rockets

[GGTharos]

Rockets, AFAIK, are never accurate enough for 'sniping' in the real world. According to certain training documents there was a defficiency in AH-1 pilot skill when it came to placing rocket fire within 50m of target; 50m! The rocket's effective radius was around 15m.

 

Reccomended techniques for attack had attacks starting at some 800m range.

[isoul]

Rockets, AFAIK, are never accurate enough for 'sniping' in the real world. According to certain training documents there was a defficiency in AH-1 pilot skill when it came to placing rocket fire within 50m of target; 50m! The rocket's effective radius was around 15m.

 

Reccomended techniques for attack had attacks starting at some 800m range.

 

Indeed they aren't! But accuracy was never expected from a rocket(one reason rockets are often delivered in salvos) as it isn't expected for typical artillery shells or MLRS rockets.

 

The only thing you expect is the rocket to go off and kill or damage things around it. If you are lucky enough your HEAT rocket will hit armor and do its job but that will be a luck hit... usually the fragments will do the damage. Fuel-Air Explosive(FAE) rockets don't have such issues... they will go off and the blast will be enough to kill personnel. If pointed on a build the FAE effect will be greater.

 

GGTharos... only 15m effective radius? Against what type of target?

 

The offensive grenade I threw once was said to have 100% kill rate against personnel at 10m radius..! A whole rocket has 5m more?

[GGTharos]

Soldiers. Any farther than 15m and the lethality goes down very quickly. We're talking about a hydra which is let's see ... 10lbs warhead. I'll try to find that document again and check it, but the number for the effective radius was actually pretty low. They had reasons for it, but I don't remember them.

[Frederf]

I still insist that "effective range" is a measure of the weapon system-operator group to achieve some standard of results based on accuracy and lethality at that range. Firearms, missiles, and rockets most definitely share that definition. The effective range of a rocket is most definitely not the maximum range at which, if it happens to hit the target through some miracle, will have satisfactory effect.

 

"Sniping" is a term that is loaded with meaning. It implies that I am looking for some one shot, one kill extreme high effective likelihood. Being reasonably confident of success with an acceptable expenditure of ordinance is not "sniping." The parameters of a weapon system are in line with its effective performance. "Don't feel bad, this weapon isn't designed to actually hit anything" is a silly argument and doesn't apply to the S-8KOM.

 

The fact of the matter is that the S-8KOM is designed with a shaped-charged warhead that absolutely requires a hit for its primary effect. The secondary fragmentation effect is absolutely that, secondary, able to do damage to infantry, trucks, and up into the lighter IFVs possibly. To achieve the primary effect of the weapon it is logically necessary to achieve a direct hit and thus be employed in a manner that produces hits.

 

There must be some range where launched properly some number of rockets must reach some certain tangible and acceptable threshold of success. That value is real and it is within our power to find it. Willful ignorance of what employment gives success or resignation to non-success is not very pilot-like behavior.

 

As a practical application I've found a use for the KOM rockets in attacking M109 Paladin batteries after clearing their local air defense. Recently I was able to engage and destroy 3 out of 4 M109s with medium range S-8KOM attacks on the medium salvo setting on 4 separate attack passes. Three salvos were effective and one was not, partially due to imperfections in launch parameters and partially due to the statistical nature of accuracy. The final M109 was engaged successfully with AP 2A42 rounds on a fifth and final pass.

[Boberro]

In attachment you have nice document about rockets especially related to AH-1 chopper, Hydras, radius and new program of laser guided rockets.

ah1wRocketTraining.pdf

Edited June 15, 2010 by Boberro
grammar

[Arclight]

Well, rockets kinda fly like bullets, so I've always stuck with 1500m for effective range and it has served me well. Bit close for comfort, but I never willingly deploy rockets against something that can shoot back anyway. If you just want to hit an area where some infantry or trucks are bunched together, 2500-3000m seems to be a good range, allowing some degree of accuracy while letting the rockets spread enough to make good use of their blast-radius (good distribution of fire or something).

 

Within 1500m you can indeed "snipe" targets with single pairs, but don't be surprised if 1 falls just short, while the 2nd just scrapes the paint on the top, and that blasted AAA puts a few rounds through yer windshield. :music_whistling:

[Frederf]

1500m is pretty good for KOMs, probably 2000m+ for OFP2s. The AH-1 document above says that the blast radius for the HE warheads of those Hydra rockets was 10m. The OFP2s are probably a little better but not much bigger than that. I would still strive to have a dense concentration.

 

I would never employ destructive rockets in pairs. 10 or 20 salvos minimum. The short burst setting is exclusively for smoker and illumination rockets. In fact a pair of smoker rockets always separates by a good amount at 3000m enough to actually use for directional and unit-length FAC(A) work.

 

The illumination rockets are pretty fun. A 15-20° pitch up in manual mode gives about a 7km lateral and +1200m vertical throw that's good for remote illumination.

[ARM505]

I think this discussion, while interesting, is a bit moot in terms of BS, due to the limited blast/frag damage simulation, limited damage model of targets, and limited enemy AI (ie you won't get soldiers to 'duck' when under fire, nor can you scatter a convoy or harm their ability to return fire). Also, the sniper like accuracy of enemy MG's is a killer. All in all, 90% of the time, rockets are a waste of weight in BS, IMHO. This clearly differs from RL.

[isoul]

@Frederf : I doubt that maximum range, meaning the greatest possible distance of travel, of a rocket is ever mentioned. As in the case of russian RPG-18, for example, the maximum range is almost never mentioned (its 1000m) because the effective range is what it matters(its 200m).

 

It would be reasonable to me that 4km range is the maximum range in which the S-8 rocket can achieve the desired concentration. Of course whats "desired" may vary!

 

@ARM505 : Mate you are partially right! This conversations is moot but not because the limitations of DCS damage simulation. I think that people want the rockets to be something different than they truly are. Many people before me refer to rockets as "artillery". They are not wrong. Inaccuracy is expected from rocket type weapons, be it aircraft rockets or MLRS rockets. This doesn't mean they are ineffective. Its a necessary limitation in order to have an area covered with fire. The claim of "too short blast radius in DCS" is something I can't judge since, apart from claims, some kind of data aren't available

 

About the simulation of explosion effects and usefulness of rockets in DCS...

 

We can assess the effectiveness of rockets. By firing single shots at a truck, then taking screenshots of near-misses (taken directly above the truck) and calculating the distance of the crater to the truck using truck's(already known) dimensions. Of course this requires time!

Edited June 15, 2010 by isoul

[RAMjb]

What's me I can't hit the broad side of a barn with those things. At least not in boresight mode. I'm still too lousy of a pilot and have problems keeping the chopper steady for a proper guns/rockets pass, so I end shooting rockets everywhere but to the target I want to hit. in my case they're TRUE area effect weapons. Dispersion is a term that acquires a new dimension when I'm firing rockets in a boresight rocket pass :D

 

Maybe if I tried aiming anywhere else BUT to the target, I'd get better results :megalol:. For sure, can't get any worse.

 

(Laser assisted things improve somewhat, but using rockets that way, hovering at 3km from the target, is to ask for a MANPAD or even a BMP launched missile to kick your butt, as I've learned the hard way).

[GuntiNDDS]

For me there are definitly uses for the rockets in the sim. For example when a bunch of enemy units hide inside a forest i usually first fire the rockets and only afterwards scan for enemys that survived and then take them out one by one with the cannon.

Another example is the mission from the deployment campaign where after you shot down the building you got to chase and destroy the car. Sure it could be done with Vikhir or Cannon too, but i find it more awesome with the rockets :D

 

I only speak from my sim experience and i have no clue how rockets work irl.

[Frederf]

I think I have had confusion to what you meant. When you said:

S-8 range is stated to be 1.3-4km. When we talk about effective range of a weapon, according to my little military experience, we are meaning the maximum range a weapon is guaranteed to score a kill.

I took that to mean that you were implying a definition of "effective range" to be solely dependent on how far away a weapon is able to destroy the target without consideration to accuracy. Rereading it you could mean either, just my keyword alarms went off with the keyword "maximum range" which when used alone is a term that refers to a range without accuracy considerations.

 

It would be reasonable to me that 4km range is the maximum range in which the S-8 rocket can achieve the desired concentration. Of course whats "desired" may vary!

 

I wonder what the average number of S-8KOMs fired from 4000m slant range is to achieve a kill on a parked BMP2. I'm guessing 100+. Concentration of impacts is not the goal but destructive effects. Concentration of impacts is merely a stepping stone on the way. Acceptable rate of effectiveness would have to be on the order of 1 per 80 rockets since that is how many the BS can carry.

 

The claim of "too short blast radius in DCS" is something I can't judge since, apart from claims, some kind of data aren't available

 

About the simulation of explosion effects and usefulness of rockets in DCS...

 

We can assess the effectiveness of rockets. By firing single shots at a truck, then taking screenshots of near-misses (taken directly above the truck) and calculating the distance of the crater to the truck using truck's(already known) dimensions. Of course this requires time!

 

The document about the 70mm HE rocket in the PDF above states a 10-15m blast radius which is pretty small. Two lengths of a BMP-2 is 12m. I should try some practice shots against soft trucks and see if 2 truck lengths is good enough for a kill.

 

Smoke rockets might be more helpful for a faster understanding as they mark their positions by design.

 

What's me I can't hit the broad side of a barn with those things. At least not in boresight mode.

 

(Laser assisted things improve somewhat, but using rockets that way, hovering at 3km from the target, is to ask for a MANPAD or even a BMP launched missile to kick your butt, as I've learned the hard way).

 

I would suggest not firing rockets in GS mode. It's a pain to range under aiming mark and then readjust. It's much easier to use the Shkval. I don't know what you mean by "laser assisted" exactly, both the GS and AT modes of targeting rockets uses the laser range finder. Also there's no need to hover during any rocket attack.

 

The rockets are absolutely fantastic for buildings though since the game operates on a "hit points" and "damage value" system. It's kind of silly to down a major factory with a dozen anti-tank rockets that are designed to leave finger sided holes in steel plate.

[RAMjb]

I would suggest not firing rockets in GS mode. It's a pain to range under aiming mark and then readjust. It's much easier to use the Shkval. I don't know what you mean by "laser assisted" exactly, both the GS and AT modes of targeting rockets uses the laser range finder. Also there's no need to hover during any rocket attack.

 

That's the point: If I'm doing a rocket pass using boresight mode I'm not talking the extra work to range. I'd have enough of a hard time trying to keep the plane steady and without drifting (and usually, failing trying to do so), to also take care of the forward-fixed shkval to do any kind of rangefinding. I simply use the fixed gunsight mark and estimate where will rockets fall. And of course, between my estimations being crap and my flying not much better :D, I hit nothing.

 

By "laser assisted" I mean using the uncaged shkval to get a proper lock on the enemy target. That way I -can- hit things. Now and then, in a full moon night, when Venus is in conjunction with Mars and Jupiter is the ascendant over Piscis :megalol:. But its the only way I can get any kind of hit with rockets.

 

Of course being my piloting skills as fantastic as they are the only way I get to put the rocket pipper over the target reticle in a more or less steady fashion, is if I am in a very slow motion or almost a hover. With any kind of speed, I wont put pipper over reticle, I'll be actually firing when one briefly passes over the another. And of course, again I hit nothing ;)

 

I'm not saying anything about the quality or usefulness of rockets as a weapon, just stressing the point: you -really- need to have a proper control of your chopper before hoping for any kind of precision. And even then I think it will still a relatively unnacurate weapon.

 

But with me, it's not a weapon. It's more like some kind of harmless nice chopper fireworks :D But that's because I suck, not because the weapon does.

 

Of course everything I said avobe is also appliable to the 30mm in boresight mode. Anything not guided, I'm not hitting with it, period. Guess practice will improve that but things are like that right now for this poor noob, hehehe.

Edited June 15, 2010 by RAMjb

[Frederf]

I forget what the targeting system assumes is the range if you don't use the laser rangefinder at all. I think it's 1100m (looked it up, yay memory) or something, at least for the gun sight, probably for all other unguided weapons.

 

I was about to say, someone gave me some good advice on rocket runs and I combined it with some other ideas. I would say you want to start 4-5 km out, get the Shkval on target and locked. Then your next job is to get the aiming mark directly below the boresight mark with rudder trim; completely ignore the target while you do this as trimming will slew you all over. Once you have that done, bank the bore mark onto the target. During the run in at 3-4km you want the three marks bore, Shkval, and aiming to be in a vertical line on the HUD in that order.

 

The Shkval mark will drift downward on the HUD from the bore mark toward the aiming mark. If the Shkval mark is going to drift downward past the aiming mark before you get to your fire range, lower the collective which will drop the nose and buy you some more time. My joystick is not the smoothest so I try to control the aiming mark strictly with collective and a tiny bit of rudder near the end. Ideally the Shkval mark will drift through the aiming mark just as you reach your firing range without ever having to touch the cyclic.

 

Before your break off range (shot or no), reset the targeting system, add in some collective and make a 120° turn left or right to not overfly the target. I use auto-turn on rocket runs to help stabilize yaw but I suppose it doesn't make that much difference.

[isoul]

...

 

I was about to say, someone gave me some good advice on rocket runs and I combined it with some other ideas....

 

...

 

This is a good way, indeed, to aim rockets I guess! Good thinking... I am going to try that too!

 

...

 

The document about the 70mm HE rocket in the PDF above states a 10-15m blast radius which is pretty small. Two lengths of a BMP-2 is 12m. I should try some practice shots against soft trucks and see if 2 truck lengths is good enough for a kill....

 

 

Mate I really don't know! As I posted before, an offensive hand grenade(frag) has an 100% kill rate at 10 meters. A defensive one "kill" radius is said that it may reach 50m(depending on ground type). All above are against infantry since hand grenades aren't filled with large enough "balls".

 

But the fact above about 70mm HE rocket needs some clarification. The 10m is the blast radius itself or the overall "casualty" range? While serching the internet I found this regarding the M151HE warhead the Hydra 70mm rockets are carrying.

 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/hydra-70.htm

The M151 HE Warhead is the 10-pound anti-personnel warhead -- traditionally referred to as the "10 Pounder" -- which was designed and developed by the Army and is currently in production. It consists of two main parts, the nose and the base, which are welded (brazed) together. The bulk of the lethality is obtained from the nose section which is fabricated using nodular, pearlitic malleable cast iron. The nose end of the warhead is threaded to receive the M423 Fuze. The M151 can be used M423, M429, and M433 fuzes. The base section is fabricated using steel or cast iron and is threaded for attachment to the rocket motor. The total weight of the loaded, unfuzed, warhead is 8.7 pounds (3.85 kg), of which 2.3 pounds (1.04 kg) is composition B-4 High Explosive (HE). Upon detonation, the warhead fragments into thousands of small, high velocity fragments. The bursting radius is 10 meters; however, high velocity fragments can produce a lethality radius in excess of 50 meters. Temperature limits for storage and firing the M151 are -65 F to +150 F.

This sounds reasonable if you consider that a hand grenade's explosive material is only a few grams (M67 grenade has 180gr explosive material). I think now we have a clue about rockets and its effects. Edited June 16, 2010 by isoul

[Frederf]

I don't really know how to interpret that information about the Hydra warhead. The usual descriptors of an explosive are "kill radius," "effective casualty radius," and some sort of "you're not really safe unless you're X far away radius."

 

M67 frag grenade is sort of defensive fragmentary since the safe distance is well farther than the expected throw. Offensive hand grenades have traditionally been low yield concussion blast type where one could throw the grenade far enough such that it didn't present a danger to the thrower without cover.

 

Anyway, the M67 has a kill radius of 5m and a effective casualty radius of 15m. The definition of the effective casualty radius is "exposed man-size targets within this range will experience 50% casualties." The fragments themselves finally have not been known to travel beyond 200m or so. The range at which the fragments can go and still be reasonably lethal would be somewhat short of 200m but I don't know what it is.

 

The reason explosive and/or fragmentary weapons are described this way is because their probable casualty-producing effects are a curve very much like a Bell curve (or a Gaussian if you're familiar.)

 

Describing this curve in a single range value without actually using a graph is tricky. The casualty "bubble" doesn't really have any defined edge to use your tape measure on. Describing the edge where the casualty probability is 0.00% is not helpful as this number will be large and not all that characteristic of the weapon.

 

In statistics typically one uses a "standard deviation" which finds the range which contains some fraction of the total probability. In science the width of a laser beam might be measured to its "1/e" or "1/e^2" point, namely the point at which the electrical field has dropped to a definite fraction of its maximum value.

 

In all of the military descriptions I've seen the "edge of the bubble" is chosen to be where the probability of a casualty drops to 50%.

 

Back to the Hydra effects... do I interpret that as kill radius 10m, effective casualty radius 50m? I don't. I doubt even an exposed soldier (or whatever the assumed target is) will become a casualty from a Hydra impacting 50m away 50% of the time. I would believe 15m ECR before a 50m ECR.

 

10 times the explosive as an M67? I would imagine then that the blast radius would be 10^.33 power as big, 2.15. 5m for the grenade, 10.8m for the rocket. This is just the blast of course and the fragmentary effects (which are of course dominant) require a different estimate.

[isoul]

...

M67 frag grenade is sort of defensive fragmentary since the safe distance is well farther than the expected throw...Anyway, the M67 has a kill radius of 5m and a effective casualty radius of 15m. ...

 

No way M67 is a defensive grenade! The WWII good old (defensive)Mills grenade had an effective radius of no less than 30m... Today's defensive grenades still have similar casualty ranges. The M67 is just 400gr! The effective throw(by a normal&healthy adult) can't be even close(not to say less) to 15m. I remember myself throwing such grenade much further(about 25m), with good accuracy, and I was no super soldier nor an athlete!

 

...The fragments themselves finally have not been known to travel beyond 200m or so. The range at which the fragments can go and still be reasonably lethal would be somewhat short of 200m but I don't know what it is.

 

Fragments may travel long distances BUT I can assure you that at 200m... or even at 100m a fragment can't be lethal (unless God WANTS you to die). I have experience at least 10 grenade explosions no more that 100m away and I hardly ever seen or heard a single fragment or rock landing(and bringing the dust up or making a noise) near me. I 've only once heard a rock falling on the ground, well away in front of me, after a grenade exploded.

 

On the contrary I know a guy that was watching grenade throws at a sheltered position(no more than 40m away, just back of the thrower) and a single tiny ball(used as filling) hit him on the nose making a tiny wound, with almost no bleeding!

 

 

Back to the Hydra effects... do I interpret that as kill radius 10m, effective casualty radius 50m? I don't. I doubt even an exposed soldier (or whatever the assumed target is) will become a casualty from a Hydra impacting 50m away 50% of the time. I would believe 15m ECR before a 50m ECR.

 

Casualty means both killed and wounded right?

 

If 1kg high explosive material goes off, blast radius can be 10m. If a defensive grenade has a 30m effective casualy radius(due to fragments), why the Hydra rocket can't have 50m? Effect is assumed against infantry.

 

For example, the OG-7V(frag rocket used with RPG-7) 40mm rocket, which has just 210gr of explosive, has a lethal radius of 7m against body armor... Russian typical grenades for grenade-launcher has 30gr of explosives and have kill zone radius of 5-7m and damage zone radius no more than 15m. Would a Hydra, with its multiple weight of more explosive material, have so small kill and damage radius respectively? I can't belive that the explosion of 1kg of high explosive material(and the possible fragments) 50m away will wound me less 50% of the time.

Edited June 16, 2010 by isoul

[Frederf]

I take that back, I was going to say the M67 isn't clearly defensive or offensive because it's fragmentary and was possibly a threat beyond how far you can throw it (which suggests defensive). However it is much smaller in danger area than the old Mills Bomb or other true defensives.

 

Interesting to know that a stray fragment is just buise-worthy beyond 40-50m. I was just repeating the "maximum fling" figure from a website. I knew that "maximum fling with sting" was shorter but not by how much.

 

It still strikes me as slightly optimistic that 10 lbs TNT equivalent warhead the size of my firsts fragmentary is going to reach out to 150' semi-reliably. A 50m sphere has 11 times the surface area of a 15m sphere. One would need 11 times the fragments to achieve the same fragment wave density. It's possible I guess. This of course assumes ideal surface like a big concrete slab.

[GGTharos]

And again according to the document above, you need to land those rockets within 25m to have good effect.

[Eddie]

The USAF Risk Estimate Distances table has 2.75" FFARs down as having a 10% PI out to 160m and 5" FFARs as 150m. So for them to be considered as "effective" fire I'd say they'd have to be least half that range.

 

Of course, under NATO doctorine, "effective fire" is anything that prevents the enemy completing their objective, so you don't technically have to cause casualties for a weapon to be effective. Of course this doesn't apply in the sim as we haven't got to the point of AI being capable of fear, yet.

[Avimimus]

The only use against vehicles that I can think of would be perfect trim + right attitude, altitude and range + laser correction + salvo of twenty rockets for some kind of suppression effect. So far I manage about 0.5 targets per pod (climbing to 1.5 targets per pod if I'm focussing so hard as to not enjoy myself) - this is in environments without threats.

 

The airframe just isn't a stable enough platform to conveniently accurately deploy rockets (at least with my joystick). For close range work the cannon and cannon pods do a much better job, while the only real use for rockets is structure demolition.

 

Which is sad because I kinda bought the sim largely for the rockets. I used to imagine the challenge of deploying them (but I underestimated the challenge). So now I only fly the Kamov without weapons. I wish there were some civvie helicopters - I'd really be into that!

[HitchHikingFlatlander]

Its been said many times that rockets are not a pinpoint weapon rather an area weapon and this is more or less true (from my understanding) for all types of a/c that employ rockets.

 

I think if you bought the sim for rockets employment I think you're missing out on a lot of other great elements in Black Shark. I tend to use rockets against un-armored vehicle columns and troops. They're pretty useless against anything armored IMO. I fly online with people who can use rockets pretty well to their advantage but I'm a little less accurate. I prefer vikhrs to say the least though!

[Черный Дракул]

The rockets are not a precision strike weapon, that's true. But you can actually use them against heavy armor, just get in closer than 1km to score direct hits. Here's a fast track demonstrating this: 4 inexpensive rocket pods and 4 burning t-72's :pilotfly: :joystick:

AntiTank_NAR.trk

[isoul]

I did some searching around the .lua files and remembered the warheads.lua file ZaltysZ mentioned on another thread(research section). So what I 've seen ...

 

The general "concept" of damages and coefficients that warheads(rockets among them) have is the following :

 

warheads["warhead_name"] =

{

expl_mass = X,

other_factors = { HE1, HE2, HE3 },

concrete_factors = { HE1, HE2, HE3 },

concrete_obj_factor = Y,

obj_factors = { HE1, HE2 },

cumulative_factor= Z1,

cumulative_thickness = Z2

};

Explanation (based on the ED remarks -in russian language-) :

 

- expl_mass : The actual damage done. ED puts here the total mass of the warhead in kg. Althought the explosive mass of a warhead isn't equal to the warhead's weight ED puts it that weight in order to take fragments "into consideration". This doesn't sound correct but its a way to represent the fragments.

 

- other_factors : This is what happens when the warhead hits the ground. It has 3 coefficients(they are explained later)

 

- concrete_factors : This is what happens when the warhead hits concrete. It has 3 coefficients(they are explained later)

 

- object_factors : This is what happens when the warhead hits "an object"(probably meaning a building, a vehicle etc). It has only 2 coefficients(they are explained later)

 

The coefficients :

 

* HE1 : This is the explosive damaging effect. This coefficient is multiplied by expl_mass (HE1*expl_mass).

 

* HE2 : This is the size of the effect of the explosion.

 

* HE3 : This is the size of funnel from the explosion. The absence of this coefficient under object_factors is reasonable cause when warheads hits an object they leave no funnel.

 

- concrete_obj_factor : This is the coefficient of the warheads concrete-penetration effects. This only occurs when wearhead hits concrete and the coefficient is multiplied by expl_mass(Y*expl_mass).

 

- cumulative_factor : This is the effect of cumulative(?) ammunition. This coefficient is multiplied by expl_mass(Z1*expl_mass) and works in conjuction of cumulative_thickness.

 

- cumulative_thickness : This something like Armor Piercing Factor. It is represented in meters.

 

In general this is what happens about cumulative_factor and thickness :

 

IF armor < cumulative_thickness

THEN cumulative_factor is applied

ELSE it will do nothing

Edited June 17, 2010 by isoul

[isoul]

COMMENTS :

 

The HE1 is the coefficient that affects the damage done when warhead impacts on different surfaces(ground, concrete etc). This is quite straightforward. Only one question remains, is this the coefficient that affects the area in which the damage is applied?

 

The HE2 coefficient needs some clarification. The "size of the effect of the explosion" can be misleading. For sure this is the the size of explosion animation (if you alter HE2=100 you see a quite big explosion with a large shockwave) but is this a coefficient that affects "area damage" of a warhead? To me the following questions arise :

 

1) Does that number represent in any way the area the damage is applied?

2) Is this coefficient multiplied with expl_mass like the HE1?

 

The HE3 is the size of the funnel. Is this represented in meters or something? Is this coefficient multiplied with expl_mass like the HE1? Its not reasonable not to multiply HE3 by expl_mass because if you check the warheads.lua you 'll see that S-8OFP and 250 or 500kg bombs may have the same HE3 value. If you set HE3=50 for example you will see a quite large crater left behind.

 

These need some tests and further investigation unless someone from ED answers that.

 

Apart from these and regarding the S-8KOM... the warheads.lua contains the following data about this rocket :

 

warheads["C_8"] = -- С-8КОМ shaped-charge, fragmented

{

expl_mass = 3.0, -- Warhead 3 kg, explosive 0.855 kg + fragments bonus

other_factors = { 1.0, 0.5, 0.5 },

concrete_factors = { 1.0, 0.5, 0.1 },

concrete_obj_factor = 0.0,

obj_factors = { 1.0, 1.0 },

cumulative_factor= 3.0,

cumulative_thickness = 0.3

};

 

The S-8KOM is stated(in DCS encyclopedia) that can penetrate 400mm armor. This, in warheads.lua, AFAIK is represented by cumulative_thickness which is defined as 300mm(0.3m). Isn't this an error?

Edited June 17, 2010 by isoul