PAF participates in "Red Flag" and "Green Flag"

[blain2]

i was thinking the same but then what does an army guy know abt counter-air-ops!

You know A LOT FM sahib! We are always learning from you.

 

[Karakoram8 Eagle]

American's in RED FLAG !

Pakistani's in RED FLAG !

 

[Chogy]

Aren't these F-16Bs from the 14 EDA ones that we received during 2006-08 and are Block-15OCUs? These fighters have upgraded engines, radar & better avionics as compared to the Block-15s from our original 40. As per F-16.Net (http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article3.html) these are already AMRAAM enabled.

So simulating AMRAAMs shouldn't be an issue I should think.

If this is the case, then it is a good deal... software-enabling is vastly different from simply calling a shot, because when the jet is set up for a missile, a number of parameters are monitored during the time of flight. You have signal quality for semi-active shots, f-pole and break-X cues, and other cues required by the actual AIM-120, that validate the shot. This is vastly different from locking up some target at a max range, pushing a button, and calling him "dead", which is often how such missiles are simulated without correct software integration.

Further, I don't know the state of ACMI these days. It has probably come a long ways, and I am guessing that the onboard software integrates with the ACMI pods, so that shots, time-of-flight, etc are properly displayed for debrief purposes.

Without that, you have some guy piping up in the debrief "Well, that aircraft was dead, even though it doesn't show it. I shot him at max range with my missile, but since it isn't correctly integrated with ACMI, we don't see it. Trust me, he's dead." And it utterly skews the results of the mission.

 

[Super Falcon]

 

[blain2]

If this is the case, then it is a good deal... software-enabling is vastly different from simply calling a shot, because when the jet is set up for a missile, a number of parameters are monitored during the time of flight. You have signal quality for semi-active shots, f-pole and break-X cues, and other cues required by the actual AIM-120, that validate the shot. This is vastly different from locking up some target at a max range, pushing a button, and calling him "dead", which is often how such missiles are simulated without correct software integration.

Further, I don't know the state of ACMI these days. It has probably come a long ways, and I am guessing that the onboard software integrates with the ACMI pods, so that shots, time-of-flight, etc are properly displayed for debrief purposes.

Without that, you have some guy piping up in the debrief "Well, that aircraft was dead, even though it doesn't show it. I shot him at max range with my missile, but since it isn't correctly integrated with ACMI, we don't see it. Trust me, he's dead." And it utterly skews the results of the mission.

I think they use a couple of things to ensure claims are awarded carefully. In addition to the ACMI pods, the AIS cub-component on the ACMI pods is used to triangulate where the aircraft was in the air relative to the other aircraft and the AIS pod allows verification to be made even if shots are being called verbally upon meeting certain pre-set parameters after verifying where the aircraft was at the time of taking the shot.

PAF has had an ACMI range for quite some time in Pakistan. PAF worked with Aselsan on improving this range to attain the same specifications as the ones at Turkey's Konya range. Since this was a while ago and PAF has been to quite a few multinational exercises at NATO standard ranges, I believe the aircraft have a more evolved method of calling shots and getting those analyzed during the debriefs by displaying uplinked and uploaded information gathered by the tracking towers at the ranges which communicate with the ACMI/AIS pods.

I may be wrong, but hopefully we will get a bit more insight from some insiders (since PAF will most likely not discuss the exercise) once this is all over.

 

[Quwa]

When watching videos about Red Flag, I noticed that the U.S. was using ACMI-type systems with computer-generated colour imagery of terrain, fighters, weapons-launched, etc. Was that a separate system to the ACMI, or an advanced ACMI exclusive to the U.S? Or is not exclusive and also available (commercially) to PAF?

To see what I'm talking about, check out this video from 2:04:

 

[blain2]

Mark,

With some difference in the graphics, most ACMI collected information is represented in a similar manner and the CCS (which actually conducts debriefs) is no exception.

Our own ACMI range has been completed with considerable indigenous development and also collaboration with the Turks (Aselsan I believe was contracted to do this work).

Wiki actually has a pretty good read on the ACMI complex:

Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation (ACMI) systems record an aircraft's in-flight data. They are often used by the military for aerial combat training and analysis.

ACMI systems usually include 4 major subsystems.
[edit] Subsystems

Control and Computation
The Control and Computation Subsystem (CCS) is usually a rack-mounted personal computer running applications that calculate Time-Space-Position-Information (TSPI).

Transmission Instrumentation
The Transmission Instrumentation Subsystem (TIS) is firmware running at or near a communications tower on the range the aircraft are flying around. The TIS will have 1-9 remote interrogators (remotes) scattered throughout the range. One of these remotes is at the TIS, and is referred to as the "remote at Master". Each remote interrogates an AIS pod (see below) loaded on each aircraft flying on range, and receives the response and relays it to the TIS.

Airborne Instrumentation
Antiquated ACMI systems triangulated each pod's position and relayed that TSPI back to the CCS. Modern ACMI systems no longer triangulate; instead, a GPS unit is installed in each Airborne Instrumentation Subsystem (AIS) pod to calculate its own position, thereby relieving the CCS of the triangulation algorithm. The CCS now gets a complete TSPI message from the AIS pod via the TIS, and forwards this data to a display system.

Advanced Display and Debriefing or Individual Combat Aircrew Display
Advanced Display and Debriefing Subsystems (ADDS) are quickly vanishing and being replaced by Individual Combat Aircrew Display Systems (ICADS) because the ICADS software can run on any compatible personal computer. ICADS is the display software that receives data from the CCS and displays it in a three-dimensional graphical user interface.

 

[Quwa]

Mark,

With some difference in the graphics, most ACMI collected information is represented in a similar manner and the CCS (which actually conducts debriefs) is no exception.

Our own ACMI range has been completed with considerable indigenous development and also collaboration with the Turks (Aselsan I believe was contracted to do this work).

Thanks. IMO this exposure to Red Flag and Green Flag will reinforce & improve PAF's own training methods in the coming years. A dream would be to see the mainstay of PAF go through Red Flag level of intensity through quarterly (4 per year) exercises of this nature held at home - perhaps an evolved version of Indus Viper. For example, conduct 2-3 strictly local exercises and 1-2 multinational program with NATO (U.S & Turkey) as well as regional partners (KSA, UAE, Oman, Bahrain, etc).

 

[TOPGUN]

Do we know how many hours are flown in the excrise's?

 

[Karakoram8 Eagle]

 

[Super Hornet]

AGRESSORS FLY IN CLOSE FORMATION DURING RED FLAG 10-2

 

[blain2]

A little story about our F-16s at Lajes. Thanks to the Americans for their great hospitality!

Lajes Airmen support Pakistan air force on first deployment to Red Flag

Posted 7/20/2010 Updated 7/20/2010 Email story Print story



by Staff Sgt. Olufemi Owolabi
65th Air Base Wing Public Affairs

7/20/2010 - LAJES FIELD, Azores -- On their way to the U.S. for the first time to sharpen their close-air-support skills, six F-16 fighter jets from Pakistan and their crew members took a quick stop at Lajes Field July 14-15 before heading to Red Flag at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev.

About 100 Pakistan air force pilots, maintainers and support personnel, accompanied by a U.S. tanker, are attending Red Flag, a premier, large force employment and integration exercise.

As soon as they touched down, Airmen of the 65th Operations Support Squadron were on standby and ready to foster bilateral relations with the international delegates.

The Pakistan aircrew arrival happened just a few hours after 12 Italian fighter jets and more than 30 support personnel passed through Lajes. The international aircrews offered the 65th OSS Airmen an opportunity to act as ambassadors for the Air Force and to provide support for these expeditionary forces.

The Italian team was on its way home after some days of flying sorties and coordinating air-attack in a Red Flag exercise at Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska, while the Pakistan jets and crew members were on their way to a similar exercise at Nellis AFB.

"This visit to Lajes is historic to us and the Pakistan crew, because we are hosting them here for the first time. It is also very crucial in the career of the Pakistan air force since it is their first deployment to the exercise," said Tech. Sgt. Jose Ramon, coronet liaison technician with the 65th OSS. "By welcoming and giving them a world-class support, we are ensuring that their short stay here is a wonderful and lasting experience."

As soon as the Lajes team learned the aircraft and personnel were coming in, Airmen here ensured the crew's billeting, locker and food arrangements were made. They quickly dispersed the necessary aerospace ground equipment support the jets needed, such as jet fuel and lavatory services, among others.

"We did everything we could to make their stay here a memorable one," Sergeant Ramon said.

Even though the stop at Lajes was ahead of schedule, this didn't hinder the quality of service the Airmen rendered to their visitors.

Supporting the Pakistan and Italian crew members, at the same time, allowed the Airmen here to showcase how flexible and ready they are when it comes to the mission. When a mission slips, everything that is already planned for might not be taking into account anymore. And the host team had to adjust for any changes the visitors might have.

"It affects everything down to billeting reservations, setting of spots for the aircraft and coordinating with other agencies such as LRS, and ATOC," said Tech. Sgt. Richard Reif, 65th OSS. "But in the end, we still get the job done (no matter the situation)."

Sergeant said that since Lajes is the stopping point for smaller aircraft trying to make it across the Atlantic, Airmen here have a sense of urgency and readiness and they "make it happen."

"In no time, we took the jets off the runway and showed them where to park," said Staff Sgt. Sean McGrath, 65th OSS transient alert.

While some Airmen of the transient alert team, who are mostly crew chiefs, said they see this visit as an opportunity to do what they are trained to do. Some said it allows them to interact with the military of other nations while stationed at Lajes.

"Dealing with international air force members, even though there could be a complete culture difference, is very exciting because it creates an avenue for us to find a common ground to communicate and learn from each other," Sergeant Ramon said. "Such a visit helps us to learn from what they do best and for them to see how we do business."

Making sure the pilots and their crew members want to keep coming back is a goal of the 65th OSS Airmen.

"We'd like crew that pass through Lajes to know that our service here is first-class," said Maj. Robert "Bob" Sweeney, 65th OSS director of operations. "We would also like them to come back here knowing that they will be well taken care of, no matter what time of the day, the weather and where they are going ... whether they are heading to the States or overseas toward deployments or their countries, we would want them to feel like this could be a second home for them."

According to Major Sweeney, the smile on the visitors' faces when they left Lajes shows that the Airmen here are mission focused, and they derive a lot of pride in getting the job done.

The Pakistan team arrived safely at Nellis on July 16 and will be participating in the Red Flag scheduled from July 17-31.

 

[blain2]

Thanks. IMO this exposure to Red Flag and Green Flag will reinforce & improve PAF's own training methods in the coming years. A dream would be to see the mainstay of PAF go through Red Flag level of intensity through quarterly (4 per year) exercises of this nature held at home - perhaps an evolved version of Indus Viper. For example, conduct 2-3 strictly local exercises and 1-2 multinational program with NATO (U.S & Turkey) as well as regional partners (KSA, UAE, Oman, Bahrain, etc).

I think the concept of Ex. Saffron Bandit is similar. CCS puts various squadrons through their paces during the exercise and this exercise is run on a fairly regular basis which ensures all combat sqns are rotated through this program and remain current with the concepts and doctrine as envisaged.

Saffron Bandit is designed on the building block concept. It progressively increases in complexity, and various elements are added with every mission to provide a complete threat scenario towards the final stages of the programme. The assets are employed in offence versus defence set up with the respective weapons system taking up their prescribed role. Some of the missions are planned to culminate with actual weapon deliveries against tactical targets at the live firing range.

The exercise is chalked out in an area around the PAF's tactical training range. All targets are selected within a specified area. A bomb line is demarcated as a boundary between the offensive and the defensive areas of employment.

The threats employed against attacking targets vary with every mission. In the initial phase of interdiction attack, the AAA and SAM are simulated so as to enable the crew to cope with simpler employment considerations. In the subsequent missions the defences are in the form of low level radar, with only a limited track length and a pair of interceptors. The subsequent missions entail an integrated defence system involving AAA, Mistral, Crotale, Low Level Radars with progressively increased track length and pair of interceptors increasing. ECM/ESM support is provided by Falcon DA-20 aircraft and the types of missions include both offensive as well as defensive counter air operations.

In my opinion, PAF's version of Red Flag is Ex. Saffron Bandit. X-man can probably add to this as he has some very interesting insights into the matter.

 

[fatman17]

PAF has been using BVR tactics for years, since the F-16s arrived in 80s, they have been learning how to use the AIM-7 Sparrow. The AIM-210 was added later to the CCS course.

the cat is out-of-the-bag - this confirms to me that the PAF has had the AIM-7 Sparrow in its inventory (also confirmed by two sources, Jane's and AFMI)

 

[x_man]

I think the concept of Ex. Saffron Bandit is similar. CCS puts various squadrons through their paces during the exercise and this exercise is run on a fairly regular basis which ensures all combat sqns are rotated through this program and remain current with the concepts and doctrine as envisaged.



In my opinion, PAF's version of Red Flag is Ex. Saffron Bandit. X-man can probably add to this as he has some very interesting insights into the matter.

Red flag was conceived by USAFs legendry Colonel ‘Moody’ when the need grew out of the alarming statistic of the Vietnam War. He deduced that if a pilot survived his first ten combat encounters, his chances of surviving a full combat tour would increase by over 300%....So Colonel got this bright idea: if you could provide those first 10 combat missions in a safe training environment, you might lose fewer men and aircrafts when it is time for the real war. ...hence the RF is designed to give every aircrew in a squadron those first 10 missions at Nellis while facing the most talented enemy that one will ever face in real world...


Green Flag is a specialised ex and may be called Red flag with ‘ trons and teeth’. Instead of practice bombs, jamming and ECM, Green flag used real bombs and full spectrum electronic nastiness.....G Flags only compromises with realism that participants don’t shoot live ammo at fellow aviators and no planes are allowed to crash and burn...


As for the PAF exercises Saffron Bandit and Hi Mark, to save my typing finger I will quote my own post in another thread..

HiMark and Saffron Bandit are totally different exercises in terms of setup , duration, deployment of forces and training value.

SB is only conducted at Sargodha by the CCS staff who acts as coordinator, monitors and judges. Only two squadrons (one Air superiority and the other Surface attack) deploy at Sargodha for a month or so and mostly fly as per the curriculum of CCS. The flying is intense and the debriefs very long and sometime get very HOT. When it comes to claims and awards of the SHOTS, people are ready to grab each other by necks....Its all part of the game. Whatever happens in the debrief rooms: stays in the debrief rooms.

After a month or so, the two squadrons head back home. The CCS staff compile the results and finalise their reports regarding the performances’ of the previous two squadrons and then gear up to take another fresh two squadrons for another cycle. Hence it takes almost 6 to 7 months until all the PAF squadrons go thru the SB. When last two squadrons depart, the SB culminates and the CCS instructors and staff are once again ready to run the usual CCS course at the school.

Exercise Hi Mark is huge in terms of deployment and works on totally different concept. Almost every flying and air defence element is deployed at the same time on their war time FOBs and MOBs. Hi Mark is simulation of war and planned in the same way in three phases. The preparatory phase, deployment phase and the final show down phase. The concept of operation revolves around Blue Land ( friendly forces) and the Fox Land ( enemy forces).

Assets are accordingly distributed, borders are marked between BL and FLand , and missions are flown across each other borders from dawn to well into the night. HiMark is more intense and the blue/ foxland treat each other like real enemies for one month or so. HiMark also serves as a joint exercise with other sister arms.

PAFs Ex Saffron Bandit is quite close to USAFs Red Flag in the concept of operation...of course we don’t have USAFs like resources, facilities’ and the effort s. ...but keeping our concept of Ops and our limitation, I think we are doing pretty fine work at our end.

SB prepares every PAF aircrew pretty well and aims to bring them to the level where an aircrew who comes back from a REAL combat mission should say, ‘’ It was just like Saffron Bandit...except the enemy wasn’t as good.’’