The new bomb fuzing needs to be an option.

[ElAurens]

Thank you Uther and Alpha for seeing my point in this.

There is nothing historical about picking a 2 second arming time, and certainly nothing historical about the arming being stopped by the bomb skipping on the water before impact with the target ship.

This is a case of making something more difficult in the misguided belief that higher difficulty always equals higher realism.

This needs to be optional, just like the new pilot health, structural damage, and engine damage selections (All of which I approve of by the way).

[Letum]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

There is nothing historical about picking a 2 second arming time, and certainly nothing historical about the arming being stopped by the bomb skipping on the water before impact with the target ship.

Whilst you are quite correct about skipping, I don't see why a two second
arming time is wrong.

It's wrong in so far as the arming is dependent on the number of revolutions
the vane must take, but two seconds sounds like a reasonable length of time
for the vane to make those rotations.

[KG26_Alpha]

The problem is the casing deciding the fusing on contact with scenery.

Velocity should decide the vane arming the bomb on release.

The vane still turns on bounce or skipping due to velocity of the bomb.

But if it was done as suggested to stop DF server airfield killing at spawn perhaps a velocity solution would be better than 2 sec arming delay ?

[Furio]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

The problem is the casing deciding the fusing on contact with scenery.

Velocity should decide the vane arming the bomb on release.

The vane still turns on bounce or skipping due to velocity of the bomb.

But if it was done as suggested to stop DF server airfield killing at spawn perhaps a velocity solution would be better than 2 sec arming delay ?

+1