Have Jet Figher Supermaneuvarability Capabilities Been Used Often in Air-to-Air Combat?

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

I remember reading how the Harrier would use it's vectoring nozzles to VIFF and let enemies bypass them. Pretty cool but tricky.

I've seen this in action in new footage and in simulations, but mostly only against old or outdated aircraft with previous generation missile technology, or in some cases even using canons.

I don't think that there's ever been a WWII style turning in fight between two modern aircraft. I remember during the Balklands and the gulf when some of modern (for the day) aircraft got into fights with similar aircraft, it was missiles from beyond visual range, and it was mostly a competition between the homing capacilities of the payload and the countermeasure systems on the target aircraft.

I think that every single F16 and Mig 29 that's ever been shot down has been hit by a missile form an enemy that they never even got close to.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

WVR is still very emphasized, it fact is a very key part of the entire training syllabus, there is a small saying, "You can't drop a bomb if you can't BFM" and its true. You want to have a fundamental and complete understanding in every single phase of the intercept timeline from the very beginning of it at 40-60NM out all the way down to ACM (air combat maneuvering is the coordinated strategy of two fighters using BFM against an adversary). Along the intercept timeline, there are various rulers that you use to kill the enemy, who has control over the target, wingman sorting, group picture, ect. These also control whether or not you crank, notch, go cold or hot. It goes on and on, once understood though decreases time to kill and increases probability of kill significantly.

So it always starts BVR and then works its way down into the WVR environment, obviously you use the highest capability you can achieve, so if that's a BVR kill and the ROE authorize it, you do that, if the ROE call for hostile ID, then you might have to go the entire intercept timeline down to the visual range (which has its own procedures) to get the tally before engaging. The whole point of all this, is to give all the fighters in the flight an understanding of the exact role, responsibility, and contract to be performed based off the sight picture they are either seeing visually or with sensors. Then they train it to total mastery, these fighter jocks could do it almost with their eyes closed it becomes second nature, which allows them to take it even further with individual unit tactics. Got to love US military, they do it right

a reply to: Forensick

The two modes have different advantages. TWS obviously allows you to lock up to 4 contacts on the APG-68 and fire on them all with their own individual solutions, RWS is a more active mode that allows 2 contacts, but they will be actively tracked the entire way. TWS is in general considered to be junk because the chances of loss of lock are high, because its a synthetic track whereas RWS is an active radar track, so it has a much higher pK than TWS. In practice, from what I recall, RWS is preferred because most of the time you're going to be engaging bandits as a unit, wingmen will be sorted and nobody needs to track 4 contacts at a time. Having the capability there is nice, but in general you want a more accurate track of the target to increase pK.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

There was an Iraqi MiG (either a -25 or -29) that was downed by an EF-111 that never fired a shot, but was credited with the kill.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Most fights will be from BVR. However WVR is still a possibility.

originally posted by: av8r007
a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

WVR is still very emphasized, it fact is a very key part of the entire training syllabus, there is a small saying, "You can't drop a bomb if you can't BFM" and its true. You want to have a fundamental and complete understanding in every single phase of the intercept timeline from the very beginning of it at 40-60NM out all the way down to ACM (air combat maneuvering is the coordinated strategy of two fighters using BFM against an adversary). Along the intercept timeline, there are various rulers that you use to kill the enemy, who has control over the target, wingman sorting, group picture, ect. These also control whether or not you crank, notch, go cold or hot. It goes on and on, once understood though decreases time to kill and increases probability of kill significantly.

So it always starts BVR and then works its way down into the WVR environment, obviously you use the highest capability you can achieve, so if that's a BVR kill and the ROE authorize it, you do that, if the ROE call for hostile ID, then you might have to go the entire intercept timeline down to the visual range (which has its own procedures) to get the tally before engaging. The whole point of all this, is to give all the fighters in the flight an understanding of the exact role, responsibility, and contract to be performed based off the sight picture they are either seeing visually or with sensors. Then they train it to total mastery, these fighter jocks could do it almost with their eyes closed it becomes second nature, which allows them to take it even further with individual unit tactics. Got to love US military, they do it right

Do the ROE allow electronic identification by radar or would it still possible need eyes on even with the radar saying it’s a Mig

a reply to: Forensick

In Desert Storm, 27 of 33 engagements were targets detected by AWACS before the fighters saw them. On average they were detected at 70nm or more. Sixteen of 33 engagements (48%) were BVR, with 28 AIM-7s fired, and 22 hitting the target or the debris of the target.

According to the data, only four of thirteen WVR engagements required any kind of significant ACM, with only 15% of total engagements requiring ACM, and 38% of WVR requiring any kind of ACM.

This F16 had to go low and slow to shoot down this Ov-10

originally posted by: TritonTaranis
Dogfighting is pretty much a thing of the past with stealth - long range - medium range missiles Etc

Thrust vectoring makes it easy to have missiles go flying right by as most can't turn fast. The US came up with the AIM-9X specifically for the SU Flankers with thrust vectoring.

The Russian plan is to make our missiles miss then get into a dogfight. The good thing is their Flankers are huge and heavy. They lose altitude fast when turning in a dogfight. This is where our smaller fighters will use their power to stay high and kill the Russian Flankers.

The Flankers were designed to cover Russia's vast territory so it needs the size for all that fuel. The Mig-29 is Russia's deadliest aircraft as it can dogfight with our F-15 and have a decent chance in winning if the pilot is as good or better than ours.

If I was going to be in any plane today it would be an F-22 or F-16 as they are the best dogfighters today. Not many pilots can stay awake turning an F-16. 9Gs with no bombs hanging off it's wings. That's

On the F-18s and newer aircraft have an automatic recovery system if the pilot passes out.

Thave been taught how to make their aircraft perform moves that are almost equal to newer aircraft that have thrust vectoring. They make the plane go out of control and learn exactly how to recover it. If you know how to do that you can be very deadly. It's called departure control.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Forensick

In Desert Storm, 27 of 33 engagements were targets detected by AWACS before the fighters saw them. On average they were detected at 70nm or more. Sixteen of 33 engagements (48%) were BVR, with 28 AIM-7s fired, and 22 hitting the target or the debris of the target.

According to the data, only four of thirteen WVR engagements required any kind of significant ACM, with only 15% of total engagements requiring ACM, and 38% of WVR requiring any kind of ACM.

The best air to air engagement was an F-111 Raven with no weapons at all, as it's an electronic jamming aircraft was taking an Iraqi Mirage down low and fast. Speed kills lol. The Mirage couldn't hang at mach 1.2 and flew into a canyon wall.

The F-111 and the B-1 bomber are straight up pimps at low level. They flip a switch and the aircraft takes the pilots on the best roller coaster ride ever designed. Mach 1 plus at feet off the ground with their terrain following radar.

Most don't know the B-2 stealth does this as well. It just don't go faster than the speed of sound. Not that anyone knows of.

I have seen it fly right over my parents house as it was using the river to guide them east under commercial air traffic coming into Tampa. You hear a slight whine and boom it's right on top of you. It's loud as a mother after it passes though.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I think that was a Mirage that chased the EF111.

There were a few crank and bank dogfights in GW1 between F-15 and Foxbats and Fulcrums. One, the Eagle driver got credit when the Fulcrum decided to spit S but should have started 3000' higher.

a reply to: Flipper35

You are correct. It was an F1EQ that escaped from a pair of F-15Cs that shot down his Wingman. He jumped the Raven and they were able to use TFR to turn him into a hill.

The MiGs were after a flight of Mud Hens at about the same time.

Our Sidewinders did not have the success ratio they should have had in GW1 though.

a reply to: Flipper35

The Sidewinder had horrible performance in GW1 compared to what was expected. They were fired at 26 aircraft,with a hit rate of 68.2%, and killed 54.5% of their targets.

That is a better hit rate than I remembered. I thought it was closer to 50%, but that may have been against a particular class.

a reply to: Flipper35

They had a higher hit rate, but lower kill rate than expected.

I can imagine super maneuverability being interesting in close battle field
ground support. Say something UAV a little bigger than a 30mm Gattling Gun and
way overpowered ?

a reply to: Zaphod58

And the Paveway had a much higher hit rate on air-born helicopters that expected!

a reply to: Flipper35

Significantly higher.

a reply to: SleeperHasAwakened

short answer, no.

over the last 20 years there have been almost no dog fights between modern fighters. in fact most air to air engagements have been aircraft using missiles to destroy helicopters from beyond visual range. the odds that an f22 will ever even fire at an su37 or the equivalent are very small indeed.

aircraft these days seem to be more platforms for launching missiles at ground targets than anything else, hence the popularity of old aircraft like the A10.