Tuesday 5th May 2020

Details Of Online Flight Nights
Flyco
Site Admin
Posts: 1909
Joined: 11 Jan 2015, 14:30
Location: York

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Flyco »

There was originally a brief available, which I had planned to deliver at 1930, to put 'the meat on the bones' of the previously published briefs. Unfortunately, last minute changes to the different flights, their tracks and their timings, plus the changes to the Server set-up, and timings before the mission, made all this impossible.

Plan comprehensively, check the plan, brief thoroughly, listen to the brief, answer any relevant questions, and then comply with the brief (in so far as it is possible). That is the only way to make such a diverse group work together. It all comes down to discipline.

The SEAD plan for example, identified the priority targets, with 'Destroy-by times'. The Northern SAM-6, was to be destroyed by Springfield, using HARM, en-route to Maykop (around 0830). The Maykop SAM was to be destroyed by 0838 (again by HARM), and the attacking ac leader (whose TOT at the IP was 0841) was to be advised by Springfield on 129.2. The other SEAD targets were less critical and were the SAM-6 NW of Sochi and any identified Tunguskas.

I do not know what the revised TOT at Maykop was, when the F-16s were replaced by Harriers at the last minute.

There is no point in changing times, aircraft types and number, routes and individuals, and still expecting the plan to work. Unless we install some discipline in the planning, briefing, and execution, complex missions will never work.

I know that I can be an 'old woman', and that as a gentleman of leisure I am not generally constrained by time, but every afternoon, before a Squadron sortie, I go on line and check my headset, SRS, Track-IR, and PC, updating any elements that require it.
Wing Commander Alan Johnson - RAFAir UK
Image
Image Image Image Image

User avatar
john (scooby)
Posts: 1910
Joined: 31 May 2018, 15:40

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by john (scooby) »

Flyco wrote: 07 May 2020, 08:09 There was originally a brief available, which I had planned to deliver at 1930, to put 'the meat on the bones' of the previously published briefs. Unfortunately, last minute changes to the different flights, their tracks and their timings, plus the changes to the Server set-up, and timings before the mission, made all this impossible.

Plan comprehensively, check the plan, brief thoroughly, listen to the brief, answer any relevant questions, and then comply with the brief (in so far as it is possible). That is the only way to make such a diverse group work together. It all comes down to discipline.

The SEAD plan for example, identified the priority targets, with 'Destroy-by times'. The Northern SAM-6, was to be destroyed by Springfield, using HARM, en-route to Maykop (around 0830). The Maykop SAM was to be destroyed by 0838 (again by HARM), and the attacking ac leader (whose TOT at the IP was 0841) was to be advised by Springfield on 129.2. The other SEAD targets were less critical and were the SAM-6 NW of Sochi and any identified Tunguskas.

I do not know what the revised TOT at Maykop was, when the F-16s were replaced by Harriers at the last minute.

There is no point in changing times, aircraft types and number, routes and individuals, and still expecting the plan to work. Unless we install some discipline in the planning, briefing, and execution, complex missions will never work.

I know that I can be an 'old woman', and that as a gentleman of leisure I am not generally constrained by time, but every afternoon, before a Squadron sortie, I go on line and check my headset, SRS, Track-IR, and PC, updating any elements that require it.

I dont think its a mission planners or breifing issue alan, imo its simply a lack of procedure to deconflict airspace when reds are around, too many blues going aftet the same targets with no coordination between the groups, its asking for trouble every time
Sqn Ldr (Scooby) Burton RAF Air UK
XI(F) Sqn 2ic
Image Image
Image
Image
Image

Flyco
Site Admin
Posts: 1909
Joined: 11 Jan 2015, 14:30
Location: York

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Flyco »

It still comes down to briefing, communication, control and discipline. Including R/T discipline.

AWACs will help, but don't forget that, unlike in the real world, not all AWACs messages on a specific frequency are heard by all on that frequency.
Wing Commander Alan Johnson - RAFAir UK
Image
Image Image Image Image

Flyco
Site Admin
Posts: 1909
Joined: 11 Jan 2015, 14:30
Location: York

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Flyco »

I will re-re-re-do Northern Clout, and produce detailed briefs for each flight. Of course these will only work if pilots read them. And they will become invalid if any changes to the mission are made without reviewing and revising all the briefs (5 or 6 of them). So if anyone wants anything changing - Spitfires instead of Harriers, Mig-29s instead of A-10Cs, etc, let me know early!

To try and keep Blue forces from self-annihilation, I will also include details of the Bulls settings. Given the position of the default Bulls-Eye, the use of distances from it should give discrete range bands for aircraft to operate within. Note that these cannot replace common sense and the use of aircraft on-board sensors, coupled with good control by flight leaders.

Just a thought, are there any current ac that do not display Bulls-Eye information?
Wing Commander Alan Johnson - RAFAir UK
Image
Image Image Image Image

Mutley

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Mutley »

again not saying a bloody word

User avatar
john (scooby)
Posts: 1910
Joined: 31 May 2018, 15:40

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by john (scooby) »

Flyco wrote: 07 May 2020, 10:29 I will re-re-re-do Northern Clout, and produce detailed briefs for each flight. Of course these will only work if pilots read them. And they will become invalid if any changes to the mission are made without reviewing and revising all the briefs (5 or 6 of them). So if anyone wants anything changing - Spitfires instead of Harriers, Mig-29s instead of A-10Cs, etc, let me know early!

To try and keep Blue forces from self-annihilation, I will also include details of the Bulls settings. Given the position of the default Bulls-Eye, the use of distances from it should give discrete range bands for aircraft to operate within. Note that these cannot replace common sense and the use of aircraft on-board sensors, coupled with good control by flight leaders.

Just a thought, are there any current ac that do not display Bulls-Eye information?
F14s don't Alan. Our onbaord sa isn't great tbh.
How about whoever leading the cap fighters has is in charge of that airspace. Ie if Enfield see bandits around the cap zone they get on 251 and either ask uzis permission or at least inform us of their intention to prosecute redair and or at least tell us they're in the area. That way uzi can deconflict the airspace of blue fighters or missiles until Enfield have either been shot down or bugged out.
Our cap point would need to be be in between the red airbase and the hogs though because stern chasing mig29s that are between us and the a10s is sketchy at best
Sqn Ldr (Scooby) Burton RAF Air UK
XI(F) Sqn 2ic
Image Image
Image
Image
Image

Mutley

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Mutley »

john (scooby) wrote: 07 May 2020, 14:40
Flyco wrote: 07 May 2020, 10:29 I will re-re-re-do Northern Clout, and produce detailed briefs for each flight. Of course these will only work if pilots read them. And they will become invalid if any changes to the mission are made without reviewing and revising all the briefs (5 or 6 of them). So if anyone wants anything changing - Spitfires instead of Harriers, Mig-29s instead of A-10Cs, etc, let me know early!

To try and keep Blue forces from self-annihilation, I will also include details of the Bulls settings. Given the position of the default Bulls-Eye, the use of distances from it should give discrete range bands for aircraft to operate within. Note that these cannot replace common sense and the use of aircraft on-board sensors, coupled with good control by flight leaders.

Just a thought, are there any current ac that do not display Bulls-Eye information?
F14s don't Alan. Our onbaord sa isn't great tbh.
How about whoever leading the cap fighters has is in charge of that airspace. Ie if Enfield see bandits around the cap zone they get on 251 and either ask uzis permission or at least inform us of their intention to prosecute redair and or at least tell us they're in the area. That way uzi can deconflict the airspace of blue fighters or missiles until Enfield have either been shot down or bugged out.
Our cap point would need to be be in between the red airbase and the hogs though because stern chasing mig29s that are between us and the a10s is sketchy at best
Now i do like that Scooby. in fact everyone should know that comapared to other aircraft our beloved F 14 has very very little tech, SA pages or anything else when compared to Say a hornet or a F16 , as i said in Tuesday nights admin meeting we can only have 3 Wps and we dont have many of the other systems taken for granted as standard in the other airframs. no moving maps no saddle no idea where anyone is, the only thing we have is a rader that loves migs and a wep system that can knock em down from 60 to 80 Miles away. and thats bugged as the missiles seem to want to kill any aircraft weather locked or otherwise. And yes i broke my silence. lol. ive siad it many times to my chaps the 14 has one job that it does very well , to kill migs Period

User avatar
john (scooby)
Posts: 1910
Joined: 31 May 2018, 15:40

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by john (scooby) »

We can do bombing as well including lgbs but yeh our sa is very limited relative to pretty much everything else rafair flies. We can do it but we all need to coordinate better.
Sqn Ldr (Scooby) Burton RAF Air UK
XI(F) Sqn 2ic
Image Image
Image
Image
Image

Mutley

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Mutley »

john (scooby) wrote: 07 May 2020, 15:55 We can do bombing as well including lgbs but yeh our sa is very limited relative to pretty much everything else rafair flies. We can do it but we all need to coordinate better.
what you mean to say is the migs are ours by all means come and have a bash if you want but we will finish them for you .

User avatar
Father Cool
Posts: 1446
Joined: 24 Oct 2019, 10:01
Location: Chesterfield
Contact:

Re: Tuesday 5th May 2020

Post by Father Cool »

SA isn't as bad in he F14 as it seems. Since myself shane and Shaggy have been exploring ways to better use the system we have there are things we can do that don't present themselves when first flying the aircraft.

As for bullseye position data we do have that info and we can use it to set up a nav grid which would be great for cordinating CAP zones etc based on a fixed bullseye. We also only have 3 waypoints that migrate from the mission editor however if we are provided coordinates before hand and time in the schedule for takeoff we can program them ourselves either on the ground or in flight (preferably on the ground) and add them to other selectable waypoints in the pit. With TWS auto combined with good IFF we also have a powerful radar tool to track our targets and pick out friendlys.

The issue that blue aircraft may face with us if they are operating in our CAP zone is the AWG 9 in TWS mode. Our preferred mode of operation with the AIM 54. We can scan and track targets completely passively hence not presenting RWR data to aircraft on our radar. In that respect we are cloaked and thats when we need to use our comms to inform our colleagues in other squadrons and give them a heads up that we are operating in the same area to avoid any confusion.
Cavan Millward callsign: 'FC' - RAF Air UK
CAW & CO IX(B) Squadron
Image
ImageImage

Post Reply

Return to “Squadron Flights”