And while you're doing it --- swing from the ceiling with a rope around your waist and have someone scream in your ears while beating you about the head and shoulders. Just for starters, of course .....heyjoe said:
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Fight's On! The origins of TOPGUN and dogfights back in the day/future prospects
- Thread starter futrMarineBlueAngel
- Start date
ACM training rules of today states max of 8 in one engagment ... no more "furballs"A4sForever said:Furball:usually morphs into being when the fight becomes > 8 aircraft (no hard rules on numbers, however) and is also sometimes referred to as "Guns & Knives" ....
but hell, i have hard enough time though keeping track of two bandits & a wingman in a 2v2!totally agree. BFM/ACM also compresses time requiring you to make quicker decisions & reactions ... go do a training block of BFM then go do a block of A-G and see if time slows waayyy down in that circle the wagon or Pop patternSchnugg said:
for those nay-sayers with the appropriate access who think BFM skills are not needed anymore, go look up those ranges for the A-A kills over the last 15 years ... and while you are at it, look up the amount of fighters N Korea & China has ...
thinking out loud wonder what we would do if N Korea did go South, and while we were preoccupied with that, China decided that would be a really good time to take Taiwan back, and while they were at it, they decided to pay back Japan ... too far fetched?
my 2¢
Most likely scenario...
Guys heading in as strikers (North Korea, anyone). Some swinging d!ck in a Mig-21 decides to take off an unimproved runway in the middle of nowhere that's not on the intel brief with the idea of throwing an Aphid or god forbid an Archer at you... you've bought the merge, like it or not...
I'm sure A4s can relate a few stories that are similar...
Guys heading in as strikers (North Korea, anyone). Some swinging d!ck in a Mig-21 decides to take off an unimproved runway in the middle of nowhere that's not on the intel brief with the idea of throwing an Aphid or god forbid an Archer at you... you've bought the merge, like it or not...
I'm sure A4s can relate a few stories that are similar...
MiG-21 threat?
More than a few USAF F-4s were bagged over North Viet Nam by MiG-21s flown by "nugget" pilots ever never drove cars before flight school by doing a zoom climb into a strike package and making a single pass from behind. NSAWC plays this scenario with a simulated strip launched Adversary F-5, which is problematic for a strike package (saw one tap an F/A-18 and a Tom before the escort turned back into the strike package and almost had a blue-on-blue).
Speaking of MiG-21s, our Israeli friends have helped Romania upgrade their MiG-21s to the Lancer configuration...HMD, digital avionics and high off boresight SRM http://www.airshots.com/riat01static/mig2101ce01.htm. Finding yourself at the merge with one of these 3rd gen+ knifefighters might be interesting and I'm sure the Israelis are willing to help others with same upgrades (wasn't that Chinese fighter that had a midair with the EP-3 sporting Pythons?)
TurnandBurn55 said:
More than a few USAF F-4s were bagged over North Viet Nam by MiG-21s flown by "nugget" pilots ever never drove cars before flight school by doing a zoom climb into a strike package and making a single pass from behind. NSAWC plays this scenario with a simulated strip launched Adversary F-5, which is problematic for a strike package (saw one tap an F/A-18 and a Tom before the escort turned back into the strike package and almost had a blue-on-blue).
Speaking of MiG-21s, our Israeli friends have helped Romania upgrade their MiG-21s to the Lancer configuration...HMD, digital avionics and high off boresight SRM http://www.airshots.com/riat01static/mig2101ce01.htm. Finding yourself at the merge with one of these 3rd gen+ knifefighters might be interesting and I'm sure the Israelis are willing to help others with same upgrades (wasn't that Chinese fighter that had a midair with the EP-3 sporting Pythons?)
"Buying the merge"
He means even with all the electronic SA and long sticks like AMRAAM, a situation like this results in being "at the merge" so you're going have a knifefight in a phonebooth.
Think of knights jousting with lances as the BVR fight. If neither is unseated, you go to the merge and whip out the close-in weapons and go from heads down to heads out of the cockpit.
eddie said:
He means even with all the electronic SA and long sticks like AMRAAM, a situation like this results in being "at the merge" so you're going have a knifefight in a phonebooth.
Think of knights jousting with lances as the BVR fight. If neither is unseated, you go to the merge and whip out the close-in weapons and go from heads down to heads out of the cockpit.
:thumbup_1
heyjoe said:
Yup.. remember hearing a deal about the Israelis selling Python IIIs over to China. The Chinese being masters of reverse engineering were thought to have developed their own version (PL-8) along with a helmet-mounted-sight...
Also seemed to recall a recent story about Kazakhstan sending over Mig-21s to North Korea... don't know if that went through or not
One thing for the pilots (and RIO/WSO's, actually) to remember:
ALWAYS KEEP YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE COCKPIT !!!! KEEP YOUR HEAD ON A SWIVEL !!!
If you fly two seaters --- leave 70-80% of the scope work to the expert --- your RIO/WSO. If you're single seat --- obviously you do the best you can to keep your head out while working the aircraft systems God and the American taxpayer has given you .... you use everything at your disposal. But don't be a "scope-head".
BUT: a "scope-head" (pilot variety) will lose the fight unless he can kill all the bad guys BVR. The object of the exercise is to reach out and touch the bad guys BVR and RTB to have a beer after the debrief. But things seldom work out as planned in love and war. Whoever "sees" the other guy first (radar or visual) will most likely live to fly another day .......
We always used to clean up on the Air Force F-15's @ Nellis and Red Flag in our clunky little old A-4s by having better lookout doctrine. "They" had GCI and better hardware; we had better lookout discipline and tactics. Besides --- what else WERE we going to look at, anyway??? Our "radar" ??? ....
"They" would call 20 mile look-down "kills" against ground clutter on a maneuvering A-4 with the then new AIM-7F .... they might "see" one of us ..... but it just wouldn't happen in reality back-in-the-day with the missile parameters existing then. The ref's wouldn't allow it --- so "they" came in 4 abreast with their heads in the scopes and we would hammer them. Pop up and shoot them in the belly. Repeatedly. One pass -- one shot -- one kill and out. "They" apparently had forgotten everything, tactically speaking, from the Vietnam experience.
Your equipment is so much better today --- so you will use it. Radars, sensors, AWACS, Red Crown or his modern-day equivalent, etc., etc. --- but in the end --- many fights will end up in a guns and knives fight to the death. I'm not trying to sound melodramatic --- that's just what happens. So keep your head out of the cockpit to win and live.
Believe it ......
ALWAYS KEEP YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE COCKPIT !!!! KEEP YOUR HEAD ON A SWIVEL !!!
If you fly two seaters --- leave 70-80% of the scope work to the expert --- your RIO/WSO. If you're single seat --- obviously you do the best you can to keep your head out while working the aircraft systems God and the American taxpayer has given you .... you use everything at your disposal. But don't be a "scope-head".
BUT: a "scope-head" (pilot variety) will lose the fight unless he can kill all the bad guys BVR. The object of the exercise is to reach out and touch the bad guys BVR and RTB to have a beer after the debrief. But things seldom work out as planned in love and war. Whoever "sees" the other guy first (radar or visual) will most likely live to fly another day .......
We always used to clean up on the Air Force F-15's @ Nellis and Red Flag in our clunky little old A-4s by having better lookout doctrine. "They" had GCI and better hardware; we had better lookout discipline and tactics. Besides --- what else WERE we going to look at, anyway??? Our "radar" ??? ....
"They" would call 20 mile look-down "kills" against ground clutter on a maneuvering A-4 with the then new AIM-7F .... they might "see" one of us ..... but it just wouldn't happen in reality back-in-the-day with the missile parameters existing then. The ref's wouldn't allow it --- so "they" came in 4 abreast with their heads in the scopes and we would hammer them. Pop up and shoot them in the belly. Repeatedly. One pass -- one shot -- one kill and out. "They" apparently had forgotten everything, tactically speaking, from the Vietnam experience.
Your equipment is so much better today --- so you will use it. Radars, sensors, AWACS, Red Crown or his modern-day equivalent, etc., etc. --- but in the end --- many fights will end up in a guns and knives fight to the death. I'm not trying to sound melodramatic --- that's just what happens. So keep your head out of the cockpit to win and live.
Believe it ......
Man, didn't think we'd stir this much emotion from this thread and the previous thread. . good stuff. I think we can definitely save the facts and figures for a less-open forum (multi-platform exercises, schools, the "quiet mumblings" in the back of the O club). . . .
The concept that a few were attempting to dismiss is that as long as there's a carrier, the "CAG" has a vital role in DCA. No AWACS, no Air Force, and oh by the way a visual is required (Hornet or Super) before other assets can get involved.
Until we are all replaced by UAVs, carrier air wings (or at least some platforms within) will always practice these highly perishable skills.
AMEN.
The concept that a few were attempting to dismiss is that as long as there's a carrier, the "CAG" has a vital role in DCA. No AWACS, no Air Force, and oh by the way a visual is required (Hornet or Super) before other assets can get involved.
Until we are all replaced by UAVs, carrier air wings (or at least some platforms within) will always practice these highly perishable skills.
AMEN.
What's old ???? The "really old" ones, starting in WW2 didn't --- the pipper was controlled by gyros. The T-2C didn't --- and the VT-4 Pensacola gun patternairwinger said:
i.e., air-to-air gunnery, was a BIG deal as we still had lots of F-8 influence and instructors around. Air-to-air gunnery was thought to make you a "man", a believer, and conversely --- if you didn't "get it" --- it kept you from getting "good" grades overall and a "good" seat later on (?). The only manual input in my stint in air-to-air gunnery (now a lost art???) was where you put the nose of the airplane in relation to the target and how "hard" you put it there ..... (think how many G's and how "hard" you pulled --- you had to be SMOOTH). Less deflection = more hits. The "new" ones (some are even "old" by current standards and pre-digital to boot ) did interface with a radar ..... remember F-8's and radar-controlled fire control systems amongst others .... What a great airplane the F-8 was --- even went Mach 2.2 in 1958 !!!!
A4sForever said:What's old ???? The "really old" ones, starting in WW2 didn't --- the pipper was controlled by gyros. The T-2C didn't --- and the VT-4 Pensacola gun pattern
The "new" ones (some are even "old" by current standards and pre-digital to boot ) did interface with a radar ..... remember F-8's and radar-controlled fire control systems amongst others .... What a great airplane the F-8 was --- even went Mach 2.2 in 1958 !!!!
And those old gyro stabilised sights would tumble under too many Gs and typically used a dail setting for wingspan of expected target to allow solve the range component via stadimetric ranging. Agreed the challenge is getting the lead right and that is a function of range, deflection and G. It's interesting, but not surprising that a lot of top scoring aces in WW II were really good hunters or brought up with a varmit shooting rifle so they instinctively understood the deflection problem. David McCampbell was the leading Navy ace in WWII and he was an Alabama boy brought up around firearms. He downed nine aircraft in a single mission, which a testimony to his superb shooting eye and efficient shooting technique (most other pilots would have run out of ammo after a few victories): http://www.acepilots.com/usn_mccampbell.html