WIP - Improved CBU-97/105

[Frostiken]

Well I didn't mean under it - I mean let's say you're using the CBU-97 on a single vehicle. Since the skeets are ejected 90 degrees in four directions from the carrier, that means 3/4 skeets are NOT going to find anything to hit.

 

This isn't to say that the single vehicle would be safe, quite the contrary, but it wouldn't be 40 skeets trying to find one vehicle, it would be at most 10. Due to the positioning, a convoy of multiple vehicles on a road would be a bit 'safer' than a cluster of vehicles in a defensive formation would be.

 

The promo video for the CBU-97 showed the search areas for the skeets when they leave the carrier and for a single carrier there were some pretty big gaps in the coverage. It's made up for by the fact that there's 9 other carriers launching skeets randomly around the place, but I wouldn't expect a CBU-97 to hit every vehicle arranged in a line. If they were positioned randomly (like the defensive formation the tank convoys go into after you attack them), hell yes it would tear them apart.

Edited August 12, 2011 by Frostiken

[GGTharos]

Ah, yes, you're correct.

 

I'd say this is a matter of choosing the correct weapons here. Against a single vehicle you'd obviously (I would think) employ a Maverick.

 

Against a column of 3 or more vehicles you would employ a CBU-97. Yes, a bunch of skeets get wasted, but it's probably going to be much more effective than ripping all four of your mk-82's.

[Frostiken]

Yep :) Plus, if we ever get the supply system / dynamic campaign, these babies are going to be rare and extremely cost-prohibitive.

 

Though honestly against three vehicles, say they're pretty close together and they *aren't* MBTs (though even if they were...) your best weapon would probably be a GBU-10. Much more cost-effective. In real-life at least. Such a weapon would most likely flip a convoy of BMPs completely off the road and cause severe damage to just about everything. The entire reason we carried GBU-31s into Libya was to knock out groups of vehicles. Ah, but that should be the goal of the next DCS module - integrate ground vehicle physics and give us much better simulation of damage on vehicles, to say nothing of better modeling of explosions, including the shockwave bounce thus giving purpose to air-burst JDAMs :D

[GGTharos]

I'm partial to rippling air-bursted Mk-82's in such a situation, but we don't get those in DCS yet ... :)

[Frostiken]

yet

 

I actually mentioned the GBU-10 over the 31 mostly because against something like BMPs, impact with the ground might give you the best results. I have absolutely no idea what an air burst would do to an APC but I imagine flipping the whole damn thing over by leaving a crater the size of a block of flats works all the same.

 

To say nothing of the unfortunates caught within...

Edited August 12, 2011 by Frostiken

[mr.president]

WOW the pics are really amazing..

Here is a video which shows exactly how the CBU-97 and 105 are working

:smartass:

[159th_Viper]

bg9uoI8RQKc&NR=1

[supraman2turbo]

When is the patch coming out? I can't wait to play with the new CBU toy.

[EtherealN]

When it's done™

[supraman2turbo]

When it's done™

 

Understood. Didn't mean it that way meant it as I couldn't wait for it to come out to reign down death on columns of tanks

[EtherealN]

No worries mate, I understand the desire fully. I felt the same way before I got recruited to the test team. :)

[supraman2turbo]

No worries mate, I understand the desire fully. I felt the same way before I got recruited to the test team. :)

 

If you need help testing. I'm just saying I'm available :thumbup:

[Elwin]

I suppose you mistook 'testing' for 'playing around with'. At least for me, there are not many things in this world more boring than having to test software :bored:

[EtherealN]

It's a voyage of discovery, and a very nice way to learn a lot about how this type of thing works. :)

 

And besides, it's not like we're testing new versions of minesweeper. :P

[Snoopy]

It's a voyage of discovery, and a very nice way to learn a lot about how this type of thing works. :)

 

And besides, it's not like we're testing new versions of minesweeper. :P

 

Exactly...at times it can be a lot of work but I've enjoyed MP sessions with testers I wouldn't normally fly as well the nice "surprises" we get to see/test before each patch is released.

[Elwin]

I see your point, but as I'm not game developer, I don't have any experience with testing games, but I agree it can be more amusing than usual software :)

[menendezdiego]

I do a lot of testing for FSX addons, currently testing an F-15E which allows the player to shoot down other aircraft and hit moving targets with GBU-12's...it's not a glorious process like many would suspect.

 

You spend most of your time looking for bugs, and there sure are a lot! I feel the non-testers are lucky, seeing that when they get the product, everything works per manual. In our case, we're constantly having to re-write things!

 

 

Regards, Diego

[andysim]

new CBUs look awsome!!

 

Great to see a great sim coming along nicely =)