How are strike missions carried out?

In a real life combat situation, how are strike missions carried out?

Especially immobile targets like buildings etc. I expect it to be pretty "simple" by using fixed coordinates as being tied to the surface target and using the adequate ordnance and computer assisted targeting methods to hit precisely.

Or is visually searching for a target a regular task? I guess due to satellite reconnaisance this shouldn't be necessary, but maybe due to rules of engagement it is?

Thanks for clearing this up :)

If it's a fixed target, they'd be using JDAMs at high altitude unless it was a strike into defended airspace. In that case, then most likely standoff weapons like glide bombs (JSOW) or cruise missiles. Or a SEAD flight would go in first, followed by JDAM carrying strikers, I suppose.

If the target cannot be destroyed by stand-off weaponry, blown up by spec-ops or long-range artillery and the target constitutes a high-risk target that needs to be taken out, will an air strike be planned.

As Kengou stated, the planning phase takes a lot of time, air defenses, routes, waypoints, refueling, C2 elements, target recon, area recon and god knows what else needs to be included, including risk to the strike package itself of course and planning for losses, CSAR and so on.

After that, it basically comes down to follow the plan, improvise, adapt and overcome whatever may be thrown at the strike package and work towards a successful mission.

It's never "simple" or "easy", ask any DCS veteran mission designer out there. There is a lot of stuff going on behind the curtain we never see or experience.

I

It's never "simple" or "easy", ask any DCS veteran mission designer out there. There is a lot of stuff going on behind the curtain we never see or experience.

Sorry, I meant "simple" by the technical/avionical side of target acquisition. I should have been way more precise :D

I mean generally the target acquisition and execution of the strike package. That's it.

Although the planning around it is super interesting but I didn't ask for deep look into it. At least not here, because for real I would love to get detailed look inside of such a planned out task.

Like "generally, fixed targets are acquired by putting a waypoint on top of the target that is set according to the coordinates determined by satellite recon".

Flying in DCS, I wonder if there would EVER be a reason in a real situation where a fixed target should NOT be an actual waypoint/fixed point programmed into the computer preflight and instead (like some DCS missions are created) you fly to waypoint X and have to visually look for the target building/artillery/etc.

If available, I'd guess laser targeting by ground units would be even more reliable and precise and first choice.

Moving targets is another story obviously.

@Sauvaaage

That's because most the missions created in/for DCS are a far cry from being "realistic", they're designed around arbitrary principles like "challenging, but not too hard" and "fun/interesting" (I'm not being sarcastic, it's a topic I've debated with mission designers at length for years). It doesn't help that a majority of people making missions for milsims are either civilian "enthusiasts" or just outright ignorant.

In real life, you would be provided with every scrap of information available that might help your mission, and if they knew exactly where the target was, they'd TELL you exactly where the target was, because in real life the objective is to accomplish your mission as safely and quickly as possible. Most air defenses/hostiles are deliberately designed to be "beatable" in some gamey fashion, which is necessary to an extent I suppose, but people often take it too far, imo.

@Sauvaaage

That's because most the missions created in/for DCS are a far cry from being "realistic", they're designed around arbitrary principles like "challenging, but not too hard" and "fun/interesting" (I'm not being sarcastic, it's a topic I've debated with mission designers at length for years). It doesn't help that a majority of people making missions for milsims are either civilian "enthusiasts" or just outright ignorant.

 

 

In real life, you would be provided with every scrap of information available that might help your mission, and if they knew exactly where the target was, they'd TELL you exactly where the target was, because in real life the objective is to accomplish your mission as safely and quickly as possible. Most air defenses/hostiles are deliberately designed to be "beatable" in some gamey fashion, which is necessary to an extent I suppose, but people often take it too far, imo.

To add on to this, IRL if the defenses are too extreme the mission would be scrubbed or assigned to another (stealthy or drone?) asset. The US doesn't risk fighters un-necessarily, fighters are too great of an asset. If it's not do-able with minimal or zero loss of life/airframes, it wont be assigned to a fighter squadron.

In real life, you would be provided with every scrap of information available that might help your mission, and if they knew exactly where the target was, they'd TELL you exactly where the target was, because in real life the objective is to accomplish your mission as safely and quickly as possible.

There you also have a point called KIO, said as kick it off.. There are points that are noticed what can happen to cancel the mission. If ToT ist not doable, if weather ist not perfect, if target looks different as briefed, if an caution light comes up and so on. Also fuel calculations and so on. If fuel state is blow a briefed value at IP or any other point, also kick it... There are a lot of points that prevent a safe mission. And this does not matter. If plane A can´t do the job, plane B, C, D or E will do it. Every abort is better than a damaged or downed jet...

Usually the targets will have mensurated category I coordinates (0-6m accuracy) so you can just use that as the designation. Realize that other things can effect this (such as GPS jamming) which might require you to self-target JDAMs or use laser guided bombs instead (which put the aircraft at higher risk because they can't simply drop then use max AB to get away from the target area and threats.)

@Cupra

I dunno... I always ride my Mk82s in to the target like Slim Pickens, regardless of risk, to insure a k-kill.

K-kill of what, I leave to your imagination.

It's true, too, that ''things change'' and there are possible variations of 'end result' like ''losing'', ''not finding the target because it moved'', ''not finding the target because you're an idiot'', ''something higher priority came up'', ''partial completion of objective necessitating follow ups''. This stuff is almost never included in missions either :p

Oh and don't forget the most common combat result in the history of warfare... ''nothing happened whatsoever and you're staring into the void waiting for your shift to end''.

As Kengou stated, the planning phase takes a lot of time, air defenses, routes, waypoints, refueling, C2 elements, target recon, area recon and god knows what else needs to be included, including risk to the strike package itself of course and planning for losses, CSAR and so on.

 

It's never "simple" or "easy", ask any DCS veteran mission designer out there. There is a lot of stuff going on behind the curtain we never see or experience.

The moment you walk into briefing before a strike mission and see they are making the mission plans on DCS mission editor :megalol:

The moment you walk into briefing before a strike mission and see they are making the mission plans on DCS mission editor :megalol:

CombatFlite, a planning tool for DCS looks VERY similar to Falcon View, the program I used in the military so the comparison isn't that far off.