Bombs destruction

[JG4_Widukind 193]

Hi Devs

We have still a Problem with Bombs destruction. 

I can only speak  about German Bombs. 

The Problem is not only on the Multiplayer Servers. 

We test it on single Player too. 

In this craters of Bombs still soft targets stay alive. Since two patches the biger Bombs up to 500kg, lost a lot of Power or Blast damage. (Buildings and Cars) 

 

 

Please check this! 

Thx from JG4

[KG_S_Kalle_Kalutz82 269]

This needs to be seen from the developers.

 

Some weeks ago, I dropped from my Stuka a 1800kg bomb between zwo BT-7 light tanks whit a distance not more than 50m from each other.

The bomb went down exactly between those 2 tanks....0 damage

[-DED-Rapidus 821]

About bombs and the effects of concomitant explosions-the issue will be further investigated. You should not expect a quick solution, because this is primarily a matter of optimization. Plus, the durability of objects depends on the durability specified by the map creators, which also has an impact.

[JG4_Widukind 193]

Thank you for dealing with the topic, I already had some discussions with players, card designers, of course we also tested a lot ourselves, I also wrote in forums (TAW)
You feel pretty alone with the topic.
We have the tests on multiplayer, single miss. and made our own servers. We know that you can set the vehicles, but there are also some that you cannot.
The effects of the bombs are really very bad after a few patches.
Thanks for working on it, it makes the game better again!

Thx Widukind
Ps: we are ready for help

[JG4_Widukind 193]

any news about Bombs destruction?

The Problem is still on the Game.

[JG4_Widukind 193]

Iam looking still on this problem ..but the community of Bombers or attackers are to small?

i know it needs Time but a info woundn´t be bad.

 

 

[ZG15_dasSofa 29]

Because i fly 90% of the Time BF110 , i can understand clearly what Widukind ist talking about. And therefore i can only speak for the German bombs too.

Few days ago i dropped at SC1800 on a Depot on the Finish Server - perfect hit between Oiltanks and Tents which where spreaded only few meters away from each other.

I was getting 1 Tent in Words ONE TENT with a SC1800 !

If the "destruction Value" from the Mission creater is fault on that, the Value should be limited from the developesr Side. There is no reasson why a Tent should act like a big bunker which eats all the destruction to save the nearby tents - if this is the case.

But, i dont think it`s only the Mission creaters fault. We tested on our own Server the bomb effects with different values. And it clearly looks like the bomb destruction is very low compared to the bomb sizes. For light armored targets its kinda debatable but the low effect on Tanks and Buildings are clearly there.

As a only Ground attack Player it takes away the reasson to play this role (and for me therefore the game). Long flight times, kinda slow, easy meat for attackers and a low output from the bomb destruction makes me really sad. Don`t get me wrong, i dont want nukes ! But a realistic destruction Power should be fair enough!

To be complete honest - i would love to buy Battle of Normandy because i like the Arado 234 and the Me 410 because they fit to my role but with the low destruction power from the bombs, there is no reasson for me to waste monney on that.

[JG4_Widukind 193]

Pictures for examble

SC 2500

SC1000 Buildings inside the Crater .We see this many times with vehicles too

 

Edited September 29, 2020 by JG4_Widukind

[ITAF_Airone1989 405]

I think this biggest problem is that in game we just have destroy/safe option.

Probably most of the buildings in the picture would be not totally destroyed but heavily/lightly damaged.

Some of them would be demolished due to the damages, others repaired in few days..

So it's not so easy to valuate how many have to be considered destroyed.

 

Btw, if a building is inside the crater, I expect it to collapse cause there is not terrain below it

[69th_Donkeyslaughter 9]

Does anyone else feel as the bigger KG bombs seem to be a bit weak? Before a rework on the damage model for bombs it used to be possible to take out multiple targets with a larger bomb. This does not seem possible anymore and now I feel it is more useful to take smaller bombs than bigger bombs. As I feel like the bigger bombs do not do enough damage. E.G. if you drop right next to a building or multiple buildings and part of the crater is touching the building / buildings it will not take out the building. So if you need to be 100% on target even with larger bombs then you might as well just take the smaller bombs in my own opinion.  

 

Does anyone else feel the same as this? Maybe the damage model does seem correct for all bombs? 

 

I feel like the

• 100lb bombs in the A20 have a good damage model.
• 250lb bombs in the A20 seem a little bit weak with splash damage.
• 500lb bombs on the P38 are very weak with splash damage. 
• 1000lb bombs are very weak with splash damage and not worth taking.
• 2000lb bombs are very weak with splash damage and not worth taking.

 

I fly mostly on the Allied side so I can not speak for how the German bomb damage model is.  And I also fly exclusively in multiplayer so I am not sure if the multiplayer servers adjust the damage model per server.

 

Just wondering if others feel the same or if others feel like the bomb damage model is correct for all size bombs.

[US63_SpadLivesMatter 831]

Bigger bombs are more useful against harder targets, but they're no longer pocket nukes that level everything in their radius like they used to be.  You have to remember that the rate at which the pressure generated by the blast decreases, grows the further you get from the blast point.

Edited October 25, 2020 by US63_SpadLivesMatter

[Zooropa_Fly 786]

I think you're in the wrong forum here old chap.

 

[[DBS]Browning 1167]

Blast damage reduces more than the inverse square of distance for any explosion that forms a crater.

Bigger bombs are only useful against hard targets.

[Hanu 332]

I think there is a room for improvement. It was corrected, yes, but overcorrected I'd say. I usually do not carry big ones any more. Sure this is not scientific approach, but I do not get the same feeling like veterans:

 

Äijö: On the other hand, the JK could carry two 1000 kg bombs, or four 500 kg's. And the hull could carry ten 100-kg (50-kg -Ed.) bombs. As long as you didn't go over the maximum take-off weight limit. If you had lots of fuel, you had to reduce the bomb load, and vice versa. You always had to count it. Usually we carried one 1000-kg and one 500-kg bomb. Some planes had two 1000-kg's. It was a heavy load. A tonner would make a crater of 30-40 meters.

 

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/en/hist/WW2History-RautavaAijoEnglish.html

 

The blast effect itself did made tanks to roll over and disabled the crew at least. Perhaps when this is modeled I'd agree more with current situation, but currently it feels like it is just more effective to lay down a carpet of 50kg's.

[69th_Donkeyslaughter 9]

22 hours ago, Zooropa_Fly said:

I think you're in the wrong forum here old chap.

 

Sorry where should I have posted this?

1 hour ago, Hanu said:

I think there is a room for improvement. It was corrected, yes, but overcorrected I'd say. I usually do not carry big ones any more. Sure this is not scientific approach, but I do not get the same feeling like veterans:

 

Äijö: On the other hand, the JK could carry two 1000 kg bombs, or four 500 kg's. And the hull could carry ten 100-kg (50-kg -Ed.) bombs. As long as you didn't go over the maximum take-off weight limit. If you had lots of fuel, you had to reduce the bomb load, and vice versa. You always had to count it. Usually we carried one 1000-kg and one 500-kg bomb. Some planes had two 1000-kg's. It was a heavy load. A tonner would make a crater of 30-40 meters.

 

http://www.virtualpilots.fi/en/hist/WW2History-RautavaAijoEnglish.html

 

The blast effect itself did made tanks to roll over and disabled the crew at least. Perhaps when this is modeled I'd agree more with current situation, but currently it feels like it is just more effective to lay down a carpet of 50kg's.

 

I will have to take some screen shots when I remember. But I agree with you that it was corrected but feels a bit overcorrected mostly with the bigger bombs for me.  At least I know I am not the only person who feels this way. I know i have talked to others and they also thing the bigger bombs almost feel useless now.

23 hours ago, US63_SpadLivesMatter said:

Bigger bombs are more useful against harder targets, but they're no longer pocket nukes that level everything in their radius like they used to be.  You have to remember that the rate at which the pressure generated by the blast decreases, grows the further you get from the blast point.

 

I understand that and I will try to get some photos. But if I drop a 500lb bomb between two fuel tanks and the crater is touching both fuel tanks I find it hard to believe that would not have taken out both fuel tanks. The pressure from the blast would have turned the fuel tanks into a twisted pile of metal. Even if the bomb crater is touching two big hangers hangers I would assume the bigger bombs would blow the walls right off both buildings. If I can level a hanger with 100lb bomb I would assume a very close drop with a 500lb bomb would also level the building.

 

I do agree it is better than it was before as the blast damage was way to big I could double two dug outs with a 100lb. But I think the larger bombs are a big nerfed maybe it is just my opinion.

[sniperton 358]

Here's a documentary showing the damage done to buildings by the nearby explosion of 25 kg TNT with casing (= SC50) and 250 kg TNT (= SC500 without casing).

In the latter case only the blast effect was tested, because otherwise the fragmentation would have damaged other buildings as well (up to one kilometer away).

 

 

 

[69th_Donkeyslaughter 9]

1 hour ago, sniperton said:

Here's a documentary showing the damage done to buildings by the nearby explosion of 25 kg TNT with casing (= SC50) and 250 kg TNT (= SC500 without casing).

In the latter case only the blast effect was tested, because otherwise the fragmentation would have damaged other buildings as well (up to one kilometer away).

 

 

 

 

Yes if I dropped any bombs that far away from a building in IL2 I would do 0% damage to the building. And this is what i am getting at with some of the bigger bombs and they have casing on them as well so you would expect it to just flatten some things that are close to one another if you drop between them.

If the bombs of bigger size can not take out more than one target then what is the point of taking them. I have yet to find something I was unable to level with a smaller bomb. So a bomb that is 5x or 10x the size should do a lot more damage and you should be able to destroy structures that are close to one another with a larger bomb.

[VBF-12_KW 466]

Part one of this document (page 54) has some good documentation: https://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p4013coll8/id/2373

 

A 1000lb GP bomb had a complete demolition radius of 33ft and a damage radius of 72ft. That’s 10 and 21 meters respectively.

[BCI-Nazgul 177]

For some targets the fragmentation radius is very important.  Non-armored vehicles, guns, some types of supplies and exposed troops can be killed/destroyed much further away than the demolition range.

[[DBS]Browning 1167]

6 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

For some targets the fragmentation radius is very important.  Non-armored vehicles, guns, some types of supplies and exposed troops can be killed/destroyed much further away than the demolition range.

 

That's true to some extent, but there isn't all that much fragmentation from the bomb casing and bombs that form craters tend to send most of their metallic fragmentation upwards into the sky. The depth of the crater blocks fragments from travelling near the ground. What goes up, will come down, but not with so much force.

Of course, if the bomb hits a building or something similar, much more material will be available to create ground level fragments.

Edited October 27, 2020 by [DBS]Browning

[BCI-Nazgul 177]

13 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

 

That's true to some extent, but there isn't all that much fragmentation from the bomb casing and bombs that form craters tend to send most of their metallic fragmentation upwards into the sky. The depth of the crater blocks fragments from travelling near the ground. What goes up, will come down, but not with so much force.

Of course, if the bomb hits a building or something similar, much more material will be available to create ground level fragments.

"The Mark 84 is capable of forming a crater 50 feet (15 m) wide and 36 ft (11 m) deep. It can penetrate up to 15 inches (38 cm) of metal or 11 ft (3.4 m) of concrete, depending on the height from which it is dropped, and causes lethal fragmentation to a radius of 400 yards (370 m)" - This is from the Wikipedia.  Other sources say 300m, but the point is that "lethal fragmentation" means exposed personnel can be killed, gun crews are the main concern in IL2.   This is modern 2000 lb. bomb, but they haven't changed that much since WW II.

Edited October 28, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[[DBS]Browning 1167]

A rifle is lethal out to several miles, but it's not very dangerous if one fires once in a random direction half a mile away from you.

Being able to kill something at a range says nothing about how likely it is to do so.

 

A bomb fragment may fly into the air and land on your head many meters away from the bomb, but given that a coconut falling on your head is also lethal, being "lethal" doesn't necessarily tell us much about the bomb's ability to damage things.

 

 

 

The question that is relevant to the thread is how likely is it to cause damage at a given range and how much damage is it likely to do to various things?

"Lethal fragmentation to a radius of 400 yards (370 m)" tells us neither of these things, unfortunately.

Edited October 28, 2020 by [DBS]Browning

[BCI-Nazgul 177]

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/903279.pdf

 

That explains and tells you how to calculate your answers.

Edited October 31, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[[DBS]Browning 1167]

20 hours ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/903279.pdf

 

That explains and tells you how to calculate your answers.

 

This is a good source and a fantastic lead!

 

I found an updated version of the blast effects calculator slide rule (now as a spreadsheet) Here and it's manual Here .

 

For the 1000lb Mk-83:

It looks like ear drum rupture at 120ft, lung damage at 80ft, death at 40-50ft and a 0.1% chance of fragmentation for a prone human at 750ft with truck overturning likely at 50ft.

[BCI-Nazgul 177]

7 hours ago, [DBS]Browning said:

 

This is a good source and a fantastic lead!

 

I found an updated version of the blast effects calculator slide rule (now as a spreadsheet) Here and it's manual Here .

 

For the 1000lb Mk-83:

It looks like ear drum rupture at 120ft, lung damage at 80ft, death at 40-50ft and a 0.1% chance of fragmentation for a prone human at 750ft with truck overturning likely at 50ft.

I thought I hit the jackpot as well.  Anyway, this can easily be converted into a table inside the program to get proper bomb effects for all weapons in the game.   IMO, if your eardrums are ruptured you are a casualty.   No soldier can continue to fight in that condition.   That means that taking out AA basically is a matter of hitting within 120 ft. with a 1000 lber.   Perhaps someone could present this as "evidence" to the developers, so they can check their calculations??

Edited November 1, 2020 by BCI-Nazgul

[[DBS]Browning 1167]

1 hour ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

.That means that taking out AA basically is a matter of hitting within 120 ft. with a 1000 lber.   

 

I don't think you can use the numbers quite as they are. That figure is for air burst explosions. Crater forming explosions are considerably less powerful at distances greater than the crater radius than airburst explosions. 

Edit: on the topic of crater radii, that is easily calculated and is a good estimate for the distance a tank can be destroyed. 

 

There are some for explosive containment structures in the calculator, but I suspect they will reduce the effects too much. 

 

More info is needed for a good number. 

 

 

 

Edited November 1, 2020 by [DBS]Browning

[BCI-Nazgul 177]

A contact fuse is may produce a crater, but the blast wave is not reduced in the lateral direction.   I'm not sure how you calculate that, but I seems to me some math can be applied to convert from air burst to ground burst assuming you know the height of the air burst.

[QB.Rails 240]

After watching that video I'm wondering if in the game it would be better to have the fuse set to contact as opposed to a delay. Theory being if you were to bomb at an angle when releasing the bomb would burry itself and the shockwave or shrapnel effectiveness would be reduced. it might  be better to skip bomb or set it to contact to get a better effect?

[[DBS]Browning 1167]

I strongly suspect (but don't know and can't find info) that instantaneous fuses, especially inertial ones, operate in about 1ms of receiving enough impulse, giving plenty of time for most bombs to partially or fully bury themselves.

I base this on inertial artillery fuses of the time as I'm unable to find info about unintentional delays on "instant" bomb fuses.

[JG4_Widukind 193]

is there any new Information over Bombs ?

[JG1_Wittmann 119]

I think maybe  you are waiting for an answer that is never going to come.   Of course they already fixed the damage  of the larger   German bombs,  they reduced their damage  and increased the damage of various allied  bombs.   All of this was done  in different aspects of the game.    

 

 

[JG4_Widukind 193]

The Problem is, it makes no Difference 

If u take a50kg Bomb or 1000kg or higher right now. The Problem should be fixt! 

[[_FLAPS_]Grim 47]

Im a mud mover, didnt fly a long time and was very disappointed about bomb damage when coming back. 

 

Flying attackers is hard enough but now without the reward of doing appropriate damage I fear every server will become Beloga over time.

[Luftschiff 383]

Dive-bombing with 50's seem to be the only reliable way to do damage to ground targets these days. I guess dud bombs inadvertently serve to decrease demand for those 4 engine bombers but I was hoping to have this addressed in some shape or form.

[JG4_Widukind 193]

-

Edited February 25 by JG4_Widukind

[Jamisco 13]

I dont want to speak for other countries because I have not played them, but when it comes to bombing buildings and other structures found in objectives

Why are the bigger bombs [edited] bad, like damn. Germany 250kg bombs and up are atrociously and disgustingly bad

 

Yesterday I ran a 40 minute sortie, to bomb an enemy depot in finish virtual pilots server, I had a 1800kg bomb and 1000kg bomb. I was bombing the rear depot and the structures were closely packed. I dropped both bombs dead center with good spread on the depot. 

 

I fly back to base and land, and in the finish mission screen.

 

1 building destroyed

 

bruva please 😑

 

How in the absolute world is this even possible? I thought bigger is better, why are the big bombs so remarkable bad at destroying things.

It is to my understanding that this is not the case in real life, so why is this the case in the game?

 

Is this a bug or is this just the way the bombs are designed to work?

 

If the bombs are designed to work in this manner, then I believe this is something that needs to be brought to the devs attention.

 

What do you guys think

 

 

Edited March 18 by SYN_Haashashin
Language

[CUJO_1970 1837]

Yep, nothing like braving flak and fighters, only to find out your SC1000 destroyed a maintenance shed and made a bicycle fall over.

[Denum 215]

Will also agree the bombs are terrible against buildings 

 

 

Frankly the big boy bombs are more dangerous to the plane then the ground targets! 

[JG51_Beazil 582]

I did something similar on there and the guy with me dropped second.  I got one building.  He got 27.  Same spot.

[=621=Samikatz 573]

Iirc this is not too unrealistic and has been brought up here before. Lots of little bombs is more effective for widespread destruction. The larger bombs are for single, hard targets like ships