Mission Planning Software

[Guest KoolKat]

While in the lab, I dealt almost exculsively with the weaponeering process and the generation of the data that provides the means for weaponeering softwares and data...

It did kinda seem silly to me that you guys would actually use a computer disk to figure out what to arm your jet with, but I've heard pretty crazy things before.

My question (actually) is how often and really just how, do you mission commanding metal-bearers actually use or imploy the Joint Air-to-Surface Weaponnering Software?

And, are there other things/systems you use to aid you in arming your weapon platforms?

[Hacker]

I used JAWS all the time during mission planning in the F-15E. More appropriately, I used the *information* generated by the program all the time, mostly when dealing with pre-planned LGB targets. The primary user is actually the intel shop, though -- we give them the target, and then they gonk out the information and pass it along to the pilots.

JAWS is needed because it is where all bomb attack planning starts. Virtually *everything* hinges on the information that software (or JMEM) tells us.

Before you can figure out a weapon release parameter, you need to know the impact condition desired. To know the impact condition, you need to know the desired weapon effect. JAWS (again, or JMEM) is the key component of figuring out what weapon effect is needed to kill a pre-planned target.

The other most useful mission planning software tools in A-G mission employment are CWDS and the Raytheon GBU-24 planning software. They are the next step in the attack planning process -- it gives the release condition required to attain the impact condition (and corresponding weapon effect).

I'm sure that Rainman and Snake will extoll the virtues of the "combat string" for attack planning and scoff use of this kind of software to generate attack parameters, but I found it highly useful. In the case of the GBU-24, it simply impossible to design an effective attack without it. Hell, even *with* it there are many known "misses" (especially in Allied Force)!

[Guest gonads]

Back at the EWO school house, we had to use it for our capstone. The instructors told us that they used it all the time for their platforms, which was every type of plane you could stuff an EW on.

[Guest Rainman A-10]

Short answer, JAWS is used all the time.

Originally posted by Hacker:

I'm sure that Rainman and Snake will extoll the virtues of the "combat string" for attack planning and scoff use of this kind of software to generate attack parameters, but I found it highly useful.

You will never hear me scoff it.

JAWS is great for missions where the target is known prior to takeoff. We don't use JAWS before every CAS mission, we use rules of thumb to weaponeer in the air to match the weapons we're carrying to the targets presented. However, those ROTs come directly from JAWS planning.

It should also be used when you crank your mils (CWDS) to set the fuze settings and impact spacing for different target types if you plan to rip the bombs/CBU.

All that mil cranking and ROT work is done by the weapons officer in an A-10 squadron. We do not allow individual flight leads to crank their own mils (CWDS). The MPC will do the JAWS planning if we are assigned some sort of interdiction tasking (not common for the A-10) and the "answer" is handed to the flight lead when he shows up to brief. It is different in every community.

Originally posted by Hacker:

Hell, even *with* it there are many known "misses" (especially in Allied Force)!

JAWS won't correct for winds during the terminal phase of guiding a GBU-10/12. The pilot (or WSO) has to do that. I laugh my ass off when people claim they don't have to offset for winds on a GBU because they are going fast. LOTS of bombs missed in OIF during the crappy wx when the SFC-4K winds were howling and guys from most every MDS just went to point/ares track directly on the target and expected a shack.

I talked to guys at several conferences after the war about combat offset techniques for wind. Most said they didn't have to offset because they were going fast. I told them it didn't matter how fast they were going at release, what mattered for a PW II was the weapon's terminal velocity, impact angle and winds from SFC-4K (or SFC-2K, technique). They would look back at me, mouth agape, and say "Yeah, but we're going faster." Yeah, right.

[Toro]

JAWS and CWDS are key to our planning for the Strike Eagle. Hacker got at the main points, the only thing I'll piggyback on is that we figure out what our target is, how to kill it (JAWS/CWDS) and work everything back from there (Weaponeering 101). I've had students come up with a stellar attack plan and have all kinds of pretty lines drawn on a 1:50 map only to realize that for all their planning, the weapon isn't going to do d!ck because they hit it at the wrong angle / low airspeed / wrong munition.