ICT "Integrated Combat Trun around" equipment.

[Wildhare]

When you land to rearm and refuel  (NOW) you park in an open space maybe with a fuel truck and a Hummer nearby.  What i would like to do (and see) is set up an ICT Spot with MJ1/MJ4 bomb lift trucks with a missile trailer, and a bomb trailer. and even a ammo trailer.  They show the MJ1 and MJ4 (jammers) in the background of Nellis, but dont have them available for us to use.  we dont need to go as far to make ground crew to load you and fuel you. 

[Tank50us]

I too would like to see these. The only issue is that real world re-arming can take quite a while to complete (up to an hour), and almost always requires the jet to be cold and dark before the ground crew approach the plane. That said, with the bits developed for the Super Carrier, we could very well see these sorts of things added to the game whenever you're at an airbase rearming and refueling, even if all they do is pull up to your aircrafts 'safety diamond' until they're finished, at which point they drive back to their staging area.

[Lace]

1 hour ago, Tank50us said:

I too would like to see these. The only issue is that real world re-arming can take quite a while to complete (up to an hour), and almost always requires the jet to be cold and dark before the ground crew approach the plane. That said, with the bits developed for the Super Carrier, we could very well see these sorts of things added to the game whenever you're at an airbase rearming and refueling, even if all they do is pull up to your aircrafts 'safety diamond' until they're finished, at which point they drive back to their staging area.

 

I think realistic refuelling and rearming times should be at least a switchable option.  With a time skip function it would mean players are not sitting at their computer for 30-60 minutes (unless they want to watch the ground crew in action), but a realistic amount of time would have elapsed in the sim world.

[Tank50us]

4 minutes ago, Lace said:

 

I think realistic refuelling and rearming times should be at least a switchable option.  With a time skip function it would mean players are not sitting at their computer for 30-60 minutes (unless they want to watch the ground crew in action), but a realistic amount of time would have elapsed in the sim world.

That's certainly fine for Single Player, not so much for multi-player however. Having done ground work (albeit with civilian aircraft) the best turn time you can get is about 65-75 minutes from the moment the plane stops and shuts down to the moment it's pushed out and saluted. Obviously, this is with civil aviation, but the same applies to military aircraft as well. On top of that, while a 757 could be fueled and loaded at the same time, a military aircraft cannot. The plane is typically shut down, fueled, and then loaded. The reason for this is two fold: 1 is obvious, if the fuel ignites having live ordinance in the flames tends to end.... badly... and second, those ordinance loaders can start a fuel fire inadvertently which leads to the first issue.

 

So while it is unrealistic, I would be perfectly fine with a fuel and ammo truck taking up positions just outside the safety zone until my aircraft is fueled and armed. Which in technical terms is also much easier for ED to do, since the alternative is to animate humans for every plane type in the game, and every plane type that follows, which would be a lot of work, and even more work if a new frame is added.

[Lace]

1 hour ago, Tank50us said:

That's certainly fine for Single Player, not so much for multi-player however. Having done ground work (albeit with civilian aircraft) the best turn time you can get is about 65-75 minutes from the moment the plane stops and shuts down to the moment it's pushed out and saluted. Obviously, this is with civil aviation, but the same applies to military aircraft as well. On top of that, while a 757 could be fueled and loaded at the same time, a military aircraft cannot. The plane is typically shut down, fueled, and then loaded. The reason for this is two fold: 1 is obvious, if the fuel ignites having live ordinance in the flames tends to end.... badly... and second, those ordinance loaders can start a fuel fire inadvertently which leads to the first issue.

 

So while it is unrealistic, I would be perfectly fine with a fuel and ammo truck taking up positions just outside the safety zone until my aircraft is fueled and armed. Which in technical terms is also much easier for ED to do, since the alternative is to animate humans for every plane type in the game, and every plane type that follows, which would be a lot of work, and even more work if a new frame is added.

 

It's certainly possible to do hot-pit turnarounds during surge tempo ops, but that was kind of meant for a real Cold War turned hot scenario when the expected life of an airframe was no longer dictated by maintenance schedules or fatigue cycles, IYKWIM.

 

 

[Tank50us]

3 minutes ago, Lace said:

 

It's certainly possible to do hot-pit turnarounds during surge tempo ops, but that was kind of meant for a real Cold War turned hot scenario when the expected life of an airframe was no longer dictated by maintenance schedules or fatigue cycles, IYKWIM.

 

 

 

And the life expectancy of the ground crews was also just as short, since such a conflict would usually involve the sudden need of 1,000,000 sun block. So if ya got sucked into an engine ten seconds before a nuke vaporized the airbase... oh well. And like I said, typically the plane is shut down for the refueling and rearming operations being conducted. Although one thing I'd also like to see is a crane come out and lift you up when you're being repaired, and set you back down on the ramp if you aren't on it. Seriously, the number of times I got stuck in the mud in my F-14 and had to firewall my throttle to unstick myself....

[Wildhare]

FYI... An actual "ICT" involving F-16 Loading:  6 MK82's , 2 AIM 9's, 510rnds ammo and chaff/flare, as well as refueling  takes Approximately 14 min.  The fastest I witnessed was 12min 34 sec from chock placement to chock removal.  ( Homestead AFB July 1985 to Jan 1988)  **46270**

[WHOGX5]

I don't know about the USAF, but the Swedish Air Force had turnaround times of about 10 minutes for complete refueling and rearming of a combat aircraft while in a forest somewhere, with 6 ground crew. I'd imagine the USAF would get somewhere close to that during an actual full scale war at a fully equipped airbase.

[Baco]

Am I the only one that thinks that a turn around on a modern battlefield has never happened since the Battle of Britain? I mean with the same CREW.

Seriously,  a crew after flying a 1.5 hs mission gets loaded and fueled again to go out again?, same crew?...

I would think it unrealistic.

 

I believe the respawning nature of modern video games has spoiled our perception of reality...

[Tank50us]

4 hours ago, Baco said:

Am I the only one that thinks that a turn around on a modern battlefield has never happened since the Battle of Britain? I mean with the same CREW.

Seriously,  a crew after flying a 1.5 hs mission gets loaded and fueled again to go out again?, same crew?...

I would think it unrealistic.

 

I believe the respawning nature of modern video games has spoiled our perception of reality...

 

Actually it happened quite a bit during the '91 Gulf War, where Hog pilots would sit in their pits, engines sometimes still running while the ground crews serviced the aircraft, and at the end of the having to be helped out of the aircraft due to how tired they were. The same is something practiced with Attack Helos.

I know what I just said contradicts my points on having to completely shut down for rearm/refuel, but bare in mind, that is under normal circumstances, not under wartime conditions. And there are aircraft the ground crews simply will not approach until the engine is off due to the ingestion risk, like the Harrier, Corsair II, Crusader, and aircraft where the hard points (and nose gear) are dangerously close to the intake.

[Lace]

11 hours ago, Tank50us said:

 

Actually it happened quite a bit during the '91 Gulf War, where Hog pilots would sit in their pits, engines sometimes still running while the ground crews serviced the aircraft, and at the end of the having to be helped out of the aircraft due to how tired they were. The same is something practiced with Attack Helos.

I know what I just said contradicts my points on having to completely shut down for rearm/refuel, but bare in mind, that is under normal circumstances, not under wartime conditions. And there are aircraft the ground crews simply will not approach until the engine is off due to the ingestion risk, like the Harrier, Corsair II, Crusader, and aircraft where the hard points (and nose gear) are dangerously close to the intake.

 

One of the reasons the A-10 engines were mounted above the wings was to more easily facilitate hot-pit rearms with less risk to ground crew.

 

15 hours ago, Baco said:

Am I the only one that thinks that a turn around on a modern battlefield has never happened since the Battle of Britain? I mean with the same CREW.

Seriously,  a crew after flying a 1.5 hs mission gets loaded and fueled again to go out again?, same crew?...

I would think it unrealistic.

 

I believe the respawning nature of modern video games has spoiled our perception of reality...

 

Go read some of the contemporary accounts of ODS, you will find plenty of examples of crews flying multiple sorties without leaving the cockpit.  It was the very definition of surge tempo ops, and they were seriously expecting a much tougher fight than they actually received.  With hindsight ODS looks like a cake-walk, the reality at the time was that the coalition were facing one of the most advanced AD networks and some of the most battle-hardened forces in the world, and a leadership who had already demonstrated an ability and willingness to use chemical and biological weapons against his own citizens.

[Tank50us]

2 hours ago, Lace said:

Go read some of the contemporary accounts of ODS, you will find plenty of examples of crews flying multiple sorties without leaving the cockpit.  It was the very definition of surge tempo ops, and they were seriously expecting a much tougher fight than they actually received.  With hindsight ODS looks like a cake-walk, the reality at the time was that the coalition were facing one of the most advanced AD networks and some of the most battle-hardened forces in the world, and a leadership who had already demonstrated an ability and willingness to use chemical and biological weapons against his own citizens.

Of course, once that leadership was introduced to 2,000lb LGBs by Sir Nighthawk, it all changed drastically on the ground. Especially once the Eagles, Falcons, and Hornets slaughtered their aircraft, and the RAF smashed their runways. On top of that, the coalition forces that showed up had been training for this exact kind of fight for the better part of 40 years, and finally got to use it (Granted, yes, the tactics were developed in the late 70s, early 80s, they were still based on lessons learned in from the 40s, 50s, and early 60s) against an army that, by comparison, was only really used to just flexing its muscle now and then and making a show.

 

This is (in a way, thankfully) a good thing when it comes to armies like the one Iraq had in '91. The reason is that their desire for a 'show' doesn't make them a very effective fighting force when faced with an enemy that's there to win. I say this, because militaries like that of the DPRK, PLA, Iranians, Syrians, (to an extent) Turks, Egyptians, and others do tend have some very capable hardware, but when their army is either forced to spend most of its time studying party propaganda, or their officers have solid political connections and no real battle experience of training, it tends to fall apart pretty quick when faced with militaries who train their armies to fight, and their officers to lead. Bonus points if that army also teaches its troops to improvise and problem solve, because when your officer takes a bullet to the face, the next man under him better know what to do from that point on or he's dead next. Something that plagued the Iraqi army in 91 was that last bit.

 

For those wondering why that is, it's due to the culture of Iraqi army at the time (and this applies to many others as well to this day), in that the conscripts job was not to question orders at all. They were to follow them without question or hesitation, and if they don't, they will get executed (in the DPRK it's even worse), as will anyone else who doesn't follow the order given. And if that officer is killed, the next one up the chain gives the orders or appoints someone else to do it. A culture where Dave is in charge, and no one else can take his place is not one that fosters a great army after all.

[Pocket Kings]

Thank you Tank50us for your valuable insight. You seem to have experienced circumstances that led to these conclusions. Do you believe the root cause lies in the cultural realm or is it a problem of the particular army you mentioned, namely a fear based doctrine within the military? The reason I'm asking is, in case of Iran, which I consider the most capable given their input / output efficiency (money and restriction wise), the leadership must know that all the barking doesn't represent strength. I mean, who falls for that except the the few fanatic nationalists? Iranians LOVE to outthink other people. On the other hand, if no one picks up the game, you just fool yourself. The US mentality is totally focused on results and bottom lines and the military reflects that in my opinion.

[Tank50us]

21 minutes ago, Pocket Kings said:

Thank you Tank50us for your valuable insight. You seem to have experienced circumstances that led to these conclusions. Do you believe the root cause lies in the cultural realm or is it a problem of the particular army you mentioned, namely a fear based doctrine within the military? The reason I'm asking is, in case of Iran, which I consider the most capable given their input / output efficiency (money and restriction wise), the leadership must know that all the barking doesn't represent strength. I mean, who falls for that except the the few fanatic nationalists? Iranians LOVE to outthink other people. On the other hand, if no one picks up the game, you just fool yourself. The US mentality is totally focused on results and bottom lines and the military reflects that in my opinion.

 

I've picked it up mostly through just what I see and hear. As for Iran, well, they like to deny it, but they are at the core Persia, and I'm sure many a Iranian leader would love nothing more than to 'restore' the Persian Empire, just as many a Russian Officer would love to 'restore' the Soviet Empire, and I'm sure you could find a few people in various European Countries who would love to see the restoration of their empires. The main thing standing in their (any nation willing to aggressively expand) way, frankly, is us. Even though, yes, our military does have issues within the ranks, it's not impossible for us to overcome those issues in a pinch. And when we do overcome those issues, we hit back like a Major League batter with a sledge hammer.

 

For example, no one in their right mind would doubt that China could take Taiwan right now if they really wanted to, and they could certainly take Japan as well with the sheer number of men and material at their disposal. As Stalin said, Quantity is a quality all of its own. What's the point of having a few great tanks, when your opponent can build hundreds or thousands of OK tanks after all. Japan may have the quality equipment, and quality troops to use it, but when the total PLA (by numbers), and those of draft age dwarf the draft age population of Japan, it won't make much of a difference when the smoke clears. And given what China is doing right now to their Ethnic Muslims, they probably won't lose sleep over using atomics to clear a path. The reason they won't even attempt it however, is because of the US Military, and its raw capability. Invade Taiwan or Japan, and the US will respond with the full capability of its military and MIC, and with us, come our other allies as well, which makes it a much more even fight on the ground, and especially at sea and in the air. Same goes for anyone else acting aggressive. They rattle the fence, but they dare not cross it for fear of the big dog on the other side.

[Pocket Kings]

For the most part I agree. But the MIC has a problem, like any western society: The financial system. It collapses, not just since Corona or 2008. At least since the 70's. My opinion on Vietnam is that the war was designed to be prolonged, not won. Great industrial booster, also on the Soviet side.

 

To some extent the same can be said about Afghanistan, though I acknowledge the war itself and the country have a totally different topology. Since the 70's the financial system lives off of medication, not a long-term plan towards health.

 

I believe the Chinese openly and bluntly express their believe about their superiority, be it in the cultural sense, financially, intellectually. Of course they know that their MIC is at least 20 years behind, but so are the US allies ones. I'm from Germany. If you really want to make a good joke, talk about our almighty tanks. There was a point recently when Germany had under 10 operational tanks, Leo II. It's not just a sheer shame but also a severe security risk to NATO. The situation is unbearable.

 

Back to the bigger picture: There was once an emperor in China in ancient times who was a mad man. He ordered to burn the, at the time, biggest fleet of warships, ferries and fast vessels. This is a dark spot on Chinas soul and they dare to make this mistake again. They buy their way into every weakened country. They will soon conquer Africas mainland, they're entering South America since the mid 2000's. Australia is just a puppet to them, an soon to be outpost. They control media, universities there.

 

China knows their topology isn't as favorable as the US one. It's relatively easy to cut them off. Heck, they even import rice! They couldn't feed everybody if they had to in a blockade scenario. Thus their only strategy is that of many shores.

 

I've had business relations with Chinese and let me tell you: argueing or disputing anything is next to impossible. Worse than with an angry wife. Yet at the same time they smile and pretend to be polite. In reality the don't give two ... ones. That's my experience at least. I know not all 1.4 billion of them are the same of course, but I guess you don't make it over there with a down to earth and truly non-deceptive mentality.

 

In essence, I don't see them stopping and I don't see any power except the United States to present them the stop sign. Europe is a just a name for a geographical part of Earth, not a concept, not a union, just a joke. Tough times like these demonstrate it.

 

Your former President, at least in our media, was portrayed as the most incompetent man to ever walk the face of earth. The more I learned about China, the more I recognized that maybe he wasn't that stupid and he also realized the US has two routes: Counter Chinas aggressive expansion or retract and focus on itself, which can work. North America can survive without anybody else.

 

Your thoughts are appreciated and to all others: excuse the derail.

[Baco]

Yeah you might be rigth the only accounts of desert Storm I read were "Vipers in the Storm" and "Every man a Tiger".

It must have been brutal to sit in that cockpit on the tarmac in that climate...

 

 

[Tank50us]

3 hours ago, Baco said:

Yeah you might be rigth the only accounts of desert Storm I read were "Vipers in the Storm" and "Every man a Tiger".

It must have been brutal to sit in that cockpit on the tarmac in that climate...

 

 

 

They know what they signed up for, and they fully accept it.

 

7 hours ago, Pocket Kings said:

Your former President, at least in our media, was portrayed as the most incompetent man to ever walk the face of earth. The more I learned about China, the more I recognized that maybe he wasn't that stupid and he also realized the US has two routes: Counter Chinas aggressive expansion or retract and focus on itself, which can work. North America can survive without anybody else.

 

Our media did the same, but when you understand how the CCP works, you find out he was doing what was needed to keep China from going aggressive, but no one wanted to take him seriously on it believing that China would not be a threat.... Come 2020 and China treating COVID the same way the Soviets treated Chernobyl....

[Wildhare]

Thank you all for the Dialog about the viability of an "Integrated Combat Turnaround" or something similar to a quick rearm and refueling of an AC. The start of this post was to request the "Graphic" equipment to set up a singular place on the airfield to taxi to to have a ICT preformed.  I believe that it would enhance the immersion to do so.  Not taxing to an empty parking area or worse yet just land and spin around on runway and rearm and take off again.  

[Pocket Kings]

Have you watched the Grim Reapers video showing the new F22 Raptor mod? While attaching ground power, the carrier trolley rolled by. Nice touch.

 

I think people was more dynamic movement on the ground.

 

The devs could also consider using more GPU rendering power while engines are off. I mean, what do you need this dormant GPU capability for while waiting for the ground crew to fill you up and attach ordnance?

[Wildhare]

I Have set up a working ICT.  Take as long as it takes  DCS to rearm & refuel.  As soon as the AC crosses into the trigger area for that ICT a Fuel truck, a MMS line truck and Crew Chief are dispatched to that spot.  They stay for 2 min the move away. 

The reason for a ICT area is for immersion. Also to encourage the"Team effort" immersion (Ground Crew & Air Crew) as seen on the Super Carrier.   instead of spinning around at the end of runway and rearming on the shoulder with half a dozen others.  There is a tone of eye candy on the the airports, immerse your self in this "Simulator"  

In our Mission we give extra scoring points when using the ICT area.   As well as points for bringing home a crippled AC, surviving a successful Ejection. but losing a life and/or AC has a SEVER reduction in your score. Every target ground and air is scored. Your score is posted to our web page.  You literally can bet on your "Bombs" score with your buddies. 

 

PET PEEVE:  Fly out to target/dogfight, win or hit the target then eject and grab a new AC and do it over.  Pilots that do that lose my respect.

 

A second area same Mission

Edited November 24, 2022 by Wildhare

[Wildhare]

and a third airbase with working ICT