Level bombing - crosshairs vs computer bomb site

[Max]

So I take a box of Lancs off a 10K field in the TA. Steady my speed and calibrate. I maintain calibration speed for several minutes as I approach the target. The computer cross hairs are about 1/2" above my bombsite crosshairs. I drop o salvo of 3 eggs using the bombsite x-hairs; I'm long. Next one I use the computer x-hairs...dead on. Rinse and repeat.

So my question is, why are the computer x-hairs different than the bombsite x-hairs?

[Tigger29]

So I take a box of Lancs off a 10K field in the TA. Steady my speed and calibrate. I maintain calibration speed for several minutes as I approach the target. The computer cross hairs are about 1/2" above my bombsite crosshairs. I drop o salvo of 3 eggs using the bombsite x-hairs; I'm long. Next one I use the computer x-hairs...dead on. Rinse and repeat.

So my question is, why are the computer x-hairs different than the bombsite x-hairs?

Your speed probably changed during that several minutes between calibration and drop.

[Max]

Nope. I verified it from time of calibration right to the drop point.

[Karnak]

How long did you calibrate for?  I find less than 30 seconds to be undesirable.

[RTHolmes]

+/-0fpm on the E6B climbrate?


(edit: it would be nice if the films showed this stuff ...)

[Krusty]

rise or fall isn't as much a factor as you messed up the calibration.


Bring out your E6B after you calibrate. Is your speed the same as in the readout for your bombsight?


If not, you screwed up the calibration or didn't do it long enough. If the E6B and the calibrated speed readout are not the same, you will miss. It's that simple 99.99999999% of the time with bombsight complaints.

[titanic3]

rise or fall isn't as much a factor as you messed up the calibration.


Bring out your E6B after you calibrate. Is your speed the same as in the readout for your bombsight?


If not, you screwed up the calibration or didn't do it long enough. If the E6B and the calibrated speed readout are not the same, you will miss. It's that simple 99.99999999% of the time with bombsight complaints.

No need to bring up E6B anymore, it's right under the data provided in the bombsight (F6).

[Krusty]

Ah, I hadn't looked at how they implemented that yet. My throttle quad snapped 2 levers off and I'm waiting shipment of some replacements.

[Rolex]

I've wondered about this, too. Maybe it's lag. I think the lead computing sight is server based, whereas the bombsight crosshair is on your front end. Ground textures would be in a different location in the server time-space Aces High universe than in your time-space Aces High universe. It may be like different people seeing carriers at different locations based on their latency to the server.

... a faster-than-light neutrino walks into a bar.

[mtnman]

I've wondered about this, too. Maybe it's lag. I think the lead computing sight is server based, whereas the bombsight crosshair is on your front end. Ground textures would be in a different location in the server time-space Aces High universe than in your time-space Aces High universe. It may be like different people seeing carriers at different locations based on their latency to the server.

... a faster-than-light neutrino walks into a bar.

Then again, maybe there's a slight error in the sight?  

Remembering back, we found some error in the LCG when we tested it together.  It doesn't (or didn't, anyway) necessarily point where it "should" have to give us hits on each other in the TA.  Upside down in particular.  The rounds flew as they should have while firing inverted, but the LCG didn't seem to take bank angle/being inverted into consideration.  I suspect if we'd have made any real effort to test it while firing vertically we'd have also seen some discrepancies.

Maybe something similar with the bomb end of things?  Could it have been terrain-related (bombing up or down slope, maybe)?

In the end, it sounds like the LCG did its job by teaching the OP to bomb better on his own than with the LCG!  Nothing says "don't get too hooked on the tool" like discovering that it isn't a perfect tool!

[Rolex]

Hiya mtnman,

Maybe the crosshair centers are determined using different formulas or different position update rates? It's a mystery!

I've always agreed with you that bullet and cannon trajectories should be modeled as accurately as possible. But, I'm of the mind that bombing accuracy is already too accurate... 

[mtnman]

Hiya mtnman,

Maybe the crosshair centers are determined using different formulas or different position update rates? It's a mystery!

I've always agreed with you that bullet and cannon trajectories should be modeled as accurately as possible. But, I'm of the mind that bombing accuracy is already too accurate... 

I'm not arguing the bomb-accuracy thing, lol!  I agree, it seems awful easy.

Of course, I'd like to think the bomb trajectory was modeled correctly too...  Has anyone looked into it yet?

[RTHolmes]

+/-0fpm on the E6B climbrate?

rise or fall isn't as much a factor as you messed up the calibration.

when you're auto-level, the climbrate gives an indication of whether you're accelerating or decelerating, 0fpm just means you have constant speed. just a couple of mph difference between when you calibrate and when you drop can throw aim off a fair bit.

I did a lanc run recently, bombs dropped exactly on the crosshair from 26k, so at least the calibration works properly in the LWMA (although there was a problem like this with the B29 iirc, not sure if its been fixed yet.)

[Hap]

Max, in your E6B is "Climb" # which will show you if you're accelerating or decelerating. 

Try this if you like: level> when climb reads 4 open doors> when climb = 0 calibrate.  And if you need to adjust your heading after your tas = calib air speed, only do so from the bombardier's chair.