Lessons learned JFACC

[132ndNeck]

Please provide all lessons learned and experiences toward the role of JTACC in this issue.

[jkhoel]

Execute next mission only when ready

This is maybe a point for general consideration, but it is something that occurred to me while I was thinking of feedback or lessons learned that I might provide;

I wonder if it would be more helpful to not have fixed duration between missions - but keep them more as a guideline. There were definitely events this campaign that was rushed by JFACC due to limited time for DCS available during the cycle. And I believe this has follow-on effects all the way down to the pilot in terms of ability to plan or provide feedback/input or to even get involved at all. Not to mention JFACC's ability to execute proper procedure and planning, and this in turn limits learning and development. Because you cannot improve tools or processes that are being used incorrectly or not at all.

I think we need the ability for JFACC, VIS or perhaps even SQN leadership to pull the brake and say hey, we need another week.

[jkhoel]

JFACC is not supposed to be the SQN SME

We need the squadrons to take more responsibility for the mission types they are given and what capacities they are able to provide. There is no reason JFACC should need to concern them selves with types of munitions or aircraft capabilities;

• Move inventory down to the squadrons; They use the weapons they are allotted at the start of the campaign as they see fit (unless guidance is given for some reason) and are also in charge of voicing requirements for resupplies

• Any squadron wanting to participate in the next OPAR attends the planning meetings with a minimum of one representative. With the amount of work being put into this, it is only fair that every squadron manage to be represented at the targeting meeting. This could of course be by a member of JFACC, VIS or others who are already there - but the goal here is to have someone who can brief their own squadron, highlight training requirements and otherwise make sure the task given is within the abilities of the squadron - or provide feedback, questions or even answers to JFACC before, during and after the meeting. A POC/SME if you will.

I get that this might not be a 100% as-is in real life, but the goal here is to account for the fact that being JFACC is a lot of work, and that we are doing this because it is our hobby and therefore needs to be manageable. And part of the problem for me was the fact that we had people basically giving comments along the lines of "oh, you didn't know our aircraft could/could not do that?" or "that is not how we would do that..." - and this to me signals a lack of involvement and understanding on the part of the pilots and squadrons, as well as a lack of knowledge on part of JFACC. And for JFACC learning weapons and aircraft capabilities should be optional - for the pilots and squadrons it is not.

[132ndNeck]

I get that this might not be a 100% as-is in real life, but the goal here is to account for the fact that being JFACC is a lot of work, and that we are doing this because it is our hobby and therefore needs to be manageable. And part of the problem for me was the fact that we had people basically giving comments along the lines of "oh, you didn't know our aircraft could/could not do that?" or "that is not how we would do that..." - and this to me signals a lack of involvement and understanding on the part of the pilots and squadrons, as well as a lack of knowledge on part of JFACC. And for JFACC learning weapons and aircraft capabilities should be optional - for the pilots and squadrons it is not.

• Very good points, a suggestion can also be for all squadrons attending the campaign to provide a list with what types of missions, capabilities and limitations for their taskings prior to attending. So this is easily available
• A second option could be two split the JFACC into two: One section that focus on "the big picture" and overall tasking, and one section with representation from each squadron that actually breaks everything down into taskings, weaponeering, coordination etc.

[132ndNeck]

JFACC TTP JFACC TTP is too large and theoretical. Should be simplified and made easier and for something to be of use. Additional "theoretical" or background information can be placed in a doctrine document that is available, but not mandatory. JFACC TTP should be tailored better to how the process actually work, and so it supports the JFACC volunteers better.

[jkhoel]

I get that this might not be a 100% as-is in real life, but the goal here is to account for the fact that being JFACC is a lot of work, and that we are doing this because it is our hobby and therefore needs to be manageable. And part of the problem for me was the fact that we had people basically giving comments along the lines of "oh, you didn't know our aircraft could/could not do that?" or "that is not how we would do that..." - and this to me signals a lack of involvement and understanding on the part of the pilots and squadrons, as well as a lack of knowledge on part of JFACC. And for JFACC learning weapons and aircraft capabilities should be optional - for the pilots and squadrons it is not.

• Very good points, a suggestion can also be for all squadrons attending the campaign to provide a list with what types of missions, capabilities and limitations for their taskings prior to attending. So this is easily available
• A second option could be two split the JFACC into two: One section that focus on "the big picture" and overall tasking, and one section with representation from each squadron that actually breaks everything down into taskings, weaponeering, coordination etc.

I was thinking of writing something along the same lines as your first suggestion; I was thinking that this might be something the squadrons could do not only before the campaign but also during. This way, the squadrons could push to get types of missions that are currently in-demand among its pilots or that fit better with their current capacities or training/recruitment cycle.

Regarding your second point, I like the idea of having a cell within JFACC for this - and I think having squadron representation would be crucial. Again - removing the need for the JFACC to be the SME, but rather being the coordinating effort. If for the next campaign JFACC takes turn being the "lead JFACC" for each event, then the next-leading JFACC could be the one doing this coordination, as then some preparations can be made for when he is leading JFACC.