The new bomb fuzing needs to be an option.

[JG52Uther]

Thanks for the explanation Letum! So the new system is more accurate that 409? If so,I will be happy with that.

[Fenrir]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Sorry, but it does.

I've been trying for some time to come up with a speed/altitude/distance/aircraft combination that works for skip bombing ships and for me it's a bust.

Sorry El, but then you're doing something wrong. I loaded up a B-25 and set up a few transports and tankers to test.

1st run, 50ft - No dice. Bombs did not fall far enough before hitting water to arm*

2nd run, 100ft - Bingo! Good drop and strike, target sunk.

3rd run, 100ft - Bingo! Good drop and strike, target sunk.

this was a tactic that was used and worked,

Details? I've got a reference that has it that B-17s of the 5th Air Force in New Guinea skip bombed at night from 150ft with repeatable accuracy. The Mitchell strafer units were renowned or going in at 'Masthead' height but that can be anywhere from 50 - 100ft. The TD team are gonna want some hard facts mate, not just rhetoric.

but now you are sentencing those that say they can do it to certain death.

Please.

If the stated reason for doing it is true, to stop folks from dropping bombs from parked aircraft, then code the bomb releases not to drop at all with aircraft that are on the ground. End of problem.

Ok, but I imagine that the reason it's been coded in is because this is a prototypical safety feature - and not just for on the ground, but as Letum states, to prevent detonation to close to the carrier a/c for a number of reasons. It's not there just to make your life difficult.

Right now I just am getting the feeling that someone else is trying to force their style of game play on me.

It's not making me happy.

Wow. So your gamers human rights are under threat? Lol! It's a bloody game chum! The indignance round here is laughable!

*Regards the arming function, should the bombs be rendered inert by the first bounce on the water is, I think, the key issue here - I don't know much about the fuses used and I am sure there are as many different types as there are applications.
From some rudimentary internet searches, it seems, for example that the US 500lb GP could be armed by vanes in the nose or the tail - I guess the low level ones would have been tail armed, but would the initial bounce impact have stopped the vane? If so, did a reduced number of turns arm the bomb? Or did they have a different type of arming and detonator entirely?

Perhaps if special fuses were required for low level skip attacks then TD could program a new loadout option for each plane to have a certain loadouts with low level fuses?

Let's try to get some productive evidence instead of stamping feet and whining.

[6S.Manu]

Guys are using that mod in SEOW for months.

You need only a little practice and all will be fine.

[robtek]

A few nice examples of the arming can be seen at that "famous movie with Ben Affleck" Pearl Harbour.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by JG52Uther

Thanks for the explanation Letum! So the new system is more accurate that 409? If so,I will be happy with that.

It's certainly how it was in reality for all US GP bombs and most British bombs. Much more accurate.

Some British bombs used a long wire that got pulled out of the bomb as it dropped to arm it, but I don't think we have these bombs in game anyway.

I know nothing about Soviet, German and Japanese bombs.

[pupo162]

Originally Posted by robtek

A few nice examples of the arming can be seen at that "famous movie with Ben Affleck" Pearl Harbour.

of ftopic question then:

if the silly boy who had a bomb next him in the ditch and stood there watching the spinner had steped in wi th his and and stoped it ( assuming it can be done ) would he have stopped the bomb?

[Sokol1]

Originally Posted by Wutz

4.10m shows this tactic is wrong:

Well, this tactic was show wrong in RL too, since almost of G4M Betty are shot down, and the only ship hit - USS George F. Elliott (AP-13) - was for collision.

Sokol1

[Galagonya]

Originally Posted by Letum

It's certainly how it was in reality for all US GP bombs and most British bombs. Much more accurate.

Some British bombs used a long wire that got pulled out of the bomb as it dropped to arm it, but I don't think we have these bombs in game anyway.

I know nothing about Soviet, German and Japanese bombs.

Concerning Soviet bombs, see the link below, the drawings show the spinner clearly.

http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/O...AB50/index.php

[Letum]

The B26 had six forward facing MGs and para-frag bombs. Just the kind of kit you need for tree-top attacks.

I don't understand you Wutz...It's a fact that bombs worked like this.
You can look at old bombs or blueprints and see the mechanics. This is how they worked. how can you disagree with such a plain fact?

1) The bomb is dropped
2) The spinner spins for 'x' revolutions (US bombs usually had two spinners front and rear; one for each fuse)
3) The bomb is now armed
4) The front or rear impact detonator is activated by impact
5) The bomb explodes

OR

4) No fuse is placed in the front so only the rear impact detonator is activated by impact
5) A pre-set time limit passes
6) The bomb explodes

[robtek]

@ wutz
You are mixing different issues her!
The bomb delay might work or not, haven't tested it now, but thats for another thread!
Is it really so difficult to understand that there is NO collision detection for casing and fuse???
There is a collision detection for the BOMB! Thats it!
Regarding this limitation the bomb arming we have now is the best possible solution to get closer to reality!
And i've done quite a few successful drops from 30m (100ft) height, tough 40m works even better.