imported_Wildman

Of course I have less than 100000000 posts, as wit and panache are my trademarks (along with this board being off limits at my last base), unlike the verbal garbage spewed by the Pool at large. I {gag} have to agree with Joe. Aussie males are as interchangable and forgetable as snowflakes crushed beneath my boots, but the fine Aussie lasses are something we all can make allowances for. If your over here Stuka, I'll need the details on how you jumped over the wall in Southern California so that I can direct the Vigilante, I'm mean citizen patrol, in your direction.

Oops, my bad! </font>

And do I blame YOU for inability to place parenthesis properly, a KEY component to understanding let alone Humour(see above)? I do NOT ... well ... technically I suppose I just DID but I didn't before that. Anyone can make a mistake young Wildman ... after all ... I took YOU to Squire. Joe </font>

Joe, Joe, Joe, Some mistakes are of course allowable and even recoverable, I mean really do we mock you for forcing bauhaus to his knees? No, to each his own we say, but to desicrate one of the fundamental tenets of humour (spelled so for German Boy of the MBT calls into question your very ability to taunt like you had a set. I mean really, to misquote the paragons of virtuous humour, Monty Python. I really think that the Gnome should take you into the woodshed and beat you with a 2x4 for our amusement. Not even a serf has so misquoted the masters....for shame!

Poor, poor Justicar I had you the perfect setup and your innate ability to make hash of the simple rises to the forefront once again.

Please Lars who are you kidding. Your in Minnesota and have no contact with females. Just lumberjacks in women's clothes...you ninny.

Coordination is definitely a problem. I know every Marine battalion headquarters and higher has an Air Officer in their COC to manage all air traffic. From talking to a Marine who assisted the AirO I understand that we usually have very good coordination with Marine CAS, but we have had problems properly utilizing AF flights because of our two different ways of doing things. Sounds to me like there needs to be more cross training and standardization between all 4 branches. </font>

Sgt, Joch. Op Anaconda is actually an example that is used for the LACK of joint cooperation in my PME. Admittily, AF bias it revealed from an AF perceptive that there was little to no coordination between Army and AF/Navy for air support....otherwise a whole ass-ton of On-call CAS could have been scheduled and wasn't

The AEF battlecenter is here at Mountain Home, I'll have to see if that Lt Col still works here. Interesting link, Steve. More of the complete stupidity of the aquisition process if nothing else. Sounds like that whole RPG defense problem that is going on between Rathyeon and the Israeli system.

Assuming that we are talking about a "Danger Close" situation, the JTAC will be giving a 9-line to the pilot. I'll see if I can dig one up. Basically it tells. 1. Friendly location including orientation 2. Enemey location 3. Threats 4. Targets locations Often the JTAC are using the designators to find a Lat/Long of the target which is passed to the pilot. The Targeting Pod can be slaved to those coords to provide the inital start point, or placed into the JDAM for immediate processing of the target. I haven't seen the game so I'm not quite sure just how much of the process your modeling, but I would guess that some LOS at some time in the process is required/highly desireable. Heck for BDA if no other reason. Here are some things I've found that might be useful. http://sill-www.army.mil/FAMAG/go_to_war_primer/Go-to-War%20Primer_files/TwoJCASArticles.pdf http://www.ustacticalsupply.com/riteinrain.shtml (click on the 9-line CAS...heck you can order it from here) Some Marine training stuff http://www.tecom.usmc.mil/g3/TACP/TACP_T%26R_Proposed_060301.doc an actual 9-line http://www.tecom.usmc.mil/g3/TACP/TACP_T%26R_Proposed_060301.doc another http://riteintherain.safeserver.com/pdf%20downloads/902LL.pdf last and least is the Joint pub on CAS http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/dod/doctrine/jp3_09_3.pdf

Steve, Only some limp-wristed, liberal, computer geek from Maine would confuse my commanding presense as a mere crew chief. I am a powerpoint master and don't you forget it. As for full-scale conflict, all I can tell you is my formor job in USFK 2000# JDAM were the weapons of choice. Often due to weather concerns I would think. As for the current weapon in vogue, I really don't know. Depends on the threat enviroment and the weather I would guess. I can tell you that from your (a programmers) point of view it should be transparent. The reason for that is the new "Effects based Planning", in other words....who cares if it is LGB or JDAM, its the same bomb body and there for the same effect. The CEP of both is less that 3m so they will both hit and kill the target...the deliver method is immaterial at the grunt's view of the fight.

Get the guy that did "The Annoying Thing" he would fun to have.

Aircraft/Munitions Maintenance Officer, currently at the 366th Fighter Wing at Mountain Home.

</font>

That is true for Laser designation from aircraft or JTAC, but most of the CAS done right now is not against vehicles but against buildings and static emplacements. the JTAC gives the 9-line with GPS coords and the JDAMs come in. None of this requires eyes on target or LOS. Also, don't forget to model 20mm and 30mm aircraft strafing. Apperently that is rapidly becoming the most popular form of aircraft support in CENTCOM...at least that is what we are training for.

Cool, just as a guy that provides all that airpower and seeing the amount of "TNT Chucking" we do in support of Army green I want to see my efforts modelled in the game. I want my Small Diameter Bomb!!! Speaking of accuracy, how are you modelling that in the game with CEPs below the publicly acknowledged 10meters for JDAM and much smaller for LGBs?

Steve, Sorry if I missed an answer. Will the total number of aircraft strikes be solely the province of the scenario builder? If so, what kind of aircraft response times are build in. Is it arrival times by the scenario designer like CMx1 or request time dependent like the current arty strikes. Given that it might time 10-20 mintues from request of aircraft to bombs on target, will that fit into the current time frame your looking at for battle length?

</font>

"Deconfliction". This is the reason most areas are going to kill boxes if possible. They then color code them to show the level of control needed and who is shooting in them. On a side note, given the level of air involvement what will be the frequency of Blue air in scenarios? While I understand that will be up to the scenario designer, I'm not quite sure most people have an understanding on just how much airpower is available...especially if you assume that the US has complete Air Superiority like we currently enjoy. Example from CENTCOM: there are 4 6hour vuls (vulnerable times) that are generally further broken down into 2-3 hour increaments. So...B-1 (12 JDAMs) cover two 3 hour blocks in the day, F-15E (2 GBU-12, 2 GBU-38, 4 SDB) cover 4 more 3 hour Vuls and F-16s (2 GBU-31 or 4 GBU-38) cover the rest. In other words, there should NEVER be a time when airpower is not available for use, and this on ON-CALL CAS, not counting CAS or interdiction support independent of those ON-CALL CAS sorties. Heck a perfectly valid scenario would be to have the Syrians in a convoy being hammered by a 2 ship of F-16s at night without any other Blue assets because the Vipers are pulling interdiction duties 150 miles past the FLOT.

No he was talking about the Canadians that were just hit in recent weeks. No details out in the airwaves yet.

Just remember that the USAF/USN/USMC are dropping bombs from anything over 12,000 ft or so to ensure they are outside the MANPAD envelope. A-10s are a little different and even the fast movers are using the gun alot more, but in general aircraft are most definately NOT coming below that magic line in the sky. So they are dropping a weapon from 2-3 miles away at 12,000 ft up (more like 20,000 for a JDAM). You'll never see the shadow and probably never even hear them until the bomb hits. Heck the BUFFs are dropping JDAMs from even higher up than that.

Steve, Part of the problem in RT developing into a "clickfest" is the need to micromanage units down to the squad level. Is there any move to send orders to a Platoon leader to: 1. Move to a location 2. Set up defensive locations against a designated compass line. So I would click the platoon leader, move to platoon orders and click move on the location I wanted. I would then click the waypoint and hit defend with an arc that I wanted them to defend in. The AI would then move the platoon and place them into a good position without my having to do this for every squad and attached MG, TOW, etc out there. If something like that existed then it would make RT much easier to handle and more realistic. Is this what your version of RT will be, or something else?

I believe that is what joint doctrine calls "getting inside his decision cycle." The current endstate for command and control

Heck ya, they are easy to identify and hit!

Steve, So by "CMBO size" your talking a map size of 2.4km or so on each side as a max?