DCS: Bomb Fuze Update

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 18 тра 2024
  • In this DCS video, I’ll be discussing new fuzing options coming to several DCS aircraft like the Viper, F/A-18C, and the A-10C II. The new fuzing options allow you select specific nose and tail fuzes for general purpose bombs, laser-guided bombs, INS/GPS-guided bombs, and canister munitions. The new feature also allows you to set the fuze parameters. This can be done from either the Mission Editor, Re-Arm/Refuel Window, and later the DTC payload editor in the Mission Planner for single- and multi-player.
    In this example, we’ll look at the new fuze option regarding the Viper. From the mission editor, we’ll select the Payload window. Let’s first look at general purpose and GPS-guided bombs and load some Mk-82s. In the top left corner of the station, click on the little triangle to edit the fuze settings. For the nose fuze, we have options for a mechanical M904 crush fuze, DSU-33 airburst fuze, or a plug with options.
    The arming delay determines how long it will take the bomb to arm in seconds once released from the jet and the function delay determines the delay in seconds or hours that the bomb will detonate after fuze initiation. When selecting the DSU-33, the mean airburst height in feet can be set.
    Tail fuze options include the FMU-152 Joint Programable Fuze (JPF) that can be programmed from the cockpit, the FMU-139 electro-mechanical fuze, the M904, and plugs. Some bombs will also have an FMU-143 tail fuze option. The 143 is designed for delayed weapon penetration tasks. It’s important to note that except for the FMU-152 JPF, all other fuzes must be set while on the ground, they cannot be altered once airborne. All you can do airborne is make sure the fuze settings in the Stores pages for the F/A-18C and A-10C II and the SMS page for the F-16C match the actual bomb fuze settings.
    From the window, you can also select the external appearance of the bomb to match USAF or USN standards.
    We’ll now select Precision Attack payloads and select a GBU-24 laser-guided bomb. Note that because the nose is occupied by the laser-guidance seeker, there is no nose fuze option. You just set the bomb fuze settings based on the tail fuze, in this case, the JPF, 139, and the 143. This window also allows you to program the laser-PRF code that the bomb will be looking for. Again, you cannot program this from the cockpit, only the laser-PRF that the targeting pod will be looking for.
    In addition to setting fuze options from the Mission Editor, we can also do in-mission from the Arming and Refueling window. Press Left Alt and ‘ to bring up the window. Just like in the Mission Editor, click on the small, yellow triangle on store window.
    This time, we’ll look at canister munitions like the CBU-105 WCMD, but this also applies to other weapons like the Rockeye and CBU series. There is no nose and tail fuze choices, but you can select the airburst delay time in seconds and the altitude in feet that the canister will open. Further, the revolutions per minute that the canister will spin can be set. The greater the airburst altitude and spin rate, the greater the coverage area the submunitions will spread. However, note that the coverage will be less dense resulting in a lower percentage of hits.
    This is the first big step in the improved fuze system. Next steps are revisiting the explosion visual effects, particularly for airburst explosions, the damage effect for airburst detonations, and the new fragmentation model.
  • Ігри

КОМЕНТАРІ • 299

  • @2KOOLURATOOLGaming
    @2KOOLURATOOLGaming 27 днів тому +139

    "Brand new fragmentation model for all weapons"!
    What a wonderful day!

    • @bigcomputerman4482
      @bigcomputerman4482 27 днів тому

      This quote was enough to make my dcs side very very horny for A-G.

    • @ghashpl
      @ghashpl 26 днів тому +15

      don't hold your breath
      we are hearing about DTC since around early 2019

    • @connostyper
      @connostyper 26 днів тому

      ​@ghashpl you heard not seeing

    • @michelestefanini5466
      @michelestefanini5466 26 днів тому

      ​@@ghashplwhat's dtc

    • @adrianfrank3305
      @adrianfrank3305 25 днів тому +1

      does it mean new explosion animations?

  • @DoradoFever
    @DoradoFever 27 днів тому +114

    The mechanical fuses are NOT compatible with JDAMs. The 904 /905 isnt an approved config. Front is either a plug or the DSU. 11 years and counting as USAF AMMO.

    • @RogueSpecterGamingOfficial
      @RogueSpecterGamingOfficial 27 днів тому +19

      Weapons here and yeah I feel the pain

    • @travistolbert2647
      @travistolbert2647 27 днів тому +2

      Thanks for the info!

    • @Motorman2112
      @Motorman2112 27 днів тому +26

      Watch them take 5 years to correct this.

    • @DoradoFever
      @DoradoFever 27 днів тому +8

      @Motorman2112 I have brought it up before, years ago. Glad we are finally at least getting this.

    • @shagrat47
      @shagrat47 27 днів тому +8

      Let's be happy we get airburst options, proper arm delays etc.
      I personally always prefered to not restrict the setup/loadout unless physical impossible (bombs intersecting). Rather educate the player on restrictions (maybe a red bomb symbol indication?) and model the effects of the mistake in the simulation, like bombs bouncing around and killing you.
      To me this is similar to what the airplane model is supposed to do: take damage when abused! No, black screen with a message of "flying outside of parameters".
      Pull too much G and feel the damage, to ripping your wings off.
      Fly a turbine in the red or beyond torque limits, see the turbine slowly suffer and deteriorate.
      Load a non-approved loadout, have a random chance the bomb rips through your elevator after bouncing of the fuel tank...
      Select two plugs, instead of a fuze, get a dud! Cherry on top would be to model the kinetic damage to, say a car, without the blast and frag damage.
      Choose unapproved fuze combinations? What would be the effect? Why not model the effect and give a pointer, that it's not approved (aka) a bad idea? 🤔

  • @laserdan
    @laserdan 27 днів тому +51

    PLEASE add short descriptions of each fuze type, there was plenty of room in the dropdown menus after the part numbers.

    • @Andrew-13579
      @Andrew-13579 22 дні тому +4

      Or, maybe easier would be a DCS munitions manual .pdf file.

  • @ghostskills_dcs
    @ghostskills_dcs 26 днів тому +7

    I like to thank the entire ED team for the detailed and beautiful work. You are already market leaders in study-level mil-flightsim, but it feels like you keep raising the bar every month. DCS and the ED team are incredible. Thank you for your attention to detail and your continuous development of my hobby.

  • @mihkeltoomet213
    @mihkeltoomet213 26 днів тому +10

    A good update!
    Please add some kind of short description behind those, what it is for or what it is and maybe when hovering with mouse for 5 sec or more, will give extra description box with detailed use cases etc. Makes identifying much easier.

  • @bronco5334
    @bronco5334 27 днів тому +27

    It would be nice if the selection menus gave an indication of what each fuze does, instead of expecting us to memorize the purpose of dozens of fuzes across decades for multiple aircraft. The descriptions you use here (proximity airburst, concrete piercing delay, mechanical instant or delay fuze) should be in the text pull-down. Or have a summary of the options for each fuze (E.G.:instant, .005 s, .01 s, 10 second) in the text pull-down.

    • @ElHyperion
      @ElHyperion 23 дні тому +1

      Agreed, I would also welcome some basic info or a chart of what altitude / spin rate of the CBU canister to choose for how widely dispersed targets

  • @wraith444
    @wraith444 27 днів тому +64

    By any chance will there be a page in the encyclopedia or maybe an appendix for the manual that lists all the different fuse types, how they're used, what their options mean, what year they entered service, what countries have them, etc?

    • @julian-sark
      @julian-sark 26 днів тому

      They could just make links into a Wiki. Minimal task requirement. I'm sure the community would fill the pages.

    • @OliverMiles98
      @OliverMiles98 25 днів тому +1

      Yeah, I definitely prefer having either a page in the encylopedia (even better if the relevant entry can be directly accessed from the mission editor, I know you can access the encylopedia from the editor already).
      Failing that - the fuse configuration utility already makes it pretty clear what each one does from what option is available and you can mouseover the fuse to get information.
      I don't agree with the same massive long display names that weapons got - it makes it look really cluttered IMO and worse is that it's very inconsistent with what information it contains and how its presented, it also made variants more vague in some cases and sometimes its even wrong.

    • @wraith444
      @wraith444 25 днів тому +1

      @@OliverMiles98 Agreed that the configuration utility does a decent job giving you an idea of the capability of each option in the moment. I wouldn't mind having a more detailed, verbose source to look at for mission editing purposes, though. It would be nice to have lots of historical and technical details on hand when trying to decide what would make sense for the situation if you were trying to do a historical re-enactment mission or something similar.

    • @OliverMiles98
      @OliverMiles98 25 днів тому

      @@wraith444 "It would be nice to have lots of historical and technical details on hand when trying to decide what would make sense for the situation if you were trying to do a historical re-enactment mission or something similar."
      I agree, but personally, I think this should be the domain of historical mode (it's just whether or not that's accurate - sometimes it isn't).
      But personally I'd rather this information be somewhere other than in the names, for reasons I've already given - I'd much prefer it to be in the mouseover info box that's already present, or the encylopedia.

    • @wraith444
      @wraith444 25 днів тому +1

      @@OliverMiles98 Oh yeah, definitely shouldn't be in the names. I just want it somewhere accessible when needed.

  • @traffictraffic
    @traffictraffic 27 днів тому +24

    This is pretty cool. Any chance of adding tool tips that gives a brief description of the fuses? Keeping track of those models numbers will be tricky

    • @MisterMannIndy
      @MisterMannIndy 26 днів тому +3

      Came here to say the same thing. Lots of unused space in those UIs as well (at least given what was demonstrated) - seems like a missed opportunity to have a description of the fuse included. Tool tip probably makes more sense from a real estate perspective just in case there are longer fuse names.

  • @omgLethalSting
    @omgLethalSting 27 днів тому +12

    Hey Wags, for the less tech jargon savvy such as myself, could we see short descriptors along the names indicating the type of fuse such as contact/impact or airburst?

  • @SqueakyBe
    @SqueakyBe 27 днів тому +55

    Don't think i didn't see that "DYN. SPAWN TEMPLATE" option in the mission editor.
    Of all the things I'm excited for, the dynamic spawns are number 1.
    It'll be so much easier to make missions without setting 80+ client slots for hot and cold and multiple different aircraft.

    • @catfunt5583
      @catfunt5583 27 днів тому +3

      God I know right, I feel like I’m crazy cus I’m the only one excited about this.
      Such a massive QOL feature, will make so many things so much easier

    • @RedFail1-1
      @RedFail1-1 26 днів тому

      Just use Briefing Room...

    • @ziepex7009
      @ziepex7009 24 дні тому

      absolutely right

    • @catfunt5583
      @catfunt5583 24 дні тому +1

      New patch is out, no mention of dynamic spawns :/

    • @SqueakyBe
      @SqueakyBe 24 дні тому

      @@catfunt5583 one day 🤞

  • @OliverMiles98
    @OliverMiles98 27 днів тому +19

    For the USAF/USN liveries for the bomb, wouldn't it be better to have them tied to the variant of bomb used by the USAF and USN? So the -31(V)1 and (V)3 would have a USAF skin and the (V)2 and (V)4 would have a USN skin.
    The GBU-38(V)1/B shown above isn't used by the USN as it isn't thermally protected - the version used by the USN is the (V)2 and (V)4 (which goes for both the GBU-31 and the 38).
    The -31 already has the (V)2 and (V)4 for the Hornet, but only the (V)1 is available for the -38.
    Similarly, for the Paveway II and Mk 80 series, the Navy uses different warheads (Mk 82 -> BLU-111A/B, Mk 83 -> BLU-110A/B and Mk 84 -> BLU-117A/B). For the GBU-24 we should have the A/B for USAF aircraft and B/B for USN aircraft.
    In every case, the practical difference isn't all that much - copying and pasting, renaming and giving them the correct livery is all that's required. Though for some USN weapons there should be the old green thermal coating (which is already present) and the newer grey coating.

  • @Gargoyle11
    @Gargoyle11 27 днів тому +38

    Man the mountain ranges look so incredible with the new map tech. Thanks for the video Wags

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  27 днів тому +44

      Sneak peek at Kola winter textures.

  • @ivaniuk123
    @ivaniuk123 27 днів тому +4

    Thanks ED, it is hard work to bring us all these features and I appreciate it.

  • @SDsc0rch
    @SDsc0rch 27 днів тому +13

    "copy to all of same type weapon"
    THAAAAAANK YOUUUUUUUUU!!

  • @Cailean556
    @Cailean556 26 днів тому +4

    Great video, and great capability in DCS, Wags - my only suggestion would be to add a tool tip, or put in brackets next to each fuse type, that describes what each fuse type is used for (airbust, penetrator, electro-mechanical etc.).

  • @Rhinozherous
    @Rhinozherous 26 днів тому +14

    Please add a short description beside the names of the fuzes (Impact, Air Burst,...)!

    • @OliverMiles98
      @OliverMiles98 26 днів тому

      It should be fairly obvious by looking at what options you are presented with when a particular type of fuse is selected.

    • @Spectre-907
      @Spectre-907 22 дні тому

      @@OliverMiles98 Whats the difference between plug types then, if it's so obvious

    • @OliverMiles98
      @OliverMiles98 22 дні тому

      @@Spectre-907 Apart from visuals, the nose plugs do exactly nothing in DCS. The MXU-735 doesn't aid in penetration at oblique angles for example, it's no different from either the short or long nose plugs.
      And all the tail fuse plugs do is blank that fuse off such that there isn't a tail fuse.
      But fact of the matter is, if you select say, DSU-33, the only option you're given in the fusing menu is airburst height - pretty obvious what the DSU-33 is then isn't it?
      Similarly for all the various time fuses - it only gives you function delays, pretty obvious what the fuse is for then isn't it?
      EDIT: And even for the different tail fuses - the only difference they have in DCS are the different time options, IRL the FMU-143 is designed for penetrator bombs (e.g. GBU-31(V)3/B and (V)4/B, GBU-24A/B and B/B), the -139 is designed for general purpose bombs and the FMU-152 JPF (joint programmable fuse) can be used in either.
      It could be useful to add something in the fusing selection GUI to indicate whether or not a fuse allows for in-cockpit selection, like the FMU-152. But display names of fuses should ideally just be the designation and name.
      And FWIW: I'm absolutely fine with their being a mouseover tool-tip, or something in the in-game encylopeadia, or a .pdf etc.

    • @Spectre-907
      @Spectre-907 22 дні тому

      @@OliverMiles98 >they do nothing in dcs
      Then why have them?
      As for "am i expecting ED to clutter things up in the names?" No, but I *do* expect a mouseover tooltip or accompanying pdf. Some level of documentation is required, this isnt their actual military-branch sim where these things are covered in actual pilot training.

    • @OliverMiles98
      @OliverMiles98 22 дні тому

      @@Spectre-907 "Then why have them?"
      To better represent what these bombs look like?
      Same for the ablative grey thermal coatings for USN bombs? It doesn't actually do anything in DCS (I don't even think it adjusts the bomb's weight) and ammunition cook-offs from fires aren't a thing in DCS.
      "Some level of documentation is required, this isnt their actual military-branch sim where these things are covered in actual pilot training."
      I'm sorry, but I'm struggling to see how clicking on a fuse and seeing what options you're presented with requires military pilot training.
      I'm not an expert - far from it. If you asked me what a DSU-33 was I'd have to look it up. But seeing as when I select it, the only options I'm presented with are airburst height, which makes it obvious that it's an airbursting fuse).
      As for a .pdf, manual or mouse over tool-tip - I'm not opposed to that at all. In fact, I'd extend it to weapons generally. I'd much rather have that than overly long, display names that are inconsistent in what information they present and how its presented. Hell, sometimes, it's not even correct.

  • @OzDeaDMeaT
    @OzDeaDMeaT 27 днів тому +28

    Is there plans for having a more descriptive dropdown list rather than just a bunch of numbers? Would be handy to have a basic description for us more casual players.

    • @RedFail1-1
      @RedFail1-1 26 днів тому +1

      Lmfao

    • @christianloose9875
      @christianloose9875 26 днів тому +3

      I agree. At least a short description like it was done for the weapons.

  • @radoslawbiernacki
    @radoslawbiernacki 27 днів тому +7

    Woow. That's something. Thanks ED. Next, cloud, fog and mist affecting heat seekers and AI visual detection please.

  • @Vortex31415
    @Vortex31415 26 днів тому +3

    Love the new fusing system. Great step in the right direction, Wags!

  • @travistolbert2647
    @travistolbert2647 27 днів тому +2

    Wow that's great to have all of the new fuse options on the jets, and then reflect them in the cosmetics on the bomb rack, great bit of added immersion! Thanks for the constant improvements to the sim!

  • @audunskilbrei8279
    @audunskilbrei8279 26 днів тому +5

    Any chance you could include a short description behind the the fuze names?

  • @fawazalrasheed4076
    @fawazalrasheed4076 26 днів тому +3

    F15e needs some love too

  • @aatwinner1377
    @aatwinner1377 11 днів тому

    This will make teaching CDCs so much easier

  • @fortheiysomeone1235
    @fortheiysomeone1235 27 днів тому +4

    DCS is moving forwards once again in swift strides.

  • @leonardoetc3565
    @leonardoetc3565 27 днів тому +3

    F-16, f-18, apache and the beautiful Afghanistan! The perfect package! The final touch would be a new infantry pack with improved animations and capabilities such as retreating, seeking cover or even flanking. I can already imagine recreating the videos of enemy hunts with Apache!

  • @dampsok
    @dampsok 27 днів тому +2

    Oh my gosh, I'm about to pop! Thanks for the fuses!

  • @Shawn-jf2qw
    @Shawn-jf2qw 27 днів тому +1

    Thank you Wags I have been wanting airbursts for awhile now and now I will be finally able to use them.

  • @Scoop1_1
    @Scoop1_1 26 днів тому +1

    Great upgrade,. This is getting complex and loving it. Don't forget to update those manuals with the various options and what they do. Also, hope that in addition the recent added blast effect and coming fragmentation model, the trees will now be destructible instead of only binding. ps. great sneak preview of Kola winter textures. Already loving the map, but this will be amazing.

  • @jvsimic
    @jvsimic 27 днів тому +6

    Seems like it'll be a good update! Can you elaborate on the Dyn. Spawn Template under the Callsign of the jet in the Mission Editor?

  • @azrzgaming
    @azrzgaming 26 днів тому

    Wags never fails to deliver the greatest sneak peak videos!

  • @spirosdelistavros2970
    @spirosdelistavros2970 22 дні тому

    @mattWagner I just read , i did not know this, you are in wheelchair? man you are my hero, its prove youcan do anything, despite fysical limitations, you have to promise us, that you never stop this work, even when your not there anymore dont let it stop. You are a legend

  • @antreasgeorgiou1411
    @antreasgeorgiou1411 27 днів тому +33

    0:54 pilot Mover?? C.w. lemoine is that you?

    • @mayurmanudhanya934
      @mayurmanudhanya934 27 днів тому +3

      holyshit it is mover

    • @Chibbs.E
      @Chibbs.E 26 днів тому +1

      Duh. Lol. They're like, friends. Wags has been on Mover and Gonky's podcast twice now.

    • @mayurmanudhanya934
      @mayurmanudhanya934 26 днів тому +2

      I am aware of that. I follow that show. I wad just glad to see that Easter egg

  • @russtuff
    @russtuff 27 днів тому +3

    Nice. Any chance for some mouse-over descriptions?

  • @numberboxgamer
    @numberboxgamer 27 днів тому

    This is a super cool addition! Looking forward to it

  • @EvMstein
    @EvMstein 27 днів тому +2

    Finally! *Thank you ED!*

  • @furiz1-1
    @furiz1-1 26 днів тому

    Great news👍, I really hope we get detailed textual instructions on what all those fuzes do.

  • @mimino0125
    @mimino0125 27 днів тому

    DCS you are the best !!! Thank you

  • @Deltarious
    @Deltarious 26 днів тому +1

    This sounds great, here's hoping that these options come to 'certain other' third party DCS modules in the near future too

  • @Andrew-13579
    @Andrew-13579 22 дні тому

    I noticed this in the F-4E. Thought it was specific to the module. Apparently, it’s much wider. Cool!

  • @smudgekenobi7126
    @smudgekenobi7126 27 днів тому +1

    Frag model and weapons effects are getting me excited

  • @joelmulder
    @joelmulder 26 днів тому

    Finally! Looking forward to this update!

  • @thecircusfreak5364
    @thecircusfreak5364 27 днів тому +5

    Winter Kola might be the one that gets me to bite.

  • @olereidar
    @olereidar 26 днів тому

    I can see hours and hours being spent testing various parameters… 😅
    Appreciate the level of detail 😊

  • @DoradoFever
    @DoradoFever 27 днів тому +2

    Yeeeeessss! Finally they get fixed! Thank you ED!

  • @nminty7485
    @nminty7485 27 днів тому

    Awesome work

  • @StrikeArikon
    @StrikeArikon 27 днів тому

    Nice, have been looking forward to this update since seeing the USN skins on twitter!

  • @romagnolo
    @romagnolo 27 днів тому +1

    Beautiful map

  • @GulliverStrange
    @GulliverStrange 24 дні тому

    Epic!!!
    Will there be any kind of documentation for all the new fuzes and options?

  • @gregorpajdlhauser2850
    @gregorpajdlhauser2850 26 днів тому

    Hello Wags here from Eagle Dynamics!

  • @denialmarble305
    @denialmarble305 27 днів тому

    this looks great, but i’m curious about the implications. will there be more bunker/underground targets in the future?

  • @Mak10z
    @Mak10z 26 днів тому +1

    Pilot 'Mover' awe.. Mover's got a fan :)

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +4

      Mover does a lot for DCS and we appreciate it.

  • @SDsc0rch
    @SDsc0rch 27 днів тому

    good stuff Matt

  • @Duckfisher0222
    @Duckfisher0222 27 днів тому +1

    Oh, that's awesome!

  • @dencuze
    @dencuze 27 днів тому

    So if I load up on JDAMs with the JPF in the future, i'll be able to (for example) set it to tail fuze in my weapons page?
    It would only require that I pick the right fuse when rearming?

  • @lorenleimer3930
    @lorenleimer3930 27 днів тому

    Curious if this type of panel could be used for things like rocket zones on the Apache, or mixed hellfire loads (without needing a full pylon, e.g. 1 Lima, 2 Kilo).

  • @theincognitoburrito6445
    @theincognitoburrito6445 27 днів тому

    Does this feature apply to the AGM-154A on the F-16? Right now there's no way to change the burst altitude or attack azimuth. If this feature applies to the JSOW, that would give it a lot more versatility. If not, at least it's still a good quality of life update for the other bombs.

  • @kittyhawk0199
    @kittyhawk0199 27 днів тому

    will the bombs with backward capabilities (mk8x series) have these settings on older airframes?

  •  14 днів тому

    This works in the MF1, best feature of the patch, Finaly able to set laser codes in the rearm menu.

  • @theflyinggasmask
    @theflyinggasmask 27 днів тому

    very nice

  • @mplmpl7780
    @mplmpl7780 27 днів тому

    Great stuff ,but please sort out the jumping aa gun pipper in the F16 !!!

  • @fenny1578
    @fenny1578 27 днів тому +1

    Will the Mk 82s on the F-4E benefit from this?

  • @n8ahbl471
    @n8ahbl471 27 днів тому

    will the apache have this system? For hydra fuse selection and for the rocket zones and hellfire rack customization. Is that in progress?

  • @gundamator4709
    @gundamator4709 27 днів тому

    Wags, will we get the option to have user made liveries on bombs now?

  • @VonHoffnung
    @VonHoffnung 27 днів тому

    BOOM-bags with air-burst....yes!

  • @jejelerider3278
    @jejelerider3278 26 днів тому

    Thank you Wags, very good news! Will you provide a table of data to understand and choose the best setting of bombs dépendant of the target?
    Does this feature will come at the same time for all the planes?
    Best regards

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +1

      The only setting you really need to fiddle with may be the function delay time. For hardened targets that require a penetration, you'll probably want to put a long conical plug on the from and a tail fuze with a longer function delay time rather an instantaneous (0) function.

  • @TechGaming45
    @TechGaming45 27 днів тому

    Awesome.

  • @Kathlanus
    @Kathlanus 26 днів тому

    I assume this means goodbye to setting up lasercodes in the hornet cockpit? Was a nice bit of convenience, but this really looks awesome

  • @vincentvoncarnap2473
    @vincentvoncarnap2473 26 днів тому

    could these triangles also be implemented for the flanker bomb racks? currently they drop all bombs at once which can be a pain

  • @Randomuser5854
    @Randomuser5854 27 днів тому

    we already have this in dcs ww2 planes so it'll be cool to get videos detailing what it actually does

  • @mohammadbt7278
    @mohammadbt7278 26 днів тому

    I’m waiting for the f16D 😉

  • @ghostdog688
    @ghostdog688 26 днів тому

    These new fuses are a nice idea; will the effects of these changes have an effect on the target?

  • @18skaterboy18
    @18skaterboy18 27 днів тому

    A step in the right direction

  • @williamk1060
    @williamk1060 27 днів тому

    For the USAF/USN skins, is that regarding whether the bomb body is green or in the Navy ablative texture? I didn't see a change when you clicked on the option in the video.

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  27 днів тому +1

      Yes, you need to press OK to apply changes.

    • @Elvinsilvester
      @Elvinsilvester 26 днів тому

      So based on the video the f16 can also carry the navy bombs? Did they ever do that?

  • @DCS_World_Japan
    @DCS_World_Japan 26 днів тому

    Will the USN selection give options for green ablative coating as well? Green was used pre-2002, and already exists in the DCS file structure along with the gray, however gray is incorrect for anything pre-2002.

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +1

      Our F/A-18C is designed around a mid-2000s jet, so the gray color is accurate. We may to the older green color, but a lower priority.

    • @DCS_World_Japan
      @DCS_World_Japan 23 дні тому

      @@MattWagner Mid-2000s still had green bombs in circulation. 100% gray across the whole inventory isn't accurate until late 2000s/2010s.

  • @Gargoyle11
    @Gargoyle11 27 днів тому +3

    So for right now will these fuze options be just for show until the fragmentation system comes online? Like in the video you put on a penetrator style fuze so I'm wondering if that fuze will cause a gbu38 to deal more damage to hardened bunkers compared to an instant fuze. Thanks again

    • @bronco5334
      @bronco5334 27 днів тому +1

      A while back they introduced penetration mechanics that actually allow a bomb to penetrate into an object before detonation. To the best of my knowledge, this only comes into play or has any actual effect in the game when one object is *inside* another object in the game: IE, an aircraft inside a hangar: the bomb can now penetrate through the hangar and explode in the void inside the hangar, directly damaging the aircraft inside. I don't think it has any effect on how much damage is done to the hangar itself

  • @jmsian3505
    @jmsian3505 23 дні тому

    Can ED also adjust the damage of JDAMS where a near miss kills the vehicle or tent.

  • @boggy8557
    @boggy8557 27 днів тому +4

    Will we notice any actual difference when using different fuzes and settings or is this just for show?

    • @catfunt5583
      @catfunt5583 27 днів тому +3

      Well, different fuses have different capabilities, like being able to change fuse settings from the cockpit. Also wags mentioned redoing the damage model, so bombs with penetration fuses will do more damage to bunkers/reinforced buildings

    • @shagrat47
      @shagrat47 27 днів тому +1

      You may want to watch the video, again. Wags explained it...😉

    • @BumpyLumpy1
      @BumpyLumpy1 26 днів тому +1

      If you listen he explains everything.

    • @boggy8557
      @boggy8557 26 днів тому

      @@shagrat47 yeh, my bad , I was half asleep and being stupid last night when I watched it. So you can change the fuses but the actual effects will come into effect later.

    • @jakesixx2726
      @jakesixx2726 26 днів тому +1

      Sounds like visuals first without the effect they are "working on ™ " splash damage may finally be coming.

  • @dfed0530
    @dfed0530 27 днів тому +1

    Is the airburst option going to have a greater splash damage effect to vehicles or is it just for show?

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  27 днів тому +1

      Discussed in the video.

  • @vwx1st
    @vwx1st 27 днів тому

    hell yeah

  • @fridain
    @fridain 26 днів тому

    Will they actually have different effects on targets?

  • @JonBloor7
    @JonBloor7 26 днів тому

    Love this. Is there any chance these fuzing options might come to the appropriate FC3/FC2024 aircraft down the line? Would be fantastic also, for instance, if the A-10A could carry LGB's and program the Pave Penny pod code for buddy lases too.
    As always, clear and well formatted video explaining everything. I know these might suck to make sometimes but your updates are always appreciated. Cheers Wags.

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +2

      Yes, this is also implemented for the FC aircraft.

    • @JonBloor7
      @JonBloor7 26 днів тому

      @@MattWagner Thanks Wags. Have a great day.

  • @sloppydog4831
    @sloppydog4831 26 днів тому

    Airbursts! Yes, finally!

  • @macieksoft
    @macieksoft 25 днів тому

    WIll F-16 and F/A-18 get option to set JPF settings in cockpit? IIRC both planes have such feature IRL.

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  25 днів тому

      They already do. Generally, only JDAM take advantage of the JPG features for in-cockpit programming.

  • @trigger5520
    @trigger5520 25 днів тому

    With all the new systems like blast effects and now the fragmentation system, are there plans to upgrade or switch the dcs engine?

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  25 днів тому

      The core DCS engines is continually updated.

  • @Krendor123
    @Krendor123 23 дні тому

    Can anybody tell me how the fuzes get triggered?
    I expect the nose fuze to get triggered on impact, then behaving like the settings for it. How does the tail fuze get triggered? Or does the nose fuze only trigger the tail fuze and detonation delays are accumulated?
    I want to try a dumb bomb, exploding 5 seconds after impact. As there is no nose fuze with that much delay, I need to use the plug for the nose and an fmu-152 for the tail, correct?

  • @allent555
    @allent555 26 днів тому

    Wow, and thanks for this update! I really like the direction this going. Question: are there going to be other updates to the cultural (structure) objects also? Like using your example, will hardened shelters have a higher survival probability (%) when hit with a non-penetrating ordinance or even a cluster munition? Or will airbrush ordinances have more effect on targets when they are separated by revetments? I know it's impossible to completely model reality, just curious how this translates into the DCS simulations. As a former USAF weapons and also TGTs I really like this detail. Thanks Again!!!

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому

      This is already, partly implemented, but as mentioned at the end of the video, we'll be tuning "targets" to better match weapon choice and fuze settings. This is a parallel task to configuration UI, visual effects, and blast/frag effects.

    • @allent555
      @allent555 26 днів тому

      @@MattWagner Wages that's really great to hear!!!! I apologize that I missed that part of the video.

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому

      @@allent555 No problem, most viewers don't watch until the end.

    • @allent555
      @allent555 26 днів тому

      @@MattWagner ROFL I did, however, my 56 y/o ears failed me. Now we just need a tool for ACO overlay and mission planning system interface like the MSS II or AFMSS and it will be like we're back in the SQ.

  • @jwg72
    @jwg72 26 днів тому

    Will these be included in FC2024 (e.g. RBK)? Any chance for selectable fuses for those rockets which have them? Excited about the possibility of the fragmentation model for rockets!

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому

      Yes, for FC, but just US aircraft for now.

  • @33vortex
    @33vortex 27 днів тому +3

    Looking forward to this coming patch as the current one has been a terrible experience for all F-16 enthusiasts. Broken TGP, INS alignment not working on bases you didn't spawn on, or after repairs. NAV mode not showing distance to steerpoint but rather the TGP SPI... and lots lots more. How did we survive?!? We are grateful it's only for our own entertainment and not like our lives depended on this spaghetti.
    Please ED, as good and unique as your product is... there is no shortage of room for improvement. Please do better.

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +1

      We believe that this is all correct based fixes to these systems. Please see the forum post here to better understand these changes. forum.dcs.world/topic/348814-bug-or-wli-after-any-ag-attack-with-a-powered-up-tgp-i-must-enable-tgp-and-tms-down-to-get-stps-in-the-nav-mode/#comment-5435126

    • @33vortex
      @33vortex 26 днів тому

      @@MattWagner One issue of many, but thanks for the reply.

  • @jubuttib
    @jubuttib 27 днів тому

    Oooh I could really use some airburst fuzes, if the effects were realistic at least...

  • @fa-ajn9881
    @fa-ajn9881 27 днів тому

    I’d be a hypocrite, as I’m a critic of some of DCS decisions, if I didn’t say I couldn’t be happier with fusing and fragmentation to the game. This is the small simple things that I’ve been begging for ED to polish out!!! As this rolls out more this will be huge for a lot of WW2 guys too as anyone who’s played warthunder will know! Great job ED!

  • @crazyhorse18
    @crazyhorse18 27 днів тому

    Top👍👍

  • @MrEfoefi
    @MrEfoefi 26 днів тому

    airburst explosions - does it really going to have a different damage on units in comparison to ground impact explosion?

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому

      Yes, that is what we are working on, but the new fragmentation model will be vital for this.

  • @cmdrbigity6914
    @cmdrbigity6914 27 днів тому +4

    This gonna work on the F-15e?

    • @janintelkor
      @janintelkor 26 днів тому

      This is independent of module chosen in my opinion

  • @primaryworm5
    @primaryworm5 26 днів тому

    i want to see 202 pieces spreads on 2500 rpm on 2200ft coverage, that's gonna be awesome

  • @SDsc0rch
    @SDsc0rch 27 днів тому

    👍👍👍

  • @RTSchramm
    @RTSchramm 27 днів тому

    I'm confused about having both a nose and tail fuse both set to detonate. What is the advantage of detonating both ends of a bomb? I thought you select a tail detonate for hardened targets and a nose detonate for unhardened targets.

    • @shagrat47
      @shagrat47 26 днів тому +1

      You always detonate the whole bomb. Two fuze wells allow to attach different options/combinations e.g. penetrator nose plug and timed fuze tail. LaserSeeker assembly on the nose and tail fuze. There was a time they experimented with two similar electromechanical fuzes in both N/T, to reduce duds, but actually the duds were caused by mechanical issues during assembly.
      Fuzing is a complex topic itself.

  • @Benom8
    @Benom8 26 днів тому

    Hopefully this means Aerges can use this to fix setting of the laser codes for gbu-12s on the F1 soon

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +1

      That will be up to Aerges.

  • @YLandorin
    @YLandorin 26 днів тому

    Wow the landscape looks stunning at the start of the video, which map is that?

    • @MattWagner
      @MattWagner  26 днів тому +1

      A preview of the Kola map winter textures. Quite nice, aye?

    • @Landorin
      @Landorin 25 днів тому

      @@MattWagner Absolutely! At first I thought I am looking at Microsoft Flight Simulator or so. ;)

  • @iou0
    @iou0 27 днів тому

    No bomb fusing options for f-15e?

  • @TeZaKone
    @TeZaKone 27 днів тому

    WOW