Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: schweige@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil (jeffrey schweiger)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: TLAM programming
Keywords: TLAM mapping tomahawk
Message-ID: <1991Feb7.021352.4926@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 7 Feb 91 02:13:52 GMT
References: <1991Feb5.044014.6696@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA
Lines: 57
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: schweige@aldebaran.cs.nps.navy.mil (jeffrey schweiger)

In article <1991Feb5.044014.6696@cbnews.att.com> cga66@ihlpy.att.com (Patrick V Kauffold) writes:

>From: cga66@ihlpy.att.com (Patrick V Kauffold)
>According to ABC news this AM, there are two locations which 
>do the programming of the TLAM; one in Newport, VA, and one
>in Honolulu.  It takes a couple of days to make up a program

Actually the planning centers are in Norfolk, VA and Honolulu, HI.

>when mapping data is available; the finished product is put
>on a floppy and then sent to the platform (security reasons?).

In the past, pre-planned missions were loaded onto magnetic disks (rigid
disks, not floppies) and hand carried to the ship.

>Physical delivery takes at least a day.  Then the FTs (or 
>whatever they call them now) on the ships load the program
>in the TLAM.


>Comment:  I was surprised at the floppy disk story; 

So am I, unless its a recent change, floppy disks are not being used.

>I would 
>think it at least possible to transmit program data via
>secure telecommunications links - land lines, satellite, etc.
>Integrity of the data end-to-end should not be a problem. It
>could simply be that the floppy is one means available, 
>suitable in peacetime.

The ability to transmit new mission plans or mission updates over secure
satellite links was designed into the system.  I do not know whether or not
this capability is being used at present.

>It does sound reasonable that TLAM would be "loadable" in 
>the theater of operations, but that you would not expect each
>platform to have capability of creating new programs.

Correct.  The equipment necessary to plan the missions is not trivial.
Both limited shipboard real estate, and cost-effectiveness issues have
precluded this ability in the past, though not necessarily in the future.
Future capabilities, are just that in the future (if ever).

By the way, the December, 1985 issue of US Naval Institute Proceedings has
a pretty good overview of the Tomahawk mission planning process.

Jeff Schweiger
-- 
*******************************************************************************
Jeff Schweiger	      Standard Disclaimer   	CompuServe:  74236,1645
Internet (Milnet):				schweige@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil
*******************************************************************************