JDAM TOSS

[Zad Fnark]

I'm wondering if anyone has every tried toss-bombing things like JDAMs.

 

Let's get real for a minute. Against a first-world opponent, you're not going to be loitering around at 20,000 feet casually dropping JDAMs or LGBs on an opponent. The SAM threat would solve that fairly quickly.

 

I remember some time ago, the Reapers did a toss of an LGB over a mountain and hit a target that way. Was pretty entertaining to watch.

 

Overall, I'm just curious how everyone attacks ground target in a fairly high-threat environment.

 

I pulled this off some time ago, trying to toss some cluster munitions.

 

 

${1}

[BuzzU]

In real life the SAM threat would be taken care of before you got there to bomb.

[sk000tch]

I'm wondering if anyone has every tried toss-bombing things like JDAMs.

 

Let's get real for a minute. Against a first-world opponent, you're not going to be loitering around at 20,000 feet casually dropping JDAMs or LGBs on an opponent. The SAM threat would solve that fairly quickly.

 

I remember some time ago, the Reapers did a toss of an LGB over a mountain and hit a target that way...

 

Couple things - let's just agree not cite Reaper videos as evidence of real world employment

 

Loft delivery profiles do not improve JDAM performance due to the shaped trajectory commanded by the autopilot. Lofting reduces the range capability afforded by a straight and level release under the same flight conditions, and significantly increase the standard deviation from mean point of impact due to autopilot inconsistencies and LAR uncertainties in the dynamic IZLAR.

 

Release profile against high threat targets is ideally high, fast and on-axis to maximize standoff distance and TOF to maximize GPS guidance. Against isolated SAMs, a tangential off-axis release along the threat ring to exploit JDAMs high off boresight capability can be used to good effect. Against IADS or well defended targets JDAM is not the most desirable weapon due to its minimal standoff relative to JSOW and propelled weapons.

 

I don't know what you mean by "first world opponent" as its not a well defined term. But, assuming a modern force with a significantly degraded IADS, the high potential of GPS jamming also makes loft deliveries a poor choice. When GPS is denied the weapon can be released INS only, but due to INS drift the accuracy degrades significantly as TOF increases and/or off-axis or shaped loft deliveries are used. Additionally, the GPS antenna is rear mounted in part to utilize weapon masking of jamming signals. A loft trajectory's upward glide will maximize exposure of the antenna to the jamming signal regardless of orientation and its long TOF will maximize INS drift, the two most important parameters in accuracy/CEP.

 

Bottom line - while you can loft a JDAM in manual release, if the 12-15nm standoff of a JDAM isn't enough use a JSOW.

[falcon_120]

In any case, under good launch paramenter, like angels 30 and above and speed close to Mach 1, you will fin that you are able to lauch JDAMs just outside of SA11 maximum range, which is quite impressive standoff distance.

[Yoda967]

Zad,

 

I think the terms you're looking for are "near-peer adversary" and "alone and unafraid."

 

You're absolutely right that an unopposed scenario is unlikely against a near-peer adversary, but (as Buzz points out) you are equally unlikely to ever go into any hostilities alone and unafraid. From what I read in various forums, there are a lot of people who hold on to the erroneous idea that you'll ever "go it alone" in a high threat environment.

 

If your target site is well defended (IADS and fighters), you're going to be part of a large force strike. First, there will be a coordinated TLAM strike...with enough missiles to do major damage to the local air defenses, if not outright destroy them.

 

The first element of your strike package will be tasked with sweeping the opposing fighters, either killing them or drawing them away from your objective area.

 

The second element of your package will be the SEAD element, using tactics tailored to suppress whatever SAM sites remain after the TLAMs did their thing. In DCS, we don't have any EW aircraft, so the SEAD element will be fighters with HARMs or JSOWs.

 

Your strikers will have whatever precision guided ordnance best suits the target and the environment...well described by Sk000tch. The strikers may be escorted by AAW fighters or may be loaded out for self-escort.

 

There will likely be an AEW aircraft in the package, providing C2 for the whole event, and it will also have a dedicated escort element.

 

That's a minimum of nine aircraft, and there will be a decision matrix on the strike lead's kneeboard showing whether the mission is still a go after the loss of any of them.

 

The timing of it is also important -- you'll want the shortest timeline possible from TLAM TOT to the last aircraft egress. The less time your adversary has to react, the better.

[sk000tch]

Yoda- I was just commenting on the question of losing JDAMs as a general matter and his 2nd question of how do you typically attack a high threat target.

 

I don’t know that I’ve seen the same lone wolf stuff in forums, I think most DCS players understand fighters fight as a section. While I do see players and/or mission designers tend toward older tactics, specifically low level, I suspect this is due to DCS lack of EW (and stealth). Because that critical element of modern tactics is missing, players defeat surface to air threats by flying nap of the earth. I am not criticizing DCS, it would be impossible le to accurately simulate. And, frankly, overbanking ridge lines is much more fun than ensuring your positioned between a growler and threat.

 

While I wouldn’t say every strike includes sweep, sead, strike and EW, yours is a good description. There are many who argue that the massive reduction in low level training hours is a mistake. But, while pilots still terrain mask and penetrate low level when given the option at LFEs, low level strikes against defended targets died 30 years ago when f-117 flew circles around Baghdad and intruders/tornadoes came back with 30mm holes. For better or worse it’s not a part of modern doctrine.

 

For anyone interested, yt has a nice almost tacview style overview of the first night that includes all plus some of what gods described:

 

[Mikeck]

If you’re looking at the chances of an aircraft delivering a JDAM onto a site protected by IADS based on experiences in DCS, you’re missing a critical element. DCS does not simulate electronic warfare. A modern western nation wouldn’t even think about attacking into an area defended by any air defense system without being accompanied by an EW capability. Even if you can decrease the range a system can lock, track and guide by 30-40%, it’s enough to get close enough to drop a JDAM. Nevermind of course the JSoW and JASM which extend range to dozens or 100’s of miles

 

Not to mention that not every target has an S-400 Parked on it. But using EW and TALDS/HARM, western aircraft have been pretty successful in getting close enough to targets to drop a JDAM (can reach around 20 miles right? If high and fast?) But fact is, you aren’t using a JDAM to hit an air defense site....your using a JASM-ER or JSOW. Your using jdams and EW for targets that are 20 miles away from a site and merely “under its bubble”. A “bubble” that is made smaller with EW

[LastRifleRound]

There are, though, some flight regimes where lofting does produce a benefit. I read a document on it and don't remember what the reco's were, but there were some fringe medium-to-low altitude flight regimes where lofting would provide a benefit to stand-off distance. Can't remember exactly what those params were, though.

 

Even if there are benefits to lofting at that altitude (and you can bet I'm going to play around with it once JDAMs are complete!), the stand-off probably isn't as good as fast and high alt but hey, like skootch said, sometimes in DCS you just need to burn grass to avoid getting pasted on ingress in this sim. Could be just the ticket in a pinch in DCS.

[sk000tch]

There are, though, some flight regimes where lofting does produce a benefit...

 

Even if there are benefits to lofting at that altitude (and you can bet I'm going to play around with it once JDAMs are complete!), the stand-off probably isn't as good as fast and high alt but hey, like skootch said, sometimes in DCS you just need to burn grass to avoid getting pasted on ingress in this sim. Could be just the ticket in a pinch in DCS.

 

Sk00tch also said that straight and level release provides superior stand-off in all flight conditions. There is no benefit to lofting in range, and it gives a substantial precision hit. Same with dives for that matter, no increased penetration or accuracy/precision. The non-ballistic JDAM flight path is most efficient when given altitude, speed and time. A release at 30k ft and .9 Mach should give you 12-15nm stand-off, with maximum gps guidance time

 

There are always tactical situations you can come up with. As a result, there is a procedure for loft release but it says the same thing I’m saying

 

Again though, this is a game... everybody should fly however they want! Just because it’s less efficient doesn’t mean it’s not fun

[Akula]

In real life the SAM threat would be taken care of before you got there to bomb.

IRL, JSOWS and SLAMS would be used to disable the SAM sites. That or it's a few tanks and boots on the ground to disable the SAM threats. JSOWS AND SLAMS can be intercepted but its better than sending in a live body to deal with it.

[LastRifleRound]

Sk00tch also said that straight and level release provides superior stand-off in all flight conditions. There is no benefit to lofting in range, and it gives a substantial precision hit. Same with dives for that matter, no increased penetration or accuracy/precision. The non-ballistic JDAM flight path is most efficient when given altitude, speed and time. A release at 30k ft and .9 Mach should give you 12-15nm stand-off, with maximum gps guidance time

 

There are always tactical situations you can come up with. As a result, there is a procedure for loft release but it says the same thing I’m saying

 

Again though, this is a game... everybody should fly however they want! Just because it’s less efficient doesn’t mean it’s not fun

 

True enough. Perhaps I misunderstood what I read. Think it's time for another look!

[Spurts]

To answer the OP, I have used GBU-38s to drop SA-10 sites by targeting the TR, SR, and a few launchers from ~40nm (outside of their targeting range) then doing a NOE ingress, pulling up around 5-6nm and tossing my bombs before rolling back to reverse course. The hardest part is getting back down before the missile can reach you.

[amalahama]

Is there any other JDAM delivery modes available in the Hornet apart from Manual Release?

[AvroLanc]

Is there any other JDAM delivery modes available in the Hornet apart from Manual Release?

 

AUTO has been in for a while. Works well.

 

The AUTO 15/30/45 loft cues should be coming soon.

 

Flight Director is the third mode. Nothings been mentioned for it. Little used (even prohibited for JDAM use?) IRL.