Training mission- target recognition

[Speed]

Here's a mission for people who are still struggling to figure out the difference between an M1 and a T-80, or a Stryker and a BTR-80. The mission is geared to be run on a server with Slmod beta 5.0 or higher installed (see my signature for a link to the latest Slmod version). You can run it without Slmod, but since without Slmod none of the trigger logic will work, you'll miss out on all the fun :music_whistling:

 

Anyway, this mission presents you with a large field of "friendly" (US) and "enemy" (Russian) stationary targets all mixed up together. You must kill only enemy units, and none of the friendlies. Target types represented:

 

Russian:

T-72

T-80

BMP-2

BMP-3

BTR-80

SA-9

SA-13

ZSU-23-4

2S6

2S19

 

American:

M1

M2

LAV-25

Strykers (three variants)

HMMWV (four variants)

M109

 

Anyway, while we don't find this mission all that fun to fly, the feedback I have gotten so far indicates that others think it to be a good learning tool. I've had a couple people in my squad tell me it has significantly improved their ability to recognize target types.

 

Slmod is functions are used so that friendly-killers are called out (via chat), and punishment is dished out for hitting more than two friendlies in a sortie :devil_2:

Anyway, here's the briefing:

 

NOTE: Slmod Beta 5.0 or higher is required for full mission functionality!

 

At waypoint 2 are friendly and enemy forces mixed together, with their AI disabled. Use discretion and ONLY hit enemy targets! SEE THE BRIEFING IMAGES FOR THE DIFFERENT TARGET TYPES. EACH AIRCRAFT IS ALLOWED NO MORE THAN TWO FRIENDLY FIRE HITS.

 

Boar, Hawg: Runway starts

Tusk: Ramp start

 

Default loadout:

6X AGM-65D

9X GBU-12

2X AIM-9M

1X TGP

1X ECM

1150 rounds CM

Target Recognition Final v1.miz

Edited November 7, 2011 by Speed

[Druid_]

:helpsmilie:Is this for U.S. pilots only? Us Brits don't get involved in friendly fire incidents :lookaround:

[Speed]

:helpsmilie:Is this for U.S. pilots only? Us Brits don't get involved in friendly fire incidents :lookaround:

 

Naw, A-10 pilots don't need to know what British vehicles look like. Just so long as you don't forget to put your orange panels on top of your vehicle, you'll be just fine! Trust me. I mean, who could be so dumb as to confuse them with something else? Certainly not any A-10 pilots. It's not like they look like rockets anything. :helpsmilie::music_whistling:

Edited November 7, 2011 by Speed

[Rainmaker]

Agree or disagree...but I don't really find much humor in that. :(

[Daimaju]

Agree or disagree...but I don't really find much humor in that. :(

 

Totally agree with you...:(

 

 

Nice training material anyways... arigato.

[Speed]

Agree or disagree...but I don't really find much humor in that. :(

 

Yes, I know it's a joke in poor taste, but I couldn't resist. You can't say anything without offending SOMEBODY, so why not? It's something that you might laugh at, but know immediately that you were wrong for laughing at it. At the same time, it's very true. My joke you got offended by reflects my opinion of the way those pilots behaved. As far as I am concerned, those pilots were f**king idiots. Maybe I'm wrong about that, but didn't they say, as they were shooting the British vehicles, "gee I sure hope these aren't friendlies". THEN WHY ARE YOU SHOOTING THEM?! I thought that folks were supposed to hold fire if there was any doubt?! Someone please correct me if I am wrong about this- after all, I am no combat veteran.

 

To better answer Druid's question, I'll ask a question myself: how useful would a mission have been with 40 or 60 different types of ground vehicles? It would have been completely overwhelming to trainees. You don't want to try to shove too much in their face at the same time, it just won't work, period. You gotta spoon feed people knowledge or they won't retain anything. At least, that's the way I am. I gotta crawl before I walk, and walk before I run. Even as is, I am pushing it, as there are 16 briefing images and 21 different vehicles and vehicle varieties represented. Basically, in this mission, I just used the most commonly represented vehicles in DCS. If you know what these look like, chances are, if you're actually having to support Lerclercs or Challengers, you'll recognize them as NOT being Russian tanks, even if you don't know what they are exactly.

Edited November 9, 2011 by Speed

[kylania]

As far as I am concerned, those pilots were f**king idiots.

 

They were told multiple times there were no friendly units in the area and were given specific permission to engage. A tragic incident indeed, but I feel the blame is in the lack of proper communication from all parties, not specifically with the pilots.

[Speed]

They were told multiple times there were no friendly units in the area and were given specific permission to engage. A tragic incident indeed, but I feel the blame is in the lack of proper communication from all parties, not specifically with the pilots.

 

Sure, there is almost always blame to go around, and I'm not saying there wasn't from what little I understand of the situation. But the final decision rests with the pilots, as least, in this case it did. They weren't able to identify what kind of vehicle they were engaging, yes, I know this is before the A-10 had a targeting pod, but still... does it make sense? Orange rockets? Whoever has heard of orange rockets?! Was there any intelligence that the enemy was painting their vehicles orange at the time like that? If not, isn't it better to be safe than sorry?

 

Oh well, it's really easy to pass judgement from an armchair, but it really didn't look like a smart move on their part. They weren't sure what they were shooting at- all they knew was that they were orange on the top.

[XarBat]

Just saw the video and I am very curious as to what the pilot meant when he said he needed to think about geting home, because of the time.

[sscan63]

Thanks! Maybe this is a document I need to work on....but of course..training is more interesting than a manual or doument.

Comin' In