Hey PYRO, HT, Eagl, any other real life fighter bomber pilots, etc. read this please.

[wulfie14]

HT, PYRO, HTC in general, etc.:

I was playing around with the level bombsight in AH.

Is there any CEP modeled based on the aerodynamic properties of the bomb itself?

Eagl and others of similar background - my understanding is that a 'dumb' bomb, even if 'perfectly' aimed (i.e. dropped from an F-15E, etc.), has a CEP of 6 meters or so per 1000' of vertical travel based on the aerodynamic properties of the bomb itself.

In other words (correct me if I am wrong, just extrapolating numbers here) - a bomb dropped from an altitude of 20,000' by an AH B-17G vs. a target at an altitude of 0 (zero) feet should have a CEP of 120 meters?

I was curious if such a thing (or anything similar) existed at all in AH (yet)?

Eagl and Co., are the numbers along the lines of what you guys know professionally? If the numbers aren't, and you can comment on it - what are the numbers you deal with 'at work'?

Mike/wulfie14

[Hobodog]

Try not to use feet and meters at the same times

[Nefarious]

Originally posted by Hobodog
Try not to use feet and meters at the same times

he he...

[Glasses]

Yes it is very un Aces High like if you use meters and feet in the same post . No room here for the metric system.

Except for Axis and Russian bombs.

[wulfie14]

I'd like to say it was a typo but it wasn't - it was an error.

After being able to take some time to study up a bit more...it seems average degree of error due to drift (not CEP, as earlier stated) is 6'/1000' vertical travel?

Bomb chuckers - does this ring true with what you have been taught?

Mike/wulfie14

[Wilbus]

Doesn't exist in AH yet to answer your question, hopefully it'll come with 1.10/new buff system.

No, there is no room for metric system in AH, the Euro community is so small

[2Late4U]

Originally posted by wulfie14
HT, PYRO, HTC in general, etc.:

I was playing around with the level bombsight in AH.

Is there any CEP modeled based on the aerodynamic properties of the bomb itself?


Mike/wulfie14

You are correct that dumb bombs are built to a spec that creates a dispersion (Ive actually read it was between 6-10 FEET per 1000 feet, maybe I read it wrong,  but the CEP was/is a reallity.)

This however is NOT modeled currently in AH.  HiTech has said it is not included because it would make a single bomber about useless, and what fun would that be    I do however wish they would at least add some CEP once we get past 10k, and make it creitical past 20k feet.  Bombers in WW2 did not fly at 30K, but that is a regular occurance in the MA

[Dinger]

Either way, the probable error being discussed here is approximately .6% of altitude.

Also, going from Current (Post 1950s) US bombs to WWII ones is a little dangerous since they were aerodynamically redesigned.
But of course you're going to get some sort of error, and of course AH doesn't model it.

[Maverick]

No bomb blast radius = need for dead accurate bombs. They ind of go hand in hand along with the high amount of explosive power needed to destroy hangers buildings etc. as it is all a compromise. The end result is a concession given to the buffers who need it to keep their portion of the game interesting for them. HT IS trying to satisfy as many customers as they can and keep the product moving on.

[Beegerite]

Know what?  It's best to enjoy this "game" for what it is.  Anyone who has had actual training in aerodynamics or flight physics could probably pick many things apart and I suspect that it is because the formulas required to make this game as good as a real life military or commercial simulator would take literally millions of lines of code and the budget of NASA.  Let's wait for HTC to go public and we'll all have an opportunity to cough up some money to give us realism to the nth degree

Beeg

P.S. I would be nice if HTC did specifically tell us what is and isn't modeled but I suspect that this is a trade secret.

[wulfie14]

Mav,

I am pretty sure that blast radius is modeled in AH. I am fairly certain that a bomb does damage to a ground target even if it does not directly impact said target.

I wanted to be clear about something - if drift is or isn't modeled at present, it doesn't affect my enjoyment of the game. I was just curious.

Mike/wulfie14

[Dinger]

It's not a NASA-class question.  It's an easy thing to calculate for, even in a half-assed way.  But if AH is geared to the MA, HTC needs to give the buffers some reason for existing before killing their accuracy.

[fdiron]

Did a real hanger in World War II require 3000 pounds of bombs to destroy it?  I doubt it.  I bet a 500 pound bomb could destroy both the hanger and any planes stored inside of it.  Maybe even a 100 pound bomb could destroy a hanger.

[-tronski-]

Originally posted by fdiron
Did a real hanger in World War II require 3000 pounds of bombs to destroy it?  I doubt it.  I bet a 500 pound bomb could destroy both the hanger and any planes stored inside of it.  Maybe even a 100 pound bomb could destroy a hanger.

One of the drawbacks to the argument of more realism, or more gaming in AH.

If hangers could be taken down by a single 500lb'er , then possibly a couple of buffs could take down a sides entire ability to fight with a grand tour mission.

Realistic, but is it killing the game?

As to the CEP, as someone who likes to buff, its hard enough in the MA without having an inaccurate bomb mechanism too. I like how AH buffs now, and would prefer to leave it that way.

 Tronsky

[Dinger]

Sure but did a real hangar in WW2 contain an unlimited amount of most major fighters for all sides of the conflict?

It's not a realism question guys.