Bombs Away!!!

[Anthony]

It's certainly possible to screw up launching guided munitions (it's possible to screw up just about anything), but it's probably going to be a Navigation error, not a Pilot error, or other similar errors (accurately hitting the wrong target, for example).

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

I'd probably treat it as a separate Piloting roll to line up the bomb drop, but with such a large positive TDM (+4 to +6 or more, depending on targeting and flight systems) that it's routine and not rolled unless the pilot is distracted, debilitated, flying by default, etc. I do still wonder if it should require a particular maneuver on the pilot's part (Attack?) to represent flying straight and steady.

I agree with your general position and as to specific maneuvers I'd just call it part of a Long Task.not taking place in combat time. That's where most "Use Skill X" ends up. These really guided munitions are normally used at altides above AAA and in areas sanitized of hostile sircraft and SAMs.

F-16s and A-10s dropping "dumb" cluster boms sometimes face triple AAA and Piloting is importat there. They still ought to get a bonus for habing a computer assisted bombsight that the guys at Midwat didn't have.

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

Ah, I was assuming that the pilot was a PC. If it's a ground operative calling in an air strike, and there isn't significant enemy air or anti-air presence, then the strike will just happen. If there is enemy interference, I might make a QC between the "relative strength" of the two sides, with allied success meaning a bomber can get through, and failure meaning the airspace is too hot.

Right. I get a bit carried away from the original post, that originate this tread. It is simple, and adress a lot of issues that could arise in situations like that.

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Uh, the same way one knows in general if a character is distracted, debilitated, etc? That's covered by a mix of general GURPS rules and GM judgement. Is there any reason you'd need special rules for distraction and debility when piloting?

There is no reason for a special rule. In a routine task, like flying from A to B, in 1,000,000 hours there is 1 incident which could cause fatalities. Statistically it is ludicrous to represent that in GURPS. So, I thought that combat stress might increase this probabilty of incidents. Indeed it increase but by not much. In a decade of air operations in CentCom there is 100+ aircrafts lost in theater by operational causes (failures, pilot errors, etc.)

The bottomline is that I want to represent realistically the chance of something wrong to happen, but it is not possible. Better is to aply GM judgement..

[General Lee]

So, gathering from what was said until now.

1) Apparently, 30-50% of total weight represents explosive weight in that formula for explosives.

2) Actual explosive weight, when available, should be used when calculating damage.

3) Penetration is treated as advertised. There is no a formula to treat different warheads for bombs. For instance, the formula above works with HE warheads, but not with ABF warheads...

4) Guided bombs are treated as homing missiles , and Pilot Skill is not relevant for hit success. As for "dumb" bombs, another story...

Some issues remains, but roughly I judge that we could reach a consensus here.

[panton41]

For what it's worth unguided bombs still see quite a bit of use. In many cases there's either no reason to use a guided bomb (like cluster bombs, though guided versions exist) and specialty designs like the BLU-107 Durandal* which is all but required to be dropped in large numbers. Or the mission parameters make guided weapons unsuitable (like a deep valley with fog that would make both GPS and laser/optical guidance not work right) Also in a fast but protracted war guided munitions run out faster than their unguided warheads so planners will switch back to unguided weapons.

* The Durandal is designed to destroy runways and an aircraft usually carries as many as it can take to the target and they're dropped at regular intervals along the length of the runway in order to maximize damage.


I still wouldn't give an aircraft dropping weapons in combat the "routine task" bonus. Now I'd certainly argue that the pilot gets tons of bonuses from equipment, but it's not quite as simple as "be in the right place at the right time" and there are still fairly strict flight envelopes to be adhered to when dropping any kind of munition, guided or unguided. Especially if the aircraft in question is a single-seat design involved in close air support.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by General Lee

So, gathering from what was said until now.

1) Apparently, 30-50% of total weight represents explosive weight in that formula for explosives.


.

1) does have the caveat that the rule is for conventional High Explosives. Incendiaries, Thermobarics and Fuel Air Explosives use different rules.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by General Lee

There is no reason for a special rule. In a routine task, like flying from A to B, in 1,000,000 hours there is 1 incident which could cause fatalities. Statistically it is ludicrous to represent that in GURPS. So, I thought that combat stress might increase this probabilty of incidents. Indeed it increase but by not much. In a decade of air operations in CentCom there is 100+ aircrafts lost in theater by operational causes (failures, pilot errors, etc.)

The bottomline is that I want to represent realistically the chance of something wrong to happen, but it is not possible. Better is to aply GM judgement..

That could be unpacked a little. Some of those statistical accidents have proximal causes that would be represented directly in GURPS but aren't necessarily available in the statistics (pilot sleep deprived, for instance).

For the rest, the chance of rolling a natural 3 is high enough that GURPS tends to make it too easy, not too hard, for nearly safe things to go badly wrong. Depending on how one adjudicates those failures.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

For the rest, the chance of rolling a natural 3 is high enough that GURPS tends to make it too easy, not too hard, for nearly safe things to go badly wrong. Depending on how one adjudicates those failures.

I think you mean a natural 18 (a natural 3 is really good), but you're right. If you assume a critical failure (or even just a natural 18) is always a disaster, you need to roll very rarely for routine tasks. Even a monthly job roll is problematic.

There are currently about 144,600 airline transport pilots in the US (pilots qualified to sit in an airliner's captain's chair). Assuming even a tenth of those are actually employed as pilots, and a natural 18 on the monthly job roll is a disaster, that should mean an average of 2 airline disasters per day in the US. It gets much, much worse if you require a roll for each take-off or landing, even with big routine bonuses.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by RyanW

There are currently about 144,600 airline transport pilots in the US (pilots qualified to sit in an airliner's captain's chair). Assuming even a tenth of those are actually employed as pilots, and a natural 18 on the monthly job roll is a disaster, that should mean an average of 2 airline disasters per day in the US. It gets much, much worse if you require a roll for each take-off or landing, even with big routine bonuses.

An 18 on a job roll can be a "disaster" without being a plane crash. It could just mean that the pilot is suspended or fined or something. It's a job roll, not a crash roll.

[General Lee]

Originally Posted by ciaran_skye

For what it's worth unguided bombs still see quite a bit of use. In many cases there's either no reason to use a guided bomb (like cluster bombs, though guided versions exist) and specialty designs like the BLU-107 Durandal* which is all but required to be dropped in large numbers. Or the mission parameters make guided weapons unsuitable (like a deep valley with fog that would make both GPS and laser/optical guidance not work right) Also in a fast but protracted war guided munitions run out faster than their unguided warheads so planners will switch back to unguided weapons.

* The Durandal is designed to destroy runways and an aircraft usually carries as many as it can take to the target and they're dropped at regular intervals along the length of the runway in order to maximize damage.


I still wouldn't give an aircraft dropping weapons in combat the "routine task" bonus. Now I'd certainly argue that the pilot gets tons of bonuses from equipment, but it's not quite as simple as "be in the right place at the right time" and there are still fairly strict flight envelopes to be adhered to when dropping any kind of munition, guided or unguided. Especially if the aircraft in question is a single-seat design involved in close air support.

I didn't said that unguided bombs are not used, or that they become unimportant, or operationally irrelevant, only that, for game purposes, we would face more situations using guided bombs than unguided ones. If you are playing a group of soldiers receiving CAS support in a modern setting. Still, unguided bombs are a credible weapon system.

I wouldn't give a rotine task bonus, because as I already said, it's stressfull, etc.

But I said that a Pilot skill is not required to drop a guided weapon, even that some maneuvers should be made for correct delivery, like Dive Toss, CCIP, or CCRP. It's "routine" for a trained pilot, in a threat-less environment. An Artillery (guided) still is required for dropping the bomb.