Libya at Dawn
-
Part 2
creating the sortie:
This was i think one of the hardest part of creating a TE, the purposes of the mission and why attacking that particular target. I am going to try to explain the choice i made for the first TE sortie, i haven’t decided if for each mission i will create a new TE or if i will make it into a mini campaign lasting for 20 days, and the player can carry on from where he left,tat option is the one that seduces me the most.
Inspiring myself from all the various books i did read i did understand that the first thing you actually want is being able to have air supremacy and that goes by eliminating the threat that is passive and active. I call a passive threat ( i am developing my own language here, sorry.) search radars and other means of tracking airplanes. From the researches i made and based on my own knowledge, i also know that it is not because something hasn’t been threatening you that it is not a threat. For example on airports and control centers for ATC, you have secondary surveillance radars and primary surveillance radars, and depending on the country you also have ADS-B. In wartime you are going to turn off your transponder on your airplane, but still due to human error and it did happen you can be tracked by civilian software if you forgot to flip a switch. Also any kind of radar or detection system poses a threat and also by destroying it you disrupt what is going on on the red side. I took a look at the Libyan map we have in EMF, and i saw that there was an airfield and close to that airfield there was an early warning and search radar. I looked at how his scan area was covering the coast and inland, i also saw that if you destroy the radar at the station, there is going to be a gap, there is a huge area with no overlap from other search radars. It would punch a hole into the early detection capacity of the enemy and allow NATO planes to approach from there undetected, well at least it would help. From what i have read and understood, a package doesn’t have to target the same target, you can have a package being composed of flights attacking different targets in the same area. I think that this is especially true when you have airplanes that are multi-role. The early warning and airfield being close-by, i did build a package that was going to have one flight targeting the early warning radar and another targeting infrastructures at the airport. In the package i did add a SEAD flight which will be lurking around the area and search for anything emitting and targeting NATO planes. Also, i added an ECM flight.
Composition of my first package and why those planes and the support planes and other assets involved
If there is no support in the form of AWACS, Tankers, J-STARS, ECM flights, there is no strike package. At least this is how i like to have it, sometimes all the assets are not available but you have some kind of support helping you get into the target area and come out. my first question was where do i place those support squadrons ? and why there and not somewhere else ? again, a lot of reading and understanding i had to do. First i took a look at the airbases available and the limitations i have in BMS. In BMS i don’t have the map of the whole world available, only one part, this is my first BMS reality (remember ? reality not limitation), just making sure you follow :blowpar:
I took a look at the following airbases:AKTIO AB (Greece) which as a NATO detachment for E-3’s, also a civilian airport.
SOUDA AB (Greece) which has a military side and a civilian side. Has a strategic position, has the extra advantage to have a NATO naval base nearby,it also has a SA-20 unit and a Patriot unit. Parallel runways, but no ILS. (for tankers and large airplanes, i think ILS is preferable, or they can use RNAV, no idea if KC-135/ KC-10 and E-3 are RNAV approved)
AKROTIRI AB (Cyprus) RAF base and has a very strategic position in regards to the middle east and North Africa.
Paphos AB (Cyprus) close to Akrotiri AB and has SA-15 and SA-17 SAMS defending the area. Good for assets based at Akrotiri.
Elefsina (Greece) since i want to involve the HAF EMB-145H AEW&C.
I looked at the infrastructure in place, those are large airplanes, you need large parking areas and space to store the support equipment for those airplanes. I looked at the runway lengths, short runways won’t do and even if long they have to be long because in case of emergency they need to be able to land and stop, consider brake failures, flap failures which increase considerably your landing distance. And you can not place all the assets at the same airbase, and you can also consider the weather throughout the year at the airbase. Greece and the whole area on the EMF theater has coastline, depending on your runway direction, you will either have strong headwinds/tailwinds or crosswinds on takeoff/landing. I also took into consideration if the airbase is actually used to have NATO airplanes being deployed there.
E-3:
I decided to put an E-3 detachment at Akrotiri Ab instead of leaving them at Aktio. The RAF has an E-3 detachment there too, regarding logistics and support (even if the versions are not the same) it won’t matter and the airbase is used to handle such airplanes. On top of that, Akrotiri has an U-2 detachment from the USAF, which for me is a big plus. In the back of my mind i was thinking that the biggest issue in life is communication. For information sharing it would be great and since Recon mission are a big part of the campaign i think it is a good idea to have them both on the same base. (sorry if i go too far for you, but i like it that way).E-8 and RC-135W:
I elected Aktio AB/Preveza Airport to be ideal for those two assets. Military and civilian side, long runway and based far away from any threat and at the same time not too far away from the theater of operations. Araxos and Andravida being close by.
KC-135 , KC-10:
I chose to base them at Kalamata airport which also has a military side. The runway is very long and there are large parking areas for the Tankers to be parked there. Not very far away from the theater of operation, which is a must since it will require less fuel to go to the orbit area and come back. More fuel for the different assets.
Fighters and other support assets:
F-15’s, F-16’s, CF-188’s and other fighters are mainly based at Souda airbase. Souda is close to the Libyan coast and is ideal for tactical planes,the transit time won’t be too long from Souda to the tanker and from the tanker to the operating area. There is a NATO naval base not too far away allowing for logistical support.
where to place the different support airplanes :
With no military background and no tactical notion whatsoever this was a big bump on the road for me. I had to take a sheet of paper and make drawings. First i had to figure out at what maximum range an E-3 can be from the area of concern without being ineffective. From public sources i did find that 300NM is the maximum range at which the E-3 can detect aircraft. This is a maximum range, it doesn’t say if at 300NM it can detect low flying airplanes, i don’t have enough knowledge on the systems and i imagine the the real data is kept secret. I took the ruler tool on the UI map and measured the distance from an island south of Creta and figured that if i put my E-3 on a 50 NM track (North to South), my E-3 would cover the whole area from Benghazi to the Egyptian border and beyond. It also covers the No-Fly zone i established,(will talk about it later on).
Also where i placed the E-3, he is in the cover from the Patriot unit and the SA-20 unit. I also placed a frigate with RIM-66/SM-2MR missiles. Giving an additional cover for my AWACS. This took away the need for a dedicated HAVCAP, on top of that the E-3 is in close range of Souda AB where fighters can be scrambled if the need ever arises. Win win situation.E-8 and RC-135W have a detection and “sniffing” range of approximately 150 NM, this is the best i could find. So i placed those assets so that the 50 NM pattern they are flying places them not closer than 100 NM at anyone time during the orbit. At the beginning and end of the orbit i placed a Frigate with RIM-66/SM-2MR missiles. The SAM coverage of the two boats overlap each other over the orbit track of the E-8 and RC-135W.
Will continue writing later on.
-
Right, how could I forget that! You had to know that because of your job (NOTAMs, I guess). So thanks a lot.
Well, please let me disagree a little about this choice, for professional reasons too. I believe that, as it is in real life, we would better to consider political choices when making a TE or a campaign, most of all because tactical choices and ROEs (to say the first ones coming to my mind) in missions and campaigns are originated from the strategic (so, political) directives. My own thoughts, driven straight from my real life job experience.
And I will be only glad to help, then. Just at this purpose, I’d be glad if you could give a look to this, inspired from your initiative and wise thoughts: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1SzEpG3RYsrERE6kYeFSo6u1ReTj5cZ5E.
I have tested it a little, and at a first glance it could work. Its story began from the UNO resolution to make the civil insurgent war to cease immediately for people’s health sake, and this combined surgical strike was the first move. Please feel free to use it and tell me what do you think.
At this point, I would like to be allowed to publicly thank Mystic for having released such a beautiful, and above all very current, theater.
In fact, according to the most reliable geopolitical studies, in the Middle East area at least three of the next conflicts of world relevance could take place (without then talking about the conflicts of asymmetric war, worrying development now underway): Libya, Israel-Lebanon-Syria, Iran-Iraq. Without then talking about the possible interactions between these three scenarios, of course.
(If I only would be able to paint correctly those blessed areas in the mission builder team utility! Bah. Let’s wait for the update )With best regards to all.
Hi Jackal,
I only fly in western Africa, never flown in Europe before. Although the Tripoli FIR still has NOTAMS telling us that it is unsafe.
For the political side, i get what you are saying, of course there will be a bit of “politics” involved in regards to establishing ROE which are specific to each country without being less than the NATO ones. But going into politics as why Canada was involved and not another country is really not a direction i want to take and on top of that i don’t have the time or the patience to actually sit down and think about such things. I will keep it simple such as when Air Forces participate in an exercise such as Frisian Flag or Red Flag. The political aspect is limited to a background story to give you a sense of involvement. Even if i wanted to discuss the intervention under operation Mobile of Canada in Libya, the forum rules do not allow me to do it. I hope this answers your question regarding the politics.
I will take a look at your TE and give you my honest opinion about it, i am very flattered that you actually ask me, i appreciate the consideration you have.
Take care Jackal.
-
My pleasure, Canuck.
And please don’t focus too much about that example I made, it only was… an example, you know.
Keep on the way you’re going, your plan sounds well conceived and far more than interesting.
On my own, I would be only glad to help… if so, call me anytime, I’ll be here.
And please be good with me and my ideas when having a look to that TE of mine… I’m thinking about the second sortie, after this first. [emoji16]
Just wondering if radar have an effective impact on missions’ action, so if would it be worth to take good care of striking them… but this is another matter, I guess.With best regards.
Inviato dal mio CAM-L21 utilizzando Tapatalk
-
Lurking around for trouble:
Labraq Ab Libya, nice to see the work done by the EMF team and noticing the attention to details. Way to go guys.
Christmas time, gifts are inbound, GBU-39 is clearly a game changer and opens the door to DEAD missions. Developping new tactics and taking advantage of the long range detection of the SNIPER pod and the big WEZ of the GBU-39 is a real game changer for the MLU. But, ROE can negate such an advantage. The GBU-54 is the ultimate weapon since until the end you can control where the bomb is going to hit.
-
Hi guys, after some further testing tonight, i figured out something very interesting.
I flew a TE mission under operation Libya at dawn and the target was Labraq AB. (this i think is going to be a TE that the BMS community will enjoy , i am very proud of the challenge it poses)
I wanted to see if 4.34 (if it was already the case in 4.32 and 4.33, i apologize ) when you target key infrastrures that are critical to sustain flying operations, if the airbase is still being declared as being operational or not.I did target all the fuel tanks at the airbase and did not target the runway or taxiways. The result was that in the debrief when clicking on the Labraq AB in the UI, Labraq was stated as being 0% operational. I was positively surprised and this is going to make the TE documentation even more fun to write.
I found an answer to one of my many questions:
I realised that in BMS 4.34, the best combat management you will have over AI is when you are in a two ship. When you are the leader of a 4 ship, it gets very hard to make the second element of your flight efficient. I tested the mission as the lead of 4 x F-16 MLU from the BAC ( Belgian Air Component). When i command my number 2 to attack a target, he will use 1 weapon for one target. Which allowed me to assign 5 targets to my number 2. I then went on and assigned one fuel tank as a target to my element flight. In BMS you still can’t give direct orders to number 4, you will have to go trough number 3 and AI logic will kick in. But when you assign one ground target to your element, they both will use all the weapons they have for an overkill. In my case they used 8xGBU-39 and 2xGBU-54 to destroy a fuel tank. The same type of target when assigned to number 2 he only used one weapon, 1xGBU-39. When you fly in Single Player and want the most out of your AI, fly with one AI. This is especially true for A-G missions. It will get very frustrating in Air-Air missions where your number 3 and 4 will use an excessive amount of missiles to kill.
There is one big issue tough i actually encountered:
When you target an airplane on the taxiway while he is taxiing or holding short, the airplanes behind him will taxi trough him and use the taxiway as if there was nothing. I think this is because the hitbox is on the plane only and even if the plane is on the taxiway, the bomb only scores a hit on the taxiway. Which is odd because when you target any kind of infrastructure, you also either damage or destroy nearby objects. Now i have to test if hitting the taxiway instead of the plane will actually stop the other planes from taxiing. But i have to hit the taxiway far enough from the plane that is taxxing else i am going to trigget the plane hitbox instead of the taxiway hitbox.
Is there a way in BMS to have combined damage effect for objects of two different categories ?
NB: a video is inbound, the video is a test sortie i did in single player targeting Labraq AB.
-
so… destroy fuel tanks and the airbase won’t back to operational forever?
got to test it in campaign… if yes then we don’t have to strike runways periodically. -
so… destroy fuel tanks and the airbase won’t back to operational forever?
got to test it in campaign… if yes then we don’t have to strike runways periodically.I haven’t tried to put a mech bataillon and see if they will repair the airbase. But yes, it shows as 0% operational with all the runways and taxiways still functional. It would be much easier now to put an airbase on its knees. The nice little touch is that when you target fuel tanks, there are secondary explosions, after a while.
-
TEST MISSION
This is a test mission for the TE Libya at Dawn. SO that you can understand the video here are some key elements:
I jumped into the cockpit when the airplanes were already flying towards the Libyan coast, this is why you see me setting up everything at the beginning of the video.This is a 4 ship F-16 MLU flight from the BAC (Belgian Air Component). Each airplane carries 1xGBU-54, 4xGBU-39, 2xAIM-120C, 2xAIM-9M, 1xALQ-131 and two fuel tanks of 370 GAL each.
SITAC and THREATS
Labraq AB is on the north-eastern coast of Libya and is situated in the No-Fly-Zone. The area is heavily defended by AAA and SHORAD’s (Short Range Air Defense) and MANPAD’s. The following equipment has been observed in the area and is known to be operational at the time your mission is to be carried out, as follows:
SA-15
SA-13
ZSU-23-4
SA-7Numbers are unknown but we know that each city and military target has an air defense unit. Labraq AB is home to a MIG-23 and G-4 squadron. We have not observed any air activity for the time of the mission but satellite images show evidence of aerial activity in the past days. The eastern part of the coast is defended by strategic SAM systems. We gathered intel about at least 3 SA-5 units to the east defending headquarters and airbases.
There is no Tanker support available for this mission and there is no AWACS support yet, the AWACS had a technical malfunction and will reach the area of operation later than expected. We have no ISR assets in place as for now since they rely on AWACS for monitoring. The L-16 network has not been set-up yet, the only form of support you have is the SA-10 unit based at Souda AB. The Greek Air Force is providing support with its EMB-145H AEW&C, but due to heavy thunderstorms over his airbase it will be delayed too.
We need eyes on Labraq AB and we need to enforce the No-fly-zone.
MISSION
In order to enforce the NO-Fly-Zone, we need Labraq AB to be 0% operational without targeting the runways. Labraq AB will be subsequently used for special forces. The fuel tanks at Labraq AB represent a significant target in order to achieve the objective. Infrastructure such as Tower, runway, taxiways or electrical supply is not to be targeted. On the south-eastern side of the airfield is a fuel storage tank near a hangar, it is acceptable if the hangar gets damaged or destroyed following the destruction of the fuel storage tank.
The airbase is defended by SHORAD’s, rendering them ineffective will also indirectly contribute to the operational status of the airbase.
The air threat is coming from the resident MIG-23 squadron. If any air activity is observed while being on scene, since Labraq is in the hearth of the No-fly-zone you are free to engage any kind of air activity.
Avoid civilian causalities.
NB: this is simply an appetizer of how the TE will be documented for each mission.
-
i test this “destroy fuel tanks to disable an airbase forever” finding in kurile campaign.
i destroy all fuel tanks, but friendly ac destroy all runway sections at the same time. so i wait the airbase repairing for a while - the result is, all runway sections repaired, but the airbase remains 0% operatonal, and no ac flight generated.
only one airbase test… but this trick is quite promising…make life much easier.
-
Sorry for not updating the thread, i am away for exams and simulator training in the UK.
-
-
I am back !
It feels good to be back into the 3D world. For my first flight in 3 weeks i discovered something that really pleased me about BMS 4.34
In earlier missions i was trying to destroy “reinforced” fuel tanks with SDB’s, the result was little damage and i then realized something. My airspeed when dropping the SDB’s was too low, i was around 350 knots. The F-16 MLU from the BAC (Belgian Air Component), is equipped with the PW220E, which is not one of the most powerfull engines out there on the F-16. If i maintain FL200 with the power lever in MIL and configured with 1xGBU-54,4xGBU-39’s,2x370GAL Tanks,2xAIM-120’s,2xAIM-9x’s and a centerline ALQ-131 … the most i get out of the plane flying a straight line is around 350 KTS. I then realized that flying at those airspeeds and trying to drop bombs wasn’t giving me the most out of my weapons.
Second thing i figured out, is that the SDB’s can’t be dropped beyond 460 KTS IAS, when reaching 460 KTS the WLZ bracket in the HUD desappears and reappears as soon as you are below 460 KTS. I dropped my SDB while passing trough 450 KTS and the result was way different than dropping them at 350 KTS. Good job BMS team !!!At 450 KTS the SDB simply obliterated the fuel tak in contrast to when i was dropping at 350 KTS and i needed two SDB’s to achieve the same result.
Altough this is a major breaktrough for someone like me with little knowledge about tactics, one issue stood out for me, and of tactical importance. I have to plan my dropping parameters carefully, if i want to get the most ou of my SDB. I need to be at 450 KTS IAS and i can only achieve this while diving. But i can’t dive the way i want, i need to take into consideration that there are MANPADS and SHORADS wayting for me below 18000 feet. Using the burner would only highlight my position. So i need to climb and dive on a shallow angle in MIL power until i reach 450 KTS and achieve all that before i reach 18500 feet ( i give myself a buffer of 500 feet for the ressource i will make to level off above 18000 feet).
Now, those considerations are at night and with clear skies. Lets say that the cloud deck is below my dropping altitude, in that case even if i use burners i won’t be seen by the threats below me, considering there is a uniform deck above target area. Other case is during daytime operations, the use of burners is less likely to hightlight my position in the sky. A lot to write down and figure out.
Another consideration: the use of burners at night can also be a big give away to ennemy fighters if flying in contested airpace, something to keep in mind.
-
SDB tactical consideration:
I was wondering about something the other day. I know that tactics is something kept in secret even in books that seem to talk openly about what happened over the battelfield.
In BMS we have cities, we have units more than once crossing the cities to get from a point A to a point B. Now imagine you have a column of tanks advancing trough a city and you want to target them. ROE (rules of engagement) are that collateral damage has to be kept to a minimum and civilian causalities to the lowest possible, avoid it if there is any doubt one could happen. So i am wondering if when you look trough your TGP (targeting pod) and see a tank in the middle of the road crossing a town if you would still attack a tank knowing the ROE’s. Let’s push it further and imagine that on your MFD where the TGP picture is displayed that you have a circle drawn around your cursor that displays the radius of fragmentation of the bomb. There are no buldings within that circle, can you still attack that tank ? knowing it is in the middle of the road in a city ? The tank when hit by your weapon, depending on which one it is will explode and implode. Implode because a tank usually has shells inside and those shells are going to explode if hit. A bit like a submarine being hit in the torpedo bay. Would you rather use a GBU-54/12 or a GBU-39 ? knowing it will both implode and explode, what will be the combined effect of both explosion and implosion on your frag radius ? i don’t know if those are just questions from me overthinking it or not .
I am tempted to say that in an urban environement it is better to use a GBU-39 (will it pierce the armour?) than a GBU-54. But on the other hand i see that with a GBU-54 you have some kind of terminal control of the weapon in contrast to the GBU-39 once dropped you can’t direct it away from it’s target. But, you don’t drop if you think you will have to sway the bomb away from it’s target. GBU-39 will induce the smallest damage and have the smallest frag circle. Now, what is the max frag circle of the GBU-39 ? i have to dig up the info, will report when i have found something.
-
Hhmmm… interesting points both, these last of yours, Canuck.
I’ll await to see what the conclusion of your speech will be before telling my (personal) one, on my own.
With best regards.
-
UPDATE
The speed limitation for SDB’s isn’t true …. i actually happened to be too much off angle from the target during the drop. This is why i had no DLZ on my HUD.
-
@ the moderators.
Please, would you be kind enough to close down this thread ? Due to the numerous updates (thank you for your work BMS team !) the files i had saved are not working anymore. I am going to continue my work on the KTO theater.
-
Please, would you be kind enough to close down this thread ?
Too bad .
I tought this was a very interesting question in fact : ROE and ethics in BMS …
I just can tell you that I try as most as possible not to bomb target in cities …… but it depends :
-
of the kind of mission I have been tasked … Sometimes, you just can’t do anything else … I try to have a little thinking for the innocent casualties … Sad duty .
-
The side I have chose : Basically , if I’m fighting for DRPK … let’s say that Kim Familly has a very “broad” sense of the ROE :rolleyes:
But in some case, Blue forces didn’t do better (Vietnam…)
-
-
Too bad .
I tought this was a very interesting question in fact : ROE and ethics in BMS …
I just can tell you that I try as most as possible not to bomb target in cities …… but it depends :
-
of the kind of mission I have been tasked … Sometimes, you just can’t do anything else … I try to have a little thinking for the innocent casualty … Sad duty .
-
The side I have chose : Basically , if I’m fighting for DRPK … let’s say that Kim Familly has a very “broad” sense of the ROE :rolleyes:
But in some case, Blue forces didn’t do better (Vietnam…)
Hi there, i am going to continue my work on the KTo theater. I am currently working on a TE which involves all forces in the KTO theater and i think it will be complex enough so that the questions i asked myself with Operation Lybia at Dawn will still be valid.
For me, in BMS, when the target is in a city, i just don’t go for it. For now we don’t really have all the options to for example set the bomb to explode after it hits the target. For example if you could set the bomb to detonate after the impact, the bomb would burry into the ground and explode. or if we could have bombs and choose to not have explosive charges on it, just using the kinetic energy of the bomb to stop a vehicle to advance. But those kind of scenarios are not really the ones you would find a full scale war like the one against North korea.
-
-
But those kind of scenarios are not really the ones you would find a full scale war like the one against North korea.
For sure …
That’s why I love to swap sides : It helps a lot to have an idea of the tactics employed by a country and its ROE , according to the kind of planes and weapons they have on hand (- “No TGP ? They’ll be blood , sorry civilians…”)
But accuracy is for the wealthy .The lesser nation simply can’t afford it . Not that they are more barbaric than other . They simply does with what they have : innacurate weapons .
The biggest nation can afford the accuracy. But they are not all the time . When you see smg like this it probably means that :
-
They don’t want to be accurate : can be seen if a country is wealthy , but not with a very democratic regime(here civilians are note true “voters” ,so the regime doesn’t fear to lose its power)
-
Or on the opposite , they are to be accurate (here in true democratic countries , the "voters pressure"is high cuz they don’t taste to see other civilians being targeted , which seems understandable at first look :so the regime fears to lose its power )
When I play , I try to simulate some operationnal conditions .
According to what I said above …… well … I’m not always as accurate as I could …War "is politic by other means " , manner to say that war is all but ethical . It proved by age , to be obvious
-edit-
I think that using SDBs (or other low weight precision weapon)is the best you can use to be as ethical as possible when making war … But , as you are dropping explosive somewhere … Chances are high to kill something .
Better should be not making war ?
-
-
It’s good to learn anyway.
Let’s only hope that you will be able to share that custom TE of yours soon, dear friend Canuck… it seems so interesting to fly with.
With best regards.