| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Griffin
UNITED KINGDOM
5068 Posts
Status: offline |
 Posted - 17 May 2015 : 22:30:46
|
Flight leads in this Sunday's official campaign mission, "Strong DPRK 8" are requested to post a debrief of their flights actions, including any lessons learned or that should be learned by others.
Please put the following information at the top of your post:
Flight Role: (SEAD, ESCORT, STRIKE, Etc..)
Callsign11: "Pilot's name" AA=X AG=X RTB,MIA/KIA,EJT
Callsign12: "Pilot's name" AA=X AG=X RTB,MIA/KIA,EJT
Callsign13: "Pilot's name" AA=X AG=X RTB,MIA/KIA,EJT
Callsign14: "Pilot's name" AA=X AG=X RTB,MIA/KIA,EJT
Mission Outcome: MS/PS/MF
|
|
|
Sharpe
UNITED KINGDOM
638 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 18 May 2015 : 10:09:19
|
Flight Role: (SEAD ESCORT)
Lobo11: "Sharpe" AA=0 AG=0 RTB
Lobo12: "Mango" AA=0 AG=0 RTB
Lobo13: "Crowebar" AA=0 AG=0 RTB
Lobo14: "Sabre" AA=0 AG=0 KIA
Mission Outcome: MS (Some fences may have been harmed in the making of this outcome)
Pretty routine flight from my perspective. Ingress was uneventful. From the IP to target the air picture was clear right up until the last phase, but Panther 2 was on top of it and there were no SAM’s evident so I pushed the strike flight on. Strike flight went in and out with no problem and I launched a couple of slammers just to ensure that the local bandits had something to think about while the strike flight did its thing.
Egress was dominated by the ongoing engagement between Panther 2 and the red air assets. I positioned my flight, then the strike flight to support Panther 2 if required, but Panther 2 quickly mopped up and we recovered at the IP and went home.
Most dangerous part of the flight was probably the landing which saw 1 Green flight aircraft destroyed and another damaged. Think some time offline practicing cross wind landings is in order Green flight!
Good comms from my flight and the package, good package discipline, and good formation flying from my lot.
I would suggest that going forwards we try to exploit our new found aerial freedom by ensuring local airbases are out of action. Then, we have the choice of using one of the two established routes into Korea to destroy additional runways and further reduce the amount of red in the air picture. If not we could take our chances over the FLOT and try some CAS and bridge blowing – but I think we need to hit a couple more airbases before we could/should try this.
-Sharpe
 |
 |
|
|
Griffin
UNITED KINGDOM
5068 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 18 May 2015 : 13:04:53
|
Scores please Sharpe.
|
|
|
|
Ironman
UNITED KINGDOM
604 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 18 May 2015 : 17:06:45
|
Fury 1 OCA
Fury 1:1 Ironman 0-0 RTB
Fury 1:2 Poppy 0-2 RTB
Fury 1:3 ZipGun 0-1 RTB
Out going un eventful and held position and speed as directed by PC. Once called into attack we went 2mile trail and got all bombs off in one pass just inside 10 mile range (A25) then right turn egress to Stp 3. All bombs were on target BUT a learning point for future OCA missions using GBU31/3 you need two to destroy a previously undamaged section of runway.
Half way to egress Stp 3 we were called to delouse which we did but the REDS knew we had ZipGn with us so they flew straight into the missiles of Black flight and commit suicide rather than face him ;0).
RTB uneventful landings were testing but we got all our jets back to the shop.
Good flight - good coms - good result.
I haven't see the ACMI yet but I thought Black flight were engaged whilst still feet wet? not sure of their distance off shore when first engaged? might need to factor that into future flights?
 |
|
|
|
Sharpe
UNITED KINGDOM
638 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 18 May 2015 : 22:18:06
|
Ironman. It's a good point, I have been pondering it myself. I think (similar to what Zipgun has suggested) there are a series of triggers.
1) A distance trigger (I think this is between 30 amd 40nm).
2) A 'feeling threatend' trigger that basically computes your flight path vs the threats flight path. If they converge then the bandit 'goes hot'. Based on Zipguns experience, keeping the bandit on your 10/2 o clock seems to keep them passive.
3) DNE zone/joker. I suspect that (much like us) there is possibly a limit to how far beyond a certain point they can go in order to initiate an engagement.
4) An actively threatend logic whereby if you actively target an enemy aircraft it becomes active and attacks you.
I can't say what (if any) of these trigger are present. Nor can I say if they accumulate, individually action a response or if certain combinations result in a response.
I plan to do some testing of this on Thursday but I would ask ALL PILOTS - do we really want to know? Does it spoil some of the fun and act as a kind of exploit?
-Sharpe
|
|
|
|
Floyd
Germany
1357 Posts
Status: offline |
Posted - 19 May 2015 : 09:58:34
|
Panther2 Escort / MS
Panther2:1 Floyd 4-0 RTB
Panther2:2 Elmo 2-0 RTB
Panther2:3 Veiland 2-0 RTB
Panther2:4 AI 0-0 RTB
Being the only escort, i've decided to keep the AI this time,
allowing to split as elements.
The ingress was uneventful, albeit delayed due to many AI flights
on taxi ways and launching. Getting close to target air field we've
attacked landing aircraft and cleared the way for the strike flight.
While covering the egress of strike and SEAD we had to attack a 4-
and two 2-ships - all were shot down w/o any losses to our package.
We've planned to a 15 mile separation between elements, but that
became a waggon wheel while defending against the bandits.
|
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
| 185th VFS |
© 2000-2018 185th VFS |
|
|
|
Sunday 17th May 2015 - Strong DPRK 8
