DCS: Bomb Fuze Update

[@2KOOLURATOOLGaming]

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

[@bigcomputerman4482]

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

[@ghashpl]

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

[@connostyper]

​@ghashpl you heard not seeing

[@michelestefanini5466]

​@@ghashplwhat's dtc

[@adrianfrank3305]

does it mean new explosion animations?

[@laserdan]

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

[@Andrew-13579]

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

[@icecold9511]

Yeah. What's the point of random designations?

[@bronco5334]

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]

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

[@ghostskills_dcs]

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.

[@wraith444]

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]

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

[@OliverMiles98]

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]

@@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]

@@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]

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

[@DoradoFever]

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]

Weapons here and yeah I feel the pain

[@travistolbert2647]

Thanks for the info!

[@Motorman2112]

Watch them take 5 years to correct this.

[@DoradoFever]

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

[@shagrat47]

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? 🤔

[@mihkeltoomet213]

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.

[@traffictraffic]

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]

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.

[@SqueakyBe]

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]

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

[@RedTail1-1]

Just use Briefing Room...

[@ziepex7009]

absolutely right

[@catfunt5583]

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

[@SqueakyBe]

@@catfunt5583 one day 🤞

[@omgLethalSting]

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?

[@OliverMiles98]

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.

[@Rhinozherous]

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

[@OliverMiles98]

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

[@Spectre-907]

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

[@OliverMiles98]

@@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]

@@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]

@@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.

[@spirosdelistavros2970]

@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

[@ivaniuk123]

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

[@SDsc0rch]

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

[@Cailean556]

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.).

[@Gargoyle11]

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

[@MattWagner]

Sneak peek at Kola winter textures.

[@radoslawbiernacki]

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

[@Vortex31415]

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

[@OzDeaDMeaT]

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.

[@RedTail1-1]

Lmfao

[@christianloose9875]

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

[@travistolbert2647]

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!

[@smudgekenobi7126]

Frag model and weapons effects are getting me excited

[@audunskilbrei8279]

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

[@leonardoetc3565]

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!

[@fortheiysomeone1235]

DCS is moving forwards once again in swift strides.

[@Scoop1_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.

[@fawazalrasheed4076]

F15e needs some love too

[@dampsok]

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

[@Deltarious]

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

[@jvsimic]

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?

[@Shawn-jf2qw]

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

[@descentmvm]

finally we can use the f1 mirage gbu's online... been waiting for something like this since the mirage f1 came out. Thank you!

[@russtuff]

Nice. Any chance for some mouse-over descriptions?

[@azrzgaming]

Wags never fails to deliver the greatest sneak peak videos!

[@antreasgeorgiou1411]

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

[@mayurmanudhanya934]

holyshit it is mover

[@Chibbs.E]

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

[@mayurmanudhanya934]

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

[@EvMstein]

Finally! *Thank you ED!*

[@Andrew-13579]

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

[@furiz1-1]

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

[@olereidar]

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

[@thecircusfreak5364]

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

[@aatwinner1377]

This will make teaching CDCs so much easier

[@DoradoFever]

Yeeeeessss! Finally they get fixed! Thank you ED!

[@vitorarbex]

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

[@FuxLE1991]

Hi Matt, is there a workaround for old campaigns or missions, air started, without the possibility to open them in mission editor, to make the bombs that were configured initially with nose fuze to modify the fuzes ? Because now, all those missions are unplayable, all bombs are DUDs. For example, on the F/A-18C, Rising Squall campaign, the tutorials have a laser guided GBU-82, but all of them are DUDs, can't progress anymore because of that...

[@Mak10z]

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

[@MattWagner]

Mover does a lot for DCS and we appreciate it.

[@stevenjamesfrank]

It should be made clear that laser codes other than 1688 *must* be set via this new fusing panel. Simply setting them (at least in the case of the F/A-18) via the Stores page in the jet will *appear* to set the new values but they do not take if not first set via the fusing panel.

[@numberboxgamer]

This is a super cool addition! Looking forward to it

[@DasPenguin85]

Would be handy if y'all put a short description next to the fuze types for us that don't have the time to go full autism on it. Ex. "FMU-139 (Penetrator _____)"

[@theears995]

Is there documentation about what these fuzes actually do? (Especially the tail fuzes)?

[@33vortex]

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]

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]

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

[@joelmulder]

Finally! Looking forward to this update!

[@StrikeArikon]

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

[@romagnolo]

Beautiful map

[@boggy8557]

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

[@catfunt5583]

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]

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

[@BumpyLumpy1]

If you listen he explains everything.

[@boggy8557]

@@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]

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

[@forcedtoexist6221]

How to select mfuze within the fa18? I am trying to learn ccip bombing with the training lesson - but there is no option to select the mfuze (pb4 on the stores page).

[@cmdrbigity6914]

This gonna work on the F-15e?

[@janintelkor]

This is independent of module chosen in my opinion

[@mimino0125]

DCS you are the best !!! Thank you

[@jejelerider3278]

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]

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.

[@GulliverStrange]

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

[@fa-ajn9881]

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!

[@Duckfisher0222]

Oh, that's awesome!

[@Phvpark]

what is that 24 hour delay option on the FMU-152, its supposed to destroy the cleaning team? xD

[@MattWagner]

More like runway repair teams.

[@lasselahti4056]

The fuses seem to be changed also in HN. But Why i cant get CBU99 can opening UNDER ANY fuze setting / circumstances. There is now in MFUZE: VT1 and VT2 ; EFUZE: INST, Delay1, delay2. Normally ingame tutorial tells to use vt2 to set the height. Now its vt1 that gets one to set the height, or atleast for me it is. BUT can does not open. What am I doing wrong?

[@primaryworm5]

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

[@jmsian3505]

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

[@yellowwhale66]

Please finally add the SPBE-D. i know it's been in the files forever. It would be fun for redfor to have some SFW for once (not encluding the jf) lol

[@MattWagner]

That would not be accurate for our -16 and -18.

[@yellowwhale66]

i meant for redfor aircraft, im sure you guys will toss it in when the FF mig29 comes though 👉👈

[@RealDarko]

What does that mean? "Brand new fragmentation model for all weapons" Need more info on that.

[@fenny1578]

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

[@vincentvoncarnap]

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

[@gregorpajdlhauser2850]

Hello Wags here from Eagle Dynamics!

[@Kathlanus]

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

[@dfed0530]

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

[@MattWagner]

Discussed in the video.

[@Gargoyle11]

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]

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

[@n8ahbl471]

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

[@denialmarble305]

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

[@andrealves2630]

Would be nice to be able to set a default skin for the bombs. I fly primarily the Hornet and Tomcat and it would be nice to not have to set the Navy bomb skin every single time

[@allent555]

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]

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]

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

[@MattWagner]

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

[@allent555]

@@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.

[@macieksoft]

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

[@MattWagner]

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

[@DCS_World_Japan]

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]

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]

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

[@williamk1060]

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]

Yes, you need to press OK to apply changes.

[@Elvinsilvester]

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

[@mplmpl7780]

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

[@Lochaby]

Can you label them and not just give the model numbers? I'll never remember.

[@Benom8]

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

[@MattWagner]

That will be up to Aerges.

[@sloppydog4831]

Airbursts! Yes, finally!

[@lorenleimer3930]

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).

[@JonBloor7]

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]

Yes, this is also implemented for the FC aircraft.

[@JonBloor7]

@@MattWagner Thanks Wags. Have a great day.

[@hak3r4]

"Added Maverick and HMCS Auto-Boresight option. If enabled, you no longer need to manual boresight these. This is an OPTION." - Where can I find this?

[@MattWagner]

forum.dcs.world/topic/209147-viper-mini-updates/?do=findComment&comment=5438636

[@VonHoffnung]

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

[@Ostach14]

At 5:16 shouldn't it be height not altitude? I'm nitpicking but it's a bit confusing

[@ghostdog688]

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

[@theincognitoburrito6445]

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.

[@18skaterboy18]

A step in the right direction

[@TheDM3002XTuber]

The part about the laser code isn't clear (at least for me). Is it now only possible to set them on the ground? So changing the laser code on the store page doesn't do a thing? (FA-18C)

[@MattWagner]

You cannot change the laser PRF code that the bomb seeker is looking for while in the cockpit, that must be done on the ground. In the air, you are only changing the loser PRF code that the TGP will designate or look for.

[@TheDM3002XTuber]

@@MattWagner Hey Matt tnx for the clarification. Will the input method on the stores page be removed? (I don't know if it's there on a real hornet)

[@MattWagner]

@@TheDM3002XTuber No, nor should it be. You must make sure the SMS fuze data matches the actual fuze settings on the weapon to ensure proper weapon delivery and indications.

[@janezsabo4487]

hi . where can I find any detailed documentation for this ? thnx

[@dencuze]

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?

[@gundamator4709]

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

[@trigger5520]

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

[@MattWagner]

The core DCS engines is continually updated.

[@RTSchramm]

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]

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.

[@nminty7485]

Awesome work

[@Krendor123]

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?