http://www.airforcesmonthly.com #369 DECEMBER 2018 // 87hese days, few people venture on a
long car journey without consulting
a map website or app to find the
best route and estimated time to get to their
destination. And, once on the road, a GPS
or mobile phone app provides constant
updates and re-routes, if needed.
Well, aircrew follow a very similar process for
air missions, but with a few added complexities.
The obvious difference is that, without
roads, there’s theoretically more freedom to
choose a route. However, peacetime airways,
airspace restrictions – as well as any military
corridors imposed for co-ordination and
deconfliction – will have to be honoured.
Indeed, air planners working in the air
operations centre may have already created a
broad plan, where sequencing of aircraft and
tasking is ‘mapped’ out for a 24-hour period in
something called the air tasking order or ATO.
This will specify routes, altitudes and
timings for aircraft ‘packages’, and it will
position and synchronise key support assets
such as tankers; airborne command and
control; electronic warfare; and intelligence,
surveillance, targeting, acquisition and
reconnaissance (ISTAR) aircraft in their orbits.
The ATO will specify fighter combat air patrols
and air defence zones for surface-to-air defence
systems, as well as areas blocked off due to a
high concentration of air activity or those reserved
for special missions. Any or all of these could be
‘switched on or off’ at certain times depending
on circumstances and might require other aircraft
to avoid them or be controlled through them.
Suddenly, that clear blue sky doesn’t seem
quite so clear.Change of plans
Of course, this rather procedural approach
to battle/airspace management, which
blocks out and allocates virtual corridors and
altitude blocks of airspace, limits the need
for active control and reduces dependency
on constant two-way communications,
but it has some potential downsides.
Firstly, it makes your tactical design
relatively predictable, something a peer
enemy would exploit quickly; and secondly,
it does not cater for changes in operational
circumstances in a fast-moving scenario.
Aircraft mission planning systems are fairly
simple in concept, in that they are map-
based and allow for a series of waypoints and
locations to be stored and flown to in sequence.
On the ‘friendly’ side of the map, this will
reflect the control routings and procedures
specified earlier, but, once on the enemy
side, it’s used to seek and exploit the most
tactical approach to a target, avoiding known
enemy defences and high-threat areas.
Target planning is an art in itself and,
depending on the complexity of the weapons
being employed, may require significantly
more thought about target identification,
lines of approach, weapons effects and the
appropriate avoidance of collateral damage.
Although the entire process is relatively
straightforward, the need to factor in different
considerations and the sequencing andplanning
T
Above: Aircraft mission planning systems are
fundamentally map-based. Here, an RAF Tornado
GR4 pilot from No IX (Bomber) Squadron at RAF
Marham, Norfolk, studies computer-generated and
paper maps prior to a training sortie. Jamie Hunter
Right: A pilot from the USAF’s 340th Expeditionary
Air Refueling Squadron refers to his personal
computer tablet during pre-fl ight checks aboard a
KC-135 bound for a refuelling mission supporting
Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan.
The availability of the tablets provides a mission-
planning boon to less sophisticated aircraft such as
this. USAF/Master Sgt William Greer