This is TD's own explanation in a thread/discussion on this forum, not mine, you need to read the full history of this thread and not come in with the wrong information.

From the v4.10 read me

Bomb Fusing
Real life bombs have generally an electrical or mechanical time fuse to avoid premature explosion in case of mishap
(e.g. a bomb detaching from the aircraft while still on the runway, or a bomb hitting the bomb rack due to turbulence).
This has been implemented in IL-2, so that bombs now have a 2 seconds time fusing.
If the bomb hits the target before that time,the fuse does not activate and the bomb does not explode.
This means that in level flight a bomb must be dropped from a minimum altitude of about 25 meters to explode.
If the bomb is dropped in a dive the altitude must be proportionally greater.
This also applies to skip bombing: the bomb must be dropped from at least 25m and must not hit the ship before 2
seconds.

This is a wrong description of how the bombs work as now if they hit any scenery before 2 secs they disarm, not just the target.




.

If TD says this is the only reason, then I must admit, they introduced it for a wrong reason.

The original author who made this model, had nothing to do with that, but with realistic naval battles, and a more realistic air to ground effectiveness.
Don't forget that this addition is not only a 2 second fuse; it is also rockets and bombs dispersion and realistic torpedo release profiles.

I will finish my involvement in this discussion by quoting what I previously said, which I think would be a good solution:

And as I have stated the simpler solution would be to arm the bombs on their velocity when dropped so the arming takes place via the vane and not through the casings under 2 sec scenery contact.

An example of vane arming.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2417418.pdf





.

so would that mean a higher velocity drop = shorter arming time?

as it is, what kind of altitudes do you need to release at say 5-600kph in a 45 degree dive?

one of the most amusing and tricky things to do when vulching - skipping ab500-2000 along a runway with bandits on it...

The last thing I want is bomb fusing tied to realistic gunnery, or anything else for that matter.

This is only about bomb fusing.

I'm fine with torpedos as they are now, and the rockets certainly are more realistic as well. My only issue is the bomb fusing.

Why do some people want to make this an all or nothing thing?

Yes, this is true for bomb fuzes produced before the 1960s. After the 60s, it
became more common to have a governor or electronics to prevent release
speed influencing the time to arm.

In IL2, this is not the case. The bomb acts as if you where going at 200knots.
with a 850ft fuze. Therefore it will take longer to arm in some circumstances
and shorter to arm in others. However, because of the variations in the arm
distance of different fuzes, IL2's 2 second arm time doesn't start to become
unrealistic until you get above 300knots (350mph / 550kph).


In reality: with a typical fuze, you would need between 500 and 550ft.

The chart below shows the air travel a bomb makes in a 45degree dive at
various speeds. You can see the air travel needed for different fuzes in my
previous (long) post.
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/2981/atta.jpg

In IL2, you should need about 900ft at 500kph.
That's about the same as a fuze with a 1300ft air travel to arm fuze. That's
quite a typical value for a fuze, so not unrealistic.

You will need about 1,100 at 600kph, the equivalent of a bomb with a ~1500ft
ATtA fuze. They existed, but I don't think that that represents a typical American fuze.

there'll never be a way of stopping idiots completely... its just a shame they spoil it for everybody else.


anyways... http://www.303rdbg.com/bombs.html

Well it is a bugger that in the well meant effort to curb idiots, everyones game has been hijacked if you use 4.10 and you have to fly as certain people have decided for everyone else.
I thought those times have gone since the fall of the iron curtain.
The sad thing though is that the idiots will find new ways to foul up game play for others. Must we then recon with more dictated ways of using our bought game?

pointless remark,..really..

hrm... everyone's?
hmm certain people have decided?.. u mean like Oleg have decided how we should fly?
Or do u mean that your solution how things should be ergo decide how people have to fly?
------------------

Honestly, I appreciate a good debate in benefit for realism and to make things as correct as possible within the sim's limitations and I am sure TD, / Oleg et al appreciate a GOOD CONSTRUCTIVE input , but I suggest that exaggerations are limited and to stop blow things out of proportion, stop the namecallings and stop building some kind of theory of conspiracy. All these things are 1) contraproductive which in no way benefit this sim nor it's development... 2)embarressing for the community... and 3) silly... yes really...plain silly.


So guys.. how about it.. stick to the topic.. stay professional and be open for eachother's views and opinions?
It's a human characterisitic to stop listening to good arguments when it is delivered with spite, arrogance and insults.

You see Wutz, this is why you can't have nice things. :rolleyes: He's only trying to be helpful.

oh? why?

Now here is an interesting question:
Does anyone still use the bomb-delay option? Or have we outgrown it?

Its getting personal now.Everyone,including me,needs to step back and take a deep breath.
Opinions have been heard,from both sides of the argument,and from some who just like to jump into threads to spit at people and have a good row,and now it is up to TD if they decide to change it or not.

Mate .. you know calling people idiots is not a good way to approach a solution.. your link is very useful as it presents interesting facts, but facts are clouded by insults and that is nothing you nor I want. so thanx for the link :)

+1

and Wutz.. I am not sure you understood what i wrote but I am glad that we share the love for this sim,,, your enthusiasm shows that ..so cheers
oh and if you are the same person as KU_Sato on WoP then it makes sense, and again.. as I told you on WoP... your opinion about this fuse issue is by now quite clear ;)

err, I don't recall calling people idiots, I recall however, saying, "it is impossible to stop the idiots" and you need to look at that in the (often skipped, but all important) context of the reasons why TD seem to have caused a furore with their fuzing changes.

"Programming these days is a race between engineers developing bigger and better idiot proof software, and the universe producing bigger and better idiots... so far the universe is winning"



thank you

sorry for the misunderstanding. :)

NP :cool:

sure in some cases it makes sense to use it.

e.g. if blast-radius of the bomb is of great size and bomb is dopped low or with slow speed.

In other words it makes sense under circumstances where the plane is endangered by the explosion of the bomb.
Mostly the case with bigger bombs.

Delay is very important on the TB3, as that thing egresses the combat zone at a walking pace!

:grin:

The TB-3 is a level bomber and has no need for delay.

yep, typically on fighter-bomber sorties i take 1.5 seconds, as i'm never sure how i will be able to approach the target or whether i may need to "mine" a 6 bandits approach. on heavier bombs i will up that to 3. if i'm feeling evil, and i know that the intended vulch victims may well hit refly rather than die in an explosion... i set it to about 8-10 secs to get them when they respawn.:cool:
not if you drive it to the target!

If you drive to the target you don't need a delay, because thank god there's a 2 sec arming time. ;)

On most every map in the game the TB3 has no room to get to altitude.

:):):):):)

And yes I have flown it in a non-historical manner. And used it as a fighter too. What now, no bomb drops from level bombers that are under 5000m altitude?

:rolleyes:

Lighten up folks.

Sheesh.

Try flying it on the Kalkin Gol map.

You will get out to target but not back.

And not over 1000m either ( I will stand corrected if found other wise ) IIRC

The ambient temperature is too high on the map for the TB3 cooling systems.




.

Well the same you can say for a Val or a Ju87, although the Val can only take a 250kg bomb as largest bomb load. But thinking of those documentries where the Stukas went in really low before releasing there bombs to make pin point hits....I guess they where doing something wrong.....:-P

As a strong proponent of Kamikaze attacks, can we get an option of instantaneous detonation regardless of whether the bomb has been released or not? It’s really annoying making the supreme sacrifice and only causing cosmetic damage.

Yepp dive at below 500m and nothing happens, and then try hitting a moving tank, but I am certain those fellows back then did it all wrong.
But I know you are right....just because you say so.:rolleyes:

Wutz, how effective and efficient was bombing against tanks in the first place?

Hmm let me see, that the Ju87s where called the flying artillery, and used in close support of ground units. But of course that is all wrong, and during the battle of France only the ground units mopped up the French army especially those Char B tanks......Those guys should have asked TD how to fly properly.

Ju 87 attacked all types of ground units. Ju 87 were not the only planes to fly ground attacks in WW2. Ju 87 had pullout altitudes high enough to allow 2 seconds of arming.

So two sarcastic sentences do not answer the question sufficiently.

would this quote change your mind?

Well if you are only focusing on the mid to late war stuff.
I was aiming at the early war stuff. Panzer IIs and Panzer IIIs against heavy Char B tanks?? The 88 canon was not used yet at that time as a anti tank weapon, so how where the French tanks knocked out? Surely not with MG34s? Also the Panzer IV was not yet available in large numbers, although even that tank would have its difficulties against a Char B, as the French tanks where at that time better than the German ones.
Also TD have admitted themselves that the 2sec thing is just a random number they pulled out of the hat.
Some one is just against dive and skip bombing and would like to see bombing refined to high level bombing. A function for which the Ju87 was really built for! :-P
I just have a feeling that the supporters of this random setting are not bomber fliers at all, but fighter jocks that hate being surprised by bombers, but wish to have every opportunity of surprise for bombers removed, and force them into high level carpet bombing. Any poor sod on a server who is silly enough to take a bomber and not have a dozen or more mates along to help, is from that point of view then just too stupid for a bomber in the first place, and should have choosen a fighter instead. From that point of view one could have then set the fusing time to 2min or indefinately.

i recommend to do a new research about the use of the 8,8 against french CharB and british MatildaII tanks in France summer 1940...................
and about the minimum heights of bombrelease of the Ju87.

that the "qualitiy" of the targets in game is sometimes questionable, true.

and to ad:
i also thinking that adding this arming time for the bombfuze was the last thing this game needed :D
at least in the form it was done....

but i DONT think that it makes divebombing or skipbombing impossible. i am just thinking about how it would be if it would have been implimented from the beginning of IL2 almost 10 years ago.......................................

In all that research did they state how many tanks had been attacked more than once by aircraft? Spotting the difference between a disabled tank and one in fully working order during attack run would be reasonable hard I would imagine.

Did they count all the ones that were temporarily put out of order due to minor damage but still taken out of the battle?

Did they count all the ones put out of action by being forced hulls down and incapable of moving due to the risk of air attack?

I have never been in combat, nor due to my age reasonably expect to be placed into that position. I'm not going to come down hard on the servicemen that claimed a kill on a derelict tank. I expect in all of these battles the pooh was hitting the A.M.D. and if you see your eight HVARs (equivalent to the broadside of a light cruiser) lifting the dirt around the tank that you are targeting I can see that you could assume that you've got a kill. Let’s face how long are you going sticking around to see the final outcome?

In my opinion these instances of over claiming are a natural part of warfare. How many claims for kills were made by the antitank gun crews in the same battles? It is part of human nature to want to hope for the best.

In the sim it should come down to if you accurately target the vehicle using the correct technique and work within the operational parameters of the weapon and the delivery system then you should get the kill. It shouldn’t be artificially made harder so it conforms to the statistics of the war.

Well that’s my opinion anyway!

Cheers

So if you line up correctly, and are in range, every gun round should hit bullseye? Every rocket should hit the same spot?

Sorry mate but that is not called a "simulation" that is called an "arcade action game".

S!

Maybe you could provide your EOD/Armament training vparez? Wutz can and so can I ;) Do you think if we work with military we do NOT have access to this kind of data? There are STILL bombs/munition out there that are cleared out by EOD personnel. And they HAVE to know EXACTLY how a fuze/bomb/munition works to safely disarm it or otherwise render harmless..or even to approach it as some fuzes tend to get very touchy with age. So let's hear your professional opinion on this matter, shall we? :)

Why does the new flyable Henschel have a low level bombing site that starts at 10 meters?
I would guess the Germans in WW2 had some idea what they were doing.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=17990

The Henschel manual mentions L.Dv.8 and L.Dv.152 (L.Dv.= Luftwaffe Dienstvorschrift)

LDV8-5

Unfortunately I dont really get it, under "Bemerkungen" they show much shorter arming times.
Anyone can clear that up?

Wutz don't stoop to their level,lets try and keep this on track.

Why do you think the Henschel 129 low level bombsight start at 10 meters,if our bombs don't work unless we are flying at 30 meters...

I know nothing about German fuzes, but as listed in my post on page 11, American fuzes with time delays of 4-15 seconds have Air Travel to Arm distances as low as 100ft, giving them plenty of time to arm in 30ft of vertical fall.

I haven't checked, but I believe the m112,113,114 fuzes are all tail fuzes as that's the norm for time delay fuzes.

L.DV.8-4

page12, left upper table.

Min drop height calculated on 1sec arming time.

Looks like they had the same issues in the war some of us are having in IL2.

A report by Rear Admiral O. M. Hustvedt about Operation Leader reads:

Source

And a doctrine on amphibious activities from 1944 reads:

Source

I would guess these cases aren't isolated.


It would be awsome if someone could get a copy of "Selection of Bombs and Fuzes to be used against various targets", OPNAV-16-V #A6, March, 1944"

German fuses were timed and the ones used for low level horizontal attack used arming times of about 1s and delay settings of 14s. Note that due to the technical characteristics of the fuse the "save" arming time was about 1.6s minimum, lower than that would be risking duds.

from me, a 99% fighter pilot;)

going up against a 1945 DD destroyer, all on my lonesome. 2 runs, first time only one bomb hits, second run, sink it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxJgiiKQ0Vk

Every one that actually fires, should land near the target. How far from the centre of the target on average is called the circular area of probability, it varies between munitions, but if it is very large for a particular munition at a particular range, the military usually don't use that munition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_error_probable

The maths is quite scary, but the idea is simple, half the rounds from a given gun at a given range will land within a circle of a known diameter from where the barrel is aimed. The barrel may not be aimed at the intended target, or there may be other operator errors, but half the rounds will go into the circle the barrel is aimed at, the others around it.

Its not a question of not adapting.I don't care if some people can bomb from 50 meters,or shoot down a Me 262 in a P11!
Again,why would a HS129 have a bombsight for low level bombing at 10 meters,if the bombs we have now have been set not to go off below 30 meters? To me that says the bomb fuzing was adjustable for different timings,not set at a non negotiable 2 seconds by someone at TD.

just out of curiosity (and i don't know the answer to this, genuine question) are we talking about the real sight for HS129, or the in game sight that Team D made?

Its a real sight,check the HS129 gunsight thread,a great picture there.

rgr.

I don't know,some people seem to want to have an internet row,can't seem to be civil,and take the thread off topic.That goes for both sides.
So Fenrir,I don't think you have noticed it,what do you think about the 10 meter low level bomb sight on the Henschel 129,and the diagram in that thread (in German,sorry) that talks about fusing?

Keep on track guys please.

I've cleaned up the thread a bit.
And lets keep it friendly too from now on.

:)

While not a priority on my list, I agree, the ability to change the fusing is important.

Fusing or arming???

Did I miss something?
The type of fuse will dictate when it will arm, and what will set it off (impact, time delay, disarming, even magnetic for mines)

Ok, I conducted some test tonight - although I can skip bomb now, I found out the fuses not only have a 2sec delay but also a 20m cap.

I tried this with the arado at 20m/750kph about 20 times.
The bomb definitely has >=2 secs before it touches the water, however the the bomb stayed disarmed in 100%.
Maybe my stopwatch is wrong... - if not, maybe TD can (or feels like) explain it?

DL ntrk from rapidshare

Hello
I would sure like to see a track on how to properly skip bomb now.. If someone has posted one, please point me in the right direction.
Thanks

Well, for what it's worth, this is directly from the 4.10 User Guide:

--------------------
This also applies to skip bombing: the bomb must be dropped from at least 25m and must not hit the ship before 2 seconds.
--------------------


Aviar

I am loving. Is very difficult to suceed. Now i am feeling the odds of the fighter-bomb pilots like the real guys feel. Most of complains is because the guys are not suceeding like they did.

I do it (correct skip bombing and hit) only 30% of the times. I skiped i correctly and explode 80% of the times, but sometimes i missed the target. My bombing run is at about 50~80 meters. Bomb explode quite often.

If skip bombig was too easy like 4.09 the dive bombers were unecessary, specially at land targets. Now Stukas and other dive bombers ll make the difference they did do not made until now in IL2, since with this new feature i would prefer high angle dive bombing for precision.

This + the wind; in IL2 4.10 it's very amusing using bombers, far more than before.
Have you tried level bombing from 5000m with 3 m/s of wind?

To me IL2 4.10 is like a new (better) game.

Optional Safety Delay In German Electric Fuse
 

Pilots Wished Bomb SALVO Fix - Got a Forced Delay 410m Fuse Instead! :(

With all respect to the fine voluntary work for developing this fine historical IL2 flight simulator I certainly must agree with you!

The IL2 sim used to have very finely made simulation for low bombing modes prior to 410m! The bomb actually bounced or slided in these simulations on the ground like the wartime expert low bombing 'jabo' pilots performed it, for instance! :)

As a virtual bomber pilot familiar with real history of delay low bombing styles like slide / bounce bombing it is very regrettable that we the 410m now denies these most exciting and skill demanding bombing modes.


Thank you for information! Here is a description that appears to match and supplement your fuse knowledge:


The Wartime German Bomb Fuse with Switchable Safety Delay

A story I recalled from Finnish wartime recollections about German bombs electric fuse. The big German bombs were known to have an electric fuse with safety delay option. It was rather simple yet versatile.

It could be used in automatic 'safety delay mode' (like the forced 410m fuse) or manually in no safety delay mode (quite unlike the forced 410m fuse). It even allowed arming and disarming bomb and switching safety delay on or off during flight.

I have understood that these electric fuses were used with bombers having crew more than on person so the one responsible for bomb release could control bomb arming and disarming. The cases I have collected from my country about small bombs like fighter bombs indicate that these had no safety delay.


German Electric Fuse Circuit Description

There were two capacitors in the German electric bomb fuse circuit. The first capacitor was the one charged from aircraft. It was connected to second actual fuse capacitor through a delay resistor between them.

When capacitor nr. 1 got a charge from a connector attached to the bomb, it would start charge the nr. 2 capacitor through the resistor which slowed the charging and thus caused an arming delay or safety delay. I guess the 410m 2 s safety fuse is related to those bombs having this electric fuse arming mode?

Knowing the capacitor 1 - resistor - capacitor 2 - electric fuse circuit we can now understand the operating modes of this German electric bomb fuse:


Electric Fuse Operating Modes

1. Automatic Safety Delay: When used as automatic, an electric connector attached through a swiveled arm to the bomb would give the capacitor nr. 1 electric charge shot just before the connector attached to a swiveled arm would be ripped off from the falling bomb. Now the bomb would be armed in free fall after the actual fusecapacitor nr. 2 would be charged through the resistor causing the automatic arming safety delay.

2. Manual arm and disarm from onboard: If the bomber staff person responsible for bombing gives the bomb a charge shot prior to releasing a bomb, it will arm itself in the alleged time and when released later, it will drop with no safety delay. He could also decide to disarm the bomb by shortcircuiting the bomb arming circuit. When shortcircuited, the arming capacitor nr 2 would bleed empty from charge through the delay resistor in about the time of the safety delay and the bomb would be disarmed again.

We see that this kind of electric bomb fuse circuit would allow the bomber crew to arm and disarm any bomb connected to onboard arming circuit and release the bomb either disarmed or armed. Further, this bomb arming circuit gave the crew an option to decide whether to use safety delay or not..! Alas, we virtual bomber pilots were not allowed to decide setting safety delay on or off with the rather incorrect 410m fuse... :(


Regards,

- J. Hartikka -

Finland


First Line HL Pilots about 410m Bomb Fuse

In this thread, we will discuss in proper civilized manner, of course. However, I guess that on the long run regarding developing this historical sim further it may be useful to get some direct user feedback, too. Here are some excerpts from HL pager discussions to tell how noted 'front line' virtual pilots really feel with the flawed 410m fuse. For obvious reasons I am pasting their feelings here incognito:

Translated: They treat us (bomber pilots) like ve vere leprous :)))



Wartime Aircraft Photos

Here are more photos that I scanned from my late uncle's album. More old photos are on threads http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...d=1#post210220 and http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...588#post216588

Sorry I do not agree. Now the most exciting and demanding method are really most eciting e demanding. Before any player could do, now one the skilled ones.

This skilled pilot you quote are just used to bomb that old way, now they have to learn again. Just this. Go training. Skip bombing is not supposed to be easy, even for good pilots. If it was, there was none reason for especialized dive bombers for better precision.

What i see is that this complains are just wounded egos of pilots not capable to score like they do before. From that supposed VVS or luftwaffe "heroes" striking massive columns of tanks and ships in one fly by.

Again the problem is the casing stops the arming of the bomb if it touches the water/land/scenery before 2 seconds.

The arming could/should have been done on the bombs velocity not contact with terrain.

As already said by TD stopping Dog Fight server spawn killers dropping bombs at home bases is the main benefit of the 2 second delay in arming.





.

I'd say the reason skip wasn't done routinely against shipping was that, similar to torpedo runs, for any success you exposed yourself to the broad side of the ship that you attacked, you also had to get really close to your target to release the bomb. Every gun on that side of the boat would open up at you and you had a high probability of getting shot down.

In the sim the AI is too easy to fool following a decending curved path on your attack run.

When dive bombing your generally attacking the ship in its bow/stern axis so you've got a larger margin for error in your attack. You dont get as close to the ship and the ships guns can't all get a bead on you at the same time. In the sim the AI seems to be able to predict your attack path in a classic divebombing run and you've got a higher chance of getting hit using this method.

In real life I am sure that pilots would have used the strategies that gave them the best chance of wining and getting home alive.

In the sim you'ld be a mug not to use the method thats going to get your team the most points!

If skip bombing is more difficult pilots will just practice more and still get the same amount of kills. Without changes to the AAA AI it's still going to be the safest option, therefore pilots will still do it!

Cheers!

Cheers!

So the fact that a fixed 2 second fuse for all bombs is wrong isn't bothering you at all...Anyway,doesn't matter now,CoD is on the way,I don't really care anymore ;)

The fixed 2 second is just because TD had not bomb fusing times for each specific bomb or the implementation time would have much more higher etc. Ask them why they used this fixed value. But i am sure this can be improved if they want.

It's only that the 2 sec. delay is less wrong than no delay!
Also the complaining about case and fuse, it's not modelled!
All TD can do is minimizing the errors, not remove them!

Well, in this case they did not minimize an error, they created a larger one.

I'm with JG52Uther on this now. Cliffs of Dover will soon be out and IL2 will no longer matter.

This issue will no doubt be fixed by other means anyway.

I agree 100%

IL2 is still in development and the new title will take a very long time to top it

because nowadays IL2 has come in the user's hands and no nomenclature is in

position to hold it back or reverse the process of it becoming a fair and exciting

simulation.

No worries :)

Absolutely agree, I hope that critical settings do not get tampered with in any near future by any non 1c people.

You guys really think there will be no such issues with CoD? It really seems like the old fallacy "harder=more realistic" which we know is not true has been turned around to "harder= less realistic" which is also not true.

I mean every plane type has similar g-limits for example (meaning by type) IIRC and every pilot is modelled the same-part of the compromise every sim programmer has to make.

Well really looking forward to spring and a whole new set of whines.*



*Not from you talking in general. ;)

You kidding?

"in user's hands and no nomenclature is in position to hold it back or reverse the process of it becoming a fair and exciting simulation."

It wasn't exciting before? Fair is NOT realistic btw, most users just want to substitute "Oleg's world" for their "fantasy but it's mine so it's right world" nonsense.

Practice makes perfect. I am sure that a large percentage of those who tried skip-bombing in WWII failed also.

+1

The real is that skip bombing was a hazardous tactic not used frequently as it was in IL2, exactly because in IL2 it was too easy. Some did not used skip, just approached low and close enough the ships and released the bombs, hiting directly. No fusing, they scored hits 100% times. This is not real.

p.s: to not say they suceed 100% always, sometimes one colided with the ship's cables. Hehehe...:cool::twisted:

Excuse me but you have no idea what i'm talking about ....

so .. give it some time & you will understand what i mean,

all in good time.

JoeA, I am only saying that the current situation with bomb fusing as implemented in the 4.10 patch is every bit as bad as it was before the patch. Just in a different way.

And I know there will be issues with Cliffs of Dover, but because that is all I will be flying, IL2's issues will no longer matter to me.

this is entirely correct.

it was wrong and inaccurate before, and apparently it is still wrong and inaccurate, just in a markedly different way.

so, is this "realism" option going to be a selectable difficulty option, or are each kind of bomb going to get their correct fusing?

either do them all, or leave it be imo.

Are you going to publish your practise maps and how they're used? Tracks would be nice.

As at least 95% of the bombs in ww2 had a arming time of at least 0.9 sek and usual around 4 to 5 sec. the patch brought definitively a improvement.
Just take the challenge and stop pointing at the minority of bombs which had no arming time.

Problem is the minority of bombs that dont have an arming timing are the little ones wich where droped from relativly low altitude in real life and now can not be droped from that altitude anymorte because of this.

A lot of bombs also had an option to set the arming delay, so i hope on the small bombs and bomblets the arming delay can be removed completly, and for some bigger boms maybe it would be a nice option to set the arming time of the bomb between 1 and 5 seconds.

btw, the FritzX has No Arming Delay on it at all, it blows up if you drop it while parked at base or flying verry low, so should be a really easy fix to remove the Arming delay on the smaller bombs.

if the bombing at spawn place was such a problem, why not have just locked the culprits' sorry ass out of the server?

Well whines will never stop...people whind back in the day when only Olg and team could make changes, when the sim was hacked and mods could be made some whined about the mods and it will never end.

this guy sure looks like he ignored the new bomb fusing completely!




http://axisofinfo.com/wp-content/upl...a-japanese.jpg

And from what to you deduct that???
Comparing the sizes that plane is 100m to 200m above the ship(300ft to 6ooft)
So he could easyly have dropped his load (multiple bombs by the way) at 100ft and pulled up afterwards.
As usual the people see what they want to see. (me included, still trying to lessen the influence, though)

Oh there are several such pictures which must be as of TDs 4.10 patch absolutely wrong. But it is pointless argueing as know it alls like robtek the jack of all trades & master of none know it simply better.
But with CoD coming out, I think the amature tampering will stop for a whole while.

wutz you are my number one when it comes to polemic.
Why don´t you just give it a try and adopt to the newly implementad bomb fusing instead of wasting your time in giving pointless arguments over and over and over again.

Just a little straight forward attitude and your problems would be solved.

No intention to be derespectful, just lack of understanding for your position, i guess.

Because it is Bull that is why! There are charts showing German bomb fuses.
What next because some one decides lets have a 10 min delay everyone just adapt right on.
That is why 4.10 was deleted, and will stay off my computer, and will not be needed for CoD
But W32Blaster you fit the picture, as you just mindlessly repeat what others say with out giving it some thought.
But I know arm chair experts know it all!
Sorry for that kind of hot air I have no use what so ever.

Whoohooo, what a bad boy!

:)

What ever kiddo, I don´t go by blah blah. But by facts like this:
http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/243...bombenwurf.jpg

Wouldn't you have to know the length of the ship and the plane to be able to start that guessing?
Its an A-20 Havoc, the angle that he at at the moment of the photo allows you go figure out what alt he was when he released the torpedo?
all that other splashing is garbage flying off the ship
I was stirring the pot- like every patch since I flew the original demo, it WONT matter what is done to the planes, the cockpits, the DM's the FM's, I'll figure it out and continue to rack major points, and enjoy the game, laff at the whiners and roll my eyes at folks who have never sat in a plane let alone a 70 year old warbird. :cool:

he's using the bombs to bludgeon the ship and it's crew, not blow it up. think 250-500lb baseball bat!

I found this document for some additional info about fuzes:

http://www.ordnance.org/fuzes.htm

or

http://www.lexpev.nl/downloads/bombfuzedata1945.pdf

there one can see that with 1 or 2 exceptions all fuzes needed at least 1.9 sec. or at least 300ft air-travel to arm.
Those exceptions are delayed bombs.
The overwhelming majority needed MORE than 2 sec and usually 850 - 1100 ft. air-travel!!!

Posted by daidalos.team on the 1C forum on Jan 24, 2011:

One of the most commented features of 4.10 has been the 2s bomb arming delay. We have listened to your feedback and spent a lot of time and energy reviewing and discussing this feature inside our team. In 4.101 we have removed arming delay from ampoule loadouts only. In 4.11 - we will rework the arming delay for each individual bomb based on available historical references and within limitations of IL-2 code. Plus we will make this feature optional either via an existing or a new difficulty switch.

Aviar

What worries be about this statement is that they may combine it with another difficulty selection.

It needs to be seperate.

Too many people here feel that if you complain about this issue that you must be a wonder woman view flyer. Nothing could be further from the truth.

+1

+10

-20

:)

Just kidding! Now Kindergarden Bombardiers have their option. It´ll be interesting to see which server will offer what configuration.

Realistic servers will probably offer a version of the game with selectable fusing options,as in real life,depending on the mission.
For people that want to fly a fantasy arcade version people can fly the stock game...
Oh and, j/k... ;)

+many
i...

sigh.

el_aurens point was lost i see.

"What worries be about this statement is that they may combine it with another difficulty selection.

It needs to be separate."

Full real is the strident request, but when offered it's not ALL of full real that is actually desired?

Mmmmm?

GET RID OF THE BOMB TIMING!!!!

I spent a freaking hour trying to land at least one bomb on a ship...that EXPLODES!!! It is not cool. I know you are trying to make the game better, but please make it an option, its a flat out pain!

Thanks

S!