# Mission planning



## ark (19 Dec 2006)

I have two questions concerning mission planning for pilots.

1. What are the aspects of a mission planning and what is the usual sequence that is followed? Something that may resemble the battle procedure we use on the green side.

2. Which aspects of a mission are planned by the pilot and which are by the Air Nav if there is one involved?

I am not looking for detailed answers (unless you have too much time on your hands ), a general idea of how it works will be enough.

Thanks


(Edited by Moderator to correct spelling in title.)


----------



## Heedm (19 Dec 2006)

It really depends on what kind of mission you're considering.  The things that are in common are weather, aircraft performance/capabilities, mission requirements, crew abilities, threats, other resources, timings, ...  

As far as a Nav or any other crewmember, their involvement in the mission planning really depends on the mission and the aircraft type.  Whoever does the planning, the aircraft commander is ultimately responsible.

Sorry for being so vague.  Is there a certain mission/type you were considering?


----------



## childs56 (19 Dec 2006)

I suggest that this not be discussed here. If you do so privatly then confirm the id and the need to know of the person asking. No offence but to much stuff is getting passed on the net now.


----------



## Loachman (19 Dec 2006)

CTD said:
			
		

> I suggest that this not be discussed here. If you do so privatly then confirm the id and the need to know of the person asking. No offence but to much stuff is getting passed on the net now.



I don't see any great secrets to protect.

The short answer is "It depends".

How do you do mission planning for a LAV/Tank/Gun crew?

You receive orders including specific tasks, analyze everything that you know, come up with courses of action, make a decision and plan, and then brief the crew. Battle procedure in the Tac Hel environment is not radically different from battle procedure for the rest of the Army, although it's tailored somewhat to our unique needs and is generally less formal. The supported unit's commander is also a key player, as we are working for him, after all.

In the case of a Griffon crew, the pilots will generally plan the mission in a co-operative manner while the flight engineer (FE) readies the aircraft.

In a multi-aircraft mission, you may see a captain planning and leading the mission while a major or two and even the CO are just flying another aircraft in the formation. They may even be first officers rather than aircraft captains if they are new on type. It's a harmonious blend of rank, experience, and qualification.


----------



## peaches (19 Dec 2006)

When I was on AWACS we would take a whole day to mission plan.  Early in the morning mission crew would get their assignments, what base we were going to, how many fighter missions we'd control in th MOA, break out the ATO etc..  We'd coord with the fighter pilots for the next days sortie, co-ord link 16 info, coord radar settings with ASO.  The pilots were sorting out weather issues, we always would conduct air refuelling so the PIC sorted that out with the tanker pilots.  After these issues were taken care of, then we'd order flight meals, water (AWACS sinks no longer work or are maintained, we use handy wipes to wash our hands). 

Next day come in 2 hrs before T/O, reveiw mission, sort out changes, and hopefully go fly (707's are very very old.  After we returned we debriefed and went home.  I theatre, oversae we had a diff ssytem, will not discuss, OPSEC!!!!


----------



## Globesmasher (19 Dec 2006)

The transport mission planning cycle is very simple.

It is usually done (nitiated/started) the day before as soon as the ATO is published.

The AC, copilot and the Nav will break out the ATO (develop their frag) and then compare what their task is to ensure it is in line with the ACO.  Other elements of SPINS and comm plans are also checked against the ATO frag.  Conflicts for corridors and other "gates" are also deconflicted as soon as possible.

The crew then takes what they have been taught on their various tactics courses and begin planning their mission IAW a planning matrix that is published in specific SMMs.  It's really quite mundane and routine.

Typically we use PFPS and Falconview for mission planning - digital mapping mission planning tool that can also incorporate many other mission planning aspects into it for threat avoidance and threat mitigation.

Crew duties, the day of the mission, for mission planning are usually quite specific.
The FE will take care of the aircraft and ensure it is fuelled and configured IAW what the AC wants.
The LM ensures the aft end of the aircraft is properly configured and loaded.
The copilot has his duties, as does the Nav.

The AC usually spends "the day of" liaising and consulting with other agencies who will be the same airspace as he is, resolving conflicts, and also ensuring he knows who he is talking to on the ground - what units he is supporting - what are the contingency plans, who is available for collateral assets and protection (OCA and SEAD for example) and so on.  Basically it is his job to ensure as many contingencies are planned ("what if" the mission) and as many risks as possible are mitigated.  Usually it looks like he is just standing around drinking coffee, chatting to people and talking on the phone.

Everything is done to a hard timeline - the ATO will designate the "time on target" so the crew simply crunches the mission backwards .... everything is then coordinated and staged according to hard gate times.

Like I said, it's all pretty mundane.  But like any human factors exercise, if the crew gets on well together the mission planning cycle is usually quick and easy - if they don't get along then it can be difficult.  Strong leadership and guidance from the AC, like in any team or unit, is essential.  Everybody has their "role" and specific job as detailed in the SMMs (Standard Maneuver Manuals), some of which are unclassified.


----------



## ark (19 Dec 2006)

Heedm said:
			
		

> It really depends on what kind of mission you're considering.  The things that are in common are weather, aircraft performance/capabilities, mission requirements, crew abilities, threats, other resources, timings, ...
> 
> As far as a Nav or any other crewmember, their involvement in the mission planning really depends on the mission and the aircraft type.  Whoever does the planning, the aircraft commander is ultimately responsible.
> 
> Sorry for being so vague.  Is there a certain mission/type you were considering?



In reference to my first question, I was looking to see if something generic exists that may apply independently of the aircraft type.  From what I see, it seems to be very specific to the aircraft and the mission type.

Thanks again to all of you.


----------



## Globesmasher (19 Dec 2006)

ark said:
			
		

> From what I see, it seems to be very specific to the aircraft and the mission type.



Yeah ark it really is very specific.  The role and the airframe really determine how to best "skin the cat".  It's all apples and oranges if you compare the Tac Avn guys to the transport guys to the fighter guys ..... different planning cycles and different objectives.  We may all use the same tools and the same ingredients ..

ATO, ACO, SPINS, Comm Plan ...
Liaise with the CAOC ...
Talk to the GLO to see exactly what he wants ...
PFPS, Falconview, CFPS ..

But how we employ those tools within mission planning specifics ..... well it gets very different between the airframes .. nothing really generic beyond the list of ingredients really.


----------



## Zoomie (20 Dec 2006)

SAR mission planning is a little more.... curt.

We have 30 mins to be wheels up and on the road to anywhere in our SRR.  

When the bat phone rings and we are launched, the FO and FE usually head out to the aircraft immediately to start spinning props and warming up the systems.  The AC and NAV stay behind in squadron planning to formulate an initial plan and file the flight plan.  Team Lead and Member (SARTechs) take direction from the AC and load any extraneous gear on board that is required for the particular mission.

The majority of our planning, recce, orders, etc happens enroute.  Most times we make decisions on how we are going to approach each mission when we are on-scene.


----------



## Good2Golf (29 Dec 2006)

Globesmasher said:
			
		

> Yeah ark it really is very specific.  The role and the airframe really determine how to best "skin the cat".  It's all apples and oranges if you compare the Tac Avn guys to the transport guys to the fighter guys ..... different planning cycles and different objectives.  We may all use the same tools and the same ingredients ..
> 
> ATO, ACO, SPINS, Comm Plan ...
> 
> ...



TAT and Tac Hel are actually fairly similar, less aviation 'packages' being blocked on the ATO...

G2G


----------

