Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30

Thread: Air to Surface Weapon Delivery Methods

  1. #11
    Senior Member Baxter's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,785
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    669
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    463
    Thanked in
    286 Posts
    The bomb triangle is always the same

  2. #12
    Member JayPee's Avatar
    Netherlands
       Netherlands
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    490
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    144
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Air to Surface Weapon Delivery Methods

    How about PGMs, what sort of delivery types are generally chosen and what determines this choice? Because I don't know any better I'd say a MAT because the weapon itself does the guidance and therefore it does not need to be aimed like a dumb bomb does.. But maybe you do need to manipulate the delivery to achieve the desired impact angle/speed, especially for laser guided Paveways as they can't be programmed to fly sophisticated paths like a JDAM as far as I know.
    Last edited by JayPee; 19Oct14 at 23:31.

  3. #13
    Mavericks & PGMs are a whole different bag, but they don't have delivery methods per se. Although you can use some of the above techniques for some PGMs, HADB with LGBs being an example.

  4. #14
    Member JayPee's Avatar
    Netherlands
       Netherlands
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    490
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    144
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Air to Surface Weapon Delivery Methods

    To continue with your example, why would I want to drop an LGB using an HADB? Just curious..

    Also, back to dumb bombing, I notice for training purposes there are scores for computed deliveries and manual deliveries whereas a smaller inaccuracy is allowed using the former method. Since CCIP and CCRP are continuously computed I guess they are considered a computed delivery. What would then be a manual delivery? A delivery without the use of any the A-10C's aiming solutions? And what purpose does it serve, training to execute the delivery as accurately as possible?
    Last edited by JayPee; 19Oct14 at 23:41.

  5. #15
    GOMER 2 Noodle's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,573

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    606
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,946
    Thanked in
    682 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by JayPee View Post
    To continue with your example, why would I want to drop an LGB using an HADB? Just curious..
    LGBs are frequently employed from MAT/LAT deliveries because they provide an opportunity to perform a "dip check": with the nose below the horizon, use the HUD to visually verify that the TD Box/TISL Spider is in the target area. They also keep the aircraft out of the small arms/automatic weapons (SA/AW) weapon engagement zone (WEZ), generally avoids the heart of the MANPADS WEZ, and allows maximum standoff.

    However, there are times when you need to ensure that a weapon that fails to acquire the spot, or otherwise fails to guide doesn't go long and endanger friendlies or non-combatants. Or perhaps the tactical situation requires a high impact angle, or increased impact velocity. In these situations, a HADB delivery might be appropriate.

    Also, back to dumb bombing, I notice for training purposes there are scores for computed deliveries and manual deliveries whereas a smaller inaccuracy is using the former method. Since CCIP and CCRP are continuously computed I guess they are considered a computed delivery. What would then be a manual delivery? A delivery without the use of any the A-10C's aiming solutions? And what purpose does it serve, training to execute the delivery as accurately as possible?
    Yes, CCIP/CCRP are, by definition, computed deliveries. Manual deliveries are made using only the depressible pipper in HARS mode, or in an emergency using the standby pipper.

    The purpose is to be able to accurately employ ordnance in combat even when aircraft systems are in a degraded or reversionary mode. When you show up in the CAS stack during a TIC, you need to be able to put ordinance on target. Period.

    Also, it exposes errors and bad habit patterns. It requires precise airmanship, and reinforces the fundamentals of air-ground weapons delivery: cockpit references, visual acquisition of GEOREFs, setting roll-in and track references, airspeed and attitude control, abort cues, etc...

    The computed solution is fantastic and should be exploited at every opportunity, however, when the chips are down, you need to be able to do it without the gucci toys.
    Last edited by Noodle; 20Oct14 at 03:31.

  6. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Noodle For This Useful Post:

    Baxter (04Nov14), JayPee (20Oct14), Ski (20Oct14), Snoopy (20Oct14)

  7. #16
    Member JayPee's Avatar
    Netherlands
       Netherlands
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    490
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    144
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    60 Posts
    Nice info!

    I thought as much, at least when it comes to practicing proper habits and techniques. However, I thought missions get aborted as soon as an issue arises that prevents more or less flawless execution, like a malfunctioning key system. But I guess situations like TIC overrule this. Probably thousands of pages of which I have no clue exist on policies when and when not to continue to pursue a mission goal.
    Last edited by JayPee; 20Oct14 at 17:23.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to JayPee For This Useful Post:

    Ski (20Oct14)

  9. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by JayPee View Post
    However, I thought missions get aborted as soon as an issue arises that prevents more or less flawless execution, like a malfunctioning key system. But I guess situations like TIC overrule this.
    The usual, unhelpful, answer of "it depends" applies here. If you're flying an air interdiction sortie then you'd almost certainly abort for any fault that had any impact on effectiveness of primary aircraft or mission systems. If you were flying a CAS sortie in support of a TiC then you'd proceed with more serious faults provided they didn't endanger the aircraft itself, so mission systems faults would likely be accepted but aircraft systems less likely. And of course even then it would depend if another aircraft was available to continue supporting the TiC or not, if there were alternative supporting aircraft available then you'd again be more inclined to press.

    Having the responsibility of making those kind of decisions are why military pilots get paid so much.

  10. #18
    Member JayPee's Avatar
    Netherlands
       Netherlands
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    490
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    144
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    60 Posts
    They don't in The Netherlands, at least not compared to the civilian ones that got a job at a decent airline prior to 2005.

    Back on topic: thanks for the explanation.

  11. #19
    Member Dojo's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,246

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,890
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,671
    Thanked in
    800 Posts
    Eddie, in the HADB, I noticed you're chopping the engines in the turning dive (I don't hear that in any of the others). Are you also applying any brakes? Trying to work on the technique!

  12. #20
    NEVER use the brakes when in combat.

    The ROT is full throttle upto 30 degree dive, mid from 30 to 45, idle from 45 to 60.

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Eddie For This Useful Post:

    Dojo (04Nov14), IronHog (06Jan15), Reaper (04Nov14)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  


Like our website?

You can help us by donating to cover our costs.

Many sincere thanks!


Search

Follow us

Twitter Twitter youtube iTunes Subscribe to our Podcast