This is TD's own explanation in a thread/discussion on this forum, not mine, you need to read the full history of this thread and not come in with the wrong information.

From the v4.10 read me

Bomb Fusing
Real life bombs have generally an electrical or mechanical time fuse to avoid premature explosion in case of mishap
(e.g. a bomb detaching from the aircraft while still on the runway, or a bomb hitting the bomb rack due to turbulence).
This has been implemented in IL-2, so that bombs now have a 2 seconds time fusing.
If the bomb hits the target before that time,the fuse does not activate and the bomb does not explode.
This means that in level flight a bomb must be dropped from a minimum altitude of about 25 meters to explode.
If the bomb is dropped in a dive the altitude must be proportionally greater.
This also applies to skip bombing: the bomb must be dropped from at least 25m and must not hit the ship before 2
seconds.

This is a wrong description of how the bombs work as now if they hit any scenery before 2 secs they disarm, not just the target.




.

If TD says this is the only reason, then I must admit, they introduced it for a wrong reason.

The original author who made this model, had nothing to do with that, but with realistic naval battles, and a more realistic air to ground effectiveness.
Don't forget that this addition is not only a 2 second fuse; it is also rockets and bombs dispersion and realistic torpedo release profiles.

I will finish my involvement in this discussion by quoting what I previously said, which I think would be a good solution:

And as I have stated the simpler solution would be to arm the bombs on their velocity when dropped so the arming takes place via the vane and not through the casings under 2 sec scenery contact.

An example of vane arming.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/2417418.pdf





.

so would that mean a higher velocity drop = shorter arming time?

as it is, what kind of altitudes do you need to release at say 5-600kph in a 45 degree dive?

one of the most amusing and tricky things to do when vulching - skipping ab500-2000 along a runway with bandits on it...

The last thing I want is bomb fusing tied to realistic gunnery, or anything else for that matter.

This is only about bomb fusing.

I'm fine with torpedos as they are now, and the rockets certainly are more realistic as well. My only issue is the bomb fusing.

Why do some people want to make this an all or nothing thing?

Yes, this is true for bomb fuzes produced before the 1960s. After the 60s, it
became more common to have a governor or electronics to prevent release
speed influencing the time to arm.

In IL2, this is not the case. The bomb acts as if you where going at 200knots.
with a 850ft fuze. Therefore it will take longer to arm in some circumstances
and shorter to arm in others. However, because of the variations in the arm
distance of different fuzes, IL2's 2 second arm time doesn't start to become
unrealistic until you get above 300knots (350mph / 550kph).


In reality: with a typical fuze, you would need between 500 and 550ft.

The chart below shows the air travel a bomb makes in a 45degree dive at
various speeds. You can see the air travel needed for different fuzes in my
previous (long) post.
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/2981/atta.jpg

In IL2, you should need about 900ft at 500kph.
That's about the same as a fuze with a 1300ft air travel to arm fuze. That's
quite a typical value for a fuze, so not unrealistic.

You will need about 1,100 at 600kph, the equivalent of a bomb with a ~1500ft
ATtA fuze. They existed, but I don't think that that represents a typical American fuze.

there'll never be a way of stopping idiots completely... its just a shame they spoil it for everybody else.


anyways... http://www.303rdbg.com/bombs.html

Well it is a bugger that in the well meant effort to curb idiots, everyones game has been hijacked if you use 4.10 and you have to fly as certain people have decided for everyone else.
I thought those times have gone since the fall of the iron curtain.
The sad thing though is that the idiots will find new ways to foul up game play for others. Must we then recon with more dictated ways of using our bought game?

pointless remark,..really..

hrm... everyone's?
hmm certain people have decided?.. u mean like Oleg have decided how we should fly?
Or do u mean that your solution how things should be ergo decide how people have to fly?
------------------

Honestly, I appreciate a good debate in benefit for realism and to make things as correct as possible within the sim's limitations and I am sure TD, / Oleg et al appreciate a GOOD CONSTRUCTIVE input , but I suggest that exaggerations are limited and to stop blow things out of proportion, stop the namecallings and stop building some kind of theory of conspiracy. All these things are 1) contraproductive which in no way benefit this sim nor it's development... 2)embarressing for the community... and 3) silly... yes really...plain silly.


So guys.. how about it.. stick to the topic.. stay professional and be open for eachother's views and opinions?
It's a human characterisitic to stop listening to good arguments when it is delivered with spite, arrogance and insults.

You see Wutz, this is why you can't have nice things. :rolleyes: He's only trying to be helpful.