Lockon Operation Red Flag/Combined Air Exercise

[Breakshot]

It simulated a refuel/rearm period

What? You make no sense.

 

It simulated real life conditions, by giving pilots realistic enroute time to target. No country would be stupid enough to place their fighters right at the front line! Check out goolgle earth, and look where Russia has all their fighters/bombers, u will be surprised to see most forward bases actually completely empty. 200km to target is really nothing, it barely gives you enough time to sort out coordination and tactics between different flights.

 

The refueling/rearming has nothing to do with it. So, by removing or at least imposing a 15 min rule on rearming/refueling we would actually represent RL conditions, providing we are talking small scale conflict. But I guess some just love to spam and run, only to come back with a full load of a2g/a2a weapons minutes after rearming and refueling on the active in 30 secs.. So much for "simulation"...

 

Oh and about "Us" flying with no ECM, I doubt it would make any difference ;) Your are welcome to pop in our server and test it out yourself, we can drop our ECMs if you are so afraid of them.

[Breakshot]

Anyway, I think the smart thing to do would be to run some sort of poll on what we want to do with the rearms/refuels for the next Flag, since it is pointless arguing as we all have our opininons. So far, it appears we have three options.

 

Leave them

Remove them (Best in my opininon)

Impose 10-15 minutes guideline (Definitively better than nothing)

[Grimes]

I personally think theres certain exceptions to be made in concern with reality and what we are doing here.

 

R&R kept the game going and it should be allowed IMO. 10-15 minutes seems a little steep considering how boring life is for the few minutes it takes to repair damage. Perhaps if a wait time is implemented it could be directly correlated to the length of the flight needed to get to the combat area.

 

I havn't seen the in game track , so I don't know, but did all players pull off, park, and then r&r or did they just pull to the side of the runway like in public games? If not, then that should at least be a requirement.

[rogue_blade]

wow that was a cool acmi. i loved the aim7 kill that turned 180 degrees. couldnt find any of the other kills haha

howcome the tacview doesnt show any of the kills and ordnance dropped/fired from a10's and su25s

[Prophet]

Really? I only glanced at it real quick.

 

The nice thing about TacView, is you get to see everything going on. You will see some funky behavior from missiles. I have noticed you will see a lot of actives that when leading the plane they are aimed it, they are well within PitBull range, but they will lead so far they lose the target.

 

Yeah, good ACMI.

[Laud]

Can all cool down a bit please while discussing pros and cons of different opinions!?! It would be a mess and far away from the spirit this event should have to get into flaming each other here.

 

As Fudd said that all involved squads will have to design a mission on their own I think thats the possibility for all to bring in their ideas and wishes. So the 504 i.e. will surely create a mission including ROE no R&R while 3sqn will bring a mission where R&R will be part of planning and tactics. Afterwards we'll have the chance to compare and point out what worked well and what did not. Please everybody don't begin to take things too much personel or tell someone what he's good in or not. How did Fudd say... no whining, no complaining! ;)

 

Using ATC (GCI) wether it's LOATC or the JaBoG-ATC-Tool (which I prefer of course!!! ;) ) could give things another kick! I think about a nighttime-mission and stuff. But to avoid making it boring the radar unit chosen for the GCI-controller should see just his homeland plus a bit of the front area. An all seeing eye like AWACS 100km out of the frontline would be too boring. I think ground based radars or far away AWACS would be best here.

 

And as I can't wait for next step of RedFlag I hope Fudd will soon give us some info on how it's gonna continue and still most interesting for me: When will we begin to switch the task of creating the mission in between the participating squads? :)

[NotiA10]

after reading through all of the latest post i would just like to mention the following

 

- i dont recall a lockon event with so many participants

- everyone seemed to have a great time (even our 25s which were on standby practice for almost 2h and 30 mins - sorry brewber :smilewink: )

- there was some great flying and teamwork

- a lot of people would have learned something (at least me)

- the mission was done and thought through very well

- i would imagine that the satisfation of scoring a kill was higher than normal due to the circumstances

- to make it absolutely perfect for everyone is impossible

 

as Fudd already mentioned initially - this is work in progress

 

in order to improve on it he needs the suggestions and opinions of the community and the participants. Fudd is the master of ceremony and after what he (with the help of other members and squads) made possible, there is every reason to trust his judgement and decisions on what will be next and how it will be done. so lets keep suggesting.

 

 

wbr,

:pilotfly:

NotiA10

[Woodstock]

My opinion on R&R:

I was sceptical at first that it was allowed.

Usually JaBoG32 insists on NO R&R as a squadmatch rule.

But then, matches are usually scheduled to feature multiple rounds.

Most important: R&R banning always has to be combined with a limited takeoff time window, especially for mixed A-A/A-G operations.

Otherwise the bombers just sit out the air superiority battle on the ground, then the A-A winning team bombers fly unhampered over the battlefield, and then finally when they and their cover fighters RTB due to fuel, the A-A losing team bombers take off and are free to manouvre over an otherwise empty map. Not desirable.

 

To my surprise it turned out that Fudd´s R&R allowance in combination with distances-to-fly worked quite well for this mission. I understand all fighter missile spamming complaints though, but for the bombers R&R ensured that the very huge number of objective targets could be taken on to a senseful percentage. And the R&R enabled us all to experience 3 hours of fun community-get-together-feeling instead of only 1 hour.

 

For the future:

 

Missions with R&R

- should feature at least the same or longer flying distances

- should skip loadout changes

- should have a pre-announced ending time, on Sat. the end was not known beforehand and seemed somewhat spontaneous

 

Missions without R&R

- must have a takeoff time window of max. 20 mins after missions start for all aircraft

- should feature at least 2 rounds to allow longer "fun" duration

 

General Feedback for future missions

- consider the use of radar tools to enable GCI/AWACS operations

- consider the use of the LomacLeague Mod to offer exactly even resources for both sides (e.g. A-10s or Su-33s for blue and red)

- consider the use of human-player flown tankers for long-range missions, given that all participants are happy to be limited to Hogs, Eagles and SeaFlankers as flyables for a single such mission.

- please DO NOT reveal all ground unit positions and types in the future!

For the bombers the ground war was just too easy, the only unknown threat were enemy fighters. It needs to be more challenging by having to search for targets and not knowing exactly what types of short/medium-range airdefenses are located where. It´s ok to give KUB, BUK, HAWK, S300 and Partiot and of course bunker positions, but everything else is just too mobile to be known.

[Groove]

Nice imput Woodstock.

 

So do we have some kind of summary why Blue Side won ? Like a summary briefing ? Sitting most time on TARMAC i cant really tell what happened ^^.

 

My thoughts are:

 

- Many RedSide fighter dropped out in the beginning of the event.

 

- Blue Side had SAM coverage on "Red Earth".

 

- Blue Side fighers had mad skills.

 

So anyone any ideas on this topic ?

[159_Archer]

Re; uneven sides

 

If you watch the Tac file, you will see that BF got more kills, and they also had a number drop-out early through performance reasons. -I think Fudd is still doing an AAR on red flag.

 

As for the apparent 'imbalance' in the 2 forces, well no one claimed that Fudd could get them perfectly matched. Both sides had at least some advantages over the other, and, what it's most important to remember, this was essentially a test for future, similar events.

 

As for some of the comments entered on RF:

 

I, along with many others here, would like that all participants regard these events in the spirit in which they are meant to be held, and not take them too seriously (at least when discussing them...). If we want what has just proven both popular and so far successful to continue, we must realise that some missions will suit us, some will not. But as far as I'm concerned, that's just fine! If you over-come a disadvantage, then that's something to celebrate, surely.

 

It's likely that all the future RF missions will have some imbalance/points of dispute, but if you want to take part, a degree of biting your lip is going to be required; Calmly put suggestions and findings from having flown the mission are fine, but no demands or tantrums.

 

I think almost everyone involved has entered into the spirit of this, and long may that continue!

[Frostie]

Re R&R

I would imagine that's what you guys like, that's how you play your matches. ;) It also throws tactics out the window because with the fuxored ECM you'd have to get in twice as close to take a shot, which isn't close to what Fudd envisioned with Red Flag. It's also not close to real life tactics. If you want to make people be more tactical and careful with their shots, ban jammers. ;) Let's see you use real tactics and go defensive rather than rely on something in the game thats fuxored as much as the missiles are.

 

This is were I questioned if you understood what tactics was about , in matches tactics are what always win and nothing to do with your implications, I didn't insult you in anyway on the contrary you seem to think that some issues occur with ECM , we all know of your feelings on Jammers but this is not an issue I have only seen blinking occur once and because you had an issue with it a while back you've chosen to label a certain squad ? I haven't seen ECM blinking from established pilots at all so stop making it cloud your judgement.

 

And try to post unabrasive comments instead of trying to win debates with slander and pissing contests.

 

If you want to talk RL tactics then shooting and immediately running is not in the book and this occured in just about EVERY occassion

BlueFor rearmed and refueled twice. Distances to fly kept R&R down. BlueFor also didn't get a chance to fire that last rearm BTW.

Some BLUEFOR guys re-armed and fired 3 times.

[3Sqn_Fudd]

It's likely that all the future RF missions will have some imbalance/points of dispute, but if you want to take part, a degree of biting your lip is going to be required; Calmly put suggestions and findings from having flown the mission are fine, but no demands or tantrums.

 

I think almost everyone involved has entered into the spirit of this, and long may that continue!

 

Totally and completely agree... Couldn't have said it better...

[Woodstock]

Archer is completely right.

Be carefull with getting overly excited about certain topics that cannot be solved to everyone´s satisfaction in the current state of LOMAC.

The reason why this event was a quick and huge success is mainly because it was clear to everybody that this was not a mixed squadwar but a friendly exercise.

That´s why everyone regarded it in a relaxed way and why it worked.

It´s not about pride and honor but about learning from each other, giving and taking.

Those of you that remember the venerable CAW days might recall that there was a totally different climate those days.

So here´s how this might succeed:

Everyone keep in mind that this is a friendly and beneficial event, squad A learns something from squad B, blue side learns something from red side.

Tactical debriefings should not be done team-internally but open to every participant, so that blues and reds could say "look, this was our plan, how was yours? - Ah that´s why this and that worked or didn´t..."

Don´t ever mean something personal or take something personal.

The one you´re argueing with might be your wingie in the next mission.

Therefore we should also intermix squads and not stick to always blue or always red. The future individual mission designs could make this possible through varying coalition mixes leading to ever new aircraft availabilities on both sides.

[Grimes]

- please DO NOT reveal all ground unit positions and types in the future!

For the bombers the ground war was just too easy, the only unknown threat were enemy fighters. It needs to be more challenging by having to search for targets and not knowing exactly what types of short/medium-range airdefenses are located where. It´s ok to give KUB, BUK, HAWK, S300 and Partiot and of course bunker positions, but everything else is just too mobile to be known.

 

I totally agree with this. I donno where I heard it but someone pointed out that maybe there should be vague target area's pointing out the general area of where a target might be. Plus a few surprises like manpads would be nice.

[RvEPaploo]

Sorry i m back late,

 

Ty for the big effort, and the quality of the participating peeps TY

we was thinking about it , we talked about it, But we did it and it was great, stuff and big honor to share it with ya

we can see here how all those mates flew together in the same kinda persepective and dat is what impressed me the most.

On blue we just talked a lil before, just few but, should be the good word because, we was providing the same feeling. and yo can apreciate tht with the tacview.

 

I still crying coz we lose two of my team mate before flying du at warp, but inthe other hand, we didnt had get too much late on this event and you can apreciate , i flew too much stuff with more then 1.30hour latze lol.

 

congrat of com quality, we can improve it again , but was already GJ, some interference beetween channel and wing but not two much coz all com was short and efficient.

 

about the kill-lose, mission wasnt a cow boy one so respect, because it is rare to see this kinda of engagement in the comunity we are in.

 

So good experience, and let do it sometime it will increase the quality of our comunity .

 

let build a ribbon , for this kind of event.

 

let share the responsability of event for different Sqd, each different single time,like dat we will fly different style, it can be interresting

 

Pap see you soon in the sky

TX

special dedicace to the 3sqn

[Laud]

I totally agree with this. I donno where I heard it but someone pointed out that maybe there should be vague target area's pointing out the general area of where a target might be. Plus a few surprises like manpads would be nice.

 

Each mobile SAM-unit should alway be a surprise! :joystick:

[Fudd]

I have to admit that I have been a dissapointed by the personal attacks etc. If you want to suggest no rearm/refuel, than suggest it. There is no reason to start a flame war. Uphold yourselves with dignity, as you are representing your squadrons to the rest of the community. That being said, I have an answer to this issue.

 

Next mission if you fire a weapon (other than cannon), and you miss your target, it will be scored against your team. -10 points per weapon fired that doesnt hit its target. (if the weapon is hit by a SAM then it wont count against you)

 

We will see what effect that has on deployment of weapons and then make decisions based on that.

 

@Woody: I like the name change... it has been made so.

[X-man]

Next mission if you fire a weapon (other than cannon), and you miss your target, it will be scored against your team. -10 points per weapon fired that doesnt hit its target. (if the weapon is hit by a SAM then it wont count against you)

 

We will see what effect that has on deployment of weapons and then make decisions based on that.

I like it...

[Fudd]

Official Mission One Results

 

The grading system I used for mission 1 is as follows:

 

-50 points for any combat loss of aircraft.

+30 points if you kill a fighter aircraft

+40 points if you kill a strike aircraft

 

100 points for objectives completed based on a percentage. So if you completed 50% of the objective you get 50 points.

 

+10 points for objects not covered by the objectives.

 

+500 points for SAM complexes near the home plates. based on percent completed.

 

BLUE FOR:

 

Two Air to Air combat kills (2x Su-33): 60 points

 

One combat loss (1x F-15): -50 points

 

100% of Objective one completed: 100 points

 

40% of Objective two completed: 40 points

 

Total: 150 Points

 

RED FOR:

 

Combat loss of three aircraft (2x Su-33 and 1x Su-25t): -150 points

 

20% of Objective 2 completed: 20 points

 

Total: -130 points

 

 

BlueFor won by 280 points. CONGRATULATIONS!!

 

Disclaimer: Because of the broad objectives in mission one, for future missions I will itemize the objectives and score them accordingly. It was hard to score losses because of the performance issues, those who crashed on landing and those who just crashed into the ground, etc. Due to large difference in points, I didnt labor excessively on what losses were due to what reasons. I simply counted in tacview those who were shot down.

[Groove]

How will be Teamkills scored in the future ?

[Maximus]

Fudd, thanks for putting down on score. congrat on blue opfor! :)

 

a friendly reminder that I have asked you to upload the mission file here.

 

:)

 

thanks

[Fudd]

How will be Teamkills scored in the future ?

 

-150 points.

 

If you are firing actives it is important that you ensure that there are not friendlies in the area. This goes with ET's also... if you maddog and there is a friendly in the area, you need to be prepared to deal with the consequences.

 

This will be in addition to the combat loss of -50 points.

[jonob66]

I'd like to say that 159th_Fudd did a great job. I'm quite new to all this but I'm a bit upset by the attitude of some. This isn't real life, its a game. I take things as seriously as the next guy. The whole point of this (as far as I am aware) was to bring all the different squads together for a good old punch up. I apeal to all you guys to take easy and except the limitations of LOMAC. I'm not a pilot I just enjoy taking part. I don't give a rats arse if the 120s or the R27ET suck. I accept that there will be aspects that are not true to life. At the end of the day I will fight again because its just a game. I was involved in that incident with the AIM 7 which took me out. I thought no this can't be but I accept it. To the guy that fired the shot, well done. BlueFor won which is cool. Talk of mucking about with rules about re-arming, ecm etc is just poor show guys. War is war. If you got an advantage you use it period. Nobody asks the orther side if there ready or not. Thats my thoughts.

[Breakshot]

Ruggbutt:

Once again with the personal attacks....................If I have an opinion it's ok to attack me, if you have an opinion it's gospel. Is that how it is?

Wow u are good Ruggbutt, Ill give u that. I guess that line shold make u look like an agel now.. LOL In reality, the way i see it, is the other way around. I didnt even finish editing my first post with suggestions, and u were already smashing everything without even reading it fully.... But no matter, Ill just leave it at that. My offer still stands though, u are always welcome to drop in on our server and have an ecm free engagement if u so desire :)

 

 

@ Fudd

 

The points rule seems like a fairly good idea! That would make someone think twice before shooting. However, on the other hand that would also make the other side "bait" you to waste points, so it could work both ways....

[Paralyzer]

Nice to see the amount of interest in Red Flag. Thank you 159th-Fudd for bringing some activity to the Lock On Community.