Up- and Downloading: The Vital Pre-Flight Ritual

Without automated mission planning systems, missions are doomed to failure before the planes leave the deck. Only proper training will ensure the aircraft get to the target and back.

Naval aviation has depended on computer-based automated mission planning systems for more than a decade to simplify and safely execute complicated airborne tasks. These have included aviation planning basics such as timing and fuel calculations, ability to join LINK-16 networks, and more recently, deliver precision-guided munitions such as the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) and Joint Stand-Off Weapon (JSOW). Unfortunately, formal air crew training on how to operate these missioncritical systems has been slow to take hold in the Fleet. Only a few training commands, Fleet replacement squadrons (FRS), and weapon schools have realized the importance of training crews and system administrators early in the training cycle.

As aircraft become more technologically advanced, they are becoming less dependent on air crew input and decision making while airborne. As a result, aviation has benefited from less susceptibility to human error in the cockpit. Much of the planning for combat sorties can now be done on a computer laptop, downloaded to a solid-state digital-transfer device resembling a PC card (known as a "brick"), and then uploaded before flight to initialize weapons, displays, radars, navigation gear, and other integral airborne devices and equipment. But complete knowledge of these systems is lacking. Today's mission planning systems are making naval aviation safer and smarter, but without an aggressive automated mission planning training curriculum, naval aviation will never realize the full potential of these tools.

Defining the Systems

Mission planning systems, used mainly in aviation, are a family of computer hardware and software that automate tasks required before flying a mission. Current naval mission planning systems are a mixture of programs that combine government software and commercial computer hardware. Planning systems include the Portable Flight Planning Software, Tactical EA-6B Mission Support, and the new Joint Mission Planning System, which combines the best aspects of today's systems. Also included are a variety of other software applications developed for specific communities or for targeting purposes, such as Weaponeering and Stores Planning software.

Operating either stand-alone in a desert tent or in a shipboard computer-networked environment, these tools significantly improve chances of mission success while greatly decreasing air crew planning and weapon system preflight preparation time.

Far too often, however, newly-minted naval aviators join their squadrons with little or no knowledge of how to operate these essential computer-based tools. Few formal classes are offered, except for those by Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) during initial fielding or after major software or hardware updates.

Vitally Important Tools

In today's combat, the Navy must be capable of rapidly planning an effective force against a dynamic enemy. Indeed, faster and better mission planning constitutes a force multiplier. Evidence clearly shows automated mission planning systems proved their worth during recent combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. As never before, a combination of new software tools, new precision weapons, and significantly better avionics allowed precision strike operations with excellent targeting in all weather conditions. Recently, these systems have been used in just about every phase of mission and strike planning, streamlining many process tasks, resulting in decreased time involved, increased accuracy and safety.

Nearly all airborne assignments come from the Air Tasking Order, the principal mission defining directive for all U.S. and allied tactical air operations. Mission planning systems decipher the U.S. message text format for air wings easily, quickly, and accurately, even drawing a picture of assigned aircraft routing and time-sensitive significant airspaces. Because of the daily multiple tasking changes to the Air Tasking Order-often shortly before crews were to launch-strike planning teams found the software tools, such as the Portable Flight Planning Software, irreplaceable.

Mission planning systems played a major role creating the big picture of the current situation every day for strike planners and intelligence personnel by presenting the latest situation or to brief on upcoming tactical events. Underway and ashore, mission planning systems were commonly used to display theater threat information, including updates from the Global Command and Control System-Maritime.

Air crews from different platforms used planning systems to initially construct routes and collaborate with each other to form the overall strike plan. Routes are built based on many factors, including tanker location, target, combat air patrol station, threats, ingress/egress corridors, altitude restrictions, and other directives. Planning systems can quickly construct the navigation plan. Standardized routes, such as those to and from kill boxes-defined areas for targetof-opportunity type missions-can be easily updated and exchanged on a network.

Beyond Getting There

Air wing targeteers and intelligence teams frequently used planning systems to determine weapon release requirements. Weapon optimization software helps targeteers find the best weapon and delivery parameters to achieve an overall probability of damage against a specific target. Planning systems also aid in target acquisition preparation.

More than two-thirds of weapons expended during initial stages of Operation Iraqi Freedom were guided munitions, which included GPS and laser guidance.1 In naval aviation, GPS-guided weapons, such as JSOW and JDAM, require mission planning systems to load essential initialization files to the aircraft's data transfer device before flight. Sometimes data loads are generated several times a day. Systems also load aircraft with necessary LINK-16 data, a nodeless, multifunctional, jam-resistant tactical data link. After the brick receives data downloaded from the laptop, it initializes cockpit displays and sends targeting information to the weapon, enhancing rapid response, and eliminating possibility of error.

Mission planning systems, combined with commercial spreadsheet programs, were instrumental in quickly creating the strike package game plan on easy-to-read cockpit kneeboard cards throughout the Iraqi campaign. For target acquisition, the cards allow aircrew in-cockpit review prior to weapons release.

Briefing slides have become one of the most automated phases of the planning process. Typically, planning systems display the current battle space and routes, and then are exported to air wing standard briefing templates to generate snapshot flow and target acquisition slides, and other briefing products.

The systems rehearse missions in two or three dimensions, mainly for target area study and approach familiarization. Even Marine convoy commanders used mission planning systems to preview terrain in 3D along planned routes. Air crews used systems to "fly through" missions, but most often for snapshots of the target area and sensor prediction.

Laptop computer mission planning systems, connected to a handheld GPS receiver, were used in a number of aircraft as a moving map display, including the P-3C Orion and C-130 Hercules.

For debriefing missions, systems allow air crews of all platforms to replay bread-crumb GPS trails of their actual flight path and document the entire mission on a laptop. Many other data files are collected on the brick that aircraft can download post flight to the computers.

Why No Formal Training Structure?

With recent success and dependency of automated mission planning systems in combat, it is surprising that systems are not taught or exercised frequently in the aviation training pipeline. An exception is the EA-6B Prowler community, which depends heavily on mission planning systems for electronic attack, jammer employment, and loading other necessary information for flight. About 30 hours of structured mission planning instruction has been in place for years at their Fleet replacement squadron, VAQ-129, and the course keeps pace with advancing technology. The East Coast strike-fighter weapons school has also been proactive in ensuring basic mission planning system skills are taught to every student at the F/A-18 FRS there.

Elsewhere, reasons for a lack of robust automated mission planning curriculum are many. The aviation training pipeline, typically a compressed 1.5 to 2 years, does not offer much room for expansion. After initial flight training, students at FRSs have a multitude of new systems to learn unique for his or her specific aircraft, and those squadrons push the training envelope to produce Fleet air crews in a timely and a cost-effective manner.

Alternative Training Methods

The latest mission planning systems include embedded tutorials and classroom computer-based training. Developed to be Web-based, the material conforms to aircraft industry computer-based training consortium standards to enhance interoperability. The training aids allow sharing through compliant Web based learning systems throughout the Fleet.

The curriculum for teaching mission planning systems at the training commands has recently gone through a long-needed overhaul. Introduction of the Joint Mission Planning System into the Fleet, along with its new training material, has offered an opportune time to better introduce automated flight planning to young aviators, and avoid steep learning curves when they join a squadron. Naval Air Training Command had previously introduced planning basics using Portable Flight Planning Software.

The automated mission planning training concept, as defined by NAVAIR, should now be implemented in Fleet aviation training. It calls for an integrated training continuum for automated mission planning first established at Naval Air Training Command and that continues to build at the FRS and Weapons and Tactics Units. Intermediate level training will be at appropriate weapon schools and in Fleet squadrons, and advanced training will be conducted at the advanced weapon schools, Naval Strike Air Warfare Center (NSAWC) and Marine Air Weapons Training Squadron One (MAWTS-I), and in Fleet squadrons.2 The ultimate goal is to give appropriate mission planning system training at each major phase of the aviation training pipeline.

Like other systems, air crew mission planning systems are trained best with a building-block approach based on minimum training objectives.3 A young aviator, perhaps after carrier qualifications, should attend a three- to four-day course at the local weapon school on automated planning tools available to him, to become an immediate benefit to his squadron when he checks on board.

Continuing education classes should also be conducted during inter-deployment training cycles-as early as possible in the cycle so squadrons can use systems during detachments. Also, planning systems can be better integrated with weapon training and other strike-warfare courses. Weapon schools should stress that mission planning systems have effectively become the ground-based component of the weapon system.

Support training must also improve. Afloat and ashore, automated mission planning systems need network connections, database updates, intelligence feeds, and other maintenance to keep them useful and safe for flight for strike planning teams. Training must be incorporated into existing courses for computer system administrators and intelligence personnel.

Work Shift from Cockpit to Deck

The open architecture of most new software allows updated functions to be added quickly and easily. Software development agencies must ensure training is also generated. NSAWC, as model manager for mission planning system training, must continue to evaluate training effectiveness during air wing deployments to NAS Fallen, and for Marine Corps aviation, MAWTS-1 must ensure proper use of planning systems during their Weapons Tactics Instructor courses.

Automated mission planning tools were absolutely essential in getting ordnance on target during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and were used frequently by strike teams underway and ashore. Computer-based planning tools need more attention during the aviation training pipeline. Recently, CVW-14 stated in lessons learned from deployment on board the USS Ronald Reagan (CVN-76):

Mission Planning has become a critical tool for the modern warfighter. The success of the mission depends on his ability to carry correct information to the aircraft and employ its weapons systems to the fullest extent. With the advent of smart weapons and advanced avionics, loading of Memory Units (MUs) or Memory Cards with correct information is vital for success. Without the correct data stored on the MU, the mission will fail before it begins. The air wing's ability to employ its multitude of weapons and respond to a crisis anytime, anywhere is dependent on its ability to fully implement and integrate mission planning systems.4

The advent of technologically advanced airborne systems for strike, reconnaissance, patrol, and close air support are welcome additions to naval aviation. The decreased air crew tasks while airborne, however, mean more thorough planning and data loading on deck. Although this seems a burden, it has proven worthwhile, even if it involves the tedium of learning new software applications early in the aviation training pipeline. With a stronger focus on pre-flight mission planning, and using systems at home as they are used when deployed, air crews will be better prepared to take the fight to the enemy.