Just wondering...?

[Esme]

You guys dont seem to be a communicative lot! :-)

I wanted to discuss with my unit COs before finalising plans, but none responded, so I had to finalise them without any input from my unit COs.  Bearing in mind Im still pretty new to AH and this is my first TOD as a unit CO I'm wondering whether or not you chaps usually use unit COs as a command staff, drawing on their experience, or whether you usually just think up a plan alone and thats it.

Personally I prefer to consult with unit COs at times - and in this case, given my inexperience here was very keen to do so. But noone replied to my emails until this morning, when Fariz commented on the allocation of 109s.

So... was it that you didnt receive my emails in good time, guys, (if so, none of you have said on the forum that you havent) didnt you WANT to comment, or are you simply not used to being asked your opinions by the side CO?  Please understand that I am not criticisng anybody, Im just trying to find out how things are/have been done here. My side-COing experience has all been in WB, so its a bit like travelling to another country - everything is kinda familiar, yet different too... I'm just trying to learn the local customs, here... :-)

Esme

[Dinger]

When I drew up orders for the last TOD, I gave a day's delay between the "preliminary plan" and the "final orders" for feedback.  None came.  
My assumption is that nobody had anything to say about the orders.
I do from time to time send some "notes" to the CO after receiving the orders.

Don't sweat it.  It's your command, run it as you see fit.

[Esme]

I'm not sweating it as you say, I'm just thoroughly surprised. I'm a bomber pilot, I could use feedback from fighter guys regarding how best to achieve what I want done.

Similarly, I'm used to a situation where I'm giving my target and maybe a suggested route, but am left to work out the actual flight plan and liaise with any escorts or sweep provided myself. What Ive seen thus far means that COs arent making use of the experience and knowledge of their unit commanders, which is a bit wasteful, to say the least.  Cant expect everybody to be good all-rounders,  and most folks are better at one side of things (fighters or bombers) than the other. Considerably better, in some cases.

(shrugs..) OK,  but when next its my turn to be a side CO I'd appreciate at least emails letting me know youve received orders, and preferably commenting on the prelim plan so I can take comments into consideration before finalising it. I'll also warn you all  now that I WILL henceforth be flying my bomber sorties my way rather than any other way, if what I am ordered to do is not good practice. I wouldnt order you fighter chaps to try to HO every time, I'd expect you to put your skills to use to best effect. Which is what I want to do with my skills as a bomber unit CO. A large chunk of that is efficient flight planning and then flying the planned route efficiently.

I hope that you all understand that Im not being deliberately awkward here, I just want for my unit to be employed to best effect. No disrespect, but some of you chaps clearly aren't too well up on operating buffs well - just as I'm no expert on using fighters well.

!

Esme

[Dinger]

Well, esme, speaking as a WB transplant myself (never flew any S3s, but I did fly/FL/CO numerous sunday SLs and EMCs), here's my impression of AH scenarios:

On the whole, TOD has done wonderful things for scenario discipline.  It has helped in reducing the "arena mentality".

Still, AH has had more of an "arena mentality' than (as far as I've seen) WB ever had.  The arena mentality pretty much includes the following:
A. Odds are I'm not going to land.
B. There will always be a higher enemy plane arriving.
C. If I don't get a kill fast, I won't get a kill.

So you see folks pressing the advantage, fighting teammates for kills, and putting themselves at the mercy of the next bad guy to enter the "toiletbowl furball"

As a CO and FL, you should be aware of this tendency and actively guard against it taking over.  One thing I learned in WB scenarios applies here: keep orders simple, and repeat the obvious (stay high, don't turn).  Heck, appoint an XO whose only job is to repeat the obvious.  And put all that stuff in the orders. At the bottom, give a description of expected scenario behaviour (when the event will happen, when to show up, radio discipline, and so on) and put links to the rules page, the scoring page, and anything else you can think of.  Boilerplate's there for a reason.

Similarly, I'm used to a situation where I'm given my target and maybe a suggested route, but am left to work out the actual flight plan and liaise with any escorts or sweep provided myself. What Ive seen thus far means that COs arent making use of the experience and knowledge of their unit commanders, which is a bit wasteful, to say the least.

I disagree.  You are absolutely correct that the CO should delegate as much authority to FLs.  But I'm of the opinion it's the CO's responsibility to arrange multi-squadron operations.  With a bomber/escort/sweep mission, for me that means grouping the flights into logical groups of about three flights (e.g., Bombers, Sweep flight, "close escort") and giving one F/L command over the whole group.  Experience and knowledge are great in planning, and in the technical details of execution (exact positioning, fuel consumption, and so on), but when it comes to tactical issues, a functional, strong plan with a clear chain of command is better than three or four people trying to get it "perfect" without stepping on each other's egos while waiting for an absentee commander to work out a solution.

And, yeah, it goes without saying that you gotta know your squads here.  Some have great sticks; others are drunk most of the time ; some are bomber specialists; others lose all their planes on Jabo runs; some spend hours practicing; others consider their squad so dangerous they only get together for TODs; Some can manage fuel well; and few -- very very few -- can actually fly a proper escort for bombers.


(all squads portrayed herein are fictional and are not to be taken as representations of real life AH squadrons)

[daddog]

I think dinger has hit it on the head with much of what he said. WB has a fabulous foundation in their special historical events. The crews that work them and the players who participate have “it down”. Many of the squads have been involved with their events for years! The TOD’s I started are only 11 months old. The MA mentality dinger described always bleeds over to the events. Very few TOD squads are “only” event squads. Even my squad has about 50% pilots that enjoy the MA. I am not knocking them because I am just as guilty as the next for “pressing for that kill” when I should be RTBing or breaking off back to escort duty. Nevertheless you will find it here no matter what arena or event you are in.

The same is true for the trading of information and communication. Some squads are VERY disciplined. 56th Fighter group for example, but I would not be surprised if you did not hear from ammo. Many C.O.’s just don’t have the time to “get in to” objectives/orders/plans as others do. Frame C.O.’s have put out some excellent orders when their turn comes up, but I think many would just want to be told what to do when they are not the Frame C.O. Sure some might give you some feed back, but most will not bother.

[funkedup]

I'll also warn you all now that I WILL henceforth be flying my bomber sorties my way rather than any other way, if what I am ordered to do is not good practice. I wouldnt order you fighter chaps to try to HO every time, I'd expect you to put your skills to use to best effect.

As a squadron or wing leader, I have, on more than one occasion, suffered from "radio trouble" or "email failure" when faced with obviously flawed instructions from higher command.  But I try not to make a habit of it.  

I would suggest that you first explain your objections to any CO who gives you orders that do not follow "good practice".  Odds are that he will be glad you pointed out the problem and glad that you have a solution, or he will have some reasons for his choices that you hadn't thought of yet.

[funkedup]

Also, on the subject of lack of feedback from Squadron Leaders:

After one has flown a few TODs, one realizes that it's really pretty simple.  It's not rocket science to make these plans, and unless you REALLY screw up the plans, the outcome will depend more on the performance of the squadrons and how well they coordinate their activities in real time.  

Even if the orders are incomplete, many of the Squadron Leaders have learned through practice how to improvise something that will be more than sufficient.  So unless your orders are very poorly concieved or there is an obvious error or omission, you won't get a whole lot of feedback.  In fact I think you can take it as a compliment if they don't respond in detail.  

But a confirmation of receipt of orders is de rigeur.  Squadron Leaders should always confirm receipt.

[Wotan]

By tuesday of every week I try to have a preliminary oplan ready. I send out emails sunday asking how many pilots each squad expects and what air craft they prefer. Some reply some dont. Tod in unique (atleast fridays tod) in that what ever the plan or the co most of the squads *know* what they need to do even if its not spelled out in the orders.

I not familiar with Sunday tod.  so I cant speak to it. On friday theres enough experience with in the ranks of those flying that if my plan were crap they would let me know



Hopefully thats the case with Sunday tod.

[Esme]

Yeah, I hear what you're saying, guys, and many thanks for giving me your perspectives on things. But the fact is that if you want to do WELL with bombers you cant have that kind of mentality, not at ANY level, neither unit nor side-CO.  The flight-planning aspect of bomber ops is as important as flying it right. Time is a tool; one tries to plan to be wher eand when the enemy wont expect you. Contrast that with fighter types WANTING to find and engage the enemy.

With regard to the planning of multi-squad ops, what I mean is this: the side-CO saya what targets he wants hit by what units with which escorts/sweep. The CO may even have a rough idea of when. The bomber CO then checks to see if that timing is possible and looks at possible routes etc, and informs the side CO and the involved fighter COs. Side CO checks it over,  decides between routes (if necessary),  bomber CO and escort/sweep COs work out fine details. The side CO determines the big picture, the unit COs the fine detail is all.. that's what I was trying to get across.

Look at it another way. In order to give fighter pilots a good game, to get them where they can use their hard-earned skills, all I have to do is throw them at the enemy. Granted, there are good ways and bad ways I can do this, but that IS essentially all one has to do. But for bombers, the same is not true. One has to get them to a particular point in fit condition to do a particular action - drop bombs.

Also, the whole point of fighters was to intercept bombers and recce planes. I know this may be a shock to the system to some, but fighters were secondary, DEfensive machines, whereas bombers are primary OFfensive machines!  It makes sense to plan the offence around what the bombers can do. And in order to make it enjoyable for those with hard-earned bomber skills, one needs to give them scope to use their flight-planning skills. Take that away and half the fun of bomber ops is gone.

Finally, if ever I give orders that someone thinks are bad, I expect them to have the sense and courtesy to speak up asap so that I can see if I've erred, and if so, adjust as appropriate taking advice into consideration. Simply ignoring orders isnt as helpful, and can cause the poor side Co considerable frustration if they dont know WHY you're doing so.  Granted, Ive bent orders somewhat myself at times... - one does have to use best judgement and expect ones subordinates to do so, too.  - worst of all is trying to get units sorted out on orders in the arena just before game start.  I will say that I wasnt entirely pleased about that today, seemed to be far more of that than should have been necessary.  So far as Im aware I only screwed up on two things; the 109F allocation and half my own squad didnt recive orders before frame start! :-} Do let me know if you spotted anything else, folks...

Still, water under the bridge. And again, I do hope you dont think Im being awkward for the sake of it - just want to do my best for the side I'm flying for... :-)

all! :-)

Esme

[GA]

My experince with the TOD is that a CO shall always put out a plan first with his first ideas of the mission!

"A good leader must know in generel what to do, or he wil kill the mens moral to fight with his leadership;)
But also a good leader ask his Officers or men for ideas regarding his pland or inputs for it!"

Then the ball starts to roll for feedbacks;).

[Dinger]

Look at it another way. In order to give fighter pilots a good game, to get them where they can use their hard-earned skills, all I have to do is throw them at the enemy. Granted, there are good ways and bad ways I can do this, but that IS essentially all one has to do. But for bombers, the same is not true. One has to get them to a particular point in fit condition to do a particular action - drop bombs.

I have to disagree here.  Believe it or not, the same skills for planning a good bomb route are required for good fighter planning.  You want the bombers to hit the target when the enemy is least able to attack them, and you maneuver the bombers that way.  You want the fighters to engage when the enemy is least able to defend.  Timings for bombers are also timings for CAP defenses, fuel consumption (which is often worse for fighters), and everything else on the map.

So, Esme, I say you're wrong: The mentality required to plan good missions for buffs isn't a different mentality from that required to plan good missions for fighters; it's the only mentality that works.

If a plan puts bombers in danger, the plan probably stinks for fighters too.

"Radio Trouble" as funked pointed out, is a last resort.  To the credit of AH squadrons as a whole, for the most part they will embark on what they know to be suicide missions rather than compromise the plan.  But if the orders given by the CO are so patently wrong as to be less helpful than some "interpretation", and if that CO will not notice any difference, I say it's time to invoke Scenario Directive #1: Each player should play the game in a manner that produces the maximum entertainment value for the other players.

[Esme]

Originally posted by GA
My experince with the TOD is that a CO shall always put out a plan first with his first ideas of the mission!

"A good leader must know in generel what to do, or he wil kill the mens moral to fight with his leadership;)
But also a good leader ask his Officers or men for ideas regarding his pland or inputs for it!"

Then the ball starts to roll for feedbacks;).

Thats PRECISELY what I did GA. And receied no feedbak from any of you despite requesting it.  (shrugs)  Did you all receivve the prelim orders?

Esme

[Esme]

Dinger, what Im trying to promote here is for unit commanders to TALK to their side-COs about prelim plans so that IF the side-Co has screwed up somewhere it can be put right before plans are finalised. Sure Im all for people doing what is sensible if orders are not within reason. But teh best way to avoid unreasonable orders is for unit COs to input to the planning stage. I gave people that option, and none took it.

I also believe youve missed my point regarding fighters somewhat; and I've yet to encounter a fighter unit, even amongst the best that puts as much detail into the flight planning side as a good bomber unit.  Unless you're claiming that all fighter units have tables of time to climb performance under various loadouts (and in AH various fuel burn multipliers too), level speed performance under various loadouts, and plan to fly the route at a certain speed allowing for a certain amount of wind in the planning - and then go and FLY the plan that way, to the minute if possible.  I somehow don't think so.

Theres awareness of the capabilities of ones planes, sure, but fighters of necessity need to be far more fluid in their actioons than bombers.  With us bombers, whilst we CAN make some unplanned diversions whilst airborne, in order to promote survival, doing so for any other reason is generally a bad idea because the attack will have been planned to come in at the most favourable direction in the first place.

It boils down to bombers targets being fixed in place - we HAVE to go to that fixed place or we cant get our job done. The same is not so rigidly true for fighters - your targets are constantly moving and so you cannot plan your attack upon them in detail beforehand; instead you have to have generalised Good Practice - like Schwarme and rotte tactics, etc. (whilst Im nowadays primarily a bomber pilot, I have been a member of III/JG2 Richtofen for 3 years, and still occasionally get to fly with them although not in WB these days).  

The upshot is that bad mission planning from a side-CO for buffs equates to a side-CO telling all fighters to always perform HO attacks or something like that.  SO I'm asking future side-COs to bear that in mind and give bomber unit COs prelim orders so that we get a chance to check the details of what were being asked to do and so put our experience and knowledge to good use. Once the plan is set in stone, that's when we come closest to being "just bus drivers" - and its no fun being a bus-driver if you know you could be driving a different route that would get the job done better but werent given the opportunity to at least say so.

I dont expect to always like the orders I get, but it galls to have no chance to comment on them when they essentially require me - I dont have the freedom of action of you fighter guys, remember? - to do a bad job. Similarly, I tend to expect input from my unit COs when I'm a side CO because not having reached perfection yet, every now and then I am likely to screw up - and as I've already remarked, I tend to think bombers, not fighters. It was rather late in the day, but there WAS one example of a fighter unit Co spotting a slight faux-pas Id made regarding fightersfor Frame 3 which Im going to sort out for the rerun. Better if that had been pointed out at prelim plan stage though.

Esme

[Dinger]

Fair enough, but to answer your question: yeah, we've done that.
A bomber unit can "wing it" by not doing those calculations ahead of time, and contrary to the implication ("unless you're claiming that all fighter units..."), most bomber units I've encountered do "wing it".  Likewise a fighter unit can "wing it" by not worrying about fuel consumption, time to climb, bingo fuel states, and most do.  That doesn't mean this is the ideal state of affairs.

Some of us do research this information (fuel consumption rates, airspeeds, routes), and do apply it in scenarios.  My experience has been that fighter squadrons have to remain flexible in their routing for the same reason bomber squadrons do: enemy activity.  Bomber groups have to remain on their toes in case an enemy defense requires a complete re-routing.  While these days I fly primarily fighters, I spent two years as a member of 925 CABS over in WB, and I'm still a fan of excessive strike planning.

I have to confess that there's an ideal amount of preparation that goes into a scenario frame, and usually we fall somewhat short of that.  Commanders tend to skimp on TODs more than on full-blown scenarios.  In part this is due to the schedule: I've received CM instructions on the Thursday before the mission.  If I send out a prelim plan, I can wait 24 hours maximum for feedback, then I have to get the orders out.  That's one day for FLs to say something.  If they've got busy lives, they won't be able to do more than read the orders over.  And by the time everyone in the squad gets it, I've got to finalize the orders.

[DRILL]

well as for myself ..after i get the orders if i see anything
  that i want changed or if i need to i will contack the other CO of the group we are attached to and give my thoughts as to what
might need to be done to carry out our orders better ...but sometimes the other CO will not even try to or just don't give a dam and i get no response ..so  there are SQ who will not seem to cooperate i won't fly with ..other then that i have a great time