Proper use of SEAD assets
Moderator: MOD_Command
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:37 am
Proper use of SEAD assets
This is specifically related to playing kennetho’s Desert Storm scenarios (while waiting for the Command Live release), but I think it has wider implications.
When I play a scenario where I’m fighting significant SAM opposition and I also have significant SEAD assets, my approach is almost always to launch a massive SEAD attack without sending any other strikes out until the SAMs have been seriously reduced if not eliminated. I enjoy planning those attacks, but I wonder if that is how an actual operation would be planned. One thing I’ve heard before is that it’s more common for strikes to to be conducted using ‘strike packages,’ something like a flight of bombers escorted by some fighters with hammers and SEAD escorts. I don’t know much about how actual air warfare is approached so I figured I’d ask here what are more typical ways of deploying assets when you have significant superiority such as in Desert Storm (or the God of War scenario from Chains of War)?
When I play a scenario where I’m fighting significant SAM opposition and I also have significant SEAD assets, my approach is almost always to launch a massive SEAD attack without sending any other strikes out until the SAMs have been seriously reduced if not eliminated. I enjoy planning those attacks, but I wonder if that is how an actual operation would be planned. One thing I’ve heard before is that it’s more common for strikes to to be conducted using ‘strike packages,’ something like a flight of bombers escorted by some fighters with hammers and SEAD escorts. I don’t know much about how actual air warfare is approached so I figured I’d ask here what are more typical ways of deploying assets when you have significant superiority such as in Desert Storm (or the God of War scenario from Chains of War)?
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
Eliminating the SAMs first is the general idea. In a war certain very long ranged SAMs that you can't just go around might need to be set for destruction early because they're unavoidable. You probably don't need to kill all of them, though. If you can carve out corridors to your targets, you can save yourself time and just go around. Also, suppression is often as important as destruction. If an ARM destroys just the radar, then the SAM site is suppressed but not necessarily destroyed. If the SAM site shoots until it's stuck reloading that's suppressed too. Depending on how much time you need, suppression can take a lot less effort and be just as good.
A "strike package" is just a bunch of aircraft carrying all the different munitions they need in order to achieve the desired effects on target. It might also include cruise missiles like TLAM, CALCM or JASSM, or ballistic missiles like ATACMS. It might also include aircraft tasked with SEAD/DEAD, offensive counter air, defensive counter air, ECM, and striking targets on the ground. Typically they arrive in a specific tightly spaced sequence so that the desired effects of each strike are achieved in the desired order. For example, if you're attacking an airfield, and your goal is to destroy as many bombers on the ground as possible so they can't attack you later, then the first few aircraft might crater the runways so nothing can escape, the next group of aircraft might drop cluster munitions all over the opened parking, and the next group of aircraft might drop laser guided penetrating bombs to destroy the hardened aircraft shelters. Different combinations of threats and objectives might suggest different sequencing of aircraft and munitions. Really big strike packages centered on heavy bombers are sometimes called, "gorilla packages." The original gorilla strikes were the Linebacker B-52 raids on Hanoi, where large formations of bombers also required complex support from fighters, Wild Weasels, ECM, AEW, chaff bombers, ELINT, and tankers.
It's really hard to say what's "typical" because the way to approach any given strike is from the perspective of problem solving. Each target is unique, and so they require different effects at different times, given the assets you have at your disposal. A target that's more heavily defended might have a heavy SEAD and fighter contingency up front, for just a few strikers. A target that's less heavily defended might not have any. A target with lots of aim points, requiring a large variety of effects, might have lots of strikers carrying many different types of ordinance, but a different target might have the same number of strikers but all carrying JDAMs. It all just depends.
A "strike package" is just a bunch of aircraft carrying all the different munitions they need in order to achieve the desired effects on target. It might also include cruise missiles like TLAM, CALCM or JASSM, or ballistic missiles like ATACMS. It might also include aircraft tasked with SEAD/DEAD, offensive counter air, defensive counter air, ECM, and striking targets on the ground. Typically they arrive in a specific tightly spaced sequence so that the desired effects of each strike are achieved in the desired order. For example, if you're attacking an airfield, and your goal is to destroy as many bombers on the ground as possible so they can't attack you later, then the first few aircraft might crater the runways so nothing can escape, the next group of aircraft might drop cluster munitions all over the opened parking, and the next group of aircraft might drop laser guided penetrating bombs to destroy the hardened aircraft shelters. Different combinations of threats and objectives might suggest different sequencing of aircraft and munitions. Really big strike packages centered on heavy bombers are sometimes called, "gorilla packages." The original gorilla strikes were the Linebacker B-52 raids on Hanoi, where large formations of bombers also required complex support from fighters, Wild Weasels, ECM, AEW, chaff bombers, ELINT, and tankers.
It's really hard to say what's "typical" because the way to approach any given strike is from the perspective of problem solving. Each target is unique, and so they require different effects at different times, given the assets you have at your disposal. A target that's more heavily defended might have a heavy SEAD and fighter contingency up front, for just a few strikers. A target that's less heavily defended might not have any. A target with lots of aim points, requiring a large variety of effects, might have lots of strikers carrying many different types of ordinance, but a different target might have the same number of strikers but all carrying JDAMs. It all just depends.
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:37 am
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
That is very helpful, thank you. It sounds like in order to create those types of strikes in CMANO, what I’d do is create several ground strike missions including a SEAD strike, possibly assign fighter aescorts and try to time the different missions to hit in the order I want to. That sounds like a lot of fun to try if nothing else, rather than send in a swarm of HARM armed planes then waiting for the results before sending in other strikers.
Thanks for your feedback.
Thanks for your feedback.
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
fatgreta1066,
SeaQueen is the best source for info!
In general, one other thing that you can do (depending on the side) is to use decoys like TALDs. Many planes can carry something like four of them. The TALDs look like planes to the enemy on radar, and they waste lots of their ammo shooting at them (as opposed to your real planes) before your HARMs even get close. TALDs are great! Mix them in with some HARMs and it will drive the enemy nuts.
Doug
SeaQueen is the best source for info!
In general, one other thing that you can do (depending on the side) is to use decoys like TALDs. Many planes can carry something like four of them. The TALDs look like planes to the enemy on radar, and they waste lots of their ammo shooting at them (as opposed to your real planes) before your HARMs even get close. TALDs are great! Mix them in with some HARMs and it will drive the enemy nuts.
Doug
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
I think you'll find there's a big payoff to that kind of rapid build up of combat power on the target area, and then POOF! You're gone before they can do anything about it. It presents more targets than the SAMs can typically engage at once, that means that when the light up, something else will likely be able to launch an ARM at it and take out the engagement radar. Result? SAM suppressed quickly and with fewer losses. It also means you have more missiles in the air if the enemy fighter defenses engage. The result? In the "how many have I got versus how many have you got?" game, you're more likely to out shoot them. The other thing is, that everything ends up ready at about the same time when you return, resulting in airbases and aircraft carriers delivering "pulses" of maximum firepower (as described in Wayne Hughes' Fleet Tactics).
I'm always surprised people don't spend more time thinking about tactics. I think the typical mode of play is to improvise and micromanage assets. I spend a lot of time planning, often with spreadsheets opened to perform the timing calculations. It's interesting thinking about what the order to do things in is, how far apart you want to space different groups of aircraft, etc. I think you'll also discover that once you start planning missions this way, some of the mega-scenarios get to be extremely time consuming to play.
I'm always surprised people don't spend more time thinking about tactics. I think the typical mode of play is to improvise and micromanage assets. I spend a lot of time planning, often with spreadsheets opened to perform the timing calculations. It's interesting thinking about what the order to do things in is, how far apart you want to space different groups of aircraft, etc. I think you'll also discover that once you start planning missions this way, some of the mega-scenarios get to be extremely time consuming to play.
ORIGINAL: fatgreta1066
That is very helpful, thank you. It sounds like in order to create those types of strikes in CMANO, what I’d do is create several ground strike missions including a SEAD strike, possibly assign fighter aescorts and try to time the different missions to hit in the order I want to. That sounds like a lot of fun to try if nothing else, rather than send in a swarm of HARM armed planes then waiting for the results before sending in other strikers.
Thanks for your feedback.
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
I'm always surprised people don't spend more time thinking about tactics. I think a the typical mode of play is to improvise and micromanage assets.
This is just my personal opinion, but I've always viewed CMANO scenarios not so much a problem to be solved but far more a game to be beaten with the highest score possible. In the vast majority of scenarios I play I try to win not through application of RL tactics, but through extensive micro and exploitation of how the AI might respond in any given scenario. One side-effect of this approach is that I have basically no faith in mission AI [due to seeing it do so many strange things when exploiting its behaviour], so I try to use it as little as possible. Mind you, this isn't actually the AI's fault generally, I've found the responsibility with how the AI behaves in any given scenario lies solely with the designer; some scenarios have a really challenging AI [something I have some opinions of my own on how to design, but that's another story] while others engage in AB dashes towards known SAM traps. 'Tis always interesting to compare.
P.S. Love reading your posts SQ, they never fail to teach me something new or make me look closer and optimise elements of my own playstyle
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
This is just my personal opinion, but I've always viewed CMANO scenarios not so much a problem to be solved but far more a game to be beaten with the highest score possible.
I don't think that's a bad way to view the game. The thing is, if the game is designed well and the scenario designers do their job well, then playing the game with the idea of maximizing your score should (in theory) naturally lead to insights in tactics, and possibly sometimes even innovation, because the underlying reasons for employing those tactics are reflected in the game.
It's also interesting to see how different (even very knowledgeable) people come up with different plans to solve the same problem. I didn't expect that until I observed it many different times. It's interesting.
-
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:45 am
- Location: Sandviken, Sweden
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
The problem with just SEAD with Anti-Radiation missiles is that if nobody turns on their radar, you have got nothing to shoot at. Had this experience in the korean missile crisis scenario. I finally took them out with Tomahawks. Maybe a bit expensive, but if they give me 150, why not.
If you have time, decoys, like TALDS might also do the trick. Sending out decoys leads to the radar turning on leads to the anti radiation missiles having something to shoot at. There are many ways to get to the goal.
Mavericks might also be an idea, if you get close enough, coming in low.
Good page to get an idea regarding a strike package
http://www.airbattle.co.uk/d_combatants.html
If you have time, decoys, like TALDS might also do the trick. Sending out decoys leads to the radar turning on leads to the anti radiation missiles having something to shoot at. There are many ways to get to the goal.
Mavericks might also be an idea, if you get close enough, coming in low.
Good page to get an idea regarding a strike package
http://www.airbattle.co.uk/d_combatants.html
Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.
Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943
Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
That's an excellent page. I like how it contrasted Rolling Thunder and Linebacker tactics, as well as USAF and USN tactics. The USAF had bulk that the Navy didn't, and used it. The Navy also looks like they didn't employ precision guided weapons so much, so they had big bomber trains with lots of unguided weapons instead of techno-weenie precision guided strike packages.
I also think that game looks interesting, in part because it seems to be scoped fairly similarly to Command. I wonder what "Command-izing" their scenarios might look like. One short coming, though: no chaff bombs in Command, or are there?
I also think that game looks interesting, in part because it seems to be scoped fairly similarly to Command. I wonder what "Command-izing" their scenarios might look like. One short coming, though: no chaff bombs in Command, or are there?
-
- Posts: 507
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 2:37 am
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
Great resources and ideas, thanks everyone.
-
- Posts: 1068
- Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 12:45 am
- Location: Sandviken, Sweden
RE: Proper use of SEAD assets
Yes, Downtown is an excellent game. There are plenty of scenarios from 1965 until 1972, including a linebacker 2 B 52 strike. So, you get a good overview.
You also get the order of battle of all the carriers used during the campaign, including their time on station.
It only includes “Downtown “ , Hanoi, as a target area. There was an expansion where you could also attack further south. The expansion also included a hypothetical scenario taking place in 1975 ( with Tomcats ).
Actually, there is one scenario of the game brought to CMAO. You can find it on steam, in the workshop. It is also included in the scenario pack (which you can also find in the workshop).
I think it is called “here and there and everywhere”.
It is about an airforce rolling thunder raid in 1965 or 1966.
You also get the order of battle of all the carriers used during the campaign, including their time on station.
It only includes “Downtown “ , Hanoi, as a target area. There was an expansion where you could also attack further south. The expansion also included a hypothetical scenario taking place in 1975 ( with Tomcats ).
Actually, there is one scenario of the game brought to CMAO. You can find it on steam, in the workshop. It is also included in the scenario pack (which you can also find in the workshop).
I think it is called “here and there and everywhere”.
It is about an airforce rolling thunder raid in 1965 or 1966.
Bougainville, November 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9. It rained today.
Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943
Letter from a U.S. Marine,November 1943