACH]

[Eddie]

Vikhrs certainly can destroy a bridge, as shown above by Viper. But the best method in my opinion is to use S-13 rockets, they make bridges (and most other things) go away very nicely.

[astrospud]

That's what FAB 500's are for :)

[sweinhart3]

I believe I launched 1 at the center and 3 more at one of the foundations on 1 side. I thought I saw it smoke a little but then it cleared up. So I went home rearmed and went back out and finished up the mission.

[isoul]

Actually I am not that sure that Vikhrs or any other HEAT weapon can destroy a quite large concrete bridge(HEAT weapons are for penetration of armor). I would say that FABs and S-13 rockets are best for the task with S-13 being better since FABs take some more practice to make them hit the target.

[CAT_101st]

I agree with isoul with the S-13s very good at destroying heavy/large objects

[159th_Viper]

Actually I am not that sure that Vikhrs or any other HEAT weapon can destroy a quite large concrete bridge.....

 

Hope you're not referring to In-Game.....If so, you need to read the Posts in reply more Carefully. Vikhrs do Indeed Destroy Bridges ;)

 

In RL no, but then again even S-13's will not....And not to even Ponder the Improbability of a Helo being turned into a Bomb-Truck :music_whistling: :megalol:

[Lucas_From_Hell]

I've already destroyed bridges with a single Vikhr, without a direct hit. Well, maybe it received some help from the big T-72 that exploded right over it :music_whistling:

 

The thing is, I pointed the Vikhr on the tank, it exploded, a fire started at the bridge (flammable concrete? :huh:), then the tank exploded and shortly after the bridge went down too.

 

If anyone's interested, I can try to get a track of it (not sure if I'll be able to repeat this 'miracle' :D)

[isoul]

Hope you're not referring to In-Game.....If so, you need to read the Posts in reply more Carefully. Vikhrs do Indeed Destroy Bridges ;)

 

In RL no, but then again even S-13's will not....And not to even Ponder the Improbability of a Helo being turned into a Bomb-Truck :music_whistling: :megalol:

 

Actually I am referring to RL! But since you are mentioning it, S-13 can destroy bunkers so its more possible to be able to damage or destroy a bridge...

[Frederf]

S-13 don't really destroy bunkers. They penetrate bunkers and explode inside to hurt what is inside.

 

Bridges are usually built very strong and it can take a serious blast or a very specific hit to bring one down. S-13s (in real life) shouldn't be that effective against a bridge since penetration is not very helpful.

[Acefighterpilot]

If all else fails...have you tried ejecting over the bridge. Not enough fuel to get home....no ammo......trust me lol it'll take that bridge out like nothin....

[isoul]

S-13 don't really destroy bunkers. They penetrate bunkers and explode inside to hurt what is inside.

 

Bridges are usually built very strong and it can take a serious blast or a very specific hit to bring one down. S-13s (in real life) shouldn't be that effective against a bridge since penetration is not very helpful.

 

No, an S-13 can't reduce a bunker to dust for sure but the bunker's strong wall interior, once the rocket penetrate the reinforced concrete and explode, magnifies the blast force.

 

My initial objection was aimed towards the fact that Vikhr is an armor-penetration missile and in real life it shouldn't do significant damage to a bridge. I am no expert in explosives but take the following facts into consideration :

 

1) A well placed German WWII Tellermine(AT Mine) with 4,5-5,5kg TNT is enough to demolish a single-arch, approx. 4m-wide stone bridge.

2) Judging from the shape, the S-13 rocket which is ingame is the S-13OF HE rocket which caries 7kg of explosives(which I assume to be TNT).

 

I don't know if S-13OF keeps the same penetration characteristics of the basic S-13(which can penetrate up to 1m reinforced concrete) but its explosive type is more suitable for demolitions. Vikhr's overall warhead weight should be no more than 10kg(thats a speculation since Ataka missile which weight 2.5kg less than Vikhr has 7,4kg warhead) which is Tandem-HEAT while S-13OF has a pure 7kg HE(overall warhead weights 33kg). So, taking all the above into consideration, when it comes to blast force I assume that S-13OF should be better than Vikhr and that S-13OF has more chances to damage a bridge.

 

EDIT : According to in-game encyclopedia the rocket's characteristics are the same as S-13DF which is a FAE(Fuel-Air Explosive) rocket with 32kg overall warhead weight/14.6kg mixture of explosive material which is equivalent of 32.5kg(according to ED, or up to 40kg according to my sources*). The FAE weapons produces significantly longer blast wave which causes even more damage to buildings. The equivalent of 32.5kg TNT explosion is quite stronger that the blast produced by Vikhr's warhead.

 

Source : "Russia's Arms 2001-2002" Copyright 2001 Military Parade Ltd. http://www.milparade.com/index.php?lang=1

 

Note : The only thing left to determine the type of the rocket (if it is the OF or the DF variant) is to check what is written on the rocket model in-game.

Edited February 1, 2010 by isoul

[Frederf]

I thought the S-13 in DCS was the high penetration anti-hardened aircraft shelter variety (S-13B) and not any other. Despite the correlation of encyclopedia data to any specific model (good thinking, by the way), I would guess that it is more likely that such a conclusion is more misleading than informative. The encyclopedia entry could have easily been made with information about a variant other than is used in-game. This would explain why you have to basically hit anything on the nose with the "S-13" to hurt it.

 

The rockets are really meant to be used against infantry mostly, and other soft targets (destroying encampments etc).

 

The S-13 is an anti-bunker weapon and requires more precise operation, but on the other hand the targets also tend to be that much bigger.

 

Or it could just be a slip of the finger when coding:

I don't believe there is any bug.

 

What has been known for a long time is that the simulation does not model fragmentation effects, because it does not actually model individual fragments. Neither the weapons models nor the damage models can support this kind of detail (in case you're curious, ED did actually implement a fragmentation model as an experiment and the resulting explosions would choke the PC). However, the effects are approximated in the model to the degree possible with abstract damage range and point values. These things can always be tuned to a greater or lesser extent, but as far as I know ED does not feel the current model is incorrect.

Sound like a "story." In Afghanistan, the Soviets still used the S-5 rockets, which were found to be highly ineffective. In fact, there are other "stories" about the Mujaheddin surviving such rockets attacks because the fragments would fail to penetrate their robes. The S-5 rockets were gradually replaced with the S-8s, which are considered much more effective, but we would still need to work with some kind of numbers in order to make a comparison with Black Shark. In other words, you have to define "effective" and "deadly."

 

P.S. Just remembered that there is actually a bug with the S-13 rockets in Black Shark. The in-game S-13 is tuned to simulate a penetrating warhead instead of the blast-frag it is supposed to be.

 

 

A FAE warhead like in the S-13D(DF) would be the best bet for damaging an exposed or enclosed structure if my understanding of warhead effects is correct.

 

Either way you're right that the warhead on any S-13 stands a much better chance of doing damage to a bridge than the tiny anti-armor-specific warhead on a Vikhr. ATGMs like the Vikhr are basically a "plasma cutting torch" delivery system so you can make a 3cm hole in a tank from a safe distance.

[isoul]

There are many variants of the basic S-13 rocket. The basic S-13 is a penetrating rocket which can penetrate 3m of ground or 1m of reinforced concrete. The B variant, according to wikipedia, has the same use but a larger warhead(standard S-13 has >2kg of explosive). The T variant is a penetration rocket with explosives that goes off in two phases(on impact and after penetration) ideal for destroying aircraft in shelters. Still, on those 3 variants (S-13, S-13B, S-13T) the warhead size/explosive material isn't that much(S-13T has a total 4,5kg of explosives, which is the bigger of the three variants).

 

ED uses the model of S-13OF, easily distiguishable by the long "nose" of the rocket which actually is a delay fuze. OF variant is a HE/Frag rocket with 7kg explosive material and 450 fragments. Still, the encyclopedia states that S-13 rocket has all the characteristics(overall and warhead weights, size and TNT equivalent) of the S-13D or S-13DF variant! Of course this can be misleading since there are so many variants of the same rocket that its easily confused.

 

Appart from this, don't you think that the explosion animation size of the S-13 in-game is quite large for an up to 7kg HE warhead? I think this is a good question for the ED Dev team to answer!

 

I thought the S-13 in DCS was the high penetration anti-hardened aircraft shelter variety (S-13B) and not any other. Despite the correlation of encyclopedia data to any specific model (good thinking, by the way), I would guess that it is more likely that such a conclusion is more misleading than informative. The encyclopedia entry could have easily been made with information about a variant other than is used in-game. This would explain why you have to basically hit anything on the nose with the "S-13" to hurt it.

Edited February 2, 2010 by isoul