Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Two-Ship Medium Altitude Tactics: Wedge/Bombs

  1. #11
    GOMER 2 Noodle's Avatar
    United States
       United States
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,572

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    606
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,947
    Thanked in
    682 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by ZeroMass View Post
    Hey Noodle, Snooze and I decided to practice the Wedge/Bombs attack yesterday. I think in the end we did pretty good for our first try, but if you don't mind, could you give us some feedback? . Only if you have the time!

    Tacview is attached and video from my view (2) is here: http://www.twitch.tv/zero_mass/b/609344767 (available for two weeks.
    Okay, so there were some notable things in the preflight and admin portions of the flight, but I'll limit my comments to the tactical portion of the flight, specifically the wedge/bombs deliveries. Also, if we were on TS in a debriefing room, before each smack in the head with my pointer, I'd give you a compliment to soften the blow. Since I'm just banging away on the keyboard, however, I'll skip the pleasantries and give it to you straight. :P

    First and foremost, overall, I'd say you guys demonstrated that with just a little bit of range time, you can effectively employ this tactic to ensure flight path deconfliction, generate offset attack headings while maintaining visual lookout, achieve tactical surprise, and egress the target while quickly regaining tactical formation and mutual support. That's a win as far as I'm concerned.

    However...

    It appears as though FL never actually flew the pattern he passed in the Fighter-to-Fighter (Wedge/Bombs, In North, Off East). Instead, the base leg of each run seemed to be either a continuous arcing turn, or a check turn to something other than a 90 degree base position. The result was that most of FL's attacks were well off the intended attack heading (180).

    An essential element to getting the geometry correct is for lead to adjust his crosswind and base legs of the box pattern to arrive at the proper base/roll-in position. The arcing base legs make it very difficult for the WM to fly Wedge formation; since he's on the outside of the turn, he's inevitably going to fall behind and stagnate near FL's six o'clock. With the WM so far aft, it's difficult for him to generate sufficient Heading Crossing Angle when he checks to FL's roll-in point. It looks like the attacks at 00:56, 1:06 and 1:14 of the ACMI file had pretty good geometry.

    Also, for the most part, the SEM and egress worked pretty well, except that those cross-turns were cringe-worthy. The WM should ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS keep lead in sight so he can deconflict flightpaths per the contract. The WM went belly-up to the FL and flew an awesome lead-turn that works great for BFM, but not for tactical formation. The WM should fly outside and above FL's flightpath.

    Other than that, it's a good effort, and not bad at all for a first attempt.

    So to recap, FL should fly a straight path on a 270 heading to his roll-in point. WM then checks to FL's roll-in point, and drives to his own roll-in point. WM rolls-in when he sees FL SEM, or when FL calls "OFF". After that, you seem to have it figured out.
    Last edited by Noodle; 12Jan15 at 08:27.

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Noodle For This Useful Post:

    Dojo (10Feb16), Griffin (12Jan15), ZeroMass (12Jan15)

  3. #12
    Senior Member PFunk's Avatar
    Canada
       Canada
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    707
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    112
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    388
    Thanked in
    217 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Snoopy View Post
    I don't see any harm in explaining what the roles are.
    Without directly quoting the passages from our OIs:

    Shooter: the guy who puts ordnance on the target.

    Cover: The guy who covers and provides mutual support to the other aircraft.

    Suppressor: The guy who either pre-emptively or reactively suppresses defenses that would or are engaging the other aircraft.

    Examples: Pre-emptive suppression would be doing a long range Gun strafe on a body of targets to get them to button up ahead of the other aircraft's attack. Reactive suppression would be engaging AAA which engages the shooter during his attack run. The former is only possible as far as I know with the suppression script running in a DCS mission.

    Decoy: The guy who confuses and distracts defenses or other relevant units to prevent them focusing or engaging the other aircraft. Probably a much more effective option against humans than nigh on perfect AI.


    How you mix and match the above is the essence of tactics and is largely not prescriptive.

    I hope that covers it without giving away too much.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to PFunk For This Useful Post:

    El_Roto (12Jan15), JayPee (12Jan15), Noodle (12Jan15)

  5. #13
    Member JayPee's Avatar
    Netherlands
       Netherlands
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    490
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    144
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    78
    Thanked in
    60 Posts

    Two-Ship Medium Altitude Tactics: Wedge/Bombs

    Thank you for the summary Pfunk.

    Are you talking about a MIST based script?

  6. #14

    Da FAC?


    476vFG GC
    Founding member
    Stuka's Avatar
    Belgium
       Belgium
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    8,419

    Awards Showcase

    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,286
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5,949
    Thanked in
    2,594 Posts
    Actually, like I know it, is that cover is a reactive role, suppressor is a pre-emptive role.

    Providing CAS when you're all out of HUA!

  7. #15
    Senior Member PFunk's Avatar
    Canada
       Canada
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    707
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    112
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    388
    Thanked in
    217 Posts
    I may be misinterpreting it, but this is the line that pointed me to that conclusion.

    4.9.1. Suppression can be an active or preemptive role.
    I characterized it as reactive rather than active and drew my interpretation along that line. I don't know if there's a measurable distinction.

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