how to ... dumb bomb accurate?

today I tried AUTO bombing to one other post about "high alt. AUTO bombing" Mk-83 as it is said to be the most accurate bomb moddeld in the release system.

How do you use this mode to get accurate (as much as possible with general purpose bombs) runs with preplanned coordinates?

Possible sources of error:

- inaccuracy due to unguided fall

- coordinates read and insert limited to arc-sec

- flying the line for percet release

- TDC not able to slew (below the canopy when the target comes in visual range)

- release during transient maneuver (eg. pullup during release) [by Robin_Hood]

Is there any way to optimice the TDC location on the fly from high alt and far enough away to concentrate on flying the line?

CCIP FTW

I would add, as a possible source:

- Will releasing at anything other than 1g (eg, a 2g pullout) reduce accuracy? Should it?

 

Is there any way to optimice the TDC location on the fly from high alt and far enough away to concentrate on flying the line?

Not really, putting the TDC on the target using the HUD is not very accurate, especially on small targets (vehicles). IRL I imagine they would use the ground radar to lock it up, or a targeting pod but currently neither are modeled. I'd use a bigger target (building), have a waypoint on it, and designate that as your target point.

Possible sources of error:

- inaccuracy due to unguided fall

- coordinates read and insert limited to arc-sec

- flying the line for percet release

- TDC not able to slew (below the canopy when the target comes in visual range)

- release during transient maneuver (eg. pullup during release) [by Robin_Hood]

 

IRL, the bombing problem is basically that the "bomb computer" has to precisely know the XYZ coordinates of the plane, the speed, and the AOA of the plane. Most of that is handled by the INS system. Then it needs to know the XYZ coordinates of the target. This can be dealt with in several ways, direct coordinate input (via waypoint), designation via the HUD, Radar, Tpod etc. The latter two methods are preferred due to the fact the "relative" XYZ position is more accurate. If you are using a way-point coordinate, thats basically bang on, but due to issues with INS drift and inaccuracies with altitude (really height over target) the position of the plane is "less known" than the other methods. If you have the radar or TPOD the bomb computer then can fairly precisely "fix" the target relative to the airplane, i.e. target is 4.312km 5.111 degrees right 20.424 degrees down, and then continually update the slant range, and it then can compute the height over target and solve the "bombing triangle".

Typically the bomb computer can also "figure out" wind drift to some degree based on relative motion of the target and aircraft.

I'm not sure how the HUD designation caret is supposed to work on the hornet IRL, but I assume it would also use radar to get the slant range to the target. But in practical DCS usage I find positioning the TDC caret pretty innacurate as the #1 source of my dumb bombing errors.

Not really, putting the TDC on the target using the HUD is not very accurate, especially on small targets (vehicles). IRL I imagine they would use the ground radar to lock it up, or a targeting pod but currently neither are modeled. I'd use a bigger target (building), have a waypoint on it, and designate that as your target point.

AFAIK HUD designation is/was used a lot in real life, even in 2003 and even with a targeting pod, so it can't be that bad. Here's an excerpt from Hammer from above: Marine air combat over Iraq, with a USMC F/A-18D as FAC(A):

As Frey [WSO] was briefing the two single-seat F/A-18C pilots, Wedesmeyer [Pilot] rolled over into a steep dive from the north and designated the artillery position through his Heads Up Display. At the same time he armed the FLIR's laser designator; this enabled Frey to derive an accurate ten-digit frid coordinate, which he subsequently passed to the other two jets.

Yes, it is used there only to derive coordinates, but on an other occasion during the same flight, HUD designation is used to drop a Mk 83

today I tried AUTO bombing to one other post about "high alt. AUTO bombing" Mk-83 as it is said to be the most accurate bomb moddeld in the release system.

 

 

How do you use this mode to get accurate (as much as possible with general purpose bombs) runs with preplanned coordinates?

 

 

Possible sources of error:

- inaccuracy due to unguided fall

- coordinates read and insert limited to arc-sec

- flying the line for percet release

- TDC not able to slew (below the canopy when the target comes in visual range)

- release during transient maneuver (eg. pullup during release) [by Robin_Hood]

 

 

Is there any way to optimice the TDC location on the fly from high alt and far enough away to concentrate on flying the line?

I'd say pre-planned flight for now is the best option for it, same as when using a waypoint on any airfield not having a Tacan if you want a precise reading on distance to practice FCLP, since we still have a conflicting coordinate format entering in the UFC versus what shows on the HSI ( i can't rememeber which one is which one but one is degrees, minutes, and seconds and the other degrees and decimal minutes), so the convertion will always makes an offset, not that important, but for precise stuff as CCRP bombing cause it to be merly impossible, as opposed to it, in the ME your waypoint added will always show as where you droped it and you could direct hit i am sure, i tank with the waypoint directly set to it.

That's my opinion. But i personaly only use Auto when going on with a JTAC lasing a target or only on big tarets, i wouldn't go AUTO with MK-82 on a isolated tank with only a pass of 2 mk-82's, but i would rather go AUTO and drop a few MK-82's riple on a building or structure. Again, once we get a pod, this might be helping us as bypassing that thing.

Something is broke. See the other thread...

Mk84 was the most reliable for me with the hornet. Mk83 missed long as did the Mk82.

A10 was dead on with mk82

Harrier was on with mk82

Suppsedly this might be fixed in beta by now. I'm on stable